The David Pakman Show - 8/2/23: Trump indicted AGAIN, MAGA collapsing, economy keeps rolling

Episode Date: August 2, 2023

-- On the Show: -- Failed former President Donald Trump is indicted again, a third time, this time for his actions while President related to the attempts to overturn the 2020 election, which Trump lost to President Joe Biden -- Donald Trump explodes in reaction to his third indictment, even going as far as to say that the charges are reminiscent of Nazi, Germany -- Donald Trump former lawyer Rudy Giuliani is identified as one of the unindicted co-conspirators in the latest Trump indictment -- Trump supporters are not taking Trump's third indictment well, including Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Kari Lake, Rudy Giuliani, and others -- Obama-appointed judge Tanya Chutkan is assigned Donald Trump's latest case, and she has been a tough judge with regard to the January 6 rioters -- How quickly will Republicans running for the 2024 nomination start running on "I will pardon Trump?" -- The economy remains solid, and Republicans have no idea what to do about it -- Donald Trump is interviewed by Breitbart's Matt Boyle and both seem confused during the interview -- Voicemail caller wonders whether the UFO hearings are meant to create a distraction from real issues like climate change -- On the Bonus Show: US credit rating downgraded, Kamala Harris rejects Ron DeSantis' invitation to debate black history standards, more Republicans say Trump committed "serious crimes," much more... 🌎 Babbel: Get 55% off your subscription (rules & restrictions may apply): https://babbel.com/pakman 🌳 Use code PAKMAN for 20% off HoldOn plant-based bags at https://holdonbags.com/pakman 🥄 Use code PAKMAN for $5 off Magic Spoon at https://magicspoon.com/pakman 🛡️ Incogni: The first 100 people to use code PAKMAN will get 60% off at http://incogni.com/pakman 🚲 Lectric eBikes! Shop for your new electric bike at https://lectricebikes.com -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

. The long MAGA nightmare continues as the failed former president previously twice indicted and twice impeached and twice arrested, has been indicted again a third time, this time for attempting to, colloquially speaking, subvert the will of the voting people and overturn an election that he did not win to stay in power, despite the fact that Joe Biden became president of the United States. This has to do with disenfranchising voters. We will look at the indictment specifically. We will look at the immediate reaction from Maga land, which has no choice seemingly but

to misstate what is in the indictment in order to defend their glorious leader, regardless of what he is accused of doing. Let's start with the Reuters report. Trump faces federal charges for efforts to overturn 2020 election. This is separate from the hush money in New York case. This is separate from the documents case for which Trump has already been indicted. This is separate from the potentially forthcoming Georgia indictment for attempting to steal those electoral votes. This is a new thing. The Reuters report reads

Donald Trump was indicted Tuesday for his wide ranging attempts to overturn the 2020 election, the third time in four months that the former U.S. president has been criminally charged, even as he campaigns to regain the presidency next year. It is a four count, 45 page indictment. It charges Trump with conspiring to defraud the United States by preventing Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden's victory and to deprive voters of their right to a fair election. There is a critically important detail just in that line, which is that this indictment is for Trump's alleged actions while president of the United States. That is already different than what we have seen in some of these other indictments. That is extremely important.

Trump was ordered to make an initial. Oh, sorry. Then President Trump pushed fraud claims he knew to be untrue, pressured state and federal officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, to alter results and finally incited a violent assault on the U.S. Capitol in a desperate attempt to undermine American democracy and cling to power. Prosecutors say Trump ordered to make an initial appearance in federal court in Washington Thursday. The case has been assigned to US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, appointed by Trump's

petter predecessor, Barack Obama. We will talk about that aspect of this and Judge Chutkin and how she has handled already the cases related to Trump rioters from January 6th, which have come before her. That's its own interesting story, which we are going to delve into. The charges stem from Jack Smith's sprawling investigation into allegations. Trump sought to reverse his loss to Biden despite a dizzying and growing array of legal troubles. Trump has solidified status as the front runner, according to public opinion polls. And that is absolutely true.

Let's go to a statement made by the special prosecutor, Jack Smith. But some MAGA people writing to me saying, David, he looks so nervous. Wouldn't you be nervous to some degree? Let's take a listen. On January 6th, 2021 was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy. It's described in the indictment. It was fueled by lies, lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the US government, the nation's process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election.

The men and women of law enforcement who defended the U.S. Capitol on January 6th are heroes. They are patriots, and they are the very best of us. They did not just defend a building or the people sheltering in it. They put their lives on the line to defend who we are as a country and as a people. They defended the very institutions and principles that define the United States. Since the attack on our Capitol, the Department of Justice has remained committed to ensuring accountability for those criminally responsible for what happened that day. This case is brought consistent with that commitment,

and our investigation of other individuals continues. In this case, my office will seek a speedy trial so that our evidence can be tested in court and judged by a jury of citizens. In the meantime, I must emphasize that the indictment is only an allegation and that the defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. So there is special prosecutor Jack Smith explaining what this is. Now we need to have on the table an important rebuttal to what many on the right are already saying. Later in today's program, I will present to you statements from individuals like Rudy

