Pod Save America - The People vs Donald Trump

Episode Date: April 16, 2024

Donald Trump makes history as the first US President to face a criminal trial and reportedly falls asleep at the defense table during jury selection. President Biden urges restraint from Bibi Netanyahu after Iran launches retaliatory drone and missile strikes against Israel. Meanwhile, Speaker Mike Johnson finds himself in a political pickle trying to pass aid for Israel and Ukraine. Then, Tommy and Strict Scrutiny's Melissa Murray discuss Trump's first day in court, the process of jury selection, and how the New York case compares to Trump's other indictments. For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast. 

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Tommy Vitor. On today's show, Iran's retaliatory strike on Israel scrambles U.S. politics, and the New York Times has the latest poll to show some good news for Joe Biden. But first... It's an assault on America, and that's why I'm very proud to be here. This is an assault on our country.

Jury selection in the people of the state of New york versus donald j trump has officially begun though after one day not a single juror has been picked none of them made it past the first day uh the republican nominee is the first former president to stand trial for criminal charges he is pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal violations of state and federal election laws. In this case, the alleged violation involves a hush money payment that Trump made in the weeks before the 2016 election to keep voters from finding out about his affair with porn star Stormy Daniels. Since we have no law degrees and one decent LSAT score between the three of us,

strict scrutiny's Melissa Murray is going to talk to Tommy a bit later about the strength of District Attorney Alvin Bragg's case. but since trump will be the first presidential nominee to spend the first two months of the general election in a courtroom nearly a quarter of the entire race two months between now and november he could end up spending it just just on this trial so yeah we're gonna dig into the politics. Let's start big picture. Most people aren't familiar with the details of this case, let alone that it's happening, beyond something about Trump paying hush money to a porn star.

If an undecided voter asked you guys why this should matter in the context of this election, what would you say? Lovett, you want to go first? I was thinking about that question. And first of all, I do think sometimes you don't need to say more than, he paid hush money to a porn star to hide it from voters. You would hope.

But I do think if you did feel the need to add on to that, you can say that, you know, he had his goons cook the books and commit fraud to hide the payments. His own lawyer went to federal prison for helping to commit the fraud. I think that, like, most people view it as unethical and illegal, but you can also say he did it for the same reasons. He cut his own taxes when he was president. He, why he spends all day reading about himself on the internet, why he tried to overturn the election in 2024. He is only thinking about himself. And that is even worse now with all these criminal cases. He's thinking about himself day in and day out.

He is doing what is good for him. He is not doing what is good for the country. He is always looking for an angle. And he believes that there should be one set of rules for him and his rich friends and one set of rules for everybody else. Tom, you got anything to add? No, I think it's good. I mean, I think I would just say, like, you guys, you undecided voter, you deserve to

know all the relevant facts about a candidate before you vote. And in this case, Donald Trump denied you that knowledge by illegally coordinating with a news organization to keep news out of the press. And he thought that information was important. We know that because he paid 130 grand to suppress it. And we know because he is constantly bitching about social media sites, suppressing information about Hunter Biden, who last time I checked never ran for president in the 2020 race. So Trump broke campaign finance laws to deny you access to information you deserved. And we can't let candidates do that

because our political system is already a mess and money is a wash through it and distorting it in bad ways. And now it'll become even more broken. Yeah, he's a liar and a cheater. Cheated in 2016, cheated in 2020, trying to Cheated in 2016. Cheated in 2020. Trying to cheat again in 2024. Cheated on Elanian. Hey, voter. If you had an affair with a porn star and you were running for office, would you be able to cover it up? Would you be able to pay a bunch of people to bury stories, including a major media outlet like the National Enquirer?

The whole scheme. He's got the National Enquirer helping him out. He's paying things thing he's gotten shell companies it's like it is though it's it's one set of rules for him one set of rules for everything everyone else and all he cares about is himself yeah we look we all have we all have somebody in our life they're always surrounded by chaos they're always dealing with their own bullshit they're always blaming everyone else from but themselves they're always saying like i could just if I could just once, once I solve this, oh,

then everything's going to be smooth sailing for me. You got somebody in your life like that. And they're entertaining. Sometimes they're at the table and you realize you are that person, but, but you don't try, but you don't, I mean,

that person who's like, their life's always a mess and they always blame everybody else. They may be fun for a while, but you don't ask them to walk your dog. You don't ask them to water the plants. You leave them alone. Don't give them the nuclear coats. You don't give them the nuclear coats.

I got that right. That was my next thing. Nuclear weapons. You don't give it to them. And also, this fits within Trump's larger gestalt here, which is, could he have silenced her without breaking the law? Yeah, probably. There's nothing inherently illegal about a hush money payment, but because he's an idiot and a criminal. Well, I have to say, I know, I know.

But I remember John Edwards went through this problem, which is that if you pay them through the campaign, it's an illegal use of campaign funds. If you don't pay them through the campaign, it's an in-kind contribution. You can really get fucked by the fact that sometimes it's kind of the legality of paying off somebody you've slept with to keep it from the voters it's a challenge it's a challenge and we've always said that well and part of what saved john edwards was that like he nothing well but his argument well he didn't get convicted but his argument was i was trying to conceal it from my wife not necessarily not the voters my wife who's dying of cancer at the time donald trump uh i think that alvin bragg's gonna have plenty of evidence that donald trump was not doing this to conceal it from melania and baron yeah no but he was doing it to conceal it from the voters which is why you have karen mcdougall

the playboy model who he also buried another uh story about an affair with with the national inquirer and he had a whole he had a whole operation. A system. Known as catch and kill. It was known as catch and kill and honestly, I put a gag order on me because I thought about this a lot in my past. And these issues, all for the best.

What else you got, John? Anyway, let's talk about how Trump is handling this trial. So far, it seems like he could have used a few more Diet Cokes before Monday's hearing

based on reporting from Maggie Haberman. Let's listen. Forty minutes ago, you wrote an observation that I was very surprised. Trump appears to be sleeping, his head keeps dropping down, and his mouth goes slack. Tell us about that. Well, Jake, he appeared to be asleep. And, you know, repeatedly his head would fall down. There have been other moments in other trials, like the Agent Carroll trial,

which was around the corner in January, where he appeared very still and seemed as if he might be sleeping, but then he would move. This time, he didn't pay attention to a note that his lawyer, Todd Blanche, passed him. His jaw kept falling on his chest, and his mouth kept going slack. Now, you know, sometimes people do fall asleep during court proceedings, but it's notable given the intensity of this morning and a lot of what was being argued. Yeah, that's rather surprising.

I almost wanted to cut this clip right after Jake goes on this long. He's like, Maggie, you just reported that he looked like he was falling asleep. Well, yes, Jake, he was falling asleep. I know. Maggie's so funny in matter of fact on TV. I know Maggie's so funny in matter of fact. I know. I know. Apparently, apparently this got back to Trump. Yes. During the trial, because then as he was walking out, the reporter, another reporter said he was glaring at Maggie as he walked out. is that a Trump aide named Natalie Harp is in the courtroom. And she's apparently one of Trump's favorites because she has a wireless printer that she uses to print out good news to show him. Oh, she's the one who follows him on a golf cart

and does it sometimes? How do I hire one of those people? What? We got you covered. I don't have to read Twitter anymore. Someone just gives me good tweets. I think it'd be good for you. Maybe it stops using,

if you don't have to use your phone at the urine. There's somebody waiting outside the bathroom. It's not going to get crazy. I want you guys to know that I asked Melissa Murray, at what point in the duration of a nap does it go from misdemeanor to felony? So stay tuned for that. Cover up insomnia.

It's a good update. All right, so he was a little sleepy during the trial, but before the trial, for weeks before the trial, we've heard him, we heard him talking about how this is an assault on America in that clip at the top. He's been ranting and raving on his fake Twitter.

He's saying, quote, I want my voice back. Once again, just being silenced everywhere. Never hear from him. That's the Little Mermaid. Yeah, that's the Little Mermaid. He's just like Ariel. He's calling this the Biden Manhattan witch hunt case, which is a little wordy. That doesn't sing.

