Trump has been a victim of lawfare and political persecution for the last 9 years, but it has really ramped up since he announced he would be running for President this election cycle. To take up all the lawfare wages against President Trump, our guest is one of President Trump s leading attorneys, Will Sharp.
00:07:56.780Do you believe he wanted to sentence President Trump to jail?
00:08:00.660And if he sentenced President Trump to jail, it's probably a shoo-in for the race?
00:08:05.080Or do you want to see what happens after the November 5th election to then make a determination?
00:08:11.900Does he sentence him to jail if he loses?
00:08:13.780Does he sentence him to jail if he wins or vice versa?
00:08:15.920So, sentencing in that case was originally scheduled for July 11th.
00:08:21.120That was a couple of days before the RNC.
00:08:23.880What happened was that we won this massive presidential immunity victory at the U.S. Supreme Court on July 1st.
00:08:30.980Now, the presidential immunity decision, that says that presidents are immune for their official conduct.
00:08:38.560The New York case relates to private conduct.
00:08:41.280But the Supreme Court also said that in a prosecution brought over private conduct, you can't use as evidence immune acts, acts for which a president would have immunity.
00:08:52.520And they did exactly that in that New York prosecution.
00:08:55.480They introduced a ton of evidence that's covered by the Supreme Court's decision.
00:09:00.220So, I think Merchan understood that he had a real problem.
00:09:03.460He originally delayed sentencing to September 18th.
00:09:06.980We've continued challenging this case on the basis of presidential immunity.
00:09:10.920And, frankly, the New York DA's office seems to understand that they really screwed up because they've essentially agreed to push sentencing off twice now.
00:09:20.100I don't think sentencing will actually ever occur.
00:09:22.880I think, at the very least, we deserve a retrial, if not an absolute dismissal, on the basis of presidential immunity alone.
00:09:30.500And if this case were ever to get to direct appeal, we have ample grounds to overturn that jury verdict.
00:09:36.180The way that jury instructions were framed, many of Judge Merchan's decisions over the course of that case, they just won't stand up to appellate scrutiny.
00:09:45.960So, I think Judge Merchan understands that, legally, he has a real problem with trying to force through sentencing before a presidential election.
00:09:53.420And in his order with this most recent continuance of sentencing, he essentially acknowledged that trying to do this before the election, given the very serious legal issues that we've raised, it raises an appearance of impropriety.
00:10:10.260I think he's deeply concerned that he's just way out over his skis here.
00:10:15.120And we're glad that he saw the light here and that he made what I think is the right decision in delaying sentencing for another few months.
00:10:23.460Now, I know you, and I'm not saying it's in any degrading way, because you guys are entitled to make money as lawyers.
00:10:29.040But why should it even come to a retrial?
00:10:31.620The whole case was brought on a bunch of bullshit.
00:10:34.100I mean, it doesn't get much simpler than that.
00:10:38.220Why should President Trump have to, it doesn't matter if he's a billionaire or not, because you put it all in perspective, right?
00:10:44.260This could happen to the small man who's worth $100,000 and it'll still cost him.
00:10:48.640Why does it even have to come to the point where President Trump has to spend millions and millions and millions of more dollars to go to a retrial on a case that should have never been brought in the first place?
00:10:57.960And it's just a perversion of justice.
00:11:01.140I mean, this case should have never been brought.
00:11:03.160The reason that the FEC, the reason that Biden's own DOJ declined to prosecute President Trump on related grounds is that President Trump didn't do anything wrong here.
00:11:13.340So you've got Michael Cohen, a serial perjurer, who's willing to come into court and tell a story.
00:11:19.140And we're in front of a New York jury, in front of a biased judge who should have recused himself.
00:11:24.100And you see how the legal system can be perverted for political ends.
00:11:28.860But, yeah, if you were dealing with a defendant who wasn't Donald Trump, who didn't have the resources that President Trump has, I mean, they've indicted him in four courts.
00:11:38.120They're trying to seize his businesses.
00:11:40.320I mean, this is just it's absolutely corrupt behavior.
