Roger Stone has been a political strategist and political icon for over four decades. He has served as a senior campaign aide to three Republican presidents and is a New York Times bestselling author and a longtime friend and advisor of President Donald Trump. Stone has appeared on thousands of broadcasts and spoken at countless venues, and has lectured before the prestigious Oxford Political Union Society and the Cambridge Union Society. He is an outspoken libertarian and has been described as a "pop culture icon." In this episode of The Stone Zone with Roger Stone, we discuss the Democratic Party's attempt to seize control of the House of Representatives and remove President Trump from the ballot in order to force him off the presidential ballot in 2020, and who the next Republican to replace him in the House will be. We also discuss the role Paul Singer is playing in the effort, and why he may be the most odious member of Congress in the history of politicians, and how he could be the next House member to replace them with a Democrat who s more likely to flip the balance of power in favor of the Democrats. Roger Stone is a prolific writer, speaker, and media personality, and is one of the most influential men in American politics. He's been a regular contributor to many publications, including The Daily Caller and Slingshot News, among many others. His work has been featured on CNN, The Huffington Post, The Daily Wire, and The Weekly Standard, and many other publications. His latest book is out now in paperback, The NextGen, which is out in paperback. . The Stonezone and is available in hardcover and hardcover, as well as on Audible and Audible, which you can buy on Amazon, wherever else you get your copy of the book, The Stonezine. The White House is available for $99.99. If you're looking for insider access to the inside the inner workings of the inner sanctum of the Trump administration, you can find it here. And if you search for it, you'll get a discount code: Stonezone, it's $99, and get 20% off your first-class membership, plus a free copy of his latest book, $99 gets you an ad-free membership plan, too! The Most Powerful Man in the White House has a year, plus an additional $100,000 gets you access to Stonezone gets $50,000 off the deal, plus he'll get an ad discount, and he'll also get access to all other VIP memberships, too.
00:08:11.660Well, I think we've got, if we take a look at who have not explicitly endorsed Trump.
00:08:18.200Okay, so Calvert was on my initial list, but he has actually endorsed Trump.
00:08:23.860Now, what's interesting about Calvert is he has received $5,800 from Singer.
00:08:28.440He's 71 years old, and he's served in Congress for 32 years.
00:08:33.380I mean, when I started looking at these, the length of time that these people have served in Congress, I'm like, these people are there for a long, long time.
00:08:41.900So I think we can safely say Calvert, having endorsed Trump publicly, we can probably remove him from the list.
00:08:51.160Now, going down to, this is length, based on the length of time served, we have Kay Granger.
00:09:00.680She, no, I'm sorry, she is 81 years old.
00:09:05.920She has served for 28 years in Congress.
00:09:09.040So being 81 and receiving $5,800 from Singer puts her right there at the top of the list.
00:09:17.160Now, we can go down to Kathy McMorris Rogers.
00:09:21.300Now, she's from Washington, from the 5th District, elected 2004.
00:09:27.340Now, she's 55 years old, okay, and she's served for 20 years in Congress, which is still a significant number.
00:09:34.740Now, you think about, okay, when it goes, when that retirement process goes through their mind, okay, 55 years old, okay, not that old.
00:09:43.540But when you have 20 years in Congress behind you, they might say, you know, maybe it's time to hang it up.
00:09:48.900I want to go spend time with my family, my kids, and do some other political work.
00:09:53.880And I want to, you know, stick it to Donald Trump at the same time.
00:09:57.520So this person, Kathy McMorris Rogers, not endorsed Trump.
00:10:02.860Now, here's where it gets interesting.
00:10:06.060Okay, we go and we look at Greg Pence.
00:10:09.800Now, I'm skipping down to number eight on my list, but I think, obviously, with the bloodline and the feud between Pence and Trump, if, you know, Greg Pence, and he's from Indiana, the brother of Mike Pence or related to Mike Pence.
00:10:29.320I didn't go further into the actual lineage there, but he's been in Congress for, it looks like, 20 years, I believe.
00:10:40.320And he's 68 years old, and he's received at least, now, I have one list here at $5,800 and another at $8,700.
00:10:49.100So I got to do a little bit more cross-checking.
