it is nothing that should be count countenanced under our constitution. >> should barack obama be prosecuted for dropping drone strikes, you know, the clinton case was brought up, that he was spared prosecution for lying about monica lewinsky, but when i am listening to it, i think about the police immunity, where they have this broad immunity to kill, but if a police officer goes home and kills his wife, that immunity ends there. they don't have a broad immunity to just go kill anyone they want. they suddenly can be prosecuted. and even in some cases like with the george floyd killers, they can be prosecuted even when they're acting in their official capacity. >> that's exactly right, and that's based on a doctrine called statory immunity, which the supreme court made up as opposed to the impeachment, which is part of the constitution. so trump's argument that he can't be prosecuted unless he's
Did a veteran judge in downstate Quincy who reversed his guilty ruling against a young man in a sexual assault case do so because he reconsidered the evidence and realized he was wrong? Or, did he do it to get around a state law that would have forced him to send 18-year-old Drew Clinton to prison for at least four years? Those two scenarios form the crux of the decision now before the ...
breaking news now. thank you for breaking all that down. a florida judge now has set the date for former president donald trump's classified documents trial. it is set for may 20th, 2024. that is apparently to start this december and the defense asking to schedule it after the 2024 election. smack in the middle of that. your take. >> well, i mean, if you look at the underlying prosecution, harris, looks to me like it is a very political operation. again disseparate treatment between joe biden and donald trump. joe biden couldn't take any documents out at vice president. the clinton case. it looks to me like a political prosecution. it will be coming smack dab in the primary season in some states. and it is going to -- may have an impact on the election. that would be the third election in a row that you've seen the
chinatown, in chinatown, many dc documents, boxes of documents. you don't ever hear about thiseu . >> all you hear about is trump. and i'm totallt hiy covered by the presidential records act and also by the clinton case. ai know what that is? that's where clinton took out tapes in it and he put them inan his drawer and they sued him just on a very civil basis.civi and he ended up winningd up w the lawsuit and.and that >> the judge said he can have whatever he wants, and that's called the presidential records . >> what about sandy berger shoving documents down his pants? there are many instanceserge ofu but especially when you're president and joe biden wasn'tmedown his president only covered by the presidential records act. if you're president, joe biden was in prison. in fact, joe biden was senator for many.iden was. hey'g and they've got a lot of classified documents when he was senator and othe clar democs senators can't even believe the fact that he has these documenteve thats. >> can't even they said, i watched dick durbin. here's another beauty. >> i watched dick durbin saying i can't believe that he took
even though he has them in delaware and probably 100 times more than i have? >> bret: so you are not worried about this case? >> based on the law, zero. zero. presidential records act plus the act, plus the clinton case, the clinton case which was won by clinton as president because he took -- he took tapes of leaders in his socks. zero. >> bret: okay. >> zero. every good lawyer has said it and you have seen that every good lawyer has said that. >> bret: obviously there are others that push back. >> this is a weaponization of politics. this was a weaponization of the white house. this was a horrible thing, a candidate that's leading. i'm leading biden by a lot. they go out and they weaponize. there is a horrible thing that was done. >> bret: let's talk about the politics. >> it's never been done. >> bret: let's talk about the politics. you are facing a number of other potential charges in other cases. >> all democrat --
reference to the so-called clinton socks case, which involves bill clinton's own personal records of interviews between him and a biographer, which at one point were kept in a sock drawer, is a desperate attempt to twist the presidential records act. those tapes were clinton's personal property and he had every right to have them in his possession. unlike the sensitive government material that trump took from the white house, including national security or classified material. as for hillary clinton and joe biden, the crucial difference between their handling of classified material and donald trump is his lack of cooperation. according to the indictment, trump allegedly a deceived authorities about the documents in his possession. that's what sets his case apart. both clinton and biden actually worked with investigators. so, here's a comparison that might be more useful for trump. retired air force officer robert bircham who, like the former president was accused in florida of mishandling classified documents and
additional indictments. whether that is for the january 6th, whether that is just adding additional people to the mar-a-lago documents case, or a third possibility, we don't know. but it is a very interesting addendum to this, and it also is ironic that there are no defenses, basically, to the case that's already been brought. and so, there's always a rule for trial lawyers that if the law is on your side, stress the law. if the facts are on your side, stress the facts. and if neither is on your side, pound the table. and i'm afraid the defense lawyers to the extent that he has any, are going to have to pound the table. because they don't have law or facts on their side. >> jennifer, as the ex president here met his match, so to speak? how does the environment of a courtroom impact the entire basis of his political identity? because in the public, he is
♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪ >> so, republicans don't know how to defend the new trump indictments. that much is clear, because instead of addressing the merits of the case or even criticizing trump, most of the gop is launching bogus accusations about a supposed to cheered justice system. for example, mike pence, who claims without evidence that hillary clinton got a quote, passed in 2016 for her handling of classified emails. never mind the fact that clinton cooperated with that investigation and as we discussed earlier, the clinton case is nothing like that of donald trump. many republican national security our bernstein and dan sullivan are also paired in that same line. at this point, the kind of what about-ism is almost expected from the gop and nobody seems to care. still, the potential electoral damage that trump could do to the party. nbc news reports this week that republicans are privately
you follow the court a lot closer than i do, you listen to all of it and the hearings. the cases that haven't been decided yet, do you think that we might find other pleasant surprises in these rulings? >> i would love to be surprised, but i am very skeptical. the two big surprises so far were the voting rights -- and the case upholding the indian child welfare act protecting native children. and one of the things that connects those two cases is that the loitering was really terrible for the conservative side. so, in one case, alabama's attorney general and the other texas attorney general put forth really sloppy arguments that basically acted as though the court was already in their pocket. they didn't need to worry about presenting a really persuasive case to the justices, and that clearly offended several of them. not just kavanaugh, but also barrett in the most recent decision. and that doesn't carry through
indictments. that much is clear, because instead of addressing the merits of the case or even criticizing trump, most of the gop is launching bogus accusations about a supposed to cheered justice system. for example, mike pence, who claims without evidence that hillary clinton got a quote, passed in 2016 for her handling of classified emails. never mind the fact that clinton cooperated with that investigation and as we discussed earlier, the clinton case is nothing like that of donald trump. the -- bernstein and dan sullivan are also paired in that same line. at this point, the kind of what about-ism is almost expected from the gop and nobody seems to care. still, the potential electoral damage that trump could do to the party. nbc news reports this week that republicans are privately saying that trump's indictment is serious, and could hurt their 2024 chances. but none of them, no one, will actually say that publicly. let's bring in my next guest,