00:11:43.540And it's a total perversion of everything that we as Americans stand for in terms of constitutional rights, in terms of the rule of law, in terms of the way that our legal system is supposed to function.
00:11:54.780It really is outrageous that we've even gotten to this point.
00:11:59.000Yeah, you had mentioned Juan Merchant again and the conflictions he has.
00:12:02.440I want to take that up on the other side of this break, because I think Juan Merchant, I mean, any way you look at it, is one of the most conflicted judges.
00:12:09.560I think we've ever seen on any high profile, any case that I can ever think about back in history between his daughter making millions of dollars and raising millions of dollars for the DNC working for Kamala Harris.
00:12:23.080I also want to take up on the other side of this break, Jack Smith's latest indictment against President Trump in D.C.
00:12:29.700The man just can't take an L. We're going to talk about it on the other side of the break.
00:12:33.120We're talking with Will Scharf. We're coming right back.
00:13:26.380Use promo code John, J-O-H-N, or call 800-969-3077.
00:13:33.280And be sure to use promo code John, that's J-O-H-N, for all those amazing savings on all MyPillow products.
00:13:43.180We're back. We're talking with Attorney Will Scharf, one of President Trump's leading attorneys.
00:13:47.500Will, before we went to break, I brought up Juan Merchant and his daughter and all her conflicting issues.
00:13:52.740How does a judge like this, when you have a daughter who's raised near $100 million for the DNC off of the Trump case alone, and I say off of the Trump case alone, nothing else, just emails sent out that President Trump was being prosecuted and the Democrats fundraised off of it.
00:14:11.520Before that, making money, millions of dollars, I think $8 million off the Kamala Harris campaign.
00:14:15.840Now, this is a kid. I work the ranks of politics. I've never seen a million dollars come into my pocket, and I've worked from the bottom up.
00:14:23.440How is a judge allowed to sit and stay on a case when he has his daughter making all this damn money off this case?
00:14:31.800How is that not ripe for, I mean, an automatic dismissal?
00:14:34.840Yeah, you know, we've moved repeatedly for Judge Merchant to recuse off of this case, and it's important to remember what the legal standard is.
00:14:43.840In Kaepernick v. Massey, which is the seminal Supreme Court case on judicial recusal, the Supreme Court held that given sufficiently extreme facts, which I believe we have here,
00:14:54.000even the appearance of impropriety is enough to require a judge to recuse, and if a judge doesn't recuse, that's a violation of a party's due process rights.
00:15:05.440That's what we're dealing with here. Judge Merchant should have recused.
00:15:08.460I think his failure to recuse is in and of itself reversible error, and it's just crazy that we have this situation where you have a guy with the conflict that he has.
00:15:19.180I mean, he also contributed money to Joe Biden in 2020, which he shouldn't have done under New York judicial rules.
00:15:25.920He should have recused, plain and simple. Like you said, I've never seen a case like this.
00:15:31.880Judges are usually very careful to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, to avoid taking cases where anybody could even question their impartiality,
00:15:41.440and that's the opposite of what we've seen play out here.
00:15:44.040So in New York, it's up to the judge, and I don't know, correct me if I'm wrong, is this federally as well,
00:15:49.760it's up to the judge to recuse himself, not somebody tell the judge, listen, you have to recuse yourself.
00:15:54.960So judges ultimately get to decide whether to recuse or not. That's a decision left up to their discretion.
00:16:01.340It is reviewable on appeal, but typically what happens is if a judge doesn't recuse himself, a party will move for recusal,
00:16:10.280and that's what we've done repeatedly in New York. Judge Rashawn has denied those requests and said that he thinks he can be impartial.
00:16:17.740We just think that, you know, given the appearance of impropriety, given the conflicts of interest at play,
00:16:22.700there's no way he should have stayed on this case. That's an issue that if we were to get to direct appeal,
00:16:27.720we would obviously continue to challenge. In the meantime, though, we think we have other very strong grounds to challenge that jury verdict,
00:16:34.720and we're certainly hopeful that we get that jury verdict thrown out altogether.
