music will discuss that. i'm now joined by a real big barnes and american constitutional lawyer. mr. barnes is a great to talk to thank you very much for your time. that'd be here. now. first of all, i'm curious. do you think of yourself as a lawyer who according to marketing, needs to know the law or a clever one who relies on his personal connections to help his cases and given the state of the american justice system? which strategy do you think is most efficient? as a practical matter, i, the mark twain is right. if your client is a politically connected or privileged individual, if your client mo, almost all my clients are under dogs and outside or so, consequently, any invitation to lunch would be declined. so consequently, my only choice is to be a good lawyer in cord. okay? so justice only works by the book when it comes to under dogs. but when it comes to privilege people, there is a whole set of rules, right?

no doubt. and people are witnessing that on the american political right it's, it's been known on different segments of the american political spectrum over the last century or so. different people experienced the different times in our legal history. but now people on the what's a good, loosely call the political right, are seeing it and live time seeing how trump is treated. seeing the different standards seeing of the january 6 defendants are treated versus the summer of love, protest writers are treated there, witnessing and live time just how disparate and discriminatory, unfortunately, are american legal system has become of now you mentioned the legal term, treatment of donald trump, i initially was intent on discussing his indictments in connection with his told me daniels case, but assumed that he was found guilty of a sexually abusing although north raping magazines. right there, jean carroll all the way back in 1996. now correct me if i'm wrong, but i think it's possible only in the united states that somebody would wait 27

years until her 79th birthday to pursue such charges in the pre election year in the state that just recently removed the statute of limitations for sexual crimes. what's your take on this case? yeah, so what it shows just how bad and weak are case was that the jury did not find any rape occurred. in fact, they didn't even check the box on whether sexual abuse took place. they just said, i assigned damages for the toward a battery that you have a new or jury. you have a very hostile federal judge to trump, in the way presided over the trial. and despite all of that, they still couldn't find him guilty of the main accusation against him. so i think trump's people will take that as the only victory they could get, but it shows how bad our legal system is, the district of columbia jerry poles and proven that in a range of cases. and now new york's jerry polls are proving the same thing, trying a person that a, the trumps notoriety in the jurisdiction that has

a bunch of people that hate and makes no sense, i may call. but one of the jurors was a democrat, a registered democrat in new york city, that was a place that voted 90 percent against trump. that's not a place that could be impartial. it is, you know, if the case was a crazy case, i see it was someone who had no witnesses. the vouch for no independent evidence didn't come forward for decades later. hated trump. every witness in our trial either hated trump, or was paid by the plaintiff's lawyers. the whole case was paid for by a big tech guy who hates trump. so it's just the last there on steroids, which americans used to seeing in other parts of the world. they're not as a custom to sing it in america. don't listen, barnes. this is not the 1st, the sexual scandal that trump has been associated with. our viewers may recall the elected golden showers in moscow described in now who will be discredited and quickly forgotten. still dose here. that didn't seem to affect a trumpeter reputation much as you have these allegations,

keep resurfacing if they are politically motivated, as you have suggested before. why do you think trumps opponents keep pressing the same rusty lever when it's clearly doesn't deliver? because the american legal establishment political establishment in the political class as a whole is used to the american public, accepting the results of judges and juries. so they figure if a judge says, if a jury says that that will get americans to reject that person and accept whatever the judge or jury says, what's happened over the trump era is that americans have quit, trusting even our judges and entrust the even higher juries just as they no longer trust our experts, they no longer trust our media. they no longer trust anybody in a position of authority because they keep lying to them and they catch them lying to the reasons we held them to bring the new clear water right now. but, you know, i'll be in jail and his law license was reinstated a year later. i mean in this is someone who did lied to the highest well to one of

the highest chords in the land. the ford intelligence surveillance activity court to allow mass mine to occur to allow a mass deception to occur. so it's our entire legal system has always had issues, but it's just coming to the bear and coming to the forefront as people witness it in live time. when it concerns trump. almost all the charges against trump are so overly and openly in brazenly political and partisan that nobody trusts them. and there's no better example that the fact they're scared to bring a case against trump in a jurisdiction that has conservatives. they only look at the district of columbia or the city of atlanta or the city of new york. they won't look at bringing the case with trump town. jerry pulled their views where he kept hinting at epstein z issues. there's i think, a vanity fair piece that was very favorable. epstein where trump keeps saying, well, he has a reputation for very young girls, worries trying to pull it out there. what's going on? so the, i think so trump was, they tried to connect trump epstein, ultimately it was unsuccessful because cup is one of the few people that kept his