00:10:51.040But, regardless, Greg Pence is right there on the list, so he might be doing his brother or his – are they brothers?
00:11:34.880And then we can go down – we'll skip back up to the top.
00:11:37.540Number six, Blaine Lutkenmeyer, first elected in 2008, 16 years in Congress, age 64, received $5,800.
00:11:48.780Okay, so he is up on the list as well.
00:11:51.620And then we go down to Drew Ferguson, Republican from Georgia's 3rd District, first elected in 2016, eight years in Congress.
00:11:58.140He's 58, also received $5,800 from Singer.
00:12:05.740Skipping Pence, going down to number nine, we have Young Kim, Republican, California, only four years in Congress, 62 years old, received $8,700 from Singer.
00:12:18.800And then we have another Republican from California, Mike Garcia, elected in 2020, four years in Congress, 48 years old, received $5,800.
00:12:30.420So, that's really the list that I have come up with.
00:12:36.160But, of course, we can always look at the other factors here, such as, you know, just going right down, taking the Trump endorsement out of the equation.
00:12:55.220I wouldn't put her in that same category, necessarily.
00:13:01.680Drew Ferguson, Bacon, Pence, and Waltz.
00:13:04.620That's all based on the length of time served.
00:13:07.820Gary, we're going to cut to a quick commercial break, and then we're going to come right back to you for a discussion.
00:13:14.900And at the top, when we come back, Troy, it's your turn to ask Gary Frenchy a question.
00:13:20.160Folks, please take a moment to hear a word from our sponsors.
00:13:50.160What you'll discover will really blow your mind.
00:13:53.240Today, silver faces a huge shortage due to the rising demand by military, solar, electric cars, and computers, all of which depend on silver.
00:14:02.680But right now, silver is priced to sell, according to worldwide experts.
00:14:06.840Now, to help you get started, Swiss America is offering beautiful United States Walking Liberty half dollars,
00:14:13.060issued by the U.S. Mint from 1916 to 1947, and minted in 90% pure silver for a special introductory price.
00:14:21.640Limit of $250 per customer while supplies last.
00:14:24.960So call the number on your screen or visit SwissAmerica.com, because now is the time to rediscover silver.
00:14:32.100God put glutathione in every one of our cells.
00:14:39.080If someone took all the glutathione out of your neighbor's body, they would be dead in three to seven minutes.
00:14:44.700We need it to sustain life, and we start losing it, Brandon, at age 20.
00:14:50.860Our stores are just constantly being depleted.
00:14:54.600The only thing, my friends, the only thing that will kill, detox, and destroy all of the free radicals, cytotoxins, mold, heavy metals, pesticides,
00:15:04.940everything that I just mentioned, virus variants, vaccine variants, is God's molecule, glutathione.
00:15:16.300It will detox every free radical, chemical, heavy metal from your brain, your liver, your organs, and your cells in seconds every single day.
00:15:46.340If you're just tuning in, this is The Stone Zone.
00:15:48.980I'm here with my co-host, Troy Smith, and we're also joined by Gary Frenchy from The Next News Network,
00:15:57.660who's done substantial research trying to determine whether or not there are rhinos in the House who might now provide the crucial few votes necessary to turn over control of the lower House of Congress.
00:16:16.000Well, because when the Colorado decision came down from the U.S. Supreme Court, they very clearly said that while the states did not have the authority or the power to bar Donald Trump from the ballot, the Congress could do so by passing legislation in both houses,
00:16:34.160essentially declaring that the president is guilty of participating in an insurrection.
00:16:41.800Jamie Raskin, the oiliest member of Congress from Maryland, immediately introduced such legislation.
00:16:49.820Control of the Republicans by the House at this moment is extremely precarious with, I believe, four vacancies, one of which will be filled or will soon be four vacancies, one of which will be filled certainly by a Democrat in a special election.
00:17:06.720So Gary has done yeoman research trying to determine who the next possible backstabbing rhinos might be.
00:17:16.200Once again, my colleague Troy Smith and I have uncovered the fact that this insidious plot is being directed by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
00:17:26.500He's the political architect, but his financier is a vulture capitalist, Paul Singer.
00:17:32.560Troy, do you have a question for Gary?
