one quick question to andrew. a potential gag order, does donald trump as a declared candidate have any special powers, legal authority, constitutional authority because the first amendment protects political candidates, as we have seen in the campaign advertisements the answer is, legally, no. there are no special rights. but this will be a first so the judge who gets assigned will have a lot of discretion. assuming that donald trump is not using his bully pulpit to incite violence and is keeping it to political discussions, obviously, a lot of us could say that s a huge if, that he will be free to participate in the political process. if he doesn t, then he can be
when it comes to raskin, what does it say about not only who he is, as nick hit us off with, but what does it mean for the case? they are now focusing on the confidential documents that were kept at mar-a-lago, endangering our national security. that s why you are bringing in someone who is a specialist in national security. the recent reporting about documents coming from that pile that involved iran and china are really scary and threaten our security. it s a very smart thing to focus on that. it makes it very hard for the department of justice not to pursue this to an indictment. there have been a number of people prosecuted for having dangerous materials in their possession, having wrongfully taken them. really, donald trump is a former president. he has no special rights. he has to be held accountable.
documents but human misinformation. the lord knows who got to see those documents. you are if you are that spy. you are not quite we want to be providing youth information to the knights s government right now. you re gonna shove up. and you can be where they might get killed. so the government wants to assess all the national security implications of what donald trump was doing. and if they have to yank those spies from the field to save the lives. they need to do that. what this judge said is, oh, i don t really buy that sworn affidavit from the fbi. and, it is outweighed by the comparable harm to donald trump s. what was the harm to him? his reputation. because unlike you and me, step, the judge said he s a former president. former presidents give special rights. this is him un-american. it is soviet. it is as bad as it gets and andrew weizmann is exactly correct. two former presidents special rights? especially when, as we ll
make it killed. so the government was sir as ot national security implications what donald trump was doing, and they have to let yank those winds in the field to save their lives of their families lives, they need to do that. and what this judge that is oh, i don t really buy that sworn affidavit from the fbi and alike and it s done irreparable harm to donald trump. what was the harm to him? his reputation. because unlike you and we have steph she said he s a former president and they get special rights this is an american it s soviet it s bad as it gets andrew weizmann is exactly correct. do former presidents get special rights,, especially when as neil points out, this content could be putting peoples lives at risk? only in the southern district of florida. it s such an abrogation of basic principles, i just want to underscore one thing he said