But I'm sure they're all calling it like the Biden case, the Biden trials. This is what the Trump campaign wants to do now because everything is, you know. The campaign's raising money off the trial, getting surrogates to talk about it. And they told Playbook that, quote, being stuck in Manhattan four days a week will not affect Trump's ability to communicate. No shit. So fair enough. But I guess the question is what he communicates. Playbook went on to write, quote, he can just as easily ignore the hush money case and stick

to campaign messaging during his arrival and departures and lunch break, which is I laughed at. But then I was like, yeah, for for any normal campaign, that might be what they held the candidate to and what the candidate wants to do. Like you're dealing with this legal stuff. Let's have you kind of program with something else what do you guys think about him talking and posting non-stop about this trial for the next six to eight weeks of the general do you think his campaign's okay with that or they just resigned to that because it's trump would he even be able to break through with other messages yeah i'm sort of trying to imagine first

of all of course they're resigned to it what else are they going to fucking do he's in there he was read his read literal rights he has to stay there in a son of a fucking paddy wagon i have to go find him but but uh the judge said to him but uh you know what is the version of this that's like i don't know the best they can hope for from donald trump is him angrily storming out of the courtroom being like biden's throat trying to throw me in jail meanwhile the border, then two minutes on the border, right? That's what they're going to hope they can get out of this. Yeah, that's exactly. I mean, yeah, you're in Manhattan, not rural Kansas. You lose like the local touch from events,

you lose the local news coverage. But yeah, I mean, I think if his staff could decide what he was going to talk about every single day and get him to stick to it, they would focus on immigration and the border and they would demagogue crime and chaos. But Trump is a narcissist no matter what, like even if he wasn't in the courtroom, he was going to be whining about himself and bitching and moaning about the deep state. And that's obviously broken through and resonated. But like you were saying earlier, it's most effective level when he makes it about, I'm the one taking shots on your behalf from the deep state, from the liberals to, because next they're coming after you if he makes it like a bigger message. And I don't know,

we'll see if he can do that here. Yeah. And the only times he's done that is either like when he's at a rally and he's got a prompter and they've written that line in, you know, because they're trying to work with what they got,

the campaign, the Trump campaign, right? And so they're, okay, he's going to make this trial all about himself, all these charges about himself, but at least we can pivot to being like, oh, I'm doing it on behalf of you, all that kind of shit.

And there is polling that shows that people believe these charges are politically motivated. Even the same polls that say that they're serious charges and that Trump is probably guilty of a crime, but also that they're politically motivated. Yeah, sign me up.

I'm one of those people. Fuck yeah. I don't think that's the case in any of the other trials. But like the more he talks about himself and how he's a victim and a martyr and like, you know, America's Nelson Mandela. Like I do think he the more he risks losing people who aren't Trump fanatics. Like I just don't think you can spend six to eight weeks talking about yourself and what a victim you are. eight weeks talking about yourself and what a victim you are. The flip side of that, the reason there is real political risk here is Trump does best when he is able to dominate the news coverage

all day, every day, and just make himself the center of gravity the way he did in 2016, the way he's struggled to do that more recently. So I think to the extent there's a political risk to Joe Biden or anyone else is that like Donald Trump once again blots out the sun and he bets on this being a low turnout election for just the most intense partisans on both sides. And he thinks, well, me being the victim fighting for you as the victim is what motivates my folks. Yeah, I think they're in a little bit of still in the primary mode, though, Republican primary with this message. Right. Where it's like they think that everyone loves him. He thinks everyone loves him. He's unbeatable in the primary and in grievance works with republican primary voters i just i there is a there is a version where he

and the campaign are disciplined enough to constantly make this about these people are after me but i'm in it for you i do not think he's disciplined enough to do that and i do think that the wine you know he whined he was whining today after the trial about how he's not going to be able to go to Barron's graduation, which the judge has not ruled on yet. The judge said, I can't rule on that yet because it's not till May 17th. Whining that he can't go to the Supreme Court for oral arguments over his contention that being president lets you do any of the crimes you want. So, like, I don't know that that's like if people, to the extent that people tune in, to the extent that people catch us, I don't know if that's going to really land with people. Yeah. I mean, I do think Trump plotting out the sun certainly helped him become the nominee. I don't think it helped him become president as much. And if you

look at like, kind of blur your eyes, we're going to talk about the Siena poll, the time Siena poll, but like, there's a kind, there's a way in which people vaguely remember Trump as a divisive figure, but they're losing touch with just how negative and awful he was. And only with rose colored glasses, remembering the economy before the pandemic. One of the numbers is like 70 percent in the Times Bowl said that he'd said something was offensive, but they were in the distant past. And I do think Trump out there every day just sort of just riffing is going to put the Trump they hate back in their minds because people view Biden as a less divisive figure and a figure more capable of uniting the country. That's a good point for Joe Biden to have day in, day out. On day one of the trial, the DA asked the judge to hold Trump in contempt

for violating his gag order in at least three posts where he attacked witnesses like Michael Cohen. The DA wants a fine of only $1,000 per post. Poof, $1,000 per post. In other words, a $1,000 post fee. But he also did ask the judge to jail Trump if he does it again. The judge hasn't ruled on that yet. There's going to be a separate hearing on that, I believe, on April 24th. But Judge Mershon already threatened Trump with jail time

if he disrupts the trial or if he doesn't show up. Do you guys think Trump has the discipline to shut the fuck up and follow the gag order? Or do you think he actually wants to be thrown in jail, as some people have suggested? I don't believe that for a fucking second. I'm with you. Look, if you go back, I remember. I think he wants people to think he's not afraid of being thrown in jail. He definitely wants that. If you go back, I remember during, I guess it was during the 2016 campaign when Trump was being deposed, I believe because of the lawsuit around Jose Andres pulling the restaurant. Oh yeah, that's right. And from the hotel in DC. Man, we are stuck in 2016 forever. Yeah, listen, we did something wrong in our

previous playthrough and now we're learning our lesson. But if you watch those depositions, there is a control Trump has when he really needs to have it that we forget that Trump does. I think that one of his great tricks is convincing people he doesn't respond to incentives. He does. I think what he is counting on is that he gets a certain number of very clear warnings before the last warning, before he gets thrown in jail. And I think that is when he will suddenly discover he knows how to shut the fuck up. That would be my, if I was going to predict, that would be my prediction. Yeah, historically speaking,

he has been disciplined during depositions. He can pull it together when he has to. I also think there's a lot of reporting, Maggie Hepburn's reported on this, that he's really scared of jail and he really doesn't want to go to jail. Understandably, either way. I think he'd do well.

But look, I'll argue the other side of it, because why not? I mean, you could imagine the scenario where the ultimate example of the system being rigged and unfair is Donald Trump getting thrown into jail for speech made in the context of a presidential campaign. And that's a very high stakes gamble. The outcome would really suck for him. you know you could you could it's you could see someone arguing for it well and that goes to sort of love its point i think where it is it's a it's the raptor testing the fences kind of thing right where he's going right up to him because if he does end up getting thrown in jail for one that's not as clear-cut

threat to the to the life of a witness or something like that you're sort of like should he have been thrown in jail then then the debate becomes that specific tweet was that should that have landed him in jail is that fair and that becomes a imagine being the consultant pitching this idea in the room all right all right no bad ideas in a brainstorm what if you went to jail i i do i also can i put on my tinfoil hat for a second please i do I do think, so a Trump, over the weekend, there was sort of a Trump statement about their kind of goals and expectations for this trial. And it was that they don't think that they can hope for- Goal.

Not guilty. Winning. Well, no, they said actually- Hung jury, hung jury. They actually said they don't believe they can get to acquittal, but they think they can get to a hung jury. So hung jury means that there's going to be some, they are, in terms of their jury pool, pretty well fucked. This is Manhattan, not even New York City.

They don't even get the the the the the Trump people from Staten Island. They just have Manhattan. Manhattan is a borough of one point six million people. Only eighty five thousand people voted for Trump. So I feel like a little bit about what Trump has been doing is putting out an APB to every one of his fucking freaks, which is to show up if he can get one. His whole the future of this country may hang on whether or not one Trump freak can hide his freak freak self long enough to get on that jury and then just cross their arms where you say absolutely not not guilty. I will never change my mind. Fuck you, Libs. And they show up wearing their totally impartial juror t-shirt from Crooked that you can get at Crooked.com.

