Talking on all political subjects and taking on all callers, this is Matt Flynn Direct with your host, Matt
Flynn.
Welcome to Matt Flynn Direct, coming to you statewide and live on civic media.
Our lines are open 844-967-2789.
No subject is off limits.
All points of view are welcome.
And remember, you're not woke if you don't know history.
You're not woke unless and until you know history going right to the front lines of history in the making Very ominous a hidden room and a locked closet A hidden room in a locked closet.
What am I talking about?
Based on a whistleblower a confidential source Jack Smith Jack Smith in the prosecution Donald Trump
front of Tonya Trotkin in DC has questioned several witnesses about a locked closet and a so-called hidden room inside Mar-a-Lago that the FBI did not search in August of 2022.
They did not search it.
Apparently this hidden room wasn't easily accessed or even, you know, even evident.
In the closet, what happened was apparently Donald Trump sent his lawyer down in the basement to look for documents to be quote, helpful in quote.
In the meantime, he had the locks changed on us to God.
The locks changed on the closet.
So he didn't work.
They searched the whole, they got in some documents.
They thought they'd searched all the Mar-a-Lago.
They didn't search the locked closet.
in the hidden room.
Now, this is August of 22.
This is just coming out.
This information is just coming out.
Professionals in the FBI are convinced that an insider tipped off their hierarchy to conduct the search.
People who observe this who are not.
In on the particular search have no doubt that an insider tip them off the insider is a whistleblower and who might that be?
Certainly not Walter Nauta is a valet sort of staff guy that follows him around and it's not the olivera The other guy who's been criminally charged Somebody in Marlago an insider or somebody close to Donald Trump tipped off the FBI
and said there is a locked closet and a room that hasn't been searched.
Now, this raises a lot of questions to everybody and to me in particular, let me tell you what they are.
Why does Donald Trump go to such lengths to hide these documents, lie about them and transfer them?
One concern I have is August of 22 to February of 24 is what, a year and a half?
You think he didn't have time to clean those closet in the hidden room out and squirt them away somewhere?
Video of him personally helping to load boxes onto a private plane to fly boxes of documents to Bedminster in New Jersey.
Why is there not a search warrant for Bedminster, New Jersey?
Why do you not?
Why do you go to these lengths?
to conceal documents, fly them to another property you own, have a locksmith change the locks on a closet to avoid an FBI search, hoping that the FBI doesn't insist on going in and having a hidden room.
Why do you do that if you're not keeping them to sell them?
Why do you do that if you're not keeping them to sell them?
He could easily sort of boast and brag and say, wait, I was president.
I thought it was fine, but okay, you want him.
Here they are.
He didn't do that.
He lied about it continuously.
He lied about it continuously.
Going back to early 22, actually 2021, they kept begging him.
Why do you do that if you're not going to sell them?
You know, there's the, let me put it this way.
Let me put it this way.
The truth doesn't mind being questioned.
A lie does.
The truth doesn't mind being questioned.
A lie does.
And I think that says it all in this case.
Who did he sell him to?
Who did he give him to?
He's already disclosed our sonar capabilities of our
submarines, how close they can get to Chinese submarines without detection, despite sonar technology.
He just spilled the beans.
It's a billionaire from Australia.
Our plans to invade Iran and so forth.
Go to the lines.
I'll take you in order.
Do not hang up.
Stephen of Green Bay, my friend, your first, what's your Monday, Stephen?
So it seems like every time we turn around,
Something else funky has come out of the Trump can, doesn't it?
The fact that he thought that as a president that he was allowed to take national secrets to his private residence in the first place is a little unsettling to say the least.
But now to know that there are secret rooms in his house that he's hiding these things.
Um, I think the FBI needs to go and raid that whole mansion and not allow anyone to go back in silent till they have the case, uh, you know, the, the mansion completely searched because at this point that mansion should be treated as a crime scene.
That's an excellent point.
And, and not only that, you know, he's had so much time now to, to transfer them.
He's had so much, so much time to get him out of there, to sell them.
And and I get back to the core question I get back to the core question Why do you do all this?
If you're not gonna sell them or show them to somebody who shouldn't be seeing them.
Why do you do all this and The fact look it's been almost 18 months.
