we're also joined by ralph nader and we will talk to him in a moment.bobbi sternheim, if you can talk about this unsealed indictment, 34 felonies against an ex-president. talk about how significant you think these charges are. >> i think the charges in and of themselves are significant and what makes it especially interesting is that each of the 34 counts is grounded in a piece of evidence, whether an invoice or a check or an entry in a ledger. so none of these charges stand alone requiring just the testimony of a witness. the documents, the ledgers come that checks speak for themselves and they cannot be cross-examined. juan: what about the issue of what were essentially considered misdemeanors being possibly raised to felonies and the debate over whether a conviction can be gotten on some of these counts? >> well, certainly, it does not seem like a slamdunk because it involves a legal theory that will have to be developed at a trial. although the indictment itself is pretty silent on the underlying facts, other than the documentary evidence, the state

i go back to ralph nader's book 1965. unsafe at any speed. at the end of the day, it took until 1983 to get legislation for seatbelts. we cannot wait that long for the technology that we use and rely upon every hour of every day to be inherently unsafe. >> given the prominence of the issue and the potential role of congress. i want to ask about the program, the doj has held companies accountable, i believe the civil fraud initiative holds accounts individuals who put citizens at risk. what would you need on a clarity of standard of care, can you hold companies that are serving the government liable? >> we are already moving out on the civil cyber initiative. it has a lot in common with what we are talking about during the last couple of minutes which is to hold accountable those who are capable and have the resources to invest and protect and also take advantage of one element of the federal government's power. we talk about developing these instruments of power. one of them is able to drive innovation, security through holding accountable th

ralph nader, i was nader's speechwriter and ralph a point where he realized there because he worked withthat ralph worked with that liberal wing of the democratic when it existed. i mean, 24 pieces of legislation the, mining safety act. oh, that was all written by ralph and then pushed through. but he watched this largely done. tony coelho and clinton took corporate money and did corporate bidding. i mean, clinton did it as much destruction as ronald reagan, maybe more nafta, fcc, glass-steagall and everything else. so destroying 70% of the original recipients on welfare were children and and and ralph's argued, you know, if we can pull five, ten, 15 million people away, that's the only mechanism we have left to put pressure on the democrats. but of course, that didn't happen. and i'm very frightened where we are and what's coming, i think informed by i went through in yugoslavia that unless that, you know, the rage these trump supporters while expressed in very frightening ways, is not illegitimate. they have every right to be enraged. um, unfortunate only that rage is being directed. i

. >> way out of line >> ralph nader, wow. directly outside of the hearin room, which had a limite audience, as you saw there there is a group of protesters who did not take too kindly to the republican surface including the number of sign jim jordan trader and it die jim jordan the manhattan office alvin bragg, who's shooting -- over their attempts to wease their way into his investigation, issued statement today and in par will be red, for outside politicians to now appear in new york city on the taxpaye dime for a political stunt is a slap in the face to the dedicated and pd officers, prosecutors, and other publi servants who worked tirelessly every day with facts and dat to keep our homes safe in a proposed amicus brief t the lawsuit, prominent lawyers members of congress and former prosecutors added, quote, they added congressiona interference in this case isn' it rages and unprecedented overreach that should be swiftly rejected congressman adam schiff is a democrat from california serving as the senior member o the judic

a third party like ralph nader into the help us.ublicans who are dissatisfied with donald trump would be great for us. so it depends. >> bret: unsatisfied democrats, too celinda. >> about a third of democrats say joe biden should run. >> we are united in joe biden. >> bret: ladies we love having this conversation. >> thank you for having us. >> bret: up next, another brutal attack in san francisco. we will take you out there. warning, this video is tough too watch. ♪ ♪ ♪coul they customize your car insurance. so you only pay for what you need! whoo! we gotta go again. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ what is it about the first warm breeze of the season that makes you feel lighter than air? ♪ no matter where you are... when it crosses your path... you'll feel compelled to take to the road and see where it leads. ♪ the first step begins at the lincoln spring sales event. going on now, for a limited time. a third kid. what if she likes playing golf? it's expensive. we're outlawing golf. wait. can i

