David Moskowitz-Will Trump Go to Prison

Show Transcript

Trump's Criminal and Civil Cases: Will Trump Go to Prison?

[00:00:00] Bob Gatty: Since his election defeat to President Biden in November, 2020, Donald Trump has put America through virtual hell, claiming the election was stolen from him, inciting the attempt by his MAGA mob to prevent certification of that election, and despite 91 criminal charges against him, attempting to win the Republican nomination and return to the White House.

[00:00:27] Those 91 charges stem from his attempts to overturn the election, interfering with the election results in Georgia, falsifying business records in New York in connection with hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, and mishandling classified records after leaving the presidency. He's been fined hundreds of millions of dollars so far, and this financial empire is jeopardized to the point that he's hawking a garish line of gold sneakers for 399 dollars a pair that he says black people should like, because they love sneakers. 

[00:01:09] We have with us today, David H Moskowitz, a retired Pennsylvania attorney, who's written a new book, The Judge and the President, Stealing the 2020 Election. We'll get his take on all these developments and what he believes might lie ahead for Trump and our nation. So stay with us. 

[00:01:30] Now, Moskowitz practiced law for 40 plus years, developed real estate and was a pharmaceutical CEO. He received degrees from Penn State, Villanova Law School, and Oxford University. He served as counsel to municipalities, municipal authorities, civic associations, and he represented clients in numerous countries around the world.

[00:01:55] He writes based on his legal experience and front row seat to the election--his wife was a Pennsylvania elector-- and efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn the results.

[00:02:08] Hey David, thanks so much for joining us on the Lean to the Left podcast. 

[00:02:12] David Moskowitz: It's my pleasure to be here. 

[00:02:15] Bob Gatty: To get started, can we talk about your book and the key points that you make regarding Trump and the election, as well as the aftermath?

[00:02:23] David Moskowitz: Yes. This book is the first, is the third in a series of four or five books, actually. The first one was The Judge and the Umpire, then The Judge and the Philosopher, and this one is The Judge and the President. When I started this book, it really was supposed to be about the complexity of determining what is the law and how do you find it.

[00:02:52] But when I was in the process of writing it, my wife was asked to be an elector in the 2020 Electoral College, and it occurred to me, this system we have for electing the president is about as complex as any item in the legal system, because it involves not only the Constitution and federal statutes, but also state statutes And also local regulations by local county boards of election.

[00:03:30] So it's really a mishmash of three different legal systems. And they overlap, they're intertwined, they're interconnected, and in some cases they're even contradictory. So that's the system we have. And that became then the focal point of the book.

[00:03:49] Bob Gatty: All right. You get into it quite in some detail, and by the way, folks, his book is really excellently done and well researched.

[00:03:59] What would be the consequences to our country David, had Trump succeeded in preventing the peaceful transfer of power after he lost the election? 

[00:04:10] David Moskowitz: That's a good question, but it's very difficult to answer because you have to know first, how did he succeed? What happened? Was the January 6th riot successful, and therefore the Electoral College votes were never counted?

[00:04:30] Did Vice President Pence throw out the actual valid certificates and accept the certificates of the seven alternate electors. Did the election go to the House of Representatives as it did in 1876? Did Trump simply not leave the White House, which it's been testified that he, that was his plan not to leave.

[00:05:00] How did it happen? Did he, did the National Guard seize all the election machines, which Sidney Powell had advocated in a meeting in the Oval Office? So you'd have to know, how did it occur? And it even could have. occurred hypothetically by going to the U. S. Supreme Court, which happened, of course, in the Bush versus Gore election in 2000.

[00:05:29] So you'd have to know how did it get accomplished to answer your question. Okay. 

[00:05:35] Bob Gatty: That none of those things happened, fortunately. 

[00:05:40] David Moskowitz: But there were 62 lawsuits claiming election fraud that happened and were unsuccessful. 

[00:05:48] Bob Gatty: Now you describe in your book three heroes. I think it was three from the January 6th insurrection.

[00:05:55] Who were they? And why do you consider them to be heroes? 

[00:05:59] David Moskowitz: Think that you have to acknowledge that vice president Pence Was in a very difficult situation under enormous pressure. And I'm talking about pressure that occurred even before the January six speech that Trump gave on the ellipsis about if Mike Pence does the right thing, then I'll be the president and let's march down to the Capitol and convince him. But even before that he was being pressured by Trump directly and by others to throw out the valid certificates. And let the president be elected by the state legislators was one theory and another theory was that he himself could do it. And Pence went through a real, what shall I call it, a real pressure process in which he tried to decide what to do.