00:17:34.060The news that Mike Johnson through the NRCC has received over $280,000 from Paul Singer since the beginning of 2024.
00:17:43.420I believe that donation took place on February 8th, 2024.
00:17:48.980And do you think that speaks to what's going to happen here in the future?
00:17:52.380It seems that Singer's made an effort to buy off the House leadership on top of these members that are getting older and possibly retiring.
00:17:58.600Well, the fact that he has his hands in almost everything is terrifying considering his track record of donations with respect to the anti-Trumpers going all the way back to, you know, the 2016 primary with Rubio.
00:18:14.120And the substantial donation to Nikki Haley that you guys uncovered, too, in the FEC reports of $5 million.
00:18:20.560So there's no question that this man is attempting to influence every single part of the House.
00:18:41.100So, I mean, if you can start at the top, why not?
00:18:43.980And that looks like exactly what he's doing.
00:18:47.980Gary, you have a very, very substantial following on YouTube that has not duplicated itself on Rumble, which is a terrific platform.
00:18:59.380So I want to tell people that the Next News Network can be found on Rumble, and I strongly urge you to go there right now and subscribe, or I should say follow, and you can follow all of this great reporting by Gary Franchi and his team.
00:20:26.120The American people need to know what exactly is happening because there's no question they want to remove Donald Trump.
00:20:32.860They're doing every single thing that they can, whether it's through lawfare.
00:20:37.020And now, of course, as you mentioned, with the Supreme Court laying out the basic, the roadmap for Jeremy Raskin to follow, we've got a very big problem.
00:20:45.120And it looks like that roadmap is being tracked by Singer with Kevin McCarthy.
00:21:13.920You know, Gary, do you think that the media would use – you know, Greg Pence seems to be the perfect thing because Mike Pence really became a media darling after the January 6th thing, and he was brought around.
00:21:24.540You think that they would spin that as, oh, a Pence is taking down Donald Trump?
00:21:28.860They would really run with that, wouldn't they?
00:21:31.700Well, actually, what media are we talking about?
00:21:35.420I mean, I don't think that the media would want to paint that picture in front of the world necessarily.
00:21:41.420I mean, of course, they'd like to cart Pence out because he will, you know, take his shots at Trump, his veiled shots when he's on the air.
00:21:49.520But, look, the reason I do what I do is because I don't trust the media to do the job correctly.
00:21:55.320So would they go ahead and point this – point out that something that's so obvious?
00:22:50.920It is a lurid tale in which I use eyewitness evidence, fingerprint evidence, and deep Texas politics to make the case that Lyndon Baines Johnson was at the helm of a conspiracy that included the Secret Service,
00:23:07.760The Man Who Killed Kennedy, The Man Who Killed Kennedy, The Man Who Killed Kennedy, the man who killed Kennedy.com.
00:23:22.360very own autographed copy, the paperback, which has three extra chapters, by going to
00:23:28.640themanwhokilledkennedy.com. That's themanwhokilledkennedy.com. Folks, this is a
00:23:35.900potboiler. It's a murder mystery. I'm very proud of the heavily documented work here.
00:23:42.340So if you are interested in the Kennedy assassination and you yourself do not believe
00:23:47.580that Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F. Kennedy acting alone, check out my book. I think you
00:23:53.580will enjoy it. Troy, you and I had a great space last night. We want to thank Lance Migliaccio,
00:24:01.560the Big Mig, and his partner, George Ballotin. They do a great show together, the Big Mig Show.
00:24:10.180I also recommend that to you. And we really broke this down. I think more and more patriots
00:24:17.080are becoming aware of what's going on. Let's go to our next guest. I want to talk to David
00:24:25.640Schoen. But in the meantime, Troy, thank you for joining us today with your breakdown. And we will
00:24:31.400see you on tomorrow's show, The Stone Zone. Awesome. Thank you very much, Roger. And it's
00:24:37.060always an honor. All right, folks, that was Troy Smith. If you don't subscribe to slingshot.news,
00:24:43.740I strongly recommend you do so. Joining me now in The Stone Zone is the criminal defense lawyer and
00:24:51.420Trump impeachment lawyer, David Schoen, to talk about the latest developments in the upcoming
00:24:58.100New York trial of Donald Trump, where he's being prosecuted by District Attorney Alvin Bragg
00:25:05.660in the so-called hush money trial. David, welcome to The Stone Zone. Thank you very much.