I personally don't think there is any document left in that hidden room or that closet I Mean he's been under all this litigation ever since
He's been in what 91 indictment indicted felonies four different cases some civil cases He's already been low seen loading boxes on a plane to Westminster And Stephen I think that you put it quite well It's crazy and strange and funky to the guy goes oh, I'm gonna take some classified documents in the plane with me as they get out of town, okay?
It is wrong
That also is technically a crime.
But if he goes, oops, you know, I just thought, I don't know.
I mean, I was nostalgic.
I was president, look over some of the stuff.
I don't believe him.
But if that's all that we're in, he gave everything back.
If he gave everything back, that's one thing.
But in this case, the National Archives can tell what's missing.
They keep an inventory of everything.
that's classified, everything.
And they know what's out, signed out to the White House.
If it's a copy, they know that.
Everything.
So when they take an inventory, when Joe Biden comes in, they go, well, what about this stuff?
And what about that stuff?
It's not there.
Okay.
Trump took it.
Many, many people, when they leave office inadvertently, take some documents, you know, their staff packs their stuff.
They don't pack their stuff.
They take it off to a library that they use.
If they dedicate a library and then they negotiate with the National Archive, like the Kennedy Library in Boston at Harvard, and there's libraries for virtually every president, a modern president.
And you have to negotiate with the National Archives.
Can we put this stuff out?
Can we let scholars see it?
National Archives says,
That's too sensitive.
No, you can't.
But if it's something from 100 years ago, what the heck?
That's the way it works.
So what they initially did was, you know, Mike Pence took some stuff in boxes, not deliberately.
Joe Biden took some stuff in boxes.
Most senators have taken stuff in boxes.
Okay.
The minute they're alerted, give it back.
So they went to the guy right away, right away in 2021.
They say, give it back.
He said, I don't have anything.
Maybe some magazine articles.
And he was lying.
Then they kept pressing him.
Then he gave back a few things.
He had a lawyer asked a lawyer to lie in an affidavit and say, hey, I searched and we gave everything back.
That lawyer was a little smarter than Trump gave him credit for.
I forget if it was which one it was, but the lawyer put in an affidavit.
Instead here the documents that my client assures me is fully compliant with with your request in other words or worse that effect in other words my client told me i'm not representing that i made a personal search then there is the the search warrant in august of twenty two all of the right wing all lights up this is terrible that you know we mean it's terrible
This guy had documents in a bathroom in a storage closet that was unlocked in a bridal dressing room.
They have plenty of weddings at Mar-a-Lago.
The bride gets to dress in this special room with her bridesmaids helping her and all this kind of stuff.
Oh, what is this?
This is our plans for attacking Russia.
What the heck is this about?
What the heck is this about?
They found it in his own desk.
They haul a lot of stuff away.
They say it was a search warrant.
Then there are boxes loaded on a plane to go to Bedminster.
That hasn't been searched yet.
I doubt that it's still at Bedminster.
It's somewhere else.
I hope it's not in some Russian spies attic in Brooklyn or something.
But then this, in February of 2024, to find out that an insider blew the whistle and said there's a hidden room
At Mar-Lago, he used to keep this stuff in.
The FBI didn't see it when they searched, and there is a closet, and it looks like, I don't know, probably looks like a broom closet.
He has a locksmith change the locks while his lawyer's in the basement trying to comply with his opinion.
I mean, what is this?
Peter Selt, oh, is this the Pink Panther?
You know, what is this, an old Sherlock Holmes?
This isn't even a decent plot.
I mean, this is...
very strange very strange but one thing that is not strange to me is that nobody does this if they don't think there's value in those documents and they're going to extract value from the documents by selling them by appeasing a blackmailer by appeasing the russian mafia because they lent him money for whatever reason and that is abundantly clear in this thing and he's got to be questioned about this in a civil case he doesn't have to give a deposition
But this has to be resubmitted to the grand jury.
This is a very, very serious matter.
Coming up, good news.
Larry Kudlow, Trump's economic advisor, says I was wrong.
Welcome
back to Matt Flynn director lines are open eight four four nine six seven two seven eight nine Well, this is very good news and it is long overdue It's got him Larry Kudlow KUD low W may not know who he is.
