Donald Trump talks to reporters in Manhattan

WPLG Local 10
31 May 202433:39

Summary

TLDRThe speaker expresses strong concerns about the state of the country, accusing the current administration of inaction on immigration and allowing criminals and terrorists to enter freely. They claim to be a victim of a politically motivated legal system, citing personal experiences with what they describe as a 'rigged trial' and a 'conflicted judge.' Despite facing challenges, including gag orders and fines, they emphasize their commitment to fighting for the constitution and the country's future, highlighting a recent surge in support and a determination to appeal what they view as an unjust legal decision. The speaker also criticizes the president's competence and policies, particularly on energy and foreign relations, and calls for unity under the slogan 'Make America Great Again.'

Takeaways

  • πŸ—£οΈ The speaker believes that if actions can be taken against him, they can be taken against anyone, indicating a sense of injustice.
  • 🌍 The speaker expresses concern about the influx of people from various parts of the world, including jails and mental institutions, suggesting a threat to national security.
  • 🀬 The speaker accuses the current president and a group of 'fascists' of inaction regarding the issues he describes, blaming them for the country's deteriorating state.
  • 🚫 The speaker mentions being under a gag order, which he claims is unprecedented for a presidential candidate, and criticizes the judge and court proceedings as biased.
  • πŸ“‰ The speaker alleges a political motivation behind his legal troubles, suggesting that his political opponents are using the legal system to hinder his campaign.
  • πŸ’° The speaker discusses a financial transaction involving a lawyer and a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), which he claims is being misrepresented as a crime.
  • πŸ“‰ The speaker criticizes the current administration's policies, claiming they will lead to higher taxes and make it harder for Americans to own cars.
  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ The speaker emphasizes his role in fighting for the constitution and the country, despite personal challenges, positioning himself as a defender of American values.
  • πŸ“Š The speaker cites a recent poll showing an increase in his public support following the legal decision, suggesting that the public sees the situation as unjust.
  • 🀝 The speaker calls for unity and support from his audience, highlighting the importance of the upcoming election and the need to 'make America great again'.

Q & A

  • What is the main concern expressed about the current state of the country according to the speaker?

    -The speaker expresses concern about the country being in bad shape due to what they perceive as an influx of people from all over the world, including jails, prisons, and mental institutions, without proper action from the current administration.

  • Who does the speaker believe is responsible for the current issues facing the country?

    -The speaker believes that the current president, referred to as 'Biden', and a group described as 'fascists' are responsible for not taking action to address the issues they have mentioned.

  • What is the speaker's stance on the recent legal action taken against them?

    -The speaker considers the legal action against them to be a 'rigged trial' and 'a scam', expressing that they were not allowed to present their case fairly and that the judge was 'highly conflicted'.

  • What does the speaker claim about the judge presiding over their case?

    -The speaker claims that the judge is 'highly conflicted', has previously been involved in other controversial cases, and is working in conjunction with the White House and the Department of Justice.

  • How does the speaker describe the impact of the legal case on their political standing?

    -The speaker suggests that despite the legal case, their political standing has improved, citing a poll where they are up six points and stating that the public understands the situation.

  • What is the speaker's view on the current administration's policies regarding cars and China?

    -The speaker criticizes the administration's policies, claiming they want to raise taxes and impose mandates that make it difficult for Americans to afford cars, while making it easier for China to build cars in the U.S.

  • What does the speaker believe the public's reaction to the legal case has been?

    -The speaker believes that the public sees the legal case as a 'hoax' and that it has backfired, as indicated by the increase in their poll numbers and the support they have received.

  • What is the significance of the date 'November 5th' mentioned by the speaker?

    -The speaker refers to November 5th as the most important day in the history of the country, suggesting it as a pivotal date for future events related to their political movement, although the specific significance is not detailed in the script.

  • How does the speaker characterize the current administration's handling of immigration?

