While Dems go hard on Trump, guess who’s getting a pass- Watters
Transcript
00:00 With Team Trump just hitting back at the Department of Justice's attempt to muzzle what he can
00:03 say in public about the 2020 election case.
00:07 The Department of Justice wants to prevent Trump from sharing details about their investigation.
00:13 But as lawyers say, it would violate Trump's First Amendment rights.
00:16 Quote, "In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First
00:20 Amendment rights.
00:21 Worse, it does so against its administration's primary political opponent during an election
00:27 season in which the administration, prominent party members, and media allies have campaigned
00:31 on the indictment and proliferated its false allegations."
00:35 The former president ripping apart the Justice Department's charges this weekend.
00:39 Watch.
00:40 Whenever more Biden corruption is exposed, his henchmen charge me with crimes.
00:44 Now, I'm being indicted for you.
00:46 I'm being indicted because of what we've done, and I'm being indicted because they're afraid
00:49 of all of us because we have a movement that's never been seen in the history of our country.
00:54 Those indictments aren't worth the paper they're written on.
00:57 They're not worth—they took away free speech.
01:00 And as the Democrats and the media go hard on Trump, you can probably guess who's getting
01:04 a pass.
01:06 This focus, this obsession, I would say, on Hunter Biden is really just a whopper of whataboutism
01:12 because the Republicans are trying to deflect, to diminish, to defend Donald Trump.
01:17 We're going to have a campaign that is going to be filled with a lot of whataboutisms.
01:20 We know the Republicans are going to talk about Hunter Biden a lot.
01:22 We know that there is a lot of, you know, influence in Washington that's based on people's
01:29 family connections and family ties.
01:31 Last names matter a lot on K Street.
01:33 As you well know, as you were very cautious about starting impeachment proceedings.
01:37 This is frivolous.
01:38 This is a diversionary tactic.
01:40 Harold Ford Jr., you're a lawyer.
01:44 So if the Department of Justice says, you know, you're not allowed to talk about this
01:50 case for the next year in the middle of a presidential campaign, how is that not illegal?
01:57 Well, it may be what you're saying is unconstitutional.
02:01 You can't strip him of a right to say, any American of a right to say, I'm innocent of
02:04 these charges.
02:06 Here's why I'm innocent of these charges.
02:08 And I would imagine that the court is going to allow him to be able to go out wherever
02:12 he wants, because I thought his I don't always agree with his lawyers.
02:15 I think sometimes they've been maybe C or D rate.
02:17 But I thought whomever wrote that was pretty good because he made clear you can't deny
02:21 an American the opportunity, particularly if the other side is talking about it as well.
02:25 Where I disagree with his lawyers, any if President Trump, former President Trump attacks
02:29 the court or the prosecutor again, he should have he should have something tamped on him
02:34 around that.
02:35 But professing his innocence, laying out the facts as he knows it, laying out the evidence
02:39 as he's going to present it on his side.
02:41 What do you mean when you say attack the court?
02:44 What does that mean?
02:45 When you say that the judge is an idiot, when you say that the prosecution is a henchman,
02:50 these are things that will inflame and not serve anyone's interest.
02:55 Did he say the judge was an idiot?
02:56 I haven't heard that.
02:57 He may have, but he has said it about this judge, the other judge.
03:01 Slander.
03:02 But I think he should be able to say whatever he wants regarding the facts and the evidence
03:06 in the case.
03:07 So you could say the judge was a partner at Hunter's law firm, the same firm that did
03:11 the dossier and has donated about forty three hundred dollars to Barack Obama.
03:16 Joe Biden, you can say that you just can't say she's an idiot.
03:19 Right.
03:20 But but there's nothing wrong.
03:21 But I would imagine if someone accused me of the things they accuse the president of,
03:24 I would be saying I didn't do those.
03:25 I wouldn't be personalizing with the judge.
03:28 But that's his.
03:29 He has every right to do that.
03:30 But what he does not have a right to do is to attack the court and to attack the prosecutor
03:34 personally if you want to attack their case.
03:36 I think he's fully should be fully protected.
03:38 OK.
03:39 And then of course, the in discovery, the Department of Justice hands us stuff to his
03:42 defense attorney and it said we had agents crawling all over January 6th.
03:47 Trump can't say that during an election campaign.
03:50 I think he's going to say what he wants, given his history.
03:53 I think he will not be taking things back when he's trying to run for president and
03:58 has all these indictments.
03:59 I'm not surprised that the Department of Justice would like him to say less.
04:02 They don't have any credibility when it comes to the repeated things they've tried to bring
04:06 against him.
04:07 And I think they're really hoping now that one of these indictments sticks on the J6
04:10 thing, you know, to answer the question about why he would go after the players here, including
04:14 the judge or the prosecutor.
04:16 It's because we've seen since Trump entered the political arena 2015, 2016, that the people
04:22 who were investigating him had political motive.
