There's been a lot of legal news this week, with Donald Trump in DC to attend an appeals court hearing over the scope of his presidential immunity as he faces continued prosecution from Jack Smith. You've also got Hutter Biden making his first court appearance a connection to his criminal tax case. Of course, he was charged with nine counts
in December. So we're going to dig into some of those issues and how does that impact the twenty twenty four election when you look at the stuff that Hunter Biden is being charged with, as well as what the left is trying to do to Donald Trump. So in this case, we're going to turn to Matt Whittaker for his take on all of this. He of course was
the acting United States Attorney General under President Trump. He's also an Iowan, so we're going to get his take as someone who was born in Iowa, who attended the University of Iowa. He was a tight end for the Hawkeyes. He also served as a United States Attorney for the
Southern District of Iowa. So we're going to get his take on all these legal issues from this past week and also get into a little bit of presidential politics as someone who's there in the state of Iowa, and you will be out, you know, caucusing on January fifteenth. Stay tuned for Matt Whitaker. Well, Matt, it's great to
have you back on. You've been in Iowa. Give us the temperature, you know what, we'll freezing, I'm sure, but you know, tell us what you're hearing from voters and caucus goers there.
It's interesting. I mean, you know, obviously the circus comes to town every four years, and Iowans are a very politically savvy group, especially at the base of the base that turns out for the Iowa Caucuses, and so there's enthusiasm. I feel like it's going to probably be similar to twenty sixteen, you know, but there's just not as many candidates and you know, and so all things being equal, I think we're going to have a good caucus, a
good turn out. It's not going to be probably record breaking. And these candidates, you know, President Trump and the vat Roma Swami and Governor DeSantis and Nikki Haley have all spent a lot of time there. And you know the famous thing I like to tell my friends from out of the state, you know, Iowa call us go typically when you ask them who they're supporting to say, or if you ask them about a particular candidate, So I really don't know. I've only met that person three times.
So I mean, they're very you know, they're they're connoisseurs. They show up, they want to ask their questions, they want to meet these people, and so I would expect, you know, a very discerning judgment here on on Monday.
Do you think, you know, looking at what the polls have been indicating and then being on the ground, do.
You think that's what we're going to see? Will there be any surprises?
I don't think there's any surprises. There's two things I'm watching, and you know, full disclosure, I've endorsed President Trump, who I worked for and as the zach Entary General, so I know it well. But the things I'm watching is, you know, does President Trump get fifty percent of total
of the total vote? And then you know, the record in nineteen eighty eight was set in a competitive caucus by the margin of victory of twelve points, and so I would you know that I would see if if President Trump can win by more than twelve that would be unprecedented record. You know, the highest percent was in two thousand, George W. Bush got forty one percent, a little over forty one percent. So those are the two
numbers that I'm kind of tracking. I don't believe the polls were President Trump is not going to win by thirty plus points. If he does, I would say the contest is pretty close to over nationally because that would be just a blowout victory. But you know, I think I think those you know, smart people that are paying attention think that President Trump probably gonna win by fifteen plus points, which again would be a record in Iowa caucus history.
Well, you know, I'm sure he's trying to get as high as he can to try to then you know, push some of these other guys out of the race and cleared the field I wanted to. You know, obviously, he was off the campaign trail in d C. To attend an appeals court hearing about presidential immunity from this prosecution he's facing from Jack Smith.
Where do you think that case is going? And does he have a case for presidential immunity?
Yeah, a couple of things. You think about what he did in twenty four hours. See, he went to the appeals argument. He flew to Iowa, did the town hall with Marcia and and Brett and then and then and then went back to the final closing arguments for his fraud trial in New York. And then you know, in the meantime, you know, he's obviously his mother in law has passed away, and so he's dealing with that. You know, he's,
he's he's just tireless. You know. The presidential community case is very interesting, and you know, I've heard a lot of legal commentary, you know, across the spectrum, and I think I think there is a belief that certainly there
is a limit to presidential immunity. And the question is, are these allegations in Jacksmith's case within the limit, you know, that the outer bounds of those limits, because you know, the media love to talk about this, you know, hypothetical about you know, if the Seal Team six was ordered to go murder of political opponent, I think everybody, all Americans would create us probably outside of the bounds of presidential immunity. And so you know, but the question is
where are those bounds? And I don't think there's a good case law on that right now. And you know, every you know, at least I think I don't know if we've talked about it before, but I you know, I certainly believe in all these President Trump's cases, these are all novel legal theories, right, They're all there's no case law on this. It's never been seen before, it's never been tried by prosecutors. You know what. I was a prosecutor here at Des Moines, Iowa for five and
a half years. You know, the cases we would bring were within fact patterns, and we had case law and the well worn road of prosecutions. And in Jack Smith cases, he's trying novel legal theories. And uh, you know, Fanny Willis down in Fulden Counties trying novel legal theories. Alvin Bragg in Manhattan novel legal theories, and Letitia James has never brought a case under this code section in New York history. And so all of these things are sort
of you know, first impression. And it's hard, you know, for somebody like me that you know, is kind of a basic blocking and tackling lawyer, you know, main street kind of prosecutor to to to figure out exactly what's going on or how he's going to turn out, because it's to some extent. It's going to depend on the judges, uh and how how they ultimately judge these cases and what the evidence shows.