Yeah. See, how about that contextual mention, Jordan? Jordan, who does a lovely job trying to market our fucking business. Great job here. That's what I'm saying. Gave him a shout out. Yeah. I mean, Melissa and I talk about this more, about the jury selection process, the questionnaire that you're allowed to give these jurors.

But there's also all these jury consultants that are out there scouring the Internet to see where you've donated, where you've registered, what you said on social media. So, you know, odds are we'll be able to identify this kind of, you know, weaponized juror. Yeah. My feeling is you figure, yeah, there's a lot of people that don't vote in Manhattan, but if you care enough to try to fuck up the justice system on behalf of Trump,

you probably voted in 2020. So you're talking about 85,000. How many of those are true, true, true diehards? You say about a third, right? That's 28,000 people out of roughly 1.4 million adults in Manhattan. That's about 2% of the population. 2% of the population.

Can they get a jury that's 98 out of 100, 10, 12 times? That's about two thirds. That's about two thirds, 75%. Yeah. I just also think there's a large, large pool of people in Manhattan who didn't vote either for Trump or against Trump. And they could be radicalized by the propaganda right on site. That's true. That's also true. Because it did happen to a lot of their fellow countrymen and women. Yeah. It took a little time. be radicalized by the propaganda right on site that's true that's also true because that happened because it did happen uh to a lot of their fellow countrymen and women yeah it took a little time it did take a little time although you don't really get the personal exposure you know you

really get you're gonna say with the leader you get the full you get to be there right there there is he's not enough he's glaring at maggie you got the whole the whole show to be i mean the reporting about what the jurors have been experiencing just coming in and being like holy shit it's donald trump can you imagine this that's so funny you show up for jury duty you think you're gonna get some fucking hit and run no you're you're on the brag trump case that rules if you have a lot of free time i would say anything to get on that trial knock on wood just kidding i tell the truth. I wouldn't talk about my liberal podcast. I would tell the truth.

Good thing you're a resident of L.A. All right, let's talk about the broader political implications of the trial. There's a general consensus that this isn't the most politically damaging of the four criminal cases against Trump. But that doesn't mean it won't have an effect on the race. Clearly, most Republican primary voters didn't have a problem supporting a candidate facing 88 felony counts. We were also reminded over the weekend that even Republican politicians who didn't support Trump in the primary are still willing to support a convicted felon in the general. Here's New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu talking to George Stephanopoulos over the weekend. So just to sum up, you would support him for president even if he's convicted in classified documents.

You support him for president even though you believe he contributed to an insurrection you support him for president even though you believe he's lying about the last election you'd support him for president even if he's convicted in the manhattan case i just want to say the answer to that is yes correct yeah me and 51 of america and if 51 of america jumped off the brooklyn bridge before a fucking barge hit it would you do that yeah if he? If it means that he could still have a future in Republican politics, even if he's dead. Good for Stephanopoulos for the way he pressed him on that. Sununu looked completely humiliated and angry in that moment

and just morally bankrupt. This is a guy who a couple weeks ago was endorsing Nikki Haley and attacking Trump left and right. Now he's just bending the knee. Honestly, sometimes I think I have more respect for like the diehard Trumpers than people like Kristen. Oh, absolutely. I won't go on a long rant because I'm sure our friends at the Bulwark will do. My first thought when I saw the Chris. Let's stay in our lane. We're here to help Jay Vail. I'm going to be very upset about this. We're here to carry Biden's water. Just pathetic.

Just absolutely pathetic. So, of course, 51 percent of American voters haven't indicated they're OK with a convicted felon as president. But what do you guys make of the polling on this whole situation so far? I mean, I think we know that if people are informed about the charges, they think they're either very or somewhat serious. There was a poll where only 24 percent of respondents said they would vote for Trump if he's been convicted of a felony by a jury. So that would be a very bad outcome for him. But we also know is that a lot of voters don't really know what happened, or at least don't have good information about what happened. Marquette Law School did a poll last year where they found that half of Republicans surveyed didn't believe that

Trump took classified information from the White House to his home at Mar-a-Lago, which he just, he did. It's a fact, just objectively drew mountains of evidence not debatable there's photos there's pictures so uh and then 18 of republicans uh told the economist in a you gov poll that they had heard a lot about the hush money case 39 said they'd heard nothing at all about it so again there's just like a huge information deficit yeah and the reuters poll that you cited originally which i think it was like 23 said said that they wouldn't vote for him if he's convicted. Among those in that poll who said they would vote for Trump if the election was held today. So these are Trump voters in that poll. 13% said they would not vote for him if he was convicted of a felony by a jury before the

election. So those voters would actually, they're saying, traditionally in polls, people are not great about predicting their own future behavior, but 13% switching would be a big deal. Yeah. I also, I also just think having weeks and weeks of coverage of this case is just a way of also talking about all the cases. And one number that jumped out at me from the Reuters poll is that roughly 36% of Republicans say that it is risky for Trump to become president or receive classified briefings because he has the $500 million legal judgment against him. I thought it was like a big and surprising number. And like, I feel like more and more like, wait a second, hold on. He's got, he owes people money all over town. He's on trial. He's been convicted. Like, I do not trust that

those numbers will carry that all these Republicans will abandon Trump. But I do think it tells people that like for all the talk that like Steve Bannon's out there being like, this is why Trump is going to win. Being on trial is good for him. People do not like this. They don't like it. They don't like seeing their president on trial. They don't think it's a good thing. They don't they don't buy any of that logic. Yeah.

And then the question is, like, does it break through? You go to poll today. Fifty four percent of Americans say they'll follow the case somewhat or very closely. Forty percent not very or not at all closely. Interestingly, only 38 percent said that they think he'll be found guilty. And that number is only 33 percent of independents. And so like 60 something percent of Democrats think he's going to be found guilty and like very, very low among Republicans. So it would be a surprise. I do think like everything else in this election, it's all on the margins.

Right. Like I think if he is found guilty, we should expect probably fewer votes to switch than we think. And if he is if there's a hung jury and he's off and some people, oh, now he's going to win. I still think it'll be totally. I think it's going to be minimal in each strike. Can I also make a can I make a hopeful pitch? Sure. That goes even further than that. It has been consistent in the polling that voters want the trial about his election interference to take place before the election. They want an answer. And I do think a little bit about this, including people expecting him to be found not guilty, is a little bit of like we've been there's been so much years so many years of noise

about how terrible trump is the crimes the chaos the noise the the offensiveness all of it and i do think there's a little bit of people just want an answer like he was convicted we're done yeah and like i do think that that's the kind of thing that could be powerful i don't know but that's just my that's just a little candle i light i think the biggest takeaway for people listening to this show is just a reminder that we are the outliers. The people who obsessively follow the news and are up on this stuff all day, every day, we are the outliers in this country. And a lot of people just have no idea what happened. And maybe they'll figure it out before the election. Maybe they won't. Right. It's just a swirl, a swirl of noise that will get louder over the next several months,

but it's still a lot of people are tuned out and more people are tuned out, I think, than they were in 2020 and 2016. No doubt. Not just because we keep rerunning the same race, but because just the people are consuming less news. They're consuming it

from different sources. We're allowed to leave the house. We're allowed to leave the house. That helps. Yeah. And if you're hearing this in a jury room, just be fucking cool.

Don't lie. Be ethical. Turn it down. Turn it down. Just be fucking cool. Download Ben Shapiro. fucking cool. Don't lie. Be ethical. Turn it down. Turn it down. Just be fucking cool. Download Ben Shapiro. Be cool. Chill out.

You've got this. You listen to nothing. You like to hear from all sides. You like to hear a lot of different kinds of opinions. You've never heard of Substack. You're open. Never heard of Slow Boring. You don't know who Norm Eisen is.

