Defund Fallout, Arizona Showdown, and the Hunter Biden Probe, with Rafael Mangual, Karrin Taylor Robson, Jonna Spilbor, and Mark Eiglarsh | Ep. 363
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 37 minutes
Words per Minute
187.57295
Summary
In this episode, Megynkellek sits down with Johnis Bilboer and Mark Eiglarsh to discuss rising crime and how it affects us all. Plus, former Vice President Joe Biden, Steve Bannon, Hunter Biden, and Amber Heard are all on the docket.
Transcript
00:00:02.840
Make sure your team is taken care of through every twist and turn
00:00:05.980
with Canada Life Savings, Retirement and Benefits Plans.
00:00:09.660
Whether you want to grow your team, support your employees at every stage
00:00:13.120
or build a workplace people want to be a part of,
00:00:16.200
Canada Life has flexible plans for companies of all sizes
00:00:19.400
so it's easy to find a solution that works for you.
00:00:22.840
Visit canadalife.com slash employee benefits to learn more.
00:00:31.220
Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest and provocative conversations.
00:00:42.100
Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show and happy Friday.
00:00:48.560
Two Kellys Court originals are here, Johnis Bilboer and Mark Eiglarsh,
00:00:52.300
meaning I've been having these guys on Kellys Court since it was Kendall's Court.
00:01:05.640
They withstood the test of time and they'll be here in our second hour
00:01:12.700
Hunter Biden, Steve Bannon and Amber Heard all on the docket.
00:01:17.720
Plus, earlier this week, I spoke to Trump-backed Arizona gubernatorial candidate Carrie Lake
00:01:22.180
and made an offer to her Pence-backed rival to come on the show.
00:01:27.880
Karen Taylor Robeson will be here today to respond to charges that she is, quote,
00:01:31.740
a rhino and will ask about the former vice president's endorsement
00:01:35.960
and what this race tells us about the future of the Republican Party.
00:01:39.820
We're seeing these intra-party wars pop up state after state.
00:01:46.260
My first guest has a book coming out in a few days that takes a deep dive into the criminal justice system.
00:01:53.100
He looks into the claims that activists have been making about police,
00:01:57.420
criminals and the defund the police movement and finds out if the stats back any of these charges up.
00:02:04.060
He also offers thoughtful ways that we can make things better.
00:02:06.760
Raphael Mangual is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of Criminal Injustice,
00:02:14.400
what the push for decarceration and depolicing gets wrong and who it hurts the most.
00:02:29.300
But what if you or a partner needs to step away?
00:02:31.720
When the unexpected happens, count on Canada Life's flexible life and health insurance
00:02:37.040
to help your business keep working, even when you can't.
00:02:40.460
Don't let life's challenges stand in the way of your success.
00:02:45.860
Visit canadalife.com slash business protection to learn more.
00:02:58.820
My gosh, you knew how to hit your book at exactly the right time.
00:03:05.020
You know, crime kind of, you know, has been an issue for a really long time.
00:03:09.920
But unfortunately, we are in the middle of a bit of a crisis.
00:03:14.720
You know, 2020 saw the single largest homicide increase in American history year over year,
00:03:21.080
which is the year I started working on this book.
00:03:23.960
So hopefully it makes an impact and encourages some debate that can get us through some of
00:03:30.280
the issues that are holding us back on its front.
00:03:37.720
The single largest spike in homicides year over year in American history is 30% across the
00:03:47.500
Of course, it was larger in some cities, smaller in other cities.
00:03:51.040
I get into this in the book a little bit, but it's kind of a colloquialism to talk about
00:04:00.740
It helps simplify the conversation for some people.
00:04:05.420
But sometimes it distracts us from a really important reality, which is that crime is a
00:04:09.820
problem that is not and has never been equally distributed across the country.
00:04:13.820
You know, if you were to be randomly dropped by, you know, parachute over someplace in the
00:04:19.700
United States, chances are pretty good you're going to land somewhere with a murder rate
00:04:27.160
And, you know, there'll be a handful of times where you land in a place that rivals some of
00:04:32.800
And that's what really drives national crime rates.
00:04:37.520
And we have to remember that there are people living in these places, good people who deserve
00:04:42.400
safety, who are just trying to go about their lives.
00:04:44.960
And, you know, they're living in neighborhoods with homicide rates, you know, 20, 30, 40 times
00:04:51.020
And when you read your book and anything at City Journal or Manhattan is to do all the
00:04:59.380
Um, you see the truth, which is what happens is the media and the Democrats find one cherry
00:05:06.940
picked case of cops who do the wrong thing, cops like a Derek Chauvin with George Floyd,
00:05:13.940
and they put it on loop and they try to say it represents all police officers.
00:05:18.820
And then policing in the neighborhood goes down.
00:05:23.720
Um, crime goes up and murder spike sometimes in record levels in the very communities that
00:05:31.240
the people who got the firestorm started in the way they did in the dishonest way they
00:05:38.600
It is black and brown people who are in those numbers that caught in the 2020 record setting
00:05:47.920
Yeah, they bore the absolute brunt of that spike.
00:05:51.860
I mean, to begin with, you know, the, the, if you just look at homicide victimization rates,
00:05:55.160
it's about 10 X for black males than it is for, for white males.
00:05:58.920
So when we talk about, you know, uh, violent crime in New York city, for example, every single
00:06:04.000
year for which we have data here going back to at least 2008, a minimum, a minimum of 95%
00:06:11.000
of all shooting victims are either black or Hispanic, almost all of them male.
00:06:13.820
That is one of the starkest and most persistent disparities in the criminal justice data, uh,
00:06:21.320
And it gets nowhere near as much attention as the disparities, uh, of enforcement statistics.
00:06:27.040
And, and that is of course the focus of, you know, people who have been critical of the
00:06:34.740
They take these really terrible cases and these are terrible cases, right?
00:06:38.800
And I'm by no means in my argument that the criminal justice system is perfect.
00:06:45.400
Any human endeavor is going to be susceptible to human error, even malice and malevolence,
00:06:54.380
Um, but we live in a really, really big country with 330 million people in a country this size,
00:07:02.540
And if you have, uh, an institution like the, the sort of mainstream legacy media, that's
00:07:09.400
dedicated to playing up one of those really rare things, it can make it seem like this
00:07:16.640
And then that distorts our perception of, of what the issue is.
00:07:20.180
I mean, sometimes I'll give, you know, public talks and I'll pull audience members and I'll
00:07:23.820
say like, how often do you think police officers use force?
00:07:26.820
And, you know, sometimes people say, oh, it's 15% or sometimes it's 50% or 60%.
00:07:36.040
It's, it's less, it's like a less than a fraction of 1%.
00:07:39.680
Um, but this is not something that say that one more time of the days on the job, like
00:07:45.140
less than 1% of what the days that they're less than 1% of all arrests that are affected
00:07:51.700
So, uh, just one example of this, there was a study, um, that looked at a million calls
00:07:56.000
for service across three police departments, one in North Carolina, one in Arizona, and
00:07:59.840
one in Louisiana, that million calls for service.
00:08:07.320
And that entire data set, there is just one fatal police shooting captured.
00:08:11.920
And in 99.7% of the arrests captured in that data set, no force was used to affect the
00:08:17.760
And in 98% of the cases in which force was used to affect the arrest, there was either
00:08:25.040
Like this is completely at odds with what the dominant narrative about policing is in
00:08:29.920
We're all told that police are these sort of trigger happy, violence prone Neanderthals
00:08:34.920
who are just going out there hunting black people.
00:08:39.680
Um, police are incredibly restrained that again, that doesn't mean that they don't make
00:08:43.340
mistakes and that there aren't examples that you can pull, um, and essentially cherry
00:08:47.900
pick to, to try and create the sort of distorted image that I think a lot of Americans have
00:08:52.040
in their head about policing, but that doesn't do us any good.
00:08:54.260
Um, what it does is it encourages both a pullback on the part of officers who are understandably
00:09:00.940
afraid that should they find themselves in a controversial use of force, that they're
00:09:04.320
not going to get the benefit of the doubt, that they're not going to get a fair shake,
00:09:08.100
um, when, when that case is being evaluated, whether it's by the executives in their department
00:09:12.800
or, um, you know, by, by the, by the court of public opinion.
00:09:18.080
And then on top of that, it encourages a policy regime, a policy agenda that we've seen over
00:09:23.060
the last two years really get accelerated that is sort of singularly aimed at constraining
00:09:28.160
the power of police, defunding them, minimizing the resources at their disposal.
00:09:32.540
And that has costs and it has costs that are disproportionately borne by the places with
00:09:39.460
And, and that's the kind of, you know, sad irony of this whole debate is that, you know,
00:09:43.700
a lot of these reform proposals are advanced in the name of so-called black and brown communities,
00:09:48.860
but these are the places that had benefited the most from the crime declines that policing
00:09:54.760
But if you look at just homicides from 1990 to 2014, it was a massive decrease in the nation's
00:10:01.840
That decrease added 0.14 years to the life expectancy of white men and 1.0 years to the life expectancy
00:10:10.620
And this is from a study done by a sociologist named Patrick Sharkey.
00:10:14.660
The public health equivalent of that, according to him, was the elimination of obesity altogether.
00:10:21.120
And so what I try to ask people is what sense does it make to claim that the institution of policing
00:10:27.680
and criminal justice writ large is sort of designed and operated to the detriment of black communities?
00:10:33.360
How is that congruous with the reality that when the system achieves its stated ends, which are crime declines,
00:10:39.200
ask any police executive in America, what are you trying to do?
00:10:43.220
Well, when that succeeds, when that happens, it's black and brown communities that benefit the most.
00:10:49.140
So there's a real kind of underlying incongruity and just the basic framing of the argument
00:10:53.200
that I think just doesn't get enough attention and makes for a really just unproductive national conversation.
