Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Trump in the Dock

Episode Date: August 4, 2023

On tonight' episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Rosanna Lockwood sits in for Piers on a two-hour special as Donald Trump enters the dock following his indictment in the US. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Here we go again. And like I said on the show last night, Rosie, a bit of a sense of deja vu. And I know similar to you, we've been international journalists, have been following the Trump circus, if we can call it that, for the last few years. And a third indictment, along with everything else. But this one in particular is going to be particularly interesting because this strikes at the heart of free speech. It strikes the heart of what is truth.

It strikes at the heart of the US Constitution and election as well. We are keeping a good visual on the doors of Trump's plane there, which of course has flown in this evening from Bedminster, New Jersey to Washington, D.C. We're waiting for Mr. Trump to emerge. And an interesting question just being raised there by Rosie's guest, Michael Graham, saying that perhaps this indictment hasn't, isn't going to get as much press interest because people are a little bit par for the course at this point. They're a little bit done with it.

We'll have to wait and see. Currently, obviously, there's interest from us. There's interest from you at home if you're watching us. And we can promise you. You're going to have an excellent time this evening, as much as can be said for an indictment, if we're allowed to say that. We've got a fantastic lineup of guests on the show over the next two hours. We've got panelists. We're going to be hearing from Republicans.

We're going to be hearing from a certain QA non-Shaman as well. So you're going to be wanting to hear all of that. I'm going to formally start uncensored now with me, Rosanna Lockwood, in for Pierce Morgan. Here we are again. What is now a routine spectacle of Donald Trump showing up to a courthouse. This time, as I just said, in the next hour, Washington, DC is going to be facing charges for allegedly plotting to overturn the 2020 election result when he lost to Joe Biden. I talked last night on this show about the myriad of criminal

charges Trump's now facing. That's some 78 criminal counts in three different cases. And whether all this is a true reflection of the actions of a corrupt, power-hungry, self-interested man, or the actions of government officials who want to shut him down at any cost. or perhaps elements of both. We know Trump and his supporters say it's a political witch hunt against him, calculated interference, to stop him getting a second run at the White House.

But what does all this mean for the US justice system that's prosecuting him? We are going to be asking these questions on the show tonight. Here in the studio, I am joined on the panel by Isabel Oakshot, Paula Rohn-Adrian, and Richard Tice as well.

Are you all, I mean, it's a bit wrong to say looking forward to this, but you've all joined us here in the studio to talk about this. Has it gripped you in the way that the previous indictments have? Richard, do you think it's more serious? This is clearly more serious because it's federal. I think we're all gripped by the spectacle. I mean, the fact that we're no one else almost in the world. Richard, sorry to interrupt you there.

We did just have Donald Trump poking his head out the plane. There we go, walking down the stairs, former US President Donald Trump there, wearing a red Republican tie suit, making his way into his motorcade. This is the last we'll see from him for a bit. We're reliably informed that this airfield is actually very close to the courthouse that he's going to be making his way to.

So we won't expect to see him now for the next few minutes whilst he makes his way to the courthouse. But interesting there, just to see him get off the plane. We love these types of shots in news. And there's the rest of his team. I wonder what the conversations were like on that plane, Richard. But there it is. There's the spectacle. No one else could command this level of attention,

just walking down the steps, and it's extraordinary. The hype, the spin, both sides. But I really wonder how many Americans are actually going to have their views changed by all of this noise? I mean, whether it's 78 counts, 50 counts, 20 counts. How much difference does that all make three cases? And then you've got, on the other side, you've got the case against Hunter Biden, the judge throwing that out, the potential implications for the current sitting president. I wonder.

It feels just like showbiz, doesn't it? I mean, it's just a spectacle to me, and I'm not a massive Trump fan or anything like that. This is a show trial. That's what it is. You know, you read through the indictment. I've looked at it in quite a lot of detail. And frankly, it looks very cooked up. And I think a lot of Republican supporters or those who lean towards Donald Trump will have their views reinforced.

We know that from the polling already. He is way out. He is way ahead of all his closest rivals combined for the Republican nomination. So, you know, there's a counter, a conspiracy theory, if you like, that actually the Democrats know that this is going to reinforce his popular appeal. And they want him there as a Republican nominee because they think their man or woman, perhaps will be a woman, can defeat him. Paula, do you think that's all the point, though, that the indictments are fueling his popularity?

because as Isabel says, he is pulling much further ahead than the other contenders. And Isabel is right in terms of the statistics. They do show that there seems to be some kind of crazy link between every time he gets an indictment or there's some kind of civil lawsuit that is raised against him, his percentages increase. But to answer your initial question about the spectacle of this all, I think I actually find it incredibly distasteful

and it's worse than watching a car crash because what we need to remind ourselves about is that seven people lost their lives on the 6th of January and they lost their lives due to the insurgents and that's what I want us to constantly remind ourselves about so this is not about the case is about well what it is in pursuing a prosecution of that though is it

that's not on the rap sheet but it is in the sense of what he was inciting them to do and we shouldn't lose sight of that and the fact is is that Ultimately, this was an outrageous display of behaviour in the terms of undermining democracy. And he stood by, and he stood by what... Even if the sixth of January...

That it can't stand the loser. Clearly it was. Let's hear from some voices in Washington, D.C. and see what they've got to say about this. Please say, we're joined by Ari Fleischer and Joe Walsh as well. Ari, good to speak to you both. Ari, I'll start with you and just get a sense from you what you think the gravity of the situation is. You sat here listening to three Brits talking about it.

Talk to us from the American point of view. Yeah, I'm distressed. I mean, I just think about what people in other countries look at America, and they've always held America up with an ideal. And I cannot imagine what you think when you watch one leader of one party indict the leader of another party and potentially put him in prison, a former United States president. You know, I think these manners should be settled by the country. people. Donald Trump has done some objectionable things, but I don't think they're criminal.

And if you don't like Donald Trump, vote him down. But to resort to the courts, to go to something that's never been done before, I just find extraordinary. And America is reaching a point where we have never gone before. And I find it very unsettling. Let's speak to former Republican 2020 presidential candidate on some of those points, Joe, because their points, I know you've heard a lot the last few days as you've been doing the broadcast rounds, this idea of a weaponized justice system and the idea that there isn't any criminal activity being alleged here. What do you say to that? Well, I agree with my friend Ari that the rest of the world must be scratching their heads, but they've been scratching their

heads for a long time. Two and a half years ago, a sitting American president led an effort to violently overthrow an American election. Now, I disagree with my friend Ari in that I think this is a good day for America. This is a day to celebrate. No one is above the law. And that man who led a violent effort to overthrow an American election is finally being held accountable.

That's a good thing. Look, Ari, your friend Joe, points this out. Can you agree with that? It's a good thing to at least have this air to hear it sort of being interrogated or investigated. As Paul on our panel just said, seven people did die in the action the rioting that took place on January 6th?

What Joe just said was simple but wrong. If that was the case, then why wasn't Donald Trump charged with incitement to riot? The charge against him was not about the riot. The charge against him dealt with the statements that he made that were deceptive about what he actually believes that he won the election, that the election was stolen, all of which led later to a riot. Look, I've always said that Joe Biden won the election, and I don't believe this election was stolen.

I've never been in the camp of Donald Trump when it comes to that. But that is a separate matter from whether Donald Trump was one of the rioters, whether Donald Trump led the riot. If that was the case, he would have been charged with that. He wasn't charged with that. He's essentially being charged with the free speech violation, that his advocacy, the statements he made were knowingly false is what the indictment says, and therefore they're charging him with that type of allegation.

So you don't charge people with making statements like that. If you did, half the Democratic Party would have to go to prison because they charged that Donald Trump stole the 2016 election. And they've said about numerous other elections. Joe, go ahead. Democracy is noisy. And I just want to say to our viewers. What we're hearing is the noise.

It should not be criminal. You're watching pictures here of the motorcade and the press team all heading towards the courthouse. There in Washington, D.C. We're going to be staying with these live pictures. Joe, go on. Well, again, I agree with Ari. Trump's not being indefinitely.

for inciting a violent attempt to overthrow an election, but Ari's wrong. Trump is not being indicted based on anything he said. He's being indicted for what he did, crimes he committed. The allegations are, and he'll have his day in court, that he lied. He purposely lied in court in court filings. If true, that's a crime. He pressured state legislators to exceed the constitutional authority. If true, that's a crime. He led a conspiracy to create fake electors

that were sent to the United States Senate. If true, that's a crime. And Donald Trump, it is alleged, pressured Justice Department officials to conduct sham investigations and lie to the American people. If true, that's a crime. This isn't about what Trump said. This is about what he did. Ari, let's respond to that then, because it's not only what Trump said, what he did. This strikes at the heart of the U.S. First Amendment as well. That is the right. You can have a false opinion.

You can have false ideas. But the argument that is now being waged is what that then incites people to do, the actions that then follow. And surely it's had an effect on the way people think, because some new polling out by CNN this evening saying that nearly 70% of Republicans and Republican-leaning people believe that Biden did not win the last. the last election. Yeah, and this is where you have unequal justice,

where justice that's supposed to be blind is not blind. I was there in 2000, after the 2000 election between Al Gore and George W. Bush that was settled by the Supreme Court, you had numerous Democrats challenged the results of that election, that Bush re-election at 2004. Numerous Democrats lied and said George Bush lost Ohio and challenged the results of that elections that came up in the Senate. So if believing ardently that someone has stolen an election and acting upon it is a crime,

then half of Washington has to go to jail both parties. And I say that as somebody who recognized that Joe Biden won. I think Donald Trump's wrong. But Donald Trump, if he ardently believes that the election was stolen, he's got a right to make that case and then to act upon that. And the systems of the American government held. Joe makes it sound like it's a crime to do the things Donald Trump did, pressure the Department of Justice.

