Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at Breaking Points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 1: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 1: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent
Speaker 1: coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about,
Speaker 1: it just means the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 1: But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody,
Speaker 1: Happy Friday. We have an amazing show for everybody today.
Speaker 1: What could we possibly have today? Yes, surprise, Surprise, big
Speaker 1: special Friday before Crystal takes the kids to school, episode
Speaker 1: of Breaking Points in honor of a Ford president being
Speaker 1: criminally indicted for the first time in history. Soacher obviously
Speaker 1: did a great job yesterday just with the initial breaking news,
Speaker 1: but we've got a bunch of more details we wanted
Speaker 1: to bring to you, also some political reaction and our
Speaker 1: thoughts on the whole situation. So I wanted to make
Speaker 1: sure to get that to you as soon as possible.
Speaker 1: Before we do those saga remind people about Spotify video. Yes,
Speaker 1: that's right. If you want to see what our faces
Speaker 1: look like at six am, so we can get it
Speaker 1: to you as fast as possible. Go ahead and become
Speaker 1: a breakingpoints dot Com premium subscriber, so you can watch
Speaker 1: an audio and video on Spotify seamlessly only for our
Speaker 1: premium members. So we appreciate everybody taking advantage of that.
Speaker 1: But Chrystal, where I left off everybody is where we
Speaker 1: just had. Literally I think it was like a few
Speaker 1: minutes after the indictment. I just came and did the video.
Speaker 1: So all I told everyone was that he's been indicted
Speaker 1: and his lawyer has confirmed it. But we've learned quite
Speaker 1: a bit more since then. We actually have even a
Speaker 1: statement from President Trump. Yeah, so we've got a better
Speaker 1: sense of the timing. Expectation is that he will be
Speaker 1: arraigned on Tuesday. Expectation as he will surrender himself in Manhattan.
Speaker 1: Trump himself has reacted with a couple of statements. First
Speaker 1: one relatively lengthy, but it is obviously very important signific
Speaker 1: and so I will bless you by reading the whole
Speaker 1: entire thing. He said. This is political persecution and election
Speaker 1: interference at the highest level in history. From the time
Speaker 1: I came down the Golden escalator at Trump Tower and
Speaker 1: even before I was sworn in as your President of
Speaker 1: the United States. The radical left Democrats, the enemy of
Speaker 1: the hard working men and women of this country, have
Speaker 1: been engaged in a witch hunt to destroy the Make
Speaker 1: America Great Again movement. Remember it just like I do. Russia, Russia, Russia.
Speaker 1: The Muller hoaks Ukraine and Ukurini Ukraine, impeachment Hoax one
Speaker 1: and Beeachman Hoax two, the illegal and unconstitutional bar Alago raid.
Speaker 1: And now this. The Democrats have lied, cheated, and stolen
Speaker 1: in their obsession with trying to get Trump. Now they've
Speaker 1: done the unthinkable, indicting a completely innocent person in an
Speaker 1: act of blatant election interference. Never before in our nation's
Speaker 1: history has this been done. The Democrats have cheated countless
Speaker 1: times over the decades, including spying on my campaign, but
Speaker 1: weaponizing our justice system to punish a political opponent who
Speaker 1: just so happens to be a president of the United
Speaker 1: States and by far the leading Republican candidate for president,
Speaker 1: has never happened before. He continues Manhattan da Alvin Bragg,
Speaker 1: who was hand picked and funded by George Soros, is
Speaker 1: a disgrace. Rather than stop the unprecedented prime way of
Speaker 1: taking over New York City. He's doing Joe Biden's dirty work,
Speaker 1: ignoring the murders and burglaries and assaults he should be
Speaker 1: focused on. This is how Bragg spends his time. I
Speaker 1: believe this switch hunt will backfire massively on Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: The American people realize exactly what the radical left Democrats
Speaker 1: are doing here. Everyone can see it. So our movement
Speaker 1: and our Party United and Strong will first defeat Elvin Bragg,
Speaker 1: then be able to defeat Joe Biden, and we're going
Speaker 1: to throw every last one of these crooked Democrats out
Speaker 1: of office so we can make America great again. So,
Speaker 1: going all the way back to the Golden Escalator and
Speaker 1: through the litany of all the whatever that he recites
Speaker 1: in that one, he also released another shorter truth that
Speaker 1: I'll read to you as well and then get your
Speaker 1: reaction about all of it. Tzager. He said, these thugs
Speaker 1: and radical left monsters have just indicated he obviously means
Speaker 1: indicted the forty fifth president the United States of America
Speaker 1: and the leading Republican candidate by far for the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four nomination for president. He continues, this is an
Speaker 1: attack on our country. The likes of which has never
Speaker 1: been seen before. It's likewise a continuing attack on our
Speaker 1: once free and fair elections. The USA is now a
Speaker 1: third world nation, a nation in serious decline, so sad.