00:16:37.960It's unbelievable to think that in the first place, a judge is the one who gets to recuse himself.
00:16:44.420If he decides he doesn't want to recuse himself, you file an appeal for him to recuse himself,
00:16:48.500and then he makes the ruling on, if he allows you to appeal, him recusing himself.
00:16:52.840I mean, it's the most ass-backwards thing I've ever heard of in my life, but I guess that's the legal system for you.
00:16:59.640I want to turn to the D.C. case, Jack Smith, who just can't seem to take a loss,
00:17:04.300and the man's been losing, he's been losing it, but he's also losing these cases now.
00:17:09.440Down in Florida, the case, the Judge Eileen Cannon case, dismissing, should have never been brought in the first place.
00:17:16.940But now, after the Supreme Court ruling that President Trump has immunity, Jack Smith tailored his case a little bit in D.C.
00:17:24.200The thing that was alarming to me is he introduced new evidence, evidence that's so confidential that President Trump's attorneys are not allowed to see it.
00:17:33.940President Trump himself is not allowed to see it.
00:17:38.520So, look, what happened here is Jack Smith took a massive loss at the U.S. Supreme Court on presidential immunity.
00:17:44.100The court ruled that large aspects of that case were just not proper, that you can't attempt to indict a president over his core presidential functions,
00:17:55.360things like conversations he had with the Department of Justice, asking the Department of Justice to enforce the law.
00:18:02.360I mean, those are core presidential duties.
00:18:04.320You're not allowed to attempt to hold a president criminally liable for that.
00:18:08.380So, Jack Smith took this massive loss but wanted to keep the D.C. case alive.
00:18:13.500So, he went back in front of a grand jury.
00:18:15.620He pulled out some of the things that he'd originally relied on but still left in what we believe are mountains of allegations for which President Trump has immunity under the Supreme Court's decision.
00:18:29.740So, to me, this is a last gasp attempt by Jack Smith to keep a case alive that, as you said, should have never been brought in the first place.
00:18:37.120But, in addition to that, is on life support, if not hospice care, in the aftermath of that Supreme Court opinion.
00:18:44.160We're going to see that play out in the next couple months in D.C.
00:18:48.180We will move to dismiss on a similar basis that we use down in Florida that Jack Smith is unconstitutionally appointed, unconstitutionally funded.
00:19:00.460Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a great concurrence on exactly that point in Trump, the United States, in the presidential immunity case.
00:19:08.280And we believe that Jack Smith was unconstitutionally appointed, that he's wielding powers that he can't constitutionally wield.
00:19:16.020And we're hopeful that that issue gets the due consideration that it deserves in D.C.
00:19:21.380In addition to that, you know, presidential immunity is still a massive issue.
00:19:25.740There are issues with the Supreme Court's Fisher case.
00:19:29.200The Supreme Court basically said that two of the charges in President Trump's case, the DOJ's whole theory of how those charges work, just doesn't mesh with the way those statutes are laid out.
00:19:43.780So we have a lot of grounds to continue fighting in D.C.
00:19:46.920I don't think that prosecution is moving really at any quick pace at all, certainly not at a pace that will affect the 2024 election.
00:19:55.760And it's important to note that when that case was first brought, I mean, Jack Smith wanted to go to trial last January on that case.
00:20:03.020And the case was originally scheduled for trial last March before we successfully got it stayed on the basis of our presidential immunity appeal.
00:20:12.240So I think Jack Smith's whole plan here was just to force President Trump to sit through trial after trial after trial.
00:20:19.660We've largely defeated that plan and we're going to keep fighting him.
00:20:22.740And I think we're going to keep winning.
00:20:35.820I was so happy he got to see it because Jack Smith rebuffed by the Supreme Court for the second time in his career.
00:20:40.580There's a lot of people who don't even get to ever go to the Supreme Court as an attorney.
00:20:43.940But from this man to be rebuffed twice by the Supreme Court, I mean, absolutely may lose day.
00:20:48.820I want to focus in on the new documents he introduced.