Well, that's also called advocating for something you believe if he believes it. And again, my point being, in America, the people are sovereign. The people solve these issues. And what we've already done in America has turned impeachment into the British-style vote of confidence. If you fail a vote of confidence,

you leave as prime minister. Impeachment is different, but we've turned it into just that. And now we're turning the courts, the criminal justice system, into another way of resolving political dispute. If you don't like Donald Trump, get rid of him. Joe, can you buy that argument that this is essentially about protecting the U.S. constitutional rights and it is a political argument that's been brought into the courts of justice? No, no, look, if we go by what Ari is hoping for here, if you're a candidate for president,

then you're not to be held accountable for your crimes. Look, Ari can disagree with this. indictment, but Jack Smith and the prosecutors have specific crimes that Donald Trump committed. And if they can prove their case in court, these are specific crimes. Trump has a day, has the right to prove that right, that he didn't commit these crimes. But this baloney that Trump's being penalized because of what he said, that's just not true. We're talking about specific actions he's he took just one, Ari. You create, you lead a conspiracy to create a slate of fake electors. And then you present those electors, those fake electors, to the United States Senate.

If true, that is a crime. Whether you like it or not. Now, before we wrap up this conversation. But one, they were never presented to the- Go ahead, Darry, sorry. They were never presented to the United States Senate. And it is legitimate. when the clock is ticking down,

and if you do believe you want a state, and then you have a date certain by which your electors have to be in place, it's prudent to prepare for that. People call them fake electors, but it's also, if you think you won the state, you have your electors. This is a political dispute, not a criminal one.

Look, before we wrap up this case... Well, he'll have his day in court to make that case, sorry. It's been plenty of days in court, both of you. Not for either of you, but there have Donald Trump plenty. Let's talk about it. Joe Walsh, just before we wrap up, because you were a former Republican runner for presidency. You've been outspoken since about the fact that, you know, kind of going against the Trump style of leadership has led you to a pathway. You're basically not accepting the mainstream GOP. That's a Republican Party.

What is it to be a traditional Republican now in the U.S.? Well, to be, look, and I fully acknowledge, this is Donald Trump's party. And someone who opposes Trump has no rule. in the party. I fully acknowledge that. And I don't think that's going to change. And maybe Ari disagrees with me on this, but all these indictments are going to do is strengthen him.

I think this indictment will lock up the nomination for him. And I think Donald Trump's going to be really difficult to beat in the general election. Ari, the nomination locked up for this? I think it's highly likely that's going to be Trump, but there is going to be an alternative. who emerges and I advise everybody, just wait. Late this fall, early this winter,

there's always an alternative to the frontrunner. Someone will emerge it, either be Ambassador Nikki Haley, Senator Tim Scott. I think those are the two likely ones to rise. There are other possibilities. As far as Joe saying, he's likely to be the next president. I don't know about that. I think America is still a 50-50 country

when it comes to the general election. I can see 82-year-old Joe Biden at the time winning the election. I could also see. Donald Trump winning the election. Despite three indictments now, he's dead even in the polls with Joe Biden. Fascinating stuff. Ari Fletcher, thanks so much for joining us. Joe, stay with us. We're going to come back to you later on in the show. And we are still, of course, bring you all of these live pictures. As Donald Trump, the former U.S. president, makes his way from the airfield there in

Washington, D.C. to the courthouse where he's going to face his hearing for his third indictment, this time on a conspiracy, alleged conspiracy to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Now, and censored next tonight. Other than Donald Trump's one man face has become synonymous with January 6th. That's the Qaemon Shaman. Do you remember him? He's already faced his own justice for that day, but after the break, he's here to tell us if he thinks the former president should too. Welcome back to Pears Morgan Uncensored. We're bringing live a special coverage. That one man that is stuck in the public's mind. Donald Trump, of course. Today, third indictment here in Washington, D.C., this courthouse, we're going to bring you live pictures throughout.

His motorcade has been making its way from an airfield in Washington, D.C. He flew on one of his planes, a sort of Trump-branded plane from Bedminster, New Jersey, earlier on today. And he's going to be arriving at the courthouse. This is a federal courthouse. He is going to be fingerprinted. That was him coming off the plane just a few minutes ago. Looking chipper, I mean, I'm no body expert analysis. But he is somewhat used to this now.

The public circus, of course, he's been used to that his whole life. But also just the narrative, the conversations we're all having about his alleged criminality, water off the duck's back, I'd go as far as to say, smoothly making his way into his car and on his way to the courthouse. As I said there, he will be fingerprinted. He will stand within the courthouse. Of course, we won't be showing you from inside there. We'll show you all the pictures from outside the courthouse. And, of course, if he makes any kind of speech as well, there have been some demonstrators, some supporters, sort of waving flags outside the courthouse.

So far today, we'll bring you anything else we see. Now, though, we want to turn this conversation to remind you about January 6th. That was January 6, 2021, when we saw those large groups of people amass on the Capitol Hill. You will remember this man's face, particularly. His name is Jacob Chancelley. He is the so-called Qanon-Shaman. And for his role on that day, he was sentenced to 41 months in prison. He's since been released early.

Joins us now to give us his unique perspective on the man, many say inspired his act. Donald Trump. Jacob, thanks for making time for us. I know it's strangely a busy time for you to be talking about this. But first of all, let's just remind our viewers, because we were very international audience here. You were the face of this January 6th uprising. You were the guy in the fur coat and the horns and everything else. You were the so-called shaman.

How do you feel about all that now? Well, it's clear that the Operation Mockingbird Media chose to make me their straw man. They chose to use my face and my image. in my image to create a shock and awe campaign that they then used to divide the country into people that support Donald Trump and people that don't. And anybody that sees that what was done to me

and doesn't agree with it, they now are beginning to see how it is that the American justice system is corrupt and has been corrupt for decades. Look, when you were sentenced, you were very remorseful. You said, quote, I was wrong for entering the Capitol. I have no excuse whatsoever.

In retrospect, I'd do everything differently. differently, I would try with all my heart and soul to stop people that also joined you that day. Do you still feel the same? Well, if I wouldn't know what was going to happen, I definitely would have tried to stop everything from happening before it happened. And, you know, what I did was technically illegal. So, of course, you know, there's no defense for an illegal action. But I have, you know, accepted responsibility.

I have served my time. And because of my good behavior in prison, as well as my program, while I was in prison, the programming that I did in the prison, I got a year off my sentence and was released early. So I think that's indicative of the fact that what it is that the Operation Mockingbird media said about me is just completely unfounded. Do you class this as Operation Mockingbird Media?

Well, yeah, absolutely. But the thing is, Operation Mockingbird has been going on for a very long time. It's when the CIA infiltrated the media outlets during the Civil Rights Movement, during the anti-war in the 60s and the 70s, and they were hell-bent on controlling the narrative in the country because it's all about controlling the minds of the people,

controlling the minds of the public through psychological warfare techniques, combining trigger words with trigger images to create an emotional response in the subconscious mind that can then be weaponized against groups of individuals or individuals like Donald Trump or myself. Now, I'm listening to all that, and then you say it because it's your First Amendment right

to air that point of view. I'm of course a journalist, I work here, I can tell you, I was never recruited by the CIA. But it is always interesting to hear this, because it is the Q&ON movement, this conspiracy movement, some call it, some call it a cult. It captured the minds of so many people.

Are you still in the movement? It sounds like your views haven't changed. Do you think they've got stronger? Well, QAnon is a fiction created by the media so they could discredit Q and the anons that were following Q. QNON is a fiction created by the media so that they could basically smear the very founded realizations and revelations of a debt-based fiat currency controlling our monetary system,

the child and human trafficking networks that are all over the planet, and are used by these elite groups that control the banks and the Federal Reserve, to blackmail people into submission like what was happening with Jeffrey Epstein. If you look into what happened with Jeffrey Epstein and the fact that his client list has not been made public, or the fact that like the finders, which is on the government website, and how children were being abducted and abused and put in cages. If you look into the testimony of Ronald Bernard, if you look into the Franklin cover up in Nebraska.

Jacob, we could keep listing all night. Oh, yeah, we could keep going all night. Absolutely. We could go all night. I'm going to couch all of this by saying those are your opinions, those are allegations here in the United Kingdom. Our broadcast media is heavily regulated. Yeah, no, no.

But if you're a journalist, you'll look into it yourself. These things are very real. You can look them up very easily. And if you're a journalist and you really want to, you really care about your country, whether it be in the UK or in the United States, then you'll look into these things and realize that to quote, to quote Kennedy, let me just quote Kennedy really quick. We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasions instead of invasions, on invasions instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of army by day. Let's hear some other news on this. Go on. You can have five more seconds. Finish your point. Okay. Is a system which has conspired vast human and material resources to create a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, scientific, economic, and political operations.

Okay. Here on Talk TV, we allow all different viewpoints and opinions, much like your First Amendment there in the U.S. So we are going to open it up now to our panel who join me in the studio, who are listening to all of that, and ask you what you make of it all, when that is somebody who claims to be one of Trump's major supporters, Paula. I have to say what I would like to ask Jacob is I'm intrigued about the whole corruption. I'm intrigued about the political power. And yet he doesn't seem to be uncomfortable with the fact that every time Trump sends out a press release, there's a funder raising link attached to it.

I mean, why is nobody uncomfortable about that? So that's a normal part of American politics. You've got to raise money in order to function in the political sphere. Why is nobody uncomfortable about that was my question? Why is it the case that we are quite happy to attach fundraising to what should be something for state-funded politics? Is that what you would have? Is that so un- Wow. Yeah, that's a deal.