Giuliani and others claiming that Trump is being indicted for speech, that he is just be his First Amendment rights are being taken away because he is being indicted for speech, that he is just be his First Amendment rights are being taken away because he is being indicted for speech. It is important to understand that Donald Trump is not being indicted for his speech. Trump's statements are not the alleged crimes. The crime was the effort to disenfranchise voters through the actions that were at issue here. And all you need to do is look at the Trump indictment. Folks, this isn't very long. I skimmed it last night and then looked at it again in more detail this morning. If you look very close to the top and we'll put it up

on the screen here, it is very clear. It actually says in paragraph three, the defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim falsely that there had been outcome determinative fraud during the election that he had won. I hope people understand that this says it's even OK for Trump to lie and tell the lie that he really won. It goes on to say he was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means, such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote in states or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases, the defendant did pursue

these methods of contesting the election results. His efforts to change the outcome in any state through recounts, audits or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful. Again, it is legal for Trump to make statements, even false statements that he won the election. That is not actually what is at issue here. And this is something you're going to hear from the MAGA right extensively. And it is absolutely not true. The apologists are saying he was indicted for speaking and it is just BS to defend him. He was indicted for actions as president. Again, I said that earlier

and I will say it again. This is an extremely important difference from some of these other charges. This is for Trump's actions as president. And while I am not an attorney and would never pretend to be one, some very interesting legal opinions that I've read over the last 12 hours are converging on the same opinion as to Trump's best defense. And Trump's best defense here is to plead ignorance. It is to insist not only did I genuinely believe that I had won, but I was completely ignorant to the legal ramifications of what I was directing others to do, of what I attempted to do with the phony slates of electors and all of these different things. It's not a great defense based on the legal opinions I've read because of all of

the evidence that the DOJ has. But it may be Trump's best defense to throw himself at the mercy of the court and say, I genuinely believed everything I said and I had no guilty conscience or negligent perspective or malicious, certainly, and see where that gets them. Again, this is only one of three cases against Trump criminally. It may soon be one of only four. So this is going to get very complicated very, very quickly. That all being said, it's not looking particularly good for Trump legally. But from the point of view of the candidacy, Trump insists he'll stay in even if he's convicted. His supporters don't seem to have any interest in abandoning him for a candidate

with lesser or no legal troubles. And Trump may continue this seemingly unobstructed path towards the nomination. Let's next talk about Trump's reaction to this. When Donald Trump found out that he was getting indicted a third time, he made claims all the way up to and including this indictment is like Nazi Germany. I did everything right and they indicted me. OK. Trump initially putting out the following statement statement from the Trump campaign, quote This is nothing more than the latest corrupt chapter in the continued pathetic attempt by the Biden crime family and their

weaponized Department of Justice to interfere with the 2024 presidential election in which President Trump is the undisputed front runner and leading by substantial margins. Fact check. There is no evidence of a Biden crime family and there is certainly no evidence of a Biden crime family. And there is certainly no evidence of that Biden crime family directing this in any way. If you have such evidence, please bring it forward. Trump continuing. But why did they wait two and a half years to bring these fake charges right in the middle of President Trump's winning campaign for twenty twenty four? Why was it announced the day after the big crooked Joe Biden

scandal broke out from the halls of Congress? Again, fact check. Some of the charges against Trump, not in this indictment, but in others stem from Trump's actions much more recently. Some of these stem from Trump's actions while he was president. If the goal was to time these indictments to be as damaging as possible to Trump, you would actually wait. And again, there is no evidence that the timing of these indictments is politically motivated. In addition to that, what he's referring to yesterday or the day before, really the Devin Archer testimony. It was not the big explosion of the Joe Biden bribery scandal that they hoped it would be.

In fact, it was quite a nothing burger. Trump continuing. And this is where it gets really wild. Quote, The answer is election interference. The lawlessness of these persecutions of President Trump and his supporters is reminiscent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s, the former Soviet Union and other authoritarian dictatorial regimes. President Trump has always followed the law and the Constitution with advice from many

highly accomplished attorneys. Once again. We said this after the first indictment. We said this after the second indictment, and it remains true. The right wants you to believe that Trump being indicted is a perversion of justice, that it is a rejection of law and order, a rejection of due process, a rejection of the justice system. The truth is that these indictments are at least a veil of accountability. What what the reason I say a veil is we need to see where

they go. And we're not going to know that for some time. But what we are learning, at least hypothetically, theoretically from these indictments, is that no one is above the law. Just because you're the president or you were doesn't mean that you are free from accountability or at least potential accountability. It should be an inspiring thing that we say, wow, all this stuff Trump did. If the average person did it, they'd probably not even get bail and they'd be sitting in pretrial detention. Putting that issue aside, there is at least the possibility that we are going to hold accountable individuals when there is evidence of criminal wrongdoing, regardless of their privileged status in society or the powerful position that they hold.

That's the takeaway that we should get from this. OK, last couple of paragraphs of Trump's statement. These un-American witch hunts will fail and President Trump will be reelected to the White House so he can save our capital C country from the abuse and competence and corruption that is running through the veins of our capital C country at levels never seen before. Three years ago, we had strong borders, energy independence, no inflation and a great economy. Today, we are a nation in decline. President Trump will not be deterred by disgraceful and unprecedented political targeting. Trump then also taking to truth social central moments before the indictment, trothing, quote, I hear that deranged Jack Smith in order to interfere with the presidential election of

twenty twenty four will be putting out yet another fake indictment of your favorite president. Me at 5 p.m.. Why didn't they do this two point five years ago? Why did they wait so long? Because they wanted to put it right in the middle of my campaign. Prosecutorial misconduct. Trump continuing later. Also, why are they putting out another fake indictment the day after the crooked Joe Biden

scandal, one of the biggest in American history, broke out in the halls of Congress, a nation in decline, and then much later, Trump engaging caps lock and then trothing, quote, Thank you to everyone. I have never had so much support on anything before. This unprecedented indictment of a former highly successful president and the leading candidate by far in both the Republican Party and the 2024 general election has awoken the world to the corruption, scandal and failure that has taken place in the United States for the past three years. America is a nation in decline, but we will make it great again, greater than ever before. I love you all. Here's my final thought on this aspect of this indictment.

Then we'll dig into other details later. Of course, as I said, these indictments are based in fact and based in evidence, and they are full of evidence. In addition to that, it is a sad and humiliating thing, as I tweeted yesterday and Zed and threaded. It is sad that the world and history will know what kind of person the American voters elected in 2016. Now, from a popular vote perspective, they didn't actually they actually voted more for Hillary than they did Trump. But at least as far as the Electoral College goes and the system we have, it will now be in the history books that the United States of America elected this type of person in 2016. And that is really sad. It's right to indict him.

