2:00

and what are Trump supporters and detractors

2:02

saying, how might this also affect

2:04

the 2024 presidential

2:06

election? Looming over everything, we're

2:08

also watching the Supreme Court. So we'll talk

2:11

about the role of the justices in this

2:13

moment. And of course, Trump has

2:15

other cases pending here in Washington, in Florida

2:17

and in Georgia. So we'll take a pulse

2:19

check on those. Let's start,

2:22

though, with how the guilty verdict has aged

2:24

over the past week. So

2:26

Rhonda, the ink or maybe the pencil

2:28

was barely dry on the jurors' forms

2:30

and Trump was already speaking to the

2:32

public, the press and his supporters, and

2:35

frankly, lying about what happened and how

2:37

it happened. How was Trump trying

2:39

to spin this? Well,

2:41

it was a very familiar speech

2:44

he gave at Trump Tower. It was

2:46

actually the same spot where

2:48

he declared his candidacy back in 2015.

2:50

If people remember him coming down the

2:53

so-called Golden Escalator and giving his speech

2:55

there, it was the same spot. And

2:59

some of the themes were very

3:01

similar to what he talked about

3:03

back then. Right off

3:05

the bat, started talking about immigration.

3:07

He started talking about there was

3:10

even a point where he talked

3:12

about Democrats will stop you

3:14

from getting cars. It seemed to ramble

3:16

a lot. So it almost felt

3:18

like it was a part campaign speech and then

3:20

a part response

3:23

to the verdict. He talked about the judge

3:25

saying the judge is corrupt. So there were

3:27

certainly themes we have heard from him before.

3:29

I think also what was

3:31

notable is he didn't have a crowd. It

3:33

was supposed to be a press briefing

3:36

or a press conference, but he didn't take

3:38

any questions. But he did

3:40

not seem like the Trump you see at

3:42

rallies. Of course, this was less

3:44

than 24 hours since this major

3:46

verdict. So you were able to see sort

3:48

of what the early Trump

3:50

response was. But it was very similar

3:52

to how he has categorized this

3:54

entire trial, saying it was

3:57

rigged. All of those familiar themes. James.

4:00

surprised that he went that route. He's

4:02

back on the campaign trail. As

4:06

we record this, he's in the air flying to

4:08

Phoenix. He's back fully in

4:10

campaign mode and

4:13

trying to use this to his

4:15

advantage as anyone dealt this

4:17

hand would. And I

4:19

think they've probably played the conviction hand

4:22

politically as well as they

4:24

could in terms

4:26

of record fundraising, firing

4:29

up their base, creating the sense

4:31

of martyrdom and

4:33

victimhood. Trump started at

4:35

Trump Tower and he's really just continued to

4:39

make that case the last week. Tell

4:41

us more about the fundraising, James, and also

4:44

how have Democrats fared in the wake of

4:46

this in terms of rallying Biden supporters, people

4:48

concerned about another Trump presidency? Everyone sort of

4:50

went to their orders. There's a couple

4:52

of things. There have been several snap polls

4:55

now that a bunch of different networks and

4:57

these organizations have done. They've showed some marginal

4:59

movement. Interestingly, not as

5:01

much movement as a year ago

5:03

when you were doing polls saying

5:05

if Trump was convicted, would you

5:07

still vote for him? The

5:10

majority of Americans in every poll

5:12

approve of the guilty verdict. They

5:14

think Trump committed crimes

5:16

he was convicted of. And

5:18

those numbers are true in

5:21

the swing states. I think that

5:23

the argument for Democrats is

5:25

there's all these other charges hanging over him. Do

5:27

you really want to take a chance? Do

5:29

you want the chaos to follow him?

5:33

But I don't think that it's like the underlying charge

5:36

necessarily as much as a sort

5:38

of reminder of what

5:41

a Trump presidency might represent. I do

5:44

think it has helped rally Republicans behind Trump.