He's a very well-known economist He was Trump's chief economist Donald Trump's chief economist He was also the chief economist and managing director of Bear Stearns.
That was one of the investment banking
firms that went under in 2008 and is responsible in part for Barack Obama getting elected.
It was so bad under George W. Bush that everybody wants it a change.
He was the director of Biden's National Economic Council.
He was the go-to economy guy, economist guy for Donald Trump.
And here's what he just said in an interview.
Quote, I was wrong about Biden, about Biden's economy and about an economic slowdown and recession.
Mea culpa.
Quote, I was wrong, not only about the slowdown and the recession, but the Fed, everyone was wrong.
The US economy grew faster than any other large advanced economy last year by a wide margin.
It's on track to do so again in 2024 In January now, this is February 2nd.
So now January be two days ago In January the US added 350,000 jobs in one month It blew apart it blew all predictions out the window is unbelievable in January the stock market keeps making
New highs record highs virtually every day There was not a recession there is not a recession and the worldwide Inflation that occurred during the pandemic because of many many factors was worldwide.
It wasn't just the United States The United States came out of it to normalcy better and quicker than anybody else and Larry Kudlow, you know to his credit
And I've never really liked the guy because he's Trump's guy.
And, uh, you know, you have a conservative economists, you have liberal economists, the guy, um, Jerome Powell, the head of the Fed now is really Republican, but he's moderate and he's a good economist and he's, he's playing it straight.
And so Biden reappointed him, you know, when it comes to economics, I mean, it's not quite like this, but you know, there's an old adage.
That if somebody's running for mayor and they go home a Republican or Democrat somebody will say there's no Republican or Democratic way to pick up the garbage There's no Republican or Democratic way to shovel snow Now that's true.
That's not entirely transferable to economists because you can have super conservative economists and super liberal economists But we you want a steady hand you want a steady hand at the helm?
Now Cudlow
Always impressed me as somebody the fact that he was close to Trump Trump's crooked as a dog sign leg a Russian agent Steal the pennies off of dead man's eyes.
I figure what kind of economists are hanging with the guy?
But to his credit Cudlow cares enough about his reputation and his credentials and Here's what he says He says I was wrong about the Biden economy and predicting an economic slowdown recession may a culpa
And then he does go on and say, I was wrong.
And so is everybody else in the Fed.
Well, not every other economist was wrong.
A number of them looked at it and said, I think we're on track for a soft landing.
This, this doesn't even qualify for, for some rough soft landing.
I mean, I've been in airplanes, you've been in airplanes where there's a rough landing, bumpy, bumpy, bumpy.
But there's some that are so smooth, you don't even know you hit the ground.
And this one is very close to that.
And the.
the intervening impediment, which was the pandemic, uh, is nobody's individual fault that is worldwide, not pinning it on Trump either.
Although it had, it basically led up to on his watch in 2020.
But that said, Joe Biden did a magnificent job.
And remember one other statistic since 1989.
Okay.
So that's 24, 30, 35 years since 1989.
98% of the new jobs created in the United States were created under Democratic presidents.
2% of the new jobs created in the United States in the last 35 years were under Republican presidents.
And it's true that a president does not personally create a job, but who the president is sets the tone
for economic policy who the president is sets the tone of the administration because he appoints secretary of the treasury chairman of the fed uh all kinds of agencies that affect this and in speeches and demeanor and encouragement he can he can note something with donald trump you have the opinion i mean you really do have the impression that uh you know it's every man out for himself
you know, suggests privatizing social security, voucherizing Medicare, continuously trying to cut any spending that would benefit anybody who's poor or anybody who's in income down the line a little bit.
And what they do not understand is that the biggest bulwark of our economy, believe it or not, the biggest bulwark of our economy,
is consumer spending by americans it's not investments by billionaires it's not investments by people overseas it is the consumer spending of the average person and you can't spend what you don't have so if you get laid off you know they try to cut they try to shut the government down every once in a while they shut it down several times once when obama was president they shut it down one time they shut it down for a couple of months
People again didn't get paid.
They got laid off.
They also had no money to spend They were lucky if they get money for food they get unemployment comp.
