Congress HUMILIATES New York District Attorney | Trump

well Donald Trump has Congress doing his

bidding for him Congress just sent an

eight-page complaint to the district

attorney Mr Bragg of Manhattan demanding

they turn over information that they

have on Donald Trump now this is phase

two of The Saga they started with an

inquiry letter to which the district

attorney replied and said hey hey hey

y'all are overstepping your Authority

Congress back off this is a local case

for a local prosecution against Donald

Trump and this is our case and that was

their response to car a congressional

request uh from a committee of three

individuals the first time that was

their first response now Congress has

responded again and you're gonna love

their response but first I want to touch

on some of the various different

allegations that are being made Aid

against Donald Trump and there are a lot

of them I'm going to go in reverse order

and I'm going to keep them somewhat

simple just so you can kind of maybe

like if you're keeping track you can

kind of just number them so first we've

got the Insurrection right crime 2 in

sight or Aid in the uh in the comfort of

an Insurrection call it what you want

that is what the allegation is okay it's

not me calling an Insurrection this is

what the allegation is so that's one the

next uh is conspiracy to commit wire

fraud and a lot of this has to do with

130 000 of hush money payments in

2016-17 that went to Stormy Daniels now

apparently through recordings that we've

heard this money went from Michael Cohen

uh two Stormy Daniels and then

potentially was reimbursed to Michael

Cohen for who was Trump's fixer at the

time was potentially reimbursed a Cohen

indirectly through shell companies now

there have been a lot of circulating

documents on Twitter suggesting that

wait a second Mr or Donald Trump never

reimburse this 130 000 of hush money

payments because here are legal letters

showing that that never happened in fact

that legal letter that keeps circulating

is right here it's this legal letter

that says from 2018 which is stamped

highly confidential which quite frankly

anybody could stamp that on there and

it's this Council for Michael Cohen

suggesting that hey look uh Michael

Cohen used his own personal funds to

facilitate that 130 000 payment to

Stephanie Clifford which is Stormy

Daniels real name and neither the Trump

organization nor the Trump campaign was

a party to the transaction with Clifford

and neither reimbursed Mr Cohen for

payments uh directly or indirectly

that's fantastic and people on the right

are saying that's it Case Closed Donald

Trump is free Donald Trump never paid

that hush money payments but wait a

minute this letter itself is very

carefully worded it says neither the

Trump organization nor the Trump

campaign reimbursed Michael Cohen right

but others are saying it was Donald

Trump's Family Trust that reimbursed

Michael Cohen see how you could trick

people Trump organization is one entity

Trump Camp k campaign is an entity Trump

Family Trust is another entity so that

other entity could have reimbursed

Michael Cohen for that 130 000 however

this guy's a convicted threats Dear Mr

Cohen so I don't really hold much esteem

for Michael Cohen's attorney which is

who wrote that letter and it does I

wouldn't put it past them to sort of

manipulate the facts in such a way

Donald Trump is also being alleged for

potentially article 175 in New York

falsifying business records suggesting

uh that uh there is a book or was

bookkeeping fraud that had happened that

could potentially carry a four-year

sentence but you would need to prove

that he knowingly caused false entries

into company records quote with the

intent to defraud there are campaign

Finance violation allegations the

allegation that potentially this hush

money payment was made via The Campaign

which Donald Trump has argued no the

campaign would never make such payments

uh to Stormy Daniels and this is where

you have the New York district attorney

potentially elevating uh this particular

crime from a misdemeanor to a felony

which will actually be really important

in the Congressional response because

they destroy the New York district

attorney for basically de-escalating

most felonies to misdemeanors and still

only having about a 50 conviction rate

then there is an argument that 103

classified documents were found with

Donald Trump theoretically there's a

10-year penalty for every document that

you knew you were in possession of and

failed to comply with returning when you

were asked then there's another charge

about Criminal Intent to conceal records

now this the only way this would Pat

like actually stick is if a court could

show Donald Trump knew he had files that

were responsive to the National Archives

uh efforts that has a 20-year penalty

for uh per offense mishandling of

documents criminalizes the concealment

or destruction of documents basically

alleging that potentially Donald Trump