Yeah, you've never heard of Andrew Weissman. Wouldn't know him if you saw him. Rachel who? Madow? Never. Not familiar with the name. The New York Times reports that President Biden and his campaign have taken a quote virtual vow of silence about the trial but that his advisors say quote they hope the trial will amplify their

argument that the former president is running chiefly to help himself including to stay out of prison so do you think that message will reach people based on the coverage of this trial or do you think that democrats if not biden himself will need to be out there talking about this trial? And I'm just talking about Democrats like us. We're just we're just lowly podcasters talking about your Biden surrogates that are on TV. I think anyone named Biden or who gets a paycheck from someone named Biden cannot talk about this case. It's just the upside is not worth it. The downside is is huge.

But I do think like Democrats writ large, senators, members of Congress, we need to be talking about this. There's the big picture substance. I don't think it's like the lurid kind of sexual details. I don't think people care about that. I think it's what you were saying earlier, like the fact that this guy who cares only about himself, he'll do and say anything to get elected. He'll break the law. He'll rip off donors. He'll stage a coup. There has to be a countervailing message to the Trump. This is a Biden, you know, set up that's rigged against me kind of message or else I do think that will break trial and that's what voters will consume because they're also going to consume the Trump and the Trump world spin on the trial and you have to push back against that. And most days of the trial itself will be boring, mundane, procedural stuff

happening. That will be the straight news copy. I agree a bit like that Biden obviously can't go out there and be like, here's what happened in court today. And neither should the campaign. I do think they've got to find a way to indirectly or obliquely mirror the message they want to come out of that trial. So Biden talking about like Donald Trump only cares about himself. He always thinks he's the victim. He thinks the rule shouldn't apply to him. He thinks he's above like I would start weaving that in because I think it's going to be very difficult to get coverage for like your random policy announcement while the trial is going on. Unless you sort of indirectly. I think you can do that. I think you can also do it with like jokes.

Like, I'm not paying attention to all that. Because Joe Biden going up and saying. I hear Sleepy Don. I'm not paying attention to that trial, but it's a it's a mess there. Huh? What's going on? it's a snooze just ask Donald Trump that's good

what if hey that's good get that to them what if in the debate Biden walked over to his podium and put 20 bucks on and was like

that's to hush hey that's pretty good I was thinking what about a what about a a rule yeah that was interesting

what I said hush I don't maybe because like hush puppy it's getting more thicker southern accent Tommymmy's doing wow dear i don't know what's going on in my head jesus oh god now you're lindsey graham or john edwards who was that it did have a it did have a gay look to it too the people in the south there's some straight people you keep talking

about gag orders and hung juries what is happening no gag no gag no gag on tommy tommy just said no one's going to be interested in the sexual details yeah sure yeah not this country i'm talking about of the justice system i think actually i think the americans are deeply interested in the prurient details of this and that's what we should be focusing on were you going to say something about it i can't remember what the question was i derailed it what are we talking about oh what what biden out there talking about this or democrats i think i think it's about i think other democrats should we talking about? Oh, what Biden out there talking about. Yeah, I agree with you.

I think it's about, I think other Democrats should be talking about the rule of law. The other thing too is like, you know, the victory of the Time-Siena poll showing that Biden has, you know, ticked up almost to being caught up to Donald Trump. It is such a sad statement of like, you know, our society. But regardless, it's like, what's going on? And like, there is this way Biden is paying, you know, the polling shows that like, basically, people view the pandemic is like force majeure. They don't hold Trump accountable, or they have gauzy, like a rosy memory of the economy. They don't remember how terrible Trump really was. They hold Biden accountable for a lot of it. But ironically, I do think one of the things

Joe Biden is being held accountable for is the fact that he promised to bring the country together. And even though people in that poll consistently say that they prefer Biden over Trump in terms of unity and bringing the country together, I do think Biden oddly pays a price for the fact that he only fucking slowed Trump down. He laid him down for a bit, but our politics are still consumed by him. And there is a way in which right now I would like to see people talking about the fact that the only way we can move on past this divisive and terrible era is by finally defeating Trump again and being done with him forever one last time. Like this is the chance to have the country finally move on from the chaos and noise of the Trump era. It's like one last chance to do that. Until, you know, Biden wins

and then Trump runs again. i can't so i guess i also say like i don't know if this was intentional uh i hope it was intentional but i don't know if it was i do like that biden is specifically focusing on a tax message this week and that he's going to scranton and he's going to do the scranton joe versus park ave trump you know and biden's in scranton fighting for you and trump's in Scranton fighting for you and Trump's in Manhattan fighting for himself. And it's a perfect place to talk about how Donald Trump doesn't think the rules apply to him and he wants to just help out his rich friends.

It's of a piece of what's happening in Manhattan right now. And so I do like that that's going to be Biden's message for the week. He's going to be talking about the economy and specifically taxes in Scranton and elsewhere in Pennsylvania. But as you mentioned, Lovett, in the new polling with The Times, like we see the challenge that Biden faces is made clear. The good news from that poll is that he's cut Trump's lead from 48 to 43 in the last poll to 47, 46 in this one. That is mostly driven by Biden, at least in this poll, winning back support from black and Latino voters, probably older black and Latino voters.

But when The Times asked people how they remember Trump's presidency, nearly half said he left the country better off. That is nine points better than how voters felt about Trump right before the 2020 election. A plurality, 42 percent, also remember the years that Trump was president as good years for America versus 33 percent who remember those years as bad for America. Only 25 percent said they remember the last four years under Biden as good for America. So one of the oldest cliches in politics is that elections are about the future. But how much do you think that the Biden campaign needs to do some work reminding voters about the past? Tommy, I think that a lot of work.

I mean, look, every president is viewed more favorably over time for some reason. I mean, even like George W. Bush, he went out with what, like an 11 percent approval rating after the Katrina and the surge. I mean, he was in the dregs. I was trying to find the numbers right now. But Bush is now viewed more fondly than he was at the time. So this is in some ways normal. But I do think there's going to be a ton of work required to remind people of all the things that you hated about the Trump era.

It is very weird that Trump keeps tweeting things like, are you better off than you were today four years ago? And that day was like the worst day of the pandemic in record, you know? So I think Trump's making it a little easier and making him easier on Biden to make the case. But, you know, it's frustrating. It does seem like the election is going to turn on whether voters remember who was president in 2020. Which seems to be a problem. That one year, just Trump was president from 2016 to 2019. And then Biden took over during that pandemic and told us all to inject bleach.

And, uh, and then the inflation happened and a million Americans died. That was it. And Biden takes so much grief for the handling of the pandemic and, and, you know, sort of by the anti-vaccine people, when Trump employed Fauci and Trump was responsible for operation warp speed. I mean, it's incredibly frustrating the way people's memories are just broken on this topic. Yeah, I really am amenable to the theory that like this is a country that was traumatized and never dealt with the trauma of the pandemic. I just really do believe that.

Joe Biden said Joe Biden was the adult. You know, this was a country we were in the pandemic. We dealt with four years of Trump's bullshit. It was terrible. And he said, I will get us out of this. And he did. And yet there's all this sort of hangover from it, including the fact that like prices,

yes, the inflation is not as high, but prices went up and stayed up. And that is like a big thing he pays for. Like, how do you go back in time and get people to remember the past more accurately? I think that's harder than reminding people of what Trump did and what it means about what he would do.