    -The speaker characterizes the current administration's handling of immigration as dangerous and irresponsible, claiming that criminals and terrorists are being allowed into the country at record levels.

  • What does the speaker suggest about the future actions they will take?

    -The speaker suggests that they will continue to fight against what they perceive as injustices, appealing the legal case, and working towards making America great again.

Outlines

00:00

πŸ›οΈ Political Persecution and National Security Concerns

The speaker alleges that they are being politically targeted and persecuted, suggesting that if it can happen to them, it can happen to anyone. They express concern about the influx of people from various parts of the world, including jails, prisons, and mental institutions, implying that this is a threat to national security. They criticize the current administration, accusing them of inaction and suggesting a hidden agenda against them. The speaker also mentions being under a gag order, which they claim is unprecedented for a presidential candidate, and hints at collusion between the court and the White House. They describe their experience with a 'conflicted' judge and an unfair trial, where they were not allowed to present their case fully, and the government was given undue advantage.

05:01

πŸ“œ Legal Battle and Public Support

The speaker discusses their legal troubles, focusing on a case involving the falsification of business records. They argue that the charges are baseless, as they paid a legal expense to a lawyer, which was then correctly marked down by a professional bookkeeper. The speaker expresses a desire to testify in their defense but is advised against it due to the risk of perjury. They highlight the public's support for them, as evidenced by a significant increase in small donor contributions and a rise in the polls following the verdict. The speaker also criticizes the timing and venue of the trial, suggesting political motivations behind it.

10:02

🀝 Non-Disclosure Agreements and Legal Strategy

The speaker defends the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as a common and legal practice, distancing them from the negative connotations associated with 'hush money' or 'slush funds.' They recount a situation where a lawyer, who had previously worked for them, pled guilty to unrelated charges and was accused of making payments under an NDA. The speaker insists that these payments were legal and not indicative of any wrongdoing. They also mention that the case against them was dropped by various agencies before being revived for political reasons, highlighting the perceived bias and unfairness of the legal system.

15:03

πŸ“Š Public Reaction and Fundraising Success

The speaker reports a surge in fundraising following the legal developments, with a record amount raised in a short period, indicating strong public support. They also reference a poll showing an increase in their popularity, suggesting that the legal actions against them are backfiring and gaining them sympathy. The speaker vows to appeal the case, describing the judge as a 'tyrant' and accusing the opposing side of obstructionism during the trial. They express their determination to fight for the constitution and against what they perceive as a corrupt government.

20:06

πŸ•ŠοΈ The MAGA Movement and Upcoming Election

The speaker emphasizes the importance of the 'Make America Great Again' (MAGA) movement and the upcoming election, which they consider crucial for the country's future. They accuse the current administration of incompetence, dishonesty, and being a danger to the nation. The speaker also criticizes the handling of the January 6th committee, alleging the destruction of records that could have been beneficial to their case. They call for support at donaldjtrump.com and highlight the contrast between the treatment of migrants and veterans, as well as the issues of crime and open borders.

25:06

🚨 National Crisis and the Fate of America

The speaker describes a national crisis with open borders, claiming that criminals and terrorists are entering the country at record levels. They express concern about the state of the economy, with the country being heavily in debt, and the loss of energy independence. The speaker also mentions the influx of people from countries like Venezuela and the Congo, suggesting that criminals are being relocated to the United States. They highlight the contrast between the treatment of migrants living in luxury hotels and veterans living on the streets. The speaker concludes by reiterating the importance of the upcoming election and the need to make America great again.

Mindmap

Keywords

πŸ’‘Conflicted Judge

A 'conflicted judge' refers to a judge who has personal or professional interests that might influence their decision-making in a case, potentially compromising their impartiality. In the video's theme, the speaker alleges that the judge presiding over their case is 'highly conflicted' and suggests that this conflict of interest has led to an unfair trial. The term is used to underscore the speaker's belief that the legal proceedings against them are unjust and politically motivated.

