>> i think it is a pediatrician talking to the child and. if you are perfectly healthy and you had covid and had some abouting veens already, thens cha -- the chances are you, you don't need more. >> his only son is a box office surprise. have you seen this or heard about it? >> will the director of that film who'll join us live. the film came in number four at the box office behind john. >> the case of a stolen red spoon. man, we sproek the story on this show and it has got a satisfying ending. who do you call if your town is run by tumbleweed. that's our viral videos. coming up.
to win again. i agree with what news week said, i have said this all along. he'll use this politically, which is another reason you can't see this politically-motivated. if it is politically motivated, it is backfiring on the motivator because it is helping to stoke the base and get them all riled up once again. the maga section of the party. >> john, what about you? >> the indictment puts the 2024 spotlight back on trump or he wants it and will make it difficult for any of his rivals to gain traction. it is probably a fair comment, your thoughts sns >> it is a fair comment, but boy, we have a lot going on in the election. he gets republicans excited. this is the way to do it. i don't mean maga republicans. i mean a lot of moderate democrats. there is a lot of people.
>> we have seen to lost the old mantra good for the goos, good for the garlander. john, lesley, jason, thank you awe all. the fox news at night common sense department spends much of the day watching wall to wall coverage of the former president trump being arraigned in the new york. if you ever need proof who really despises donald trump, 60% of americans agree that donald trump should be indicted. >> the very same poll shows that 37% believed that trump pays out to stormy daniels was illegal. if common sense has its math correct, that means 60% think trump should be indicted and 30% thinks he did something illegal. >> even though he did not do
that crime is never mentioned in the indictment. that's a serious flaw. donald trump may be able to get out of this case because of the failure of this indictment of the timing of the crime. what crime is it and if it is a federal crime, i don't think bragg is able to prosecute the federal crime. this is one of the many legal flaws that are afflicting with this indictment. >> i am not a legal expert but a lot of legal experts agree with you as well. mr. bragg owes the public a better explanation of he is theory of the case. his unclear invasive reply on tuesday does not help. the country does not have to wait four months to find out the answer. bragg at the news conference today did not know how to answer these questions, john. >> or he just did not want to. this indictment is so legally insufficient that apart of me is wondering whether or not alvin bragg
it has no nutritional value. there is nothing there. >> is slurpee the proper analogy here? >> i get his point. what he's saying here is if you read the indictment, you can't tell what trump did that was illegal. it is all seems to be coming later. this is a problem constitutionally. the purpose of indictment, the reason and the constitution gives you due process rights that you as a criminal defendant, trump, have the right to know what the government is charging you with. you read this indictment, you can't tell what's illegal and what's a felony. so, i agree. it has no content to it. and it may be constitutional vulnerable on appeal. >> john, we hear this all the time that nobody is above the law. this time the former president is below the law. a normal person would not have been facing these
ami documents. it is not just that $130,000 wired payment. >> however, many legal scholars have been quick to point out that while the charges say that the 34 false business records conceal another crime, the indictment never says what that crime is. bragg claims the law does not require him to do so. now, you will remember at one point, bragg did hesitate to prosecute this case but then referred to new details allegedly prompted a push forward. while the judge says he wants to move expeditiously, the next hearing is early december. >> kevin corke live for us in d.c. thank you. let's bring our law officer john yu. john, i want to play some
sound. this is the former president tonight, he made a good point and i will get your take. >> everybody says this is not really an indictment, there is nothing here. there is nothing here. they're not saying what you did. >> he's right, john. they did not disclose the crime. >> not one darn thing. >> sorry, john yu, go ahead. [laughter] >> it is okay. we look alike, too. we are like twins. >> separated at birth. >> the problem of this indictment has a big hole and as what kevin said, it does not describe the crime. without that description of the crime, all you have got are a munch of misdemeanors, the clock ran out over five years ago on charges. they're not even that serious. you don't go to a grand jury. the only way you can get to a felony is the cooking of the books have to be concealed of other crimes.
charges. your final thoughts. >> yeah, the law is not applicable in this case. you know we are all above the law if the law does not apply to us. one more thing, i am ashamed that alvin bragg duped a grand jury. we should not be allow to indict a ham sandwich or a potted plant or a pair of sox. we should only indict people when there is probable cause of a crime. this is not that. >> yeah, it is a very one-sided document. jonna spilbor and john yu, thank you. a bit of a circus today. nate is live in manhattan with that side of the story. nate, good evening. . >> reporter: good evening, trace, what a day it has been for former president trump. you saw part of his defiant speech in mar-a-lago. his day started differently here in new york city. while coming down here to the courthouse for his arr