00:25:12.540So, David, I mean, first of all, I don't understand how this case got elevated to be a
00:25:17.280criminal trial. At a minimum, if there's really a case here, isn't it a business records case? Isn't
00:25:23.080this really a, if there were even a case, wouldn't it even be a civil case? Yeah, I mean, nobody would
00:25:29.560charge this criminally. And in fact, that's why all of the higher-ups in the office counseled
00:25:35.080against bringing this case criminally. As you well know, they had appointed Alvin, sorry,
00:25:40.520Cy Vance appointed a special counsel, Mark Pomerantz, a longtime experienced lawyer in New
00:25:46.220York, to investigate the matter. Pomerantz has written a book about it. Pomerantz was in favor
00:25:50.760of prosecuting, but he came in favor of prosecuting before he even investigated, it would seem. But
00:25:56.040if you read his book, he, all of the higher-ups in the office were skeptical at best about bringing
00:26:01.640a criminal prosecution here. And as you also know, the feds thoroughly examined the situation,
00:26:08.480decided not to charge anything criminally, and the Federal Election Commission passed on it. So
00:26:14.280this is simply a political move by Alvin Bragg, who ran on a platform of getting Donald Trump.
00:26:20.620But, you know, the other point you raise is, not only is it difficult to see how it's a criminal
00:26:25.640case, but it's difficult to see how it's a felony at all. And in fact, I think that the indictment is
00:26:32.520fatally defective, because the grand jury didn't find what felony was committed. In other words,
00:26:38.640it's a jerry-rigged way to come to a felony. They've charged a misdemeanor, false business records,
00:26:46.000and then in New York law, under New York law, that becomes a felony if it were to commit another crime.
00:26:50.460But the grand jury never identified what the other crime was. And therefore, as a matter of due
00:26:55.460process and otherwise, it's impossible to defend against. It would be if the business records were
00:27:02.240doctored, for example, to allegedly commit a tax crime, that would be one defense. If it was for
00:27:07.980election fraud, that would be another defense completely. So I think it's fatally defective
00:27:13.960should have been dismissed. So unlike the evaluation trial before Judge Ingeron,
00:27:21.760will Donald Trump be afforded a jury trial in this matter? Yes, he'll have a jury trial.
00:27:28.080So let's just say, hypothetically, that because of the makeup of the jury, and also because the judge
00:27:36.020limits certain defenses by Donald Trump and the Trump organization, Trump were to be convicted.
00:27:43.960Is an appeal possible based on what you just said, that the indictment from the very beginning was
00:27:50.100fatally flawed? Oh, sure. Assuming they preserve the issue, I hope the lawyers have. I'm not confident
00:27:55.800that they have, but I hope they have. There have been many issues for appeal, including this judge's
00:28:02.260gag order, but even substantive issues in the case. I personally thought there were other grounds for
00:28:07.500recusal that the judge's disqualification that they haven't raised. Also, this judge was handpicked
00:28:12.280to this case, not by random selection. He was assigned to the Trump Foundation case,
00:28:16.860the Trump Organization case, and the Steve Bannon case. And the chief administrative judge has said
00:28:22.700that he picked this judge for him. He tried to imply that he picked him because the judge was
00:28:28.260particularly competent. That's not my experience with this judge. That would not have been a reason
00:28:33.520to select him for this case. There's a long history in this district attorney's office of the
00:28:38.200district attorney rigging the system to pick a judge. They would pick a judge to oversee a grand
00:28:43.160jury investigation, and then that judge would stay on. That was challenged by the New York Criminal
00:28:48.580Defense Lawyers Association many years ago, and it was upheld. The system was upheld. They found there
00:28:55.260no constitutional right to random selection. However, an action was brought in federal court, and in federal
00:29:01.380court, the district judge said, this really tends to have the appearance of impropriety or a bias,
00:29:06.960and if it were challenged on direct appeal, we might have a different result. The district attorney's
00:29:12.220office claims that they stopped this practice several years ago. I'm not so sure, but in any
00:29:17.160event, it looks terrible to have a judge handpicked specifically for this case. He's a known Trump
00:29:23.600hater. They raised the issue that he's contributed to Democratic Party causes, de minimis sort of
00:29:30.100contributions. The recusal motion was denied based on that. I don't think they've raised all of the
00:29:36.360grounds that should be raised for recusal. I don't think he can be a fair judge. That's just my
00:29:41.100opinion, having dealt with him. I find him to be a very insecure person. I don't find him to be
00:29:46.400competent, and I do find him to hate everything associated with Trump. Those are all my opinions,
00:29:52.460my experiences. So I worry about the trial, but I think there'll be a lot of evidentiary issues
00:29:59.640for appeal also. I've just heard about one today that I find hard to believe, but we'll see.