00:11:00.480
I mean, that's many of us have been saying it in the wake of George Floyd and so on over
00:11:06.040
But really, the proper response to the, you know, cops are bad.
00:11:13.260
Look at Derek Chauvin is you're having the wrong conversation.
00:11:19.080
That's really the proper response, because if you tell me that that that 95 percent of the
00:11:23.080
murder victims in in America are black and brown people, do we know what the homicide rate or like
00:11:30.600
how many people were killed, like on an average basis?
00:11:44.020
So you're talking about a thousand people just to take one city as an example.
00:11:48.180
A thousand people, the 95 percent of whom are black and brown, killed by murder, killed
00:11:58.680
Never mind what happens in Chicago, what happens in Baltimore or what happens in Philly.
00:12:03.400
We take one case of a bad cop or an allegedly bad cop and we put it on loop and say that's
00:12:08.240
the problem because it's so much easier to fix.
00:12:10.720
It's so much easier to attack the cops and say bad policing.
00:12:15.500
Racism, as opposed to taking a hard look at why, because in a lot of those cases, it's
00:12:21.180
black on black crime, black on brown crime, whatever.
00:12:24.160
And so that's that's where the media says, hmm, wait, they don't mind covering if the
00:12:29.740
black cop killing a black defendant or, you know, a suspect, they'll cover that.
00:12:36.800
But they don't want to get into black on black crime or black on brown crime where neither
00:12:44.920
And anyone who's called attention to that, like in the media or otherwise, many have been
00:12:49.300
fired for even trying to raise it or contextualize what we're seeing.
00:12:54.260
Why, why, why can't we go there who was, I think, a data journalist at Reuters who lost his job
00:13:01.720
after bringing attention to this kind of thing.
00:13:04.700
And so, yeah, I think I think there's just so much power that was discovered, so much political
00:13:12.940
power discovered in just perpetuating the narrative that these big legacy institutions, policing,
00:13:20.640
prosecution, corrections, that that they were systemically racist.
00:13:24.620
If you can make that claim, you have a foe to fight against.
00:13:27.640
And if you're fighting against a foe, that just makes you attractive to, you know, the
00:13:32.940
public in a way like everyone, everyone loves, you know, kind of an underdog story.
00:13:36.840
Everyone loves someone who's sticking it to the man.
00:13:38.620
Um, and so it helps to kind of ignore the good that the man or the system does.
00:13:44.300
I mean, you know, if you look at just study after study after study, I mean, it's one of
00:13:48.220
the most robust findings in the criminological literature.
00:13:50.720
More policing means less crime and that holds true everywhere.
00:13:55.900
But the effect given where crime concentrates, the effect is more pronounced in black communities.
00:14:01.100
And so more policing doesn't just mean less crime.
00:14:03.600
It means less black on black crime, means less black victimization, less brown victimization,
00:14:08.620
these are precisely the communities that need the most help that already have enough to
00:14:13.720
They already have all these other social problems, uh, that they're fighting.
00:14:17.200
And, and so it, it becomes really, really, um, uh, just important to kind of take a step
00:14:23.200
back, reground the debate in, in data and acknowledge that for all of its problems, institutions like
00:14:29.800
police, like in cars, like our, our carceral system, that they exist because there is this underlying
00:14:36.560
reality of, of violence that is again, not equally distributed.
00:14:39.940
Take any city in America, about 5% of street segments are going to see about 50% of all
00:14:45.240
Um, and so that has really profound implications for the rest of the New York city pattern over
00:14:53.260
And the number of that, that, that experiments are replicated in cities across America and cities
00:15:00.580
I mean, part of it is just a function of the built environment, right?
00:15:03.140
There, there are studies showing, for example, stand by, cause I actually want to get there
00:15:10.300
Um, the book, the book talks about sort of why the left doesn't want to go there or what
00:15:16.560
they'll say when it like looking at black on black crime or, you know, minority on minority
00:15:21.920
And it says, Oh, you know, they'll talk about poverty, poverty.
00:15:25.280
So it's sort of, it's sort of like, we don't want to go there cause we caused it, you know,
00:15:29.140
where America is not doing its part to help these communities.
00:15:33.600
So don't lecture me about the crime rate with those people.
00:15:35.660
Cause we should be doing something about that too.
00:15:37.500
And you take that on square and say, Hey, it's not true.
00:15:41.700
And then say, B, here's what's actually leading to crime.
00:15:44.800
Here's what actually we might want to consider.
00:15:47.880
It's not necessarily that we can fix it, but here's, what's actually driving criminals to
00:16:01.620
There is not a consistent relationship with things like between things like poverty,
00:16:06.060
unemployment, economic inequality, and violent crime.
00:16:10.580
There's, there's some relationship between those things and property crime, things like
00:16:15.660
If you're poor, you're more likely to steal, but that's not the majority of, of, of violence,
00:16:21.400
when we're talking about shootings, robberies, rapes, homicides, that, that is not driven
00:16:30.040
We know this because it's just what the data says.
00:16:32.580
When take New York city, for example, 1989, which is the year before homicides peak in
00:16:40.020
Um, the poverty rate in New York city was actually slightly lower than it was in 2016.
00:16:47.020
Because that's the year before our Valley number of homicides of 292.
00:16:51.780
So here you have poverty moving in the wrong direction, albeit slightly.
00:16:56.040
And yet you have this massive, massive decline, uh, in homicides.
00:16:59.880
And I have yet to hear the sort of socioeconomic explanation, uh, for New York's, uh, uh, decline
00:17:06.620
It's, it just, it's, it's not out there because it's not a socioeconomic phenomenon.
00:17:10.500
It's a, it had a lot more to do with the fact that we reinvested in policing.
00:17:14.660
We revolutionized policing, but let me stand you by standing by because it's taking my brain
00:17:19.640
like one 10 second delay to catch up with your information, which is also good.
00:17:24.060
So what you're saying is over a somewhat on a 20 plus year period, the poverty rate basically
00:17:31.080
And so you would think that if poverty is what's causing violence, criminal and violent
00:17:36.260
crimes, that the violent crime rate would have stayed the same, right?
00:17:39.560
Cause we did nothing to solve poverty, but it didn't.
00:17:42.500
If you look at what happened in New York, the crime rate went way down, like way down.
00:17:48.080
So what even the, the statistician, the, the philosopher, the, the scientist has to look
00:17:52.640
at, well, what else was happening in New York city during that time?
00:17:59.900
We took a much more aggressive approach toward crime and incarceration and truth in sentencing
00:18:07.520
Like we got very tough on crime in New York in a way that really did affect the crime rate.
00:18:13.500
So there's, there's real data there from which you can, I can extrapolate.
00:18:19.520
You may not like the methods, but we know how to decrease crime.
00:18:24.240
We've done it recently and we've done it in multiple jurisdictions.
00:18:29.000
And so it's really just a political choice that we're making now to sort of forego these
00:18:34.540
time-tested methods of, of keeping crime under control.
00:18:37.700
And, you know, if you want to make the argument that, you know, just things like, you know,
00:18:42.200
incarceration, policing, hotspot policing specifically, you know, things like truth
00:18:48.400
and sentencing actually extending the amount of time that repeat offenders are going to spend
00:18:51.980
behind bars, which is less time that they're going to be up on the street.
00:18:55.200
You know, if you want to oppose those things by saying that the, the, the sort of social costs
00:18:59.680
of that kind of program outweigh the potential benefits, then by all means make that case,
00:19:06.440
Accept that there are going to be costs and try and convince people, you know, that those
00:19:11.020
What people do instead is they just try to say, oh, we can safely cut incarceration in
00:19:18.540
All we have to do is just reinvest that money in, you know, other social programs, which is,
00:19:24.600
I mean, again, we've just seen so many shocks to the system, whether it's changes in unemployment.
00:19:32.860
The unemployment rate nearly doubles across the country.
00:19:35.200
The homicide rate declines by 15% during that period.
00:19:37.700
Crime didn't go, violent crime didn't go up during the great depression.
00:19:42.140
You know, it's, it's just, it's long past time for us to let go of that trope and just
00:19:50.040
The argument I hear about incarceration in one of them is it takes these men, again, as
00:19:56.400
we pointed out, a lot of times minority men away from their families.
00:19:59.140
And that's part of the problem to begin with is that, you know, fatherless homes lead to
00:20:03.520
criminal, you know, kids who don't get ahead and then they become criminals and blah, blah,
00:20:10.720
So we're against incarceration and we're certainly against lengthy incarceration and mandatory
00:20:19.940
I mean, well, there's, there's a big assumption underlying that argument, which is that the
00:20:24.240
sort of men that are likely to find themselves behind bars would otherwise be sort of reliable
00:20:30.040
sources of economic and emotional support if they were able to remain with their families.
00:20:35.120
That is a very big assumption that is based on zero data.
00:20:40.800
If you just look at the, the, the incarcerated population, which you're going to find is a
00:20:46.640
really large group of highly antisocial individuals.
00:20:49.500
And there is a large body of, of, of sociological research showing that when you expose children
00:20:55.600
to highly antisocial parents, their outcomes are worse, often worse than just the, the
00:21:01.640
bad outcomes associated with being raised in a single parent family.
00:21:04.900
So we know that two parents are better than one, generally speaking, but if one of those
00:21:09.420
parents is highly antisocial in their disposition, it may actually be worse to have both parents
00:21:13.980
present than it would be to have the one pro social parent absent.
00:21:18.060
And, and that, you know, I think shocks a lot of people, but I mean, just the, the numbers
00:21:22.680
are astounding take something like, like antisocial personality disorder.