Speaker 1: So you know a lot of the type of language
Speaker 1: you would expect, but notably no calls for protest or
Speaker 1: death and destruction or anything like that. Yeah, that's right
Speaker 1: for what we currently know right now. As a president,
Speaker 1: Trump is likely to be arraigned on Tuesday, where the
Speaker 1: so called purp walk may occur. What will the mug
Speaker 1: shot look like? I was actually looking at some previous
Speaker 1: politician mug shots. The ultimate question is do you smile
Speaker 1: or not smile? He gave us a very nice smile,
Speaker 1: and given that he also got off in a hush
Speaker 1: money scheme, maybe that's what the Trump I should feel like.
Speaker 1: I feel like Trump is going to go with the smile.
Speaker 1: That's my bet. I think you should go with the smile. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think you should go with the smile. So in
Speaker 1: terms of the actual charges, I have a little bit
Speaker 1: more detail for everybody here that I can pull up.
Speaker 1: So basically Trump has been indicted on thirty four different counts. Now,
Speaker 1: many of you might be asking how how is that
Speaker 1: even humanly possible whenever it involves a single hush money payment. Well,
Speaker 1: what it turns out is that many of these payments
Speaker 1: were paid in multiple installments. So there is the theory
Speaker 1: right now that every single payment, every installment of the
Speaker 1: payment of the one hundred and thirty thousand dollars given
Speaker 1: over to Michael Cohen itself is its separate criminal charge.
Speaker 1: As they're rolling up into an overall theory of the
Speaker 1: case and the indictment. Another thing that we have learned,
Speaker 1: Crystal is that there ran jury witnesses were also asked
Speaker 1: about Karen McDougall, the right playboy model who was involved
Speaker 1: in the capt and kill scheme with the National Inquirer.
Speaker 1: That is somehow being rolled into this case as well. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so just to remind everybody of those details, because it's
Speaker 1: been a few years, so you could be forgiven for
Speaker 1: having forgotten all of the ins and outs of these
Speaker 1: various alleged affairs. So Karen McDougall and Stormy Daniels both
Speaker 1: assert that Trump had affairs. Both of them basically sought
Speaker 1: payment to make these stories go away before the twenty
Speaker 1: sixteen election, and there were two different methods which were employed.
Speaker 1: With Karen mc the National Inquirer actually purchased her story,
Speaker 1: led by David Packers, the head of that outfit, purchased
Speaker 1: that story and then held it in a practice that
Speaker 1: is known as catch and kill. And obviously with Stormy Daniels,
Speaker 1: we had the Michael Cohen payments, hush money payments, and
Speaker 1: that's how that one went down. So Packer apparently was
Speaker 1: a key witness in front of the grand jury. That
Speaker 1: is significant because of the Karen McDougall story. Also because yeah,
Speaker 1: he's kind of a long time Trump confidant and an associate.
Speaker 1: He could speak to Trump's thinking about whether these payments
Speaker 1: were about benefiting his campaign or whether they were mostly
Speaker 1: about other issues like preserving his marriage. And that becomes
Speaker 1: incredibly significant in terms of whether they'll be able to
Speaker 1: actually secure a conviction because of the new unique nature
Speaker 1: of the charges they're expected to bring here, which would
Speaker 1: require a federal campaign finance violation in order for them
Speaker 1: to be a felony. At least that's the expectation. Making clear,
Speaker 1: we don't actually have the charges in front of us.
Speaker 1: Yet we don't have the charge. It's the only one
Speaker 1: that would really make any sense, though, take a step
Speaker 1: back and just I can explain this again for people
Speaker 1: fellowing bookkeeping fraud, and we do know he's been indicted
Speaker 1: with the felony requires not only a bookkeeping error or
Speaker 1: was made, or not only that a bookkeeping cover up
Speaker 1: was made, but that it was done in the commission
Speaker 1: of a second crime. And the reason why this is
Speaker 1: a pretty novel interpretation is that Alvin Bragg has no
Speaker 1: jurisdiction under federal law. This is only jurisdiction under New
Speaker 1: York state law. Under that jurisdiction, federal election law obviously
Speaker 1: is a crime that he is alleging was covered up
Speaker 1: during the bookkeeping. So in the prosecution of that, he's
Speaker 1: basically going to have to say that bookkeeping was done
Speaker 1: in the prosecution of another felony, even though it's a
Speaker 1: felony that I technically do not have jurisdiction over. Now,
Speaker 1: clearly it was enough to pursue an indictment against the
Speaker 1: former president, it was enough for the Manhattan grand jury
Speaker 1: to come through. But the famous quote is and grand
Speaker 1: jury can in dyet a ham sandwich, And you know
Speaker 1: all I have to do is say, well, we have
Speaker 1: kind of a case here at the heart. This is
Speaker 1: going to be at the very, very hard and I
Speaker 1: encourage everybody to get familiar with these details because this
Speaker 1: is going to be at the heart of the entire
Speaker 1: legal defense theory of the case from President Trump and
Speaker 1: from his lawyers. There's going to be a political angle,
Speaker 1: which we'll talk about it in a little bit about
Speaker 1: the prosecution and all that, but at the actual like
Speaker 1: will he face charge, will this case even go to trial?
