Popular Posts

There he is. Even at the defense table, he looks like a winner. He really does. There aren't enough people out there defending him, calling out this trial for the total farce that it is. Handful of folks in conservative media, but not as much as it should be. It should be widespread everywhere. This should not be happening. As usual, he's his own best advocate. Take a look. - The whole world is watching this hoax. You got a DA that's out of control. You have a judge that's highly conflicted. The whole thing is a mess, and you have the leading candidate and leading crooked Joe Biden by the line. He's the one that should be in trial. He's a crook. You got a crooked president. He should be in trial with all the stuff he's done in his family. He should be in trial, but he's the one in charge. - It's so true. Anyway, they say, "Oh, that's not true." And they try to fact check him all afternoon long. It's not. He's holding some papers, yeah, from some of the legal heavyweights out there. There should be more. And they kind of tiptoe around the issue, but good for him for finding support where we can. - I'm supposed to be in New Hampshire. I'm supposed to be in Georgia. I'm supposed to be in North Carolina, South Carolina. I'm supposed to be in a lot of different places campaigning, but I've been here all day on a trial that really is a very unfair trial. These are all stories. This is over the last few days from legal experts. This is "Wall Street Journal" editorial. But all of these are stories from legal experts saying how this is not a case. The case is ridiculous. This is another one of the cases. A ridiculous Trump indictment. It's missing fraud, there is no fraud. All of these stories are stories of how, and these are done by the experts, and editorials. Greg falsified business record and he falsifies them. He's the one. He's the fraud. But take a look at all of these, our stories. You see them here. Greg's indictment even falls as an indictment. All of them. Greg crosses the Rubicon indicting Trump, on nonsense. On nonsense. Yeah, I know some people like, why would he do that holding those papers there? Why not? How would you act if you were wrongly accused and pulled off your job and you got to sit in that courtroom all day long, but it's not getting them down? I haven't seen this before in court. You see that, that hand pump? I love it. And you know what? Look, in America, I don't have a problem with some of the people who showed up for jury duty. I don't. The ones who are honest, the ones who said that they were biased, and yeah, that's kind of to be commended. There are people out there, unlike the judge, who know that they're not impartial. Take a look. - Personally, I do not like him at all. I don't approve of a lot of what he has done as president, but I think that the right to a fair trial in this country is incredibly important. - If there's a reason that you don't think you could be impartial or that you could be perceived as biased, that you should raise your hand. So I raised my hand. - What happened? Why were you dismissed? - Because I couldn't be impartial. - You couldn't be impartial. When the judge asked that hand, can you be impartial? You raised your hand and you said you cannot. - Exactly. - And good for her. Good for all of them. The judge, as he's asking these questions, he's the one. It should have dawned on him. What am I doing? I'm a complete hypocrite. I am totally and completely conflicted. I can't do this. You know, if the judge came in as a juror and he said, hey, you know, my daughter works in politics and I gave money to Joe Biden, it's by a matter of logic, he can't be a juror. Therefore, he can't be a judge. But he is. And he drew up this rigged questionnaire. You heard about the questionnaire? Totally skewed, totally strange. Now, one thing Newsmax has mentioned, I love it. They wanna know if anybody gets their news from a bunch of different sources, including Newsmax. All right, what else is in there? Oh, a list. Do you currently follow any anti-Trump or organization on any social media site? Or have you done so in the past? And then they list a bunch of, well, I mean, let's face it, pretty hardcore groups out there. But they don't mention anything about Joe Biden. They don't mention anything about Black Lives Matter. You know, if you are for Biden, you're kind of automatically against Trump. Anyway, I talked to some legal experts. This thing is skewed and designed to find a biased jury, as if we didn't have enough problems. Anyway, they'll get through it, but we've got to help in any way we can. And I don't know, maybe it's writing a check. Maybe it's, think about it. All right, next. - Donald Trump is no stranger to violating norms. - Trump is violating norms. - He violates political norms. When he violates constitutional norms, Trump has violated norms. - Oh yeah, the norms. And this is totally normal. Having a former president in court for this nonsense, and it is nonsense, and we have to recognize a guy named Mike Pomerance. He is a really bad guy. An evil doer, I think, in this whole scheme. He is a former prosecutor who volunteered to basically do legal work for the district attorney, for Alvin Bragg. You can't do this stuff for free. Donald Trump is fully aware of this dude. - You have Pomerance, Mark Pomerance. - He was Hillary Clinton's lawyer, Democrat National Committee's lawyer. He worked in Paul Weiss, he walked in, and he took over the district attorney's office, nobody's ever seen anything like that, to prosecute Trump. And then they wouldn't do what he wanted to do, and he goes out and he writes a book long before any decisions were made. He writes a book about it. And the book gets published, and everybody's reading his book. And the judge said there's nothing wrong with that. It is so incredibly unethical. And the book, though, yeah, he incriminates himself big time. I read the book. Not as many people read the book as you might think. When I joined the Trump investigation, I got countless emails and telephone calls from friends and colleagues urging me to go get 'em! And wishing me luck. How about that, huh? That, he put it in a book. It's one thing to have friends who hate Trump, but see how arrogant they are. Listen to this. I was enthusiastic about working on the case, and happy to work without pay. You see, when you're a lawyer, you're professional, professional cannons and all that stuff, it doesn't work if you don't get money. This is not pro bono. This is not a pro bono situation. This, I think you get disbarred for this, or maybe it will lend itself to a mistrial. Something else, this guy is, he goes right for the juicy stuff. I dug into the payment of hush money to Stephanie Clifford. I started there because it was interesting and easy to understand. You see, you think these guys care about the law? No, it was interesting to him. Let's see. I had followed the whole story from the sidelines, and it involved allegations of sexual infidelity. Is that why you liked it so much, pal? As compared to delving into the valuation of various real estate holdings, he wanted to talk about this. He comes up with this crazy plan that they're actually pursuing right now, and in the book he says it's undoable. To charge Trump with something other than a misdemeanor, the District Attorney of New York, D-A-N-Y, would have to argue that the intent to commit or conceal a federal crime had converted the falsification of the records into a felony. Nobody understands that. No appellate court, you see, in New York had ever upheld or rejected this interpretation of the law. It seemed we could not thread the needle of New York's antiquated penal law to find an appropriate felony charge that was immune from legal challenge, but they're doing it anyway. They're doing it anyway. Who's gonna stop 'em? Right? The people? (laughs) They laugh at us. I think we're gonna get the laugh. Laugh.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.