I mean, we know they're going to you know, keep them pretty tied up in the court over the next few months. Is that their strategy is to keep them off the campaign field. And then also, you know, how will that impact us with you know, wanting to get him in the White House if he's the nominee.
Yeah, it sure looks like that's part of the strategies to try to bottle him up and process and proceedings and not allow him to campaign as much. I mean, like I said in the last twenty four hours, I mean, he still he did it in spite of anything. And you know, he's a very effective campaigner, and his people are willing to show up for him, and you know, he's had obviously a lot of high profile supporters nationally that are also willing to do some of the heavy
lifting of the campaigning. But there's no substitute for the candidate, and so you know it's going to certainly affect that. I think the biggest concern I have as I look at these legal proceedings is just how aggressive Jack Smith has been to try to bress this Washington d the case he's got to. He brought the case mostly because you know, he knew that the judge in Florida was maybe not going to see the world the same way
he sees it. And it most likely gives Trump the time he needs given that he's running a national campaign for president. But I think Jack Smith has found a judge in Judge Shutkin in Washington, d C. That's willing to press this case. But obviously the immunity case has been appealed already and the Supreme Court didn't put it on a rocket docket, so they you know, the Eth Circuit has it, and then they'll probably appeal to an
on bunk and then ultimately Supreme Court. So I don't know if they're going to be able to hold that prial date. It was supposed to start the day before Super Tuesday on March fourth, March fifth being superdud there.
Do you think that goal then with Jack Smith, as he's trying to get a conviction before election day, is that what he's gutting for here?
Yes? No, no, no doubt. In my mind, the polling shows that a conviction could influence you know, the swing voters in their decisions, and so I think that's exactly what Jack Smith's trying to do. I think it's a shame. You know, defendants typically are given a lot of leniency when it comes to the timing, and especially First Amendment considerations and political campaigns are typically given consideration by the courts. But you know, in this case, obviously you are never
stray too far from Trump duragement syndrome. That it affects a lot on the left, and it appears to really you know, Washington, d C. Is not friendly Trump territory, and there's not a lot of you know, friends that he's going to find in the courthouse in Washington, d C. So we're just going to have to see if people give him a fair hearing and consider his legitimate arguments.
I mean, it's not hilarious because it's despicable, but I guess there's got to be some humor in the fact that they're talking about a threat to democracy while simultaneously trying to unilaterally remove him from ballots and states and deny people the opportunity to vote for him.
But so that's the world that we live in.
That is that is the definition of iron.
It's like it's like, I don't it's not funny, but it's like I just feel like in this crazy world, you almost.
Kind of just have to laugh or it's it's too much.
I feel the same way. I think that, you know, the other thing that just show I mean, the left always shows how they really despise our systems and our you know, constitutional rights. And the way that Colorado violated the due process of President Trump and took him remove him from the ballot. And then the way that the main Secretary of State just absolutely unilaterally, you know, used power she thinks she has to take him off the ballot.
It just shows you the left just it will do anything to not have Donald Trump run for president because they know that, you know, it's and when he wins, it is going to change our country for the better and obviously is not going to serve you know, their world view, which is a steady march towards the cliff of socialism and the really of our you know, liberty and freedoms during the United States.
Take a quick commercial break more with Matt Whittaker. My biggest concern is I just I don't know how independents are going to view all this when it comes down to, you know, leading into election day. I think that's that's the big question mark for me. Do they see this as a political hit job or do they buy the argument that they're being told and sold. I don't know.
I don't know yet. You know, there's there's there's kind of mixed messages out of these swing states at Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wis Thompson, Arizona and the Battle those kind of places. I think it's too soon to tell. I think there's just going to be have to be a lot more road behind us in this twenty twenty four election before we really know what's going to happen.
Speaking of you know, irony in the sense of what we're talking about with the you know, trying to you know, talk about democracy while trying to remove him from the ballot.
You've also got Fulton County District Attorney Fanny Willis, who is prosecuting Donald Trump from racketeering charges, who has recently been accused of having a romantic relationship with a Special prosecutor Nathan Wade, who you know, she's involved in this, and he's made I think something like nearly a million dollars in legal fees since he was appointed.