Maybe a few other things they live off their family You need people consumers who buy a car Go out to eat even if they think you think that's the luxury.
I don't think that's the luxury they go out to eat Go to a try to go to a bucks game with two kids
Husband wife and two kids and everybody has a hot dog and the husband wife have a beer and pay for the tickets.
You know what that costs You got to be able to do things you want to do Gotta be able to buy a book buy clothing All of that in the aggregate sustains the most the richest economy in the history of the world and the Republicans continually are obsessed
with cutting down people's purchasing power except for the small group of people who who donate to them and who's interested they serve.
And it's just absolutely flat out crazy.
Oh, you have to look at the data.
Look at the stock market now.
Look at job creation now.
Joe Biden is under Joe Biden.
He didn't create any jobs himself, but he set the economic policy.
Under Joe Biden more than 14 million jobs have been created and it's been what?
Three years little less than three years three years That's amazing And don't take that for granted and don't take for granted that they can't cut things because they will if they get back in But for Larry Kudlow to get up there and say I was wrong maya culpa That's Trump speaking.
That's Trump's economist speaking
And that's a very, very, very, very important concession.
OK, coming up, a lot of news, a lot of weather.
And the consultants on the gerrymander maps issue a decision.
This is a very, very important development coming up.
Welcome back to Matt Flindereck.
Lines are open 844-967-2789.
Major development in the gerrymander case.
Major development.
You may recall that the Supreme Court hired two consultants who were experts on setting out legislative maps.
And unlike what everybody had thought that maybe they would try to tilt it one way or the other in terms of
politics, these two consultants are very, very respected nationwide.
Two universities, one in New York, one in California, and they've done this before and they're politically neutral.
They're not Democrat or Republican publicly.
And not only that, one of the maps that one of them had drafted for one state recently tilted a little Republican, mapped it.
The other one.
Drafted or drew recently told it a little bit Democrat and The court gave them their marching orders and here is the courts marching orders our Wisconsin Supreme Court It said we want maps that emphasize political neutrality compactness Contiguity and preserving communities of interests and quote
Contiguity is required in the Wisconsin Constitution.
That's why they tried to make this judgment proof from the tarantulas, because it's certain that these Republicans, Voss, will appeal to the tarantulas, try to get them to overturn it, but the tarantulas are not supposed to screw around with state constitutions.
That's the sacred thing.
They're not supposed to do that.
So this thing nails it down to be as appeal proof as possible.
And here's where the two consultants came back with.
There were six maps they were told to look at.
Two of them were submitted by Republicans, one by the legislature, which is itself gerrymandered, and the other one by this Institute of Law and Liberty, which is a very right-wing pro-Republican group.
A couple were...
by Democrats, Governor Evers is one, the legislature is one, and a couple were by academics who were neutral.
And they looked at all six maps and here's what they said.
They said the maps from the Republican legislature and the Institute for Law and Liberty don't deserve further consideration.
They say they're in effect just re-jerrymanders.
Now of the other four they said we're not going to express an opinion It said that each of them comports as much as possible with your your directives and improve quote improve on traditional good government criteria Then they said two things that really fascinated me one of them was they said if you want we can slightly alter them according to your directive
And what they also said is Any one of them all four now listen to this this is two democratic maps a couple of independent Independent academic maps all four of them tilt slightly Republican and I'm not I'm not misquoting it all four tilt slightly Republican, but what they said was that
They're close enough to all of your criteria that quote the party that wins the most votes Will win the most seats Now that says to me and let me tell you this If a district is 60 40 democrat or republican You could put up last year in 1010 okay as your candidate and if you're the 60 they're gonna come in they can walk on all fours they're gonna come in all right if it's
55-45 is almost certain that they'll win.
But if it's 51-49, or 52-48, I mean 50-50 is a statistical anomaly.
I mean that's very difficult to have it exact, but if it's within a couple of percentage points, the quality of the candidate matters, and the issues that the candidate talks about matters, that they matter.
So it sounds as if the two consultants have narrowed it down to four maps.
They said they're willing to work on it more.
I do not know whether the Supreme Court will say, all right, we're looking at this.
You've explained how each one deals with contiguity, compactness, keeping communities of interest together, and political neutrality.