00:20:53.340So when they went to Mar-a-Lago and they seized all these documents and they raided the place with guns and went through a safe and they took all the documents.
00:21:03.320So they they presumably went through everything because they were looking for something he took for the nuclear code, something they could get him on the espionage act.
00:21:10.420Because, you know, that would be the worst thing they could possibly do to the man.
00:21:17.200Obviously, none of that was in there because these indictments would have been a lot worse than they really were that we've seen.
00:21:22.780I mean, why is Jack Smith in this latest indictment introducing new documents that he didn't introduce in the first time?
00:21:30.440Presumably he had them because, I mean, they have all the manpower in the world.
00:21:33.640This isn't, you know, a small law firm they're taking their hand and all the documents to and saying, hey, go through this discovery.
00:21:40.120I mean, this is an organization of thousands of attorneys in the DOJ and the FBI.
00:21:46.240What is the new document he introduced that's so damning to this new indictment?
00:21:51.040So, look, I mean, basically, as I said before, the Supreme Court's presidential immunity opinion gutted key parts of Jack Smith's legal theory.
00:22:01.560So now he's rushing to make up ground.
00:22:07.660So I think they're basically throwing paint at the wall that they rushed in front of a new grand jury.
00:22:12.700This was not a slow deliberative process.
00:22:16.480They wanted to get as much in as they could.
00:22:19.000And they attempted to sort of fireproof their case from the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision.
00:22:25.560I think they've been entirely unsuccessful in doing that.
00:22:28.640I can't speak to, you know, grand jury documents or things that are under seal here.
00:22:33.360But basically, from a 10,000 foot view, what you're seeing here is Jack Smith's desperate attempt to rescue a case that after the Supreme Court's decision, any reasonable prosecutor would have just dismissed.
00:22:45.180We're going to see more tactics like that.
00:22:47.900We're going to see more shenanigans in the months ahead.
00:22:51.080Jack Smith's whole office was set up to get Trump.
00:22:54.640And now that they're failing, they're going to get increasingly desperate.
00:22:58.140But we believe the law is on our side.
00:23:00.180And I'll also say that the facts are on our side.
00:23:02.380I don't believe that President Trump did anything wrong.
00:23:04.660Certainly nothing illegal in his efforts to investigate election fraud in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
00:23:11.380And that's really what the case is all about.
00:23:58.240Yeah, as you said, I think this is one of the most important presidential elections in our nation.
00:24:03.220We really have two competing visions of America.
00:24:06.760You know, the left has become increasingly unhinged, totally unmoored from core American principles, from the Constitution, from the rule of law.
00:24:14.180If they win, if Kamala Harris is in the White House, you are going to see radical Marxism, at least attempts to implement radical Marxism in every aspect of American life.
00:24:24.380I mean, Kamala Harris's first major policy proposal after becoming the Democrat presidential candidate was Marxist price controls.
00:24:32.940It was attempting to turn back the clock and basically reenact the Soviet Union's economic policies.
00:24:39.020I mean, this is not yesteryear's Democrat Party anymore.
00:24:42.320You know, we're not talking about Bill Clinton or Bill Bradley or whoever anymore.
00:24:46.680This is a very different breed of leftist.
00:24:51.540I think it's also worth remembering that this is one of the first elections in American history where we have two candidates that both have a presidential record to run on.
00:25:01.640You know, we know what President Trump got us.
00:25:04.060He got us one of the strongest economies in American history.
00:25:07.140Peace abroad, a resurgence of American strength, a secure border.
00:25:10.700We know what he's capable of and we know what he's going to do if he gets into office.
00:25:15.380And then on the other hand, we know what the Biden-Harris administration has gotten us.
00:25:19.700Record inflation, an economy in shambles, a world at war, a totally uncontrolled southern border with tens of millions of people streaming across.
00:25:28.240We cannot afford another four years of this.
00:25:30.520I think the American people understand that.
00:25:34.140And that's why I think President Trump is going to win resoundingly in November.
