Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 8/1/23 BREAKING: TRUMP INDICTED, Krystal And Saagar React

Episode Date: August 1, 2023

Krystal and Saagar react to Trump being indicted on new charges (8/1/23).To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case. If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

High key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell,

and Evie Audley. We got a lot of things to get into. We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she about to yank my bank account. Correct.

And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter. Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Stay informed, empowered, and ahead of the curve with the BIN News This Hour podcast. Updated hourly to bring you the latest stories shaping the Black community. From breaking headlines to cultural milestones, the Black Information Network delivers the facts, the voices, and the perspectives that matter 24-7 because our stories deserve to be heard. Listen to the BIN News This Hour podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, guys, we are coming to you with some major breaking news.

Once again, former President Trump has been indicted. This time the charges have to do with January 6th and fake elector scheme. Special Counsel Jack Smith announced the charges in a press conference earlier. Let's take a listen. Today, an indictment was unsealed charging Donald J. Trump with conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to disenfranchise voters, and conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding. The indictment was issued by a grand jury of citizens here in the District of Columbia, and it sets forth the crimes charged in detail. I encourage everyone to read it in full. The attack on our nation's capital on January 6th, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy.

As described in the indictment, it was fueled by lies. Lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the U.S. government, the nation's process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election. The men and women of law enforcement who defended the U.S. Capitol on January 6th are heroes. They are patriots and they are the very best of us. They did not just defend a building or the people sheltering in it. They put their lives on the line to defend who we are as a country and as a people. They defended the very institutions and principles that define the United States. Since the attack on our Capitol, the Department of Justice has remained committed

to ensuring accountability for those criminally responsible for what happened that day. This case is brought consistent with that commitment, and our investigation of other individuals continues. In this case, my office will seek a speedy trial so that our evidence can be tested in court and judged by a jury of citizens. In the meantime, I must emphasize that the indictment is only an allegation and that the defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. I would like to thank the members of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who are working on this investigation with my office, as well as

the many career prosecutors and law enforcement agents from around the country who have worked on previous January 6th investigations. These women and men are public servants of the very highest order, and it is a privilege to work alongside them. Okay, so you hear there the specific charges. Those are the ones that were listed in the document that Trump received announcing to him that he was a target of this investigation. So no huge surprises there. But there's a lot of detail to go through in this indictment. The special counsel goes to great lengths to assert not only did Trump assert false election lies, not only did he use those lies to try to perpetrate this fraud over across multiple states involving slates of fake electors and going all the way up until January 6th and pressuring Mike Pence to try to overturn the results of the election. But they also go into great detail trying to persuade what will ultimately be a jury in D.C. that Trump knew that those claims were false and that he pushed forward with

them anyway. Just to give you a sense of, you know, one of the pieces of many pieces of evidence that they use for this, of this person and that person who had told Trump that these claims were false and he pushed forward in spite of it. They're talking about his claims with regard to Georgia. And they say on November 25th, one of the co-conspirators, which by the way, six unindicted co-conspirators, and we can talk more about that in a moment, filed a lawsuit against the governor of Georgia falsely alleging massive election fraud accomplished through the voting machine company's election software and hardware. Before the lawsuit

was even filed, the defendant retweeted a post promoting it. The defendant, not defendant is Trump, did this despite the fact that when he had discussed this far-fetched public claims regarding the voting machine company in private with advisors, the defendant had conceded that they were unsupported and that co-conspirator three sounded quote crazy. Co-conspirator three's Georgia lawsuit was dismissed on December 7th. There was a lot more that was similar to this of, you know, the attorney general told him it was false. This agency at the Department of Justice told him it was false. This advisor told it was false.

He went to Arizona and the officials there told him it was false. To me, this was some of the more compelling evidence, though, that he actually took some of this in because he was even saying like, yeah, this sounds kind of crazy. Yeah. So it's interesting. So as you noted, in terms of the six co-conspirators, we do have the what I guess, alleged possible list of some of who these folks could or could not be. You can kind of suss out who it is. Yeah. Yeah. So we definitely know that Rudy Giuliani is one. We also know that John Eastman, he was the lawyer who helped come up with the legal theory around election certification, is one. We don't yet know if his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, was listed in the indictment.

And we know a few other political advisors. Sidney Powell, almost certainly likely to be one of those co-conspirators as well. Noteworthy in what Jack Smith said there, Crystal, in the press conference was this will not stop our investigation into other individuals. So let's all make sure we're underlying that. This could not be the last indictment. I wanted to give everybody a sense almost of the initial legal reaction in terms of what the two sides are going to be bringing.