It's amazing. Imagine that state-funded politics. It's uncomfortable for me that a man who ran a number of businesses into the ground could then take over a country and is now suggesting that this country is somehow corrupt. That's uncomfortable for me. It is just the American system. It might feel uncomfortable for us, but they are allowed, you know, private businesses, private donors, to fund themselves to the moon.

And they do need to trust a very level. But it's literally, Paul of that is literally what happens in the UK. I send out an, hang on, hang on, and Eve, how do you please? I send out an email. I send out an email every other week asking for donations. I've got my own business. I'm running a political party. We're seeking votes.

We would like to help run this country better. So that's, it's, what you've just said is, there's nothing corrupt about that process. Our donations are clearly declared above a certain level. I would suggest that there are. questions that Jacob may have wanted to ask Trump about that and may have wanted to suggest about that, but he seems quite comfortable to allow Trump to behave in ways that may be questionable. I have said that as a man who has run a number of businesses, those businesses in the way

he has run them has been questionable. And he has faced a number of very serious questions about that. He doesn't seem to be worried about that. And that he's taken that questionable behavior into his presidency. He doesn't seem uncomfortable about that. Let's bring Joe Walsh back into this conversation. I feel like we could use with an American voice here. Joe, thank you for staying here. Were you listening to us there, talking about that, getting nitpicky

about the way that American politics is funded? Well, I just want to compliment you. You handled Jacob deftly. Look, the whole thing made me sad. Jacob needs help. I hope he's getting help. But it makes me sad because, look, I come from the world of Trump supporters.

I voted for Trump in 2016. So many of these people are in a cult and they just can't get out. And Trump can do or say no wrong. It just makes me sad. I wanted to ask you about that, Joe, actually, on the what-aboutism point, because we did a show on this last night.

I spoke to pastor Mark Burns, who is close to Trump. When I asked him a question about Donald Trump and about the way this indictment was going, he immediately said, well, Biden, Hunter Biden's laptop, Biden, everything else, what we're used to seeing, and I want the viewer to understand that this is a common tactic deployed.

This is not me saying that only Republicans do this. Democrats do it as well. Everyone does it across the political spectrum. When you ask somebody a question and they immediately point at someone else, how weak that tactic is. And do you think that when you saw somebody like Jacob speaking just now, the Q&N on Shaman, that it undoes his cause to speak the way he did? Or do you think it galvanizes supporters?

more? Oh, I think it galvanizes the forces. Look at everything Jacob's been through and he's still uttering bull crap like that. He's not alone. I hear from these folks every single day. Go to a Trump rally like I have. There are so many Americans who think that way. We're in so much more trouble in this country than the world really understands. How do we find a way out of it? I mean, It's not just you. This is happening elsewhere in the world as well. And I'm not saying I'm taking a complete position against critical thinking and rational inquiry, but this conspiracy like cult-like behavior you're talking about. Look, I think Trump's greatest legacy is the destruction of truth.

All politicians lie. We've never had someone like Donald Trump who lies every time he opens his mouth. So now we live in a country where half of America doesn't believe basic truths. 80% of my former political party believes Donald Trump won in 2020. How do we get beyond that? We need conversations. We got to figure out a way to talk across the divide because there are people who can get out of the cult.

But right now, it's so political. We have to do all we can to make sure Trump's not reelected. Even Elon Musk the other day, not my favorite person of the world, but he did tweet something I agreed with, which is that if you're in a political party and you agree with everything that political party is saying without questioning one part of it and running to its defense

any other opportunity you are in a cult. Do you think that type of cultish behavior exists on the left as much as it does on the right as well? It exists everywhere in America, but right now it is by far the most pronounced on the right. And I say that as someone who comes from the right and still is of the right. The right has been beaten down in this country

for so long, Donald Trump was the first national figure who came along and said, I hear you, and I'm going to seek revenge on the left in this country. From that moment on, he became their cult leader, and now they are just tied to him. Let's go back to the panel in the studio. Joe, thanks. Stay with us for the rest of the show. Isabel, I noticed you've been sort of...

Yeah, I did actually find the conversation with Jacob really interesting. Because whilst he's undoubtedly wrong about a great deal. He's also very clever, isn't he? This is a very intelligent guy, and it upends that image of all Trump's diehard supporters

being incredibly stupid, rednecks, no idea about the bigger picture in the world. This is one very articulate guy, and a lot of people go along with those conspiracy, extraordinary claims he had, Paula and I were looking at each other about the caged children, you know, some really outlandish stories.

stuff there. But some of what he was saying is much easier for many ordinary Americans to believe that there is this elite that is somehow controlling things and depriving them of their democratic vote. And in the end, actually, the reason Trump was objecting to the result was because he was standing up as he saw it for true democracy. And that's why this is so divisive. You know, you've got one side saying he's trying to subvert democracy. The other side. other side, Trump and his supporters saying actually quite the reverse, this guy was championing democracy, which is being corrupted by this invisible elite. Look, it's, I think you raised some interesting points there. And as a journalist, it's very difficult to interview somewhere like that.

Exactly as you said, I found him articulate, intelligent. I want to hear what he has to say, but you have to counter what a clearly, in my amount of untruths. But Richard, it strikes at the heart of perception of reality, which is at the core of the indictment we're seeing today. Trump did he believe what he was saying about, for example, the Georgia vote count? I mean, the reality is Trump throughout his whole life has been a salesman and clearly a very good salesman. And we all know that great salesman always overpromise and under deliver in many cases. And he's still, he's still always on the act. He's still sort of, you know, playing to the audience, the crowd.

Everything he does is about that. He knows he's got his believers, as Joe says, his cult followers. And he's playing to that crowd. And he always appears strong. He appears confident. And that's what a lot of people like in a leader. And they don't have to believe everything that person does or says. And I think that's where we're at with Trump now.

But here's the real thing. Whatever Joe says, the fact is that Trump could be indicted. He could be found guilty. He could go to jail. He could still win the presidential election. Ultimately, that means the voters have their say. The voters are sovereign. Democracy still exists and you're right, you know, it's a high popularity contest and he's a strong man leader.

Look, we'll keep our panel with us because there's so much more to discuss. And after the break, we're going to be hearing from a strong Republican voice stateside. Our friend Tommy Lauerin joins the show to talk about all of this, as well as some of the other Republican contenders as well. Stegroar out for that. Welcome back to Uncense. We are still showing these live pictures from outside the courtroom in Washington, D.C., where Donald Trump, a former U.S. president, is shortly expected to arrive for his fingerprinting, for his hearing, for his third indictment, allegations this time that he conspired with co-conspirators to overturn the 2020-U.S.

Election result in which he was defeated by Joe Biden. This has been a long time coming in investigation into the capital riots on the 6th of January, 2020-21. It's a culmination, all that. Potentially his most serious indictment yet. And a reminder, there have been some 78 criminal charges over three criminal trials he is going to be facing, as he makes the second run of the White House. Framing that all up to be joined now by the host of Tommy Laren. The host of Tommy Laren is fearless on Outkick

and still joined in the studio by Talk TV's international editor, Isabel Oakshot, Talk TV contributor, Paul Lorone, Adrian, and talk TV presenter, Richard Tice. Now, Tommy, coming to you. I'm sure you're very busy at the moment, giving you follow all things politics in the US. But just let's get your outlet, basically, on this indictment. You knew it was coming.

I'm sure. What did you think when you read through it? Well, first of all, I thought convenient timing. I mean, imagine that earlier this week we get bombshell testimony from Devin Archer, Hunter, Biden's business associate, basically incriminating Joe Biden for being on speakerphone over 20 times, apparently just talking about the weather, you know, as they say. But convenient timing. Then now we've got another Trump indictment. If you look at the timeline of this, it's always convenient the way this happens. What a coincidence.

But looking through this particular indictment, whatever you think of Donald Trump, I think this indictment in particular looks to be written by a kindergartner because it goes on to acknowledge that Donald Trump has the right to free speech, but then ends with the fact that, no, he really doesn't have the right to free speech. So I think it's a farce, just like the other two indictments and just like the fourth likely will be. This is clearly in a political weaponization attempt to take out the Republican frontrunner. And unfortunately, for the Democrats, just dipping in now to hear from a spokesperson standing outside the courthouse where Donald Trump will shortly be heard. He may not agree with Mike Pence. He may not agree with one of his lawyers, but that doesn't mean that there weren't other people advising him exactly the opposite. And the president has a right, as every one of us do, to listen to several opinions and make their decision. I remember hearing Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams argue their elections were not right. I mean, the weaponization on the DOJ didn't happen then.

No, of course not. But if your last name's Trump, it's very different. So Hillary Clinton could have a problem when she lost the election and we could have a complete liberal meltdown, as we all saw. But when we have dignified disagreements, we take them to court, we say do things patriotically and peacefully. He's to blame for things that he did not himself do. And that's what we're seeing.

Frankly, folks, this is not about that. This is about politics. This is about 2024. Period. The end. Thanks, goodness. Thank you. Continuing to listen there to the spokesperson, just talking there about what you were talking about, Tommy, basically, what they're calling the Trump campaign, the politicisation of the Department of Justice, stateside and the politicisation of this whole trial, a persecution, a politically motivated witch hunt, if I can borrow those words.

Let's just talk then. We cut you off. I know you're used to it because you've been to broadcast yourself for many, many years. But let's just talk about the rest of the Republican contenders and what they do. We've been saying off the back of all this Desantis, but also Pence. We've heard from Tulsi Gabbard as well. Pence has come out swinging against Trump, but Desantis not so much. Yeah, you know, I think that, unfortunately, what's happening to Donald Trump has largely meant that every Republican everywhere has to make a comment about it. And I don't think that's necessarily fair.