5:49

Overwhelmingly, Republicans disapprove of the

5:51

verdict. But it is

5:53

not campaign shattering. It's still, I

5:55

think, too early to say. it

6:00

didn't move the needle the same

6:02

way. Honestly, the charges against

6:04

Trump did a year ago in terms of

6:06

getting Republican's morality behind him. It

6:09

hasn't had the same kind of tectonic

6:11

effect on public opinion just yet. So

6:14

Rhonda, how have members of Congress been responding? If

6:17

I could tack on just something James

6:19

said about the polling, he's absolutely right

6:21

about how it feels very static with

6:24

both sides. Republicans are entrenched in supporting

6:26

him. Democrats are entrenched on

6:28

saying this conviction means he should not

6:30

be running. But there was one interesting

6:32

poll that came out from ABC Ipsos

6:34

earlier this week and right after the

6:37

verdict. And it pulled the double haters,

6:39

the people that we have

6:41

classified as they don't like Biden, they don't

6:43

like Trump, they're very unhappy with both choices.

6:47

65% of Americans who view both Trump and

6:50

Biden unfavorably think the verdict was correct with

6:52

67% believing Trump

6:54

should end his presidential campaign. 67%

6:57

of these double haters. And from what we have

6:59

seen and what we're reporting right now from

7:02

the campaign trail, these are the folks who will make

7:05

a dent in the results in November.

7:07

So that's a really important group to

7:09

look at their sentiment on what happened

7:12

in post-conviction. Before we move on to

7:14

the question about Congress, James, I'm wondering

7:16

if you are a political

7:20

maverick, let's say, which you kind of are actually,

7:23

what are you watching? What are you

7:25

concerned about on either side of the

7:27

aisle? Like, where are you gonna be

7:29

watching for change and danger zones?