So first, I think we should start with the defense, I guess, as they do in a trial. I actually was watching Fox News in order to prepare for this because they had both Andy McCarthy and Jonathan Turley. I guess they're whisperers, right, really, of the conservative legal movement. And here's what they say. McCarthy in particular takes issue with Smith's use of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 in order to prosecute Trump. He says of Jack Smith, quote, The second reaction from Jonathan Turley, he says here, quote, when I take red pen through this indictment that is protected by the First Amendment, it reduces to a haiku, a.k.a. a short poem for those of the uninitiated.

Many of the things that are being charged here are protected speech. He follows up, Crystal, by saying that this is, quote, a disinformation indictment, but that is all part of the First Amendment. And just right before we get into that, one of the things that McCarthy made clear to point out is that the statute, which is actually written here, Section 241 of the Civil Rights Law, says that actions of public officials addressing conspiracies to prevent them from exercising their rights, that prosecutors must show that a defendant acted not only intentionally, but with a purpose to deprive the victim of a constitutional requirement which has been made specific and definite. McCarthy points out that the Supreme Court actually, in two separate instances, has thrown

out cases brought against former public officials and other individuals that were prosecuted successfully actually under these statutes, but for not being specific enough for the deprivation. And so that's, I guess, the legal theory I want of the defense. Let me get Brad Moss. I asked him for a quote. Here's what he says in response to the Turley argument in particular. Quote, protected speech does not permit you to rely upon knowingly false information to corruptly use the levers of executive power to subvert election laws. It does not allow you to corruptly coordinate with state activists to submit false electoral paperwork to the archivist and the VP. It does not allow you to corruptly pressure the VP to act unlawfully on January 6th.

Speech is not what is at issue. It is conspiracy to command action. That action was unlawful. And so I think those two sides of it, that effectively I think is going to be the main line by Jack Smith in terms of convincing this DC jury. We should note here that the judge is not necessarily going to be friendly to Trump. Apparently this is a, and it's not just that she was appointed by Obama, but apparently has, um, uh, sentenced January 6th defendants to sentences longer than the government has requested. It seems clear crystal that given the outcome is very like, it's very likely, uh, in order to be a conviction, just given where it is, although, you know, he'll get his day in court, that there's some major Supreme Court things that will be addressed here as a result of this, just because

some of the questions here are so fundamental. And I, you know, I guess regardless of this crystal, you know, when you're laying it out, you can't help but read this and just be like, oh, yeah, this is totally nuts. Like, regardless of whether he's guilty or not, you're like, oh, yeah, this is actually insane, like the false elector scheme so now we're talking here on a political level and i thought that the best point that you made on our show a couple of maybe it was a couple of weeks ago i don't know what it was everything blends is you were you were like you know in the eyes of most americans it they don't give a shit about documents they're like this is what they hate him for like the people who do hate trump and so on a political

level we're reading this politically, not as an indictment. It's damning politically. You know, when you when you read the judgment and the statements and the people around him. So that's everything that I'll say about. I think I think that's a great point that you are referring to me having made previously, if I do say so myself. But the documents case may actually be more straightforward from a legal perspective. And Brad Moss, that's what he told us before. I mean, you know, he had the documents. He said these documents aren't declassified. We have the audio tape of that. They're highly, you know, really top secret,

top secret stuff. OK, we have the pictures of the bar, all of that stuff. OK, the documents case is probably more of a slam dunk legally. This one is a little bit legally dicier, although I still think that this is also very compelling because you also have to keep in mind the civil rights charge is different. I haven't seen that charged against any of the other January 6th, like, you know, the people were just storming the Capitol. The other charges have been successfully levied against some of the January 6th rioters. And so, you know, if they were corrupting a government proceeding, then certainly it appears like the guy who was sort of directing things from above would be potentially guilty of that as well. So, you know, when they go through the litany of what was going on, all the conversations that were

happening, all of the text messages, all of the times Trump was told this is total bullshit. Some instances where he basically agreed. He's like, yeah, we don't have proof. Yeah, it sounds crazy, etc. And then you see the, you know, for Trump land, methodical effort to put together these slates of electors and actually snow some of the people who didn't want to be on the electorate slates unless it was going they were they were basically put on them under false pretenses and you've got I think seven different states and all of the machinations that

