Very interesting interview. Says he withdrew not because of Trump but because of Trump's political advisor was interfering with the legal representation. Also says he dealt with the Select Committee's "investigators" who did not want to see or hear any evidence that did not support their narrative. And that Bill Barr refused to conduct any investigation into the election issues that were being reported to Trump.

I find him quite credible and persuasive. He expects that IF Smith gets the DC Jan 6th case heard before the election, a DC jury will convict and Trump will be sentenced to jail for as much as ten years and then be reversed on appeal a year or so later.

His legal analysis of the case against Trump is incisive and thoughtful.

Worth the watch, IMO.

Part Two of the interview.

In first segment he impeaches Trump's lead counsel. He's a kid with no trial experience but with political campaign experience that's limited. He ran off all the good attorneys. Oh my. Trump is terrible with HR!

The Trump defense has paid out over $20 million paid through PACs. He said all four cases and 93 indictments could be defended for $5 million. But some attorneys are overbilling at rates like $1,000 per hour while providing no value. One attorney amounted to 1/4 of what has been spent$5 million!

Thanks Mrs Hawg!

54:00 - Bill Barr basically ignored the complaints that Guiliani and Kerik brought up. I think this is a very important point of the whole Georgia case. No one investigated anything!

sanangelo said:

---

54:00 - Bill Barr basically ignored the complaints that Guiliani and Kerik brought up. I think this is a very important point of the whole Georgia case. No one investigated anything!

---

And I find his statement about Trump telling Raffensperger about only needing to find X number of votes to cover the margin of victory and not the full 100,000 votes that Trump believed he won the state with. The call was Jan 2, 2021, four days before Jan 6th. Trump is asking Raffensperger to do a limited investigation in scope. Not manufacture votes.

He thinks Fani Willis' case will fizzle out. Her state RICO is very thin.

Okay. I officially have a crush on Tim Parlatore. If anyone likes Victor Davis Hanson, you will like this guy. Not only a good legal analyst and trial lawyer but a political historian as well.

Fascinating to listen to.

I saw these as well. I appreciate his perspective from the inside of the defense. He is well spoken. I watch all the Shawn Ryan interviews. He's good stuff.

aggieland09 said:

---

I saw these as well. I appreciate his perspective from the inside of the defense. He is well spoken. I watch all the Shawn Ryan interviews. He's good stuff.

---

No idea who Shawn Ryan was until today. Never watched him. I'll check out more of his interviews.

I've never heard an interview from Ryan that isn't outstanding.

He's not even a great interviewer but does have amazing guests. I'm not sure I'll ever forgive the State Department (likely acting on orders from Milley and Austin) for refusing our snipers request to kill the suicide bomber in Afghanistan.

Therefore getting 171 Afghanistan citizens murdered, 145 Americans injured, and 13 American servicemen murdered.

Oh, I agree the DC case is sealed and a done deal if it happens before the election next year. All it takes is one count to be convicted and he'll get convicted for sure. I'd LOVE to be witness to the jury selection and see how many phone calls Chutkin gets (not to mention the ones she's already gotten).

If that trial is pushed past the election, can't Trump call off the feds if he's the president? It may be unethical, but all the Dems want Trump dead anyway, so it shouldn't make any difference.

In am episode last week, he alluded to great frustration with all of the wars that have popped up.
My words based on how I interpreted his message, "it's all coordinated based on money."

Ryan is fantastic interviewer

Thanks for posting these. I recommend everyone listen. Even though it's a bit long, it's a great summary boiling down years worth of actions to the seminal points. Yes, he was formerly on Trump's team, but does a tremendous job of trying to be unbiased about the strengths, weakness and oddities of both sides of all the cases. But the political bias of these prosecutions can't be ignored by even the most unbiased presenter, and is the most frightening aspect of all this that will likely not be fixed no matter the outcome of any one of these cases.

ag said:

---

His legal analysis of the case against Trump is incisive and thoughtful.

Worth the watch, IMO.

---

Thanks for the review. These were in my feed to listen to while traveling the next few days. I was sorta iffy on them until now; looking forward to it.

Bump.

Listened to the episodes. Very enlightening. As someone who hasn't taken the time to become familiar with all the nuances of the charges, this was a quick education.

It clarifed the cases against Trump and debunked much of the fake news talking points that have been spread.

Explains why Trumps legal team is in shambles. And why his cases are costing more $ than they should.

Trump needs to hire attorneys who have actually defended against RICO charges, for the NY case.

Quote:

---

https://open.spotify.com/episode/6wap5MC70zkphAwWuf8XDW?si=538c1c1e14fb4782

---

This was part 1. If y'all can stomach the interview and it's very disturbing topic, it will give you a healthy enlightenment on Epstein, our government (principally the DOJ/FBI), and the ASTOUNDING amount of blackmail (there's no other decent explanation) involved in the corruption of children and females.

I'm sure hundreds of operations are involved on the southern border. I just don't understand.

I was shocked at Sergei Brin being a regular Epstein "client".

Here's part 2. I HIGHLY recommend listening to these, along with all of Shawn Ryan's podcasts.

Quote:

---

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4oQsUOIgXGWqexBhB9uzBa?si=a6b98b0873c24abahttps://open.spotify.com/episode/4oQsUOIgXGWqexBhB9uzBa?si=a6b98b0873c24aba

---

Listened to only half and already annoyed at Trump.

According to this guy, this is "the case of the century" and Trumps instead of hiring the best lawyers, hires lawyers that tell Trump what he wants with little experience.

And then he says these lawyers care more about their self-interest rather than the client, are over billing. Didn't Trump learn anything after 2020 election? Trumps legal fees are largely being paid by his PAC that Trump is begging his supporters to donate to by buying trading cards and NFTs and other bullcrap.

So Trump wants to take on the swamp which is a huge task considering how much they've kicked his ass so far. You'd think he'd hired the best for his cabinet and team and indication is that it'll be the same as with his legal team for the "trial
Of the century" and he'll hire people slobbering his knob for their own self interest rather than Trump. And Trump wants to cut the debt and be a good steward of our tax money but he's getting ripped off by his own lawyers paid for by his voters.

Trump is a joke.

Looks like Dan missed the bigger point and didn't bother listening to the BIGGER point of the interview....

You know, the complete and total BS witch hunt revolving around 4 different cases of indictments of Trump and ultimately the weponozation of the DOJ and court system.

But NO!.... let's focus on his lawyer team instead!