it's ultimate speed for ultimate business. don't miss out on our fastest speed plans yet! switch to comcast business and get started for $49.99 a month. plus, ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card. call today! welcome back everyone to the weekend. election interference was at the heart of the new york criminal case against donald trump. in closing arguments, the prosecutor put it like this. quote, this scheme cooked up by these men at this time could very well be what got president trump elected. this was overt election fraud, act and furtherance of the conspiracy to promote mr. trump's election by unlawful means. more simply, those crimes contributed to trump being electedment. wekaty fang is with us and also partner of the alliance law group. >> i love the fact that you are an attorney. you don't just play one on tv. people would refer to this as hush money case. i would argue that's to differentiate it from all the other election interference. >> there is so many. >> we have to differentiate that. >> i wanted to frame why it mattered that bragg decided to pursue this as a question of election interference. >> i wrote a piece online about why it was as a legal concept a novel theory in terms of trying to do this because the case in and of itself, new york election law statute, is not really prosecuted that often here. falsification of business records, alvin bragg has referred to those as bread and butter white collar cases from the manhattan da's office. to elevate to the felony is kind of the more novel thing. it took courage to do this. why? you not only have to make sure you have the probable cause and elements of the crime, but when you are a prosecutor you have to take stock of whether or not a jury is going to care about this kind of case. will a jury say it's just a hush money payment. why are you trying to make it into something that it's not? that's the theme that the banner has been running with to defend donald trump. it crystallized better as i got deeper into the case. the 2015 trump tower meeting i call the original sin. the reason is that is when pecker, trump, cohen conspired to do the catch and kill schemes. the reason it's the original sentence but for that meeting where they agreed to kill negative stories and promote negative ones about trump's opponents, he may have never made it to the oval office. everything that's spun off from that meeting and successful catch and kill has led to him claiming absolute immunity as a president, has led to him stealing classified documents, has led to him having january 6. if we think about all the indictments that came after he became president, maybe just maybe if he had never made it there in the first place, he never would have had these cases. we would have never had a january 6. there was all this stuff that came as a domino effect from the meeting and bragg made you care about that meeting. bragg put it in a way and set the table for you to understand it had nothing to do with him having sex with other people. it was nothing about those two people having sex. whoever it was, him and someone else. it was about him stealing the election from the american public and that's why you care. >> that's interesting. i agree with that analysis at the end of the day. the political climate at that time would not have tolerated that story lane, would not have tolerated any of that which is what the fear of the access hollywood tape did in conjunction with the stormy daniels affair, that political climate in the country would have said hell no, we are not going there. for trump it was a matter of corroding that political climate, bringing the political climate to where he is so it becomes more accepting of this bad behavior which is why you say i think a lot of the fractures across the country, the hardness of those who is supporting a guy that six, seven, eight, ten years ago, there is no way. because culturally, politically, the country was in a different place. he has in many respects effectively moved it closer to his view of these things where they're less important. it's more about him. he is the victim. verses what it would have been otherwise. i would love your thoughts on that. >> two things. first, i do want to put us all back in that time frame as you point out, mic i will. i was general counsel to the clinton campaign at the time. donald trump was reeling from the access hollywood tape. as you recall, one of the only times you have seen donald trump have to show contrition was after the access hollywood tape because it was so serious. to me, the key moment of the trial politically for me was actually hope hick's testimony where she acknowledges that this would have been the end of the campaign. had this come out, this would have been the end of their campaign. i tweeted shortly after the verdict that for those of us who worked for hillary clinton or were supporters of her, this proved something we always suspected, that but for his criminal acts he wouldn't have beaten her that election. i want to give her that due. we talk about he wouldn't have been president. who would have been president would have been hillary clinton. hillary clinton would have appointed two justices to u.s. supreme court. hillary clinton would have been in charge of healthcare policy and foreign policy. and our country would look very different today but for the crimes that he engaged in to win that election. i think that's important. the other thing you say, michael, that i think is worth pointing out is it also hardened the republican party into believing that criminal acts were part of the political process. you know, we now see a republican party that's bragging how much money it raises off of felony convictions and it's transformed republican party into a party led by a crime boss that celebrates crimes. >> i mean, marc putting the finer point on it. this point about what we call it and how this case is framed i think is absolutely critical. i really think that what laughlin and cart wright was saying last hour before we came to you about making sure the american people understand what this is really about, that he will do anything, he as in donald trump, will do anything to try to hold on to power. he did what he needed to do. he crimed, lied about crimes, covered crimes in 2015 and 2016 because he wanted to be president. he lied and tried to bully the american people and lied and lied and tried to subvert the election in 2020. then when that didn't work, he helped instigate january 6. if people don't think he will do the same thing this time, they are literally, they must have been