00:21:26.020
This is, you know, a very sort of serious psychological diagnosis that, you know, sort of takes the
00:21:32.040
form of lacking remorse and, you know, outward facing aggression and lack of patience and
00:21:38.640
The prevalence rate for men in, in just the general public for antisocial personality disorder
00:21:45.800
In prison settings, it can range from as high as 40 to 70%, right?
00:21:51.100
So on what grounds do we posit that we can release people from prison or not incarcerate
00:21:57.800
them in the first place on the belief that they're going to go and be good fathers and
00:22:05.020
I mean, the, the, just the data just isn't there.
00:22:07.240
I mean, everything from substance use disorders.
00:22:09.280
Doesn't that get to a cause and effect question, right?
00:22:11.000
Because this is what the people, for example, of no bail are saying.
00:22:14.540
Like you take a relatively decent person who falls off the non-crime wagon once, commits
00:22:23.500
a mild crime and winds up sitting in Rikers for, you know, a year because they can't afford
00:22:30.720
And then they finally get tried and they put in and get a too long sentence in, in with
00:22:36.240
all these maniacs that kind of helps turn them into a criminal where, you know, if you'd
00:22:41.820
let them out on bail and stay with the family and maybe we could have kept them on the good
00:22:54.200
People have it in their head that incarceration is this very, very sort of a common response
00:22:59.920
to, to low level criminality, even high level criminality.
00:23:03.120
But the reality is, is that only 40% of felony convictions in the States result in a post
00:23:10.260
So 60% of people who are convicted of felonies are not then going to prison.
00:23:14.660
They're either getting out with time served in pre-child detention or on, you know, sort
00:23:18.920
of pre-trial release conditions, or they're getting probation or a conditional discharge
00:23:24.100
where, you know, it's like you behave for this period of time and then we'll, we'll
00:23:31.540
So yeah, there, there just isn't a large group of people who are committing low level
00:23:36.020
offenses who don't have serious criminal histories and then are getting shafted by the justice
00:23:39.580
system, but, you know, being forced to stay inside again, that doesn't mean that you
00:23:43.560
can't sort of cherry pick cases in which this does happen.
00:23:46.440
And I've been critical of sort of heavy reliance on cash bail in so far as I think there's
00:23:51.280
something to the critique that you don't want to end up with a system in which someone
00:23:55.280
who is dangerous, but wealthy gets to buy their freedom, whereas someone who is relatively
00:24:02.640
So my answer is, well, let's just reorient the inquiry around risk.
00:24:07.160
And when someone turns out to be risky, we'll hold them.
00:24:11.980
So that, that seems to solve, you know, the sort of central critique of, of cash bail
00:24:17.540
Unfortunately, there is not a real appetite for doing that, even in the jurisdictions that
00:24:22.280
have sort of made their bail reforms in such a way that judges have this option, you see
00:24:29.960
And part of that has to do with, I think, the mischaracterization of a body of research
00:24:34.200
that shows kind of what you described when you were framing your question, which is that
00:24:37.880
there is evidence showing that for some people, for some people, exposure to incarceration
00:24:43.680
will produce worse outcomes insofar as it will make them more likely to commit crimes
00:24:48.860
Now, the way that you study that is you have to create circumstances under which the decision
00:24:57.640
They're really good reasons why people get incarcerated, and they're really good reasons
00:25:02.900
So what researchers do is they, they find a population of offenders who are engaged in
00:25:07.880
criminal conduct that isn't so bad that it like becomes obvious that they'll get incarcerated,
00:25:13.000
but also isn't so minor that it becomes obvious they'll be spared incarceration.
00:25:16.800
So they, they call these people on the margins of incarceration.
00:25:20.380
And then they look at the judges in that jurisdiction, and they categorize them as, you know, sort of moderate,
00:25:26.900
And they only look at the harsh and lenient judges, and the cases get randomly assigned
00:25:31.620
And they look at people who the harsh judges incarcerate, and they look at people on the
00:25:37.640
And yes, the ones that get incarcerated have worse outcomes.
00:25:40.720
The problem, though, is that that research is then grafted on to a body of offenders that
00:25:45.880
is not at all represented by the people in those studies.
00:25:48.640
The typical jail inmate, the typical prison inmate is not the marginal offender, right?
00:25:55.020
These are people who are, have a much more serious risk profile.
00:25:59.660
And so, yeah, I'm all for, you know, not incarcerating first time offenders with no criminal
00:26:04.540
history and, you know, who have engaged in low level misconduct.
00:26:08.240
But that doesn't mean that it's a good idea to release somebody who has 15, 16, 20 prior
00:26:13.540
arrests, which we see very commonly in the stories of really heinous crimes that I'm just
00:26:21.340
I mean, you know, how many times do you read a story about a homicide?
00:26:24.320
And then it's like, oh, well, the person arrested was out on probation or out on parole and has
00:26:31.200
Especially now, we have these soft on crime DAs in city after city.
00:26:35.500
Thankfully, I mean, like there was good news this week out in San Francisco.
00:26:39.000
We know Chesa Boudin got recalled in his replacement as DA, fired 15 DAs.
00:26:47.040
If you don't want to prosecute crime, get the hell out of the DA's office.
00:26:50.280
So like bit by bit, as we see these experiments in, as you would call it, criminal injustice,
00:26:56.920
Even far left cities like San Francisco are coming back to reality and saying, hold on,
00:27:06.180
All of these these approaches have been afforded to these cities by years of tough criminal justice
00:27:14.320
programs that gave them safety and security and a false belief that they could reverse
00:27:23.820
I mean, you know, is there a case to be made that there was an overcorrection in the 80s
00:27:30.820
But the answer to that is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, right?
00:27:33.800
Like we should be trying to reform at the margins and make the system as fair as possible
00:27:37.860
without eschewing the benefits that were associated with the program of policing and incarceration
00:27:44.360
that helped bring about one of the greatest achievements in urban American history, which was our
00:27:50.260
I mean, I don't think people fully appreciate what it means to a community to have crime
00:27:56.460
under control that allows kids to concentrate in school in ways that they just wouldn't
00:28:03.200
It encourages economic investment that creates jobs that gives people security and the sense
00:28:09.440
of security that allows them to go out into the world and be productive.
00:28:12.540
If that is lost, that's how you get these sort of generational, you know, pockets of poverty
00:28:22.940
And I think part of the problem is, is that the criminal justice debate is sort of framed
00:28:26.940
as one between compassionate supporters of these communities and people who, you know,
00:28:36.320
I mean, the people I know making the sort of cases that I'm making genuinely want to see
00:28:50.440
Because these Democrats, if they really cared about these black and brown communities, they
00:28:54.420
wouldn't be using them to advance their own quest for power or electoral hopes, et cetera.
00:29:00.920
They'd be taking an open, honest look at the problem and for real solutions like people
00:29:05.580
like you are and our other friends at the Manhattan Institute.
00:29:09.700
Yeah, no, I mean, it's it really is frustrating, in part because a lot of the people kind of
00:29:14.580
making the most outrageous claims about criminal justice, they would never step foot in some
00:29:22.000
of the neighborhoods that have the biggest crime problems.
00:29:24.880
They wouldn't dare walk through those neighborhoods at night.
00:29:28.600
They have no idea what it's like, you know, to wake up in the morning as a 15 year old kid
00:29:33.720
and dread going to school, not because you didn't study for, you know, a pop quiz or
00:29:37.860
something like that, but because, you know, there's a gangbanger in the school that you've
00:29:41.820
got bees with that that that wants to jump you and just the anxiety, you know, like they
00:29:46.700
have no idea what it's like to hear gunshots at night.
00:29:50.780
And I think there needs to be a just sort of real conversation and a real exposure of these
00:30:01.300
And I think that would actually be a really good first step in sort of taking us back.
00:30:06.820
I feel like so I'm 51 years old and I do feel like people 10 years older and 10 years
00:30:13.780
That's the group that really, really gets this that gets this easily because we lived
00:30:18.200
You know, I grew up first 10 years in the 1970s when crime was terrible.
00:30:22.280
My parents didn't turn on the news every night, but I saw enough of it to know it was very
00:30:29.100
I go down to visit my Nana, who was right outside of New York City, and there was no
00:30:36.920
And then you get into the mid 80s and things starts, you know, people start taking a hard
00:30:41.640
And through the 90s, you know, to start to come out of it.
00:30:44.740
And then this sort of glorious period where the crime situation had largely gotten under
00:30:50.300
control in many places like New York, where I then moved with my entire family.
00:30:54.780
And now I'm on the back end watching it deteriorate as a result of people forgetting the history
00:31:00.200
or just never knowing about it at all and thinking there is a new way of finding safety
00:31:05.600
and security and a kinder, gentler way with criminals.
00:31:08.760
And it's just there's no empirical evidence for their approach.
00:31:12.140
And now the empirical evidence is disproving all of their hopes and dreams.
00:31:17.000
Rafael, I got to run, but I want people to buy this book.
00:31:23.260
So to tell the audience again, it's criminal injustice, injustice with the push for decarceration
00:31:29.200
and depolicing gets wrong and who it hurts most.
00:31:41.920
Up next, it's Trump versus Pence today in Arizona.
00:31:45.200
And we have got one of the candidates smack dab in the middle of that fight.
00:31:50.460
On Monday, we brought you the Trump back candidate for the GOP nomination for governor in Arizona,
00:32:02.880
Today, we have her main opponent, Karen Taylor Robeson, and she has been endorsed by Mike Pence.
00:32:09.940
You got Trump, Pence splitting on the candidates.
00:32:12.640
We've seen this in a couple of states, but that's one of the many reasons all eyes are on
00:32:25.960
So I don't know if you saw your opponent's interview on the show, but her essential description
00:32:36.940
She thinks you're sort of a soft Republican, as our our viewers today might understand that
00:32:42.960
that word is used about people like Susan Collins of Maine or Mitt Romney.