distance from epstein over many years. once he found out what he was about. so the but it, they reflects the sad nature of our intel system, but the trump has to be one of the highest integrity people on the planet. it goes to be a new york real estate hiking titan and all they can find on you is some affair. so this is uh no, just uh, fascinating but uh, i mean it's totally, uh, it's hard to understand for somebody like like myself, how, you know, the, the democrats would be a vaccine pat politic about the, you know, all the crimes on all the more. oh, you know, character off of trump while you know, seemingly knowing about things that are going on within the own camp. i mean, it's just, it's b b young comprehension. it's i called confessions to your projections. so you look at all the crimes they accuse trump of, and it's pretty much what the bite and family has done so like they accuse trouble

being engaged with various for incorruption scams. and now it's coming out that the biden family was taking money from almost anybody around the world to line their pockets by them, you know, the, by the democratic use trump of various sexual misconduct. there's all kinds of allegations circulating, bite and concerning that in concerning, far worse misconduct. and so i think what you see is a lot of confession through projects and what they accuse trump of is what they themselves are guilty of. or perhaps even more as well. mister barnes, we have to take a short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments stationed the

by the middle of the 19th century. practically the whole of india had been under the rule of the british and by the colonial authorities that it close that heavy desk, bringing the people into a poverty head, sporting 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 to even to those who operated with them. the facts of ignoring the religious believes of the hindus led them. you need the voice, mercenary, soldiers, surfing 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 equal. 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 them you may result in the death of 800000 inhabitants of the indians. however, the british empire never broke the free spirit of the indians and their will will resist the welcome back towards the parts, vis rovers barns and american constitution. lord, mister barnes, going back to the store mcdaniels case, you've been privy vocal that donald trump's indictment is very weak on both legal

and factual grounds. in fact, it doesn't even mention what federal law trump supposedly violated. um, yep. it was brought involved in a very forceful, very conspicuous way in the pre election year. so i assume people who are behind it, really confident about what they're doing. how do you understand their rationale as a lawyer? i mean, i think the rationale is, is power is raising the appeal to power rather than appeal to principle. so the new york district attorney's office knows that his office has a lot of power. the new york judges tend to be very differential to the new york district attorney's office, and the new york appeals courts have been very hostile to trump individually. he's got a jury pool that pretty much dissipate, despises. trump voted against them, 90 to 10. as a you know, about 80 percent of them have a very unfavorable view of trumps. so i think that's what he's betting on. now trump remove the case from state court to federal court and he's asking united states federal district court to take control over the case if that happens,

that throws a big wrench into the state prosecutor, because all of a sudden it's a different jury polled different judicial different appeals process and in all of its unparalleled and unprecedented american legal history. but they're willing to break all the norms to go after trump. do you think the justice or judicial, uh, branch is independent enough or invested enough in its independence said to go buy the book rather than political considerations because it's one thing, whatever they think about trump. uh they, they, they certainly must have some, you know, loyalty to that own profession and to the law as such that they should, but not often in the city in new york. and my experience. i mean, i represented a cooper, the so called central park karen in new york. and my experience with the system is that it's very political. in fact, new york is probably one of the most political jurisdictions in the country other than the district of columbia. they're probably the 2 most political jurisdictions where you have a lot of jury's judges prosecutor's lawyers. too many that just don't care about

the rule of law and they care about how it looks politically in the quarter public opinion. and so i think that's the risk trump faces. i don't think you didn't get a fair trial from a state court in manhattan. i think they should either remove it either the federal court should take the case or you should remove it to staten island and then i think you could get a fair jury. i heard you say in another interview that even if a trump have page storm mcdaniels through his campaign coffers, that constitutionally protected under us law was the point of channeling money and this way then it is there it's, it's basically for saving yourself from political embarrassment. but you know, we do gag orders every day in america and settlements in a ride range of cases, entirely constitutional and legal. and then from a campaign perspective, you're allowed, if you're spending your own money, you're allowed to do whatever you want. and there's many people who believe it, even if it,