living under a rock with headphones on. >> the destruction of norms is something we talk about on this show, my show, and other programs. one of the biggest institutions, that's why i admire marc so much, the rule of law has to be protected all the time. it's not a convenient truth for certain administrations or people. when you don't have that protected, when you have congress that's compromised, ovals compromised, scotus compromised where is the safe space for justice to live, breathe, survive? that's what's happening. maybe starting with the deliberation delineation of calling it hush money. >> it was the press that started calling it the hush money case. we can defend it but that was wrong to do. it was wrong. other people sat around tables and they were like this is about a porn star and a president. that was not correct. if it were up to the media apparatus the jury probably wouldn't have understood it. i thank god that the lawyers in the courtroom for d.a. bragg knew what they were doing and put this in the correct frame. the d.a. never framed it that way in the indictment. it never said hush money. we was wrong. >> i think also to both of your points, it sort of broadens it a little bit more. you have now a letter from senate republicans, eight of them, vowing to oppose all nondefense spending, biden nominees, democratic legislation, this goes to where is the safe space for justice? so you create that safe space but then you've got political consequence by ill liberal unprincipled individuals like mike lee, jdvanc, rick scott, roger marshall, marco rubio who want to penalize the justice system for doing what it was supposed to do which was adjudicate the facts in front of it. and 12 peers of donald trump decided you're guilty. now they want to haul bragg in. you've got to tell us, you know, all the fraud and lies you made up to convict donald trump. how do we rectify this? i am going to be straight up. i don't think a lot of democrats in the political world appreciate the urgency of this moment and they're still sort of piddling around with this idea that stuff like this, using the system against the system is not political to go after. >> i think one of the great tragedies of our time is how unseriously we take the threats that donald trump is to the political system and to democracy as a whole. the fact is we know he committed crimes. we know he incited violent insurrection and crimes to try to overturn second election. we are five months from his third election and what is it about his behavior to lead us to believe we won't see further criminal acts? with respect to the republican party, there was not long ago when we were told marco rubio and scott represented the moderates. scott said he won't accept the outcome of the election. marco. i wish the mainstream media, not you all, but when i see others in the media, i wish they would acknowledge this. i understand they're looking for that unicorn, but they don't exist. when donald trump says he won six elections in 2020 that he didn't, they are going along with it. when he said recently he won minnesota, you didn't see any of them say he didn't even though he lost by seven percentage points. michael steele, you are party chair, so mark my words, he gave a rally in new york in which he says he believes he will win new york and new jersey. by election day donald trump and the republican party will be saying he won all 50 states. you think it's crazy today but i am here to tell you people thought i was crazy in 2020. >> i wanted to add something which seems pretty small in response, i call them the gang of eight, the gang of eight is taken. none of these people are negotiators and getting bipartisan legislation done. the fact that they're like real brave and real strong getting together to write a strongly worded together is pretty pathetic. >> i will just leave that there because that's exactly right. it is pathetic. everyone stick around because we going to talk about more pathetic. more with marc and katie after this. you're watching "the weekend." " your turn. new tresemmé keratin smooth collection. ♪ ♪ [sfx] water lapping. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [sfx] water splashing. ♪ ♪ [sfx] ambient / laughing. ♪ ♪ donald trump's fate is in the hands of judge marchan. he will face the judge he calls corrupt and the judge he has called incompetent when sentenced on july 11. it is unclear if the manhattan da's office will seek jail time for the former president. how is how alvin bragg addressed that very question. >> i will let our words in court speak for themselves when we get to the sentencing matter. i will not address hypotheticals. they raise arguments. we'll respond. this is an active ongoing matter. we have other phases. we will continue to do our speaking about this matter about issues like that in court. >> katie and marc are back with us. i want to start with the sentencing. >> i just want to get into it because i love the play that donald trump is trying to create and has been trying to create with this judge, this sort of back and forth with him which is why costella was such an effective trump voice on the stand. we want to play some sound from trump saying he is dangerous, crooked. >> a conflicted but crooked judge. you will understand that. i say that knowing that it is very dangerous for me to say that. and i don't mind because i am willing to do whatever i have to do to save our country and to save our constitution. i don't mind. >> so little hands. >> he is telling us he is willing do whatever. he is very crazy. >> that's the thing. it's a duality. it's not only egging the judge. i dare you to throw me in jail. rate? it's setting the narrative also that he is egging also a broader population of supporters, that he is ready to do anything, his words. how that's heard by people matters in this moment. is that something the judge also is concerned about or is he just looking, calling balls and strikes as he did during the trial, he will do the same when it comes to sentencing. >> absolutely. bragg said during the press conference after the verdict we pursued this case without fear or favor. that's one of my favorite phrases. if you let yourself be cowed by somebody like donald trump whether you are alvin bragg or judge merchan, then it collapses. there is no place for the luxury of law. the presentence investigation report that you have spoken about that's prepared by a probation officer after he or she interviews donald trump, that's a sentencing recommendation that the judge will take seriously. that's the person's role. they explore donald trump's personal