7:31

I talked to someone

7:33

who did a focus group with 10 suburban

7:37

women in Phoenix after the

7:39

verdict came down. It

7:42

was 10 women who voted for Donald

7:44

Trump in 2016 and

7:46

Joe Biden in 2020. And

7:49

they were still sort of, most

7:51

people have regular lives, they're not following the ins

7:54

and outs of this. They had sort of heard

7:56

the news, but hadn't really internalized it

7:58

yet. A lot of these people... still

8:00

sort of aren't paying attention

8:02

to the election. They feel like it's a ways off

8:04

and they

8:07

also My service

8:09

who was in the room watching this focus group

8:11

said they just they didn't feel like it directly

8:13

affected them So I

8:15

sort of wonder You

8:17

know at what point do those people start

8:19

paying attention or engaging? Does

8:23

does it break through? Beyond

8:25

the headline with with really

8:27

a honestly shockingly small number

8:29

of voters in like five states

8:32

We're actually gonna determine this

8:34

election. So Rhonda turning to

8:36

Congress, you know There is this fascinating thing

8:38

that's happening where instead of sort of trying

8:40

to move on past it some Republicans are

8:43

Trying to light it on fire right using it to really

8:46

try to motivate people and tick them off Yeah,

8:48

how are they reacting and what are

8:50

they doing? Yeah, they're definitely reacting But

8:52

in ways that we would expect right

8:54

because many of them were there in

8:57

the the last weeks of this trial supporting him

8:59

putting on a Press

9:01

conference the Speaker of the House was there but

9:04

more specifically what I've seen from members

9:06

of Congress specifically House Republicans

9:09

They are taking this and they're running with

9:11

it. They in fact the Speaker of the House

9:14

Unveiled a plan that he said will be

9:16

a three-pronged approach at Undoing

9:19

the weaponization the so-called weaponization of

9:22

the judicial system one

9:25

of those approaches that actually started up this

9:27

week is Trying to

9:29

use the appropriations process in Congress

9:31

Which pays all the the federal

9:33

bills and the federal agencies to

9:36

use that to freeze funds out from

9:38

the DOJ Because

9:40

they feel that you know that that's

9:42

one way to stop some of the

9:44

investigations into Trump a lot of this is

9:46

just Messaging I

9:48

don't know if it'll go far It'll

9:50

probably gum up some of the negotiations when

9:52

it comes to funding the government that bill

9:55

will be due in late September But

9:58

we have seen them react pretty forcefully

10:00

and stand with Trump and say that

10:03

they're going to do everything they can

10:05

from the legislative branch to

10:07

help them out on this. You know,

10:10

James, some of this I track back

10:12

to Brett Kavanaugh. Now, stay with me

10:14

for a minute, but there's this real

10:16

outrage reaction that seems to be effective,

10:18

right? And when Brett Kavanaugh was accused

10:21

of sexual misconduct back when he, you know,

10:23

back when he was like a teenager and

10:26

he's there going before the Judiciary

10:30

Committee in the Senate trying to sort of

10:32

justify his nomination to be a Supreme Court

10:34

justice. And at first there's

10:36

this retreat and then there's this

10:38

forceful, like yelling, screaming, just pushback.

10:40

And it seems like Republicans

10:42

have found that for whatever reason, in whatever way,

10:44

that is working for them. And they are just

10:46

continuing to use that, that harshness.

10:49

We're going to talk about the irony of this

10:51

weaponization question in just a little while, because someone

10:53

else is going through his own legal problems right

10:55

now as President Joe Biden's own son. So

10:58

it's a bit rich for Republicans to say this

11:00

is being weaponized against Donald Trump when Biden

11:03

is a Senate Democrat who's on trial right

11:05

now. Joe Biden's own son is on trial

11:07

right now. He's absolutely a curtain

11:09

point. You compare Kavanaugh to Roy

11:11

Moore. Kavanaugh

11:14

is in 2018, Roy Moore

11:16

is in 2017. And

11:21

the Roy Moore case was really the last

11:23

gasp. You have Richard Shelby,

11:25

the then Senator from Alabama saying he couldn't

11:27

vote for Roy Moore and people

11:30

being really horrified by the accusations,

11:32

very credible accusations of misconduct. And

11:34

then a year later, kind of

11:37

rallying around the flag with Kavanaugh.

11:40

And I do think that part of what

11:43

we're seeing is that this is Donald Trump's Republican

11:45

Party. He has fully consolidated control on

11:47

the party. One of the things

11:49

I was most struck by coming out of

11:51

the verdict last week was how few

11:53

people were critical of Trump

11:55

on the right. How few Republicans. Right. Right.

11:59

How few Republicans. actually put out sort of a Trump

12:02

statement. Larry

12:05

Hogan, the Republican Senate candidate in Maryland,

12:08

a state that's as blue as West Virginia

12:10

is red, he said you'd have to respect

12:12

the verdict. And then you had Laura Trump,

12:15

the president's daughter-in-law and co-chair of the

12:17

RNC going on TV saying

12:19

he shouldn't have said that and basically

12:22

threatening to cut off his campaign

12:24

from getting national help. Chris LaSivita, one of

12:26

Trump's advisors said, we're not gonna spend any,

12:29

the national party's not gonna do anything to help you. And

12:32

I think that was all about

12:34

sending a message. Like you have to stay in

12:37

line, you have to rally behind Trump or else.

12:40

And it really is striking. The chairman of

12:42

the College of Republican National Committee said this

12:44

is a country where we believe in the

12:46

rule of law, I don't think Trump should

12:48

have been prosecuted, but you have to respect

12:51

the jury's verdict. And you had all these

12:53

prominent Republicans saying this

12:55

woman who's running the College Republicans

12:57

needs to be ousted because of

12:59

the apostasy. I just think that

13:01

that's the kind of, that's the

13:04

enforcement of discipline and

13:06

the kind of the cult of personality that the

13:08

GOP has become. I wanna play

13:10

something that Speaker Mike Johnson said on

13:13

Fox News. He's talking about the Supreme

13:15

Court and he's setting, one

13:18

would think, a very unrealistic expectation, Rhonda,

13:20

of what he expects the Supreme Court

13:22

to do. Let's listen to this clip

13:25

and then we can talk about it afterwards. People

13:27

have to believe that justice is fair, that

13:29

there's equal justice under law. They don't see

13:31

that right now. And I think that the

13:33

justice is on the court. I know many

13:35

of them personally, I think they're deeply concerned

13:38

about that as we are. So I think

13:40

they'll set this straight. They wanna try to

13:42

bankrupt Donald Trump. They want to diminish his

13:44

credibility and go after his character. They wanted

13:46

to keep him off the campaign trail, which

13:48

they were successful in doing for many weeks.