00:32:46.680
And she ties you very much to John McCain and Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, who she says
00:32:51.380
are also not on board with the sort of America first MAGA agenda agenda, which I think is is
00:33:00.360
Want to give you the chance to respond to that?
00:33:06.560
And people who know me know that I check every box, you know, I believe our rights come from
00:33:15.420
I've been pro-life my entire life, always, always have been, always will be a second
00:33:21.280
I mean, I could go through the entire conservative platform and I check every box and I have been
00:33:32.440
I worked for Ronald Reagan was my first job out of college.
00:33:37.340
I worked for Republican candidates, you know, since before I could even vote.
00:33:41.520
And so it's kind of rich coming from a woman who walked doors for Barack Obama, who donated
00:33:46.480
to Barack Obama, you know, for her to to name call and call others a rhino.
00:33:54.260
And with every single passing day, people are beginning to understand they can't trust her
00:33:59.080
because she's very her her actions are very, very different than her words.
00:34:05.580
In fact, Fox News just this week reported on a day.
00:34:10.140
They had somebody found a meme that she posted about a week before Donald Trump was inaugurated.
00:34:17.620
That basically it was a picture of Donald Trump said, not my president.
00:34:20.980
And even had suggestions for revenge donations to Planned Parenthood, to the ACLU, to the NAACP with hashtag not my president.
00:34:33.040
And so, you know, while I was out raising money for and and supporting Donald Trump, both in 2016 and again in 2020,
00:34:42.580
she was she was out telling people she he was not her president.
00:34:46.420
So it's very interesting to be called a rhino by somebody with that kind of background.
00:34:52.520
She her campaign did respond to Fox saying this is very clearly a news anchors post reporting that there was outrage against President Trump's election and asking if people were going to visibly protest.
00:35:05.260
This is a news anchor saying this sentiment is out there.
00:35:10.500
You know, do you plan on doing any of these things to protest him?
00:35:15.720
But I think, you know, on our program, she admitted that she had supported some Democrats in the past and had different party affiliations.
00:35:22.260
But she thinks that is an asset for her because that describes Donald Trump.
00:35:29.860
It describes some of his base who used to be Democrats, but just got so disaffected that they they came over to the Republican side.
00:35:39.620
For you, I think she thinks you're too soft today on some of these core issues that are important to the MAGA crew.
00:35:47.500
Well, I think her overnight conversion is a is an insult to to Donald Trump and to Ronald Reagan, who was also a Democrat.
00:35:55.000
But his, you know, their conversion was over years of talking about conservative issues.
00:36:01.540
She found God guns in the GOP about a day and a half before she decided to run to governor.
00:36:10.540
And with each passing day, more and more is revealed about her history and her character.
00:36:16.620
You know, it's it's one thing to vote for, you know, Barack Obama, which she has admitted to doing.
00:36:23.520
And it's it's a whole new level to go out and knock doors for the most progressive president in modern history.
00:36:35.840
And so to and then, you know, she she you know, she is she was a purveyor of fake news for 27 years.
00:36:42.600
And she freely admits that she was lying to us for much of that time.
00:36:49.980
You you don't have 27 years to learn your next job.
00:36:53.240
It took you 27 years to figure out you were peddling fake news in your last job.
00:36:57.200
You know, I have spent the last 30 years in the private sector, building a career, building communities, creating jobs and giving back to my community and giving back to conservative causes.
00:37:09.840
I have a 30 year track record as an executive leading teams, accomplishing results, signing both sides of a paycheck.
00:37:18.380
And Arizonans are looking forward and they want a CEO, somebody who knows how to get things done.
00:37:26.000
They what do you mean when you say that she did that she admit she was a purveyor of fake news for all those years and that she was lying to people?
00:37:34.600
She said she's admitted as much that she was reading what was put in front of her and that it was fake news.
00:37:47.280
My record is abundantly clear what I've done, who I've supported and and I'm ready to lead.
00:37:54.060
You got, you know, issues you have supported Democrats, though, in the past.
00:37:57.220
You donated to Democrats like Representative Ruben.
00:38:01.020
Is it Gallego and other Democrats and other local races?
00:38:06.820
I did donate to Ruben Gallego after he was elected in a 40 plus Democrat district here in Arizona.
00:38:13.200
And he also is the only member of our delegation on the House Armed Services Committee.
00:38:18.740
And everybody who knows me knows how much I love and support our military and the importance of the aerospace and defense industry in Arizona.
00:38:26.860
And he is the only voice representing that industry and our military in Washington, D.C.
00:38:32.600
So just to clarify, you donated to him because this is a district in which the Republican had absolutely no chance.
00:38:38.960
So you wanted to back the Democrat who is best aligned with your own vision.
00:38:43.680
Who's best aligned with the importance of the military to Arizona.
00:38:48.300
You know, our principal military installations in Arizona have a tremendous economic benefit to the state.
00:38:53.540
Thirteen billion dollars in annual economic impact.
00:38:55.940
And again, I am I have been a big supporter of our military for decades.
00:39:01.460
And he's the only voice in our delegation who has a seat at the table on the House Armed Services Committee.
00:39:11.280
I would put my record of donating to Republican candidates and conservative causes up against anybody running for office today.
00:39:18.640
So she was very animated on this show, as she has been on Twitter about she said you exploited older voters by sending out a solicitation for donations that suggested you were going to be pushing the Trump agenda.
00:39:37.220
I'm paraphrasing right now when, in fact, it was a solicitation for you and it made it sound more like they were going to be giving to something more directly aligned with Trump.
00:39:49.480
These kind hearted retirees would click the link and little did they know they were signing up for a recurring donation, but not to build the wall or help President Trump.
00:39:59.840
It was a recurring donation to a woman that they don't even know.
00:40:03.600
Our team spoke to some of the victims of this ploy.
00:40:06.000
I'm going to investigate donations to Karen Taylor Robeson, a candidate for Arizona governor.
00:40:10.160
I have a record that you made a donation to her.
00:40:13.480
Karen Taylor, I'm not familiar with this person that you're even telling me.
00:40:25.480
So it's obviously a part of her campaign to call you those names and go find voters who sound like they didn't know they donated to you.
00:40:34.460
You know, digital fundraising efforts that are done all over this country, you probably get them.
00:40:42.480
And any time somebody wants their money back, they get it.
00:40:44.960
But I can tell you that my refund rate is far lower than the average.
00:40:50.280
In fact, you know, by implication, she's attacking Donald Trump because his refund rate, doing the same thing, is a multiple of my refund rate.
00:41:02.400
And it's quite interesting that she has, you know, she doesn't report refunds.
00:41:08.720
And so, you know, from my perspective, it's much, much better to be completely transparent.
00:41:13.780
You know, if you want to take a pair of shoes back to Macy's, they refund your money if you don't like your shoes.
00:41:18.860
And so anybody who wants a refund, we'll give them a refund.
00:41:27.620
She also needs to include Donald Trump in her complaint about me.
00:41:33.280
She suggests that you're trying to buy the election.
00:41:35.500
You're married to a very rich man, as I understand it.
00:41:37.740
And, you know, that you've definitely thrown a lot more money at this race than she has.
00:41:42.000
She's in, I think, the low couple of millions in Europe, around 13 million.
00:41:46.560
And that you're thus going to be beholden to that donor class in a way she says Trump wasn't.
00:41:57.380
You know, she was living in the living rooms of Arizona for 27 years.
00:42:01.820
So her name ID walking into this race was extremely high.
00:42:05.240
Meanwhile, the last 30 years, I was in the private sector working to build communities.
00:42:17.720
So, you know, she doesn't know the source of my money.
00:42:20.280
But I have been putting my money, my family treasure, my time,
00:42:24.760
my career on the shelf to give back to Arizona.
00:42:28.660
Meanwhile, she has been using her campaign to support herself and her family.
00:42:39.440
She, you know, spends an awful lot of money at resorts and fine dining establishments.
00:42:48.040
But it's, you know, quite frankly, it's no surprise.
00:42:50.180
You, as I understand it, and obviously, since I didn't know how to pronounce Gallego, I don't
00:42:58.960
I don't pay enough attention to the legislators, legislators coming from Arizona unless they
00:43:07.460
But I don't explain to me why you, as somebody who seems to have donated to President Trump,
00:43:15.260
raised a bunch of money for President Trump, supported President Trump's agenda for many
00:43:24.540
I think he was given bad information, but I and I can't explain it because, yes, we donated
00:43:33.600
Several members of his family were at our home for fundraisers.
00:43:36.380
And I will defend Donald Trump's record all day long.
00:43:43.920
You know, we can rattle off everything from USMCA to getting our NATO partners to pay their
00:43:49.440
fair share to historically low Black and Hispanic unemployment.
00:43:54.540
To the rollback of federal regulations to those 234 federal judges.
00:44:03.320
She was there until January 20th, turned out the lights at the White House.
00:44:07.280
So we have a long history of supporting the president.
00:44:11.760
But what I'm looking for is the endorsement of the voters of Arizona.
00:44:19.460
That's what I'm out there earning every single day.
00:44:21.440
But don't you think it has to do with January 6th?
00:44:23.500
I mean, frankly, you know, like she's she's not a believer that Biden won.
00:44:31.180
And I know and I pointed out to her, you've said there were problems.
00:44:36.320
And there were some unfairnesses in the process, but not stolen.
00:44:44.880
Again, that's you know, you'll have to ask President Trump why why he did it.
00:44:49.260
You know, I wouldn't be running if Donald Trump was still in the White House.
00:44:53.560
I'm running because Joe Biden's in the White House and our freedoms are under attack.
00:45:00.600
You know, I tell everywhere I go, we're being we're being invaded from the south and our freedoms are under attack from the east.