πŸ’‘Gag Order

A 'gag order' is a legal order issued by a court or judge that prohibits the parties in a case from speaking to the press or the public about the case. The speaker in the video claims to be under a 'nasty gag order,' which they suggest has been used to silence them unfairly. The concept ties into the video's broader narrative of the speaker being victim to an unjust legal system.

πŸ’‘Rigged Trial

A 'rigged trial' is a term used to describe a legal proceeding that is believed to be manipulated or predetermined, often implying corruption or bias against the accused. The speaker alleges that their trial was 'rigged,' using this term to express their view that the legal process was not conducted fairly and was instead designed to produce a particular outcome against them.

πŸ’‘Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA)

A 'non-disclosure agreement' (NDA) is a legally binding contract between two or more parties that outlines confidential material, knowledge, or information that the parties will not disclose to outsiders. In the video, the speaker discusses NDAs in the context of legal expenses and insists that they are common, legal, and honorable, contrasting this with the negative portrayal they have received in the media.

πŸ’‘Falsifying Business Records

To 'falsify business records' means to alter or forge official business documents with the intent to deceive. The speaker mentions being accused of 'falsifying business records in the first degree,' which they argue is a misrepresentation of paying a legal expense that was correctly marked down in the books by a professional. This term is central to the legal case discussed in the video and the speaker's argument of being unfairly targeted.

πŸ’‘MAGA (Make America Great Again)

MAGA stands for 'Make America Great Again,' which is a slogan and campaign promise used by the speaker in the video, who previously used it during his presidential campaign. It encapsulates a vision of restoring the country's perceived past glory and addresses various issues such as the economy, immigration, and national security. In the script, the speaker reiterates this slogan to rally support and emphasize their ongoing commitment to this vision.

πŸ’‘Partisan Politics

The term 'partisan politics' refers to the loyalty to a political party and its interests, often leading to bias or conflict between parties. The speaker accuses the opposing party of engaging in corrupt practices and being against their policies, suggesting that their legal troubles are a result of partisan bias rather than legitimate legal concerns.

πŸ’‘Impeachment

Impeachment is a process by which a legislative body, such as the U.S. Congress, brings charges against a government official, such as the President, for alleged misconduct. The speaker refers to past impeachment attempts against them, framing these as politically motivated 'hoaxes' and part of a broader pattern of what they perceive as unfair treatment by their political opponents.

πŸ’‘Unselect Committee

The term 'unselect committee' is a derogatory term used by the speaker to describe a committee they view as biased and unfair. It appears to be a play on the term 'select committee,' which usually refers to a specially appointed group in a legislative body. The speaker uses this term to criticize a committee they believe is conducting a partisan investigation against them.

πŸ’‘Corrupt Government

A 'corrupt government' implies a government in which officials engage in dishonest or fraudulent conduct, often for personal gain or political advantage. The speaker repeatedly accuses the current administration of being corrupt, suggesting that their legal issues are the result of a corrupt system rather than actual wrongdoing on their part.

πŸ’‘Open Borders

The term 'open borders' refers to a policy or situation where there is minimal to no control over the movement of people across national boundaries. The speaker criticizes this policy, arguing that it allows criminals and terrorists to enter the country freely. This concept is used to highlight the speaker's views on immigration and national security.

Highlights

Concerns about immigration and the influx of people from various parts of the world into the country.

Claims of a president and group not taking action against what is perceived as a destructive trend.

Opposition to raising taxes and restrictive mandates affecting car ownership.

Allegations of a rigged trial and unfair treatment by a conflicted judge.

A gag order imposed on the speaker, which is claimed to be unprecedented for a presidential candidate.

Criticism of the current administration's handling of crime and the economy.

A detailed account of a legal expense being misrepresented as a crime.

The speaker's desire to testify and the perceived risks of doing so.

A discussion on the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and their legality.

A record fundraising amount following the trial's verdict.