13:50

And now they want to call him the

13:52

convicted felon. This will be overturned, guys. There's

13:55

no question about it. Okay, a lot to

13:57

unpack there. We have to just say first

13:59

and foremost. that this

14:02

was not a prosecution run by

14:04

Joe Biden or the Biden administration. And

14:06

there were a lot of checks and

14:09

processes that the judge went through. And this

14:11

was a jury of New

14:13

Yorkers who was chosen and Trump's lawyers

14:15

had a role in the process. He

14:17

had every right to have

14:20

his role served as a defendant. So

14:23

I have to just put that out there because I feel like we

14:25

can't start with a false premise of like justice wasn't served. Okay,

14:27

moving on from there, Rondo, what kind of an expectation

14:29

is Johnson setting up for the Supreme Court to act?

14:33

Well, I almost think that's more for the

14:35

viewers, the viewers who tuned into that. And

14:38

I don't know if the reporters or the

14:40

anchors who were interviewing him asked what

14:42

he meant by overturn, but

14:44

I believe the Speaker of the

14:46

House would know that the Supreme

14:48

Court can't overturn this verdict or

14:51

can't help in a case that

14:54

is sovereign to a locality, New

14:56

York City. So this was a

14:58

local case, essentially. The federal government

15:01

doesn't have any influence into it.

