pull no punches, so look for it. trip um number one, for the 1st time ever a u. s. president is being tried on criminal charges. it has begun truth, bob, number 2. as mr. trump corrupt a serious criminal charge, or just a business man protecting his brand. misdemeanor will explain both trip. um, number 3. can mr. trump end up in jail? what are the odds we're going to tell you. i'm rick sanchez. this is directive pack the . all right, so this is the day to do this story because it's on the somewhat cd corruption case against donald trump is on. and the opening arguments have been delivered.

according to the prosecutor representing the state of new york, bringing charges against mr. trump. he is a man who seemed to quote, corrupt the 2016 election by silencing people who would have hurt his chances of winning. according to, by the way, the state of new york with mr. trump dead, was quoting again, election, fraud, pure and simple. those are the words that were ordered by the opening arguments or during the opening arguments by the past years was the words mister traps. lawyers though had different words. they tell a very different story. they say, this is the fraud, and what the former president did had nothing to do with the election. defense attorney todd blanche seems to admit that mr. trump didn't pay off the controversial porn star. but he says it wasn't brought. as you said, it was a fraud and it had nothing to do with the election. he says it was simply done to

quoting here, proud tact, his family, his reputation, and his brand. and it was not a crime. so okay, here's what we should do since the thing is just starting, i kind of want to give you a, a setup, right? this is non political, here's what's gonna happen in the trial, right? so let's, let's go through the, some of the players. these are the players where you will hear about what you're not going to see them, at least not testifying because the case is not going to be televised. and there will be no cameras in the court room front and center, the former president who becomes the 1st ever to face a criminal trial in the country's history. all right, baseball card number to spell me daniels. yes. she really is a pornographic movie star whose real name is stephanie covered and did apparently have an encounter with mr. trump. michael cohen. he was mr. trump's

lawyer who actually paid hushed money to miss daniels and was then repaid by mister truck. go in, sir, jail time for the incident and now will testify against trump, who he says should also go to jail just like you to a, a, karen mcdougal. she is a former playboy model who is said to also have had an affair with mr. trump. and then agreed to sell her story for a $150000.00 about it. however, a magazine who bought it, buried it instead. story that is not her. david packer. mm. interesting name, huh. he is the publisher of the magazine. who paid mcdougal, prosecutors argue he was mr. trump associate and would often do this to silence his critics. do what? well, it's called, catch, and kill. pay for the exclusive rights to

a story and then kill it. instead of doing it. becker is also a witnessed in the case. so there you have a some of the big players that we know of right now. others possibly could be introduced aside from prosecutors and defense attorneys. those are the people who are going to be really making up this drama. right? but what about the drama itself? what for example, does the state of new york have to prove right about donald trump? that's a very good question. they need to prove that what mr. trump did wasn't just to pay off. that's not enough by itself to show that he committed a felony to have to go beyond that. they also can't just say that mr. trump lied when he had mr. cohen pay daniels on his behalf. because that just by itself would only be a misdemeanor, not a felony. so not really that big of

a deal. so what does the state have to prove to convict mr. trump, of a more serious crime, a felony, or they have to prove that he did all of this as part of another underlying crime. so the payoff itself is not enough. he had to have done it for another reason, a more serious crime, an underlying crime. that's the term that used underlying now they must prove, for example, that the money was spent to improve his chances of winning the election. if they can do that, they can say the only way is a new pay this off is because he didn't want voters to know about what you did right. then they could say that it wasn't just a payment to avoid embarrassment or so his wife didn't find out what he had done would be a fair and all that stuff. but that he was instead influencing the election within the lead. the campaign finance payment. that's their argument that they say they're going to be able to prove. so if that becomes the underlying crime,

that he was actually making a campaign finance payment, then the case becomes a felony. so that's what, that's what they have to do, not just show that he did it, but why he did it. so what about mr. trump's lawyers? what, what do they need to do? what do they have to show in this case? another good question. here's lawyers need to portray the daniels pay off as a private matter then the charges against him as nothing more than a technical bookkeeping violation. oh, i was suppose to put it in the ledger as i paid here, but it actually went down as i paid over there. people make mistakes when it comes to bookkeeping all the time. that's what they're going to argue. by the way, that would not be substantial enough toward a criminal charge against the former president. and they also need to try and show that prosecutors are overreach. you need to tell the jury these guys are come on. this isn't that big a deal and they're trying to make the case bigger than it is that's,