energy independence and a counter-revolution that developed immediately to rachel carson is some ralph nader ism environmentalism that had gone too far. it went so the right said that nixon become a new dealer and i'll mention why they thought that. but you know, in and out of that counter swing to i'm about to tell you about was born the american institute heritage foundation and koch brothers industry say the brothers you know all any federalist society they all are coming to save money they don't like the federal government regulate them it's an anti federal regulation movement emerges after the environmental movement starts petering out in 73. now, i had, instead of kennedy begin my book in 1945. i didn't want to. when i have people complain me, they see how fat my book is i know i could have begun it in 60 and gotten away with it. i would have been disingenuous. i would have been doing that to be a marketing of books. but their customers real history began in the days after world war two, once hiroshima gets dropped, we talk about it as victory over japan. the wars ended and we celebrat

i agree with scott, the green party is the way to go and i voted for ralph nader as well.i'd like to address is i'm a liberal democrat and i have an ongoing list of things i been called by callers to your program and from politicians, stupid socialist, communist, baby killer, pervert, satan, corrupt, sinister, criminal, elitist, radical left lunatic, insein, and it it ended generate psychopath entry hugger which i am. that's old school. and a tree hugger, which i am, that's old school. i am mexican-american so that's a whole different category of names i been called. its not hurtful to me personally , but i think is just not helpful to our civic discourse. host: i agree. and we want to have a civil discourse on this program. we as people not to call each other names, make your argument without doing so. people are capable of doing that. mississippi, republican, hi there. caller: how are you doing? it they got president trump indicted, why have they not indicted president biden and his sons? and hillary clinton for the things she has done. that is a two-tiered system and un

very much like ralph nader. what do you think of that charge? guest: we dug into that.omething we take seriously. we do not want to have unintended consequences and throw an election to chaos. there are couple things wrong with that argument. if you take ralph nader or joe stein in 2016, they did pull votes from the democratic side, but that is what you would expect because they ran especially left-wing campaigns. they're going to pull votes, it is always going to be the democratic side. the last time an independent arguably made an appeal to the vast middle of the country was in 1992. when we look back and look at exit polling after the election, they asked them if if you would not been in the race, who would you have voted for? 30% said clinton, 30% said bush, and a 24% said not a dog. when he ran he pulled evenly from both sides. our latest poll shows the same thing. it showed an independent ticket pulling evenly with the major party nominees were for president trump and president biden. host: if you like to call in you can use -- do so on our lines. republicans, 202

very much like ralph nader. what do you think of that charge? guest: we dug into that.omething we take seriously. we do not want to have unintended consequences and throw an election to chaos. there are couple things wrong with that argument. if you take ralph nader or joe stein in 2016, they did pull votes from the democratic side, but that is what you would expect because they ran especially left-wing campaigns. they're going to pull votes, it is always going to be the democratic side. the last time an independent arguably made an appeal to the vast middle of the country was in 1992. when we look back and look at exit polling after the election, they asked them if if you would not been in the race, who would you have voted for? 30% said clinton, 30% said bush, and a 24% said not a dog. when he ran he pulled evenly from both sides. our latest poll shows the same thing. it showed an independent ticket pulling evenly with the major party nominees were for president trump and president biden. host: if you like to call in you can use -- do so on our lines. republicans, 202

i always go back to ralph nader's book 1965.nsafe at any speed and think about it unsafe at any cpu speed. that was 1965 should it took until 1983 to get legislation for seatbelts. we cannot wait that long for the technology we rely upon every hour of every day to be inherently unsafe. >> this is interesting because given the prominence of the issue and to your point i think the potential role for congress, i want to ask marshall about a program the strategy calls out the doj has in place to hold companies accountable specifically vendors to the federal government should i believe that is the civil fraud initiative. old account entities or individuals that put u.s. information or systems at risk by knowingly providing deficient cybersecurity's or services. i would be curious to know what would you need in terms of clarity on a standard or duty of care to use ccf i to start to hold companies venting to the federal government liable for defects in their product? in the next year >> you're already moving out in the civil fraud init