Jack Smith teases new NIGHTMARE news for Donald Trump & allies

you're watching the legal breakdown so Glenn we've got some really surprising news from Jack Smith here the Federal grand jury in DC that indicted Trump last week is now meeting again so what does that mean it means we're going to have a new indictment soon I suspect remember in the first indictment that was issued by the grand jury for the Donald Trump's attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election the first D.C indictment there were six uncharged co-conspirators what can we glean from that those six individuals um Jack Smith is now on record as saying they committed crimes with Donald Trump they are co-conspirators in Trump's efforts to steal the 2020 election there's no way that Jack Smith would put that information in a public-facing document a criminal indictment and then decline to indict those six criminals so I suspect he may still be presenting evidence to the grand jury regarding those six co-conspirators but I have a feeling very soon we will see the second indictment not necessarily what we call a superseding indictment but a second separate indictment of those six co-conspirators and Brian it could include lots of others remember that there were 48 people that were indicted and convicted either pleaded guilty or went to trial and were found guilty behind the Watergate scandal and that was a pretty modest criminal Scandal as compared to what Donald Trump orchestrated in his efforts to steal an election from the American people so if we had 48 defendants in Watergate goodness we could have a hundred and forty eight defendants in this case right but Glenn couldn't that have the unintended consequence of slowing down the entire case against Trump given that every new defendant leaves more room for delays great question that's why I said this will be a second separate indictment not a superseding indictment if Jack Smith started to return superseding indictments and that's a term of Art in the law it would mean that every indictment would include Donald Trump but it would add charges and add defendants and you're absolutely right if that is the route pursued by Jack Smith then every time there was a new indictment handed down by the grand jury that included charges against Donald Trump it would push the trial date farther and farther down the road that's not what I'm expecting to see I'm expecting to see additional indictments but without Donald Trump being charged in those new indictments so that the one indictment the four count indictment that Jack Smith has already had the grand jury return against Donald Trump I suspect will remain unaffected by subsequent additional indictments and that case though those four counts will be on track to go to trial and I suspect Tanya chuckin will make it a speedy trial so just to be clear now if we do see indictments a new indictment for these otherwise unnamed co-conspirators this would be an entirely separate case I mean it would be it would be obviously related to the ongoing case that Trump is facing right now but it would act as an entirely separate case right absolutely and Donald Trump will go to trial as the lone criminal defendant sitting at Council table and all all of the other defendants who are charged in separate subsequent indictments they will all go to trial together and what do you think any new charges for a new indictment could be based on so I have a feeling we're going to see at least these six presently unindicted co-conspirators charged for basically the same charges that Jack Smith brought against Donald Trump because he made clear in that indictment that these six co-conspirators committed the crimes that um that Donald Trump has been charged with why because they were all part of the same conspiracy so we're going to see those charges but the other thing I suspect we're going to see we might start seeing some charges for Donald Trump's Finance crimes as part of his you know his pack his fundraising efforts that he told his donors are going for one purpose they end up going for an entirely uh different purpose you know the open question the really interesting question is do we see Donald Trump added into those indictments for financial crimes for example um in a subsequent case that Jack Smith is not interested in going to trial in any time soon because he wants to kind of keep pristine the four count indictment that has already been returned against Trump so that one can remain on the fast track to trial now is there any likelihood that we might see a charge either for Donald Trump or any new co-conspirators for inciting an Insurrection and and also beyond that like what would be the downside of bringing a charge like that that may be harder to prove than the charges that are already uh that are already on the table that's an important question because if we think back to what Donald Trump said in his pre-insurrection rally on the ellipse on January 6th and what Rudy Giuliani said and what Don Jr said and What mo Brooks said they all used dramatically uh inflammatory language trying to get everybody whipped up into a frenzy lying to them about their votes being stolen and their election being rigged and then in various ways they said you know what you got to go to the Capitol and fight like hell or you won't have a country anymore or Rudy Giuliani said let's go have trial by combat right or Beau Brook said something about you know blood needs to be shed I'm Taking Liberties I don't remember exactly the inflammatory language he used here's the thing if there is a charge for inciting an Insurrection bra that is actually where there would be a robot bust argument that some of that might be protected by the First Amendment the beauty I use the term loosely the beauty of no charges being brought for inciting the Insurrection that day is Jack Smith has taken away thus far from Donald Trump and anybody else who might have been charged for inciting the Insurrection he's taken away the argument that the charges have anything to do with what is possibly First Amendment protective speech it really was a conservative call at least on the legal front a conservative call by Jack Smith and I would go so far as to say it was a really smart call because there can be no defense mounted by Donald Trump that he is being prosecuted because of his speech speech that might enjoy first amendment protection right maybe maybe not a legal defense but clearly that isn't stopping him from making that argument in the court of public opinion I mean that is the exact argument that he and his allies have trotted out across the the conservative media ecosystem right that this is all an attack on on Donald Trump's First Amendment rights and I think Jack Smith knew so well in advance