Could that sink her case?
And you know, and that obviously she's going after Trump alleging that he's corrupt, and then she's engaged in something that is entirely improper and you know, corrupt. So you know, it's like, you know, how do you think this will impact it?
Will it impact it? You know, what's what's your take on that?
Quite possibly some extent it We just we have an allegation and we don't know the extent of of this allegation and how much is true. But you know, certainly on the headline is very shocky. And you know, the suggestion that he, you know, was essentially pushing money to his law firm and then they were and going on trips and essentially funding a lifestyle she couldn't afford as
a public servant. I think is is offensive. I think the voting public and the taxpayers of Fulton County are going to be very upset if their money was funneled to this guy so that he could romance the prosecutor. And so, you know, I think we're just gonna have to see how it plays out. Ultimately. I'm not sure that it has a dramatic impact into the Trump case other than you know, to your point, which is, you know, it's it's it's it's pretty rich to have a corrupt prosecutor,
you know, choosing somebody else of being corrupt. It's it's really irony is probably the best word we have in the English language, but does not do enough to you know, really capture what's going on here.
Well, it also just kind of like underscores that this is all political, right because clearly, you know, they don't care about democracy if they're trying to remove him from the ballot. They don't care about the rule of law if they're doing improper things themselves. So you know, it just sort of underscores and you know, demonstrates why they're really doing all this.
Yeah, and apparently you know.
He purchased tickets for them to travel on like cruise lines like the Royal Caribbean and they went to nap about So I mean that seems like it should be illegal if she's paying him this money and then essentially sort of getting this kickback in the in the uh, you know, in the way of you know, travel paid travel right from him. So I don't know if that's illegal or not, but it should be ver least it all.
Yeah, well it's certainly unethical, you know, and based on these types of statutes that they're trying to get, you know, to again for the first time apply to you know, Donald Trump and what they you know, accuse his behavior being certainly the sound like are you know a Fanny Willis Rico conspiracy? To me, doesn't it?
It's it's wild stuff.
I wanted to you know, Hunter Biden interrupted a House Oversight Committee vote overholding him in contempt of Congress. You know, he showed up. Apparently they weren't expecting them. Why do you think he did that? Uh, you know what point was he was he trying to make? And what do you think they're they're reasoning.
Yeah, he was trying to make the point that hey, I'm willing to show up. I've been willing to show up, just not based on you know, I just won't do a closed door deposition. And I think they've done a good job messaging kind of their their position. I thought your colleague Jonathan Turley had the best quote of you know, the coverage, which was, you know, if you're gonna if you're going to you know, be part of the circus.
You don't have to put on the big shoes in the red nose and talking about the Democrats, you know, trying to support Hunter Biden at that at that at that committee hearing. But you know, abu Ole is a very talented, sophisticated political operator and lawyer in Washington, d C. So this, you know, was all intentional and the you know, the what happened was exactly what they wanted to happen.
And once they had received enough of it, then they walked out and were able to sort of you know, make it, you know, get the video and and and again overcome uh and change the narrator. Ultimately, there was going to be a hearing to vote on contempt charges and that was overwhelmed by just you know, the spectacle of her Biden sitting in the front row with his lawyers, as you know is uh bong ripping best buddy and benefactor.
You know. And he also made us first court appearance in his criminal tax case. He's been charged with nine counts in December, you know, failure to pay taxes, evasion assessment, and falseter fraudulent tax return. We've seen them get a sweetheart deal before obviously it blew up, but we've already seen his Barisma taxes that the you know elapse and uh, why mind blanking on?
Oh statute of limitations? Yeah, well yeah, what's run out right? Exactly?
Statute of limitations.
Thank you, I'm I'm here for you.
I appreciate that, Thanks, Matt. That's why we have you on.
Do you think he's just gonna, you know, get like a you know, a pat on the hand, or do you think he's in some you know, serious trouble here with us?
So I think he's in serious trouble. And I think he should have been in this serious trouble a while back. You know, I think he had this unbelievable sweet artdeal not only the statue of limitations, did it run and was allowed to run, which prosepcutors should never have done for his most lucrative packs here to twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen. But you know, he was getting kind of this deferred judgment on the guns, and he's getting misdemeanors on the taxes.
Now he's facing you know, three felony gun charges, three
felony tax charges. Everything else is a misting miror is gonna have probably a misdemeanor contempt of Congress charge potentially if the part Adjustice you know, willing to bring that, similar to the way they charged Banning and others, Peter Navarro, and so all that being said, I think, you know, it is yet to be seen, but this is much more serious than that deal he had up in Delaware where he almost walked away with you know, with his with a slap on the rest to your point.
And his attorney, I mean, he helped kind of blow that up too. So I mean, do you think would he have been smarter to just you know, taken some sort of deal or taken that deal.