that's kind of like their job. that's what you're going to be hearing. and that, linking this case, right, they're going to say you're trying to link this case to federal election law. so those 2 things have nothing to do with each other. they're gonna say that that's kind of a weird approach. that would test the interaction of the laws at the state and at the federal levels. because remember, campaign finance is a federal matter. it's about a state matter. he's being charged in the state court. did you follow that? and here's another question. this is important. and the question is probably the one that is most asked can mr. trump actually go to jail? if he's found guilty, is going to be going to jail? actually, the chances of that happening are slim. even if mr. trump is convicted, he's unlikely to face any present time. why? because even at the felony level, falsifying business records, gary's a sentence of up to 4 years in prison. for the 1st time offenders, particularly a non violent cases, what they often get is probation. and finally,

if mr. trump is found guilty, can you still run for president? yes, absolutely. there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits them from doing so . however, there is a button here kind of a big, but there are some states that might then argue that they have the right to take him off the ballot based on what their state constitution say about a convicted felon running for office. that's where this thing could possibly get confusing. so here we go. let's discuss it further cuz we're still, i know a lot of questions and a lot going on and there's dabbles are, he's a writer, he's a journalist and an expert on the us constitution and he's good enough to join us right now. maybe we start with that last part, the part where trump's attorneys are going to say to the jury look um yeah,

he may have done something which could have been a crime because he somehow made a pay off and he had his attorney do it. and he didn't do it, but that he paid his attorney. so that was deceptive. however, you can't put that together with any campaign finance laws because that's a bridge too far. is that an important point that you think they're going to stress, right? oh yeah, totally important. i mean, i think the a, i think the, the case is a real stretch. i mean, tying what is a at that, that's the kind of a, a, a, a, an accounting fudge and a misdemeanor. right? that tying into a violation of federal election laws strikes me as just about the biggest stretches, i can imagine, especially because federal prosecutors themselves exec m a. so decided to pass on it. there wasn't enough there. but uh, albert bag ran for d. a on a, i get trump platform. so this campaign promise fulfilled. he's got

a club club with some, this is the best he can do and therefore he's going forward. but let me, let me quibble with you there on that a little bit. i hear republicans make that argument all the time. all they're just bringing this case because it's trump, we're one of those people every time a 17 year old black kid in the hood gets his life ruined by smoking a marijuana cigarette. where were they? every time we see injustice put upon some american doesn't have enough money to pay for lawyers. i mean, all of a sudden the, we just discovered that the judicial system in this country often times is not blind. and we're only going to bring it up in this case. right. oh, yeah, totally. i mean, i mean, i completely agree. i mean, anybody who's ever sat through a trial in the manhattan court room, uh, you know, knows that this is a highly uncertain business and

a lot of stuff goes wrong. yeah. and a lot of ordinary people, wind up getting screwed screed royally and well, she's not going to accept that and hopefully prosecute to your point is subjective . it's subjective across the board, not just in this case. you know, it's subjective. it's also regressive because the 17 year old kid smoking a joint, you'll only goes to jail if he's black and poor. believe me. if he's a prep school student with a, a lawyer, dad, and, and a mom sobbing hysterically at his side, he does not go to jail. he never goes to jail, may be goes to, you know, to the court mandate or do you know, some kind of therapy program, but that's it. i mean, they'll still be able to apply it. so, you know, for admission to yell the next day of the following year. uh so yeah, this is, this is comple whitley redress completely filed up. there are so many, so many,

so many abuses that go on. but the fact that there are abuse is doesn't mean that is okay with using know, donald trump, in this instance, i mean, i don't like donald trump, but certainly this whole case that you know, is completely bonkers. what do you like? what do you make up, dan? of i think one of the most fascinating parts of this, and of course is matters to me because i'm a journalist and that never heard about this until it became public. as i started reading about this cage, this, this whole catching to say where some people have so much money. um, you know, to be able to pay a 100150000 dollars, 200000 dollars every time somebody has something on you. and you have a guy who is a publisher for a magazine, and i tell him, hey, go give this guy money on the story, but don't do the story. thereby, we killed the story. that's, that whole thing is really fascinating. what do you think of it? had you heard of it before? and what impact might it have on the jury?

i actually, i had not heard was it before, but i've heard a lot about the national inquiry. you know, this is the, this, the magazine that, you know, by the house, wives, new hampshire. we're having our sex with space. aliens, you know, uh, this has been their, their, their, their money maker. uh so you know, so i'm not surprised that goes this far but, but like at the, it'd be fair to be fair. i mean, trump is a guy who's running for president is he's got a checkered past. he's a big business man, he's glamorous, you know, he's been on page. there was no countless times. page 6 in your post, i mean countless times. so. so from charles point of view, a lot of people are kind of comes coming out of the what work with stories to tell . and they want to be, you know, they want to be paid off. you know, whether it's the know there's this, the, the building inspector who claims that from bass of the system, a bribe or the playboy center full to claims that she slip with trump, etc. everybody is got a reason. everybody's got a, got a, a, a motive to, to,