And we'll make our own decision of the four.
Or we may say, hey, look, there's a couple here that look possible, but we need you to tweak them to be more, more contiguous.
They gotta be contiguous.
Contiguous as they touch or they don't touch.
But preserving communities of interest, give you an example.
Right now, Sheboygan County's cut up seven ways from Sunday, Green County, all done to gerrymander.
Now you can't keep every county totally intact for a simple reason.
Milwaukee is so big you're gonna have a number of districts What does community of interest mean so but anyway, this is what has occurred now?
They have a very very short turnaround the Supreme Court today's February 2nd If they turn it back to the two experts They turn it back to them.
They said they can do it right away almost immediately.
What does that mean?
I don't know.
Is it a week?
Is it three days?
What does it mean?
Then the Supreme Court has to has to vote on it.
It's possible that the Republicans and the Supreme Court who are election deniers, two of them, not all three of them, two of them, not Brian Haginorm, but the other two, I mean, they could say, well, we want time to write a dissent or whatever.
They can do anything they want, but the, the majority rules and the majority, if they're together on this, we'll say, here's our order in that.
Descent can be written anytime you want, but this is our order.
Then what has to happen is that this has to be ordered to the Wisconsin Election Commission.
They've got to send it out to the clerks, print the ballots.
And remember, ballots have to be mailed.
Ballots have to be mailed to military personnel and people overseas in about two weeks from now, roughly, I think the middle of February.
So there's time is of the essence.
Then they have to be published in March Some some of these things if they have any actually the more I think about it if they don't include municipal elections for February primaries and April April generals That would not be the case but if they're August primaries and wishes what these would be actually as I think about it the August primary and the November elections
I think by March, they have to get these things decided on what the lines are and publish that so that people know where to circulate nomination papers in April.
Let's suppose you want to run for the assembly in Ladysmith and you live right in the outskirts of town.
All right.
What assembly district you're in?
Well, you're in this district now.
Okay.
You're still going to be in that district.
So time is of the essence, although it's not as much of the essence
because municipal elections aren't involved.
They're also being asked to deal with congressional gerrymandering.
That's pending right now.
I don't know if they're going to be able to get that done this year.
For the simple reason, first of all, they have to decide where they're going to take the case.
Then they've got to hear all argument, read the briefs, vote on it, have their experts look at it, do the whole stick.
Can they do it?
I don't know.
I hope so.
Right now there are two congressional districts in the in the first where style is the congressman and in the third where van Ordne is that are sort of competitive now.
I have high hopes for van Ordne seat We have a couple of terrific challengers and in the first congressional district we have Yeah, I'm sure some good candidates, but that one theoretically could be very competitive It could they could be a heck of a lot more competitive
if they weren't gerrymandered, and I think that's what we're looking for.
So bottom line, bottom line, there are four maps that the Supreme Court is going to be looking at, and they're going to make a decision very quickly, do the experts retweak the stuff a little bit, or do they pick one and get the Wisconsin Election Commission to get that out publicly so people know where they're running.
This is so important.
I can't begin to tell you how important it is right now The Democrats get about 52% of the votes statewide and they get 33% of the seats in the assembly in the Senate In fact, it would be it'd be a veto proof.
It is a veto proof Senate right now In other words that Republicans have two-thirds of the seats and it's two seats shy of being veto proof in the assembly And yet the Democrats get 52% that's not right.
And what is the result of that ban?
Well, we have forever chemicals in basically all of the drinking water in the state.
In wells in many cases, we have it in Lake Michigan, Green Bay, we have it in the rivers and the lakes because of the Republicans.
And when you have gerrymandered seats, these are the people, the leapers and screamers and the extreme wing nuts in each party, frankly, that get elected.
If you're in an 80% district, a 60% district,
Your only fear is you can be primary or Trump can endorse somebody against you like happened to Robin Voss and You will do anything Stupid right up to criminal.
Hopefully you'll draw the line there to hurt the state to appease Trump or to appease the right-wing caucus and the donors or they'll lie about you They'll pump a lot of money in say you're bad on abortion and guns
And even if you don't think you are for that party's persuasion, that's a kiss of death.
That's all they have to say guns.
It's no good on guns and lie about it.