04:24 Peter Shruck, Lisa Page at the FBI investigating him, saying he could never be president.
04:29 Now you have this judge in D.C. on the J6 case who is an activist.
04:33 She has donated lots of money to Democrats.
04:35 She was very sympathetic to the BLM riots while she's throwing J6ers behind bars longer
04:41 than prosecutors even asked for.
04:43 So that is relevant to the context of the broader situation for people to understand
04:49 why he may have some commentary on that.
04:52 But while this is all happening with the indictments, and this is the double standard play, Hunter
04:56 Biden is rewriting his plea agreement.
04:58 He was able to plead guilty when he was supposed to plead not guilty, and now he's working
05:02 with DOJ to figure out what's next after they screwed up in front of the judge and got caught
05:07 with their blanket immunity statement.
05:08 So while Trump is dealing with all of this, Hunter Biden is working with DOJ on another
05:13 sweetheart deal that may also fall apart, depending on what's in it.
05:17 And the lawyer for the former president, Trump, said this weekend, "We should have cameras
05:22 in the courtroom.
05:23 This can't be a secret trial right before an election, Dana."
05:26 So I've had a longstanding principle in my life.
05:29 I am against cameras in the courtroom.
05:31 Full stop.
05:32 I agree.
05:33 On the federal level, I think they've held, there's never been cameras allowed in the
05:36 courtroom on the federal level.
05:38 I think it just adds to chaos, chicanery, nonsense.
05:42 Chicanery.
05:43 You have, you know, and actually you asked the press secretary to Bill Clinton, whose
05:47 name was Mike.
05:48 McCurry.
05:49 McCurry, thank you.
05:50 Sorry, Mike.
05:51 Democratic trivia right here.
05:52 Yeah, thank you.
05:54 He was the first to allow cameras in the briefing room.
05:57 How do you think that's gone?
05:58 Yeah.
05:59 In the briefing room, when you have people.
06:00 Acosta.
06:01 Yes.
06:02 And like making like a mockery of it.
06:04 One of the things that the Supreme Court did during COVID was they allowed, under a bit
06:09 of duress, but it seemed to work out kind of okay, was you could listen to the audio.
06:13 I like that.
06:14 And the audio actually makes you listen.
06:16 The other thing is if you're watching it and you have cable news pundits like commenting
06:22 on it and watching, like you might get, for either side you're on, the legal nuance is
06:26 wrong.
06:27 You might get it wrong.
06:28 So having cameras in the courtroom are not a good idea for the long run.
06:31 And I wouldn't do it in this case either.
06:33 Okay.
06:34 I would do audio in this case only.
06:36 Greg Gutfeld, your thoughts on this gag order attempt or whatever they're calling it here
06:40 with the president.
06:41 Well, it appears that they want to limit Trump's public comments.
06:45 Isn't that the whole point of the trial?
06:48 So they're trying to limit his public comments.
06:51 Maybe they should limit his comments about the comments they want to limit about the
06:55 comments that they want to limit about.
06:58 As for Nancy Pelosi saying this is a waste of time, the Biden impeachment thing, you
07:03 want to know what a waste of time was that?
07:06 Think about that first impeachment over a phone call.
07:09 It wasn't just a waste of time.
07:11 It was about when that waste of time took place.
07:13 That was during the hearings for COVID.
07:15 That was in that period of time when we should have been looking at that.
07:19 Instead we were looking at this because the media felt that fighting Trump was more important
07:23 than fighting this weird, strange disease that's coming out and killing a bunch of people.
07:27 So now they lowered the bar.
07:28 They got a drink at it.
07:30 That's the way I say it.
07:31 So we've got to have, you know, they, they miss the good old days when there wasn't anybody
07:34 fighting pack.
07:35 The good and bad part about Trump is there's no off switch.
07:38 So you're going to have it no matter what.
07:40 Can I mention one thing about this, which is if DOJ is going to ask for this protective
07:44 order and the judge is going to say, yeah, Trump, you better respond to this.
07:48 She should also issue a warning, I think, to the justice department that if any of this
07:52 leaks like the other leaks, then there should be consequences for the prosecution as well.
07:57 100% agree with Dana.
07:58 But can you, and they will be leaking, but Jesse, just one thing on the judge is giving
08:02 money to campaigns that happens on both sides.
08:05 This is not, this is, I just want to make clear, but credibility is, but there are a
08:10 lot, right.
08:11 But a lot of judges, Democrat and Republican, but the history of DOJ with Trump does not
08:15 bode well for that context.
08:16 Yeah.
08:17 Well, if he does get the gag order, I'm sure he'll violate it immediately.
08:21 He will.
08:22 And he'll dare the judge to do something about it.
08:24 Vote next.
08:25 The liberal media has a new defense for Kamala.
08:27 If you dare criticize her, you're a racist.
08:47 [BLANK_AUDIO]