Speaker 1: Is going to be this novel interpretation and yeah, we'll
Speaker 1: save some of our political thoughts for later. Yeah, let's
Speaker 1: just suffice it to say that when we're gotting in
Speaker 1: the weeds about bookkeeping, hush money and all this, that's
Speaker 1: gonna be a tough one for a lot of people
Speaker 1: to digest. Well, you know, I think we'll talk more
Speaker 1: about the politics of it. I think the timing is
Speaker 1: going to be quite remarkable, because you are talking about
Speaker 1: you know, it's going to be months before this even
Speaker 1: is heard before a judge. The first step will be,
Speaker 1: you know, the judge could throw this thing out before
Speaker 1: it even gets to a jury. That's the what Trump's
Speaker 1: lawyers and Trump himself will obviously be hoping for. So
Speaker 1: there will be months before that even happens. So you're
Speaker 1: talking about, you know, the meat of a potential trial
Speaker 1: unfolding right in the heart of a presidential election cycle.
Speaker 1: So it really is an extraordinary event. It's a historic event.
Speaker 1: You know, it's one we've seen coming for a while.
Speaker 1: But I don't think that should diminish the import of
Speaker 1: what's happening here, you know, and the specter of a
Speaker 1: former president like being potentially handcuffed, fingerprinted and read his
Speaker 1: rights is you know, it's an astonishing moment, however you
Speaker 1: feel about it. And the political reaction has already been,
Speaker 1: of course, all over the map. I think we already
Speaker 1: have a pretty clear sense of how this will play
Speaker 1: in the Republican primary. How it plays in the general
Speaker 1: election is an entirely different question though. So now the
Speaker 1: GOP response, well, meetball Ron materialized, crawled out of his
Speaker 1: hole and actually decided to say something about this. Here's
Speaker 1: what he finally has. He tweets quote and let's put
Speaker 1: this on the screen. The weaponization of the legal system
Speaker 1: to advance a political agenda turns the rule of law
Speaker 1: on its head. It is un American. The Soros backed
Speaker 1: Manhattan DA has consistently bent the law to downgrade felonies
Speaker 1: and to excuse criminal conduct, yet now he is stretching
Speaker 1: the law to target a political opponent. Florida will not
Speaker 1: assist in an extradition request given the questionable circumstances at
Speaker 1: issue with this Soros backed Manhattan prosecutor and his political agenda.
Speaker 1: So a couple of things to say there, Crystal Number One,
Speaker 1: he's bringing out the extradition canard, but after Trump has
Speaker 1: made clear that he's likely to surrender and array in
Speaker 1: to a period. Two, now he's decided now it's not
Speaker 1: silly season. Apparently now he apparently does know something about
Speaker 1: hush money. It's just so clear to me. It's just
Speaker 1: so clear to me that he got the pushback from
Speaker 1: Trump and from the MAGA world to are very upset
Speaker 1: with him, internalized it, and then when the indictment happened
Speaker 1: and decided to come you know, full bore. It is
Speaker 1: interesting too because he doesn't even say Trump's name, which
Speaker 1: almost makes it appear even stranger. It's like talking in
Speaker 1: the third person. But at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: you are still defending Trump. And this just highlights the
Speaker 1: power dynamic of all of this To me at he
Speaker 1: had to spit out because he is the governor of Florida,
Speaker 1: and because Trump is the most popular Republican, and because
Speaker 1: people want to hear this from Ron DeSantis. So this
Speaker 1: just shows me that like the third way, the wishy washy,
Speaker 1: like trying to politically calculate your way through this, it's
Speaker 1: just not gonna work. My read is the same as Arrasagar.
Speaker 1: He had a sort of like natural experiment focus group
Speaker 1: with when Trump announced, like, oh, I'm about to get indicted.
