Loading summary
Transcript2 lines
- [00:00]
A
Atblinds.com it's not just about window treatments. It's about you. Your style, your space, your way. Whether you DIY or want the pros to handle it all, you'll have the confidence of knowing it's done right. From free expert design help to our 100% satisfaction guarantee, everything we do is made to fit your life and your windows. Because@blinds.com, the only thing we treat better than windows is you. Visit blinds.com now for up to 50% off site wide plus a professional measure at no cost. Rules and restrictions apply.
- [00:30]
B
Lawfare is upon us, another major piece of payback by the Trump administration. I will tell you which cases work, which cases don't, and whether or not doing this is going to bite the President in the behind I am Chris Cuomo. Welcome to the Chris Cuomo Project. My brothers and sisters, I got to tell you, I get the difference between revenge and retribution. And I can tell you a funny story about it as well, borrowing from a movie. But here's what matters in our analysis, the latest news is that John Bolton, someone else the president hates because he was disloyal because he started to tell the truth about the Trump administration and his experiences with the president in foreign policy and how the president decides to deal with it. This is a big deal. Here's why. Just like with Comey, okay, we have different grades of analysis. Sometimes you'll hear me say, does he have the right to do this? Versus is it right to do? Okay, that's one type of analysis. That's not what I'm applying here. This is what is the right way to deal with what you don't like. Okay, James Comey, I'll be completely transparent with you. I don't like what James Comey did. Now, do I like or dislike James Comey? Don't know him. Okay. I inherently it takes a lot for me to dislike a person. That's not something that I do easily or often. Why? Because I believe it's giving people power over you. Our president is not bothered by that. He's got a long enemies list and he thinks about who he hates all the time. However, here's what I do care about and here's what I do think about. I don't like what he did during the presidential election with Hillary Clinton more than anything he's ever done to Trump. Okay? I think that the Russia probe was too aggressive. They weren't transparent enough about the dossier and what they knew about it and didn't know about it, and they duped the media and I think they duped the Democrats, frankly. Now how much of a hand did the Democrats have in that duping against the media and themselves? That's a fair point of analysis and I'm sure there's plenty there to work with. But it leaves me in the same place, which is I don't like what happened. I don't like that we got caught up in it. I think it was very counterproductive for the country. So I totally get beef with Comey. But does that mean he is guilty of what he is charged with now? For a lot of people within maga, that's like not really a relevant concern. Only the first part is that he did the wrong thing by Trump with the Russia probe. So they should sue him and they should prosecute him and he should be punished just like he made it happen to Trump. I do not agree that two wrongs come anywhere close to being a right. I don't even think it's a close call. Now that's frustrating. But you just said you don't like Comey. Yeah, and he's either guilty. See, look, revenge is not justice. Sometimes you hear that like in the movies, you may even hear it in our politics. Right, but it isn't. Justice is fairness under law. What does that mean? That there is a law and that the facts satisfy the requirements of the same. So what is it here? That Comey lied to Ted Cruz when he said he never leaked anything while he was the Director of the FBI? Do I like the case? No, I do not think they're gonna win the case. I don't like that they're bringing the case. And in fact, I'm not the only one who thinks this way. The DOJ senior people who were there a long time and you can dismiss them as Democrats as you want, but we don't know that. And I think you gotta be careful with pissing on your institutions. They quit over this. They refused to bring these charges cuz they love Jim Comey. I don't think so. I think some of them may have. Some of them didn't and felt this way despite how they felt about Jim Comey because they care more about justice than vengeance. Trump does not. I would submit to you. And the people around him at a fealty or lack of character feel the same way. So on the facts with Comey, we just don't know. I mean, Andrew McCabe is going to loom large in this again. You remember that name? Look him up. He was at the FBI. Did Comey leak While he was FBI director. I don't think that they're gonna be able to have proof of that beyond a reasonable doubt. Don't hit me with what do you mean? They just indicted him. That's probable cause. That's basically 50, 50 as a standard done by just the home team, just the prosecutor. And by the way, they only got half of the grand jury to indict. So it was a close call within people who are only looking at it as a 50, 50 proposition. Very low bar, Hence the standard that you can indict a ham sandwich. You ever hear that line? That's why. Low burden. Much different than beyond a reasonable doubt, which is seen as