right pause because of the power of this factual evidence. take the republican prosecutor we have cited before, andrew mccarthy. a fox-news favorite, who wrote a whole book defending trump in the mueller probe, and accusing others of pushing the real collusion, which is one reason he is on fox quite a bit and has a huge conservative legal following. he was also appointee in the southern district of york under rudy giuliani himself, so he is a reagan appointee and that doj. but he is also someone who and you see his face on the screen you may recognize him because he is on fox he is someone who says he also tries to deal with legal analysis. perhaps, it is a more confident variety. he clearly was in the reagan revolution but he is respond to the evidence. he says when you look at the evidence, as a criminal-legal matter, it is devastating against trump, and that the new evidence in that hearing makes a big difference. he is saying this in public and this week, he is now e
abetting the intimidation of federal officials, which is a pretty serious. crime. do you expect we are going to see trump prosecuted by the justice department on on any of these charges? i do now, yeah. i do now. that s just three words. i gave you his credentials. he is saying what he thinks will happen. based on the evidence. he does think there is a case to indict donald trump, and he does think it is now passed the line from debatable evidence to overwhelming evidence of a violent felony which is serious, that s true. and that last word, now, it speaks to what everyone is wondering about these insurrection hearings. about this difficult interbranch process. the now is that the evidence has passed a certain point. and i will just say on a personal note, mr. mccarthy, a lawyer who talks act these issue, reports on them, and analyzes them on tv, as do i,