Speaker 1: He failed the test he took in like, Okay, here's
Speaker 1: what people wanted me to do. So this time around,
Speaker 1: I'm going to do what people told me they want
Speaker 1: me to do, right out of the gates. So it
Speaker 1: definitely smells of like very politically calculated to be the
Speaker 1: most sympathetic to his position that I possibly could. Again,
Speaker 1: there's no good play here, Like there is no good
Speaker 1: response for him, because obviously last time he tried staying quiet,
Speaker 1: that was a disaster. This is probably the best possible
Speaker 1: response he can have in terms of the Republican base,
Speaker 1: But it once again just hands Trump power. So to me,
Speaker 1: this is a microcosm of the issue that he faces
Speaker 1: in the GOP primary overall, which is there are no
Speaker 1: really good moves for him to make. It's an impossible
Speaker 1: position effectively for him to be in at least, you know,
Speaker 1: just trying to take on Trump directly or not take
Speaker 1: on Trump directly. That there is no good move on
Speaker 1: the chess board. So that's kind of how I looked
Speaker 1: at it. But yeah, in terms of the Republican response,
Speaker 1: it was across the board. Glenn Youngkin also came out
Speaker 1: right away and said very similar things. I think I
Speaker 1: saw Kevin McCarthy. You know, this was not a tough
Speaker 1: one for them to react to. Whatsoever. I think the
Speaker 1: way the public will pross us this is going to
Speaker 1: be just a rorshack test of how they feel about Trump.
Speaker 1: We've seen multiple polls at this point that show effectively that, yeah,
Speaker 1: people think you did it. People, even a majority of
Speaker 1: people think that these charges and allegations specifically around hush
Speaker 1: money payments are either somewhat serious or very serious. They
Speaker 1: also feel that it is political, So then it makes
Speaker 1: it kind of a wash in terms of a public
Speaker 1: reaction and does once again come down to just what
Speaker 1: is your pre existing feeling about Donald Trump and whether
Speaker 1: he deserves to be prosecuted. My guess is that we've
Speaker 1: spent a lot of time, and I think it's you know,
Speaker 1: this is the case against a former president. I think
Speaker 1: it makes a lot of sense to dig into the
Speaker 1: legal details and the you know, all of the landscape
Speaker 1: of what is entailed here. I think for most people,
Speaker 1: they're not actually going to care that much about the
Speaker 1: details of the charges, whether it includes Dormy Daniels and
Speaker 1: Karen McDougall or not, or even that much whether it's
Speaker 1: over hush money payments or January sixth and fake elector schemes.
Speaker 1: I think it's more just about whether the person who
Speaker 1: has committed crimes and deserves to be held accountable for it,
Speaker 1: And however you felt about that going in is probably
Speaker 1: going to result in your reaction to these specific charges
Speaker 1: against Trump. So in some ways I have sort of
Speaker 1: changed my view on this a little bit. I actually
Speaker 1: think the details of these particular charges don't matter that
Speaker 1: much in terms of the public I do think that
Speaker 1: these are the ones that are the easiest for Republicans
Speaker 1: to defend, where some of the January sixth faker elector
Speaker 1: stuff would put like Mike Pence and others in a
Speaker 1: more difficult position in terms of how they would react, right,
Speaker 1: And that's why immediately Mike Pence came out and said
Speaker 1: that the indictment is quote in outrage. I even have
Speaker 1: the Glenn youngin tweet you alluded to, you know, the
Speaker 1: most probably center right governor in the entire country. Quote
Speaker 1: is beyond belief that district Attorney Alvin Bragg has indicted
Speaker 1: a former president current president of candidate for pure political gain.
Speaker 1: Arresting a presidential candidate on a manufactured basis should not
Speaker 1: happen in America. Continued to attempt to weaponize our judicial system,
Speaker 1: erode people's faith in the American justice system, and it
Speaker 1: needs to stop. So when you've got Glen Youngkin, Mike Pence,
Speaker 1: vivek Ramaswami, Ron DeSantis, all of those people coming to
Speaker 1: your defense, who do you think the king is? It's Trump.
Speaker 1: And so you know, as you said, in terms of
Speaker 1: how people will digest this, you're talking in a general election, Well,
Speaker 1: if you're a GOP primary voter, you know who the
Speaker 1: number one target is of the latter, Well, that's how
Speaker 1: most of these people vote. And one of the reasons
Speaker 1: that this is worth focusing on is We just showed
Speaker 1: everybody yesterday a Fox News poll that showed Trump a
Speaker 1: fifty four percent strength in the Republican primary. Why did
Speaker 1: that happen? Why did he gain ten percent on a
Speaker 1: month Well, potential indictment was listed as one of the
Speaker 1: main reasons that people were flocking towards Trump, So in
Speaker 1: terms of his primary victory or this has made it
Speaker 1: so much more likely now. Look, of course anything can happen.