that the mere fact that it's an indirect benefit on the campaign is not enough to make it a campaign donation. this came up in the john edwards case. it would have been litigated up on the court of appeals, but they couldn't secure convictions in the john edwards case. in the john edwards case, you had a presidential candidate who somebody else was paying off his mistress. here you have trump paying off of the legs, mistress? well, that's entirely under the us constitution under the 1st amendment. no campaign lock and limit what you spend on your own behalf. and so that's why you as a constitutionally protected right to do whatever you want. that's why they're going through some procedural shenanigans to try to escape the constitution's restrictions on their charges for some barton's campaigns and nations. and billings have been used by previous democratic administrations. and they're pretty legs a fair way. it's no secret here in ross or the prior to this huge fallout between moscow and washington and member of russian banks and steve connected enterprises, made contributions to the clinton foundation. i think that it was also raised as

a concern and the cables were released by we can leaks. why do you think the this issue of campaign financing is only becoming an issue now? they're basically looking into hyper technical ways to go after them. and it is a case a confession through projection because they look at the crimes they committed and try to accuse trump of them. and this is, that's a pattern going all the way back. because hillary clinics, who did commit this crime in 2016, she procured the so called russia gate dosa through lows, laundered as a kid that was not listed as a campaign expand. so as low it was listed as a legal expense at the perkins co law firm. and, and so that secret hide and per fingerprints in it that ended up in a federal court record because there was a separate ation of perjury installs affidavit submitted to a federal court saying that it was not a campaign part of the process. so that's an example of a real campaign crime. and instead of prosecuting hillary clinton, they just accused trump of something that's us on

a much smaller scale than what hillary clinton actually did right there in the city in new york. now uh, as has recently immersed brock obama also may have benefited from some very questionable donations uh which compared to um, elijah pay off to store mcdaniels. it seems to be far more well um from speaker is because uh, in the case of trump he's uh accused of using his own money. but the, in the case of obama, the talk is about some shady find that finance here from god knows where do you think, given a bomb as venerated status, a among the liberals? do you think that case will be given a go? and i don't think there's any chance of that other brock obama or hillary clinton will ever face the same degree of scrutiny or criminal prosecution that trump is done. the trump's true crime has been to be an independent, dissonant voice on american foreign policy. and that almost every president who is

ever voice that the most prominent one being john kennedy, has faced the hardest consequences from sort of the deep state apparatus. all of trumps charges have that fingerprint on it. and there's no better example of that. then the disparate treatment brock obama committed real campaign crimes. they'll be no prosecution. hillary clinton committed real campaign crimes. they'll be no prosecution. a bite has been committing crime for 40 years and his whole family, they'll be no prosecution. that was speaking about by the assembly. uh, you alluded to that before and it's well known in this part of the world of his son and a couple of his associates. also, all springs of permanent democratic families has been involved in the deals that involved if not enough, it isn't done clear influence trading there, that there are proven records on that. do you think the american justice system can deal with that?

and i'm not asking about fairness here are blindness of the american justice system . but given that there seems to be a lot of in fighting a political and fighting, even with them the, by the end of ministration between various camps. do you think that case could be used by the democrats uh, themselves in the fighting for power? i think if they had somebody they could replace by miss vice president, they would use that as extortion to get biden to resign from the white house site health grounds. but basically use the because everybody in washington is known that the buying buying is whole family of sisters is brothers, a son, you name it. in some cases, nieces and nephews to engage in met. it's a basically enrich his family through public office. and so there's and then hunter was just off the chain in terms of the scale of corruption and crimes that he was involved in, whether it's task for the public behavior. i mean, uh, let's not forget the, all he's doing says with prostitution and you know,

i'm using this and the addictions, etc. exactly. and so you add that. i mean, there's all kinds of, or there's already suspicion from the arkansas court where he has a 100 by, as a child support proceeding involving a child that he had at an out of wedlock. that he's biting income from his art dealing in a lot of his are dealing looks like money laundering to a lot of people. as soon as, as soon as his dad is president, all of a sudden he's is art is worth tons of money. art, of course, is infamously known for its money laundering capacity. so there's so many places in cases that they could bring against them. i think the problem they have is a simple one, even though by this kind of a dementor candidate in the white house, with all these corruption issues, they could easily use as leverage. who's going to replace them? nobody likes, kamala harris. nobody likes any other democratic candidate who could replace them. so right now the democratic party in the deep state is kind of stuck with a notoriously corrupt president. well, it's not just notoriously corrupt them in mr. barnes. i mean, it's just my,