I think that's how you go from the past to the future. He put the judgments in place that overturned Roe. He will continue to come after abortion rights. He cut taxes for the rich. That is his biggest accomplishment as president was cutting taxes for the rich. He has already promised to do that again. That is the kind of presidency he will have. And like, I think that's the way I think you can start telling a story about his term in a way that does kind of let you pitch forward towards the future. I found the numbers in 2018. There was a poll where 61% of voters had a favorable view of George Bush, which was double the 33% that he ended with. Yeah. So there's a recency bias, right? That's just in not just in politics and all things,

right? And in politics, also incumbents for the last couple of decades have just taken a lot of shit. Right. You're the incumbent. You're held responsible for everything. So you take a lot of shit. I do think it is it is tough to spend a lot of the campaign relitigating the past. I think that is not what voters love. But clearly Biden has this challenge. I think you use Trump's current behavior to remind people of the past since the good news is that guy doesn't change no so like everything he did in the past that people were annoyed about you have to talk about it again i do think you want to move away from the trump said something offensive isn't it awful kind of attack to uh trump is going to do this and we know he's going to do this because remember he did it when he was president or wanted to do this. And we know he's going to do this because remember, he did it when he was

president or wanted to do when he was president. So you got to get away from sort of the, oh, no, let's flip out. He said something offensive line of attack to the here's what he's going to do. All right. President Biden is also dealing with an expanding conflict in the Middle East. Over the weekend, Iran launched a drone and missile attack against Israel in retaliation for a strike on the Iranian embassy in Syria that killed several top Iranian generals. It was the first time Iran directly attacked Israel, though the U.S. helped Israel shoot down nearly all the drones and missiles. One young girl was seriously wounded and an air base sustained minor damage. Iran said that's the end of the attack. And Biden reportedly told

Netanyahu to, quote, take the win and said the U.S. won't support additional attacks on Iran. But the Israelis are still saying they'll respond. Republicans in Congress are pushing Biden to respond as well, or at least support Israel in its response. And all of this looks like it's going to come to a head this week as Mike Johnson figures out what to do about funding for Israel and Ukraine. Tommy, Iran was widely expected to respond in some way, but what did you make of how they did it? Yeah. So as you noted, I mean, this was Iran's response to Israel killing a bunch of top Iranian generals. Imagine sort of the equivalent of if another country took out the chairman of the joint chiefs or the CIA director, and they did it in

one of our diplomatic facilities, which are considered foreign soil. So it took Iran about two weeks to respond. They telegraphed what they were doing, but I was blown away with how extensive the response was. So it was a hundred ballistic missiles, 30 cruise missiles, and 150 drones. So that's like a pretty serious arsenal going at your country. Now, as you noted, 99% of them were shot down in various ways a lot of those interdictions were made by israeli missile defense systems like the iron dome david sling the arrow 3 system all of which were funded by barack obama by the way for all the people who say he was like a david sling not a person david sling is a missile defense i read that i was like

who's david sling i think it's a biblical allusion. I think it's King David. It's my friend, Dave. But again, you hear all these right-wingers say Obama sold out Israel. In fact, he funded missile defense systems that literally saved lives. And then you had U.S. fighter squadrons that shot down about 70 drones. There were U.S. destroyers in missile defense systems in Iraq shooting down these ballistic missiles. British fighters helped too. Remarkably, the Jordanians and the Saudis contributed to this coalition of taking out

these Iranian missiles. So it was a hell of a display of military might and technology and coordination. The one thing, though, that before people get too triumphant is the Iranians telegraphed what they were doing. They literally briefed the wall street journal reported that iran briefed a bunch of countries in the gulf about their attack plan days in advance those countries obviously told us so everyone is ready for this one the next one will be different so it doesn't seem like it's in anyone's interest uh particularly

israel's to respond with another attack that would escalate this war. Why do you think they seem to be going ahead with it anyway? Or do you think they're going to do something like Iran did, which is to save face, they have to do something or to send a signal or what? Well, so back in 2020, the US, Trump ordered the assassination of the head of the IRGC at the time, a guy named Qasem Soleimani. The Iranians responded. They shot about a dozen ballistic missiles at U.S. bases in the region. By sheer luck, no U.S. service members died, but 100 of them had traumatic brain injuries and were severely wounded. When that happened- Which Trump said, no big deal, it's just some headaches. Some headaches, yeah. So at that moment, the Iranians sent a message to the U.S. saying,

all right, we're done. And to his credit, actually, Trump decided not to further escalate. A very similar thing is happening here. The Iranians did this response over the weekend, and then they said like, okay, we consider the matter done. So Israel could pocket this or move on, or they could decide that Iran firing missiles at their sovereign territory is intolerable and they have to do something to retaliate to show that there's a cost. The military term you hear all the time is deterrence. We need to restore deterrence. There's also politics. Netanyahu is trying to hold together a super right-wing coalition where you have a bunch of crazy people, frankly, who are demanding a hawkish response. There was a report that a bunch of senior Israeli leaders in the war cabinet

wanted to respond to the Iranians while the missiles were still in the air before they landed or hit anything. So time will tell. I mean, you know, these guys, the Iran and Israel have been involved in like a low grade proxy war for many, many years. This is just the most open it's been. So we'll see. I don't know. It's Israel killed a bunch of their generals. That was the tit. I believe this is the tat. Yeah. Seems like you've done, they've done the tit for tat.

It seems like, and listen, I'm no foreign policy expert, but that does seem like, it seems like they think they, I think they've completed a tit for tat. And it seems like everybody should chill the fuck out because of the completed tit for tat. My fear is that BB Netanyahu has wanted the U S to fight a war on his

behalf against Iran for a very long time. We heard about has wanted the U.S. to fight a war on his behalf against Iran for a very long time. We heard about this all the time in 2009. And so you can imagine a scenario where he does something to escalate things and then we get drawn in to make it worse. I mean, Ronan Bergman is an incredibly well-sourced Israeli journalist. He talked to someone in the Israeli war cabinet meetings last weekend who said, quote, if the internal discussions among authorities are broadcast on the media, 4 million people would rush to Ben Gurion airport to leave Israel. So basically it was so hawkish that it would scare people out of the country, but hopefully like cooler heads will prevail. Do you think that's why Biden and the Biden

administration was so public about saying like, we will not him telling Netanyahu, we're not going to support you if you, uh, escalate further just because like he. Just because he knew that Netanyahu might want to draw us into a war against them? Yeah. I mean, there were reports that the Israelis were about to respond, but Netanyahu was like, let me talk to Biden first. And Biden's like, no, take the win. Stop. And that stopped things. So Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, apparently, will either hold a vote on the senate bill uh that combines aid with israel and ukraine and if he does that it could trigger a motion to uh vacate from uh large march or he could uh hold a vote on an israel only aid package the white house has already said that they

do not support that there seems to be a lot more pressure, especially from Republicans, to support Israel in whatever it decides to do. But this is also happening just as more Democrats have come out in favor of conditioning aid to Israel over Gaza. And it seems like even the Biden administration has softened their position on that. So what do you think happens now? And like, does how does biden handle it how should biden handle it uh look i i don't mike johnson has been sending so many conflicting signals over the last like even couple of days because he has been reassuring people like behind the scenes that he is going to do a ukraine bill yeah he's telling donors he will um but he's been dragging his feet now for weeks uh if even, you know, originally the idea is that you put them together so they both go. Separating them seems to at this point, please, no one and doesn't do anything to save his job. So I don't totally understand. I don't even understand what he's hoping to figure out because it just seems like if he does, if he means what

he says, which he has been persuaded that we have to do Ukraine, and it does seem like that, remember that meeting where basically Biden put it hard on him, how important it was to do this. It seems like that there has been a legitimate, like he legitimately understands the importance of actually doing this because he thinks the country should support Ukraine. I don't know how he gets out of this without ending up with some kind of a motion to vacate. And if that is where he's ultimately going to end up, it seems like he would end up putting the combined bill together. The interesting thing here, though, is you notice, I think, Speaker Johnson did his little pilgrimage down to Mar-a-Lago last week, and they did a press event after he and Trump.

And Trump really seemed to knock down any suggestion that there should be a motion to vacate or effort to oust him. So that there should be a motion to vacate or, you know, effort to oust him. So that did seem like a pretty public rebuke to MTG. I mean, I think broadly, though, like I think what this horrible incident over the weekend shows is that the war in Gaza is growing and metastasizing and continues to be destabilizing six months into it. Remember, like the Iranians, their proxy groups killed two US service members in Jordan. The Houthi rebels are firing missiles into ships in the Red Sea like every day, basically. Hezbollah has tens of thousands of missiles aimed at Israel, and they have not

gotten fully engaged in this war, and they could at any time, and that would be devastating. So what this tells me is we are working with an Israeli government that is not making smart strategic choices. They're making a lot of political choices. And I think the priority from the Biden White House needs to be getting a permanent ceasefire, securing the release of hostages. In the interim, could you imagine a scenario where you make sure the Israelis are fully stocked up on missile defense interceptors and defensive weapons? Absolutely. stocked up on missile defense interceptors and defensive weapons? Absolutely. But are we really going to write a big blank check for a bunch of 2000 pound bombs that are getting dropped on, you know, civilians in Gaza? I don't think that's a good idea. I think we need to deescalate.