The evidence is there. It's clear. But it is sad that this now becomes American history forever. And we have to live with that. This is what the Maggots, the Magadonians, the Magapatamians did in 2016. Plastic, it's everywhere we look and not enough is being done about it. One hundred billion plastic bags are used and thrown away every year. Here's something super simple you can do to reduce plastic and help the planet a little bit. Our sponsor, Hold On Bags, is the company making plastic free trash bags and zip seal kitchen bags. They're just as strong and

high quality as the plastic bags you're used to. Hold on bags are 100 percent plant based and home compostable, meaning they break down in just weeks, not decades. Their zip seal kitchen bags come in sandwich or gallon size to fit all of your needs, whether it's carrots or crayons at home. I put all of my food waste in a hold on trash bag, throw it in the compost pile. And when I throw The David Pakman Show is a production of the David Pakman Show David Pakman dot com. Pacman code Pacman saves you 20 percent. The info is in the podcast notes. If you're like me and you love the nostalgia of enjoying a bowl of cereal sometimes as an adult, check out our sponsor Magic Spoon. Magic Spoon is the breakfast cereal with the crunchy, sweet goodness you love, but with zero grams of sugar, more protein and only four to five net carbs. So it's perfect if you're doing low carb, if you're doing keto, if you're like me and you

just don't want to eat a bunch of sugar. Magic Spoon has delicious flavors to choose from. Cocoa, fruity, frosted peanut butter, honey nut, cinnamon roll, birthday cake. My favorite is maple waffle. And right now they have limited edition spring flavors, strawberry milkshake and peaches and cream. Sometimes you just feel like sitting down with a bowl of cereal when the mood strikes. Go for something with plenty of protein without all the sugar. If you don't love magic spoon as much as I do and our team does, Magic Spoon will refund all of your money. No questions asked. Go to magic spoon dot com slash Pacman. Create a custom bundle. Use the code Pacman for five dollars off. That's magic spoon dot com slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes. The David Pakman Show is an

audience supported program. I would love it if you grabbed a membership on our website. Join Pakman dot com. You know, a lot of different media outlets are funded in different ways. Corporate media, a combination of sometimes cable subscription fees. If you're Fox News or very heavily reliant on advertising from big corporations. We as our primary funding source really just depend on our audience. If you like what we're doing, you can help us keep doing it by signing up at join Pacman dot com. We do an extra show every day for our members. There's a long list of benefits you can read about on our website. And we have a new coupon code. The coupon code is thrice indicted. We used to have the coupon code indicted again, but you all know what happened.

So now the coupon code is thrice indicted. It gives you a healthy discount. You get 100 percent of the benefits without all of the costs at join Pacman dot com. There are unindicted co-conspirators listed in the third criminal indictment of the failed former President Donald Trump. We are now learning about who those unindicted co-conspirators we are learning who they are. CNN was able to report on this yesterday. Rudy Giuliani is one of those unindicted co-conspirators. Let's listen and then we will discuss what this means. The identities of the six Trump co-conspirators. Sarah, what can you tell us? That's right, Wolf. As you noted, there are six co-conspirators who are unnamed in this indictment. We are prepared

to identify five of them at this point based on reporting from our CNN team. I think most notably the first unindicted co-conspirator, who again is unnamed in this indictment, we have identified as Rudy Giuliani. The indictment notes that this is someone who called the Arizona Speaker of the House, and that was Rusty Bowers, somebody who made a presentation before Georgia state lawmakers, and the person that Donald Trump tapped to lead his post-election legal efforts. That is all Rudy Giuliani. Number two in this indictment is former Trump attorney John Eastman. This is a person who wrote this two-page memo. This was the plan for Mike Pence to be able to essentially overturn the 2020 presidential election while presiding over

the Electoral college certification. Number three on this list, another former Trump attorney, Sidney Powell. They point out that she filed a lawsuit against the governor of Georgia, which we knew. They also point out in this indictment that Donald Trump was espousing the theories of this co-conspirator, even though he had privately admitted that they sounded crazy. We know all of that to be Sidney Powell. Co-conspirator, even though he had privately admitted that they sounded crazy. We know all of that to be Sidney Powell, co-conspirator number four on this list is someone we've talked about a lot. Former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark. The indictment identifies him as a justice Justice Department official.

It also points to an email that it. All right. So they list some other individuals, but critically here, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Sidney Powell, unindicted co-conspirators. What does that actually mean? What does it mean? You conspired, but you haven't been indicted. When we talk about an unindicted co-conspirator, we're essentially saying here is someone that prosecutors and investigators believe took part in a conspiracy to commit a crime, but they are not charged, at least in this particular indictment.

It's conceivable that they will not be charged at all. Sometimes unindicted co-conspirators, if they have collaborated or cooperated, may actually have been granted immunity. Rudy Giuliani, for his for his part in this, has said he did not turn on Trump. But we we just don't yet know what sort of deals were were arranged and whether there is any immunity involved in any of these aspects of this. Sometimes you would name an unindicted co-conspirator to avoid the risk of revealing confidential information or compromising ongoing investigations. There is a lot of different reasons that unindicted co-conspirators are named. To avoid the risk of revealing confidential information or compromising ongoing investigations.

There is a lot of different reasons that unindicted co-conspirators are named. This is where we are right now. And it is, again, a reminder that this was not Trump watching TV and throwing ketchup at the wall and saying, hey, what about fake electors or what about this or what about that? This really was a concerted effort. There was a conspiracy here. And we're using the term conspiracy in its legal sense. We're not in the sense of a conspiracy theory.

