Months, the former president of the United States has been indicted, arrested, and a range. And lets face it, weve become oddly familiar with how this all goes. Theres the release of the indictment itself, helicopters following black suvs, and of course, the court sketches, all followed by a barrage of deranged posts on truth social. Theres a bit of a rinse and repeat feeling that starting to set in. But this one did feel different, because it is different. It felt bigger, because it is bigger. The indictment filed by Special Counsel jack smith this week detailed the ways in which an american president engaged in a criminal conspiracy from the oval office to subvert the will of the people. Of course, like any criminal defendant, trump is innocent until proven guilty. There will be a trial, and his legal team will mount a defense. But no matter how it ends, this is the one that historians will be talking about 100 years from now. Trump is now facing four criminal counts in this case, in
andrew weissmann joins us to. he would have been great on that stage. it is not his normal form, but, it needed a courtroom approach. a more persei s, targeted question, then many of the questions we got. so, we will try to see, and we might have some suggestions. i would like to see andrew weissmann versus trump, but i would like to see it in a courtroom. that is another matter, for another day. i will be watching, lawrence. i think cnn did the best they could, it using conventional tools, and we kind of knew ahead of time that conventional tools don t work. i only hope that they are, honestly, privately, i m not asking them to admit any mistakes, publicly, but just privately, watch the game film, try to figure out what you did right, because you did two things right, and try to do time. trump is coming back to cnn. he has found a new home, he will be back. let s just hope that cnn is watching the game, film trying to figure out how to do it better. here s to fingers c
then many of the questions we got. so, we will try to see, and we might have some suggestions. i would like to see andrew weissmann versus trump, but i would like to see it in a courtroom. that is another matter, for another day. i will be watching, lawrence. i think cnn did the best they could, it using conventional tools, and we kind of knew ahead of time that conventional tools don t work. i only hope that they are, honestly, privately, i m not asking them to admit any mistakes, publicly, but just privately, watch the game film, try to figure out what you did right, because you did two things right, and try to do better than next time. you know there will be a next time. trump is coming back to cnn. he has found a new home, he will be back. let s just hope that cnn is watching the game, film trying to figure out how to do it better. here s to fingers crossed. have a good show, lawrence. thank you alex. thank you. well, donald trump, only submitting to interviews wi
that. no one ever suggested that. president trump actually, he has said that. by the way, there is another the president asked him to violate the constitution. he said the president asked him to violate the constitution. which is another way of saying he had to break the law. no, that s wrong. that s wrong. a technical violation of the constitution is not a violation of criminal law. i, mean that sounded to me like a new argument, or a new one there. andrew, what did you make of that? well, to go to neil s point, a technical violation of the constitution, which is overthrowing the democratic process by which we elect a president, that is neither technical nor is it legal. this is i understand that this is defense detour and they try to throw things added to see what might stick with the public.
the documents keeps changing. you remember when we first heard of this it was basically a defense detour. we are going to see a chart lists that all out. and when you are questioning donald trump in an interview, as happened last night, you were to go through all of those inconsistent stories. you would do what medicine said, it was slow down and take your time and make him have to eat each one of those to point out all of the inconsistent stories. the second thing you could do is, you could also sum up, a classic sort of prosecutorial technique, you saw it in the e. jean carroll case, which is to say, you say acts, but let s talk about all the other people who say why. mike pence told you that the election wasn t stolen. bill barr, your own attorney general said that. the leaders of the depart me a tartan just to said. that and go through the litany of all the evidence of people