00:45:06.380
And Joe Biden, Joe, that the Biden-Harris administration is a disaster in this entire country.
00:45:15.180
They go to the, you know, having to make a decision whether they're putting gas in a gas tank or food on the tables or asking whether they can even fill their gas tank up to go to work.
00:45:23.980
And I will bring to Arizona a vision for education, freedom, economic freedom.
00:45:31.040
There's 70 percent of our adult population in Arizona came from somewhere else.
00:45:34.900
We are still that shining city on the hill and the left is coming for Arizona.
00:45:40.660
And I'm going to do everything I can, everything I can to win in 2022.
00:45:45.260
And, you know, 10 days from now, you know, the Democrats are coming after me now because they know I'm the nominee that they're going to have trouble beating in November.
00:45:53.560
They want Carrie Lake to win because they know they can defeat her.
00:45:57.300
They think they can do better in a state that's not hardcore red with a Carrie Lake sort of Trump MAGA type candidate.
00:46:04.260
But when, you know, I had an interesting reversal with her when she was on the phone.
00:46:09.460
I mean, when she was on the show, because first she said either one of you would beat Hobbs, the Democrat.
00:46:15.000
She said, we're not going to lose to her in Arizona.
00:46:17.760
But then she changed it later and said, no, I'm actually the only one who can beat her, that you would lose to Hobbs.
00:46:27.100
Do you believe that either one of you would beat Hobbs?
00:46:38.140
Based on the numbers that I've seen, no, I do not.
00:46:41.420
Arizona has a long history of electing the person, not the party.
00:46:45.220
In fact, 20 years ago, in 2002, in a red wave year, we had a Republican candidate lose to Janet Napolitano.
00:46:56.840
Never in my lifetime did I think I would see that.
00:47:00.520
But Carrie Lake has put herself in a position where she's not going to be able to appeal to the majority of Arizonans.
00:47:06.540
We now have more independents registered in Maricopa County than we have Republicans, which is a first.
00:47:13.460
Yeah, it's a real question about whether you can go hardcore MAGA in Arizona in today's day.
00:47:18.960
And that's one of the reasons why your race is getting national attention.
00:47:21.660
You know, the split between the two of you and between Trump and Pence.
00:47:29.040
Because the latest polls show her the real clear politics average showed her I think it was 8.5 percent ahead of you.
00:47:35.160
So how do you like your chances in this primary race on August 2nd?
00:47:43.660
The polls that I listen to are my own internal polls.
00:47:47.040
And the poll, of course, that matters is the poll on August 2nd.
00:47:51.460
And, of course, the voting is already underway.
00:47:55.440
But as we now know, the election day is weeks long and months long in some places.
00:48:01.060
One of the many issues that has been thrust into the national conversation.
00:48:07.140
And we're going to be watching this race very, very closely.
00:48:14.520
OK, up next, a deep dive with our panelists on Kelly's court.
00:48:18.820
The probe into Hunter Biden hits a, quote, critical stage.
00:48:22.580
They're basically saying he's going to get charged with something.
00:48:25.240
They're not going to do it within two months of the midterm elections.
00:48:28.340
So that means ASAP basically means August is the last chance.
00:48:35.440
Is he actually going to be charged by the feds and with what?
00:48:39.360
And what about Amber Heard, who has now just filed an appeal?
00:48:42.680
We'll tell you her grounds and whether she's got a chance.
00:48:52.340
On the docket today, Hunter Biden, Steve Bannon, Amber Heard, and a woman who is suing a man
00:49:01.460
Joining me now, criminal defense attorney, John Spilboer and Mark Eiglarsh, former prosecutor,
00:49:06.240
now criminal defense attorney, and he does civil work as well.
00:49:11.460
I was just talking about, can you believe that, that we got this started in 2004?
00:49:26.580
And since then, I've moved on to another husband, had three children.
00:49:32.720
Now we're getting old, but we're getting, we're getting wiser.
00:49:48.920
OK, let's talk about Hunter Biden, who's not using the right facial products.
00:49:56.020
As a matter of fact, he's really just into his crack, his hookers and his guns.
00:50:04.460
The law says, you know, I mean, I don't know about the hookers and the guns, but you're not
00:50:08.700
allowed to have the crack and the gun at the same time.
00:50:11.940
As it turns out, something he's apparently admitted to many times.
00:50:19.160
And what we read now, John, is that it's on the list of things he's being investigated
00:50:22.840
for as all the Hunter Biden stuff, all of it, all the weird stuff overseas, seems to have
00:50:28.800
boiled down to whether he broke gun laws or drug laws, right?
00:50:34.640
Have I have I accurately summarized where we think the federal investigation is?
00:50:41.640
And I think it's summarized thusly because those are the easy tax.
00:50:51.400
But those are the easy charges that can be made against Hunter Biden, because trust me,
00:50:58.600
when you prosecute Hunter Biden, you're not just prosecuting Hunter Biden.
00:51:03.700
Like Hunter Biden's case is going to have tentacles.
00:51:06.440
It's not like Nancy Pelosi's husband getting caught for DWI, where the worst thing that's
00:51:11.660
going to happen is, oh, sorry, old man, but we're going to take your license for 90 days.
00:51:17.600
So I don't know if the feds are going to try to get the easy stuff, the drugs, the prostitution,
00:51:23.180
the firearms, the stuff that's not going to affect America as much as just sort of a way
00:51:29.920
to get around it and finally prosecute this loser, or if it's going to really,
00:51:37.080
And I'm a little scared by that, but I think, you know, we're going to have to see because
00:51:40.720
they're just this is just the tip of the iceberg, what they got.
00:51:44.180
They wouldn't have any of this, Megan, if he wasn't stupid enough to drop his laptop
00:51:47.740
off at a third party place that a disinterested party's establishment.
00:51:53.940
That's where they're getting all this evidence of his bad behavior.
00:51:58.000
And in a way, Mark, the feds are in a tough position on the gun and the drug stuff because
00:52:06.320
But they it's not really the kind of thing they would normally run around prosecuting.
00:52:13.200
Now it's a tough situation because they don't want to look like they're doing special favors
00:52:17.080
Listen, if I represent him, I'm celebrating right now if their investigation is now solely
00:52:24.320
focused on guns and crack, because number one, how serious, really?
00:52:31.160
And number two, who knows whether they're really going to bring those charges?
00:52:34.000
They're not in the business going after those types of cases.
00:52:41.480
In other words, yeah, in his book, he brags about using crack every 15 minutes or whatever.
00:52:45.840
But do we really know that he answered untruthfully when he said that he wasn't?
00:52:53.180
Listen, I'd rather be on the prosecution side, but, you know, I'm a defense lawyer.
00:52:55.940
So I'm thinking like in his mind, maybe during the time period that he answered the question,
00:53:04.280
What where he said, no, I don't have it in front of me, but OK, I'll tell him in 2018.
00:53:11.160
I think it was a gun application record that asked, are you an unlawful user of or addicted
00:53:17.920
to marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug or any other controlled substance?
00:53:24.000
Meanwhile, five years earlier, he'd been discharged from the Navy Reserve for testing positive
00:53:28.980
Family members have spoken out about his history of drug use.
00:53:31.500
According to his memoir, Beautiful Things, he was smoking crack every 15 minutes during
00:53:36.820
So by his own hand, which wrote allegedly Beautiful Things, he admits he admits he was
00:53:41.800
smoking crack when he said no to that question.
00:53:46.940
And now I'm going to now people are going to roll their eyes.
00:54:03.600
Are you an unlawful user of doesn't have to just be an addict, user of or addicted to
00:54:13.860
Are you now they didn't say what period of time are you as you're signing this an unlawful
00:54:22.340
And his answer would be no, because maybe that day or that week he had quit.
00:54:31.340
Now, the second part is, are you an addiction, an addict?
00:54:34.260
Number one, denial is part of, you know, the whole thing.
00:54:40.300
Had he stopped in that brief moment, whether it be a day or two, does he want the stigma
00:54:46.140
Does he believe he can conquer the addiction by not calling himself an addict?
00:55:01.920
I've always said that if I'm ever in trouble, I'm calling Mark, and that is why.
00:55:06.260
Because you can create a great argument out of nothing.
00:55:10.120
Look, he wasn't sober for the five minutes that he filled out that application.
00:55:16.020
That is the world's dumbest question, because nobody is going to say, oh, you know what?
00:55:24.120
They're not going to they're not going to testify truthfully on that kind of application.
00:55:27.420
And it's up to the people who are vetting those applications to do a little digging
00:55:34.620
OK, but wait, I'm going to let you finish your point.
00:55:38.440
It's in large part to his own father that he even had to answer that question.
00:55:43.000
And that lying in response to that form four, four, seven, three question is a federal felony.
00:55:49.540
Cook article on National Review that's punishable by up to 10 years in federal prison.
00:55:54.180
Once again, your daddy issues are ruining your life.
00:56:03.260
I don't know if the daddy issues are ruining his life or he's ruining his daddy's life
00:56:08.160
because what came first, the chicken or the egg?
00:56:12.160
I would ask all of you, as I would ask my jurors, do you think you can come up with a way to
00:56:17.780
word that question with more detail or in a better way?
00:56:22.380
And everybody would say, well, yeah, I would say, have you used in the last week?
00:56:27.020
Have you, you know, whatever you want to want to specify since they didn't.
00:56:31.580
That question sucks, especially for prosecution.
00:56:37.480
Let's move on to the other piece, because it's also illegal under federal law to use
00:56:45.660
So you're supposed to answer the question on the application for the firearm, honestly.