life, professional life, his criminality. what we saw and what happened yesterday if i am prosecution, i don't mind if he keeps doing that. he is digging himself into a deeper hole. he is showing a lack of remorse that the judge will take into account when he is deciding what to do for the sentence. the fact that there is the defiance of the gag order yesterday. he violated it during deliberations, during opening arguments. just because you didn't see the da's office file a motion doesn't mean it didn't happen. when i say that what we see is old and tired, it literally is. what we saw yesterday with donald trump had weekend at bernie's energy. i mean, he is old and decrepit. i will stand by that. he is the shadow of what he was four years ago. we cannot underestimate the danger of what he says and what he does. his rhetoric. it's not just words. so in the law we try to make a clear distinction between what you are allowed to say under the first amendment and what you are not allowed to say. lines get blurred sometimes. in this instance though when he says what he is doing, it is not so much him. we saw this happen and play out in the trial. he like most mob bosses gets other people to do his dirty work. you didn't see him making the statements directly to stormy daniels' lawyer. he used michael cohen, used david pecker. he uses people. here he uses surrogates. you see that from the weaponization in the house judiciary. you see what happens during the trial when he brings red tie brigade. he is saying what he is saying. it will hurt him. part of me is like go ahead, say it, you are digging a hole. >> on one hand you have this rhetorical framework that donald trump and allies are working with as you said to shift the prism of this up coming election. at the same time you have techno crats doing the work, what we saw from the supreme court allowing for racial gerrymandering, the fact that if they can't win with the current rules then they will, in tandem with this rhetoric, work on changing the rules. >> a couple things. the first is those do work in tandem because what you have is donald trump saying i will do anything which is like outrageous out to here. then you have the techno crats who say we will only go this far. so he sets outer bounds of outrageousness and they set a bounds that would have been outrageous unto itself but seems quite within the bounds of normal given that they're not, you know, insurrection. on the trump sentencing i want to add one thing. i think the judge will be smart and i think he will ignore the attacks. he is not going to say because you attacked the judge, i am going to increase your sentence. i think this is where contempt citations will come back into play and attacks on the judicial system as a whole. the judge is there to uphold rule of law and see whether he is remorseful of his cop duct. he will take the things donald trump that violated gag orders, attacks on juries, attacks on witnesses and i think that's where donald trump has dug his hole. but alicia he wants to be the victim. he wants to be the victim. republican party fuels itself on aggrievement. people ask why do they sue so many cases and lose? i say part of it is they want to lose because after the election they can say the election was rigged. if they won any of the cases they would have gotten what they wanted. they want to say they were cheated. i think that's where donald trump is now in the sentencing. he wants to say he was treated unfairly because it gives permission structure for supporters to be more outrageous and more lawless as we head towards five months from now. >> a final word and then you have to go host your show. >> i like hanging out with you guys though. i believe marc will agree. it's the todd blanches allowing this guy to get it done. he doesn't have a bar license. there are people giving access to the place where they can lose these bs lawsuits all across the united states. that is the problem. we have an entire failing of lawyers that are propping up donald trump to allow him to go to court to do these things. that is a shame on the profession. that is the biggest debasement. i don't care where jim jordan does. i care about lawyers that have independent ethical obligation to be sure they protect rule of law. the facilitation that happens makes me so angry. but for them helping him, he wouldn't have access. that's why it is important for marc to fight the good fight like he does. that's why it's important to look at what happens in court and say i don't care if you attack it, the process worked. that's why we had to respect the results. they ended up being the right thing which is the 34 felonies. >> your head is the size of a refrigerator. >> don't mess with marc. >> marc is sticking with us. katie i have to free you up to host your show. catch katie at noon. she will cover with an all star panel with ian millhiser. that's coming up. your thoughts on justice roberts refusing to meet with democrats. that's next. you are watching "the weekend." in the chase app. when you've got a decision to make... the answer is j.p. morgan wealth management. -unnecessary action hero ... the nemesis. -it appears that despite my sinister efforts, employees are still managing their own hr and payroll. why would you think mere humans deserve to do their own payroll? because their livelihoods depend on it? because they have bills to pay? hear me now, paycom! return the world of hr and payroll to its rightful place of chaos or face a tsunami of unnecessary the likes of which you have never seen! switch to shopify and sell smarter at every stage of your business. take full control of your brand with your own custom store. scale faster with tools that let you manage every sale from every channel. and sell more with the best converting checkout on the planet. a lot more. take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify. wanna know a secret? more than just my armpits stink. facts. that's why i use secret whole body deodorant for clinically proven odor protection everywhere. so i smell great all day, all hike, and all night. secret whole body deodorant. no, my denture's uncomfortable! dracula, let's fight back against discomfort. with new poligrip power max hold & comfort. it has superior hold plus keeps us comfy all day with it's pressure absording layer. time for a bite! if your mouth could talk it would ask for... poligrip. chief justice roberts refused to meet with democrats on senate judiciary committee who wanted to support enforcement of the code of ethics. roberts says he is concerned about judicial independence. the chairman di