00:25:37.620But if we don't get out and vote, I mean, if conservatives don't actually put in the work and go out and make sure that our friends vote and that we all get to the polls,
00:25:47.360unless we make this too big to rig, the Democrats are going to steal another election and we're going to be right back to square one, you know, where we were in 2021.
00:25:55.680So to me, that's the most important thing is folks need to understand what's at stake here.
00:26:00.420We can't get dispirited, whether it's by this campaign of lawfare or by the mainstream media.
00:26:05.160We need to be willing to, as President Trump would say, fight, fight, fight, and make sure we do everything that we can, everything in our power to make sure that November goes the way that it should.
00:26:31.300She couldn't answer a straight question.
00:26:33.120One thing I wish President Trump would have went up there and have done, I think the numbers just came in, 67 million people watched the debate.
00:26:40.780I wish President Trump would have went up there and looked at Kamala Harris, turned over and looked at Kamala Harris and said, what the hell are you doing on this stage?
00:26:48.800Because a lot of Americans don't understand the process of how Kamala Harris got there and how, you know, uncommon it is for her to have done what she'd done, pushing Joe Biden out.
00:26:58.980And I think Joe Biden now, I think he's got extreme resentment for Kamala Harris.
00:27:03.220I don't know if him putting the Trump hat on this week has anything to do with it, but I think he's got extreme resentment because they did push him out.
00:28:17.000And what they care about is enacting their radical leftist agenda.
00:28:20.440And whenever anything gets in the way, whether it's Trump, whether it's, frankly, Joe Biden and his failing presidential campaign,
00:28:28.580the left will lie, cheat and steal to make sure that they are in the best position possible to get more leftism done.
00:28:35.320And that's what we've seen time and time again in modern American history.
00:28:38.620That's what we've seen play out in this presidential election.
00:28:42.900Now, Kamala Harris at the debate, you know, all the pundits said that she did a great job and it's absolute garbage.
00:28:49.460When you actually look at the polling numbers, the polling numbers show consistently that the number one issue for Americans right now is the economy and inflation.
00:28:59.400And when you look at the polling numbers coming out of that debate, a vast majority of people who watch that debate had more confidence in President Trump handling the economy than they do in Kamala Harris handling the economy.
00:29:10.980That is the key number. That is the key metric coming out of that debate.
00:29:16.060The debate was an unalloyed success for President Trump and an unalloyed failure for Kamala Harris.
00:29:22.320She failed to convince the American people that she would be a good steward of our economy, which is the issue front of mind for most Americans.
00:29:31.720I don't think there's going to be another presidential debate because I don't think Kamala Harris's team will put her up again.
00:29:38.040They had the most friendly moderators possible.
00:29:41.880They had in this ABC News team a totally biased group of supposed moderators.
00:29:48.560They knew exactly what they were doing.
00:29:50.160And even in that setting, Kamala Harris couldn't seal the deal, couldn't get it done.
00:29:54.460The idea that they would put her up in front of Brett Baer from Fox News or any unbiased moderator, even the CNN team, you know, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash or whoever,
00:30:04.780they're just not going to do it because they can't take that risk.
00:30:08.880Yeah, I think ABC, David Muir is a total, the guy's a total loser.
00:30:12.980I mean, to fact check President Trump seven times, the abortion thing, he went after, they wanted to stick on abortion for 20 minutes
00:30:20.720because abortion historically makes Republicans look bad because they don't explain it.
00:30:25.040I think President Trump explained it the best any Republican has ever explained it for all 67 million Americans tuning in and watching,
00:30:32.340even the non-Americans tuning in and watching.
00:30:35.360But David Muir was so quick to fact check him about, you know, no baby ever being aborted alive.
00:30:40.460Well, just the news is John Solomon put out a report the next day that in Tim Walz's state of Minnesota in 2025, babies were born and aborted.
00:30:49.860Yeah. So this guy was so quick to fact check it, an absolute know nothing.
00:30:54.120I mean, it made sense that he was on Kamala's team because she's another know nothing.
00:30:57.840Everything she said was rehearsed and totally fraudulent.
