Georgia laying the groundwork not to certify the election. It is clear that they are taking steps to undermine the election and if those fail they are going to claim the election was rigged. Like they did in 2020, and the last time this happened we had an insurrection at the capital, so we have to take it very seriously. And we will. Great to have you on. You are a wealth of knowledge. Thanks for your time tonight. That is our show for tonight. It is time for the last word. Good evening, lawrence. Good evening. You missed what Donald Trump said about his wife. He referred to her as a great First Lady who people love. He did not say that he loves her. He did not say that she loves him. Oh man. The passive one when you are describing the love of your life. The third love of his life that he actually married. I dont know how many loves of his life he had during those marriages. Many people love her. A great First Lady who people love. Happy anniversary. You are loved by people. There you have it. Trumps president Ial Campaign has a very bad day coming. The West Today any president Ial Campaign has ever had, and that is scheduled for september 26. The harris for President Campaign is now 46 days old and every one of those days has been a bad day for Donald Trump. The worst Campaign Day for Donald Trump is coming. On thursday, september 26. He is now scheduled formally to have the worst day in the history of president Ial Campaigning as we know it. The first residential candidate in history to have a federal Prosecutor Outline in detail and in writing including possibly secret material from a Grand Jury describing Donald Trumps federal crimes of the prosecutor says he committed to overthrow the will of the american people in the last president ial election. The judge ruled late today special Prosecutor Smith must file his full argument in writing about why Donald Trump can be charged with federal crimes even though the Supreme Court created a new president ial immunity from criminal charges for some of what Donald Trump did to overthrow the election results. In a one hour 14 Minute Hearing Today in her courtroom the federal judge dealt with a flurry of attempts by trump criminal Defense Lawyers to delay any consideration of evidence in the case of United States Of America VersusDonald Trump until next year. No doubt in the hope Donald Trump will then be in a position to order a new Attorney General to drop the case. An appeal of the case earlier this year allowed trump appointed supreme Court Justices to create a Brandnew Law of the land based on nothing in the Constitution Granting Criminal Immunity to Donald Trump for some of what he did leading up to and on january 6. Special Prosecutor Smith and his team having now read the supreme Court Opinion limiting what evidence they can present about crimes committed that while he was President And Panel a new Grand Jury in Washington Dc which issued a new Superseding Indictment of Donald Trump which preserved all four criminal charges against Donald Trump and the original indictment included conspiracy against the united states of america, but on the many did some of the underlying evidence that supported those. Special Prosecutor Smith obviously believes there is enough evidence in the Superseding Indictment which is nine pages shorter than the original indictment to convict Donald Trump of the alleged crimes. In Court Today the team urged the judge to first do with the Supreme Court has ordered her to do and evaluate the new indictment to see if it conforms to the limits imposed by the Supreme Courts immunity decision. Trump lawyers opposed that because it would force possibly public consideration of the evidence against Donald Trump before the election. The trump criminal Defense Lawyer argued instead that the judge should first rule on the Defenses Motion to completely dismiss the case based on the Supreme Court immunity decision. If the judge ruled on that Dismissal Motion first no matter how she ruled that could and would be appealed by the losing side and could be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court adding possibly another year of delay to the case. That delay is not going to happen. In the courtRoom Today, and shows us once again that a Court Transcript can never quite capture the full drama of what happens in the room. Windchimes criminal Defense Lawyer began his complaint about allowing any evidence in the case to possibly be revealed before the election live tweeting the proceedings reported this. Wants about prosecutors being able to put into the public record at a very sensitive time in our Nations History which we cant ignore. Let out a sigh and leaned back in her seat at that remark. Here is how it appears in the transcript. Its incredibly unfair in the sense that they are able to put in the public record at this time very sensitive time in our Nations History. Which we cant ignore that they are able to basically load up on what they think this case is about without our ability to meet those factual assertions that the right to crossexamine. That a written reply is due october 17. A minute later when he referred to this sensitive time. The judge had enough. Lets just discuss what the sensitive time is. I understand there is an election pending, and ive said before and i say again that the electoral process and the timing of the election and what needs to happen before or shouldnt happen before the election is not relevant here. This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule. There is an election coming, but the sensitive time that you are talking about if you are talking about the timing of legal issues and evidentiary issues and in relation to when the election is that is nothing i am going to consider. The Trump Team trying to throw another distraction at the judge that did not work. Telling the judge he wants to file a motion to dismiss the case on the basis that Jack Smiths Appointment is unconstitutional. The justice was the only supreme Court Justice who noted in his Written Opinion on the decision that he also believed Jack Smiths Appointment is unconstitutional. The opinion of one supreme Court Justice that is not a part of the ruling in the case is of course immaterial, but enough for his favor federal judge who he appointed to reach the decision that Jack Smiths Appointment was unconstitutional and thereby dismiss the criminal case he brought against Donald Trump and florida for illegal possession of classified documents and violations of the espionage act. He is appealing the decision to the 11th Circuit Court of appeals. They have rolled repeatedly over the years that the appointment of special councils is constitutional meaning that the judge is bound by the rulings of the Appeals Court in her jurisdiction. She has in effect no choice but to rule that the appointment is constitutional. And nothing that Clarence Thomas or they have written seems to impress her. Comes criminal Defense Lawyer told the Judge Justice thomas wrote a very persuasive concurrence that suggested that the Special Counsel does not have authority. And in