A surge in public support as indicated by a recent poll.

Plans to appeal the trial's outcome on multiple grounds.

Accusations of a corrupt government and the impact on the country's future.

A call to action for November 5th as a critical date for the country's history.

Concerns over national security and the potential for foreign influence.

A commitment to continue the fight for the country's values and future.

Transcripts

00:00

[Applause]

00:03

[Music]

00:04

[Applause]

00:10

[Music]

00:11

[Applause]

00:17

thank you very much

00:18

everybody this is

00:21

a a case where if they can do this to me

00:24

they can do this to anyone these are bad

00:28

people these are many cases I believe

00:31

sick people when you look at our country

00:33

what's happening where millions and

00:36

millions of people are flowing in from

00:38

all parts of the world not just South

00:40

America from Africa from Asia from the

00:42

Middle East and they're coming in from

00:45

jails and

00:46

prisons and they're coming in from

00:49

mental institutions and insane

00:52

asylums they're coming in from all over

00:54

the world into our

00:56

country and we have a president and a

00:59

group of fascists that don't want to do

01:01

anything about it because they could

01:03

right now today he could stop it but

01:06

he's not they're destroying our country

01:08

our country is in very bad shape and

01:10

they're very much against me saying

01:12

these things they want to raise your

01:15

taxes by four

01:17

times they want to stop you from having

01:20

cars with their ridiculous mandates that

01:23

make it impossible for you to get a car

01:24

or afford a car but make it very

01:27

possible for China to build all of our

01:30

cars it's a very serious

01:33

problem that we have we just uh went

01:36

through one of many

01:38

experiences where we had a conflicted

01:42

judge highly conflicted there's never

01:44

been a more conflicted judge now I'm

01:46

under a gag order which nobody's ever

01:48

been under no presidential candidate's

01:50

ever been under a gag order before I'm

01:52

under a gag order nasty gag order where

01:56

I've had to pay thousands of dollars in

01:58

penalties and fines and was threatened

02:01

with jail think of it I'm the leading

02:05

candidate I'm leading Biden by a lot and

02:08

I'm

02:09

leading the Republicans to the point

02:11

where that's over so I'm the leading

02:14

person for president and I'm under a gag

02:16

order by a man that can't put two

02:19

sentences together given by a court and

02:22

they are in total conjunction with the

02:24

White House and the doj just so you

02:26

understand this is all done by Biden and

02:28

his people maybe it's people more

02:30

importantly I don't know if Biden knows

02:31

too much about it because I don't know

02:34

if he knows about anything but he's

02:36

nevertheless the president so we have to

02:39

use his name and this is done by

02:43

Washington and nobody's ever seen

02:45

anything like it so we have a judge

02:47

who's highly conflicted you know what

02:49

the confliction is nobody nobody wants

02:52

to write about it and I'm not allowed to

02:54

talk about it if I do he said I get put

02:56

in

02:57

jail so we'll play that game a little

03:00

bit longer we won't talk about it but

03:02

you're allowed to talk about it I hope

03:03

you do because there's never been

03:05

anybody so conflicted as

03:08

this as far as the trial itself it was

03:12

very

03:13

unfair we weren't allowed to allowed to

03:16

use our election expert under any

03:20

circumstances uh you saw what happened

03:22

to some of the witnesses that were on

03:24

our side they were literally crucified

03:27

by this man who looks like an angel but

03:30

he's really a devil he looks so nice and

03:33

soft people say oh he seems like such a

03:36

nice man no unless you saw him in action

03:38

and you saw

03:40

that with a certain witness that went

03:42

through

03:43

hell and when we wanted to do things he

03:47

wouldn't let him he wouldn't let us do

03:49

those things but when the government

03:51

wanted something they got everything

03:53

they got everything they wanted it's a

03:56

rigged it was a rigged trial we wanted a

03:58

venue change

04:00

where we could have a fair trial we

