to yeah, i mean, i was just gonna say very, very quickly, i was speaking, speaking through a former colleague in the u. k. just a couple of days ago. and it's for my colleague set to be rory. is it true that there's been a drone striking must go? i said there were been numerous drones strikes and must have good but the u. k. press. when there is a ukrainian strike up most going to they, they put all the way down the front page and to a tiny box on the side. so the, you don't see these all essentially terrorist attacks on civilian errors, yellows. next time we are going to speak for longer, but for that we're going to have to wrap this up but just put the code in the chief editor of the finish media off of m v. lucky i always appreciate you on the program . a real straight shooter. thanks for your time. you on us. thank you. thank you very much where i think the next. thanks for joining a surface program live from moscow wrapping it up from a real research right here at the desk. but my colleague, you know, neil is here in hoffman hours time with lots of your world wide headphones. i do hope you can join him, the,

[000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to was a part. it's arizona, the american humor, mark twain famously a remark that a good lawyer and it was the law of a clever one, takes the judge to lunch. has he been witness to the current politics of his country? he may have added prescriptions for prosecutors, campaign donors, and sex workers with trump,

and by then seemingly subs for another ballad stand of legal cases hovering about them and their family members who is likely to face the music. to discuss that amount joined by robot. barnes and american constitutional lawyer. mr. barnes is great to talk to thank you very much for your time. that'd be, you know, 1st of all, i'm curious. do you think of yourself as a good lawyer who according to mark twain, needs to know the law or a clever one who relies on his personal connections to help us 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 court. okay, so justice, so only works by the book when it comes to under dogs. but uh,

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 out of january 6 defendants are treated versus the summer of love, protest writers are treated there, witnessing and lifetime, just how disparate and discriminatory. unfortunately, our american legal system has become out. 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 sexually abusing, although north raping magazines,

right. or jean carol 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. you may have 3 election years in the state that just recently removed the statute of limitations for sexual crimes. what's your take on this case? yeah, 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 tort of battery. that you have a new york 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 it. 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 pools and proven that in

a range of cases. and now new york's jerry polls are proven the same thing. trying a person that of 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 to 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, not mr. barns. this is not the 1st, the sexual scandal that trump has been associated with. our viewers may recall the

legit golden showers in moscow described in now will be discredited and quickly forgotten. still dose here. that didn't seem to affect a trump the reputation much as you have these allegations, keep resurfacing, if they're politically motivated, as you have suggested before. why do you think trumps opponents keep pressing the same rustic 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 interest and even hard years 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 them. and especially when it comes the truck, they don't believe anything. they trump supporters,

don't believe the accusations against them because they're, as you know, did with russia gates, there been so many false accusations made against ro? yeah. what's interesting about the russian gate, i mean, uh, you know, the, that's the case. so that those here, usually damage, not only the relationship between our 2 countries, but it's on the mind global politics a great deal. i mean, that's one of the reasons we are on the brink of a nuclear war right now. but you know, our 2 countries, and yet i don't remember anyone being prosecuted or convicted for authorized falls, quotes that content are contained in that oh indeed. in fact, the one lawyer who was prosecuted was given a sweetheart deal. he never served today in jail as well. license was reinstated a year later. i mean in this is someone who lied to the highest. well, one of the highest chords in the land, the for 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 and 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 and 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's own jury pool because they know that trump's own variable won't accept it as being true. and it's because it's not true typically. now let's talk about the treatment of the other side. and one revelation the surface recently in the wall street journal is how many american power players continued to meet with convicted sex offender. and peter file jeffrey f. soon after his conviction, including people like the courtesy i, a director william burns,

who at that time was serving as deputy deputy secretary of state. and he had a meeting scheduled with apps to him convicted, sex offender in athens. own private mention of the same goes for obama presidential advisor or for, you know, a college president. what does it say to you about the informal ways of power and the implants and the american? well, the post world war, 2 era, the american sort of deep state as it came to be known or calder people. some people called the national security establishment of the military industrial complex. really kind of entrenched its power across the media as a spectrum across the university spectrum across our corporate institutions across our global institutions. as robert kennedy junior just said, as we, he's running for president the attributes to the c i a and those act bad actors, the assassination of both his father and his uncle, president john kennedy. and part of all that goes back to always having honey traps

having being involved in sex trafficking, operations being involved in various kind of elicit operations around the world, to blackmail and extort targeted individuals in jeffrey epstein. and not coincidentally, it was connected to robert maxwell, the british publisher, who had connections to intelligence operations all around the globe. he came from an adult in school, the adult where he cried guys 1st break the adult in school, secretary of state anthony blinking went to that same dalton. so william bars, the attorney general, former attorney general's father was the head master right before epstein was hired at the adult the school. so you have a lead prep school tie and you go deeper, there's tides between blankets, father and epstein. so it's not a surprise, epstein was i believe, the center piece of kind of a honey trap. extortion operation, blackmail operation for intelligence agencies around the world. he had ties to robert miller use it. the reason why you get a sweet are deal is will most likely use a secret and form it for the end of the aisle to robert molar. this goes back.