Of course, we know that because DeSantis is the frontrunner against Donald Trump, his biggest competitor, a lot has been put on DeSantis's shoulders to have to speak out on behalf of Donald Trump. I don't think that's wholly fair. I mean, he's running his own campaign for the Republican nomination for president in 2024. So he has mentioned the politicization of the DOJ. He's mentioned the two-tiered system of justice, but I don't think it's realistic or reasonable to expect him to go to bat for Donald Trump fully and wholeheartedly, given he is his competition. And I think it's okay to say that as somebody who likes both Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis. I think it's unfair that DeSantis has been put in this position. I agree with you on the point that I think it's not

unexpected to hear him coming out against his nearest rival for the Republican candidacy. In fact, I would suggest that DeSantis hasn't gone far enough. Would you not think he'd be more tempted? I know there are reasons why he might not want to come out and attack Trump publicly. I can understand the criticizing of the criminal justice system, if that's part of his campaign strategy. But he's got to beat Trump if he wants to become president. Yeah, I think DeSantis' biggest argument is not going to be just going after Donald Trump because a lot of Republicans and Trump supporters do believe that this is being weaponized against Donald Trump and he is being witch hunted yet again. I think DeSanta's best strategy here is to say, hey, listen,

what's happening to Donald Trump, my competitor is wrong, and that is exactly why I need to be president so that I can actually get elected. I have a better shot at getting elected, get into the White House, and then fix some of these things, actually drain the swamp. That is going to be the best lane and most effective lane for Ron DeSantis to take, not to attack Donald Trump for what's going on, because a lot of us believe it's wrong, but to say, hey, I'm the guy that can fix it, and not only that, I can win. And it doesn't matter. None of this matters, all of our gripes and complaints. They do not matter unless we win in 2024. So I think that's the best lane for him to take at this point. And just a reminder for our international views, we're talking about Rhonda Santos, who's the

governor of Florida and one of the near contenders to take on Trump for the run for the White House of the Republicans. Let's take a listen to him. A Republican, a D.C. jury would indict a ham sandwich and convict a ham sandwich if it was a Republican ham sandwich. I think Americans need to be able to remove cases out of D.C. I think the juries are stacked. I think that they're going to want to convict people that they disagree with.

Let's cross to our panel in the studio. Paul, a ham sandwich. I was going to say I was intrigued at Tommy's definition of the indictment being looked as if it was written in the kindergarten. But of course, the grand jury didn't agree with her on that point. And a number of grand juries haven't agreed with her. And a number of juries haven't agreed with her in the terms, in the sense of Trump coming before them and decisions being made against him. And, you know, apart from this, we've also got two other civil suits that he's got to deal with.

I mean, it's just an endless pile of legal issues. What about Hunter Biden then? What about what about? What about Hunter Biden? Shall I tell you what about Hunter Biden? Well, let me tell you, because if I remember correctly, the, the way, What about Hunter Biden? The district attorney who came to negotiate the settlement was appointed by Trump?

I think that there are... That's right, though, isn't it? That plays into the narrative, Paul, and that it's politicised on both sides. There are so many allegations against Hunter Biden with the involvement of his father, the president, which are getting nowhere near a proportionate amount of attention by mainstream media on both sides of the Atlantic. You know, I'm guilty of not being fully clued up about all the allegations against them. Guess what? Because they're not actually being covered in much detail here.

And I haven't given enough time to looking at them. And I am very probably representative of many other people. Yeah, it's a really interesting point how Descentus responds to this, because it's so tribal. I think his best approach is to attack the Democrats, attack the whole Biden issue. I think that was great. I think that was quite right. Yeah, I do appreciate that.

And I think that's. right and say actually, you know, I Ron DeSantis, I'm the person who's most likely the best chance of beating the Democrats and then drain this while. But it is a very difficult line that he's got to, he's got a trend there. A rare flash of charisma there from him about the ham sandwich. I mean, great sound like, great. Great sound bite. Look, I want to just finish on that point, it's well you may, because yeah, of course it's relevant still to talk about Biden. I was joshing when I said, you said, what about Hunter Biden? Because we made the point earlier in the show that it is generally used as what aboutism at the moment. Is there.

ever a good time to talk about the Biden allegations, the allegations surrounding that family. Of course, I would say as a journalist all the time, these things must be inquired, interrogated and hopefully tried if they're required to it. I'm honestly actually much more concerned about the physical and mental state of Joe Biden. I mean, why can't we talk about that openly and have a vigorous debate about whether it's... We do. In this country, don't we? We mock him relentlessly and suggest that his medics don't know what they're talking about. It's just that he doesn't know what is talking about.

It's quite clearly the case. We don't. In this country, he would not be allowed to be in the highest office. Let's go back to Tommy. Tommy, where you're listening in on all that, are you somewhat reassured by hearing a load of Brits talking about the fact that we do need to interrogate the allegations against the Bidens?

I am so happy to hear it. And it is unfortunate that the world is not getting the real story in the full picture of exactly what the Biden crime regime has been up to. When you hear it, I mean, just take out the names. Just hear that somebody who is a sitting vice president was on speakerphone while his son was discussing business with foreign entities and business associates and then receiving millions of dollars. And then you've got Devin Archer saying that Joe Biden was the brand. He was the flex. He was what they were selling. Was Joe Biden, the then vice president? This is concerning. Talk about Donald Trump conspiracy to defraud the United

States. If these allegations are true and We're soon going to find out, I hope. Boy, that seems like much more of an issue, much more egregious than anything Donald Trump has been charged with. Well, we'll have to wait and see. But as it stands today, it is Donald Trump that is standing outside a courtroom currently in Washington, D.C., ready to be indicted again. Tommy Laren joining us for that insight. Thank you. Thank you once again to our panel as well.

Welcome to those pictures from outside the courtroom. Welcome back to uncensored. Of course, we are nearing the top of the hour when Trump's a point of justice began. Just around two hours ago in Washington, all the lives of the latest pictures of the supporters, and his and this was him getting off the plane, disembarking, not waiving to him. It's not seen for jubilation, is it, your third indictment?

And this, of course, as he faces a series of charges from the US federal government for a range of allegations. This latest one, alleging a conspiracy with co-conspirators to overturn the results of the 2020 US election in which Joe Biden claimed victory. That was Donald Trump getting into his motorcade, and we've been following as his car has been making its way to the courtroom where he will be fingerprinted

and he will be heard in this indictment. We don't expect him to speak much. We've heard already from members of the campaign. There are supporters outside the courthouse as well, and as expected Justice Special Counsel, Jack Smith has entered the courtroom as the hearing is about to begin. We'll be bringing live pictures as and when.

But I am joined from Washington, D.C. by the former Republican 2020 presidential candidate, Joe Walsh, still with us on the show. It's been great to have your insight so far. And in the studio by the former advisor to Donald Trump, Dr. Jan Halper Hayes, Isabel and Paula also staying with us here in the studio. Let's start with you, Dr. Jan.

Very kind of you to make time this evening. You have had a close professional relationship to Donald Trump. You have been a founding member of Republicans overseas here in the United Kingdom. You're based here in the UK. Watching all this from London, what did you think of this latest indictment? It was expected.

We were waiting, and we thought that they were going to try and do the 14th Amendment and charge him for treason and sedition. Even though he's been charged as a criminal, the fact is that he's allowed due process. And so that means that he can subpoena anyone he wants, and he can present any of the evidence that he wants to present. I know that on one hand, one reads the indictments, but there's nothing really there,

concrete, just like Alvin Braggs. He just cut and pasted 37 times. So the thing is that they have not succeeded in destroying him, and they will keep on trying to destroy him. Let me ask you this, because I thought this stuck out from the indictment, the co-conspirators, allegedly involved, not named, but plenty of gossip over who they might be. Were you surprised at that because it does hint that there might be people in Trumps in a circle

that he can no longer trust? I'm not sure that I would go there because there were even rumors that Mark Meadows had turned against him. I don't take those things seriously until people tell me that there is serious evidence about that. the co-conspirators were also thrown in there because they're trying to scare anyone connected to Trump and bankrupt them because of legal bills. Can I ask where you were on January 6, 2021? Where did you watch that from?

From London. And how did you feel? Well, see, I had information that there were federal agents there. I had a lot of information. I did not. I knew they were going to blow it up as an insurrection. How do you have some people rebelling initially and suddenly five minutes later they declare it's an insurrection?

Why did Nancy Pelosi have her daughter with her film crew there filming Nancy Pelosi through it? You know, I had gotten enough text and enough pictures to know some aspects of it being staged. I think that it's... That's a strong allegation to make, especially given the indictment that we're seeing. And I want to bring in Joe Walsh into this conversation.

He is listening in and ask him to respond for that. The allegations you're making at January 6th was in some way... I hesitate to repeat the word staged, but had some kind of thinking behind it, Joe. Look, what your guest just said, again, makes me profoundly sad. As sad as I was when I sat there on January 6th and watched our Capitol attacked, watched thousands of people storm into the Capitol because they believed a lie. Think about that. Trump's lie was behind all of this, and these poor people went into that Capitol to try to stop our elections process.

But what your guest just said is exactly what the vast majority of Republican voters believe. It's wrong. It's a bunch of bull. It's a lie. But Donald Trump has convinced Republican voters of that, which is why this indictment will help him politically. Look, both of you. Joe, thank you for your inputs on that. Dr. Jan, thank you for joining us here in the studio. Unfortunately, that is all the time we've got this hour. Usually at this point in evening, we actually sign off from uncensored and hand over to the talk. But tonight we're staying on air to cover this huge breaking stories. It happens. After the break, Mike Graham and Nicola Thorpe will be joining me to lend their analysis to Trump in the dock. Welcome back to Uncensored with me, Rosanna Lockwood, where at this very moment Donald Trump is in the courthouse at the foot of Capitol Hill, the site of a years-long government effort to hold accountable those who tried to subvert democracy. We are showing you live pictures here from outside the courthouse. Donald Trump is inside at the defence table.

