. >> trump is facing 13 criminal counts, including violating georgia's antiracketeering or ricco law.f convicted, the law carries a penalty of a minimum of five years in prison, a 25,000s fine, or both. lawyers say georgia's ricco law is unusually broad and in this case could be used to turn defendants against the former president. >> what the prosecution is going to want to do is target them, getting them to turn against the bigger people at the top and that's how you end up getting an easier prosecution. >> other 18 defendants include former white house chief of staff mark midwest doughs and former trump attorney sidney powell and rudy giuliani. they face charges that range from making false statements to georgia legislators to conducting a fake electoral scheme to stealing data from election equipment in rural coffee county. district attorney willis wants to try all 19 cases at once in a trial within the next six months. a timetable that clashes directly with the first four republican primaries and court dates for trump's other three criminal cases. [cheers] >> on truth social toda

but he is mentioned as one of the co-defendants in the ricco conspiracy by fani willis. now moved to change the venue to federal district court out of fulton county is that a legitimate claim that he has here given the very parallel tracks that they are moving in with smith and willis? i think it's a very viable claim. it's certainly not frivolous. it's legitimate it's based on a federal statute that says if you sue or indict at the state level, somebody based upon their actions, in federal office that that can be a grounds for removal. that's a very valid point to raise. and it can be raised by president trump as well and, if you will notice. i think that's one of the reasons that willis added some charges from september of 2021 so she can say this goes beyond when he was president i have clearly, the bulk of the activity alleged against the former president in this indictment is while he was in office and based on activities in office so i think it's quite possible. >> laura: sol, you can indict presidents for lying and lawyers for giving aggressive advice. wow, we hav

so the notion that this is well settled is crazy. >> laura: on the ricco side of the fulton county casethat would require findings of bad faith on the part of, you know, all the co-defendants that were engaged in this ricco conspiracy according to this fani willis. so, on that score, john, that would have to be you all basically agreeing, implicitly, explicitly that you all knew this was phoney and that your decision amongst yourselves was to advance the plan to overturn the election. and to that you say? >> they got all the evidence. they got all my emails. my phone was seized over a year ago. they have got all that stuff as well. i challenge them to find a single email or communication that supports that implausible theory. the fact of the matter is -- oh, you know, one of the other things they said well bill barr said there wasn't any evidence of fraud. well, i had lots of evidence of fraud. >> laura: i haven't seen that evidence and i'm always wanting to see everything. i haven't seen that evidence. and i would love to see that evidence. but, i don't know, the thing that i always co

she is using ricco to try to step far beyond our boundary. and if the ricco case falls. everything outside of fulton county falls. everything even in the state house falls because she is a county official. she doesn't even have jurisdiction over the legislature -- legislative building over where, you know, the phone call goes to the secretary of state. none of that is hers. >> laura: tim, i'm so glad we got a chance to talk to you tonight. this is a really disgusting moment for the united states of america. as someone who lived in the former soviet union for a short time when i was a student, i never thought i would see this in the united states of america. this is soviet-style justice. thank you, tim. all right, joining us now former deputy independent counsel, fox news contributor sol wisenburg and president and founder of the article iii project mike davis. mike, what can you tell us about trump's new attorney steven sadow that sol did not inform us about? people were saying switching attorneys, you know, tim was a former attorney. obviously now we have another attorn

going to do the ricco act.me and she wants to do this, get, this before everybody else. she wants it within six months. many people think that's a folly. let's look at the election schedule along with the legal schedule and think about this. everything is unprecedented about about we are about to show you. okay,august 23rd, next wednesday. big debate we are all going to be watching, right? not sure if trump will show. by the 25th he has to show up and turn himself in for the case that was filed yesterday in georgia. then, on the january case. i need more time. i have an election coming up. i can't be cooking that the d.c. judge says i don't care about elections but i'm going to look to push this as quick as possible. we will see who slows down and who speeds up. then the trump organization has a civil suit against it. that to me is letitia james trying to get famous. nobody had any problem with the trump organization until it became the republican nominee and eventually the president. see about the caucuses on

using ricco statutes.ing to flip witnesses to turn against trump but all the while trump persisted. he just decided to keep going. remember they call him the energizer bunny? it's for a reason. look at the polling today. the real clear politics average 5. closest one to him is desantis. right now he is at 13%. that's the national polling. democrats and never trumpers know he is the inevitable nominee so they are getting contingency plans in place. next up on their list? the 1st amendment. >> section 3 of the 14th amendment presents a clear and unequivocal statement that anyone who is sworn an oath of office, who engage in insurrection or rebellion, never serve again. donald trump is disqualified just as if he were running and not a born u.s. citizen. >> laura: never forget that donald trump humiliated the d.c. establishment when he won in 2016. he humiliated them again when the economy boomed from 2017 to right up to the end of 2019 before the pandemic. and then he scared them in 2020 when he came so close