tore up Pages there's the contempt of

court charge which is disobeying a

subpoena from May of 2022 to turn over

documents because later more documents

were found there's a conspiracy to make

a false statement which would make it a

crime and and would be a violation of

the law to lie about other documents

being available but then again they'd

have to prove that Donald Trump knew

about these and I'm just giving you all

of these potential charges against

Donald Trump right uh then there's the

Georgia election charge that Donald

Trump pressuring the governor uh and

Secretary of State to find additional

votes was really a crime to solicit

someone else to commit election fraud

but that you know a lot of these feel a

little scratchy because really then you

have to ask well was Donald Trump just

saying can we like can we double check

to make sure there aren't illegally cast

votes

or was he asking can you just get me

some fake votes right like that's going

to be very difficult I think probably to

prove in court there are also potential

crimes of Rico laws racketeering laws

which are usually violent in Georgia

Rico laws are usually related to Violent

uh breaking of laws but uh this there

could be Rico claims for the

solicitation to make false statements

for forgery related to not Georgia phone

call uh then of course you have uh

January 6th which we talked about

already regarding those introduction

Clips so so these together are sort of

all of these claims that are being

thrown against Donald Trump and people

on the left are very frustrated because

they're like how is this guy Teflon Don

but then when you look at every single

one of the claims individually

there might not be the biggest Smoking

Gun but not because maybe Donald Trump

didn't manage to to kind of skirt the

way things were supposed to be done but

because of the legal standard that's the

fight this isn't Democrat Republican I

mean even though it is we know it is we

know it's Democrat Republican but when

you look at the legal standard the legal

standard is so high to prove how how do

you go to a court and somehow prove oh

he knew the documents were there he knew

how many there were he knew exactly

where how do you prove that even if

Trump knew how do you prove that he knew

right remember you in a criminal case

you have to convince a jury or a judge

Beyond A Reasonable Doubt and if there's

any doubt that Donald Trump didn't know

about these documents if there's any

doubt that he didn't know exactly what

Michael Cohen was doing if there's any

doubt that he didn't know exactly what

his words meant when he said them on

January sex because he would have not

expected that people would have actually

broken down doors and windows at uh uh

at Congress

then

it's kind of hard to convict

because there's doubt so it's kind of

interesting but what's very fascinating

is this Congressional response right

here and this just came out yesterday

and so this is a letter to Alvin Bragg

the district attorney of New York

bagging on him and saying yo now

remember at the beginning of this

segment what did I tell you I said

Congress wanted information on Trump

the response from the district attorney

was dude no this is not your place like

back off this is our case you don't

deserve to have any insight into these

documents because you have no

jurisdiction here F off like this is on

us

so go away

and what do we actually have now well

Congress comes back with yet another

argument and their argument is pretty

detailed and I think it's definitely

worth going through so let's do it look

at this

in reply we did it's worth noting that

uh the allegations of potential pressure

from the left that Congress is making

against the district attorney was not

addressed At All by their office in

other words these uh individuals who are

writing this letter in Congress which

are Jim Jordan the chairman of the

committee on the Judiciary

Bryant Steele chairman of the committee

on house administration and James calmer

the chairman of the committee on

oversight and accountability these chair

folks

are making the allegation that hey you

know in our first letter to us where we

said you guys are basically just folding

to political pressure from the left and

you're weaponizing the office of the

district attorney you didn't even

address that in your last letter and why

are you upgrading a misdemeanor charge

against Donald Trump to a felony using

an untested legal Theory at the same

time as you're simultaneously

downgrading other felonies in your

jurisdiction so what has happened here

is the district attorney has really

poked the bear they've poked the bear

and now all of a sudden you have a very

upset Congress and some of the arguments

they make here are very interesting so

they say here first of all this is

extremely important for National

purposes because if a president ever in

the future avoids taking an action he

believes is in the National interest