We're saying there were individuals here who conspired to try to do this. We know about Sidney Powell's role in it. We know about Eastman's role and the infamous memo where he had the idea of maybe we can push Pence to do this, that or the other thing. And of course, we know about Rudy Giuliani's role in this as well. If and when this may lead to who knows what, we just don't know right now. But this has reached Giuliani. It has reached multiple lawyers.

And of course, there are those who will say, David, but again, this is they're violating speech. They're violating attorney client privilege or whatever the case may be. We have, this is they're violating speech. They're violating attorney client privilege or whatever the case may be. We have discussed this before. Many legal experts have weighed in. There is a crime fraud exception where if you involve your lawyer in a conspiracy to defraud or commit crimes, attorney client privilege can go out the window. It is not in every case. It depends on circumstance. I'm not going to pretend to give you all of the details, but that there are random people on Facebook who think they've got novel legal insight by saying they're violating attorney

client privilege. Do you not think that the Department of Justice is aware of what the limits are of attorney client privilege? And so for all of the sort of back is aware of what the limits are of attorney client privilege. And so for all of the sort of backseat legal analysts, maybe give that one a rest. Let's now look at the reaction of Maga World, including Rudy Giuliani, to this third indictment. They aren't taking it well. They aren't taking it well. The Maga crowd and I'm talking here about elected officials are really not doing well when it comes to Trump being indicted and soon arrested a third time. Here is Lauren

Boebert, apparently now a legal scholar, explaining how everything Trump did in trying to overturn the 2020 election was completely kosher. My word, not hers. Legally justified. I didn't know that she was a legal expert. Let's listen. Here she is on Stinkfield tonight from a place fittingly called Rifle, Colorado. Listen to this. We were doing our role. We were not rubber stamping states that we saw massive irregularities in the voting where tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of ballots were mailed out illegally. It is illegal for states to change election laws. That is something that is untrue, by the way, thing or excuse me, for the federal government to change election laws or secretaries of state or rogue judges. It is up to the state legislature. And that did not happen.

And so we objected to several states who remember that they love saying this states unilaterally changed election law, like it or not. The covid pandemic authorized states to on the basis of public health measures, make changes to things like vote by mail. If you could say that shouldn't have happened, but it is not against the law. Did exactly that. They changed their state election law and the Constitution says it's the state legislature that changes those. And that is why we objected.

There was nothing illegal, certainly nothing for President Trump to be indicted over. But now I hope he uses this indictment to go to each and every state that we had in question and finally fix our elections and secure them once and for all. There you go. So there is Lauren Boebert's idea. She's not taking it well, but what she's saying has no basis in law and certainly no basis in fact. Then we go to Peter Navarro. This is one of Donald Trump's former advisers who says that we actually need to charge special counsel Jack Smith, you might say, for for what crime, David? Peter Navarro says for seditious conspiracy. These people are unbelievable.

And this idea that there was there that you can say categorically that there was no election fraud in 2020 is is absurd. I mean, I've looked at that. I looked at that very careful in a three-volume set called the Navarro Report. And nothing has changed since then to make me think otherwise that there was a grand stuff-the-ballot-box strategy by the Democrats, basically bending and sometimes breaking the rules. And these were legitimate questions to be asked. So, you know, to have to walk down that path, though, the noise, it's like this is a this is a seditious conspiracy. It's Jack Smith is running in coordination with Joe Biden. Remember that there is not a shred of evidence of that. They can repeat it as many times as they want. But at some point, I hope evidence is demanded of them and the White House

and others in the deep administrative state. And I just you know, when Donald Trump becomes president, I hope one of his first acts is to have the attorney general make sure he looks at every email correspondence and phone record. All right. Yeah, listen, Peter Navarro envisions a world in which the guy who tried to throw overthrow our legal election is president again. That tells you everything you need to know about Peter Navarro. Then we go to Carrie Lake, the failed Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate. Harry Lake put out a statement called Following Another Sham Indictment. Carrie Lake calls on every Republican to suspend campaign and support President Trump. We have video of her on Newsmax. I guess this is

making the same demand of other Republicans. His poll numbers will continue to go up. I really believe that those other people running in the Republican race should stand up, speak out in support of President Trump, talk about how this is an injustice, unlike we've ever seen with our Department of Justice going after an innocent man. And frankly, they should suspend their campaigns and step behind and support President Trump. There you go. There's an idea because Donald Trump has been indicted again. I am ending my campaign and will be endorsing Trump. Beautiful idea.

You can see the desperation to be vice president dripping off of her face here. Then we go to Rudy Giuliani. Rudy Giuliani. Again, we learned an unindicted co-conspirator in Trump's third indictment. He seems to almost be in tears during this interview on Newsmax last night. And I guess you have to be careful what you say. He still is the special investigator, the special prosecutor. You know, I'm kind of a long time ago. You know, yours and others future. Go ahead. Long ago, stop being careful. Yours and others' future. Go ahead.

A long ago stop being careful, and I don't worry about the Jack Smiths of this world. I have a chapter in my book called Stand Up to Bullies. So here's what I say to Jack Smith. After the Supreme Court threw out your case, which should have been a disgrace, and you should have gone and found another profession because you don't belong in this one.