00:30:07.620There's a very important witness named Bob Costello, who represented Michael Cohen as his Michael Cohen's
00:30:14.000lawyer. And Bob Costello, according to testimony that he's given to a grand jury and statements he's
00:30:20.560given to the feds when they were investigating and concluded not to bring charges, Robert Costello
00:30:25.920testified that he offered Michael Cohen the opportunity to come forward and say whether
00:30:30.680Donald Trump had done anything wrong in connection with these payments to Stormy Daniels. And Michael
00:30:35.600Cohen told him, absolutely not. And Costello even said to him, listen, Cohen, this is your one chance
00:30:40.760to really help yourself. If Donald Trump did anything, now's the time to tell the government.
00:30:45.460And Cohen said, no, absolutely not, according to Bob Costello. And Cohen had waived attorney-client
00:30:50.200privilege, so Costello was free to say that. Bob Costello said that today, for the first time,
00:30:55.340he was contacted by the Trump lawyers and that they told him that the judge has barred his testimony
00:31:00.300in this case. That's almost impossible to believe, but that will be a serious appellate issue if that's
00:31:05.220the case. All right. Well, if you're just tuning in, folks, we're on the Stone Zone. We're talking
00:31:10.220to criminal defense attorney David Schoen. We're going to take a quick break for a commercial message,
00:31:14.880and then we'll be back with David Schoen and more of his analysis on the upcoming trial
00:31:20.480of Donald Trump in Manhattan at the hands of District Attorney Alvin Bragg. We'll be right back.
00:43:14.020If you're just tuning in, folks, we're here with David Schoen, criminal defense lawyer who ably represented Donald Trump in one of the two impeachment proceedings against him in the U.S. Senate.
00:43:25.020We're going to take a quick commercial break.
00:43:27.020But when we come back, I want to talk to David Schoen about the documents case and what's going on there.
00:43:34.020So take a moment to hear from our commercial sponsors.
00:43:38.020And we'll be right back with David Schoen, criminal defense lawyer, right here on The Stone Zone.
00:43:56.020She called me today and she told me something.
00:44:00.020And I said, you have got to tell the audience this.
00:44:02.020They need to hear this because it's really good news for those of you that, well, are taking Bella Grace.
00:44:07.020Well, I went to my hairdresser and I had not told her about this product that I've been taking.
00:44:12.020When she was blow drying my hair, she said, you, I just noticed when I was parting your hair and fixing it that you have a bunch of new hair growth.
00:44:19.020I've been going to this lady for probably 13 years and she's never said that to me.
00:44:25.020And I had noticed it, but for the fact that she, the fact that she noticed it was, I had to call Bran right away and tell him.
00:44:31.020She just said, you've never had this like this and it's growing and you just have all these baby hairs growing in and they're kind of curly.
00:44:37.020And so I just told her that what I was taking and she was amazed, so.
00:46:01.020I'm Roger Stone, and we're here in the Stone Zone.
00:46:04.020Joining me is criminal defense lawyer David Schoen.
00:46:08.020We've been talking about the upcoming trial in Manhattan brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg against Donald Trump.
00:46:19.020What should, in my opinion, be a civil trial, if that at all.
00:46:23.020It's a business records case, certainly not a criminal case.
00:46:27.020Before we leave this question, David, yesterday, I believe it was, we learned that Donald Trump would be gagged during this trial.