to pick him up from money. so therefore, it seems that his organization, you know, ran an operation in which they tried just to stop these people before they could make trouble. going to the final weeks. the campaign and trump had enough problems with you know, what that uh, that same is, you know, access hollywood tape which you know, tied him up for, for weeks. the last thing you needed was in late october to have stormy daniels come forth with some kind of salacious 6 tail. uh so yeah. so you know, the patch until uh makes a certain amount of sense amount of contact. but what again uh, let me push back on you. why pay if you didn't do it? if you didn't do it, if you didn't sleep with a porn star or a playboy bunny, and if you didn't have your best friend give her a 150000 dollars to automatically claim to do the story and then kill it. if you had nothing to do with any of that stuff,

why don't you just had nothing to do with this them? i don't know what your people are even talking about and walk away yet, but yeah, that's that. that's really, that's really the admirable thing to do. we are quite right, but anyhow, but, but the, but the fact is, what do you, what does the, all the old line uh, you know, a lie is around the block before it. a tooth even puts its, uh, its, its boots on. yeah. i mean, the navigation like that cuz how i stuff up are good sized stuff up for, you know, for weeks the press would want to talk to tom, but nothing else. you know, the trump campaign would been, you know, halted in his tracks as the press focused on the stormy dan daniels and go and i wouldn't really heard of, or conceivably might have heard him. let's talk so therefore, you know, therefore he's as long as you want me to stop it. i'm going to take a break. and when i come back, i want to ask you about this whole underlying crime thing because the seems to be right at the crypts of this up of this whole matter that the prosecution has to be able to prove. how important is it? where's that, where's it come from in the constitution?

and how likely is it that it will be the difference maker in this case? we're going to talk about that with them. is our stay right there will be right back the, [000:00:00;00]

the, the, the, the, [000:00:00;00] the, by the middle of the 19th century,

practically the whole of india had been under the rules of the british and by the colonial authorities that impose that heavy death, bringing the people into poverty exporting natural resources, and moreover, these authorities absolutely had no consideration for the predictions of the local population, treating them like 2nd class citizens. the british were showing signs of disrespect even to the operated with them. the facts of ignoring the religious beliefs of the hindus led them you may have, as the voice, mercenary soldiers serving under the british ground. 3000000000 began on the 10th of may 1857 in the garrison town of may river, north of india. the form of abuse. the rebels quickly took over daily that he rode the resistance of the indian people lasted for one and a half years. however, the forces were not. the colonial authorities dealt with a rebels, cruel, late fee and slaves. the boys were tied to the mouth of the cannon and were shot

right through their bodies for the amusement of the public. these type of execution was called the devils with the obliteration of the mutiny resulted in the death of 800000 inhabitants of the indians. however, to the british empire, never broke the free spirit of the indians and their will will resist the monday. i'm rick sanchez. and this is a direct impact. and i'm talking to dallas are about the donald trump case. we're talking about the donald trump case because it's finally begun. we've heard so much about an actual criminal case and there's been so many political opinions, one way or another on this case. and i think what we're trying to get to here is, what are the facts, how strong is the case or how weak is the case it? and what we know right now is that what the prosecution has to do to try and find

donald trump guilty is a bit of a novel argument that they have to create. they have to not only prove that he did this, which by the way it seems like the defense is stipulating. he did it, you know, they're not going to go in there and say, now he never had a relationship with stormy daniels or this other woman mcdougal. what they're saying is, what the hell does that have to do with him being charged with a felony in this case? because, you know, he didn't want his wife to find out, or he was embarrassed, or he wanted to predict his read what they have to prove. the prosecutors, and as we've discussed, is that it was more than that. what it was actually try to do was trying to make sure the american people didn't find out about these things. and by trying to make sure the american people didn't find out about this, he was interfering in the campaign because he paid over a $100000.00 in both cases. and they're gonna say, well, those weren't really pay off. they were kind of campaign finance payments. and that's what they have to be able to show. it's a bit of a sticky wicket. his dad has been telling us, but it's

a really important part of this case. then i'm wondering, where were you surprised when you 1st started reading about this case and you read that? that's the avenue that they were going to take. and what did you think of it when you 1st heard about it? and what do you think of it now? that's right. yeah, i was very surprised. i mean, it was, i saw it was a real stretch then i think the same thing now. and you know, by the way, um, uh let me just correct you on one on one of course of course not admitted to having a sexual relationship with uh what story daniels, uh, everyone assumes he did, but he actually has not admitted to that. um, so uh well let me, let me, let me, let me, let me just add a one. let me just add something to that during opening arguments that i read carefully last night. there was no indication by his attorneys that they were going to argue that point and you're right, that doesn't mean they're saying he did. they're just also not saying you didn't

for what it matters. right. so from his point of view, some woman comes out with a story that is believable, although he insist is not true. and therefore, in order to so you know, to make sure everything goes, go smoothly in the final weeks of the campaign. these pacer some money tells her be quiet and go away. and so, and so, and if yours, which is donald trump is you can, you know, can passed out, you know, some, some big bills pretty freely. so that's what he maintains he did. so he said he wasn't, he wasn't trying to cover up. he wasn't trying to lie. he was simply trying to prevent somebody from going public with a salacious, but full story. but so, but he's a politician. so who cares? who cares what he says, dan, come on. this is a court of law. it's not about what some politicians set on the stump. of course. anything a politician says on the stop, i'm not going to believe i don't care of it's joe biden, or either not. well, i'm not gonna say mother theresa, but no matter who they are, the, what matters is, what are their lawyers going to say when they get into the court room?