Yeah, he should have done it much faster. And you know, I mean what happened was once the you know, people started complaining about it and shining a lantern on it, obviously the judge took a close look at it, and then the US attorney replaced the trial team who probably took a closer look at it. And you know, they had a really advantageous deal for Hunter, and you know, just they just couldn't get it across the goal line because there was just too much interest and attention on it.
And again it was you would never have done that deal. I was a Us' trade for five and n half years, and you know, you just would have never offered that deal if you were serious about prosecuting someone. And so it just demonstrates, what, you know, kind of how ridiculous this was. And then they appoint you know, the Special Council as the guy who had agreed to this deal in the first place. So the whole thing to me seems like Hunter Biden was getting every advantage of being
the president's son and that shouldn't be the case. You know, in are in a system where allegedly, you know, justice is blind.
Well, yeah, I mean I remember those days there. Those are a nice days, Matt. We don't have those anymore. Do you think Republicans in Congress, particularly the House, are doing a good enough job of trying to tie Joe Biden into all of this and to try to prosecute the case against him with his business dealings at least?
I think the biggest problem for the Republicans in the House is they just have a very small majority, and so it's hard, you know, if you if you want to put some teeth into what you're doing, ultimately you need to have a block that the majority can vote to do things, whether that's to impeach, whether that's old people in contempt. When you have a three vote advantage, it's just very difficult to do that kind of business.
And so I think there, you know, James Comer, I would point out as a as an example example of where they've done some good things and turned over some good evidence. I think, you know, Jim Jordan, it seems to me to be working hard, but he has not turned up as much maybe his investigations as people were hoping. But you know, that being said is I think they're
doing an effective job. Obviously all of this is done through the lens of politics, and it just you know, then it then it ends up being you know, kind of what color jersey you're wearing and what you believe
the evidence shows. But there's no doubt that you know that Joe Biden knew what Powter was doing, that he anticipated in what hud was doing, either knowingly or as you know, as as a father who wanted to help his son be successful, and that Hudder Biden was selling influence, and especially when his father was the vice president the United States, there's no doubt about that.
Quick break more with Matt.
Do you think voters care or do you think it's just already kind of baked in the cake that politicians leverage power to enrich themselves and their families.
Yeah. I hope we're not to that point yet, Lisa, But I think that there is a lot of cynicism among the electric. They understand that, you know that none of these people are perfect, and none of these people are able to resist power and money. But at the same time, we need to hold everyone to a higher standard and have everyone, you know, do the right thing for the right reason. And unfortunately we're just not there.
And obviously the Biden's have somehow become very wealthy after Joe Biden being in public service for forty years and only having four years outside since the government in the last since the nineteen seventies.
Yeah, I mean, how else does a you know, crackhead and a play dress become so rich?
So only in America?
Right, Yeah?
Yeah, special place. What do you think the big issues should be for Republicans heading into the selection?
Well, as I mean, I get around the state of Iowa right now a lot and taught me to a lot of folks. Obviously, the border is top of mind that every community is being affected by the border right now and what's happening, and it's an insecure border, in the in the system of asylum and all those things. And then you know, obviously the economy. I think a lot of people are not stealing the strength of the American economy. And I think mortgage rates are part of that.
You know, it's becoming very hard for anyone to buy a house. You know, the interest rate spike has caused mortgage payments to almost double if you have to buy a house now from what you would have had. And so I think those are what people are feeling. You know, in my home state of Iowa, agriculture issues are very important, as you can imagine, you know, big act state and so, but you know, it's the national issues are are the issues that I think a lot of people are thinking
and chealing. I think there's also just sort of what I would describe as a as a as a as a cultural issues. You know, whether it's the drag queen brunches, you know, whether it's you know, sort of the whole transgender, the men and women's sports, all those issues are are certainly people are are are thinking about it about as well.
I hope that we, you know, effectively prosecute the case on all of those fronts. Matt, I know you're busy guy. I appreciate you taking the time to join the show. Always enjoy talking with you, Lisa.
I am a big fan of yours and I think you know I'm always looking forward to when I can catch you on television. And you know, I think your podcast is wildly successful, even though you know your producer is kind of marginal and best, but you know otherwise otherwise, I always enjoy spend a time with you. So thanks for having me on today.
And for those listening. We say that and Jess because they're friends. So Matt, always appreciate you coming on. I feel the same about you, so appreciate you bring us your insight and for taking the time my friend.
Thank you, all right, thank you.
That was Matt Whittaker. Appreciate him taking the time to come on the show.
Great guy. Always fund having him on.
I want to thank you guys at home for listening every Monday and Thursday, but you can listen throughout the week. I want to thank my producer, John Cassio for putting the show together until next TI time