that that would be Trump's uh defense here which is why he put it on page two of a 45-page indictment that says not only can Trump say what he whatever he wants to say about this but he can actually go so far as to lie about the results of the election and all that's protected speech this um this indictment is not about that this indictment is about conspiring to deprive Americans of their right to cast their ballots uh conspiring to you know create this whole scheme to to defraud uh to defraud uh you know a free and fair election from moving forward and from blocking the certification of the election results so I think uh I I think that you know to your point Jack Smith very clearly knew that that was going to be uh Trump's move here and and kind of pulled the rug out from under his feet yeah let me follow up on that it's a great point and I would say it's comical but there's really nothing funny about about what's going on but it's almost comical that Donald Trump and his defense attorneys are out there you know spewing into the Public Square his defense attorneys going on all of the Sunday news programs saying Donald Trump's being prosecuted for First Amendment protected speech it is almost as if the defense attorneys are making arguments against the indictment they expected to see but not the indictment that Jack Smith had the grand jury returned right and the other thing I just wrote a piece for MSNBC daily about this that hasn't gone to publication yet um the really unfortunate thing is Donald Trump's defense lawyers his mouthpieces are making these absurd arguments about First Amendment protected speech and they are misleading the public you you know it very much has the feel of what Donald Trump did in advance of the 2020 election that he knew he would lose what did he say he said oh it's it's going to be a rigged election that's the only way I could lose and now Donald Trump and his attorneys are throwing so much disinformation propaganda and lies into the Public Square saying things like oh you know what uh I can't get a free trial in DC the jurors hate me so if I am convicted it's because it will be a rigged trial well we've heard that before haven't we and here we go again Donald Trump and his lawyers spouting out this nonsense I will say Brian it's it's really upsetting I think for those of us who practice law in the criminal justice Arena both prosecutors and defense to see defense attorneys going on the public Airwaves and making misleading statements about what's going on really parroting or mimicking the misinformation the propaganda and the outright lies of the client I hope to heck judge Tanya tuckkin at some point holds the defense attorney's feet to the fire and says listen you will take those dirty tricks that you've been spouting out in the Public Square put them back in your trick bag and do not take them out again yeah well look I'm not I'm not saying that Donald Trump's attorneys are bad but I will say that when you have a reputation for never paying the people who work for you you're left with a certain quality person so we'll just uh leave it at that uh Glenn what still has to be litigated in pre-trial motions and when do you presume that we'll see a trial date announced for this case for the uh for the election theft case yeah I could almost promise you we're going to have a trial date announced on August 28th the reason I can promise that is because as I attended the arraignment hearing for Donald Trump the magistrates the Magistrate Judge who was presiding over that hearing it wasn't uh judge Chuck and it was a Magistrate Judge um said judge chuckin has asked me to direct you prosecution and defense attorneys to file a motion with a proposed trial date and then when you meet at the next status Hearing in this case which was set for August 28th judge chuckin will be setting a trial date so I'm quite sure judge chuckin will be setting a trial date on August 28th with respect to what needs to be litigated pretty much everything right all pre-trial motions that the defense can come up with attacking for example of the theory of liability you know they will make all sorts of claims largely frivolous us claims baseless claims claims without any legal support that you know the grand jury process was abused and the charges as returned have some legal infirmity they will um argue executive privilege they will argue anything and everything they can think of in part just trying to bog down the process but again with judge chutkin presiding she is in a fair uh independent smart Fearless judge she has proved that in 10 years on the federal bench she will move through all this like you know what through a goose and she will stick with a trial date she sets but don't be surprised if we see lots of motions filed by Trump's legal team some of them may have some Merit and require some serious litigations to resolve many of them will not all right and finally Glenn given the fact that there is only one defendant in this case and we don't have to deal with the with the issues of declassifying classified documents and whatnot so you think that there's a world in which this trial Could Happen early in 2024 as opposed to you know something closer to the summer or the fall of 2024. I believe the case will be tried and resolved sometime in early to perhaps mid 2024 there is absolutely no reason that the defense team can't prepare for a trial that is set six months in advance let's say February 2024 a trial like this will probably take three or four weeks to try to its conclusion to try to a verdict so I would expect we will have this case resolved by perhaps March maybe April of 2024 which at least will be well in advance of the November 2024 presidential election so as we've discussed previously in the event Donald Trump is the Republican nominee for our president the voters will know whether they're casting their vote for a convicted felon or a completely exonerated defendant who the jury said you know what he's done nothing wrong we've cleared him of all charges what what is the likelihood that will be the result yeah pretty pretty amazing development that'll be for the party of Law and Order but uh you know what can what else can you expect uh with that said for anybody watching if you want to stay on top of this stuff especially as we see this case continue to work its way through the court make sure to subscribe the links are right here on the screen I'm Brian teller Cohen and I'm Glenn kirschner you're watching the legal breakdown foreign [Music]

Channel: Brian Tyler Cohen

Views: 996,294

Keywords: Brian Tyler Cohen, Trump, Republicans, Democrats, brian cohen, politics, news, jack smith trump, trump indictment

Id: CaRwwyy-LsI

Length: 14min 40sec (880 seconds)

Published: Thu Aug 10 2023