This one will be your legacy, violating the right of free speech of an American citizen, never mind whether he was president or not. And again, remember that this is another example. They're saying Trump is being indicted because of his speech. That is, of course, not the case. And in fact, it says it in the indictment. In the indictment, Rudy's holding up. It says it could be anybody. It could be a homeless person. You don't get to violate people's First Amendment rights. And of course, they were not violated. And then lastly, we go full circle to Marjorie

Taylor Greene. At some point, one of these people was going to invoke God. And indeed, Marjorie Taylor Greene does and says at such difficult times, we must put our faith in God. So looking forward, going from this date, it is worrisome about what's going to happen in our future. But I always have hope. And and that's one thing I just want to mention. It's important that we put our whole faith and hope in God and not anything that we see

in the headlines and not anything that we see happening in the news. Our real hope needs to be in God and in Jesus Christ as my savior. And I know he's yours as well. Of course, I'm sure it is the savior of the host. Sure. Of course, when they go back to don't pay attention to what the news is saying, don't what you're seeing and hearing can't be trusted. Instead, just pray. Pray to Jesus. That's what we need here. They are not standing on what I would call the surest footing. So MAGA is not happy. All of those clips I played for you. They'll be on YouTube. They'll be on TikTok. They'll be everywhere if you want to review them. Now that we've gotten beyond the unhinged reactions of MAGA, the next question

becomes, who is the judge in this third Trump indictment? What is the outlook for how the courtroom will be run? It's maybe more interesting than any of the other criminal cases against Trump. We'll take a very quick break and discuss that next. Did you know that anyone in the world can very easily access a ton of data about you online? Data brokers collect huge amounts of data about everything you do on your phone, your computer, where you go, what you look at. But we recently learned that government agencies like the FBI have also been buying a ton of this data from data brokers just to keep track of people without needing a court order.

Criminals can also use the information to target you. Ad companies and political consultants can buy it and try to influence you. But you can stop it. Our sponsor, Incogni, is an affordable service that specializes in getting your data removed from these sites. Incogni will send data removal requests to the major data brokers. They are required by law to remove it upon request. If your information stays online, Incogni will just follow up with them about removing it. It's that simple. And you will be kept updated every step of the way. So you know what's going on.

What Incogni can accomplish is amazing. I use it myself and my audience gets 60 percent off. Go to Incogni dot com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman. That's I n c o g n i dot com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman for 60 percent off. The info is in the podcast notes. Let's now discuss the judge who has been given Trump's latest case, the third indictment overall, the second federal indictment. The reason we care about this is that there is a sort of sub story to Trump's first federal indictment, which was filed in Florida and will be handled by Judge Eileen Cannon. Judge Eileen Cannon is a Trump appointee.

And although we don't yet know for sure whether this is going to be a problem, a conflict of interest, there are already questions as to whether she would be a fair arbiter of that case. We have a very different situation, which with Trump's latest indictment, which was filed in Washington, D.C. ABC News reports the judge assigned to Trump's January six case is a tough punisher of Capitol rioters. The federal judge assigned to the election fraud case against former President Trump has stood out as one of the toughest punishers of rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol

in an attack fueled by Trump's baseless claims of a stolen election. She has also ruled against him before. The judge is District Judge Tanya Chutkin, former assistant public defender nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama. She will oversee the case that accuses Trump of trying to overturn the 2020 election. She has often handed down prison sentences in the riot cases related to January 6th that are harsher than Justice Department prosecutors recommended. Chutkin has also ruled against Trump before in a separate January six case in November of twenty one. She refused his request to block the release of documents to the House's January 6th committee. This is immediately becoming an area of focus for right wingers.

Now of course the idea that this is a handpicked judge by Jack Smith falls apart very quickly when you realize that in the previous federal case, it's a Trump appointed judge that got the case. Eileen Cannon Axios reporting what to know about Tanya Chutkin, the judge overseeing the January 6th case. It gives some basic information. Chutkin was born in Jamaica, went to UPenn Law School, Trump's alma mater. You might remember she worked in private practice, became a public defender, trial attorney, supervisor, then joined the law firm Boyce, Schiller and Flexner, specializing in litigation, white collar criminal defense, and was appointed by President Obama.

She has some January 6th cases in her background, as we mentioned. Expect the character assassination to start very soon. And I cannot imagine that that is going to go particularly well for Donald Trump. Now, there's a couple of different stories here. On the one hand, of course, you are going to hear from MAGA people that by virtue of having been appointed by Barack Obama, maybe by virtue of being Jamaican, that that may come up. Remember, they talked about a Mexican-American judge who couldn't possibly rule fairly on the travel ban when Trump was president.

They may use Chutkin's background. They may use Chutkin's alleged antipathy towards the Trump riders by virtue of her tough sentences. Somehow they will argue this is not someone who can fairly adjudicate or handle this case. If you believe that, then you would also have to accept that Judge Eileen Cannon similarly can't for reasons of being too deferential to Trump rather than too antagonistic. So if they want to make that argument, then we are going to be able to say, well, what about Eileen Cannon? But there's a bigger story here. In a sense, I'm glad that this judge was assigned the case. I feel sorry for the grief that she's going to go through. I hope that if the MAGA people start blaming her for Trump's problems and start threatening her,

I hope it doesn't happen. But I hope that everybody is ready to deal with that if it were to happen. But the point here that is extraordinarily important is that there is a movement which wants to minimize this entire Trump prosecution. And by this entire Trump prosecution, I don't mean just the third indictment. I mean, all three indictments, the possible fourth indictment in Georgia, the Trump being found civilly liable for rape and defamation against E.G. and Carol. All of it. They want to reduce to either politically motivated nonsense or mere technicalities, sometimes calling them process crimes. These are not process crimes. And I'm

going to delve into that more in a later segment. But understand the gravity of what we're dealing with here. We need judges who will take this seriously and who will not be, you know, intimidated by Trump's presence. And when I look at Judge Chutkin's record, I see someone who's not going to be intimidated by Trump. This is very serious stuff. It needs to be dealt with in that way. Let's now discuss what opportunity does this present for the Republican wannabe nominees running alongside Donald Trump? We already know that there are Republicans running for the Republican nomination against Trump who have either said or implied they would pardon Donald Trump. Now, remember, presidential pardons apply only to

federal charges. Trump is facing state charges in New York already. In the next 10 or so days, we may learn about Trump facing charges at the state level in Georgia. A presidential pardon would not help Trump there. But regardless, now with a third criminal indictment against Donald Trump, is there an interest among Republican candidates of becoming the Trump can't win, but I'll make sure to pardon him candidate? Are there going to be candidates running against Trump who will see this third indictment as an opportunity to say Trump is too beleaguered to be the nominee himself?