00:46:37.020Now, I think that the so-called valuations trial, where I was very happy to see that he finally got justice and they lowered the appeal bond to a still expensive but at least manageable level,
00:46:53.020was one in which Trump was not gagged and he could step out in the hall or after a court proceeding and give his side of the story.
00:47:02.020In other words, defend himself in the court of public opinion.
00:47:06.020Well, that's perhaps why we saw Trump go up in the polls during this proceeding because, well, the average American can understand the whole concept.
00:48:05.020Interestingly, now, you know, they're focusing on the social media posts about this judge's daughter.
00:48:12.020The judge and his family are not included within the gag order.
00:48:15.020But anyway, this is a matter of great public interest.
00:48:19.020The district attorney wrote a long indictment as held press conferences detailing what he claims Donald Trump did that was illegal.
00:48:28.020President Trump has to be able to respond to all of these things at all times, to point out the political motivation of the prosecutor, to point out evidentiary failings with the case, everything about the case.
00:48:42.020This idea that, you know, people are put at risk if he does.
00:48:45.020He's a public person who has a great following.
00:48:48.020They're entitled to hear what he has to say.
00:48:51.020He's also in the middle of a political campaign now.
00:48:54.020It's not fair to politically prosecute him and not allow him to respond in political terms and in real fact terms.
00:49:02.020He has to be able to defend himself publicly.
00:49:06.020In the case, a gag order is to be used most sparingly and to be most narrowly tailored and not have all of the extra commentary that this judge has given because he likes to take every opportunity he has to, you know, say something negative about President Trump.
00:50:21.020So this was the most outrageous gag order I've ever seen in any case anywhere in the civilized world.
00:50:27.020Well, and interestingly enough, I was gagged prior to trial, during trial, and I continue to be gagged right up until the time I was supposed to be remanded to prison.
00:50:36.020I don't think that's ever happened in the history of the country.
00:50:40.020And because of the gag, you were denied a fair jury also, frankly, because the lawyers really couldn't put out there the story.
00:50:47.020And anyway, that was a complete nightmare.
00:50:50.020It's the most draconian and inappropriate gag order I've ever seen.
00:50:53.020Well, we don't need to relive that piece of history.
00:50:57.020David, let's talk for a moment about the all important immunity case that's now going to the U.S. Supreme Court.
00:51:06.020Trump's lawyers obviously argued that he had presidential immunity to the trial judge.
00:51:13.020They then went to the D.C. Court of Appeals.
00:51:16.020That seemed like a pretty politicized proceeding.
00:51:19.020It was not surprising that they also ruled against him.
00:51:24.020Then, as I think most people know, Special Counsel Jack Smith had actually sought initially to leapfrog the appeals court and take it directly to the Supreme Court in an effort to streamline.
00:51:37.020But I should say speed up and expedite the trial, proving that that trial itself is an act of election interference.
00:51:47.020The left seems bent on having a trial of Donald Trump before the election.
00:51:54.020I don't think the Bragg trial was their first choice.
00:51:57.020In fact, I think it's the weakest of the cases against him.
00:52:01.020If you were arguing the immunity question before the Supreme Court on behalf of Donald Trump, just hypothetically, what would you say?
00:52:11.020I would think that the court ought to come up with a framework for immunity.
00:52:14.020First of all, I'll say why I think the Supreme Court took it.
00:52:17.020I think the Supreme Court took it because the Court of Appeals opinion, while very comprehensive and detailed,
00:52:22.020is just too categorically against the idea of immunity for president, which puts the institution of the presidency and the president himself or herself in great danger.
00:52:32.020We can't have a president worrying about making decisions in wartime.
00:52:36.020And otherwise, it might then subject that person to criminal prosecution if they made the wrong decision in someone else's judgment afterwards.
00:52:44.020And so the Court of Appeals categorically seemed to deny the idea of immunity from criminal charges.
00:52:51.020What I would suggest is that the appropriate framework is the framework drafted by the court in Nixon versus Fitzgerald,
00:52:57.020which held that a president is immune from civil liability for any act taken as an official act during the presidency,
00:53:05.020including to the outer perimeters of the official duties of that office.
00:53:11.020That, I think, ought to be a framework for the for the immunity from criminal charges in this case.
00:53:18.020So far, President Trump's lawyers, in my view, at least, have taken too extreme a position, a position that doesn't need to be taken.