were happening here yeah it's pretty compelling to speak to what uh Turley was saying in particular about hey a lot of this is protected speech. Jack Smith attempts in this indictment to address that legal defense. He says at the very top, basically like, look, he could think it's still he's allowed to say it. He's allowed to take these claims to court, which he did. None of that is illegal. However, it is illegal to put together fake elector slates and then try to use these lies to actually subvert the election. That part crosses the line of illegality in the telling here. Right. So I do think that, you know, in terms of the core of what people actually hate about Donald Trump, what they really don't want a repeat of

if he were to get back into the White House, this is the piece that everybody has sort of been kind of waiting to drop because it does speak to the heart of what we're doing here as a democracy. It was an insane, horrendous day to watch all of that unfold on January 6th. And so even though the documents

case might be more straightforward legally, this gets to the core of what people actually think Donald Trump is a criminal for doing. Right. And then let's get to the political defense. So from my understanding, at least, and actually, and look, I'm actually wanting to know what you think about this. Yeah. Trump, Trump statement was, he actually didn't deny any of it. He just goes, they waited two and a half years to indict me while i was running i mean i do think they've got a point there crystal like why did it take two and a half years in order to bring the case merrick garland didn't end up bringing it they shelved it they put it on the back foot they appoint jack smith then this guy

brings an indictment right at the time that trump is i mean from a political quote-unquote interference in the process i mean it really could not be a worse look, especially whenever he's surging over his rivals. I mean, I do genuinely think that is a very compelling defense that Trump will be able to not only keep the GOP primary base around him on this. I think this will solidify his support. Once again, DeSantis is already out with a statement being like i'm going to dismantle the fbi so i can support trump i'm like okay well why shouldn't i just vote for trump then right so again like on a political level that is going to be the best and look i was watching fox i was trying to imbibe like the right wings i'm like all right let me

take it all in so i can try and convey like the main thing is. And the points, the only points I really felt like not only should be reiterated, but which I think there's something to the McCarthy defense. We're going to hear that in court, whether people don't like it or not. Something to the Turley defense as well. And then on the political front, why did you wait two and a half years? Like, if you know you could have impeached him, you didn't do that. And then if you really believed it, I mean, the best time to throw his ass in jail or whatever during January 6 is right after January 6, when you assume office. So that's going to be a tough one to talk their way out of. And I'm curious what you think. As someone who supports these charges, and believes the former president should be held accountable for what I see as crimes

against our country. And as someone who desperately does not want him back in the White House, I wish that this had all happened a lot sooner. And I don't really have a good explanation for why I didn't. Because I respect the fact that this is a process. It takes time. You read this document. It's extensive. I know there was a lot of investigation, but it does seem like it could have happened a lot quicker. And even if you look at like the documents, one that that timing, I understand because they were trying actually to go back and forth with him and resolve this in a way that didn't involve the criminal justice system. So that one, the timing makes a little more sense to me. But even with that one, we're talking about a trial date that's set for May. Terrible. Okay. That means the GOP nomination is sewn up, right? That one's done and

dusted, no going back. And you're talking about a trial and potential sentencing coming right in the heat of a general election. Now, listen, I think he should be held accountable. I don't think that anyone, including a current, former, past, potential future president should skate. I don't believe in that form, you know, two tier form of justice. However, it there is just no denying that this creates an extraordinarily volatile and potentially chaotic political situation going into an election where there is no doubt that emotions are already going to be very heightened.

That's important. I'm glad they said that. Oh, yeah, go ahead. I was just going to say, in terms of my actual prediction of how this is all going to work out for him politically, on the Republican side, you know, it doesn't take a genius to see that they're, majority of Republicans, over like 70% of them think the election was rigged and stolen. So this is going to, you is gonna water off a duck's ass in terms of the Republican base. If anything, it just makes them like him more. I'm sorry, Ron DeSantis, you should probably take Trump's advice at this point and drop out and give him your money for ballot harvesting or whatever. Not looking good for you, buddy. In terms of

the general election, I do think that there is a sort of normie instinct of where there's smoke, there's fire. There was real revulsion among independents and not just Democrats around what happened on January 6th and Trump's role in it. We saw real revulsion in the midterm elections around January 6th and around Stop the Steal. So right now you've got, according to the polling, jump ball between Biden and Trump. I do think that this, with a general election audience, is going to be very difficult to survive. I just don't know. It's one of those where I think you're right. I think it will hurt.