Speaker 1: He actually could get convicted, although I don't know, I
Speaker 1: think that it would really hurt, you know, maybe outside
Speaker 1: of black Swans snarios though politically for him in a
Speaker 1: GOP primary, which is really all it really matters right now.
Speaker 1: This is nothing but helpful as you can see everybody's coming,
Speaker 1: Tim Scott's coming to his defense. Nikki, I haven't seen
Speaker 1: Nicko Hilly yet, but every as you said, every standard
Speaker 1: Republican has a take now out there. The only people
Speaker 1: who are you know, not protesting are like Adam Kissinger
Speaker 1: and Liz Cheney, which shows you like he still has
Speaker 1: a hold on ninety eight percent or so. Yeah, of
Speaker 1: the GOP who all have to come to his defense.
Speaker 1: Really in a moment of needed, if you have to
Speaker 1: come to somebody's defense on something like that, then you're
Speaker 1: in a position of weakness and he's in a position
Speaker 1: of Here's another question. I'm curious for your reaction to Sager,
Speaker 1: which is, you know, there was a lot of nervousness about,
Speaker 1: you know, with regard to the January sixth and faith
Speaker 1: elector scheme, potential indictments, there's a lot of nervousness around, like, Okay,
Speaker 1: what does it mean to indict a former present? What
Speaker 1: is the reaction in the country been. Trump has obviously
Speaker 1: tried to frighten those who are looking into charging him
Speaker 1: into thinking like, oh my god, this would just like
Speaker 1: tear the country apart. I'm not sure we can do it.
Speaker 1: And you know, we'd all love to pretend these decisions
Speaker 1: aren't political and that those sort of calculations don't we end,
Speaker 1: but we know that they do. So one thing I
Speaker 1: was wondering is, if you have this first indictment and
Speaker 1: there isn't this huge create the death and destruction that
Speaker 1: Trump is like warning of, does that make some of
Speaker 1: the other individuals, and you know, the Georgia folks or
Speaker 1: the Special Council in Washington, does that make them actually
Speaker 1: less nervous about indicting Trump because you know, the seal
Speaker 1: has already been broken in a way, the dam has
Speaker 1: already been broken, and the country was able to survive.
Speaker 1: So perhaps that sort of encourages them, like, Okay, we
Speaker 1: can move forward with our own charges here, and it's
Speaker 1: not going to be the destruction of the republic. It's
Speaker 1: certainly possible. But at the same time, first of all,
Speaker 1: I think a lot from what I've seen, you know,
Speaker 1: amongst a lot of MAGA figures, all of them are
Speaker 1: saying like, look, we're not proached, like we're doing to
Speaker 1: do this peacefully. We're going to fight this in the
Speaker 1: legal system. All of that, because I think they feel
Speaker 1: pretty sure that they could probably beat this in a
Speaker 1: court of law. You only have no idea. It's not
Speaker 1: even worth speculation, because you know, it could be that
Speaker 1: they don't protest for indictment, but then who knows, maybe
Speaker 1: the dam would break whenever it comes to conviction, or
Speaker 1: maybe people learn their lesson from January sixth, and they're like, hey,
Speaker 1: you know what, like I don't need to be involved
Speaker 1: in some bs like this, but I will come out
Speaker 1: and vote and make my you know, make it very clear,
Speaker 1: like how I feel it's it's a complete, you know,
Speaker 1: range of possibilities. I genuinely don't know in terms of
Speaker 1: you know, the indictment schedule and all that. The other
Speaker 1: problem though that I could easily show, say is let's
Speaker 1: say that this you know, charged frivolous you know, in
Speaker 1: my view, is one that gets struck down immediately. Well,
Speaker 1: it actually looks more bulletproof and stronger. So then if
Speaker 1: you do come out and you charge him with Fulton County,
Speaker 1: then it's just going to set even more of a
Speaker 1: public expectation, whereas the facts of the case on that
Speaker 1: one are much harder for him. It's or on a
Speaker 1: January sixth one, or even on a classified documents one
Speaker 1: for legally you know, to have some standing. So yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is a good thing. Why why don't we go
Speaker 1: ahead and move to the political section here, because I
Speaker 1: think it's it's worth talking about what the fall this
Speaker 1: might be. So political reactions thoughts, broader takeaways? What do
Speaker 1: you think? Yeah, it's what's your fifty thousand foot I mean,
Speaker 1: the big takeaway is this is a remarkable moment in history.