addition, another judge, a very respected judge in the Southern District of florida, wrote a Decision Dismissing the Special Counsels case on Appointment Claus Basis and also on appropriations and it is a critical issue that now has to be decided by the court in light of Justice Thomass Interest in this issue, and also in light of what the judge decided in the Southern District of florida. It seemed the judge could not believe what she was hearing. She repeated to trumps lawyer what he was asking for, which made it sound all the more preposterous. You want to file this because there is binding d. C. Circuit precedent on this issue. You have in a Concurrence Written By justice thomas and you have an opinion filed by another District Judge in another circuit which frankly this court doesnt find particularly persuasive. So thats her basis for seeking to file that motion . Your honor, we could not file the motion because of the Circuit Court decision. So is your argument that another District Judge in florida, that opinion plus in a concurrence in the Supreme Court, those two things combined towards me again going against binding d. C. Circuit precedent . What i am saying is that the court should consider this issue, and justice thomas in effect directed us to raise this issue and suggested that we do it immediately in light of this view and that concurrence. The judge, he directed you to do that . Well, i shouldnt say he absolutely said, you know, do it. But when you read that opinion, its absolutely clear that is something we have to do now to preserve this issue. The judge, well, i certainly dont read the opinion that way. There is no suspense on how the judge is going to rule on that motion. When it does finally reach her consideration. Let me begin with you. When you performed it for me it was kind of a bigger moment. Oh yes. You are saying there was a moment with a year of background. It did. It was a deep sigh. She was slumping back on the bench very deeply. At the moment where the transcript recorded that through the rest of it that is when she is reclining deep on the bench, and as you mentioned, i mentioned that this had a year of build up to that moment. I actually looked back to the hearing where there was a moment like that in august 2023. August 11. I put of the quote. She said at the time what the effects of my order are on a political campaign are not performing and are not going to influence my decision here. This is a criminal trial. This is going to be a criminal trial brought at the time the government decides to bring the charges that they decided they were ready to bring. I do not have any control over that, but i cannot and will not factor into my decisions the effect that is going to have on the political campaign for either side. She has been consistent for a year making this repeatedly known from the same hearing. More than a year ago. Just about the same time. She said he is a criminal defendant. He will have restrictions like every single other defendant. Here she is making a year ago telling him that trump is going to be treated like any other criminal defendant. So when they press the issue and talked about the momentous occasion and the presidency this was familiar ground, and it was a year of frustration that pointed over at that moment. The big Dismissal Argument entered by the Defense Today is that the use of Mike Pence in this Indictment And Conversation between Donald Trump and Mike Pence clearly means the indictment has to be dismissed because the Supreme Court clearly in the Community Decision said you cannot use that evidence. Here is how one exchange went about that. This is the trump Defense Lawyer. The other major problem is the Supreme Court has already decided that the information between President Trump and Vice President Pence is an official act. The judge, no. I would disagree with you. They have not decided that. They have sent it back to me to figure that one out. This is complicated. There may be obviously the judge could do what she wants and there will be appeals, but the issue is to each of the allegations of the indictment and as to all of the proof that is when there will be filing not just about the indictment but about additional proof. We are waiting to hear what that is. The issue is to each of those things about Mike Pence and other pieces. One if it is official. Have they spoken on whether it is official . And even if it is the government gets to rebut it, so there are these two issues about whether it is official or rebutted. There is no question the government has the opportunity to rebut the there is i think questions about exactly what they meant when it examined the Mike Pence allegations. I think that they have the better argument. One thing i want to point out about something you said so people understand how fair the judge is. On this whole issue about the appointment of jack smith. She could have said he had an opportunity to file this a year ago. I had a date for all motions being filed. It is not true that you couldnt have filed this because of a d. C. Case. If youre trying to preserve the issue and she said im going to let you do it. She is like im not going to preclude it. I am willing to hear it so that you can preserve the issue. She did not have to do that. Poor people thinking she has it in for trump and the lawyers that is really a judge that is refreshing who was being fair. Who was treating this defendant like anyone else and showing her initial temperament. I have to say that it is refreshing to see. The Prosecution Team on that kind of let up. They could have said we insisted the deadline for that has passed. They could have done it and didnt do it, but they went along with the judge relaxing and. Let him bring it in and you could see pretty clearly. I do not feel there is a thought of suspense and how she is going to rule on the constitutionality of Jack Smiths Appointment. Absolutely not because she is bound by precedent. When they file the motion that is just for the Supreme Court to take it down the road. This was a very judicious she has been fair to both sides, and even evident in what we were talking about in that exchange. The way that she was deflating. There was this one great moment when laura said something to the effect of the Supreme Court was crystal clear, and she chuckled. There was no clarity in that decision. That is why they are debating it out right now. The big fight today. Putting everything. Ump team is it was the judge who said the Supreme Court could have in their opinion written out the Mike Pence evidence, and they did and. She also had the point they could have dismissed the entire case based on the Mike Pence evidence, which is what you are asking for now, and they didnt. She is absolutely right about that. They have sent this back to her for legal and factual findings. In addition the indictments changed. At the indictment that was before the Supreme Court is not the same as the one now because there is material that was withdrawn. Also material that was added. That actually gives up a lot of room for those government and for the