15:04

However, we've seen this from Republicans

15:06

before throughout this entire year that

15:08

they have wanted to investigate Alvin

15:11

Bragg. They've actually written a letter

15:13

the House Judiciary Committee, and they want to

15:15

see if he can come in and do

15:17

a testimony. We'll find out actually

15:19

on Friday tomorrow if

15:22

he will agree to that testimony. But

15:24

there has been this really

15:26

vigorous effort to perhaps

15:29

message to Republican voters to

15:32

think that the legislative branch,

15:34

the Supreme Court can

15:36

do something about these charges and that there

15:38

isn't really anything that they can do. So

15:40

I'm just a little confused at what he

15:43

meant by overturn. Again, I don't know what

15:45

happened after that clip and if maybe the

15:47

anchors followed up with him, but that's

15:50

not how things work. And I will

15:52

also add that Merrick Garland was on

15:54

the Hill this week in front of

15:56

a Hill committee. It was a usual

15:58

cabinet official, you know, in. That's

16:01

how these things start. But of course, given

16:03

the timing, a lot of Republicans use the

16:05

moment to go after Mayor Garland on charges

16:07

against Trump. There was one point where

16:10

Matt Gaetz went after Mayor Garland

16:12

and, you know, accused him

16:15

of playing a role in the New

16:17

York case. And it almost appeared as

16:19

if Garland was a little confused. Like

16:21

he said, we didn't have anything to

16:24

do with this case. So, again, there

16:26

are separations of powers in this country,

16:28

at least there should be. That's what

16:30

the Constitution has. So,

16:32

again, a lot of this is messaging to

16:34

the base. Yeah. James, what was your two

16:36

cents on this? Well, there technically, technically

16:38

is like a very narrow path

16:41

to appeal. I mean, so

16:43

the way federalism is obviously central to our

16:45

system. And I think Mike Johnson was being

16:48

disingenuous. This is just like before January 6th,

16:50

Trump saying, well, if Mike Pence does the

16:52

right thing, then I'll be fine. This is

16:54

the kind of Trump world saying, if the

16:57

Supreme Court does the right thing, I'll be

16:59

fine. The way the appeals process works, it's

17:01

a little confusing because New York uses different

17:03

nomenclature. But after sentencing,

17:05

we'll talk about Trump will have 30

17:08

days to file a notice of appeal. Then

17:10

it goes from the Supreme Court, which is

17:12

the trial court, as confusing as that is,

17:14

to the appellate division. And

17:16

then if Trump loses there, he can

17:18

appeal again to the court of appeals,

17:20

which is essentially their state

17:23

level Supreme Court. And

17:25

this could take years. These are

17:27

very long drawn out

17:30

processes. If Trump loses

17:32

at the highest court in New York, on

17:35

a matter of law, on some kind

17:37

of technicality, it wouldn't be like challenging

17:39

the facts or the findings of the

17:41

jury. Theoretically, there would

17:43

be a way

17:45

to appeal to the US Supreme

17:47

Court. But the thing about appeals

17:49

is not only do they take a long time, they

17:52

usually fail. And this is

17:55

just not a serious

17:57

thing to say. It also is. sort

18:00

of the pop calling the kettle black. It's

18:02

sort of like, well, the justice system is

18:04

being weaponized against us. We're

18:07

gonna get our friends on the US Supreme Court

18:10

to do the right thing and to save Trump. And Trump

18:13

obviously nominated three of the nine justices,

18:15

but it does send this message that

18:17

is very at odds with their claims,

18:19

you know, that the court, they

18:22

were basically saying they want the courts

18:24

to be political for them. Yeah,

18:26

and this is after John Roberts

18:28

and others have tried to sort of have

18:31

this like, we're not all buddies, like, right?

18:33

We're an independent branch. And then they go

18:36

and say this and it sort of really

18:39

blurs the lines and it makes everybody wonder

18:41

just, I mean, it's ironic they're asking

18:43

for impartiality and rule of law. And they're also

18:45

saying, like, I'm paraphrasing here, but come

18:47

on, good buddies, like, you know, do

18:50

us a solid, right? Do us a solid. I

18:53

wanna just pivot a

18:55

little bit to an

18:57

undercurrent that's happening here, which is that Joe

18:59

Biden's son is on trial right now in Delaware. This

19:01

is moving a lot faster than Donald Trump's trial. Jury

19:04

selection just took a day. They're moving forward. We will

19:06

probably have a verdict. I would say next week, James,

19:08

is that fair to say? Probably,

19:10

yeah. And I in no

19:12

way wanna make any sort of

19:15

equivocation between

19:17

what Donald Trump was convicted

19:20

of and what Joe Biden's

19:22

son is accused of doing. But

19:25

Trump and his team are trying

19:27

to weaponize that and go after

19:29

Hunter Biden, the president's son, and sort

19:31

of muddy the waters and cast

19:33

a lot of suspicion on the Bidens because of it.

19:35

So I wanna just dig into the facts of the

19:37

case so we can clear up any misconceptions

19:39

and then talk about how it's being

19:41

politicized. So James, take us through what

19:43

Hunter Biden is on trial for and

19:45

what the parameters of that are. Yeah,

19:48

so Hunter faces two separate criminal

19:50

trials by the feds. The

19:53

first, which is what this one is about,

19:55

is that he bought a revolver in 2018.

20:00

And he signed

20:02

a form, which anyone who buys a gun

20:04

does, that were asked to

20:06

check a box and it says, are

20:08

you using illegal drugs? Or are you

20:11

using illegal drugs? And he checked the box

20:13

saying no. And

20:16

honestly, it's a pretty clear

20:19

cut open and shut case. Like Hunter

20:21

definitely was using drugs. He definitely bought

20:23

this gun. And the prosecution

20:26

is basically laying out all the

20:28

evidence including playing for the jury,

20:32

a clip of Hunter reading from his own

20:34

audio book about how he was using drugs

20:36

at the time. And then they're having a

20:39

Hunter Biden's ex-wife and Hunter

20:41

Biden's then girlfriend,

20:44

who was the widow of his

20:46

dead brother, basically testifying that he

20:48

was using drugs and that he had bought this

20:50

gun. And it was actually

20:52

Howie Biden, those widow who threw the

20:54

gun in a dumpster because she was

20:57

concerned about him having the gun. So

21:00

it's salacious, but

21:02

it's a pretty narrow specific charge.