that's what matters now. yeah, yeah, sure. so it matters. yeah. and the of, of the question is, you know, is this a, the question is of overreach? the question is of a desperate prosecutor that desperately a, you know, trying to uh, to advances political career by, by nailing donald trump, who was about as a, as better as popular manhattan as a typhoid mary. and send him to prison, i live. and thereby, and, you know, add, you know, uh, ernest stripes i, so that's clearly what's going on here. i mean, i just, this is the, this is not how the system should be used. do you think that he is capable? well, the system is capable of delivering him a fair trial in a place like new york, where as you say, he is very much loved i'm, you know, i, well, i've sat on juries, i've been, i've been the, i've been non lucky enough to have chosen for rich,

already and i was once actually you got locked away in a hotel for 3 days or the deliberate in some case and, and juries because of it's a very intense experience and, and yours. you know, they do do their best. they try to figure stuff out, they go over a fine point to the law they, they know they scratch their heads and, and argue with one another. and so yeah, i think a jury is capable of deliberate, deliberating in a fair way. uh and uh, in, in this case i think that uh, that merch on the judge is capable of ruling and i, honest and fair way i, i, i'm not very suspicious of the gag orders. i think that as at merchants, a political ties are sort of very strange in this case. but i think this whole case is really strange. so, so i don't blame trump for, you know, for one of the point to all these things out. do you think in this case that i and

the jury. busy will be able to come up with something where let me rephrase this question. what does the, what do the defense attorneys have to be able to make them understand? so that they come back with a not guilty verdict? what is the most important thing you think they need to do? transits or so? i think the question of the stretch it is, i mean, i think the idea is that you know, that he's, he paid this money in order to out and that this, this payment amount into a violation of federal election laws. that is the big question. that's the big hurdle, the prosecutor that has got to overcome. and that is know that is the, the, the, the, the barrier behind which the, the defense attorneys will high. does it take pot shots of the da's us now? by the way i do i, i do have a bit of a concern and that i have been watching many of trumps attorneys in the past. and these cases and they have not held a well, not all of them, but there's been a few, but i've made that i wondered why he hired the,

do you know anything about these guys that are using this time? are they, are they, uh, credible. i really know. i know. yeah. me neither. i. i, i worries i have no idea. yeah. to you so you know where i'm coming from though. i mean, you know, yeah, yeah, yeah. i mean i, i think that the question is where the trunk is from side defense. can you all can really bond adequately quickly and expertly and after this case. but i think that they really have uh they have to have good material to work with. and remember, all you have to do is just plan a reasonable doubt exam one of 12 jurors. and if you do that, then uh then you won the uh you want. dear boy, my god, you do, or is there over wishing this poor man? yeah, he did something wrong, but come on, this is too much and they're doing it because he was the president and etc, etc. dan, up great conversation. i enjoyed it as usual. and let's see how this thing goes. i mean i,

i think we've kind of set the table for people now. we just kind of let the process uh, do courses. they say thank you my friend for joining us. yeah. but always a pleasure. thank you so much. always a pleasure to talk to them before we go. i want to remind you of our mission here at some point, really the side of the world stop living in little boxes where we think it's only our box that matters truths. don't live in boxes. truth your everywhere. how much sanchez? i thought we see that and i'll be looking for you again here on direct impact

the, the russian states never. i've side as i'm one of the most sense community best ingles, all sense of the, in the system must be the one else calls question about this, even though we will fan in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on the rush of funding and supports the r t supposed net, keeping our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube tv services. for what question did you say

even closer to the video? so it's not someone pretty easy to run them. good. that sounds good. yeah, we use them for some of the lots of up to just get all kinds of them document that initiate and look at the results of those. this reasoning why the, the most people use of the news, the columbia, and what's her story?

so we took the transformer, the, the heat in the hollows in gaza. mold in 300 bodies are found in the mass gray by the hospital. that he's ready for the 3 through from the area. and independent review says, there is no evidence to back israel's planes that stopped from the hugh and relief on what agency took part in the have mazda attacks in october and other organizations. advocates faced similar, unfounded accusations related to the kind of plan that preston have experience. once again,