00:53:25.020When they argued in the Court of Appeals that if the president were to order SEAL Team 6 to kill his political opponent,
00:53:32.020he would have immunity and would have to first be impeached and convicted before he could be prosecuted.
00:53:37.020I think that's just plain wrong. And the easy answer was, no, it doesn't fit within the framework.
00:53:42.020It's no in no circumstance. Could that be considered an official act?
00:53:46.020We'll see how the court plays it out. There's some interesting writings from some of the justices on these issues before.
00:53:53.020But, you know, people change their positions also. But I think that's a fair framework.
00:53:58.020And then the question would come to be, did President Trump arguably act within his official duties when he ordered what he ordered or directed Pence to take certain steps or insisted on an investigation based on the information he had at that time?
00:54:15.020I can tell you unequivocally that I believe President Trump believed that there was a question about the election integrity at that time.
00:54:22.020There needed to be an investigation. I can tell you also that the leading election law expert in the country has said nobody knows what the vice president's role truly is under the Electoral Count Act in such a circumstance.
00:54:35.020And so to prosecute this thing criminally seems absolutely wrong headed to me.
00:54:41.020And I do think it was in within his official act, given his mind state, a mindset at the time and his belief that he had an obligation under the oath he took under Article two and under the take care clause in Article two to take care that the laws are faithfully executed.
00:54:56.020Excellent observation. You speak of mens rea, the requirement, which would be true in the Washington case, D.C. case as well.
00:55:06.020They have to prove Trump's state of mind. Their argument will be, well, the attorney general told him the election was on the up and up and the CIA director told him that the election was on the up and up and the FBI director told him.
00:55:19.020I don't think any of those things matter. What matters is what Trump himself believed.
00:55:24.020And only Trump himself knows what Trump himself believed.
00:55:29.020On the other hand, the chances of a fair trial in Washington, D.C., relatively slim based on my personal experience.
00:55:37.020David, turning quickly with just a few minutes left here to the so-called documents trial.
00:55:43.020I don't know if you read the latest from that trial.
00:55:48.020The judge seemed unimpressed with the argument by Trump's lawyers that the Presidential Records Act allows him to hold on to certain classified and top secret documents.
00:56:00.020However, she did seem to me to be moved by the selective prosecution argument, which really burst into public view with the report by Robert Herr, the special counsel charged with investigating Joe Biden's retention of classified and top secret documents.
00:56:21.020The left had been insane since Judge Cannon, by the luck of the draw, not through some phony related case motion or or by appointment, was assigned to this case.
00:56:36.020Any predictions or observations about the so-called documents case?
00:56:41.020Yeah, I can't really make predictions, but observations be this.
00:56:45.020This judge has been unfairly picked on across the board by the media.
00:56:51.020There's a prosecution background, law clerk background, family of immigrants, worked her way up.
00:56:56.020Mother worked very hard to build up her career, excellent academic credentials.
00:57:01.020She's trying to be as fair as any judge can be, very different from some of the other judges who have been assigned to Trump cases in that regard.
00:57:08.020And they constantly mock her in the media.
00:57:21.020It's directly relevant to the state of mind, once again, of President Trump.
00:57:25.020Remember, there's a 2012 decision from Amy Berman Jackson, judge you well know, and who's a real Trump hater, in which she said the statute only designates one person,
00:57:35.020only identifies one person who can designate the nature of documents that were presidential records.
00:57:40.020And that's the chief executive himself, the president.
00:57:43.020Then she goes on, in her opinion, to talk about the complete, virtually complete control over records during his time in office.
00:57:50.020He enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents.
00:57:55.020And she says it's only the president who can decide what documents are official presidential records and what are personal.
00:58:03.020President Trump has said he designated records to be personal.
00:58:06.020That's relevant. Jack Smith's wrong that the PRA isn't relevant to the case, because if President Trump believed that he was entitled to hold on to these documents as personal records or otherwise,
00:58:18.020that's directly relevant to the mental state Smith has to prove to get a conviction in the case.
00:58:23.020And so the Presidential Records Act is directly relevant to the case.
00:58:27.020It may not be dispositive, but it's directly relevant.