Stay updated with breaking news from Stephanie borges. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
but there is no proof or evidence that the prosecutors are not giving him anything is there? >> nothing is happening. >> so how is he gonna do that? >> he's going to get discover, he's going to have time to review the discovery, he's gonna have time to make his motions. he is trying to argue his case in the court of public opinion. it's just nonsense. everything that he said there has no basis in fact for anything that happened today at this core proceeding. >> but in some bizarre row world charles, does not make sense? because the court of public opinion is what matters the most to trump's voters. and what he needs more than anything is to get the republic nomination because his ultimate defenses i got to get elected. >> you're absolutely right stephanie. there is a strategy here that is important for us to understand. when you look at judge aileen cannon and the way that she set him up with the may 20, 2024-day. what she basically said to him
electoral count act does not give the vice president the ability to change the outcome of an election. we've said it before, we will say it again. president -- former president trump's woeful ignorance proves nothing. with that let's get smarter with the help of our leadoff panel and ice promise they have been working overtime. luke broadwater, pulitzer prize -winning congressional reporter for the new york times. kyle cheney, political senior legal affairs reporter. barbara mcquade, veteran federal prosecutor in former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. barbara, i want to start with you. what should we be paying attention to tomorrow, any surprises that the trump legal team could throw into the mix? >> i would be surprised, stephanie. an arraignment is actually a pretty routine matter. the defendant has a right to have the indictment read to them which they almost always wave because they want to get the whole thing over with as quickly as possible. you know, they find out what the penalties are. they enter their preliminary
and for fact sake, the electoral count act does not give the vice president the ability to change the outcome of an election. we've said it before, we will say it again. president -- former president trump's woeful ignorance proves nothing. with that let's get smarter with the help of our leadoff panel and ice promise they have been working overtime. luke broadwater, pulitzer prize-winning congressional reporter for the new york times. kyle cheney, political senior legal affairs reporter. barbara mcquade, veteran federal prosecutor in former u. s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. barbara, i want to start with you. what should we be paying attention to tomorrow, any surprises that the trump legal team could throw into the mix? >> i would be surprised, stephanie. an arraignment is actually a pretty routine matter. the defendant has a right to have the indictment read to them which they almost always wave because they want to get the whole thing over with as quickly as possible. you know, they find out what
not just trump, it is _ do, but it is a dual effort, it is notjust trump, it is both- do, but it is a dual effort, it isl notjust trump, it is both sides donna — notjust trump, it is both sides donna from _ notjust trump, it is both sides donna from the _ notjust trump, it is both sides donna from the very— notjust trump, it is both sides donna from the very picture i notjust trump, it is both sides donna from the very picture of| donna from the very picture of authoritarianism _ donna from the very picture of authoritarianism element - donna from the very picture of authoritarianism element is i donna from the very picture of authoritarianism element is toj authoritarianism element is to refuse — authoritarianism element is to refuse to _ authoritarianism element is to refuse to leave _ authoritarianism element is to refuse to leave office - authoritarianism element is to refuse to leave office and - authoritarianism element is to| refuse to leave office and have authoritarianism element is to . refuse to leave office and have a peaceful— refuse to leave office and have a peaceful transfer _ refuse to leave office and have a peaceful transfer of _ refuse to leave office and have a peaceful transfer of power- refuse to leave office and have a peaceful transfer of power and l refuse to leave office and have a i peaceful transfer of power and that is what _ peaceful transfer of power and that is what is _ peaceful transfer of power and that is what is at — peaceful transfer of power and that is what i . . ., peaceful transfer of power and that is what i . _, ., , is what is at the core of this indictment. _ is what is at the core of this indictment. the _ is what is at the core of this indictment. the former - is what is at the core of this - indictment. the former president violated the fundamental obligation of the occupant of the oval office andindeed of the occupant of the oval office and indeed any american, and that is put country before party or person and to abide by the laws, and to concede and participate in a peaceful transfer of power. if we want to talk abut authoritarianism thatis want to talk abut authoritarianism that is exactly the point there. congressman davis also went to get your thought on that?— your thought on that? listen, i see the polarisation _ your thought on that? listen, i see the polarisation in _ your thought on that? listen, i see the polarisation in this _ your thought on that? listen, i see the polarisation in this country - the polarisation in this country that is— the polarisation in this country that is teaching the next generation that is teaching the next generation that the _ that is teaching the next generation that the only thing that matters in politics— that the only thing that matters in politics is— that the only thing that matters in politics is a fight, and i think the media as — politics is a fight, and i think the media as a — politics is a fight, and i think the media as a whole has some culpability here, whereas there is not a _ culpability here, whereas there is not a tot— culpability here, whereas there is not a tot of— culpability here, whereas there is not a lot of discussion upon where stephanie — not a lot of discussion upon where stephanie and i worked together on issues _ stephanie and i worked together on issues that we agreed upon and