No one wins a full scale war between Iran and Israel. No one. If Israel aid passes Congress, can the Biden administration still like condition that aid, like based on what Israel does? Like if Congress obviously appropriates the money, but then can the Biden administration still say like, well, we have decided that this can go and this this this military can go in this camp. I think they have an enormous amount of flexibility in terms of how they slow things down. Got it. As we were talking, our friends at Punchbowl and other Hill reporters are reporting out of the GOP conference meeting. This is Mike Johnson's meeting with his caucus. Apparently, first of all, MTG said that Trump standing by Johnson doesn't change her plan to oust him if he screws her. Weird that logic didn't work with her.

Yeah, but they apparently, Jake Sherman says House Republicans plan to try to pass four bills this week to send aid to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, according to four sources familiar with the plan. The fourth bill will include a ban on TikTok, a bill to sell seized Russian assets, a lend-lease act for military aid, convertible loans for humanitarian relief and other provisions. And the GOP leadership will try to move this plan under one rule. Okay. That doesn't sound simpler. It does not sound simpler and uh and then uh hakeem jeffries said we're not going to come to any conclusion on process until we understand the substance which seems like we're recording this monday afternoon so you know it

seems like that should always be the case yeah one would hope right uh so yeah i mean it does seem like the senate bill is the easiest path here but there it seems seems like he's got he doesn't know what he's doing. It's like Mike Johnson doesn't know how he gets out of this. Like what you're saying? He doesn't know how to get out of it. And he's looking for some new there's always been like this search for some way to like cut the Gordian knot. And it's just like it isn't there. You just have to untie it and lose your job.

You have one vote, pal. Apparently, he also said in the meeting, Johnson said Ukraine needs to stand on its own. So, OK, what does that mean? They were invaded. People are getting killed. he also said in the meeting johnson said uh ukraine needs to stand on its own so oh okay what does that mean though they were invaded people are getting killed it's like it's like oh if we keep if we keep giving ukraine aid it'll never learn the self-sufficiency and go out there and get a job right it's time for ukraine to fly out of the nest ridiculous unbelievable all right before we go to break a few quick housekeeping notes. Buy our book, Democracy or Else. If that sounds threatening, good.

It was supposed to. We only have a few months left to try and stop the country from getting Donald Trump as president again. So we're done with subtlety. When were we not done with subtlety? We're not in the nuance business, are we? No, I didn't think so. Anyway, pick up brand new Democracy or Else merch inspired by our book that you haven't even seen yet. But the merch is inspired by it.

At the Crooked store, wear it to remind you and everyone around you that this really is a make or break election. We were just kidding the other times. There is a range of teas, mugs, stickers, and totes. And as always, a portion of proceeds from every order will support Vote Save America, its partners, and other organizations. Shop the whole collection at crooked.com. Also, it's 2024, and as we said, we're facing another election with unprecedented stakes. If you're not sure how to make an impact, Vote Save America's Anxiety Relief Program will route your recurring donations directly to grassroots orgs and down-ballot candidates who need it most. We're not going to waste your money.

candidates who need it most. We're not going to waste your money. With your help, they've already raised over $200,000 in recurring donations from more than 4,700 donors in March alone. Good job, VSA. Your donations have helped to support the work of the Black Mail Initiative, Freedom Block Ohio, and Detroit Action, who are working to increase voter turnout and political power in black communities, plus other organizations mobilizing for voter registration this year. Let's keep the momentum going. Head to votesaveamerica.com to set up a recurring donation today. Paid for by Votesave America, votesaveamerica.com, not authorized by any candidate or candidates committee.

When we come back, Tommy talks to Strict Scrutiny's Melissa Murray. Joining me now is the co-host of the best legal podcast in the world, some might say the universe, Strict Scrutiny, and the co-author of the book, The Trump Indictments, The Historic Charging Documents with Commentary. Melissa Murray, great to see you. Thanks for having me. It's great to be here. It's always very fun to talk with you. So wild day today, big legal news. We're talking on Monday. Donald Trump just spent the day in a courtroom in New York. Can you just remind us of the basics here? What's he on trial for doing? And what are the legal risks associated with Donnie sitting in a courtroom all day? risks associated with Donnie sitting in the courtroom all day. So again, where to start, Tommy? The reason why I actually have to give you this information is because there are actually four different indictments against Donald Trump. So it could

get confusing. This one is a state level indictment brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. And the theory of the case is that Donald Trump, before he became president, orchestrated what is essentially a conspiracy to falsify business records so that those business records could be used to hide hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels in order to prevent the public from learning about Donald Trump's alleged affair with Stormy Daniels on the eve of the 2016 election. So there are, I think, 34 different charges of falsifying business records, which ordinarily in New York State is a misdemeanor offense. But when it is done in furtherance of some other crime,

here the idea is that it is in furtherance of state and federal and maybe state-level tax violations. All of that leads to a felony charge. So this is being charged as a set of 34 different felonies, all related to the falsification of business records. Oof, a lot of felonies. So the conventional wisdom you often hear about this case is that it's the weakest of the four cases that you just mentioned, though that doesn't mean it is a weak case on its own. I've heard you and your co-host push back hard on that notion. What do you think is the more accurate way to think about this specific case? So I don't think it's fair to call this a weak case. I think that maybe to think about it in terms of the consequentialness of the other cases,

yes, this may be less consequential in that it does not involve an effort to overthrow the results of a validly conducted election, nor does it involve an effort to allegedly sequester scads of classified intelligence documents in your own personal beach house on the Florida coast. So yes, it's really a question of degree. Like when compared to those things, the, you know, impeding the peaceful transition of power, attempting to create a coup, attempting to keep these documents for yourself because they're your personal property. Yeah, this sounds like small potatoes. But I think if we were to think about this on its own, it actually does feel quite weighty.

And if we think about it in tandem with those other three indictments, I think what it leads to is the sense that there's kind of a pattern, a practice of engaging in subterfuge, engaging, if these allegations are proven beyond a reasonable doubt, engaging in kind of fraudulent behavior in order to get what you want. And so, you know, I think one way that I might think of this case is kind of an amuse-bouche of election interference. I mean, it's not the kind of coup-adjacent behavior that we saw on January 6th, or what is alleged to have been coup-adjacent behavior on January 6th. But it is the effort to sequester information that could, at the margins, have changed the mind of the average voter who was kind of on the fence, not sure what to think

about Donald Trump. I think that is especially the case in light of the Access Hollywood tape that came out as a true October surprise in October of 2016. If you were someone on the fence and that Access Hollywood tape gave you pause, learning about the fact that Donald Trump had also allegedly had these extramarital affairs with these other women and had paid off the National Enquirer to catch and kill these stories, that might have changed your mind about whether or not he was the right person to occupy the Oval Office. And so I think if you think about this case in that lens, then it's a really important case. It kind of goes to who is this person who occupied the office of the president, who was allegedly falsifying business

records from the Oval Office, signing these checks from the Oval Office, and who now seeks to be president once again. Yeah. And look, we know that Donald Trump thought these stories were potentially electorally damaging because he paid $130,000 to suppress them. And also, he complains constantly about social media sites suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story because that also came out right before the election. So clearly, there's a precedent here. Earlier today, so in the courtroom, the DA asked the judge in the case to order Trump to remove some social media posts where he was attacking witnesses and to fine him for those posts. posts. If Trump keeps violating his gag order like that by talking shit about witnesses or, you know, maybe even the judge's family, if the gag order gets expanded, what are the odds that he gets some sort of penalty, maybe a stiffer one, maybe jail time? So I think most of the judges

who have had to deal with Donald Trump thus far, and most of them have been in the context of those civil lawsuits, have really been loathe to throw the real hammer at him, which is contempt of court, which is, you know, holding him criminally in contempt for his behavior with regard to these different witnesses. You know, Judge Kaplan certainly talked about this, but no one has ever really gone up there. Like the most we've seen from Judge Engeron are significant fines. And I think part of that is because the narrative that Donald Trump is parroting is that he is the victim of persecution. These are selective prosecutions aimed at discrediting him. And everyone is in cahoots with Joe Biden to do this. And the judges are in cahoots, the prosecutors are in cahoots,