00:56:49.840
But you're also, once you get the drugs or sorry, the gun, not supposed to use drugs while
00:56:59.260
A great deal, because a week or so after he purchased his firearm, Hunter Biden appeared
00:57:03.640
in a bunch of sordid photographs with one hand on the trigger of the gun and his other hand,
00:57:09.060
of course, cupping his genitals, something he loves to do.
00:57:12.780
While what appears to be crack cocaine can be seen on a plate alongside used and packeted
00:57:20.120
condoms, gross alongside drug paraphernalia and a spoon.
00:57:35.680
Do you think that ever in the criminal justice arena, they have ever prosecuted someone for
00:57:51.280
But, Johnny, you tell me, do you need a test to convince a jury that's crack?
00:57:58.380
You're not going to need a test to convince a jury that that's crack.
00:58:03.960
Even, I mean, he's committing crimes left and right.
00:58:08.680
This man should not have a license to possess a firearm.
00:58:12.340
And you don't need to prove what drug is on the coffee table when you snatch his license.
00:58:18.720
So even if they don't successfully prosecute him on that, they've got to yank the firearms
00:58:28.340
He had, didn't I read that he had, his friend actually was so concerned over his drug use
00:58:33.240
and his possession of the firearm that she took the firearm and threw it in a public garbage
00:58:48.680
I don't disagree that during the time period, per his own admission with the drugs that he
00:58:53.400
was allegedly doing, which by the way, doesn't prove conclusively that he was doing drugs.
00:58:58.000
But with what he says in his own book, I think that's enough to prove, if true, that he shouldn't
00:59:04.500
I'm solely making a legal argument, which is what we're here for as lawyers in Kelly
00:59:09.100
court, that I don't believe that they can carry their burden on this case solely because
00:59:13.460
a picture in the background looks like something you guys think may be crack.
00:59:20.280
I think they're going to get the little Hallie, the then girlfriend, who was the dum-dum who
00:59:26.440
thought a better place would be right across from a school.
00:59:28.600
Um, and she's, she could absolutely be a witness to say, yeah, he did it.
00:59:33.760
Uh, he, he loved to wield the gun and he loved to grab his genitals and he loved to do the
00:59:39.700
All right, let's move on to the next question though, about possible prostitution charges,
00:59:45.020
because that's another crime that doesn't often get, you know, pursued, get prosecuted,
00:59:51.680
And if your name's not Hunter Biden, definitely sometimes does.
00:59:56.080
I don't know anyone to whom it's happened, but so I read, they do go after both prostitutes
01:00:03.220
If there's anything he loves more than crack, it's prostitutes.
01:00:07.800
I mean, the stories are out of control, uh, documents, texts, videos showing he spent,
01:00:14.380
this is citing the daily mail, uh, $30,000 on quote escorts in just five months.
01:00:20.820
This is why he needed that seat on Burisma, the Ukrainian company.
01:00:23.680
He had so many hookers running around and they don't come cheap.
01:00:26.560
Mark, uh, the president's son wrote checks to a Ukrainian woman.
01:00:29.900
Oh, speaking of Ukraine, whose transactions were red flagged by banks or suspicious activity.
01:00:37.000
This is like an anti-corruption thing that they normally look into.
01:00:43.320
And, um, a lot of them, he, he's got a check here.
01:00:47.520
They're, they, they're showing a picture of the daily mail for $3,400.
01:00:51.980
It says the money is for the blue water wellness reboot.
01:00:58.580
Joe Biden was loaning Hunter money to pay, you know, to pay to go to.
01:01:02.320
But in fact, we have, we believe it may, it may have been all one big disguise to cover
01:01:15.820
Like if I had a dollar for every time you said genital and hooker so far, I'd be a wealthy
01:01:27.600
So would they go after him for quote, transporting prostitutes across, across state lines, which
01:01:35.720
You can't use the hooker and you can't transport the hooker across the state lines.
01:01:41.420
Should I go first and tell you how I don't think this is going to happen again to everyone's
01:01:53.540
Mark's going to say, what if they were his girlfriends?
01:01:56.080
Friends and he's just going up with tons of gifts.
01:02:01.740
I mean, unless you bring in cinnamon, amber, fallopia and toiletta to say, yeah, that's what
01:02:20.520
It's going to be tough, but this is alleged just across across state lines, not across
01:02:29.560
If this is what all of the big web has boiled down to hunters in a good position, the tax
01:02:37.220
Those looked pretty good against him, but he did pay over a million dollars in back taxes
01:02:41.640
once he found himself in the feds and the feds crosshairs, which lowers the likelihood
01:02:45.920
of prostitution or prostitution prosecution, but doesn't.
01:02:53.980
Will will Hunter Biden in the next 45 days be charged with a crime?
01:03:05.000
I'm going to say, by the way, wait, hold on, not because he didn't do anything.
01:03:12.140
I'm just saying, I don't think based upon the analysis that I provided and more that
01:03:16.460
I can share with you, if you just go to speak to Mark dot com, I am telling you, I don't
01:03:25.320
That's why you might get charged, Mark, because now then he can become a sympathetic figure
01:03:29.900
instead of the idiot that he is, because if they charge him with this crap and then
01:03:34.020
they can't prove it, then it's like, oh, my God, my son, my son, Hunter, look, he's an
01:03:41.380
And that's why he probably will get charged, but not with anything significant.
01:03:49.460
Either way, we're celebrating if hypothetically he was my client.
01:03:55.200
I don't I think this is kind of pathetic that all of these multiple violations of the
01:04:03.680
Pathetic that we have due process and you actually have to prove things not like a crack or it
01:04:09.900
Who knows his name were Joe Schmoe or whatever Hunter Schmoe instead of Hunter Biden.
01:04:16.600
No, he'd be no, not not on this many violations and the tax violations, all that stuff.
01:04:24.300
OK, let's move on, because Steve Bannon is also in some really big trouble.
01:04:29.360
And the jury, if people haven't been paying attention, he's he's been on trial this week
01:04:41.280
And the reason he's on trial is because he got subpoenaed by the January 6th committee to turn
01:04:49.320
over all documents and information and sit for depositions, I think, too.
01:04:53.080
And he basically said, pound sand, you can go take a long walk off a short pier and tried
01:05:02.920
But that was sort of a bogus claim from the start, John.
01:05:07.460
I mean, I can see just from any I'm trying to be fair to the guy, but like he wasn't
01:05:13.580
even working in the White House for most of the time covered by the subpoena.
01:05:21.120
My take on what really happened here now, first, let me let me jump ahead.
01:05:28.660
I think it's just the the feds kind of sticking it to him because what he did here was when he
01:05:33.800
got subpoenaed, he said, I'm not playing your game.
01:05:41.120
You can go pound sand, got on the phone with his lawyers and said, you know, make me look
01:05:45.620
like I'm not saying go pound sand, but I'm telling them to go pound sand.
01:05:50.000
Then the lawyers like, oh, subpoena, I don't know, let's try to change the date.
01:05:57.460
And while they're doing that, which is perfectly normal and happens all the time in civil and
01:06:01.980
administrative cases, by the way, not involving famous people or sometimes involving famous
01:06:06.020
people, while they're doing all that, the DOG is like, you know what?
01:06:13.840
We're going to prosecute you for two misdemeanor charges, which the most you can do on these
01:06:18.960
charges is 60 days in jail, which is nothing in real time.
01:06:26.860
And so now Steve Bannon's like, well, wait a minute.
01:06:29.180
I didn't exactly say I wasn't going to supply anything.
01:06:31.400
I just said I needed to the scope and the dates and the this.
01:06:35.220
So even if he loses this trial, which he probably will, it's again, it's a whole lot of nothing.
01:06:44.700
He didn't want to participate in this in this theater, which is what these hearings seem to
01:06:52.620
The just to just to tell the the listeners, it's a federal trial.
01:06:59.220
He it's been seven decades since someone went to jail for this offense, criminal contempt of
01:07:06.200
So, you know, once again, we have, you know, somebody connected to a very famous politician
01:07:11.300
who may or may not be prosecuted in Bannon's case, yes, in Hunter's case, we'll see for
01:07:16.540
crimes that are definitely on the books, but aren't aren't always pursued.
01:07:22.200
But having said that, Mark, he does appear to have like stuck his finger right in the
01:07:25.680
eye of the congressional committee and said, F you, I'm not doing it.
01:07:41.060
And number two, I will say that the stronger argument is not necessarily executive privilege,
01:07:45.780
but it's to somehow get his lawyers to say the date that they asked him to come forward.
01:07:56.220
And I do deal with subpoenas all day long from federal prosecutors.
01:08:08.440
And he's going to say, you know, that's my lawyers doing.
01:08:20.780
You know, it was a real date and time is of the essence.
01:08:23.240
And of course, the reason for that, and they've stated this publicly elsewhere in New York Times
01:08:26.560
and also they realize they're probably going to lose control of Congress in the midterm
01:08:31.000
And they really want to have this wrapped up there.
01:08:36.720
And they realize that a Republican controlled house probably doesn't give two dams about
01:08:42.220
So, like, I don't know if that's a real time is of the essence argument.
01:08:46.260
I mean, I suppose if the judge is, you know, a Democrat, maybe.
01:08:52.740
I mean, you're in a Democrat area in D.C., but I think the judge might be a Trump appointee.
01:08:57.140
Um, so I don't know how this, yeah, how does this, how does this shake out with the jury?
01:09:04.360
Like, what do you, what do you predict is going to happen, Anne?
01:09:10.860
I'm wondering why he actually didn't maybe waive jury for a case like this, because, you
01:09:17.080
know, maybe a Trump appointed judge would be a little bit more sympathetic and kind of
01:09:21.680
But he's probably, he's probably dead to rights, legally speaking, because there are
01:09:29.440
laws in the books that say, you know, would you have to comply with subpoenas, et cetera.