So it is so important to have 51 49 seats, preferably 50 50 seats or 52 48.
And we can put up some very, very good, young, aggressive challengers who talk about the issues.
And all they need is a few percentage points of independence and moderate Republicans to say, hey, the nut that we have in there right now, I don't even like looking at the guy as he walks through a picnic.
And that's enough.
And we're going to hear this very, very shortly, very, very shortly.
Let's say a couple of funny things.
I don't know why I get humor out of this, but I've said before how
Criminality and bankruptcy follow Trump.
You know, he walks along as a walking crime scene.
Everybody around him seems to go to jail, they get indicted, they go bankrupt, or they get pardoned.
Something bad happens to him.
Well, just found out today.
Do you remember Allen Weisselberg?
Allen Weisselberg was Trump's CFO, chief financial officer.
Allen Weisselberg pled guilty to some tax crimes, and he spent a hundred days
in the caboose, in the who's gow, in Raker's Island, I can't imagine.
In Raker's Island for 100 days, he comes out, now he's in negotiations to plead guilty again to perjury.
To perjury.
What perjury?
He was called as a witness in the Laetitia James case when a judge angered on.
Apparently he testified under oath and he lied, flat out lied.
As a result, you may have read, or you will read, the Judge Angaran, and this is Letitia James Fraud Case against Trump's civil fraud case in New York.
Angaran has said, I'm going to get the decision out by the end of January, very beginning of February.
Just announced, well, as a result of this, I've got to look at this and the impact on it.
I'm not getting that decision out for another couple of weeks, mid-February, maybe beyond that.
You'll have to look at Wesselberg's testimony.
What about it was a lie, it was perjury.
He can get that information at some point reasonably soon.
How does that affect the amount of money that Trump owes?
Because frankly, he's already been found guilty of the fraud by some re-judgment.
And so now it's just a question of payola.
How much is he going to pay?
$370 million to $50 million, some less, some more.
What is it?
But this character, Wesselberg, always pops out of the weeds at the most inconvenient times.
I'm amazed anybody calls the guy to be a witness.
You know, what does it say when your chief financial officer and lawyer all go to the who's gown?
You think what?
You're pure as the grim and snow.
Give me a break.
Give me a break.
Okay.
Coming up, we're going to step away very, very briefly.
And you will not believe what happened to Roberta Kaplan, a great lawyer, Eugene Carroll's lawyer at a deposition in Marlago coming up.
Welcome back to Bethlehem Director.
Lines are open at 844-967-2789.
Well, this is amazing.
In a way, it's funny.
I mean, it's sad is what it is.
But occasionally, you know, I got to have some levity in this business.
All the bad news from Trump and the Republicans.
Roberta Kaplan is a lawyer, no relation to Judge Kaplan in the Eugene Carroll case.
The Roberta Kaplan was Eugene Carroll's lawyer and she had another lawyer as well, Crowley, who is excellent too.
Roberta Kaplan revealed that she was down in Mar-Lago to take Trump's deposition.
And he fought like heck and he didn't want to give a deposition too bad, so sad he had to give the deposition.
So he gives deposition.
And they're sitting there and it comes close to lunchtime.
Now, let me tell you something from experience about lunches at depositions.
You always talk to the other lawyer and you say, look, you know, we want to go for eight hours today.
If we each take two hours to go for lunch, it's going to cut down the time.
Can you order in some sandwiches and you can bill us for our side of it or whatever in every case that I've ever been involved in the host law firm where you're sitting for the deposition.
orders in a bunch of sandwiches and potato chips and sodas of water.
And you take 20 minute lunch break, half an hour max, and then you go back and you continue the depositions.
Very, very common.
Very, very common.
So in this case, Trump looks at her and he goes, uh, so where do you think you're going to lunch?
Well, this is in Mar-Lago.
Some people think, well, at least she'll spend money at his joint.
I personally think he'd order the staff not to give her any food.
And she'd have to go and waste a couple of hours and spare him some time as a deposition.
Or just to be kind of nasty to her and cruel to her.
So here's what she said.
She said, well, Mr. Trump, I've talked to your lawyers.