As expected, Justice Special Counsel, Jack Smith, also there. He was the prosecutor who bought these charges. and revealed them the other day. And we've been hearing from Trump's lawyer in this indictment. Let's hear what he said. If your last name's Trump, it's very different. So Hillary Clinton could have a problem when she lost the election and we could have a complete liberal meltdown, as we all saw. But when we have dignified disagreements, we take them to court,

we say do things patriotically and peacefully. He's to blame for things that he did not himself do. And that's what we're seeing. Frankly, folks, this is not about that. This is about politics. This is about 2024. My apologies there for misgendering Alina Haber, the Trump lawyer. That's my unconscious sexual bias, and they're assuming a lawyer would be a man.

I have been to speak to Alan Dershowitz a lot the last 24 hours or so. Joining me for the second hour of uncensored still with me, the former advisor to Donald Trump, or one of them, Dr. Jan Halper Hayes. And from the talk, I'm pleased to say we're joined the studio by Nicola Thorpe and Mike Graham. So do not despair if you usually tune in at 9 p.m. to watch them. They are both here to give us their views. let's talk then a little bit about this, your kind of view of it, Mike. I mean, you've been watching politics for decades, if I'm allowed to say that,

many decades more than me. I'm afraid so. And you are heralding the return of Trump. Well, I'm not saying I'm heralding the return of him, but he's certainly going to get the nomination for the Republican Party as a result of this. I mean, I've been watching a lot of people talking about this from inside the Republican Party, talking to some of them myself. And they all say, look, if he was only 90% there, he's now 100% there.

because as you've been saying, this is another indictment. It's just as serious, if not more serious than the last one that was really serious. And it's a kind of a show trial, as people have been saying. It's not going to do him any harm. I don't think it's doing him any good, perhaps, in the country for the rest of the Americans who don't vote for him and who won't vote for him. But it's going to lock him in, I think, as a Republican candidate. And I think that's unfortunate.

But if it's Trump against Biden again, I think it's really unfortunate. I think that's just a hopeless choice for Americans. It seems somewhat unfortunate that those are the two, best options put forward, Nicola? I believe the New York Times did a poll over the last 24 hours, and they had them, if the presidential election was to take place yesterday, it would have been 43% Trump, 43% Biden. And actually quite a few of the people polled, requested, was there a third option?

They actually asked for one, even though none was given on the polls. So I think it says a lot about where Americans are at the moment. Let's have that third option. I mean, I can sort of sympathise with that. Sometimes I feel like that in British elections too. So how much legal trouble is the former president actually in? and could he be going to jail? One person has been speaking out about Donald Trump's legacy,

and that's his former attorney, Rudy Giuliani. This one will be your legacy, violating the right of free speech of an American citizen. Never mind whether he was president or not. It could be anybody. It could be a homeless person. You don't get to violate people's First Amendment's right, Smith. No matter who the hell you are,

but no matter how sick you are with Trump derangements, Trump derangement syndrome. And this isn't the first time you've acted like an unethical lawyer. It should be the last. Well, let's use that as our jumping off point, shall we, to go to Massachusetts and speak to Donald Trump's former lawyer and author of the best-selling book, Get Trump, Alan Dershowitz. Alan, thanks for making time of us again this evening.

I really enjoyed our conversation yesterday. I want to remind our viewers of something you said about the First Amendment, where you said people can have the right within the U.S. Constitution to have a false opinion. or, indeed, a false idea. Have you had a development of your thinking over the last 24 hours with regard to reading that indictment since then? Well, I've read it very carefully.

It's not the kind of indictment that should be brought when it's being brought by the man against whom Donald Trump is running for president. The incumbent president's attorney general brought this indictment. And it should be the strongest indictment in history.

before you can go after the man running against you. Otherwise, you're interfering with an election. Look, I want to vote against Donald Trump. I voted against him twice. I have a constitutional right to vote against them for the third time. Yes, I defended him, but I defend a lot of people I disagree with. I disagree with Donald Trump. I disagree with Rudy Giuliani.

But I don't think that this indictment satisfies the First Amendment and the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. First Amendment protects the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. believed he won the election. He was wrong, but he petitioned the government, and he failed. Also, he had lawyers to help him, and they have been named as unindicted co-conspirators. So this indictment dangers the right of defendants to have zealous and creative lawyers and goes after the lawyers, too. Trump's had a hard time getting lawyers to defend them because there's a group of lawyers on the left in the United States that are filing bar charges against anybody who's ever defended him. When I criticize that group, they foul the bar charge against me.

And so what we see is an attempt to intimidate lawyers. I won't be intimidated. I'm too old for that. But I'm going to fight for the right of people who I disagree with and want to vote against. So I'm hoping this indictment will not result in a conviction that would be bad for America and bad for our freedom of speech. I think you've got the rights of the American people and the American voters at the forefront of your mind there. Do you feel like they are being duly protected? not only in the criminal justice system at the moment, the way this process is playing out,

but in the way that politics is happening around them, do you think they're getting a fair whack at life with these types of people getting power? No, I think that both sides are going to lose in the end. The American people are going to lose because today it's going to be the Democrats that go after the Republicans. Tomorrow it'll be the Republicans going after the Democrats.

Already we're seeing Republicans calling for the impeachment of Joe Biden, unconstitutional grounds. I would defend Joe Biden as vigorously as I defended President Trump against an improper impeachment. Both sides are weaponizing the legal system for their own partisan advantage, and the losers are the American people who have their rights suffer in the process, the right of free speech, the right of political association, the right to petition, and the right to have counsel. We are a weaker democracy today than we were before this all happened. I want to bring our other American guests that we currently are standing by in on this then to get their response to the points that you've just made.

Dr. Jan, Helper Hayes and Joe Walsh, still joining us down the line. Dr. Jan, I'll start with you based on what we were just hearing there from Alan. Do you agree that the American public are being sold short here? Absolutely. Why? Why? Well, the fact is that I think we have very immature politicians that really play pay pay. petty games, and they have not served the people for a number of decades. And for this game to

keep on going, just like the Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, et cetera, it really takes, it's a distraction, which they want to do from what the real issues are. Coming to Joe Walsh now to get your views from the U.S., of course, as a former Republican contender for nomination yourself or for presidency, and just as a U.S. citizen, do you agree with what Alan Dershowitz said? Look, I appreciate what Alan Dershowitz said, and I appreciate the fact that we have to always be cognizant and vigilant of our justice system trying to interfere with an election.

But we have to balance that with the fact that no one is above the law in this country, not even a candidate for president. And I need to emphasize this again. Look, you can disagree with what's in this indictment. But don't say that Don't say that Donald's, Donald Trump was indicted because of things he said. He's being indicted for things he did. You have a right to lie about the election.

You don't have a right to purposely lie in court filings about the election. That is what he is alleged. That's just one to have done. That's a crime. That's something Trump did. Alan, last night when we debated this idea, you said the answer to a false idea

is the marketplace of ideas, not criminal prosecution? Do you stand by that with regard to what Joe is just saying? Absolutely. And the government has to prove under his theory that Donald Trump actually believed, actually knew he had lost the election. And I know a lot of people who are close to Donald Trump. I'm not associated with Donald Trump,

but I know a lot of people who are close to them. They all believe that Donald Trump actually talked himself into it. believed that he had actually won the election. Now, is that a defense? You can call it the stupid defense. I'm so stupid that I actually believed I won the election when everybody knows I lost the election. But under the Supreme Court decisions on First Amendment,

New York Times v. Sullivan, et cetera, there's a very, very high burden on the government, even in civil cases, to show not only that he was wrong, but that he was maliciously wrong. And in the criminal case, they may have to show that he subjectively knew he was wrong. And that's going to be a hard mountain for the prosecution to climb. And I think ultimately, they'll fail if that's the test. Because I think Donald Trump, for whatever reason, actually believed that the election was stolen.

He was dead wrong about that. But the issue is not whether he was right or wrong. That's for the marketplace of ideas. The issue in a criminal case is whether he actually engaged in fraud, actually engaged in corruption, And to prove fraud and corruption, you have to prove subjective intent that he actually knew that he was lying when he said that he had won the election. I don't think they're going to be able to prove that. Joe, you're shaking head. Go ahead. No, well, I'm shaking my head because I respect the hell out of Alan Dershowitz, but I don't believe that.

It doesn't matter if Trump believed he won. It's a crime. What Donald Trump is alleged to have done was to pressure state legislators to exceed their constitutional authority. That is a crime whether Trump believed he won the election or not. Again, it's on the actions of Donald Trump. It doesn't matter what he thought. It didn't matter. Well, it does matter.

It does matter what he thought. If he thought he had won the election, then it's not pressuring. Then it's asking people to do the right thing. Just the way I was asked to do the right thing in 2000, when I thought the election was stolen from Al Gore by the butterfly ballot in Florida. And I represented the Democrats of Palm Beach County and the court ruled I was wrong. But nobody suggested that. To ask state legislators to exceed their constitutional authority, that's okay.

To ask them to ask them. The answer to that is let the court say no. They're exceeding their authority. But good lawyers press the envelope very far. And you know, you now think that they were being asked to exceed their authority. He thought that that was within their authority. And there were people who supported that view. Remember, too, that in Hawaii in 1960, a judge ruled that the way to challenge a presidential election is to come up with an alternate slate of electors. So it all comes down to what Donald Trump actually believed. Yes, he did. But if he did things based on his belief, they're not crimes. Just a point on the burden of proof point you brought up. as well. You know, I'm not saying that Mike Pence is going to be testifying in court,

but he's come out swinging very vocally against Donald Trump and saying, you know, when it came to that vocant stuff, there was a comment, I can't remember, but a gaggle of lawyers and, you know, everything else. He's basically come out and debunked Trump's version of events. Do you... No, no, he hasn't. He has the question that he'll be asked by the defense on cross-examination, did Donald Trump ever look you in the eye and admit that he knew he had lost the election? And Pence will have to answer that question. Honestly, no, he always said he won the election. He was wrong. He was dumb. He was perverse. But he always said he won the election. And Pence maybe asked, did you believe that? I don't know if that's admissible or not.