01:09:34.520
Although, wait a minute, actually, let me take that back.
01:09:36.500
The jury is probably going to be very savvy because it's a jury, a D.C. jury.
01:09:44.740
So I don't know, maybe for that reason, they'll either hang or they'll find a way to find him
01:09:52.660
I wonder, because in its federal court, which is always like, you know, that's better.
01:09:58.160
I think it's just better in general to be in federal court, although the feds usually
01:10:05.640
But I think that, you know, you still got coming from the same jury pool in federal court.
01:10:10.860
area people, which tend to be very, very blue, very, very blue.
01:10:13.660
And in the very, very blue circle, Steve Bannon is the devil.
01:10:22.000
One of the jurors admitted that they watched at least the opening primetime January 6th
01:10:30.440
I mean, only partisans watch that and news people like me.
01:10:36.740
But anyway, my point is, that's not good for him.
01:10:40.020
So I think the odds are very much against Steve Bannon.
01:10:45.940
I mean, he went into the trial, Mark, saying, never mind, I'll give you what you want.
01:10:54.880
You know, if I'm a juror, well, he was going to do it.
01:10:57.840
And maybe he was counting on the delay to help, you know, iron things out.
01:11:02.820
But I also think that if the prosecutors keep this simple, we sent him a subpoena, he was
01:11:17.680
I would want, as a defense lawyer, to have 12 people and just find one who just says,
01:11:29.760
I wouldn't trust, just because this is a Trump appointee, let's say, that the judge would
01:11:34.120
then say, so anything under the whole Trump arena, you know, I'll go in that direction.
01:11:40.260
This judge may say, you know, what you did was thumb your nose at a subpoena.
01:11:48.180
I do think the going for a jury trial suggests he knows he has no defense.
01:11:52.740
Like if he thought he had a very solid case, a very solid defense, I think he'd be happy
01:12:06.360
I mean, it's really like maybe my lawyers misled me.
01:12:18.100
His podcast apparently is rocketing up the charts.
01:12:22.620
He only then, you know, becomes a stronger and more marketable and a bit of a martyr.
01:12:28.480
If he's found guilty, I, you know, I don't follow him, but I would imagine that this is
01:12:34.320
His podcast was like at 111 and now it's in the top 10.
01:12:37.920
And if you're telling me it's really potentially only 60 days or two, two months, I don't know.
01:12:42.140
I heard it could be potentially longer than that.
01:12:50.240
Maybe he'll get some sort of a slap on the wrist.
01:12:52.260
OK, let's move on to January 6th, because the whole reason Steve Bannon's testimony was
01:12:58.040
relevant was because they're going after the big kahuna and that's Donald Trump.
01:13:03.340
And certainly they've dinged up Trump, you know, his character in these hearings.
01:13:08.780
They've dinged him up politically, which is really their goal.
01:13:12.700
But the big, big question is whether they're going that would they have they laid the foundation
01:13:16.180
for legal charges against Donald Trump insurrection, conspiracy to seditious insurrection.
01:13:23.020
Because there's a large faction of Democrats that want to see that, want to see Donald
01:13:26.760
Trump in handcuffs and, of course, exit the political scene.
01:13:35.460
I mean, I've watched enough of it and read enough about it to say they don't have anywhere
01:13:46.960
And, you know, I don't maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really think that the
01:13:50.880
January 6th hearings are nothing but political theater, kind of like a Hail Mary.
01:13:57.040
They know that I don't know if I can be really critical of Joe Biden.
01:14:02.020
Like, seriously, you guys lights are on, but nobody's home.
01:14:08.020
And the committee who is conducting this these hearings are all completely anti Trump.
01:14:14.260
I mean, there's like two rhinos out of nine people on the committee.
01:14:21.760
So it's like, what are you really trying to accomplish here?
01:14:24.640
Just more egg on his face because they're not going to all they can do.
01:14:29.540
They can just recommend that the DOJ institute criminal charges against him.
01:14:36.800
So I don't think I don't really think this is going to go anywhere.
01:14:39.340
And I don't know if they're going to finish up before the midterms, to be honest, but we'll
01:14:44.540
Mark Adam Schiff at the beginning of this said he thought there was now credible evidence
01:14:51.620
Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, said the committee would show that Trump organized
01:14:57.920
John Dean, former Nixon counsel, said an indictment would be forthcoming.
01:15:01.180
Indeed, I don't see how the line prosecutors at DOJ cannot take a lot of this evidence and
01:15:08.320
Lawrence tribe said the only question is what's going to be charged first.
01:15:12.120
That's it, because there's tons of felonies shown.
01:15:16.520
The tone has shifted a little as we go into as we went into final hearing last night or
01:15:21.400
maybe final hearing, final hearing for now, where it's more like he's terrible.
01:15:27.880
It's like a little softening from these Democrats.
01:15:34.800
There's a big difference between morally and legally.
01:15:38.460
So morally, hypothetically, if they proved and again, I don't know what they proved.
01:15:47.480
So I just have to take everybody's word for it.
01:15:51.080
But let's just say hypothetically, there's facts that show that he knew that there was
01:15:58.900
And for a period of time, he chose not to do anything about that.
01:16:03.000
One would say, yeah, morally, the leader of our free world should probably put a stop to
01:16:08.460
Question is, is there some type of criminal charge that you could levy?
01:16:14.560
So the next question is, and a lot of people ask me, what about inciting a riot?
01:16:21.840
There's a difference between, let's say you're on a crowded street, you yell, those cops are
01:16:35.300
That's different than saying, let's attack the cops.
01:16:40.600
So similarly, if Donald Trump is saying things like the election is fraudulent and they stole
01:16:46.820
it and all of that then causes people to react, that's very different than him saying, let's
01:16:58.860
There's a defined distinction between what's First Amendment and protected speech and what's
01:17:04.380
And I think they fall short in terms of proof so far.
01:17:08.680
I could not agree with what you just said more.
01:17:10.580
And we're just kind of pretending that his rhetoric about the election is the same thing
01:17:15.360
as incitement, I-N-C-I-T-E meant, under the law.
01:17:24.700
And the voters will decide whether they've made that or not.
01:17:31.660
His lowest poll numbers ever, which I do believe were post-January 6th, are still not
01:17:39.480
But what they're saying is he knew he hadn't lost.
01:17:43.540
And he lied when he said over and over again that he did that that Joe Biden had lost.
01:17:51.820
He knew that Biden won and he was lying to the American public when he said that Biden
01:17:59.460
And then he falsely incited a bunch of insurrectionists to go and take over the Congress in an attempted
01:18:08.540
First of all, Trump absolutely believes to this moment.
01:18:12.500
And I 100 percent believe from January 6th forward that he won.
01:18:17.000
Does anyone really think Trump doesn't actually believe he won?
01:18:21.040
Like, how are these Democrats like the of course he believes that that's why he gets
01:18:34.380
He genuinely to his core believes that he won this election.
01:18:52.440
So he just comes up with this theory and many people jump on that bandwagon.
01:18:57.340
But I mean, whatever's in him that can't allow him to lose.
01:19:01.320
Is making him reject any evidence that suggests he lost.
01:19:06.960
So this whole argument by the Democrats, like knowingly lied was out there.
01:19:11.320
They keep trying to prove like Bill Barr told him this was bullshit.
01:19:14.860
This person went in and said, we don't have any fraud that would change the results.
01:19:19.980
It's like, well, that only shows us that Trump heard that.
01:19:31.320
I'm still listening to you and who I respect very much.
01:19:34.500
I can't believe that Trump has actually convinced you that he believes that any more than I think
01:19:41.280
that he believes that abortion should be unlawful.
01:19:51.040
But nobody on that side gives a damn because he did what they wanted him to do.
01:19:56.820
He's at least smart enough to know that he fell short and won a second place medal in
01:20:04.460
But he has enough damage done from I don't know what.
01:20:08.980
Whatever happened in his childhood has made him incapable of accepting the label loser.
01:20:18.260
He's not like the rest of us where it's like, I don't like it.
01:20:20.860
But every once in a while it happens and I'll just get back up and fight back.
01:20:27.060
But wait, I want to get to the reason I'm getting into all this is because their big
01:20:31.300
evidence on Thursday night was listen to Trump in the outtakes from the speech he ultimately
01:20:38.800
finally gave condemning the rioters and all that.
01:20:41.700
Like he finally did get around on January 7th to saying the things that they wanted him
01:20:47.660
But there were several things that were taken out of those remarks.
01:20:51.120
And we have a mashup of what they played last night on the outtakes.
01:20:57.360
I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack yesterday.
01:21:17.680
The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defied the seat of dust.
01:21:34.860
I just want to say Congress has certified the results.
01:21:39.160
I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack yesterday.
01:21:49.600
Take the word yesterday, because it doesn't work with the heinous attack on our country.
01:21:59.460
My only goal was to ensure the integrity of the vote.
01:22:03.160
My only goal was to ensure the integrity of the vote.
01:22:15.980
The only thing in there that was interesting was where he said, I don't want to say this
01:22:24.740
I mean, he's kind of been suggesting he still thinks it's up in the air.
01:22:33.720
I'm being called over here, because I don't know if Biden's legitimate either.
01:22:43.300
Do you really think that Biden got more votes than Obama?
01:22:49.060
I'm not buying it either, but we're talking about the January 6th hearing, so...
01:22:59.520
But I, you know, as a journalist, I need proof.
01:23:03.900
And I know people say, well, there wasn't enough time.
01:23:06.100
Well, there's been lots of time since then, and none of it has actually proven that anything
01:23:15.540
Even if Trump had won Arizona, he would have lost the election.
01:23:18.820
So that's not to say there wasn't any funny business.
01:23:20.620
Not to say that they didn't change the law to Biden's benefit in Pennsylvania and so on.
