Mark meadows, marc short, greg scavino, pat sibley no, miller, ken cuccinelli, on and on it goes. this is a whole lot of people who are very close to donald trump, whom he now cannot talk to you about that case probably a very similar list on this one. these are the people who talk to the grand jury. there are others on another list also included that he can t talk to who were interviewed by the special counsel investigators. so a whole lot of people. the judge was so intent on making sure that donald trump not only understood but acknowledged what he had to do here that he was warned, trump said to him you cannot retaliate against these witnesses. meaning not only can he not talk to them but he can t do, like you see an old mob movies the wink and the not, you know the thing that i m not talking to you about, you better not talk about the thing. the judge said are you prepared to comply? in front of the judge, in front of the american people, in front of the flag donald trump said yes
Want to give you an example. this indictment in this document. sites trial by combat. cites the mayor discussing trial by combat. what fails to include is the fact that the mayor s use of the term was clearly in relation to comparing the mechanical functions of different voting machines, right? obama appointed judge in a related case even said as much. what the mayor said that there was constitutionally protected speech and in no way did he mean any violence with the term trial by combat. this is one of many examples. excuse me, ted, having said that statement you do believe that he is referenced in the indictment based on what you just said in the explanation you ve given. my question though, directly, is has he received a target letter from special counsel at all? we haven t, the mayor hasn t heard from the special counsel.
I really think if you look at all of this, what you find yourself saying, no matter how you feel about the outcome of this case, is the person who puts out this kind of information, who attacks the judge, says all of this, is that person capable of doing what he pledged in court he would do? following the rules? and if he does not follow the rules, if he tries to communicate with these people and let them know what he wants. what price might be paid? i m looking at this as a prosecutor and saying i see some of my motions that he will file and then you change the judge bias as well, but attacking a judge might get him in hot waters. look at this as you mention, soon in 2024 it will be our
They don t think necessarily that they can get a fair trial here in washington d. c.. i do think the judge is going to react to this motion? look, i think that donald trump can t get a fair trial in d. c., he has a judge who has who has a reputation for being a fair and evenhanded judge. look, wherever you go in the country this is a front matter, everyone is watching on cnn, on every channel, if the president can t get a fair trial here he can t get a fair trial anywhere. this is the look of the events took place that day, it was here that he called for the insurrection from the ellipse, it was carried the insurrection took place. this is the place to try the case.
That he made with respect to election workers were inaccurate. this he believed he did not admit a single thing. what he did was make illegal maneuver in order to get to a point in the case that allows for a motion to dismiss. is the judge aware of the to suggest anything else is disingenuous. that would be interesting for the judge to know that illegal maneuvered despite a statement that was made on the record. i want to stick to the facts of what we understand, and i rely on you to realize that information to me. does rudy giuliani sitting here today, although he is obviously not with you, does he believe that the election in fact was