But if he's asked if he believed that, I think Pence will say, yeah, I believe it. That's who Trump is. He actually thought he won the election. He was dead wrong. So I don't think they have a smoking gun here. Let's remind of you, as Mike Pence, of course, was vice president under Trump. Let's take a listen to what he just said. I want the American people to know that I had no rights. to overturn the election. And then on that day, President Trump asked me to put him over the Constitution, but I chose the Constitution, and I always will. I really do believe that anyone who puts themselves over the Constitution should never be President of the United States. There we go. That was Mike Pence speaking there. And according to Alan Dershowitz, of course,

when he does testify in this, if and when we do see that, he will be asked straight in the eye whether or not Trump typically I mean I'm paraphrasing Dershowitz terribly here but you heard it there yourself let's cross to our panel live now Mike Graham Nicola Thorpe and let's discuss what you were thinking there still joined in the studio as well by Dr Jan you're listening to that argument

might play out when it comes to the way this is tried do you have faith with your knowledge of the US I know you go there a lot as well as work there a lot and you cover it as a journalist that we will see trial that plays out fully and or do you think we're going to see some sort of bargain before we get that? Well, I think it will play out, but I think the problem here is it shows a very good illustration of why you can't politicise, you know, the law and you can't use the law to make political points because basically, as Anderswit said there, it's all about what Trump believed. You can't say that he made a false claim and therefore that is in some way against the constitution because it's not, because they've said it isn't.

Now, if Joe's right and he says, well, it's not about what he said, it's about what he did. But again, as Alan says, if he knew that he's, that he's, he's not about what he did. But again, as Alan says, if he knew that he thought that he had won the election, he was not breaking the law by asking people to investigate it. He was asking them to do the right thing because he thought that the election had been stolen. But let's face it, all these people like Joe as well, who's being a bit honier than now about Donald Trump and saying, you know, this man was trying to bust up something that had been freely voted on. You know, the Democrats have been doing that for a long time.

Lots of people have done it in America. Lots of people have done it in this country. Hold on, Joe. Lots of people have done it in this country. You know you're talking absolute rubbish. Absolute cobbler. Joe, go ahead. For the first time in American history,

a sitting American president didn't have the balls to accept as an election loss. He didn't have the balls or the decency. So why does that bother you so much? Except the will of the people. You're telling me I'm holier than thou. You are. This guy tried to end our damn democracy.

Well, he didn't go, did he? Yeah, he didn't do it. Why don't you move on and just get over it, Joe. Get over it. Get over it. The man is going to be the wrong. Republican Party nominee and he has a shot to... And you're helping him.

And he's a traitor to this country. But you're helping him, Joe. You're helping him back to the White House. You're helping him back to the White House with your holier-than-now attitude. It's ridiculous. In American history, who else has done this? Nobody else has done it to anybody else either, because Trump is your... Do you think about Trump when you go to sleep at night?

You have nightmares about him? You know, move on, man. Let's bring him Dr. Jan. answer the question. What other president in American history refused to participate in the peaceful transfer of power? Tell me. Well, you know the answer to that, Joe, don't you? But you're so upset about Donald Trump that you can't believe it be. Of course he's upset about Donald Trump. Of course he is. Of course he is. I'm older than now. You are. Because I'm upset I would not bumped into this country. It's a great show. You do look as if you're not taking this, you know, like somebody who is neutral. You look as if you're obsessed with.

Trump and you want to stop him from ever becoming president ever again. I think that's right, isn't it? Tell us that's not right. I'd like him held accountable for what he did. If that's obsessed, then I'm obsessed. So you want to stop him from getting back into the White House, though, don't you? No. No, if he committed crimes, if he did, Michael, if he did, I want him held accountable for the spot. So you're not sure that he did now? No, no, I believe he did, but Michael, we have a process here. He's going to have his day in court. And if a jury of his peers, believe he committed crimes.

I want him held accountable, don't you? Look, Mike, you've made your point. Joe's allowed himself to defend himself as well. Is he helping Trump get into the White House? I think Joe would probably disagree with that. He's going to stay with us, Joe Walsh, throughout the show, so we can come back to him and get thoughts as well from the rest of our panel.

Uncensored next tonight. We're going to be joined by one of Donald Trump's longest-serving advisors as we continue our live coverage of this extraordinary story. Bring you back to Uncensored. in former President Donald Trump is appearing currently before a judge in Washington, D.C., but is expected to enter a not guilty plea in relation to four charges brought against him earlier in the week. This is the third indictment. I remind you of that well for more on what this means. We're going to continue to bring your live pictures from the quarter house in D.C.

We're joined by political strategist and lobbyist Michael Caputo. Former Republican 2020 presidential candidate Joe Walsh still joins us. Kind of you to stay with us from the previous conversation. and joined in the studio still by the former advisor to Donald Trump, Dr. Jan Halper Hayes and Talk TV presenter, Nicola Thorpe and Mike Graham. They're both still with me. So we've got plenty of voices. Let's start though with Michael Caputo, a voice we haven't heard from yet.

And I mean, what I find most interesting about your insights into this is that you were heavily involved in the Russiagate investigations that happened prior. And you have made some points to us about the way that that affected you, in terms of legal fees. And I'm interested to know from you how you think that changes things or the way it shapes the way we look at how Trump is fighting

these current indictment charges. Well, I think in America, we call this whole strategy lawfare. I think you might call it the same over there. And our society is becoming quite dead into the pain of lawfare. Really, it's about punishing your opponent with as much legal fees

and accusations and charges and terrible media cycles as humanly possible. Our family was crushed by our legal fees, hundreds of thousands of dollars, and I was just a witness. There are some like Roger Stone or into the millions of dollars. And in reality, these are all a lot,

you know, the charges against Trump now remind me of all the allegations against us. It's really political speech, and they just, you know, this is a weaponization of the federal government. government to fight and try to defeat Donald Trump before he defeats Joe Biden. Look, with the word weaponization has been used so much within the last week or the last few days since this indictment, latest one dropped.

Anyway, I've heard, you know, likened to the McCarthy era in terms of exploiting paranoia and fear with regards to interrogating and investigating people. We're talking Russiagate now as well. But in terms of the funding, you were in a very different situation. You say you're a witness to that, but it crippled your family with regards to defending yourself as a witness in Russiagate. Donald Trump is in a very different position. He is a was anyway, you could argue still is successful businessman. He was former president of United States. His affairs, his tax affairs have been revealed. It's all very complicated. He is raising funds,

of course, for his campaign. Explain to an international audience how he's probably going to fund this type of defense. Well, you know, this is really part of the issue. The Department of Justice is pursuing the very likely candidate. after the Republican primary who will run against Joe Biden or any other candidate they may have. And they're trying to cripple him before he gets there. Part of that is to drain the funds and distract the candidate. And we know that there's been millions of dollars in legal fees in the past. I mean, these indictments are getting to be like that movie Groundhog Day.

But it's not Bill Murray. It's Donald Trump. And it isn't funny. It's not a comedy. In fact, this is very dangerous stuff. You know, this first charge that Jack Smith came up with, the conspiracy against rights charge, includes a penalty of up to 10 years in federal prison. But if a death results from the conspiracy against rights, they can also seek the death penalty. The conspiracy against rights charges from the January 6th riot, and Ashley Babbitt was killed by the Capitol Police.

In fact, if these charges, and especially the conspiracy against rights charge, Six, they're seeking the death penalty. Look, this trial, this indictment rather, that we're hearing about now, it does cap off this year's long investigation into the events of January 6. We're going to have to wait and see from the indictment, from the trial that pursues. We've obviously got the 45 pages to read the details they've bought up. But you're right, Sir Michael, in saying that it's not a comedy. It is very real.

I just want to bring the audience the latest breaking news from inside the courtroom, rather. The magistrate has now arrived. The hearing started. the rest of the courtroom rose. The court clerk called the case the United States of America versus Donald J. Trump. The judge asked the former president to give his name. He stood up even though he didn't need to. He said Donald J. Trump and he has now been sworn. And we'll bring you the latest details from the courtroom as when they get to us. But I want to come back to the studio to Dr. Jan Harper Hayes, who stayed with us through some of the debates we've been having and

talk to you a little bit about the argument in fact that Mike Gray is. who's to your right here in the studio is having with Joe Walsh and will bring him back in shortly with regard to whether this is all helping Trump back into the White House. Oh, absolutely. But see, what people aren't also reporting on is that on September 12th, 2018,

Donald Trump filed Executive Order 138488. Within that, it had to do with foreign and domestic election interference. In that, he predicted what what would happen with 2020. I'm not willing to conclude that he's not guilty or he is guilty, but when I have these different facts, I want to figure out what is the real message,

because when things are reported, often it's to distract us from the truth. This has helped Trump endlessly. And the other thing is that he's going to be able to present his evidence if he truly believes that 20,000 people, that 2020 was rigged. Coming to you now with some more breaking news, Donald Trump has just pled not guilty for all counts.

Those are the four counts that are contained within this latest indictment. That was very much expected. And certainly it was never get to a stage of sort of bargaining on a point of admitting that. I mean, Nicola, coming to you in the studio, no surprises there. No, no surprises there. And I just wanted to ask, Jan,

if you're saying that this helps, this indictment helps Donald Trump drastically, why are you saying it's so politically motivated? I'm not sure I understand your question. Why would it be so politically motivated by the other side? If you believe actually in the long run, this is going to help Donald Trump, wouldn't they therefore not have brought about this indictment, knowing that it would have been so helpful to him?