21:04

And then in a few

21:06

months, closer to the election, Hunter

21:09

Biden will be on trial in California for

21:11

not paying his taxes for a couple of

21:13

years. So Rhonda, congressional

21:16

Republicans are really

21:18

trying to create this whole swirl around

21:21

Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, talk

21:23

to us about what is

21:25

actually happening in the courts right now versus

21:28

everything they're trying to throw and

21:30

get attention for on the Hill.

21:32

Yeah, as James just outlined, the

21:34

current trial on Hunter Biden involves

21:37

that gun charge. However,

21:40

congressional Republicans in the House

21:42

have, especially the committees

21:45

that are over the impeachment inquiry

21:47

into the Biden family, they

21:49

have referred criminal charges to

21:51

the DOJ through a letter

21:53

that they wrote this week saying that

21:56

Hunter Biden, as well as James Biden,

21:58

the president's brother lied to them. during

22:00

closed-door depositions they gave as a

22:02

part of this impeachment inquiry that

22:04

the House voted on and

22:06

have been going through for the

22:09

last several months. There hasn't

22:11

really been a smoking gun with this

22:13

inquiry, but by

22:15

having a criminal referral letter

22:17

to the DOJ, that sort

22:19

of shows their

22:22

supporters, their voters, that they've been working on

22:24

this inquiry. Again,

22:26

what they are referring to the

22:29

DOJ and saying that Hunter Biden

22:31

did or lied about, that's different

22:33

from the charges he's facing in

22:36

this gun charge situation. But

22:39

the timing is really everything, and they're trying to

22:41

kind of lump it all together. And also

22:43

do it on the coattails of Trump's

22:45

conviction, right? Right, right, right. It is

22:47

sort of that what about is some

22:49

that we've seen from congressional Republicans where

22:52

if, you know, Trump is being investigated on

22:54

something, they will build an investigation on Biden.

22:56

So that's a lot of the congressional

22:58

politics that we've seen all year. And

23:01

James, I've heard you say something interesting

23:03

though, that this might actually prove to

23:05

be like the last gasp of Republicans

23:07

attempts to impeach Joe Biden. Explain that

23:09

to me. I think it's one of those things.

23:11

It is a face-saving attempt. Iran is absolutely right.

23:13

But basically they're taking everything that they were able

23:16

to get from all these depositions

23:18

in this long fishing

23:20

expedition. And now they're just putting it

23:22

in a document and

23:25

a referral and sending it to the

23:27

Justice Department saying, hey, we think Hunter

23:29

and Jimmy Biden lied to us about

23:31

business dealings. You should charge them. And

23:34

it's pretty thin rule. But what this means

23:36

is that they're not moving

23:38

ahead with their impeachment, that

23:41

they don't have the votes among

23:43

the Republicans, that they don't think

23:45

it would be politically advantageous in

23:47

an election year. So one way

23:49

to look at this referral, which

23:52

they're saying, oh, the Trump Justice

23:54

Department next year could prosecute these

23:56

guys, is that they're basically admitting

23:58

that the impeachment inquiry. after

28:00

my opponents, but he is

28:02

very much out there saying

28:04

that's his animating rationale for

28:06

wanting another term in office.

28:09

Just last night actually, so we're taping on Thursday,

28:11

just last night on Wednesday, June

28:13

5th, he was on Fox News talking to

28:15

Hannity about this question. Hannity asked him about

28:17

retribution, and let's listen to how Donald Trump

28:19

answered it. Those that

28:22

want people to believe that

28:24

you want retribution, that

28:26

you will use the system of justice to

28:28

go after your political enemies. So, number one,

28:30

they're wrong. It has to stop because otherwise

28:32

we're not going to have a country. Look,

28:35

when this election is over,

28:38

based on what they've done, I would

28:40

have every right to go after them.