04:03

didn't get it we wanted a judge change

04:05

we wanted a judge that wasn't

04:07

conflicted and obviously he didn't do

04:10

that uh there's nobody's ever seen

04:13

anything like it we had a DA who is a

04:17

failed da crime is rampant in New York

04:20

violent crime that's what he's really

04:22

supposed to be looking at crime is

04:24

rampant in New York yesterday in

04:28

McDonald's you had a man

04:30

hitting them up with with machetes a

04:34

machete whoever can imagine even a

04:37

machete being wielded in a store in a

04:41

place where they're eating and he's

04:42

going rampant and brag is down watching

04:45

a trial on what they call uh crimes

04:51

crimes they're falsifying business

04:55

records that sounds so bad to me it

04:56

sounds very bad you know it's only a

04:58

misdemeanor but to me it sounds so bad

05:00

when they say falsifying business that's

05:03

a bad thing for me I've never had that

05:04

before I'm falsifying you know what

05:07

falsifying business records is in the

05:09

first degree they say falsifying

05:11

business records sound so good right it

05:14

means that legal expense I paid a lawyer

05:19

totally legal I paid a lawyer a legal

05:23

expense and a bookkeeper without any

05:25

knowledge from me correctly marked it

05:28

down in the books very professional

05:30

woman highly respected she

05:32

testified marked it down to the books as

05:35

a legal expense so a legal

05:37

expense paid a lawyer is a legal expense

05:40

in the books it's not uh

05:43

sheetrock

05:44

construction or any other thing it's a

05:48

legal expense think of that this is what

05:51

the falsification of business records

05:53

were and I said what else are you going

05:56

to call it what else are you going to

05:58

call it now I would have testified I

06:00

wanted to testify the theory is you

06:03

never testify because as soon as you

06:04

testify anybody if it were George

06:06

Washington don't testify because they'll

06:08

get you on something that you said

06:09

slightly wrong and then they sue you for

06:11

perjury but I didn't care about that I

06:13

wanted to but the judge allowed them to

06:15

go into everything that I was ever

06:17

involved in not this case everything

06:19

that I was ever involved in which is a

06:22

first other words you could go into

06:24

every single

06:26

thing that I ever did was he a bad boy

06:29

here was he a bad boy

06:31

there and my L said what do you need to

06:33

go through and all you wanted to do is

06:35

testify simply on this case because I

06:38

would have loved to have testified to

06:39

this day I would have liked to have

06:40

testified but you would have been you

06:43

would have said something out of whack

06:45

like it was a beautiful sunny day and it

06:47

was actually raining out and I very much

06:50

appreciate the big crowd of people

06:51

outside that's incredible what's

06:53

happening the level of support has been

06:56

incredible so the whole thing is

07:00

legal expense was marked down as legal

07:03

expense think of this this is my this is

07:05

the crime that I committed that I'm

07:08

supposed to go to jail for 187 years

07:11

for when you have violent crime all over

07:14

this city at levels that nobody's ever

07:17

seen before where you have businesses

07:19

leaving and businesses are leaving

07:21

because of this because heads of

07:22

businesses say man we don't want to get

07:25

involved with that I could go through

07:27

the books of any business person in this

07:31

city and I could find things that in

07:33

theory I guess let's indict him let's

07:36

destroy his

07:37

life but I'm out there and I don't mind

07:40

being out there because I'm doing

07:42

something for this country and I'm doing

07:43

something for our constitution it's very

07:46

important far beyond me and this can't

07:49

be allowed to happen to other presidents

07:51

it should never be allowed to

07:53

happen in the future but this is far

07:56

beyond me this is bigger than Trump this

07:58

is bigger than me this is bigger than my

08:00

presidency and the people understand it

08:03

because I just see a poll just came out

08:06

the Daily Mail that was the first one

08:08

came out was done last night right after

08:12

the verdict where I'm up six points six