But trust me, if you choose me, I'll keep him out of trouble by pardoning him. Although, remember, at the state level, they can't actually help Donald Trump. Who might be the people that would do that? Well, we have Ron DeSantis. Ron DeSantis in a recent interview on OutKick, which we looked at. What's the date? I guess this was last week. Certainly implied that he would pardon Donald Trump.

Here was what DeSantis had to say. Action even happens that you would look at that. I think you said on our show before, you'd look at pardoning all the January 6th. Well, my view, I mean, with respect to like, you know, do we really think it's good for the country to have an almost 80 year old former president in prison? Like, is that is that going to be good for us to come together? Yeah. You know, that's the thing. It's like, you know, there's divisions in this society, but there is some opportunity, I think, to come together on some things. But it's like when all this is going on, that makes it very difficult.

So, you know, I look back at like like Nixon pardoning Ford. He took a lot of heat for it, but I think it was the right decision. All right. So anyway, we talked last week about how this analogy to Nixon and Ford is nonsense. But this is DeSantis basically saying without saying I will pardon him, saying I don't think it's good for the country to have a nearly 80 year old former president sitting in prison. So maybe DeSantis would take this up as listen. I believe I'm a better candidate than Trump. Trump made mistakes. Trump can't win, but I promise I will pardon him. Vote for me. Could that help DeSantis maybe regain some of the 40 plus percent support he has lost?

I don't know. Vivek Ramaswamy, who joined me earlier this week, he says he will pardon Trump after yesterday's indictment. He put out a direct camera video saying I will pardon Trump. Take a look. It's another sad moment in our country's history. The 45th president of the United States, Donald Trump, has yet again been indicted by the Biden DOJ, a political party in power that is now repeatedly using police force to indict and arrest and potentially eliminate its political opponents from competition. This is a politicized prosecution. It is a political persecution through prosecution now in a third indictment just in a matter of months against the person who is still at present the lead contender in the Republican primary. And remember that Vivek doesn't actually have

or cite any evidence for the things he's saying. I know it doesn't matter to a lot of people, but it's an important thing to know for U.S. president. I want to be very clear. I am running for U.S. president in that same Republican primary. It would be easier for me if Donald Trump were eliminated from competition. That's not how I want to win. This is not about politics to me. This is about first principles. We do not want to become a country where the party in power is able to use banana republic-like tactics to eliminate its political opponents. Yet I'm sad to say that's exactly where we are. The allegations in this indictment fall flat. It is wrong and incorrect and inaccurate to place blame for what happened on January 6th at the feet of Donald Trump.

I said this at the time. I've said it ever since then. I continue to say it today. I would not have made the same judgments that Donald Trump did in how he handled that day. But that's different from saying that he committed a crime. Wow. He did not. He specifically told the protesters that day to behave peacefully. The First Amendment in this country gives political protesters the. So this goes on and on. I'm not going to play it all for you. Eventually, Vivek says I would pardon Trump. The things he's saying, of course, are not actually

relevant. Trump is not being indicted for things he said. Eventually, Vivek says, I would pardon Trump. The things he's saying, of course, are not actually relevant. Trump is not being indicted for things he said. He attempted to subvert the will of the people. Fake electors scheme. It's how many times am I going to repeat the same stuff? But they're going with he's being indicted for speech. Here is Vivek also the day before on CNN saying, yes, he would pardon Trump, at least in the classified documents case.

But let's move on now to federal prosecutors added new obstruction of justice charges against former President Donald Trump on Thursday. The indictment, the superseding indictment, says that after Trump learned that the Justice Department wanted to subpoena security footage from Mar-a-Lago, Trump talked with an aide who later told the IT director at Mar-a-Lago that, quote, the boss, end quote, wanted the footage deleted. Now, I know you've said repeatedly that you would pardon Trump in this document's case, but this is significant new information. So given this new information, do you still, would you still pardon him if you were president? The standard I use as our next president is what moves our country forward.

What is the right thing for the United States of America? Right. And would having a president like this move it forward? And absolutely the right answer is to move on and I would pardon him. I would, I intend to be our next president. And yes, I do believe I will move us forward. And yes, I think one of the right ways to do that is to pardon the former president of the United States from what is clearly a politicized prosecution. And I'll share a view with you, Casey. All right. So he he says that he would pardon Trump.

One of the claims that Vivek and others have made is these are process crimes and that that may means that these aren't really the types of things we should be prosecuting for. Now, a process crime is a crime that interferes with the judicial process. So like if you lie to people investigating something or if you obstruct those investigating or if you fail to appear in court, that's what process crimes are. They're not, oh, I went and killed someone. It's I lied or obstructed an investigation into a murder which I didn't commit or something like that. And the idea is these aren't really related to underlying criminality. It is really important to know that the charges against Donald Trump are not process crimes. They are not based in actions during his investigation

or a trial. There are additional charges that are because Trump did try to obstruct. But especially with this third indictment, we're talking about Trump's actions in the aftermath of the 2020 election. They're not related to an investigation. They are Trump's actions when he conspired to defraud the American voters, when he tried to subvert the will of the people, et cetera. And so if you look at the Manhattan district attorney charges, falsifying business records, hush money, et cetera. And so if you look at the Manhattan district attorney charges, falsifying business records, hush money, et cetera, that is not a process crime. That was something Trump did to try to affect the outcome of an election. It is a violation of state election law. If you look at the second set of charges related to the documents and the willful retention of information

he's not supposed to have, et cetera, There are some process elements when Trump tried to obstruct the investigation, deleting, et cetera. But that is separate from the underlying crimes. And again, with this latest charge, these are also not process crimes. We're talking about fraud, corruption, abuse of power, conspiracy. So Vivek and others saying these are merely process crimes. They are wrong. Just because someone may have committed process crimes doesn't mean that their wrongdoing should be ignored. But on the merits of what they are claiming, they are wrong. So is there someone who stands to benefit from saying I will be the one to most strongly pardon Trump? Could it be the Santas? Could it be Ramaswamy? Could it be someone else?