28:43

Okay, so I'm hearing multiple things. I'm hearing, no, no, I

28:45

wouldn't be retribution even though he said it will be before.

28:47

And then at the end he's like, but I'd have a

28:49

right to. So I'm confused. What I was going to

28:51

say right before we blowed into that clip was

28:54

over the weekend when he did another Fox interview

28:56

with Fox and Friends. He claimed he had never

28:58

said lock her up about Hillary Clinton when there

29:00

were lots of tapes of him responding to the

29:02

crowd, yelling that in 2016. So

29:06

he is all over the place. He is very

29:08

erratic. My takeaway, I'm eager to hear Rhonda's analysis,

29:10

is that Sean Hannity was trying to get him

29:12

to be like, no, no, no, I'm never going

29:14

to do that. Don't worry. He's

29:16

trying to get him to say, I'm going to be presidential.

29:19

I'm going to be above that. And

29:21

Trump, I read, he wouldn't say it.

29:24

Yeah, I would agree with James on that. He

29:26

wouldn't say it. I just had to look it

29:28

up. But I do remember we have it on

29:30

record that Trump said, I am your justice. I

29:32

am your retribution. He said that at CPAC. So

29:36

he is on record saying these things and

29:38

the lock her up thing that James just

29:40

pointed out. But

29:42

one thing that I was thinking about when

29:44

I heard that clip is, you

29:47

know, maybe don't focus

29:50

too much on the words. Focus on the actions,

29:52

because we could go back to when I

29:55

covered the first impeachment trial of then

29:58

President Trump. And I remember. What's

36:00

going on there? Judge Eileen Cannon has also

36:02

sort of dragged her feet, installed quite a

36:04

lot, hasn't ruled on a bunch of motions.

36:06

She actually did, on Wednesday, give some

36:09

structure to how she's going to go about

36:12

ruling on some various motions and

36:14

setting some dates for hearing arguments

36:16

from Trump's lawyers and Jack Smith's

36:18

lawyers. But

36:21

they're fighting over, for example, they're

36:23

going to have a hearing on

36:25

whether it's even on a motion

36:28

to say that Jack Smith's appointment as

36:30

special counsel is unconstitutional. This

36:33

is part of a strategy to delay,

36:35

delay, delay, and

36:37

they'll have the hearing. Judge

36:40

Cannon will presumably rule that Jack

36:44

Smith is legitimate and can proceed.

36:47

Then there's just going to be a bunch of fights.

36:49

So it's just it's going to stretch

36:52

for a long time. And

36:54

Judge Cannon seems kind of perfectly happy

36:57

and content to let this drag out

36:59

and talk to the election, perhaps hoping

37:01

that the case becomes moot if it

37:04

goes past the election. Yeah, one of

37:06

the interesting things about Georgia is so we got

37:09

the news that the appellate court says we're not

37:11

taking this up until October. We got that news

37:13

this week. We also got news yesterday that they

37:16

will not let the case, any sort of

37:18

pretrial work, happen either. That's on ice. So

37:20

that's sort of it's now doubly on ice.

37:23

And McAfee, the judge in the Fulton County

37:26

case, he did say that if the Trump

37:28

side wants to appeal his decision to keep

37:30

Fannie Willis on, that they can, but the

37:32

court will continue to work on the case.

37:35

Well, now the appellate court says that they cannot. They

37:37

put a stay on that. So I

37:39

don't even know if it's conceivable. And of course, we

37:42

can maybe ask our great reporters who've been covering this

37:44

case, is it even conceivable that that case could move

37:46

forward even in the early months of the next year?