08:15

points from what we already were we were

08:17

leading fa fairly substantially we're up

08:20

six points in the Daily Mail poll now

08:22

maybe other polls come out and says

08:23

something differently but a lot of

08:26

people have predicted it because the

08:27

public understands and they understand

08:29

what

08:30

what's going on this is a scam this is a

08:33

rig

08:34

trial it shouldn't have been in that

08:36

venue we shouldn't have had that judge

08:39

he should have allowed allowed us to

08:40

have an election expert we had the best

08:43

expert most respected expert head of the

08:46

federal elections commission he was all

08:48

set to testify he was waiting for two

08:51

days and when it was his turn Bragg's

08:55

people

08:56

protested and the judge knocked them out

08:58

said you can't test testify he actually

09:00

said you can't testify for anything

09:02

having to do with the trial you can say

09:04

what the federal elections is well that

09:06

doesn't help everybody knows that but

09:09

you can't testify so essentially he

09:12

wasn't able to testify other people

09:14

weren't able to testify but with these

09:16

people they were able to

09:19

use people

09:21

salacious by the way and nothing ever

09:24

happened there was no anything nothing

09:28

ever happened and they know it but they

09:30

were as Sal as salacious as they could

09:32

be and it had nothing to do with the

09:34

case but it had to do with politics and

09:37

do you notice the timing the timing was

09:40

perfect this case was dead it was

09:42

dropped by every agency every

09:45

governmental board it was dropped by the

09:48

highly respected southern district they

09:51

said no there's no case here it was

09:53

dropped by federal election and that's

09:55

what it's about this about a federal

09:57

election not a state election you're not

09:58

even allowed to look at it they took the

10:01

state and the city and they went into a

10:03

federal election they're not allowed the

10:05

people from federal election southern

10:07

district and Washington dropped the case

10:10

everybody dropped the case there was no

10:12

case sance dropped the case and when

10:15

Brad came in he said this is the most

10:17

ridiculous case I've ever seen and who

10:20

would have a certain person again gag

10:22

order who would have a certain person

10:24

like this ever testify he said this is

10:27

essentially one of the worst people I've

10:29

I've ever seen ever to

10:32

testify he said the craziest case I've

10:34

ever seen this is

10:36

Brag then when I announced I was running

10:38

for president long time later they

10:42

decided to revive this case and they got

10:45

a

10:46

judge

10:48

judge Martian who

10:52

was responsible for another case that

10:54

was also brought it destroyed the life

10:57

of a very good man by the way destroyed

10:58

the life

11:00

of a very good man who went to prison

11:03

once and then they just put him in

11:05

prison again because they said he he

11:08

lied he didn't lie I looked at the

11:10

statements he made in fact he didn't

11:11

remember something and they put him in

11:13

jail again they've destroyed him with me

11:17

for many years he was an honorable

11:19

person he was an honest

11:21

man and if you look at what he did

11:25

supposedly it never happened there's

11:27

never been anything like this over the

11:29

education of his

11:31

grandchildren over he didn't report that

11:34

he had a car or two cars on his income I

11:37

don't know I wonder how many people here

11:39

have cars I wonder how many people said

11:41

oh gee I have a car that's worth X doll

11:43

how do you even figure it and I guess

11:45

you do have to report it but I would say

11:47

probably almost nobody does nobody even

11:50

thinks about it they put this man they

11:52

destroyed this man but they put him in

11:55

jail again because they didn't want him

11:56

to

11:58

testify they didn't want him to testify

12:00

that's why he went to

12:02

jail put him in jail

12:04

twice he's 77 years old now normally I'd

12:08

say that's an old guy but I don't feel

12:13

77 nobody ever says that about me I'd

12:16

like them to say gee we have to have a

12:18

little sorrow for this man because they

12:21