Speaker 1: I think the impact on the GOP electorate is incredibly clear.
Speaker 1: I think the impact on a general electorate is somewhat
Speaker 1: less clear. I would lean in the direction of listen,
Speaker 1: if you're being indicted and you're on trial for this
Speaker 1: and probably other indictments to come, that's probably going to
Speaker 1: be a bad thing for most for a lot of
Speaker 1: ordinary voters, the type of people who may be persuadable,
Speaker 1: which you know, it's a small sliver in the country,
Speaker 1: but they're determinative at this point. So, you know, do
Speaker 1: I think that these are the strongest charges against Trump? No,
Speaker 1: but you know, you call them frivolous. I wouldn't call
Speaker 1: them frivolous. I think if you or I were engaged
Speaker 1: in these types of schemes husher Maine payments and potential
Speaker 1: campaign finance, like I, we would get hit. Right. So,
Speaker 1: I think a lot of people will look at this
Speaker 1: as this is a man who has gotten off for
Speaker 1: so many things, so many times, and they're not going
Speaker 1: to be super hung up on whether this was the
Speaker 1: strongest case against him. They're more interested in if this
Speaker 1: is you know, people who want to see Trump held accountable,
Speaker 1: is he actually going to be held accountable for anything? Ever?
Speaker 1: And so that's kind of my you know, that's my
Speaker 1: view is it's going to be a worshack test for
Speaker 1: how people felt about Trump going in, and the actual
Speaker 1: details of the cases matter somewhat less from a political perspective.
Speaker 1: Obviously from a perspective their paramount, but from a perspective
Speaker 1: details of the case matter less that people's existing matter
Speaker 1: on the former resident. I think that's fair. I'll tell
Speaker 1: you why I say fenv of us, because look, he
Speaker 1: is an extraordinary individual. He's not a normal person, even
Speaker 1: oh in the eyes of the lot. Okay. The reason
Speaker 1: that I said it is because, okay, think about the
Speaker 1: politically what he has done here. I actually almost think
Speaker 1: back to impeachment. Do you remember, And a lot of
Speaker 1: people forget this. The highest level of GOP identification in
Speaker 1: the Trump years came at the exact moment that Democrats
Speaker 1: were indicting or were impeaching Trump over the perfect phone call.
Speaker 1: Because look, nobody was saying that the phone call was good.
Speaker 1: We're like, hey, this is not a great thing. That said.
Speaker 1: When you're gonna subject the entire country to the details
Speaker 1: of this of what a lot of people think is
Speaker 1: straight up bullshit, then a lot of people are gonna
Speaker 1: be able to see through this and they're going to
Speaker 1: conclude that one party is not serious and that the
Speaker 1: other person is being unjustly prosecuted. We almost have a
Speaker 1: direct one to one now. The feelings on January sixth, though,
Speaker 1: are very different. So I agree that the details themselves
Speaker 1: don't necessarily matter. But to the small persuadables, you know,
Speaker 1: you're doing yourself a tremendous disservice at a macro level
Speaker 1: by not focusing on the one thing that we know
Speaker 1: that these persuadables are turned off by the absolute most
Speaker 1: and putting Republicans in a tougher spot where they can't
Speaker 1: be completely united. For example, I do not believe that
Speaker 1: an initial Fulton County, you know, DA prosecution against Trump
Speaker 1: is met with the same level of GOP vociferous defense
Speaker 1: of Trump. Maybe some seventy five percent of it, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: but not the one hundred percent that we have seen
Speaker 1: right now. So I think Alvin Bragg has successfully united
Speaker 1: the entire GOP against Trump. You know, I tweeted this
Speaker 1: with potentially the dumbest charge relative to consequence in American history,
Speaker 1: and that is why, like, I look at the charge
Speaker 1: and I just think it's such a tremendous mistake because
Speaker 1: also the likelihood that he beats this charge before a
Speaker 1: judge is very high. It's very high that this case
Speaker 1: does not even go to trial. Politically, also, you're making
Speaker 1: him even more bulletproof, in my opinion, whereas it is
Speaker 1: way harder for him to contest the Fulton County one
Speaker 1: and even the January sixth one in terms of election
Speaker 1: interference or you know, conspiracy to commit to government obstruction,
Speaker 1: although they're you know, legality wise, it could be difficult. Yeah,
Speaker 1: any of those too. I mean, I guess I agree
Speaker 1: with like the broad sentiment of the American people, which
Speaker 1: is that he did it, that the allegations against him,
Speaker 1: theorious that they're not nothing, and also that there were
Speaker 1: politics involved here. Like I feel all of those things,
Speaker 1: and I definitely don't you know, I definitely agree with
Speaker 1: you that of the charges that he is facing and
Speaker 1: of the things that people broadly want to see him
Speaker 1: held accountable for, this one is there's no doubt about it.