They've graciously agreed to bring in lunch for all of us and remember something you have a court reporter You have a staff you might have a paralegal there You have occasionally somebody comes in if some document has to be copied and they take it to the Xerox machine Trump got angry very angry that he couldn't either deprive her of lunch or screw up her deposition
He stands up, there's a big sheet of papers and he pushes them across the table.
Bust them up, pushes them, stalks out.
Now that is super strange, okay?
I mean, first of all, the protocol and something like that is, hey look, you can have lunch.
You have staff there.
You have the court reporter there sitting there working the machine.
You'll have a paralegal.
You may have another associate there.
They got to eat lunch.
You don't want to bust eight hours of a deposition with an hour to lunch, sniffing around Marlago, looking for something that'll serve you.
This guy, I guess, this guy is a micromanager beyond belief.
Remember all the, the testimony I would throw hamburgers at the wall, food at the wall in the White House, in the White House.
He throws food to stick up against the wall.
He is now, he says, looking for a new lawyer for his Eugene Carroll appeal.
Eugene Carroll appeal, remember something.
Besides the fact that he can't control his temper and frankly has early onset dementia, argumentative dementia.
The reason it was 83 million bucks is he got up and he put it in the jury's face and Judge Kaplan's face.
And he's muttering stuff like, you know, she said she suddenly she remembers and they hear this stuff.
They don't like that.
They really don't like that.
Then he gets up in the middle of aging Carol's lawyers summation, closing argument and stalks out.
And Judge Kaplan says, let the record show that Mr. Trump left the courtroom.
When you get in the jury's face, you get in the judge's face and the jury sees that they really don't like it.
They will punish you.
And I will say again, they were going to go to the lines.
I see you in the line, but I will tell you this.
The, um, if he had not shown up in the courtroom the second time, it would not have been an $83 million verdict.
It's not his lawyer's fault.
It's his fault.
It's five million the first time cause he didn't show up.
Second time, all his lawyers had to say is look, he shot his mouth off on Caitlin Collins.
She was getting in his face and you know, it ain't great, but it certainly hasn't caused her any additional damage.
They might not even have given her five million again.
But he gets in their face and sells their vanity.
This respects the judge right in front of them.
It's a very, very small area right in front of them.
They go, okay, I'll tell you what.
Then they go in and they say, let's take an average.
What do you want?
And for 83 million to be an average, an average, that means somebody came in in nine figures, over 100 million.
Somebody came in 20 million, 30 and the average is.
So you got to 83.3.
It's his fault.
No, any, there is not another, not another lawyer who's any good who could have done better if they have a client sitting there doing that.
We're going quick to the lines.
Gary of Sussex.
Thanks for calling, Gary.
What's in your mind
today?
Hey, man, I asked you a question last week about, or earlier this week about cops getting beat up in New York.
And then after they released them with.
a no bail and then they flipped off the bird to everybody.
Um, did you ever get a chance to read what I was telling you about and what's your.
Yeah, I did.
And I, I have a segment on that, but I'll do it right quick now.
I agree with you.
I've looked at the video, a swarm of these illegal immigrants circled two officers, a lieutenant and a patrolman.
I did look it up and see it and they kicked them trying to kick them in the head.
Then they ran off.
Four of them were arrested.
They were released without bail.
You said before you thought that was the judge's fault.
I think it's the DA's fault and the judge's fault.
If the DA wants bail, they'll be bail.
I can tell you that.
And they've then run away.
That's the new information.
So I'm glad you called.
And they think they, and there were others involved.
They're way more than four people ganging up on these officers.
The authorities in New York think that they're on a bus to California.
And they also think when they get there, they're going to try to slip back into Mexico.
The other thing that the authorities say and this is a bigger story than you let on when you called was that among the Migrants who were here in good faith and who are looking for work and a good people There are gangs of people that commit You know in Europe all of these people at Angela Merkel Angela Merkel let in 60% of them run accompanied males and that's starting to happen at our border as well and they have rap sheets
Something's got to be done.
I do agree with that.
Something's got to be done.
Okay.
Coming up, a lot of news, a lot of weather, a lot of news, a lot of weather.
And then we have this.
Chutkin, Tanya Chutkin took the March trial off of her docket of Donald Trump.
Why is that coming up?