because it would negatively impact a

local jurisdiction because of fear that

they would be subject to retaliatory

prosecution from a city

then Congress needs to know about that

and that's basically how they start over

here so they make this argument that

look this is a national security issue

because really what you're doing is

you're saying hey if a president can get

sued after they leave office then what

happens in the future if another

president gets in let's say you know

Robert Jones is president in 10 years

and Robert Jones passes a law or signs a

law into effect that hurts New York What

if after he's done he gets prosecuted

that's the argument uh that uh Congress

these these three individuals in

Congress are responding with uh and they

are threatening to potentially take

legislative action to potentially

protect former or current presidents

from politically motivated prosecutions

now I wrote a little note here and I

said LOL empty threat

and that's true there's probably not

going to be any legislative action

between now and the 2024 election

because after midterms very little gets

done other than what is necessary

but I did actually write that I thought

this was a very nice count like a pretty

solid counter by Congress here like look

this is the responsibility of Congress

because it affects how presidents

potentially act in the future it's

actually a good point especially since

Bragg when he campaigned for office said

he felt convinced he wanted to prosecute

Donald Trump based on what he publicly

believed was enough evidence to

prosecute Trump

so it's kind of like he went into office

and got elected with a mandate to

prosecute Trump and now he's Prosecuting

Trump and of course the left is arguing

good Donald Trump deserves to be taking

the justice and the right argues what

the hell like you're supposed to see a

crime and then investigate not

investigate somebody and then find

crimes like it's backwards because

you're weaponizing the office for

political purposes like that's not how

it's supposed to work

it's not like you're supposed to say who

whom do we think is deserves to go to

jail Trump okay how are we going to get

him in trouble let's find something

that's sticking with that and a lot of

people are saying this is scary this is

not how law enforcement should work just

work the other way around if you do a

crime then you get caught then you get

investigated then you go to jail not the

other way around all right get going

here

Congress argues that the Supreme Court

has and when I say congress in the

context of this video it's important to

remember uh it's those three

Representatives

so they make this argument that the

Supreme Court has recognized a broad and

indispensable power to conduct oversight

thanks to a 1961 or 62 I can't remember

it was either 61 or 62. law or case law

Wilkinson versus the United States and

they created a three-prong test to

determine the legal sufficiency of

basically a congressional inquiry and

basically the standard is pretty light

it basically says any committee can

investigate

broad subject matter that's authorized

by Congress which could be

Appropriations

the investigations must be pursuant to a

valid legislative purpose which could be

oversight

and the specifics of the inquiries must

be involved pertinent to Broad subject

matter which have been authorized by

Congress basically this three-purpose

test is kind of saying as long as

Congress wants to conduct oversight they

can look into anything they want so it's

a pretty broad interpretation of case

line it was a pretty broad case uh for

for what it gives the power to do

so they then argue that committees are

authorized to conduct such an inquiry

they talk about how uh the last thing we

want is a collision between the Secret

Service and local law enforcement

officials they go on to talk about how

and this is what happens when you poke

the Bear by the way like your your own

faults come up listen to this one under

your leadership

the New York dis New York County

District Attorney General's office has

adopted and defended your Progressive

criminal justice policies which include

downgrading 52 percent of felony cases

to misdemeanors even with downgrading

more than half of your felony cases to

misdemeanors your office's conviction

rate when Prosecuting serious felony

charges was just 51 percent

think about that for a moment that's

pretty incredible so what they're

basically saying is

52 percent

of felony cases were downgraded to

misdemeanors of that 52 so if you have a

hundred that just turned into 52. of

those 52 only about 25 ended up in

convictions

so in other words your conviction rate

on felonies is only about 25 that's

crazy yeah there it is you're convinced

oh well and then look at this then it

gets even crazier then it says also your

conviction rate for misdemeanors is just

28 so in other words in New York they're

basically saying the felony conviction