Speaker 1: This is the weakest and it's the weakest case. I
Speaker 1: think the timeline of this is all going to matter
Speaker 1: a lot, because remember, it's not like he's gonna this
Speaker 1: is going to be thrown out a court immediately. This
Speaker 1: is going to take months to unfold. Probably in those
Speaker 1: ensuing months, were likely to have additional indictments on January
Speaker 1: sixth on fake life schemes that are also going to
Speaker 1: be you know, working their way through the news media
Speaker 1: and being processed by the American people in real time.
Speaker 1: So I think, like I said, bottom line, in terms
Speaker 1: of how people are going to respond to these charges
Speaker 1: and the potential charges to come, it's all going to
Speaker 1: be through the lens of whether you feel this is
Speaker 1: a person who's basically been lawless, not just in the
Speaker 1: presidency but in a lot of ways around his entire
Speaker 1: life and never been held to account for anything, and
Speaker 1: you're not going to trouble yourself too much with the
Speaker 1: details of like, well, was this the particular strongest case
Speaker 1: against him, because there's a sense this man just operates
Speaker 1: with absolute impunity, that because he has been an elite,
Speaker 1: he's been able to get away with whatever he wants,
Speaker 1: and so you're happy to see a chance for him
Speaker 1: to finally face some sort of penalty for you know,
Speaker 1: crimes that the majority of Americans, even a lot of Republicans,
Speaker 1: feel that he did in fact commit. You're right. It's
Speaker 1: important to understand that a large portion of this country
Speaker 1: hates Trump and genuinely does want to see Hi prison,
Speaker 1: like probably like thirty percent and then equally thirty percent
Speaker 1: or like never want him to see no matter what
Speaker 1: he did, they would no matter what. Yeah, in his
Speaker 1: own words, he could shoot a man on Fifth Avenue
Speaker 1: and he would still win. I actually think that's true.
Speaker 1: And then the middle part is gonna be that that
Speaker 1: That's why I can't let it go, because I'm like,
Speaker 1: you know, if this is a game of inches, like
Speaker 1: you really are giving up a lot of the uh
Speaker 1: turf that you would have. You are giving up your
Speaker 1: ability and not managing this in a smart way. Uh,
Speaker 1: We'll see how it plays. I genuinely don't know, you know,
Speaker 1: in terms of the election. I do know on the
Speaker 1: primary front, he basically just handed him the GOP primary.
Speaker 1: I mean to the extent that he hadn't already, which,
Speaker 1: if you think about it, is a foolish move. You know,
Speaker 1: if you think that Trump actually is some existential threat,
Speaker 1: and now you know, we could be in some Eugene
Speaker 1: Debs situation. But again, you know, it's not supposed to
Speaker 1: consider that it's worth it's worth saying, so just quickly
Speaker 1: on the gene Deb's situation that you reference there, there
Speaker 1: is a possibility of jail time with these charges to
Speaker 1: the extent that we you know, have guesses about what
Speaker 1: the charges are, but it is not mandatory, so he
Speaker 1: would not have to face prison time if even if
Speaker 1: you were found guilty with these particular charges. So I
Speaker 1: just wanted to put that out there. But yeah, it's
Speaker 1: you know, it's quite remarkable to watch it all unfold.
Speaker 1: I think it's very hard to predict what's going to
Speaker 1: happen in the general election, but I do think it's
Speaker 1: very clear the impact in the Republican primary. This just
Speaker 1: hands a ton of power to Trump and it's almost insurmountable.
Speaker 1: And it makes it so that all the media attention
Speaker 1: and focus is going to be on him indefinitely from
Speaker 1: here on out. So you know, good luck with like
Speaker 1: whatever little bills drawn DeSantis wants to get attention for
Speaker 1: passing through the Florida legislature. No one's going to care,
Speaker 1: even Biden. I want people to understand this. We're back
Speaker 1: in it now, folks. We're in the circus again. It
Speaker 1: is officially silly season, like we are back to the
Speaker 1: We are back to the cameras that are outside the
Speaker 1: you know the thing, the leaks from inside the Trump
Speaker 1: legal team, the Hannity interviews about what's going on. We
Speaker 1: are fully back, you know, in the Trump years. Like
Speaker 1: this is gonna be it now for for months, and
Speaker 1: it's so exhausting. Uh, you know, obviously we will break
Speaker 1: it down and keep everybody informed and all that. But
Speaker 1: this was exactly kind of what the Biden administration, all
Speaker 1: of them, were saying they wanted to move away from.