my personal remark, but when we look at his cognitive ability, it's really scared to think about what's going on behind the scenes. because the man is entrusted with the most powerful weapons on this planet and the, you know, in every other public appearance, he barely knows where he is as that's, i don't know why that doesn't bother the americans. i mean, i have no personal uh, investment in whoever wins. i think it would be still bradford rush or but it's pretty scary on on. when do you consider the global security and no doubt, i mean the recent abc washington post poll found that 60 percent of americans believe that by does not have the mental capacity or, or cognizance level to be present united states. and that his health suggest he can't be president, that's what everybody can witness. it shows how bad the democratic party has fatigue, that they don't have an easy replacement if they were conscientious, they would embrace robert kennedy's campaign,

but they despised robert gabby's campaign. the democratic party establishment, much as they did his father, so consequently they're stuck with this a corrupt idiot in the white house. now mister barnes, going back to your point that the democrats favor it's way of operating is confessions through projection as a student of collective psychology. i think it's always been a that's way with the, with the american. so you just like, projecting your shadow onto other nations or a group of people, but i think it was never as blonde and primitive as it is right now. there was a degree of sophistication and even elegance in the previous political counts. like, let's say, what are gabe? why do you think it's becoming so crude? it's the degradation of our lee, so that we've gone from kissinger types whose moral compass it was probably always broken, but at least was intellectually competent and capable. now we have the same lack of a moral compass,

but people whose intellect is severely damaged. you're talking about people of 34 generations of upper middle class privilege backgrounds. they grow up and save space as well as kids. they don't serve of the military. they don't serve in law enforcement, they have little connection to those who do, they don't know the working class and the working populations of the country. and so they're, they're there. but they're a lot like the british colonial leads of the early 19th century, late the early 20th century, late 19th century, where they're just decaying. that they're part of a, an apparatus that just needs itself and is parasitic towards its own population. now finally, i know that you one almost half a 1000000 of yours after betting on trump to win the 2016 elections. are you placing any that's for 2024? uh, yeah, so the, i mean i, my bet would be on trump again. de santis will not be a meaningful challenger to him in the primaries. i think all these indictment and lost their efforts will only strengthen him constitutionally they can't prohibit

him from being on the ballot. i think that there's a lot of the supporters that every time they see an attack on them, they see even more reason to support them. they're like, well, we're clearly we're right. we're right that he's going to challenge the system. we're right, there's gonna be better the 2nd time around or otherwise the whole system wouldn't be trying to take him out. i will allow that him to govern properly because uh, the last time she one here struggled great deal. that's going to be the most interesting aspect because it's a lot like 1968 where the, you know, if robert kennedy one, what was the system going to do, given that he planned on implementing the rest of his brothers agenda and going into very dramatic direction hopefully we don't see that outcome here, but the idea, but that's where it 10 of these challenges to trump also need to abide and also present options there. kind of each other's so security of a sort, the better kennedy does, that helps trump and vice versa. and so i think the, the yeah, i don't know how the systems gonna react. i mean,

the all efforts to take out trumpet failed. what happens if trump is the one that takes, you know, you're ation. what do they do next? a if they're smart, they're looking at where they can go and there's no extradition. mr. barnes, we have to leave it here. thank you very much for this fascinating conversation. thank you very much and thank you for watching hope to see her again on the was part of the,

the, the, the with more than 96 take the country is heading for with president hood one, securing less than 50 percent. the opposition candidates come on like he likes to roll, it's usually the tech he is on the news agency at the store thing the polling data

and claims. he's actually winning the race president of edwin's policy. brunswick allegations, as propaganda, and split tends to assassinate the national will. plus we speak with a i t if a child psychologist took a slow amaica and paul, a mentor, a foreign affairs committee, had his face, took a thank things good relations with other countries. despite level tensions as on career, puts the interests of technicians put this in the.