37:48

So, and also what's interesting about

37:50

Georgia is that was always looked at as

37:53

one of the four cases that had so

37:55

much evidence. It had the physical evidence of

37:57

the phone call where you actually actually see

37:59

Donald tied to this

38:01

electors' scheme. And

38:04

we've seen in other states, there have been five

38:06

states so far who have gone after the fake

38:08

electors in their state, have gone after some of

38:10

the architects of the fake electors' scheme to overturn

38:13

the election results in Wisconsin, Michigan,

38:16

Arizona, Nevada. So

38:19

the fact that this Georgia case is

38:21

not moving forward is a pretty big

38:23

deal. And also, sorry, Rhonda,

38:25

to cut you off, but also no small thing

38:27

that it could have been televised.

38:30

Cameras that were allowed in the courtroom in Georgia

38:32

in that case. And so we would have all

38:34

been able to see it and experience it with

38:37

our own eyes and ears and judge for ourselves

38:39

or what Americans could judge for themselves, what they

38:41

thought about the justice situation, the

38:44

justice of it, as well as the case, as

38:46

well as the defendant. So we'll

38:48

be talking more in other episodes of Sidebar

38:50

about just where these cases are, where they're

38:52

going. And we'll check in with the reporters

38:54

who, like Rhonda said, are kind of going

38:56

in the micro level of what could happen

38:58

next. James, I want to break one bit

39:00

of news here that just happened before we

39:03

started taping. And that's about Steve Bannon. And

39:05

I just want you to throw out what's

39:07

happened in his case, because we now know

39:09

he will be reporting to jail. What's the

39:11

significance and why? So he has to report

39:13

by July 1. It's significant. Pierre Navarro

39:17

already is in prison for the same

39:19

crime that they were both convicted of,

39:21

which is refusing to testify

39:23

before the January 6 special committee.

39:26

And they

39:28

were held in contempt of

39:31

Congress, prosecuted, convicted. And Bannon

39:33

has been trying to drag things out with appeals,

39:35

the judge saying, you don't have grounds

39:37

for appeal. You need to start serving your sentence. But

39:42

politically, it will help Bannon

39:44

and others create this narrative

39:47

that's inaccurate, that the Biden Justice Department

39:49

is coming after them. And it

39:53

is, I think, meaningful

39:55

accountability. There are a

39:57

lot of people who didn't want to testify before the January

39:59

6. or 6th committee did sort of

40:01

kicking and screaming or taking the 5th

40:03

like Michael Flynn. And these

40:06

guys just thumbed their nose and now they're

40:09

being held to account for it.

40:11

Well, that wraps up this episode

40:13

of the Trump trials sidebar. Thanks

40:15

so much as always to Rhonda

40:17

and to James. A reminder that

40:19

you can find us on YouTube.

40:21

It's youtube.com/Washington Post. And of course

40:23

we are on your favorite podcast

40:26

apps as one of the Washington

40:28

Post's podcasts. Please do subscribe

40:30

and read the Trump trials newsletter.

40:32

It is still so full of

40:34

information and reporting. We may be

40:36

through the New York trial, but

40:38

there's a lot of other relevant

40:40

reporting that's unfolding weekly, day

40:42

by day. And Devlin

40:45

and Perry are there breaking it all down

40:47

for us. So check that out. We'll be

40:49

broadcasting live when the sentencing of Donald Trump

40:52

does happen right now. It's slated for July

40:54

11th, but of course stay tuned and we'll

40:56

also be covering breaking news

40:58

on all other fronts. The Republican

41:00

National Convention, the Democratic National Convention,

41:02

a big news summer for us

41:04

as it gets rolling. Thanks again.

41:06

We'll see you soon. There's

41:21

a lot happening these days, but

41:24

I have just the thing to get you up to

41:26

speed on what matters without taking too much of your

41:28

time. The seven from the

41:30

Washington Post is a podcast that gives

41:32

you the seven most important and interesting

41:34

stories. And we always try to save

41:36

room for something fun. You

41:38

get it all in about seven minutes or less. I'm

41:41

Hannah Jewell. I'll get you caught up with

41:43

the seven every weekday. So follow the seven

41:45

right now.