everyone. And so I think most of the judges don't want to make a martyr of Donald Trump by really throwing the book at him. So I think they give him a really long leash, certainly a longer leash than any other defendant would likely get under similar circumstances. I mean, I can't imagine another criminal case where the defendant was publicly and on social media attacking the judge's family, attacking prosecutors, attacking potential jurors. I mean, essentially creating a climate of fear for anyone who might be impaneled as a juror that they're going to be doxed, that their information is going to be given over to these hordes of individuals who believe and follow Donald Trump. I mean, it's incredibly intimidating. I don't know any defendant who would have been allowed to get away with this

to the extent that Donald Trump has. So, you know, to the extent Donald Trump likes to talk about how poorly he is being treated and how he's selectively being targeted, he's actually getting some of the doest of due process. I mean, like, that's Kate Shaw's own phrase, and I think it's right. He's getting away with quite a lot, because I think most judges are really loathe to make a martyr of him. Yeah, nevermind the fact that he actually gave some of the judges who could rule on his case their jobs. You know, that feels like, well, I mean, point your direction. The Eileen Cannon situation is really a novel one. And we can sort of talk about the politics of that as well.

I want to ask you about that at the end. Trump also reportedly took a little tiger snooze today in court. How long of a nap do you have to take before it goes from misdemeanor to a felony nap? You know, listen, this is he's an older gentleman. And like, I don't you know, we all need a cat nap now and again. Court proceedings, at least in this sense, people think about law and order and fiery orations at the jury box. But for the most part, it's a lot of anodyne stuff, like back and forth between the lawyers and the judge. It can get boring.

I'm not going to fault him for falling asleep. Not sure it ever gets to a felony. But to the extent he's sort of tagged himself as the more vigorous candidate here, it did seem like he was on a couple of unisoms during today's proceedings. I don't know. We'll find out. Yeah, you're right. He's an old man. We should not begrudge him taking a little nap. I mean, who among us hasn't drifted off in a really boring... I'm not going to fault him for that. But yeah, like, you know, maybe there's some melatonin going on. I don't know.

The New York Times reported that the jury selection process could take about eight weeks, and then it's going to keep Trump in town for like four days a week during that period. Can you walk us through the jury selection process? What is that like? What should we expect? So jury selection, I mean, especially for a case like this that is so high profile, where I think most jurors, prospective jurors coming in off the streets, have some idea about what's going on. That's going to make this a little more difficult than your average criminal case where the circumstances are likely unknown to the prospective jurors.

Everybody knows about this. And in order for Donald Trump to get a fair trial, everyone has to be satisfied that the jurors that have been impaneled, whether as actual jurors or as alternates, are the kinds of individuals who are willing to take all of the evidence with an open mind. They don't have preconceived views. And that's hard because Donald Trump is a polarizing figure. You really have to be careful that you don't have individuals who are stealth jurors who want to be on the jury because they want to stick it to Donald Trump or self jurors who want to be on the jury because they believe Donald Trump is being unfairly treated. And, you know, they're there to be a kind of poison pill. There's going to be a lot of discussion on the questionnaire form for the jurors, which, you know, the judge has worked on with the prosecution and the defense to sort of identify the kinds of questions they're going to ask these prospective jurors to determine whether they can truly be impartial.

It's going to take a lot of time to go through that. They've already called around 96 prospective jurors and dismissed about half of them because people are just like, listen, I hate the guy or listen, I love the guy or just like I know too much and I don't, you know, like, and then there are those jurors who have legitimate reasons that they cannot be on a jury. They have child care or, you know, they're going to be out of the country for something where it's a true hardship. So, you know, there are all of those kinds of anodyne things that get people taken out of the pool for jury selection. Both the prosecution and the defense have opportunities to make selections and to throw jurors out, prospective jurors out. So there are a number of peremptory challenges that each side has. And these are situations where you can remove a juror from the pool for whatever reason, so long as the reason does not have to do with a protected category like race or gender or religion. But I don't like the look of that person.

Peremptory challenge. You can get those gone. And then there are challenges for cause. And, you know, like this person clearly dislikes Donald Trump. This person worked in the Biden administration, something like that. Those can be reasons to get rid of people. So this is kind of painstaking, laborious work, trying to sort of get at each person and sort of suss out where they're coming from, asking them these questions, following up with them, and trying to put together your panel. And again, you have two different sides trying to assemble a group of 12 and then a couple of alternates that meets their needs, but they all have to kind of agree that this is the panel. So, I mean, that's really difficult work. And I think it's going to take some time, especially in a case as well known as this one.

And so the judge disallowed direct questions about party registration or who you support politically. But you can ask about news sources you consume and social media, et cetera. That's true. But could I, as a Trump lawyer, look, we all live online. We all, you know, if you register to be a Democrat in the state of New York, that's in a, that's public somewhere. That's gettable information. If you post it.

And they will have jury consultants like doing all kinds of work like this. And I think there was, yeah, but I think there was a John Grisham novel about this with jury consultants. I mean, it's, it's a huge cottage industry where they're doing online research trying to figure out what aren't you telling us? Like, what don't we know about you? What can we find out? On and on and on. And so this happens all the time.

So, yes, you may not be required to divulge your party affiliation, but they can be online figuring out, okay, you've donated in the last four election cycles to Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand. I guess you're a Democrat and maybe I don't want you on the story. Give you the boot. OJ Simpson died last week, RIP to the juice. It reminded every one millennial and older really what it was like when an entire nation obsessed over one trial. The OJ trial was different in that they allowed cameras in the courtrooms. We were watching this literally all day, every day. And it was obviously lurid in many different and awful ways. But do you have a prediction about whether this case could sort of meet that level of attention compared to

OJ? I mean, the overlay of race with OJ was just so evident when that case was being litigated. And again, Los Angeles had erupted in flames just a few years earlier because of the Rodney King beating that was, again, televised. And I think people made a lot of connections between the fact of those officers in the Rodney King trial getting off and then, you know, O.J. Simpson being charged with murder. So the racial tensions of that case and the sort of surrounding political milieu, I think, were very, very thick. I don't know if that is really the situation here.

I mean, there's a lot to this case. And I know Donald Trump has tried to paint himself as sort of akin to the average Black defendant, but he really isn't. He's getting a lot of benefits that most defendants are not getting in the criminal justice system. That's not quite the same thing. I also think the judges are really different. Judge Lance Ito, who was the presiding judge in the O.J. Simpson trial, I think most people would say his case management style, his courtroom management style, was not quite as stringent as Judge Merchan's.

And I think that's really important. A lot of things can get out of hand when you don't have a judge who's in control of the courtroom. It seems that Judge Merchan is, this is his courtroom and we're doing things his way. And there's not going to be a lot of judging from the prosecution or the defense in lieu of the judge taking control of the courtroom. Yeah, we got a racist on trial, not race on trial. Do you see all these Gen Z kids doubting whether we millennials actually watched the verdict be delivered at school?

I know I did. Gen Z. watched the verdict be delivered at school? I know I did. Gen Z. I mean, so is it fair? Can I confess that I'm not in your bracket? I'm not a millennial. You're just, well, you're just just outside of it. That's very flattering, Tommy. I think I'm well outside of it. I mean, I was in college when the O.J. Simpson trial was happening. And I remember we were let out of class at the University of Virginia, not necessarily the most, at the time, the most enlightened place about race, but we did get out of class to hear that verdict. And I mean, it really was electrifying, people crying, people jubilant, and surprising in many respects. The one thing I do remember

about that moment was that was really the moment where Jeffrey Toobin kind of ascended into the cultural consciousness. He was the one reporting on that case from Los Angeles. He later wrote what I think is one of the best legal books ever, irrespective of what you might think about Jeffrey Toobin. But The Run of His Life is one of the best legal books I have ever read, with the exception of the Trump indictments, the historic charging documents and commentary

by Melissa Murray and Andrew Weissman. That's exactly right. Look, there was a Monoculture Kids, and we did all watch it. And I'm sick of you questioning us on Twitter. We didn't have TikTok. We didn't have Instagram. We could not, there were no alternate sources

of entertainment. This was it. Shit was wild. Last question for you. Wait, wait, one more thing. Do you remember where you were with the Bronco chase? Like that to me is the most salient. And the people thereafter, like how did you know if someone was a good friend?