You know what? They're trying to destroy him. Right. And if you think about that action, and if you think about what Einstein said, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and not succeeding, that's what's happened to them. They are obsessed, just like Joe Walsh is. I will tell you why they're obsessed.

And you know, I've watched obviously that debate between Mike and Joe, and I agree with Joe on this one. I'll tell you why people are so emotionally invested in this is because of the way that Donald Trump acted as a president. He mocked disabled reporters. He bragged about grabbing women between the crotch. Please stop. That feels very, I won't stop.

This feels extremely personal for every single woman who watched a man brag about speaking about women and touching women in that way, a man who's found legally liable for sexual assault recently. It is very personal for every single American to see somebody like that have the potential to regain the most powerful position in the world again. Let's cross back live to Joe Walsh,

who's been listening into this conversation, Joe. What do you make of it? Well, and I agree with what Jan said. Look, this indictment is going to help Trump politically. I believe that. I don't even believe it will just help him secure the nomination. I believe it will help him get reelected. I could be wrong, but that's what I believe.

Because what Jan believes is what most Republican voters, what Michael Caputo said, that there's this deep state out to destroy him. That's a powerful narrative. I think it's wrong, but most Republican voters believe it. Look, Trump has been accused of committing crimes to overturn an election. Do we just ignore that?

because he's a candidate? Do we just ignore that? Mike. Well, I don't think you ignore it, but I think you have to ask why it's taken one, two and a half years. If it was such a serious allegation

that was made at the time, you know, there's always an excuse. The Democrats are now hiding behind the idea that, oh, well, we didn't want to bring any charges at the time because it was too aggressive a situation. We didn't want to make it any worse. We didn't want to throw any more fuel on the fire.

So we waited two and a half years until he declared that he was running again, and then we decided that was a good time to do it. Well, there is no good time to do it. if you're worried about the reaction. You know as well as I do, Joe, that half of the country, as you quite rightly say, believe that Trump is the victim of a witch hunt,

half of the country believe him to be a criminal. You know, unfortunately, America's found itself in this place. I don't know how it got there, and I don't know how you get out of it, but I think by continuing to try and make out that Trump, one after another, after another, after another case against him is going to somehow ruin him.

It's never going to work. He's going to get stronger and stronger and stronger. But, Michael, I think you would agree with me that it doesn't matter what the American people think on either side, it really should be about the facts and the law, correct? Yeah, it should be about the facts and the law, but the law is being politicized, unfortunately, and you can't find two people who will agree

on opposite sides of the Trump argument what the law actually is, right? You keep saying it's about what he did, but what he tried to do was what he did. He didn't actually do anything, because he wasn't victorious, he wasn't successful, and so therefore it would be better for the country, I think. And I have people, I have family living in that country, right? It would be better for the country to heal themselves and to move on and to stop trying to victimize the guy.

True, but if you try to rob a bank and you're unsuccessful, you've still committed a crime, my friend. Yeah, but you don't wait two and a half years before you arrest somebody for doing something. I wish they had come out a long time ago. I wish they hadn't gone through this process. I agree with you on that. Thank goodness. Mike, do you really think, though, that somebody alleged a criminal? criminal behaviour, you know, we should just move on.

Well, yeah, because it's not criminal behaviour. You don't know that it's criminal behaviour. Until you try it in a court. Well, no, and the Constitution is very clear. As Joe has said, the Constitution protects the free speech of Donald Trump. I mean, I'm very uncomfortable with this idea of the wrong opinion or a false opinion. You know, an opinion is an opinion. But in the First Amendment of the Constitution, you were allowed it.

But the reason they're in court is because people don't agree about the law, and you have to try the case. So it's wrong to say that he broke the law, because we don't know that he broke the law until it's been proven. in a court of law, that he broke it. But you're saying, if the perception of the laws differ, then how are we ever going to try anything in a court of law? If people can't agree what constitutes the law. You have to also get the idea that in a court of law in America, you're talking about a very different situation.

And a grand jury in Washington, D.C., as Trump says, is an anti-Trump grand jury. The lawyer who's going to represent the country is going to be anti-Trump. The judge in the case is anti-Trump, pointed by Barack Obama, has already sentenced some of the criminals from the night of the riot. It's a longer terms of the government asked for. You know, it's a rigged situation.

Let's bring in Michael Caputo. He's been patiently listening along to that. Michael, is this a damning indictment of the US justice system? Well, I think this indicates to all of us who support Donald Trump or even, you know, real justice, that this indicates, really, we need true reform at the Department of Justice. We need true reform at the FBI. The whole system is totally screwed up.

There are people that are deeply politicized who are burrowed, deeply into all of our federal agencies, but certainly all the national security agencies, and we know they're in the FBI. I think it inspires people around Trump. It inspires me, for example, to think about ways that we can reform the Department of Justice, to stop the abuse of the FISA courts, the way they core up Carter Page for no reason, you know, all the different tricks of the trade that they've used and abused to create these hoaxes. These things need to be reformed.

But beyond that, these are serious charges. There's no question that they're trying to politicize, they're trying to criminalize political speech. And they're trying to criminalize discussions between lawyers and their client. But we have real problems in America where a lot of people in my family, the families around me, don't know what's next after this. You know, they've tried everything against Donald Trump. I thought the only thing they haven't done is, you know, arresting. Well, then they've done that more than once. You know, the last time I saw him, it was moments after he was arraigned in Miami at a prayer meeting.

You know, for some reason or another, he's a bullion after these things. He gathers strength from challenges, and he knows a lot of people are praying for him. He knows a lot of people are behind it. We all know, we've talked about it. It's 50-50 in America. And I think that in the end, that we're going to a place with nobody's backing down. Nobody's trying to pull up. Donald Trump's never going to quit.

I've known him for 30 years. He's not quitting. So where are we headed? And America is really worried about this. We'll be exploring that question further on in the show. Michael Caputo, it's been great. Having your insights, thanks for making time. Joe Walsh, staying with us.

He's been a trusty reaction to all of the debate. And our panel, staying with us in the studio as well unscensored next tonight as former President Donald Trump. Sorry, I'm going to be serious. This is very serious. Please not guilty in relation to four charges to January 6, 2021. Rising Cat in the capital, we're joined by Louise Mench, who's made time for us as well. We'll be hearing from her next. Welcome back to Uncensored to our special show we've got for you,

coming the latest Trump indictment that's happening currently in Washington, D.C. If you're just tuning in, let's remind you what's happening. Donald Trump's appeared before a judge in that courtroom in D.C. Where he has entered a not guilty plea in relation to four charges that were brought against him over the 2020 presidential election. Now, we're showing you pictures from live outside court. There are supporters, there are detractors. There are some arguing that by this point, third indictment in, we're not quite getting the same level of reaction.

But as you can see there, it's a pretty orderly crowd. Nothing untoward has happened yet. From inside the courtroom, the judge was actually 15 minutes, 19 minutes rather late into court before the court was in session. The gavel was banged. Trump stood up with his lawyers and everyone else at the all-rise order. He has pled guilty to all four charges that have bought before him in this current indictment.

And we did actually hear from his lawyer outside the court. courtroom. Your last name's Trump, it's very different. So Hillary Clinton could have a problem when she lost the election and we could have a complete liberal meltdown, as we all saw. But when we have dignified disagreements, we take them to court, we say do things patriotically and peacefully. He's to blame for things that he did not himself do. And that's what we're seeing. Frankly, folks, this is not about that. This is about politics. This is about 2024. Well, for more conversation, joined now by former British Conservative MP, Louise Ment, who's based Stateside and still with me here in the studio talk TV presenters Nicola Thorpe and Mike

Graham have been bringing us a lot of lively discussion and chat throughout the last hour of course they're normally on the talk at this time it's very very kind of them to share the studio this evening but obviously Donald Trump does demand this kind of attention from all these great guests we've had so far let's get over to Louise now and get your reaction to what we've been seeing so far do you think it's fair to say the reaction has been somewhat more muted to this indictment despite the fact that charges are more serious I don't think that's actually true if you look at the media coverage over here. Everybody over here on the American TV channels on the American newspapers

is talking about this as the most serious of the probably four indictments that he's going to face with one to come in Georgia. So although you're seeing perhaps the crowd is a bit more muted, because now it's another day, it's another Donald Trump indictment, that's not the case when it comes to the media coverage of the event. Look, one of the big debates we've been having, the last two nights when we've been talking about this, is this First Amendment right to free speech

to have what's called a false opinion or a false idea. This, of course, is at the heart of whether Trump really believed what he was saying when he demanded recounsel, said that votes weren't as they were. And it's whether he believed it and then delivered that truth to his followers and supporters or whether he didn't believe it, but still spouted it anyway. And it's going to be a very, very hard thing to testing court

is what we've been hearing. Talk to us about how you think this will be approached and where you think it's going to be won or lost? Well, sometimes I think some of the commentators and guests on your show haven't actually read the indictment because Jack Smith, the special counsel, makes it completely clear that he believes he is accusing Donald Trump of knowingly lying about the election,

which, by the way, he says he's allowed to do under the First Amendment, but then converting that into a conspiracy by using those lies to pressure state lawmakers to go against the Constitution, for example, to tell the governor of Georgia that he just needed to find exactly the right amount of votes to get him over the top, by trying to interfere in the counting of votes, by trying to pressure Mike Pence into changing the results of the election. That's what's not legal in America. And I think it was Mike who said that it is absolutely not legal in America. That's a crime. It's a conspiracy against rights.