01:23:30.280
Anyway, I don't think they've got Trump on January 6th.
01:23:38.640
And if they get thrown out in November and are forced to move off of this stupid, never-ending
01:23:44.920
primetime show that people aren't into, so be it.
01:23:49.440
Okay, Mark and John, stand by, because we have somebody else who people think is delusional,
01:23:54.320
And she's back with a new appeal, trying to get the entire verdict against her thrown out.
01:24:09.280
She has filed an appeal after losing her motion last week for a new trial.
01:24:15.880
She first tried to get the trial judge to set aside the verdict, and she had, like, a new
01:24:21.740
I mean, she's asserting all the same stuff as before.
01:24:23.800
You know, like, it's unfair, but you shouldn't.
01:24:25.480
But she said in the motion, juror number 15 is a problem.
01:24:31.820
Juror number 15 was a 77-year-old man who was not the one they wanted.
01:24:47.880
But they had subpoenaed, you know, your jury summons, the 77-year-old dad.
01:24:52.100
And the two guys have the same name, their father and son.
01:24:56.600
And so the younger guy showed up, and the older guy should have.
01:25:02.920
And on this basis, Mark, she says that they should throw out the verdict?
01:25:10.140
I don't know that state's specific law, if there's something in there that I don't know about.
01:25:16.620
Because whoever showed up, whether it be a potato or the guy's son, they then vetted him and had full opportunity.
01:25:23.140
Both sides did, including the judge, to ask questions to determine whether they can render a fair and impartial jury, impartial decision.
01:25:45.820
If you're just tuning in, Megan's just quoting random supernames.
01:25:51.920
They say, Amber Heard's lawyers say, Virginia law is very, extremely is the word, strict about juror identities.
01:26:00.040
And they say this case of mistaken identity is grounds for a mistrial.
01:26:04.900
You know, if I could talk to Amber Heard, I would shake her by the shoulders and say, please quit while you are behind.
01:26:12.980
Now, on the juror issue, the person who should be the most upset right now is the father who actually got summoned but didn't serve.
01:26:30.460
You don't walk into a courthouse, sit down, and all of a sudden you're a juror.
01:26:33.180
There's voir dire, there's questions by the judge, there's written questions.
01:26:39.920
Like, you know, they go to whatever, the voter election board, and out they go.
01:26:45.320
And so it's not like they're handpicking the jurors who are going to be possibly seated on a jury, number one.
01:26:58.740
But ultimately, she just doesn't want to have this $10 million judgment hanging over her head.
01:27:04.720
And there are better ways to get out from under that than doing what she's doing and incurring more attorney's fees when she can't afford to pay the attorney's fees to date.
01:27:13.800
She needs to have a little heart-to-heart with her ex-husband and say, what's it going to take for you not to come after me for this judgment?
01:27:19.660
Because if you're going to come after me, I might go bankrupt or, you know, whatever other option she has to run from this judgment for the rest of her life.
01:27:34.640
Like, she has a terrible verdict against her right now, which her lawyer says she cannot afford to pay.
01:27:38.740
So it's like and the lawyer is supposed to be getting paid by an insurer because when you get sued like this in a civil court, generally you have insurance that will defend you.
01:27:49.840
And if you settle or get a verdict against you, the insurance company will pay, which is why Don Lemon can say publicly, in my opinion, that he didn't pay anything to his accuser is I bet you dollars to donuts.
01:28:04.960
But anyway, back on this case, her insurance company's telling her to take a walk, too.
01:28:10.680
So the insurance company doesn't want to pay anything.
01:28:15.320
We'll get to the insurance company in a second, maybe.
01:28:17.360
But, Mark, she's going to go in in there on appeal and she's going to say, among other things, I believe, based on what we heard from her lawyer, unfair.
01:28:28.640
I believe they listened to the Twitter mob and didn't listen to the evidence.
01:28:37.600
And it says the court made errors that prevented a just and fair verdict consistent with the First Amendment.
01:28:47.540
Denied meaning they're not going to do anything that can disturb the verdict on those grounds.
01:28:54.060
But her strongest argument, follow me here, is that the jury did find in her favor on the countersuit for $2 million, the substance of which would suggest that there was some credibility to the fact that she was a victim.
01:29:10.240
Because when the attorney claimed that she manufactured the whole thing, apparently they found in her favor and said that was not right.
01:29:18.800
So if there is some shred of evidence or belief that she believed that she was a victim, then she writes that statement from the position of someone who believes that they're an abused person, and thus they have the First Amendment constitutional protection afforded to all those who write things.
01:29:40.240
Now, obviously, the argument on the other side, which I'm going to get in the hate mail, is, boy, did I get it during the trial when I raised that argument, just as a lawyer, is, you know, no, they found that you can't make it up, and it was all not accurate, and she just lied.
01:29:53.600
But then what about that verdict that she got in her favor?
01:30:03.940
You made up this whole thing against Johnny Depp.
01:30:10.900
You learn later when you've been practicing longer.
01:30:14.980
It's a joke because Mark can run circles around me legally.
01:30:19.100
But I think it was saying that representative Johnny Depp, who went out there, the agent who went out there and said, you created a fake scene, you know, like you messed up your apartment to try to make it look extra bad when the cops got there.
01:30:38.440
You may have made up all this other stuff, but we don't believe you created a fake crime scene.
01:30:43.380
So we're going to say that that was defamation by Johnny Depp's representative, and therefore he gets pinned with a two million.
01:30:48.720
I think they were just looking for a compromise just to say, like, I'll give her something.
01:30:57.880
That explains that explains the split to me that that like they did not believe her.
01:31:02.000
And even one of the jurors has given an interview to a news outlet saying we never believed any of her claims of abuse.
01:31:13.220
And I don't know if it's been said, but the mistake was she was so poorly prepared to testify.
01:31:22.400
All she needed to do was sit down and say, oh, there were things that I did that I'm embarrassed.
01:31:36.460
And thus, when she had claims that they could have embraced, potentially, supported by her sister, supported by some of the audio recordings, they just rejected her outright.
01:31:45.640
She wasn't prepared at all because being abused, being abused or feeling abused, that's a very kind of abstract term.
01:31:57.000
They would have accepted it to some extent, I think, maybe, if she had just been open and honest about other stuff.
01:32:07.580
Her testimony came across so damn rehearsed that it was almost you think that she learned a whole new script for it.
01:32:15.520
And the jury didn't buy it and the public didn't buy it.
01:32:18.980
The fact that her team thinks that maybe social media didn't do her any favors, I think social media did do her favors because they were so hard on her based on what everybody was watching that I actually started to feel sorry for her.
01:32:32.300
So if I'm feeling sorry for her and I'm an ice queen, then the jury might have started to feel a little sorry for her too.
01:32:52.780
It was delightful for those who were getting the ticket.
01:32:55.720
But it actually did make me feel sorry for her because it was so relentless.
01:33:02.940
First of all, the jurors are not supposed to be looking at social media unless the defense.
01:33:09.260
She's just, you know, she's throwing darts without a real target.
01:33:13.360
And secondly, secondly, she started the PR war.
01:33:17.360
She's the one who called TMZ and said, take pictures of me outside of the she did.
01:33:21.540
So you cannot, as I said, my talking points the day after the verdict, live by the sword,
01:33:26.860
You can't start the PR war, lose it and then cry.
01:33:39.860
And that then influences the jury, which they cannot prove.
01:33:47.180
And if that somehow adversely affects the jury,
01:33:50.460
because it continues and somehow their verdict is based upon a tick tock that they saw or
01:33:57.120
other influences other than the evidence in the law, then, yeah, you've got an argument.
01:34:01.920
Unfortunately, they're not going to be able to prove it.
01:34:03.380
Yeah, they have not been able to close that loop.
01:34:06.680
A woman is suing over a date that didn't happen.
01:34:16.400
Um, the woman says that her she went out on one date with the man.
01:34:30.420
Now she's suing him for intentional infliction of emotional distress, saying it was the anniversary
01:34:36.060
of her mother's death or it was her mother's birthday and her mother had just passed away
01:34:42.720
And here's the defendant, Richard Jordan, making his defense to the judge.
01:34:47.680
We had a date, one date and nothing else after that.
01:34:56.680
It was I don't see how this is going to go any further.
01:35:05.620
Here's a bit of the exchange between the plaintiff Kashante and the judge himself when she claimed
01:35:11.360
that was a lie, that the defendant was lying to the judge.
01:35:21.060
Well, you can't you can't say, listen, he has he has the right to put whatever is in the answer.
01:35:30.740
You can't do you can't add another count because you don't like or you disagree with what is
01:35:37.380
If he respond and his response is a lie, it's perjury, then my documents will prove that
01:35:51.820
First of all, do you understand what perjury is?
01:35:58.120
Perjury is a statement, a false statement made under oath.
01:36:03.080
And I can have documents that prove he was lying.
01:36:05.740
OK, so what do we think about Kashante's chances of recovering her $10,000, Jonna?
01:36:19.760
You can't sue somebody for standing you up on a date.
01:36:24.940
But I got to love this poor schlub who had the one date who's now holding the court on
01:36:31.180
He's got to be saying to himself, damn, I dodged a bullet.
01:36:39.060
And that poor judge, you know, she was giving it right back to him.
01:36:41.520
There's more to that video where, you know, she says to the judge, are we done here?
01:36:48.320
There's a picture of the defendant with just his head buried in his hands.
01:37:03.540
And she apparently has a history of malicious prosecution against people.
01:37:16.120
Want to tell the audience that I'm going to be off for a short vacation next week, but
01:37:19.940
we will be back with a fantastic lineup of guests, Adam Carolla, Dr. Laura, yay, and
01:37:29.720
And thank you in the meantime so much for listening.