don't they just don't say that about me

12:23

but maybe I'm better off that way I

12:24

think I'm probably better off that way

12:26

but they put him in jail twice

12:29

and you have to see what they put him in

12:31

jail and he was threatened by the

12:33

judge this man was told you're going to

12:36

get 15 years in

12:38

jail if you don't give up Trump and he

12:42

was told that you're G to get 15 years

12:45

in

12:46

jail and he made a plea deal because he

12:50

didn't want to spend the rest of his

12:53

life and he was told that

12:55

viciously we're living in a in a fascist

12:58

state he was told that

13:00

viciously so you can go to jail for four

13:04

months 5 months or you can get 15 years

13:09

in jail so do a

13:11

plea almost who wouldn't do that plea

13:13

everyone does those pleas it's a

13:15

horrible thing there's a whole group of

13:18

lawyers that fight that it's so unfair

13:20

it's so unfair but they destroyed his

13:22

life so many other things uh you look at

13:26

Southern District didn't want to bring

13:28

the case

13:31

nobody wanted to bring the case and then

13:34

you know who didn't want to bring the

13:35

case most of all is brag brag didn't

13:38

want to bring it but then he brought it

13:41

and they tried to make it a different

13:42

case they didn't say legal expense equal

13:44

legal expense

13:46

again if I wrote

13:48

down and paid a lawyer and by the way

13:51

this was a highly qualified lawyer now

13:52

I'm not allowed to use his name because

13:54

of the gag order but you know he's a SLE

13:56

bag everybody knows that took me a while

13:59

to find out but he was effective he did

14:03

work but he wasn't a fixer he was a

14:05

lawyer you know they like to use the

14:06

word fixer he wasn't a fix he was a

14:08

lawyer at the time he was a a fully

14:10

accredited lawyer now he got into

14:12

trouble not because of me he got into

14:14

trouble because he made outside deals

14:16

and he had something to do with taxi

14:17

cabs and medallions and he borrowed

14:20

money and that's why he went and then he

14:23

pled to

14:25

three uh three election

14:30

violations and as soon as I saw that I

14:32

said I wonder why he did that he pled he

14:34

took a deal now he took a deal because

14:36

he wanted to get off in other words I'll

14:40

take a plea deal and I want to get off

14:42

and he wanted to make a deal with the

14:43

southern district and they

14:46

wrote the worst report I think I've ever

14:49

seen on any human being other than the

14:51

report that was written on James Comey

14:55

by the Inspector General a very great

14:58

Inspector General general actually wrote

15:00

a report that was so bad this one was

15:03

possibly

15:04

worse the southern district the judge

15:06

didn't let us use it he said it's heay I

15:09

said it's not heay wouldn't let us use

15:11

it this is about the man but he got in

15:14

trouble for a very simple reason because

15:19

he was involved with borrowing a lot of

15:20

money and he did something with the bank

15:22

side I don't know if it defrauded the

15:24

banks but something happened you guys

15:26

know what it is and then in addition

15:29

into that he gave up on three things

15:31

where he wasn't guilty in fact they were

15:32

going to testify in that the uh head of

15:35

the FEC the Brad Smith the election

15:38

expert number one rated in the country

15:41

was going to testify he took a plea on

15:44

three things he just added them in

15:45

because that gave him more bargaining

15:47

power with respect to me but the three

15:49

things that he pled on having to do with

15:52

the

15:53

election and having to do essentially a

15:55

little bit with me uh they weren't

15:58

crimes they weren't crimes nor is paying

16:03

money under an NDA so we have an NDA

16:07

non-disclosure agreement it's a big deal

16:10

a non-disclosure agreement totally

16:12

honorable totally good totally accepted

16:15

everybody has

16:16

them every company has non-disclosure

16:19

agreements but the Press called it slush

16:22

fund and all sorts of other things hush

16:25

money hush money it's not hush money

16:27

it's called the non-disclosure agreement

16:30

and most of the people in this room have

16:32

a non-disclosure agreement with their

16:35

company it's a