I don't know on what margin. I don't know to what extent. I think, you know, in terms of the prediction basis on that one, I genuinely, like, people cared in 2022. Will they care in 2024? It's a little bit different. We're talking about Congress and Senate versus the actual guy and his, you know, his own political quality. So I don't know. In terms of the indictment, I do think I want to see this First Amendment stuff litigated, because I actually am genuinely curious to see how and

what the threshold that you have to cross is. You famously is like you can't yell, what is it, fire in a crowded theater. And, you know, there's important exceptions, I think, to First Amendment case law. That is the part where I really want to see like where that will be applied. And then on a political level, this is I think this is probably a net benefit to the Democrats because January 6th is so repellent and it is the most repellent thing about Trump. So that that's where I do think it will continue to hurt him. And then on the Republican side, like you said, I yeah, I mean, this is it. Like this is because the documents one, there is no ambiguity that Trump obviously acted wrong.

And your only defense is like, oh, they've got it out for him. But I want to return actually to the point that you made, which is on the documents timeline, there actually wasn't much of a delay. You know, basically, as soon as he was obstructing, they indicted him. Here they waited two and a half years. Let's point back to the actual original statement by Jack Smith. Remember, he said that he wants a speedy trial. Me too. You know, the whole country needs a speedy trial here on this. We should try this whole case two and a half years ago. Well, we kind of did, you know, in the Senate for impeachment. But if you were going to bring charges like doing this in the middle of primaries, you know, your point about we can't be having this in May of 2024.

We should have this wrapped by Iowa. But, you know, I mean, looking at a calendar, it's pretty clear that's just not going to happen. So we're all up for some serious chaos, I think, timeline to a general election. But, you know, part of the challenge with Trump is because he is charismatic, because he is charming, because he's funny, because Biden is like super old and falling apart and has all the problems that Joe Biden has. It's easy to forget the worst parts of Trump, right? It's easy to forget that. And so when you have a trial going

on, reminding everyone constantly about the very worst parts of Trump. And by the way, on a just like personal gut level, reminding people of like, you really want to go back to this dude who wouldn't even give it up last time. Remember what that felt like? Remember that chaos? Remember that stress and anxiety? That was a very tense time in American life. What other side you were on of what was going on? It was very stressful, intense and chaotic time. So I think having that reminder front and center going into 2024, I have to think that that's going to be very damaging for Trump and gives Biden a chance when, frankly, I don't know that he would otherwise because he's got a lot of problems of his own. But then imagine this. He gets convicted. It's still at the top of mind and he still beats Biden. Then what does that say about Joe Biden? I don't know what any of the

fact that we even have these two men as the likely party nominees says nothing good about the country to start with so I saw an interesting tweet I just want to end kind of on this uh from DC Drano he's a huge uh Twitter account really and he basically was like he put out the tweet where he just said look it's either the president it says quote if he wins he can pardon himself if he, he will be imprisoned. That's what's at stake. Interesting, too, in terms of the messaging they're being directed at the base. So I think that's important.

And he's like a Republican Trump influencer account. Got it. For him to, like, put it that starkly in the seriousness and also the way it will be relentlessly messaged, I think, to the GOP primary base. Yeah, I have been thinking about, you know, is there a chance of political? Of course, there is a chance of political violence. I don't think anyone could deny that. But I will say, you know, the last two indictments that came down, there were calls for people to come out and protest. Not many people really did. Thus far, It's been relatively

calm. So we'll hope that that continues to prevail. Hopefully CounterPoint's going to have a great show for everybody tomorrow. Thanks to our premium subscribers that enable all of this snap reaction and all this other stuff. And we'll see everybody on Thursday or if any other some crazy stuff happens, I guess maybe we can log on for that. We will be prepared, ready to jump on. Hopefully not, but we will be prepared. We'll see you guys later. Over the years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned no town is too small for murder.

I'm Katherine Townsend. I've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community. I was calling about the murder of my husband. The murderer is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case. If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

High key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell, and Evie Oddly. We got a lot of things to get into. We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl,

the way she about to yank my bank account. Correct. And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter. Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Stay informed, empowered, and ahead of the curve with the BIN News This Hour podcast. Updated hourly to bring you the latest stories shaping the Black community. From breaking headlines to cultural milestones,

the Black Information Network delivers the facts, the voices, and the perspectives that matter 24-7. Because our stories deserve to be heard. Listen to the BIN News This Hour podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.