LEFTIST **FREAKING** Over Trump Arrest | "Big Mistake" - Shocking!

want to start right away by talking

about the prosecuting of Donald Trump

because what's really interesting is

there's a pretty left-leaning article

and newspaper organization that just

came out and said wait a minute maybe a

big mistake is being made and this was

mind-blowing to me because I'm a big fan

of trying to understand corporate and

media biases and I'm blown away that the

economist said that potentially

Prosecuting Trump in the Stormy Daniels

case looks like a mistake this blows my

mind because I'll tell you I listen to

The Economist a lot but I know they are

they definitely lean left I wouldn't say

they're super far left they're sort of

like there's the middle and then they're

just as far left as the Wall Street

Journal is to the right but what blows

my mind is the media reaction here that

the economist would actually under perp

talk say okay Prosecuting Donald Trump

and the Stormy Daniels case looks like a

mistake this blows my mind because

really what you have is you have a

leftist organization saying hey wait a

minute wait a minute maybe we shouldn't

convict or prosecute Donald Trump for

for these crimes now yesterday I did a

complete about 40-minute live stream

going through the entire uh indictment

the likely claims in it the booking

process Willie B handcuffed will he not

be the difference between the Secret

Service handcuffing him being Donald

Trump's Choice the uh New York Police

Department handcuffing him being the

choice of the district attorney which we

don't think will happen more likely a

secret service would at the direction of

Donald Trump this is likely to happen

next week where Donald Trump will be

booked and then enter his non-guilty

plea during the arraignment if you want

the complete details to that watch the

other video just type into YouTube meet

Kevin Donald Trump indictment you'll see

everything about it the history the

background everything but regarding this

reaction I have to get through this

because I I think it blows my mind so

first of all after so much speculation

that it seemed America's media might

have just repeated uh Echoes a grand

jury indeed indicted the 45th president

of the United States this is to use a

term that is worn out by or was worn out

by the end of of the Trump

Administration historic so they've

already kind of got this sort of like

tone of being a little like all right

all right we're kind of over Trump here

and and they're very clear about that

you'll see at the end of this article

they do not like Trump but listen to

what they say and it just it blows my

mind

Trump has been fundraising for weeks on

the back of his potential indictment

which he predicted was coming on March

18th it turns out to have been one of

his more accurate posts again sort of

another Slam at Trump for potentially a

hyperbole or exaggerating but anyway if

Mr Trump has committed a crime it would

be wrong to duck Prosecuting him because

it would put stress on America's

governing institutions in other words if

he did indeed commit a crime of course

he should be prosecuted for example

other presidents like uh Sylvia

bussellini in Italy or Nicolas sucker Z

in France were convicted as well for

example in the case of Sarkozy he was

convicted of one year or one corruption

count for which he needed to serve one

year in prison after being president of

France and a second corruption charge to

be served in home confinement

now treating a former president like any

other Citizen though Cuts both ways says

The Economist now this is really

interesting they see on they say on one

hand

you should apply the law equally to

everyone like nobody's Above the Law if

somebody committed a crime they should

be prosecuted but if you're turning a

blind eye to a ton of crimes in your

city like New York is

why are you looking into this Trump case

because this isn't like the most clear

Smoking Gun you could have picked so

that's what they say here they say a

prosecutor has to weigh the seriousness

of a crime the likelihood of securing a

conviction and the public interest in

securing not not like the Public's media

interests but like the public safety

interest and Prosecuting the crime about

uh and then of course in this case they

talk about how potentially half of

America is going to look at this uh

trial as impartial and a political

weaponization and the other half of

America is going to look at this as like

that's right we're looking to serve

Justice so we've got this real divide in

America Democrats cheering about yay

Trump's finally going to come to Justice

and and Republicans why are we

weaponizing the district attorney right

but now here's what I think is very

interesting

The Economist says ethics and hypocrisy

are not what are on trial in Manhattan

so in other words The Economist is like

look we could bag on his ethics and his

hypocrisy all day long but this is a

prosecution about potentially hush money

payment where a payment was labeled

potentially a legal expense which is a

misdemeanor but now prosecutors are

arguing that this misdemeanor made it a

breach of federal and state campaign

Finance violations and linking these

charges is actually really novel it's a

novel way to try to bring this test and

it's not the strongest case you could

bring against Trump they actually

suggest that the case in Georgia is much

stronger

so listen to this The Economist says

while Trump remains a threat not just to

America but to the rest of the West

remember they lean pretty left they say

if Trump is to be prosecuted it should

be for something that cannot be

dismissed as a technicality where the

law is clearer the Manhattan DA's case

looks like a mistake think about that

for a moment you literally have a

leftist paper saying it seems like a

mistake to prosecute Donald Trump

because this is not a smoking gun case

and it's just going to divide America

more if Donald Trump killed somebody and

he was caught on video holding a Smoking

Gun just like any other person he should

be prosecuted and convicted nobody is

above the law

but in this case it seems almost like

evidence and we don't know yet we don't

actually have the complete indictment

and the evidence that'll come out soon

enough but at least right now it seems

like a lot of this has been strung

together

to create a pretty loose and potentially

not very sticky case against a former

president that is making this case look

very politically motivated the Wall

Street journals editorial board actually

had a very similar thing to say they say

hey look maybe there's going to be new

evidence coming up but that evidence

this is the Wall Street Journal now

right they lean it a little bit more

right Wall Street Journal says that new

evidence better be solid enough that a

reasonable voter would find it

persuasive

the last thing a politically polarized

America needs is a case in which

partisans line up on either side like a

political O.J Simpson trial and the

prosecution must be seen by the country

as an example of fair-minded Justice

now I find this really incredible the

fact that you have newspapers and and

basically Publishers uh for uh Politics

on both sides arguing that this case is

a mistake against Donald Trump even if

you hate Trump's guts it's a mistake

because all you're doing is polarizing

America more with what seems like it

could be a relatively weak case so

that's pretty incredible to me I'm

surprised to see this especially from

The Economist because I listen to them a

lot because they have really good

economic information I try to take out

their political bias when I can but I

have to say both of these papers they're

right the people on the left and right

they're right here this is probably not

the best case to bring against Donald

Trump