Speaker 1: And the amount of billions of dollars in earned media.
Speaker 1: He's going to say, get from the amount his name name,
Speaker 1: you know, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, all of that. Like,
Speaker 1: we are fully fully back to the Trump years in this.
Speaker 1: Let me say let go yeah, go ahead, Let me
Speaker 1: say one more thing about that, because I think Democrats
Speaker 1: never learn, they never learned, they still underestimate him. And
Speaker 1: I look, my gut instinct is that charges against him
Speaker 1: and the specter of him being on trial in the
Speaker 1: middle of the present campaign whatever is probably bad for
Speaker 1: him with the general elector. But I genuinely don't know,
Speaker 1: right I think it could it could be wash, It
Speaker 1: could go either way. I think it will be bad
Speaker 1: for him because there's just this like normy, like law
Speaker 1: and order instinct of you know, if you're on trial
Speaker 1: you did something wrong. Is bad. Democrats have forgotten what
Speaker 1: a skillful politician he can be. They have are continuing
Speaker 1: to underestimate him, and so you mentioned like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: this basically hands the Republican primary to him, and that's
Speaker 1: not really great thing for Democrats. I think they believe
Speaker 1: that it is a good thing for them because they
Speaker 1: feel that Ron DeSantis is a stronger general election candidate.
Speaker 1: Rond de Santis certainly thinks that the donors that are
Speaker 1: backing Ronda Santis certainly thinks that the polls mostly indicate
Speaker 1: that as well. Right now too, I'm not sure I
Speaker 1: buy that, because Ron de Santis is just not nearly
Speaker 1: as skillful a politician as Donald Trump, and so hard
Speaker 1: to say who's the stronger general election candidate. But I
Speaker 1: think it is foolish that Democrats at this point are
Speaker 1: actually wishing for Donald Trump to be the nominee once again,
Speaker 1: and has a lot of echoes of twenty sixteen, when
Speaker 1: they thought the same thing. They thought he'd be so
Speaker 1: weak in the general election, they thought it'd be a
Speaker 1: cake walk for Hillary Clinton, and we all know how
Speaker 1: that turned out. So I think we have a lot
Speaker 1: of echoes of history here. I completely agree with you.
Speaker 1: I say this to everybody. Somebody's like, you really think
Speaker 1: Trump can win? I said, Hey, anybody who's in major
Speaker 1: nominee GOP or DEM, they can win. Can't win. That's it, period,
Speaker 1: end of story. You have no idea what's going to happen?
Speaker 1: None Like I could. I could lay out what We're
Speaker 1: almost two years away from election. Who knows what the
Speaker 1: economy is going. We could be at a full blown
Speaker 1: recession and Trump could be running, you know, on make
Speaker 1: America great again. That sounds pretty good. You know, we
Speaker 1: could have a crazy escalation of the Ukraine wore and
Speaker 1: Trump is the only guy who's calling for peace in
Speaker 1: the election, and he gets re elected. You have or
Speaker 1: we could say it the other way. You know, Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's an old man. Yeah, yeah, we don't know what
Speaker 1: the future holds for him. And then even you know,
Speaker 1: if his health even just declines and people or thinking like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, we're gonna have Kamala Harris as the
Speaker 1: commander in chief. No, thank you. There's a million ways
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump, even facing indictment or prison for whatever
Speaker 1: is coming down the bike here, could be walking back
Speaker 1: into the White House. Now, I'm not saying that's a guarantee.
Speaker 1: I do think he's weaker than he was before. I
Speaker 1: think he's hobbled by you know this. Certainly people were
Speaker 1: hated stop the steal and hated January sixth, and that
Speaker 1: clearly has been sort of like an albatross around his
Speaker 1: neck with the general public. But never say never, man,
Speaker 1: don't underastimate this man. They always do. They always do.
Speaker 1: That's okay, I guess we talk about Okay. Thank you
Speaker 1: everybody for joining us for our emergency episode here. I
Speaker 1: hope you guys enjoyed it. As we said, we got
Speaker 1: Breaking Points dot com if you want to be able
Speaker 1: to watch the show on Spotify as well for all
Speaker 1: of our premium members, and we'll see you all later.
Speaker 1: If there's anything that happens over the weekend, we'll monitor
Speaker 1: it and if necessary, we'll do another breaking thing. We'll
Speaker 1: see everybody later. Bye, yeall.