robert miller has ties to other people that did that operation. similar to that, out of san francisco. and then people can look up. so it's not a surprise. it's just an under belly of american and global institutional power. we don't often get to see and live terms. and i think that's just coming to do, i understand you correctly, my hearing you correctly, that you believe that all these parties that epstein was involved in organizing, involving teenage girls or very young women. you believe that it was not only for the sexual gratification of, of their participants, but possibly a scheme, a means for co opting for further control. oh no doubt. it was a classic blackboard storage in ring that it's not about providing the list of services to an elite group of people who otherwise can't find the easily the access to those that at least elicit activity. but it's also to black bellnick stuart that ma'am, it gives a coincidence. i think some of the efforts failed. i think like the effort to

a to get material on say it allen durst was didn't ultimately work out because he didn't take the bait but nor i, nor do i think known chomsky who apparently met multiple times with him. i don't think he took debate on any of that, but most likely because he was also involved in eugenics and involved in a lot of weird science the, you know, epstein. but i think the long term goal and objective in each one of these cases was due in trap, and it's near these people in the world that could then be used against them. the, according to the various reports, there are lots of video cameras all over epstein island in prison. we, we just don't know whatever happened to all of that material, but all of it has the finger forensic fingerprints of a black male operation involving western intelligence agency. now i don't know if it's accurate, but i, i've read somewhere that comes to resort them are longer was absolutely a off limits for f, f students parties. and if that, to that, i think that's the reason is a very interesting question about morality because it's one thing to, you know,

pursue adult women, even as the extramarital affair i'm, it's quite a different matter to you, you know, by the bodies of the average, the souls of teenage girls, what do you think about that? oh yeah. so to early on, uh, epstein was reported as harassing some young women at more awhile ago, so trump banned him from our logo. and you can find some old interviews where he kept hinting at epstein is 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 put out there what's going on. so the, i think so trump was they try 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 if they reflect the sad nature of our intel system, but the trump has to be one of the highest integrity people on the planet. because

to be in new york real estate taking tight and all they can find on you is some affairs. so this is, um, 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, with the vaccine pat politic about the, you know, all the crimes on all the more, you know, character all 5 of try as well. um, 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. and 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. mr. barnes, we have to take a short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments station. the, [000:00:00;00] the

welcome back to was a part of this rover's barnes and american constitutional lawrence, mr. barnes. um, going back to the store mcdaniels case, you've been pretty 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, yes, it was brought involved in a very forceful, very conspicuous way in the pre election year. so i assume people who are behind it . i'm 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 there is an appeal to power rather than appeal to the principal. 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 trump. 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 pro is 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 surely must have some, you know, loyalty to that own profession and to the lawyers such that they should, but not often in the city in new york. and my experience. i mean, i represented a me, 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 he 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 stormy danielle's 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 at a 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 he has a constitutionally protected right to do whatever he wants. that's why they're going through some procedural shenanigans to try to escape because to do some restrictions on their charges. mister barnes 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 russia. the, the prior to these huge fallout between moscow and washington and number of russian banks and steve connected enterprises, made contributions to the clinton foundation. i think that it was also raised as a concern. then 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, he 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 and false 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 right now. uh, as has recently immersed brock obama also may have benefit from some very questionable donations uh which compared to um, elijah pay off to store mcdaniels. it seems to be far more well. um can speak here is because uh, in the case of trump, he is accused of using his own money. but the indication for 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 than 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. in his whole family, they'll be no prosecution. so speaking about vital assembly, you alluded to them before, and it's well known in this part of the world that his son and a couple of his associates. also,

all springs of prominent democratic families have been involved in the deals that involved is not enough which 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? i'm not asking about fairness here. are blindness of the american justice system, but given that there's has to be a lot of in fighting a political and fighting, even within the biden administration between various camps. do you think that the case could be used by the democrats 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 a 100 was just off the chain in terms of the scale of corruption and crimes that he was involved in. whether attached to the public behavior. i'm in uh, let's not forget the, all he's doing says with prostitution and you know, abuses and the addictions, etc. exactly. and so you add that. i mean, if there's all kinds of there are, 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 scary 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. 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 spilled. bradford, russia, but it's pretty scary on, on when 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 is health suggest he can't be president. that's what everybody can witness. it shows how bad the democratic party has fatigued, that they don't have an easy replacement if they were conscientious, they would embrace robert kennedy's campaign. but they despised robert galleries, campaigned the democratic party establishment, much as they did his father. so consequently, they're stuck with this. a corrupt idiot in the white house stop mister bar is going back to your point that the democrats favor it's way of operating is concessions 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 blunt and primitive as it is right now. there was a degree of sophistication and even elegance in the previous political scouts. like, let's say, what are gabe? why dressing is becoming so crude?

it's the degradation of our lee, so that we've gone from kissinger types those 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 that 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 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 baths for 2024? 0 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 won 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,

the, but that's where it kennedy's challenge to trump. also, i mean, to abide and also presents options. they're 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 trump of failed. what happens if trump is the one that takes the, you know, your 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. thank you for watching hope the searing down on was part the hard top stories today, pocket sounds high court spends the 3 year corruption sentence against the former prime minister in wrong, although keep sending custody over another case, live reactions on the coming, right? all the people of molly are skeptical of us and external solutions sometimes and in good faith, sometimes by other agendas that prolonged for sustains is quite 6. rather than helping to resulting molly to give us the boat to un peacekeepers in the country,