I don't know. I don't know. DeSantis has lost more than 40 percent support. Is he going to get it back by saying I will pardon Trump? Hard to say. The big Ramaswamy continues to pull 5%. Does he have a path to the nomination by saying I will be the guy who most strongly pardons Trump? It's hard to imagine, but I'll leave that question with you. Is there a path to the nomination for someone who runs on Trump's damage? He can't win, but I can and I'll pardon him. Let me know what you think. Summer is in full swing. No better time to get out and explore my favorite ways on my electric bike.

It's just great exercise like a regular bike, but you can go further. You can see more. My electric bike is the XP three point O from our sponsor, electric e-bikes, thousand watt motor with a ton of torque. I can go up to twenty eight miles an hour. It's just super fun. My XP three point O also has upgraded hydraulic brakes, five level pedal assist, providing intuitive and smooth acceleration and a twist grip throttle for pure Thank you so much for joining us today. on one charge. Every model folds up so I can put it in my car, the garage. Electric e-bikes cost way less than the competition with financing as low as seventy three bucks a month. So your outdoor fun won't cost you a fortune. Every bike ships free and fully assembled. So what are you waiting

for? Start your journey at electric e-bikes dot com. That's L.E.C. T.R.I.C. E-bikes dot com. The link is in the podcast notes. One of the things we've been talking about over the last really couple of years is the reality of quite strong economic numbers. Now we will talk on the bonus show today about the downgrade of American debt. I don't know that this dramatically changes the overall state of the economy and the labor force, but we'll discuss that on the bonus show. But from a political strategy standpoint, one of the really interesting things that's going on is

that because the economy really is pretty solid, Republicans sort of have no idea what to do. Now, one of the things they're they're trying to do is just say the economy is bad. It's not really landing. There are people, you know, if you go to Trump rallies and you interview people, you'll see people repeat this line from Trump. We've got to turn the economy around. By dynamics is socialist. It's Marxist. It's anarchist, as some say. But it's not really landing nationally. Nationally, the country sort of thinks the economy is OK, maybe not as good as the numbers show, but it's not really working. So now the question becomes, what do Republicans talk about?

What do they do? There's a really interesting article by Jennifer Rubin, not someone I'm like a huge fan of, but this opinion piece in The Washington Post is quite good. And it's called Without a Recession to Exploit, the Republican Party Has lost economic coherence. And in this article summarizing it, we'll link to it, but summarizing it, Jennifer Rubin says there's really a lack of economic plans and policies and there's not a recession right now. Republicans continue to insist, oh, there might be we're on the brink of a recession. We always sort of might be, but it's not clear that we are right now. And Republicans really aren't offering constructive

alternatives to the Biden agenda. They attack the Biden agenda. They attack the Inflation Reduction Act. They attack student loan forgiveness. They do all these things, but they don't really propose anything other than this vague and general. The Green New Deal is bad. Remember, the Green New Deal isn't law, although elements of it are arguably part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which to a partial degree have started to be implemented. That's pretty weak. If your argument is we will end the Green New Deal, we don't really have it. They generally and vaguely want to lower taxes, except Biden hasn't actually raised taxes on the vast majority of Americans. So that also kind of falls flat. And this is how

we end up with Republicans focusing on obstructionism and focusing on culture wars as we look around. And many of us who think logically and sort of try to analyze things for what they are, we see the obsession with drag shows. We see the obsession with what they call child genital mutilation, gender affirming care, how we teach about slavery in schools, woke and Barbie and all these stupid things. And we wonder, why are they doing this? These don't really seem to be the big issues for most Americans. The reason they're doing it is they are completely incoherent on economic issues. And this is potentially a major problem for Republicans. Now, there is a contingent, even if people in my audience who see this, they see the economy is pretty good and Republicans are offering nothing

and instead just playing politics, saying the economy is bad and meanwhile doing culture war stuff. They're going to get crushed in November of twenty twenty four. They can't possibly do well. The economy is good. It's good. They're going to get crushed. I think it is premature. To assume that Republicans will get crushed in November of twenty twenty four, just because the economy by just about every metric is doing well, and there's a couple different reasons for that, number one. It's about the perception of the economy more than it is about the economy. There was a time 20 years ago where the average voter more accurately assessed the state of the economy. If the economy was pretty good, the average voter would realize the economy is pretty good. And then usually they would be likely to vote to continue for with more of

whatever is in power, whoever is in power on that basis, that they understand the economy is pretty good and I realize it's pretty good. That is different right now. It's different for a number of different reasons. It's different because of the amount of disinformation and propaganda and fake news that's out there insisting the economy is bad, even though the economy is not bad. Number two, the Republican Party has abandoned policy and is focused on insisting the economy is not bad. Number two, the Republican Party has abandoned policy and is focused on insisting the economy is bad while pointing the eyes and the attention and ears

of voters in other directions. And number three, the election isn't for another. What is it, 15 months? The economy may not be as good in 15 months as it is right now. So I think it would be wrong and extremely shortsighted to assume we don't have to worry about 2024. The economy is good. That means Joe Biden and Democrats widely win. So that's one thing everyone must vote. We're not going to take our eye off the ball from a more general kind of analysis perspective. It is interesting that the Republican Party has nothing left but the culture war. And it is a culture war that on paper they are losing. When you pull people about wokeness, when you pull people about drag shows, when you