remember, this is a ricco racketeering case. it is complicated. also, also is not great. we have been told for the prosecutor, we have been told by experts that this is a sign that, perhaps, this judge is willing to try these cases separately, which makes prosecuting a ricco racketeering case much more difficult. so, look, the october 23rd, 2023 date right now is just for kenneth chesbrough, that's for right now it is possible that that date could be given to other co-defendants if they couple other asking for. >> steve: chesebro wants it quick. donald trump's team says take your time. thank you for joining us from down at the jail. let's bring in fox news legal analyst gregg jarrett. >> good to be with you guys. >> ainsley: good morning. >> steve: we got the mugshot. it's official. there was a phony one. >> i have seen that look up close and personal. >> i interviewed the president before he payment president. and i asked tough, challenging questions. did he not like it one bit. and he was angry about it. and every time i see him, he reminds me of that interview. then i

i used to tell the students if you bring ricco case it increases your chance of winning a trial and losingn appeal. if we get a conviction before the election, then it goes to an appeal that won't happen until after the election. is this going to help or hurt him if he ends up getting convicted? >> look, i think that this is obviously helping him. >> the american people don't like to see this. this is what you see in a lot of other countries. you know, the willis indictment has legs in the sense that it tends to be more iron plated because these are conventional state charges. that doesn't mean that it's right. when you look at this indictment, it's charging everything. every call, every tweet, every speech. you know, the president is allowed to challenge elections. he is also allowed to be wrong. and there is no -- there is no clear principle or dividing line of when challenges will now be criminal and when w they will be allowable. >> ainsley: one more question why 18 co-defendants? what did they do wrong? >> i think, once again, this is a very typical approach to a racketeering case. yo

why else would they choose to do a suit, which the trial to start with all 19 in a ricco situation, rightper tuesday? we want to get this done this year. why do you care if you are looking at justice? >> yeah. this is political interference. the right to a speedy trial is a right that belongs to the defendant. it's not a right that belongs to the government. and now becomes even harder for president trump to be able to prepare for any one of these cases because, you know, he and his team have to prepare for four of them. it's even more of a reason for this not to be rushed the way that it is. but, everyone can see right through it. this is being rushed. and all these indictments are being brought by, in some respects, political people, elected officials. people who campaign on it. and for jack smith, i think some people view it as, you know, you have donors to biden the judge, donor to obama. it's in the d.c. circuit. one of these cases is. folks look deeper into it like the new georgia indictment where you are bringing up as a charge that president trump is asking people to turn on anoth

problems with this case as a ricco case. 1 defendants. # 1 counts. of the overt acts tweets and press releases and public statements by trump declaring -- president trump declaring his victory things all protected by the first amendment. you and i talked about this last week, bribe. i think the case, the central arguments of this case are going to be questionable. i mean, the case really rests on two essential arguments. first, that when president trump said to ross tenberger find me 11780 votes. when he said that, was he asking ross ten berger to falsify the votes. that is the presumption. >> brian: and he will say no. will. >> he would say no. i think him simply saying find me 11780 votes i think that's a matter of will. i don't think that's is he looking to falsify the votes. the other question is, this issue about false elector. this it issue of false slaft electors. this essentially relied on a legal theory of some of the president's attorneys on the reading of the 12th amendment that the vice president has turn down electors from states. i thin

ricco charges against a number of people or narrow it down?i willis was bringing charges against fake electors of course participated in trump's scheme to try to claim the electoral college somehow in play. however in jack smith's most recent indictment he signaled some of those ultimate elector could actually be more properly views and victims rather than perpetrators basically depicting them as duped or lied to at least in some cases. so does fani willis' view mash jack smiths or is there divergence and how would that affect criminal defense and anyone she indicts fitting into that category? >> all relying on your side-by-side reading of those indictments on your podcast. betsy thank you for spending time with us. mary, sticking with us. >>> up next for us, trump trying out a possible new defense. this time qualifying his stolen election claims as merely beliefs. not facts. show you a soft launch of this strategy. that's next. and we could see exactly when they'd arrive with a replacement we could trust. that's service the way we want it. >>