And when you do that, when you try to overturn a legitimate election, you're actually taking, away the votes of everybody who vote for the other guy and who actually beat you. And that's what Jack Smith says he's going to approve in court. So we can say, well, did he believe it or didn't he believe it? The indictment's really clear. In the first two sentences, it says that Donald Trump was knowingly lying when he pushed this line and that he was doing it to try to overturn an American election. That's why this is so serious. Just getting some live updates from within the courtroom that the hearing has now finished. Trump will next be in court on August 28th, and he's been ordered not to speak with witnesses in the case, Louise. I think that's going to be very difficult.

If there's one thing you all know about Donald Trump is that he does love to speak, doesn't he? He does love to, if not tweet, send out his messages on truth social. And as with Michael Cohen in the past, he's been accused of contacting witnesses. This judge is fair. She was a former public defender, but she's not going to have any nonsense from Donald Trump or any other defendant in her courtroom. So that's the condition that I think he'll find difficult to obey, but he probably will do as best to obey it, given the legal danger that he's in.

Let's cross live back to Joe Walsh as well. Trustee Joe Walsh is still there in Washington, D.C., for us to talk about that. And whether or not we do think Trump is going to be able to comply with those conditions, of course, not to speak with witnesses, as Louise said, might be tricky given he loves his tweets or his truth socials, rather. I think generally he will. I think the next 15 months are going to be all about Donald Trump. I think any and all of his Republican candidates are toast.

I think it's over. And again, as an opponent of Donald Trump, I'm not convinced that these, Luis is right, it will be four indictments against him. I'm not convinced that these will hurt him in a 50-50s. country. He could get reelected. People need to understand that. Louise, is he, are the other contenders toast, DeSantis? That's it. Boom. Go on. No, I think you have to, I don't agree with Joe that he's got a decent chance of getting elected. He's got a very good chance of winning the primary. I think he's absolutely toast

in the general election. Independence didn't want him in 2020. How much less likely are those independent voters, those swing marginal voters that make the difference? How much less likely are they to go for him when he's under every indictment known to mankind. And as it was mentioned earlier, has lost a civil case where he was accused of sexual assault. Women are a very important voting bloc. I don't think personally he's got a chance in the general election. And that's why I think that just maybe down the line, Republican voters, they might come to their senses and say, look, we really hate Joe Biden. We love Donald Trump, but we hate Joe Biden more. And maybe they will start looking at an alternative candidate that can actually win the election.

because one thing I do know, if Donald Trump is the nominee, Joe Biden is going to win 2024 in a landslide. And how badly do the GOP primary voters really want that when it comes down to it? When we're closer to the election than we are now. Yeah, that is the other argument. Let's bring your mic in the studio because we've heard, you know, accusing Joe of kind of helping Trump back to the White House. But the other argument here is that all of this and is happening

is actually helping Biden secure the nomination or the presidency. The trouble with all of that, though, is that, yeah, if it's Trump against Biden, it's a two-horse race, and any political analysts will tell you, worth his weight or her weight in gold, is that if a two-horse race, anybody can win it. You know, something could happen to Joe Biden. You know, he's not exactly in the full fullness of health at the moment.

If he's expected to go for another four years, he expects to go through another campaign, don't forget the last campaign was held during COVID. He didn't go anywhere. Didn't even go out on the stump. Nobody saw him. He was hiding in a basement most of the time. So in the end, you know, if you've got the Democrats,

the best thing that they can provide is Joe Biden, I think people will be horrified by the general spectacle of all of it and they'll just go, we don't really want to vote for anybody. Maybe it'll be a low turnout and Trump could maybe win that way. So I don't think you could be sure about writing anybody off. I think, but I do agree with Joe that I think there's no doubt that Trump is now the nominee for the Republican Party. It can't be anything else.

Well, Nicola, you were talking earlier on about the third option wish that some American voters could have. But if they were presented with Trump or Biden, I mean, Biden, is it really that terrible? I don't know. I mean, look, he won four years ago, three years ago. And I don't know if he was that much healthier back then. I think it was always a little bit. But at the end of the day, I think that Trump is still so much more the worst option in the majority of American people's eyes. In the sensible people's eyes. I mean, over here in this country, it's mad to me. The way we see it, and yes, we are onlookers, we're not living in that country. But the way we see it, we go, America must be mad to even consider getting Donald Trump back. But again, again, we see it. Again, we look at Joe Biden and say, that would be really difficult if that was our prime minister. Also, remember back to 2016 when Trump won, you know, nobody thought he would. I mean, there was absolutely no chance of him winning that election. He was written off right up until practically the end, right?

So I think those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. We don't have a brilliant one in the UK. It's, I mean, fascinating and fantastic candidates, I would argue, in the last few years or so. Anyway, on censored next tonight. We'll have the latest from Washington, D.C., as former President Donald Trump appears before the Elijah Barrett-Prettyman Federal Kelt House to answer those four felony charges to which he has pled not guilty. Welcome back to Unsensored. We are following the Motorcade. This is Donald Trump's Motocade. The former US President's making his way through a tunnel back to an airfield in Washington, D.C.,

where he's going to hot foot it back onto his Trump plane, back up to Bedfordston, New Jersey, the safety of home. Well, could we expect a speech from him when he gets home? We've seen it happen before when he's back on the golf course, some comments from him because we haven't heard from him outside. Washington D.C. courthouse where he had his hearing for his third indictment today, pled not guilty to those four charges contained within. Just to remind you of how that all went down. He made his way promptly into the courthouse with his team. We heard from his lawyer beforehand. Then arrived there. The judge was 19 minutes late, slammed the gavled down, asked them to rise. They all rose in the courtroom. Can't bring your pictures because they were no cameras. Donald Trump rose said his name, pled not guilty, has been told to not communicate with witnesses

and to return to court on August 28th. We'll, of course, bring you any more details as and when we get them. No fireworks, but plenty of supporters and detractors outside the courtroom today. Thank you so much for joining us for the last two hours or so. We have had some really fascinating debates.

Back with me is the former Republican 2020 presidential candidate Joe Walsh. And still with me here in the studio, Talk TV presenters, Nicola Thorpe and Mike Graham and Louise Munch, still joining us stateside as well for this final wrap-up discussion. And what we want to ask you just to kick things off as we think about how this is all heading

is whether or not you think we are going to see a conviction of Trump. In any of the criminal trials or the civil trials coming, there are numerous counts loaded up against him here and whether or not you will see him elected and a reminder here that those two things are not separate. He can still run for the White House even if he is convicted,

apparently can still be president from jail. Nicola, what do you think we're going to see? Oh, I mean, I certainly hope that we will not be seeing that, but it would not surprise me. Like, as Mike said, just before we hit the break, nobody thought that Trump was going to become president in 2016. It took a loss of us by surprise. It would not surprise me if this happened again.

What I think is such a shame is that this has become a First Amendment free speech issue when it was made so clearly, as Louise just said earlier on, in Jack Smith's indictment, that it was not about his free speech. It was not about his opinions. It was the actions that he took. And actually, Jack Smith's indictment was so restrained. There were two other charges that he could have put on there.

He could have put on seditious conspiracy and rebellion and insurrection. They were absent from that charge sheet, and yet this is going to be free speech. Is he going to be in the White House? No. Mike? She doesn't want him to be in the White House. It's not the same thing. I think the problem with the indictment is that there's a reason why he didn't make those two charges

because he didn't think that he could make them stick. And as Alan Dershowitz said, whose word I would take on the law, before anybody else is on this show tonight, is that you know, you can't prove what somebody was thinking. You can't prove that they deliberately did something because that's an incredibly difficult thing legally to get across the line. Look, we are running desperately short of time here. We do need to hear these polling, our informal talk TV,

uncensored poll this evening. Louise Mange, do you think we're going to see conviction? Do you think we're going to see election? Yeah, let me just spread it to say. Donald Trump is not going back to the White House. Donald Trump is going to federal prison. And in my opinion, he will be convicted on three of the four charges. He might get out of the Nothing Burger from Alvin Bragg in New York,

all of the others he's going to be convicted on, especially this one. And this is his journey to prison, not back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Okay, Joe, you've been a legend for sticking with us for two hours this evening, up against lots of Trump supporters. Yes or no, convicted, elected. I don't think we'll see any verdicts before the 24 election.

I think there's a decent chance Trump will be reelected. There's evidence he committed crimes to overturn the 2020 election. For people saying we should just move on, then they're saying that Donald Trump is above the law. Nobody in America should be above the law. And that strikes right back to what we were talking about at the start of the show, the minds of the American people, the voters, the people that matter here, hopefully not being lost in all of this. you all so much for giving us your view there. The poll coming up at the top of the hour is first edition, as ever, with Phil Gail. Phil, high drama out of the US. What are you got coming up tonight? Yes, well, of course, we'll continue with following the Trump circus as he is arraigned in Washington.

We'll speak to a Trump loyalist who claims this is a witch hunt and we'll also hear from a moderate Republican. And of course, we'll look at today's a Bank of England interest rate increase. what can the government, what should the government do to help people with mortgages and we'll have a look at tomorrow's papers today with our first edition panel. All that at the top of the hour. Thank you so much, Phil. Do stay tuned to us here on Talk TV for that. I want to thank all of the amazing guests that we've had throughout the last two hours,

giving us their view from the States and also here in the UK. We've had our panelist Richard Paul, Isabelle, in the studio, Mike and Nicolet in the last hour as well. So you haven't even missed out on the talk either. And we do have the motorcade still heading back to that airfield in Washington, Ducey, Donald Trump making his way to the safety of his Trump plane. And back to the safety of Bedminster, New Jersey, a classically long motorcade there for the man that is never knowingly understated.

That is it from me. Whatever you're up to, make sure it's uncensored. Good night.