every single one of these questions, I know that if you go on Breitbart or if you go on, you know, read it, I'm sorry, read it or yes, Twitter, which is now called X. I have to keep track of what things are called now. You might get the impression that these issues are just, you know, the foremost on everyone's mind. But it really is interesting to see that they are obsessed with issues that are not the most important issues for Americans because they have failed on the economy. The economy is pretty good and they're offering nothing coherent. We're going to follow whether the narrative or story changes from Republicans over the next 15 months or even within the Republican primary. But for right now, absent a recession, Republicans don't really know what to do about the very

solid but by no means perfect economy that we have under Joe Biden. I want to look at a couple of clips of a very strange interview. Donald Trump was interviewed by Breitbart. This guy named Matt Boyle interviewed Trump. It is such a weird interview in which Trump insists he's being indicted for nothing. I don't know who's more confused in this interview. Is it Trump or is it the interviewer? Well, there's never been a time like this in our country. They go around indicting me for nothing for play, you know, for really political interference or election interferences, what they're practicing at a level nobody's ever seen. And this is a crime family that was

like mobsters the way they spoke on the phone, the way he spoke on the phone about his father sitting there and he was sitting there. Does anyone have a doubt about that? You know, this is a thing that this country has never seen before and nothing happens to him. And making the argument, of course, an incoherent argument that while he's being indicted for nothing, mobster Joe Biden isn't being punished, I guess, is what he what Donald Trump would want. And the interviewer is like a sock on the floor 20 feet away. It's like it's inanimate, completely inanimate. It's actually quite stunning. Then they get into the issue of corruption. And Trump says Biden's the most corrupt ever. So in 2016, you very famously branded Hillary Clinton as crooked Hillary. Right.

So worse. Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton. What a tough question. Who is more crooked, sir? Is it Biden or is it Hillary? Well, I took the name of crooked. We call her beautiful Hillary now because, you know, that one's over with. And the word crooked was very pertinent.

I think it was a very good word for Biden. No, he's crooked. He's a crooked, most corrupt president we've ever had. And he's also the worst president we've ever had. You look at what happened in Afghanistan. You look at what happened with inflation. Look at the economy. Look what it's what a what a random occurrence, huh?

The guy that happened to have defeated Trump soundly is both the most crooked and the worst president that we have ever had. What bad luck that that's the guy Trump lost to the subject of Mitch McConnell's stroke or seizure came up during the interview. And Trump says that McConnell should step down on this. I agree with Trump. So speaking of the Senate, we saw another big story this week is that the Senate leader, Mitch McConnell, had another of what appears now to have been several major health incidents. I don't know if you saw the video of him at the press conference. What did you think about that? Well, I thought it was sad. At the same time, I think it's a shame that he went so far out to give Green Deal money to Biden.

It's a shame he had a stroke, but he gave money to Biden. Democrats, you know, he got 10 people to vote because they needed 10 people. And he got 10 people to vote on numerous occasions for trillions of dollars. And I think that's a shame. But that was too bad. That was actually a sad thing to say. He had a bad fall, I guess, and probably after effect of that. But it was also sad that he gave trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars to

the Democrats to wait. Both are sad. The stroke in public is sad or whatever it was. And also helping Biden sad also. Stunned the Green New Deal and destroying our oceans and destroying our great, beautiful vistas and planes all over our country with windmills that, you know, are very expensive energy. Can you believe it? So that's a very sad thing also. Do you want to see a new Republican leader in the U.S. Senate? Do you want to see McConnell? We have to have that. No, we have to have that. We need and we have some people in the Senate that are fantastic,

would be great at that position. But it's just amazing that he would do that. At the same time, I hope he's well. So he should resign, but I hope that he's doing well. And then lastly here, Trump hopes that indeed Joe Biden will be impeached. Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy has said that he is he believes that we're on the verge of opening an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. What do you think about this? I mean, obviously, you've gone through it twice. Do you think that's right? Joe Biden should be impeached.

They impeached me over a perfect phone call. This guy's stolen millions of dollars. No evidence of that. Remember, and done worse than that. phone call. This guy's stolen millions of dollars. No evidence of that, remember. And done worse than that. I mean, look at what he's done to the country with the inflation, with the energy, with taking away people's rights. Remember, inflation down 27 months in a row. DOJ, weaponized DOJ. No, I mean, they impeached me over a perfect phone call. And here's a guy stolen millions of dollars and done other things that are so bad. Our country is in a position where it's just it's so sad to see what's happening.

I mean, is that you think we should? I don't want to comment on it, but, you know, I think people understand nobody's ever seen anything like it. We'll see what they do. Let them make their decision. But they should do the proper thing. There you go. He's not going to comment, but they should do the proper thing and impeach Joe Biden. This is what we've got. The thrice indicted president visibly confused and making

all sorts of demands that he has no place making. And the interviewer nods along like a ventriloquist dummy. Incredible stuff. We have a voicemail number. That number is two one nine two. David P. Here's an idea about the real point of those UFO hearings last week. Hi, David. I want to talk about this UFO garbage that keeps flooding all my recommendations and stuff. All right.

Apparently Congress is talking about right now. So it almost seems like a psychological operation where the idea is you think about things that are dubious and that may or may not be true on some level. And you ignore things like climate change, where we're at a point where any idiot knows that the summers are hotter than they have been since they can remember when they were younger and that wildflower wildflowers. Wildfires are raging. Yeah. So the idea here is we joked last week where the UFO hearings meant to distract from Hunter Biden's court appearance or was Hunter Biden's court appearance scheduled to distract from the UFO hearings?

This idea is different, which is if people are talking about UFOs, they're not thinking about climate change, wildfires, air quality, etc.. I don't know that any of these things are literally what's going on, but you could certainly make the case if people are thinking about UFOs, maybe they're not thinking about climate change. But beyond that, I don't know that there's any kind of concerted conspiracy when it comes to it. We've got a great bonus show for you today. Sign up at join Pacman dot com coupon code rice indicted. We'll see you then.