essentially you could read the indictment as one that is about a threat to national security and obstructing justice. and it sort of pulls the thread through to show what happens when donald trump is investigated when he is no longer president of the united states and he s investigated, you know, by a justice department that is not, you know, afraid to take him on. now, would the justice department have gotten there on its own had it not, you know, when they opened up those original investigations? i don t know. but i think that something that i always have to sort of remind myself of is that you had a special counsel s office with jack smith that really went after this. they weren t listening to anything that trump had to say. they didn t have a trump-controlled justice department to go through to figure out whether they could subpoena the president of the united states or do any of these other matters. and they really for lack of a
where the line is. they know it, they know exactly where it is, they know what an interstate communication looks like for a valid threat to life. they know what it means to actually be specific about how it will happen and where it will happen. they know to fall back just behind that line. the problem is, enforcement, educating police and prosecutors, getting even u.s. attorneys once an agent goes to a u.s. attorney and says, look, threat to life or not? if that u.s. attorney goes, does it meet the statutory elements? they re left to do exactly what s been described here, which is pay a visit if you re lucky. the good news here is, there s a stepped-unwillingness and proactive approach at fbi to go ahead and do that knock and talk, they call it, that five years ago, four years ago, would not have been done. just don t have the time for it. now it is eating up a lot of
being a threat to you. if you end up seeing a movement like what we saw with the tea party movement or against wall street as we saw about ten or 12 years ago you end up seeing the political parties trying to almost corrupt those movements to ensure you end up having just two parties. gentlemen, thank you very much. a look at that, we re entirely out of time for this show. it went by really fast. that ll do it for me on this friday. deadline white house starts right now. hi there, everyone. it s 4:00 in the east. it is through line in the story of the classified documents investigation, the one thing that keeps popping up over and over again. and it just might have been one of the biggest factors that led to trump being indicted by the government he once led. it is of course his obsessive attachment to what he saw as his
to clamp down on speech like this that tends to only happen on one side of the ideological divide. i think chris is describing one instance, and i won t paint the fbi with a broad brush, but i d love your reaction to what he describes. so it s absolutely true that there s not enough exercise of existing laws that are in place, particularly at the state level. the police seem in many places not to be attuned to the rising and escalating threat level in this country and the need to proactively get out in front of it. the same goes for prosecutors as well. on the federal side, i know we re not here to debate whether something that s been described is or is not a federal crime. we could do that for an hour. i can tell you this. the people doing this kind of thing, the people that visited mom s house here, they know
better term took the gloves off and pierced the inner circle around trump in a way that we had not seen before to produce an investigation that essentially says, look, this is a threat to national security and he obstructed justice in the process. yeah, pete, i want to let you respond to that, but jack smith literally pierced the bubble by going before the judge and showing that crimes were likely being committed through the attorney-client relationship and had access to everything. i mean what what are your thoughts? what s your reaction to some of the widening of the lens that mike s talking about? well, i think mike s absolutely right. i mean, look, there are two aspects to when you look at trump there s the criminal component, that was back in 17 when the obstruction case was open. what jack smith is doing now and mueller did is looking at the criminal aspect of of his