Would you drive the Bronco for me? Would you be like AC? Like that's how you knew if someone was a true friend. I mean, like a hundred million people watched it. I mean, it was outrageous. Yeah. It was knew someone was a true friend. I mean, like 100 million people watched it. I mean, it was outrageous. Yeah. It was like a Super Bowl, truly. Final question for you. So you mentioned this, alluded to it earlier at the top. The most obviously open and shut case, to me at least, seems to be the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, given the law, given the evidence we've seen with our own eyes, given the clear obstruction. But Judge Aileen Cannon seems to be just a disaster in terms of both of making decisions in a timely manner and also maybe understanding relevant law.

I mean, can you just give listeners a quick sense of how strangely that case is proceeding? I think you've characterized it exactly right. This is the open and shut case. You know, all that is required for a conviction is that you have the documents, you know, you're not supposed to have them, and they're still in your possession. And there are people in federal penitentiary for having far less than what Donald Trump is alleged to have had at Mar-a-Lago, leaving aside the question of like the obstruction charges and the moving the stuff around and allegedly trying to destroy videotape that

shows them moving the stuff around. This is a pretty open and shut case, which is why it's so surprising that it's moving so slowly and it seems to be getting just gummed up all the time. And, you know, I think it's fair to say part of that is Judge Eileen Cannon. She is a Trump appointee. She was appointed during Trump's administration. She doesn't have a lot of criminal trial experience. Most of the cases that she's had as a lawyer and as a judge have been civil matters. She's had a couple of criminal cases, but they've been pretty anodyne fair, like felon in possession of a gun, maybe deportation cases, things of that nature. This is not necessarily a difficult case, but it does

involve some complicated questions regarding the nature of the evidence because much of the evidence is going to be classified information. So you have to deal with an entirely different statute, the Classified Information Procedures Act to deal with that. She doesn't have that experience. Yeah, I mean, I think you could ask real questions about what the extent of her working knowledge is, how it reflects here. I mean, we've already seen that she has been rebuked by the 11th Circuit, which is the Intermediate Court of Appeals that's above her, right below the Supreme Court, for failing to get the law right on the question of the special master even before this came to her as a trial. So, you know, real questions here. I will just note the political valence of this. The reason why Eileen Cannon is the judge in that case is because there are two major vacancies on the Southern District of Florida. And Joe Biden hasn't been able to fill them because the two state senators in Florida are Marco Rubio and Rick Scott. They're Republicans. And in order to nominate and confirm a judge to those district court seats, the home state

senators have to give their blue slips. Again, another one of these archaic Senate procedures that just gum up the works. And they have never given their blue slips to a nominee to the district court out of Florida. And so there are two vacancies here, which means that when this case went in the wheel to be assigned to a judge in the Southern District of Florida, there was like one in three chance they would get Judge Cannon. So those are pretty good odds if you're Donald Trump.

We got to get rid of this stupid blue slip process. It's ridiculous. It's also just unbelievable to me that there is an actual conversation happening about whether Judge Marchand is a fair and impartial judge in this case because of something his daughter does when Donald Trump literally gave Aileen Cannon her job in Florida. What are we doing here? So, again, I think there have been circumstances. I mean, presidents nominate federal judges.

I think, you know, it is perhaps extraordinary, unprecedented for a president to then wind up in the courtroom of a judge that he nominated. But, you know, things happen. Bill Clinton was the subject of a civil lawsuit before a judge who, again, like these things happen all of the time. I think what's really interesting here is that she's had so many opportunities to get this case on the right track and to do this by the book. And, you know, it seems like she's making a lot of decisions that, A, don't make sense or seem only to make sense in the context of keeping things in the way Donald Trump might want them as a criminal defendant. Yeah. And maybe dragging this thing out for as long as possible. Well, I mean, which is what Donald Trump as a criminal defendant is exactly what he wants.

Frustrating. Well, listen, if you want to understand more about all of these cases, you should absolutely read the Trump indictments, the historic charging documents with commentary by Melissa Murray. Also, if you want to know all about the Supreme Court, what it's up to in the legal culture surrounding it, like where the hell is Clarence Thomas today? Nobody knows. Listen to Strict Scrutiny. Truly one of my favorite shows uh just so smart and so fun and funny at the same time so thank you for joining thanks for having me all right thanks to melissa murray and uh before we go look we said earlier trump's going to be counter-programming this trial with all kinds of rallies and events on wednesdays and on the weekends when he's when he's off.

And we just wanted to play one example of the kind of soaring rhetoric and powerful messaging that's going to come from Donald Trump in some of these events. This was from over the weekend. If he can stick to this message, we're screwed. Yeah, let's hear it. Union was saved by the immortal heroes at Gettysburg. Gettysburg, what an unbelievable battle that was. The Battle of Gettysburg, what an unbelievable battle that was. The Battle of Gettysburg, what an unbelievable... I mean, it was so much and so interesting and so vicious and horrible

and so beautiful in so many different ways. It represented such a big portion of the success of this country. Gettysburg, wow. I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania to look and to watch. And the statement of Robert E. Lee, who's no longer in favor. Did you ever notice that? No longer in favor. Never fight uphill, me boys. Never fight uphill. They were fighting uphill. He said, wow, that was a big mistake. He lost his great general. And they were fighting. Never fight uphill, me boys boys but it was too late

how fucking high was he pickets charge you wouldn't catch me charging boys it's also by the way just sort of gettysburg wow gettysburg wow you don't you don't here's the thing here's the thing you don't you don't do uh the gettysburg address is too good for you to riff your own version that he he's out there being like gettysburg Address is too good for you to riff your own version. He's out there being like, Gettysburg, so vicious, so beautiful. Four years and score. Four score and seven truths ago. Let this be dedicated to... It shall not perish so beautifully.

Whatever happened to Robert E. Lee? He's out of favor. Why does everyone not like him anymore? Must have been those Manhattan judges. Robert E. Lee no longer certified fresh. What happened there? I thought people liked Robert E. Lee. Not anymore. It must have been those Manhattan judges. Robert E. Lee, no longer certified fresh. What happened there? I thought people liked Robert E. Lee. Not anymore. Not anymore. Rotten tomatoes.

Just a horrible, horrible, disgusting. We're all so beautiful. Beautiful. His wife, Sarah Lee, great chef. It was so much. It was so much. So beautiful. So vicious. But it was so much. Hey, Donald Trump, you can become president. You just gotta tell us everything you know about the Gettysburg Address and the battle that took place there. Just walk us through every detail that you got.

I think the Biden folks should put that in an ad. Just to have that riff. It would be very funny. Those are the kind of ads. They're like, you don't test them. They're off the wall. You don't know if they're going to move voters. But I don't know.

You have a bunch of people seeing that. They're like, what? I don't want this guy being president. What did he take? That's fucking weird. Anyway, that's what we got for today. The world will little note. Nor long remember.

What we say here. All right. Bye, everyone. We'll have another episode for you on Wednesday. If you want to get ad-free episodes, exclusive content,

and more, consider joining our Friends of the Pod subscription community at crooked.com slash friends. And if you're already doom scrolling,

don't forget to follow us at Pod Save America on Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content, and more. Plus, if you're as opinionated as we are, consider dropping us a review. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our show is produced by Olivia Martinez and David Toledo. Our associate producers are Saul Rubin and Farrah Safari. Kira Wakim is our senior producer.

Reid Cherlin is our executive producer. Reed Cherlin is our executive producer. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis. Writing support by Hallie Kiefer. Madeline Herringer is our head of news and programming. Matt DeGroat is our head of production. Andy Taft is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Haley Jones, Mia Kelman, David Tolles, Kiril Pallaviv, and Molly Lobel.