practically kind of like a 95% or above certainty. I don't know that you find that. I think that you find that it gets a little fuzzy about when he was giving things to people to leak out, whether they were classified or not, whether it was during the administration or not. I think it'll be a little fuzzy, but I don't think you're gonna get him in a lie. Why? I don't think the facts will be dispositive. I don't think his understanding of the question and what they were asking him, not that he's stupid, but how the conversation was going in that point and what it meant. I just don't think they're gonna make the case. Okay, does that mean that I like Comey, or I don't think he did anything wrong? No, I definitely think he did things wrong. I just don't believe in having someone prosecuted for something they didn't do because I don't like something they did do in another situation. I don't think that's the right way to do it. And I've heard that a lot, by the way, over the years in this job. Like, this case, was a little soft. But, you know, this guy, this is what he did. You know, he's a bad guy. He did lots of bad things. It's like how they invented RICO to get mob guys because they couldn't get them for the murder, so they'd get him for tax evasion. And, you know, I believe that RICO is a. Is a really aggressive tool that is easily abused, and I'm against that. I am big on let 100 guilty men go free so that one innocent man does not get falsely convicted. I believe in that. I believe that justice has to be beyond reproach, and we are nowhere near that standard right now, especially with the Comey case and now with John Bolton. So here's what we know. 18 counts, the indictment. Very impressive. Well, what does that mean? It really means probably different documents more than different acts. Okay. The allegation is you abused your access to and transmission of classified documents. Now, is any of this like the launch codes or anything? No, we don't have any reason to believe that any of it is really serious information. And I'm going to tell you what I think the biggest problem with the case is in a second. But what's interesting, though, is to get into where people think this is going, lawfare in general. And that's why I partnered up with Kelsey. Why? Kelshi is the country's largest US prediction betting market. Okay? There. That platform is the number one. Why? Because people are putting their money where their mouth is on political predictions. And I think when people have to put money on the line, it is a better indication of preference than just some preference poll. Okay. Cause it's like, who did you talk to? How'd you ask the question, when was this? Versus You've got actual money up in it. So I wanna look at the markets, and then I'm gonna take you through what I think is behind where the markets are when it comes to who's there. So John Bolton was indicted, okay? Their question, the market on Kalshee was, will he be arrested this year? Okay. And it's at 90%. So then it becomes like, who will be arrested before 2027? Comey is at 54%. And then you see these other guys. James clapper is at 49%. Boy, is this a vengeance tour. You guys really think he's going to go deep 5050 on clapper? Why? Well, it's got to be the dossier. It's gotta be the intelligence based around the Russia stuff. But it's so interesting that you guys are so open and willing to put your money on Trump's potential for vengeance. Because I got to tell you, this is about the process versus the substance for a reason. What I think is interesting here is that, you know, you guys betting on Kalshee absolutely believe that this is going to be an expansive vengeance tour. And I think it is a really dicey play for the President. I think the American people, beyond maga, I think the majority believe injustice as fairness under law, not petty vengeance. Here's the other one that's interesting to me, which is. And I'll tell you more about why I think Bolton is not a good case. And there is a huge factor he has on his side. But this is the one that I Like will Nancy Pelosi be charged with a federal crime before January and it's 95%? No, I agree. Because even by Trump standards. With what? With what? Trading in stocks with companies that come before her, it's not illegal. Unless you can prove insider trading, it's not illegal. Not calling for the National Guard on January 6th. First of all, it's a murky legal situation, but do you really believe that any case like that is going to wash? And then the biggest reason why I believe it's 95.5. Would I still make a bet on it? Yeah. Because do I think they'll talk about going after Pelosi? Yeah, I do. So this bet will probably become worth more money, is my suspicion. But why do I think it's 95%? No. That there's only an 8% chance the woman's like 80 something years old. You really. You know what I mean? What a bad look that is. What a bad look. It's bad enough with Comey and Bolton, and people don't like them and they're not, you know, old, old, frail people. So I get that with Pelosi, and it's kind of reassuring to me that, like, the smart money isn't like, yeah, that's how vengeful, that's how raw, that's how rabid we are, is that even she is vulnerable because she's an enemy. Now, what would be the basis of going the other way on it? Bolton. All right, so