rate when you combine the uh discounting

of of demoting uh felonies to

misdemeanors is only about 25

and your misdemeanor uh conviction rate

is only about 28 so in other words if

you want to commit crime Congress is

basically saying go to New York because

their conviction rates are horrible

I mean this is what happens when you

poke the bear like you kind of get

exposed uh so then they argue here in

fact in a Judiciary subcommittee here

last year on a mother of an army veteran

testified

after her son was murdered in your

District

she criticized your office's handling of

her son's murder because you offered a

plea deal to the defendants despite the

fact that the murder and their roles was

caught on video

yikes that would definitely piss off a

mom who lost their son and then saw plea

deals being offered to murderers

so they keep going and talking about

some basis I'm really just wanting to

show you the most interesting parts

they argue that Congress absolutely has

the right to investigate because even

though the district attorney says hey

your requests are an unlawful incursion

into New York sovereignty they say our

inquiry does nothing to stop your duties

oversight and inquiry is not something

that distracts you from doing your job

it's a normal course of business Fair

argument you know that's kind of like

saying hey if you got an SEC art audit

uh to make sure you're doing what you're

supposed to be doing correctly uh then

that's not like saying oh well now I'm

distracted I can't do my job that is

part of your job to respond to oversight

requests anyway the court has further

noted that a congressional committee

engaged in legitimate legislative

investigation need not grind to a halt

whenever it responds to inquiries same

thing I just said basically so they make

their case here and they sign it please

respond no later than March 31st now

keep in mind they did not explicitly

threaten a subpoena against uh Bragg's

office

but let's just say a lot of people are

really pissed uh even to the point where

bomb threats have been called into the

New York Criminal Court apparently now a

suspicious white powdery substance was

mailed to the DA's office which anybody

who is probably older than like 25

remembers the whole like anthrax scare

of uh uh the past so it's kind of scary

so uh kind of wild to see all of the the

uh

political trauma on both sides around

this but my goal is to do my best to

provide you insights on both sides I

know that's not like the most popular

thing to do because then people are like

no man you're young and then they don't

actually tell you how they're wrong or

or that I'm wrong because my opinion is

just different my opinion is really

designed to just be in the middle like

when I look at something like that that

article on Twitter

or like 99 of the responses or that

letter on Twitter to the letter on

Twitter 99 of the responses to that

letter on Twitter are people going

that's it Case Closed man it's over

Trump's free

no like if you actually read it with

detail you could see where the holes are

and that's my point is to show I I don't

want to say like make people more jaded

but I do think we need more of that sort

of critical analysis when we look at

things and I think it's a good thing

like hey what I would do if I you know

if I had any involvement in this is I

would send a letter to that law firm and

I'd be like hey you know you all wrote a

letter in 2018 could you verify that

it's not just the Trump organization nor

the Trump campaign or Trump personally

or his family trust personally that

didn't reimburse anybody and if they

don't say anything that's kind of a

Smoking Gun to some degree there right

because it's like all right you found

the hole

maybe not right or maybe they respond

and say yep nope no organization of

Donald Trump they didn't say no

organization of Donald Trump reimbursed

Michael Cohen for Stormy Daniels they

specifically said Trump org or Trump

campaign okay well he's got like 20

other businesses maybe uh Atlantic Trump

Atlantic casinos did it or Trump

University

or Trump's trust yeah the point is these

are all like this this these letters

often uh seem like they're so conclusive

they're really not

so anyway I think that's very

interesting uh so with that said I need

to remind you to get yourself twill free

stocks from Weeble by going to

metcaven.com Weeble check out now we

have buy now pay later a firm being the

most popular clarna coming in second

close second there for the courses on

building your wealth linked down below

you could break up those payments in

three months six months 12 months if you

want generally don't recommend using

buying I pay later but some people have

been demanding it so it's there check

out those programs link down below and

get your life insurance in as little as

five minutes by going to metcaven.com

life thanks so much for watching and

we'll see you in the next meet Kevin

report

all right

[Music]