00:31:00.960I want to wrap up with too big to rig.
00:31:04.340A new report out in Wisconsin says that 140,000 Wisconsinites can vote through a voter ID loophole in 2024 through a mail-in ballot.
00:31:13.520Pretty much they don't have to identify or give anything.
00:31:36.120Merrick Garland last week comes out and says, you know, should you come out and challenge this election and speak out?
00:31:43.280Go look at those January Sixers who are sitting there pretty much rotting in jail because that's going to be you.
00:31:50.660What are we supposed to do if there are abnormalities in the election?
00:31:54.300Will, you as an attorney, you look at what happened to guys like Rudy Giuliani,
00:31:57.520other lawyers across the spectrum who have been disbarred, taking everything taken from them, paying millions of dollars to defend themselves.
00:32:08.680What are you supposed to do in a situation where if we see in 2024 there are abnormalities, there is rigging, there is theft.
00:32:16.700What are we supposed to do as American citizens?
00:32:18.820What are we supposed to do in your case as attorneys?
00:32:20.880Yeah, well, look, first, the key thing is we need to win.
00:32:24.300So if you think historically, you know, throughout American history, there's always been some voter fraud.
00:32:29.560In 2020, they used the COVID crisis, the manufactured COVID crisis to basically throw the doors wide open
00:32:37.180and to fundamentally corrupt the way that we do voting and the way that we do election integrity in this country.
00:32:47.100The Dems are going to do everything they can to steal this thing.
00:32:49.820They're going to use mail-in voting to the extent they can.
00:32:52.820They're going to try to pollute the voter rolls.
00:32:55.100They're going to pull all the same tricks that they pulled in 2020, except without COVID, they're not going to be quite as effective.
00:33:02.200So if the quantum of fraud throughout American history has, let's say, been 1%, and if in 2020 it was instead 5%, now we're back down to like 2% or 3%.
00:33:12.700The way that we win is by turning out every voter that we turned out in 2020.
00:33:18.880If all 74 million people who voted for President Trump in 2020 come back out and vote for him again, plus new younger voters who are coming into the party, plus whoever else, we're going to win in a landslide.
00:33:29.840What we can't allow to happen is for people to get so dispirited by everything that you're talking about, by all the stories coming out about election rigging.
00:33:38.720We can't allow ourselves to be demoralized by what we know the left's bag of tricks are, because the way that we will win is by making this too big to rig.
00:33:49.140I think President Trump's exactly right on that point.
00:33:51.980We need to bank every single vote we can.
00:33:54.940That's how we'll beat the quantum of fraud.
00:33:56.860That's how we'll beat the Democrats' fraudulent margins.
00:33:59.700And that's how we'll put President Trump back in the White House.
00:34:02.440In terms of me personally, you know, I know John Eastman.
00:34:09.860I mean, the left is willing to run roughshod over anybody and everybody willing to stand up.
00:34:16.080Those are the stakes that you take on yourself when you agree to do things like what my team and I are doing in representing President Trump.
00:34:23.780We know that there are risks involved.
00:34:26.340And I think for a lot of Americans, there are risks involved in being active in the political arena.
00:34:31.920But again, the way that the left will win is if they intimidate us and bully us out of the arena.
00:34:38.900If they make us so scared of what they're going to do to us that we stop fighting, then there's not going to be a fight at all.
00:35:44.340I mean, the fact that we're, you know, OK, it's like owning a restaurant and saying, well, my employees are only stealing 100 bucks a week from me or 200 bucks a week.
00:35:56.440You know, it's so sad, and I'm not saying it to you.
00:35:59.580I'm saying that this is where we're at in America right now, and it's sad.
00:36:03.260The other thing that's sad is, you know, you presumably have a wife and a family that you have to feed.
00:36:07.280And for you to think in the back of your mind that you have to contemplate, if I do this, here's the consequences, but I have to do it to save my country.
00:36:16.260I mean, it's really sickening to think that this is where we've come to in America, that, you know, we have to worry about what we say and worry about what we do to save this country.