here's the big. But what about this factor in the Bolton prosecution? The law is very narrow. There is very little leeway on your ability to take things home when it comes to classified documents, even if you're a big shot. That's why so many seem to abuse it, especially from what we know, presidents. Now, what people will bring up is, you know, these lesser, lower guys, when they violated this, they're so strict and it's like just one thing they did wrong and they get nailed and Biden's allowed and Trump was allowed and this one was allowed and that wasn't allowed. Why? Because there's more discretion given to people higher up. That's why. Because they have more power and they are given more purview. They're given a wider berth than someone lower on the totem pole. That's why. And because it's more common that they do it. Why? Because they're all taking their papers home at the end. Why? Their memoirs or libraries and stuff gets shuffled in it for no other reason. All right, so many things are classified and then unclassified in different degrees of classification and they're not that important, even though they're called classified or they're about things that aren't of any real value. So you have a little bit of that culture going. Okay. Bolton, of course, is going to have very confident counsel. I believe his lawyer is Abby Lowell, who is like, you know, one of the best when it comes to this stuff. And what I think his main defense will be is that a lot of these documents are old and had no value. Now how do I know that? Because I know this story from when I covered it, when they first came after him about his book. Cuz the book was so nasty about Trump and his defense then quieted them down, which was a lot of them are part of what he will claim was part of his book, the Room where it happened. Remember that? And that he went through a pre publication review. Which means what? Which means that the White House went through, or their counsel went through what he was using and that he was made aware of classification obligations or had undertaken compliance steps to meet with them then. So that if you had a beef, it shouldn't have been then. And that he never shared them anyway with anybody where it mattered. And the only person they'll get him for is maybe talk, talking to with family or sharing with family. And that that's not enough to trigger the statute in this kind of context. And it's really just about revenge and that the DOJ is doing this to satisfy the President. Now that last reason may be the most relevant thing I just said, but it will mean the least in the court of law. Why they're bringing the case doesn't really matter if they can make the case. I care about prosecutorial discretion. It's an argument I make all the time about why I didn't like the New York cases against the President. Why? I think he didn't do it. No, I think he did it, but I think there are cases that wouldn't have been brought except against Trump and I think that should matter. No, he did it, so it doesn't matter. No, I think it does. I think it does. Why? Because if this is what people do in that industry, even though it is technically not legal, but you gotta prove it, that you did it for a certain way. And for instance, with the financial records, no bank lost money, no bank complained, but you're gonna convict him of fraud. I don't understand that. And you had to twist the law to kind of do it. Why? Because it was Trump and you promised you would go after him. You went after him, the campaign finance violation, for paying someone to shut up about your affair. Really? That's a case that they make? Oh, yeah. They make cases like that all the time. Not that I know of. Not that I know of. They made it because it's Trump. I feel the same thing about the case they made against this guy, Michael Cohen. I don't like how he conduct himself during that time. But no bank loses money, no bank complains who's the victim. You know what I mean? I think you wind up bringing the case because of who it is. Now, I know you may not like that, but that's not my problem. That's your problem. My problem is justice and fairness under law and prosecutorial discretion. However, arguing that case here, just like in those cases, once you bring the case why you brought it, that part's over. They may argue it to a jury, but it's really not relevant to whether or not you did what the law says you cannot do. And just like Trump was convicted, they could have that same thing here in Bolton's case. But again, I think it's a stretch. Why? Because of the question that may not matter much at trial, but does matter in the analysis of why they're bringing the charge, which is they wanted to fuck with who fucked with them. And I think justice demands more than that. I think the Office of the President demands more than that. I think this is a play to the base that will separate the President from the majority. It looks petty, it looks vindictive, it looks wrong. That's my feeling about it. What is yours? We see where the markets are. The Kalshee markets are suggesting there may well be more to come. My brothers and sisters, thank you for subscribing and following. Thank you for being with me at News Nation. 8p and 11p every weekday night. The problems are real. They're gonna keep coming. So let's get after.