passed — issues that we agreed upon and passed in— issues that we agreed upon and passed in a bipartisan way, which frankly— passed in a bipartisan way, which frankty is— passed in a bipartisan way, which frankly is most of what happens in washington on a daily basis, because what is _ washington on a daily basis, because what is given the most attention are the extremes. the extremes of stephanie's party and the extremes of my— stephanie's party and the extremes of my party. and that becomes the norm _ of my party. and that becomes the norm in _ of my party. and that becomes the norm in today's social media atmosphere for millions of americans, so they are used to the fight, _ americans, so they are used to the fight. they— americans, so they are used to the fight, they pick their red team, they— fight, they pick their red team, they picked their blue team, and now they picked their blue team, and now the potting _ they picked their blue team, and now the polling numbers you mentioned earlier, _ the polling numbers you mentioned earlier, they have picture whether or not— earlier, they have picture whether or not this — earlier, they have picture whether or not this case needs to go on or if it needs — or not this case needs to go on or if it needs to— or not this case needs to go on or if it needs to be dropped even before a — if it needs to be dropped even before a shred of evidence is produced _ before a shred of evidence is produced by anyone. may before a shred of evidence is produced by anyone.- before a shred of evidence is produced by anyone. may be that is under a note _ produced by anyone. may be that is under a note we _ produced by anyone. may be that is under a note we can _ produced by anyone. may be that is under a note we can agree - produced by anyone. may be that is under a note we can agree on. - produced by anyone. may be that is under a note we can agree on. i - produced by anyone. may be that is| under a note we can agree on. ijust want to briefly bring back sarah. what happens next going forward for the former president, specifically in this indictment? the the former president, specifically in this indictment?— in this indictment? the next big activity for _ in this indictment? the next big activity for this _ in this indictment? the next big activity for this case _ in this indictment? the next big activity for this case is - in this indictment? the next big activity for this case is the - activity for this case is the prosecution team to produce the discovery in this matter. i assume
find an attorney, and saying codefendant now same thing, you mean like that? >> exactly, except when you're talking jeff clark, and kenneth chesebro and john eastman and the others, you'll have bigger sort of first amendment claims and legal challenges. they are all out. it is zeroing in on trump as the defendant, and i think smith in his 26 words, two of them or speedy trial, the others realize, lies, lies. i think this is really ham he had seen the enemy and the enemy is the calendar plus donald trump. he is in the best position to combat it. >> mr. watts, let's zero in on your specialty. the department of justice has charged, within 1000 defendants, in the capitol riot. what do you make of how jack smith is linking the insurrection to the case against trump? >> yeah, it's pretty clear. i just have to say, stephanie, what is remarkable when you read this from an investigative
>> well, tali, at this point, it seems like donald trump's clearest or maybe best defense is to just keep delaying these things. and it's not actually working. his property manager somehow couldn't find himself a local lawyer. so, his arraignment has now been delayed until august 10th. to me, this seems crazy. am i wrong? >> you would think so, stephanie, except it happened with nauta as well that he had some trouble finding a local lawyer. and some delay was costly because of. that ultimately, there's just not that many moves left for delay. and the thing about de oliveira it is that the charges against him don't seem to implicate the need to see the classified documents, which is really what makes this case take some time. that is sort of the ingredient that leads to the most slow down. and he doesn't seem to need that. so, i don't expect him coming
citizens in the district. - citizens in the district. looking _ citizens in the district. looking at _ citizens in the district. looking at the - citizens in the district. looking at the fact - citizens in the district. | looking at the fact that citizens in the district. - looking at the fact that there are now three indictments in the past four months that the former president is facing, as we know in new york, must be mentioned, and miami comeau sub indictment and now here in washington, dc we are possibly leading a further indictment in the state of georgia. also on efforts to subvert the election results there. allen, coming to you, how difficult is this going to be for the former president to face these trials and also run an election can? it looks like we don't have him with us at the moment. stephanie i will put the question to you. i stephanie i will put the question to you. i think he is atoin to question to you. i think he is going to juggle- _ question to you. i think he is going to juggle. we - question to you. i think he is going to juggle. we have - question to you. i think he is i going to juggle. we have seen going tojuggle. we have seen every— going tojuggle. we have seen every single time that he has been — every single time that he has been caught up in the legal system, _ been caught up in the legal system, he uses it as an opportunity to fund raise. he will continue to do that. the republican party will continue
that — he actually knew the truth. that is _ he actually knew the truth. that is really— he actually knew the truth. that is really important - that is really important analysis there. thank you for making that clear for us. i want to get your take on what we will see on thursday, stephanie, with this arraignment in particular how people see the former president use this for his campaigning. i use this for his campaigning. i think we will see a serious proceeding. what i do not think we witt— proceeding. what i do not think we will see is the amount of backtash— we will see is the amount of backlash that donald trump has been trying to spur up with his supporters. i think for weeks now. — supporters. i think for weeks now, actually months, he has been — now, actually months, he has been talking about how angry his supporters will be at every turn _ his supporters will be at every turn when _ his supporters will be at every turn when he faces legal jeopardy and what we have seen with the — jeopardy and what we have seen with the previous indictments, white — with the previous indictments, while people have not been happy— while people have not been happy about it, there has not been — happy about it, there has not been a — happy about it, there has not been a return of the level of vitriot — been a return of the level of vitriol that we saw on january the 6th _ vitriol that we saw on january the 6th i_ vitriol that we saw on january the 6th. i think people, his supporters, may not be heavy on what _ supporters, may not be heavy on what is _ supporters, may not be heavy on what is going on, but they will not go down that road again. so i do not go down that road again. so i do not —