[00:07:02] He called Dan Quayle, who had been vice president in the same situation he was in more or less, Dan Quayle went to his lawyer who then got him to a former judge, Michael Ludwig, and he was very influential in convincing Pence that his obligation was simply one of being the caretaker, more or less, to the votes being counted, that he had no discretion that he could exercise to throw out votes.

[00:07:43] And so Pence, under all this pressure, even with his family there at the Capitol and the hang Mike Pence situation, he went ahead and did the right thing. So I think he's number one. Number two, I would think would be the Capitol police because they were in a very difficult position. They were undermanned.

[00:08:12] The National Guard didn't really come in until much later, and they had to try and prevent this crowd from stopping the counting of the votes. So I have to acknowledge their role. And then the third, I would say, was the judicial system, and the judges who decided the 62 cases because the whole theory originally that Ken Chesebrough brought out was that some of these cases would be successful and in those seven battleground states that would allow for alternate electors to have their votes counted.

[00:09:01] So the judiciary came through and some of them were actually Trump appointees. He lost all the cases. There was no, what the DOJ calls, outcome determinative fraud in the election, and so you have to acknowledge that when it came time to hold the fort they did 

[00:09:29] I 

[00:09:29] Bob Gatty: think you also credit in your book many of the members of Congress for standing up and doing what they were supposed to don't you do that?

[00:09:36] David Moskowitz: The amazing thing there is the number of members of Congress. who didn't stand up. There they were, under threat of violent action, and even so well over a hundred voted the wrong way in terms of the counting of the votes. 

[00:09:58] Bob Gatty: Yeah, some of them had even conducted tours prior to the January 6th incident.

[00:10:05] David Moskowitz: I don't know if they themselves did the tours or their aides.

[00:10:10] Their aides. 

[00:10:11] Bob Gatty: That doesn't matter whether it was the congressman himself or the congresswoman or their aides. It still was done by the by their office and presumably helped those would be insurgents to determine what they were going to do the following day. Isn't that true? 

[00:10:29] David Moskowitz: Yes, that's absolutely true.

[00:10:31] Bob Gatty: Yeah, that's disgusting. And those people, I just did a blog yesterday. One of my writers for my blog site, leantotheleft. net, did a piece about, Representative Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, who was one of those people who who did that. And It's just disgusting. I think those guys, those people ought to be impeached.

[00:10:55] They ought to be thrown right out of the House of Representatives. 

[00:10:58] That's what I think.

[00:10:59] David Moskowitz: You could make an argument for that. Yeah, all right. But you don't have the votes there to do it. 

[00:11:04] Bob Gatty: No, of course not. Yeah. Let's look at these four cases involving Trump and what maybe you think might lie ahead.

[00:11:12] First let's look at the federal election interference case. That jack smith is working on. How about taking a look at that? 

[00:11:22] David Moskowitz: First, let me premise a response by saying that predicting the outcome of lawsuits is very difficult, right? So that's what you're asking for. Having said that, I want to make sure that the listeners understand it that virtually a vast majority of lawsuits get settled. And the only way that lawsuits can get settled is by lawyers making predictions to their clients. about how the lawsuit's going to turn out. You can't settle lawsuits without lawyers predicting outcomes. Okay. With that understanding, I'll try to answer your question.

[00:12:07] Okay. The DOJ lawsuit has five counts. One of them is for violation of, What's called the Ku Klux Klan Act, and interfering with the actual voting process, and the other four are conspiracy counts. Unlike the Georgia case where you have 19 defendants, in the DOJ case, you only have one defendant.

[00:12:36] So that makes a big difference, both in terms of how the trial is actually conducted and the amount of time the trial will take. And when we get to the Georgia case, I'll return to that theme. So you have one defendant, and you have maybe six to eight weeks of trials. And we, you and I, don't know exactly all the evidence that's available that can be introduced that at the trial, there's a lot of evidence that we haven't heard yet. Even last night, I learned something new about Kenneth Chesebro. And he's a lawyer, and I think you could give him the title of being the original theorist for what turned out to be John Eastman's memos.

[00:13:40] He did memos before Eastman wrote his memos. And Chesebro was the first one to plead guilty in Georgia. So he's a lawyer who was involved in theorizing. But what I learned last night was that he not only did the theorizing, but he also was involved in assembling the alternate electors, in getting the certificates to them, in getting the certificates from them to Pence, to the National Archivist, and the other two places where the certificates go.

[00:14:26] Last night, what I heard was that Chesebro, who pled guilty in Georgia is required by his guilty plea to meet with any other state or federal agency that's having a trial concerning what he did and for the first time , in talking to the prosecutors in Michigan, he was asked, did you have any social media activity?

[00:15:04] And he said no, and he committed perjury when he did that or lied to governmental officials because it turns out, and this is what I learned last night, that he has a Twitter account and there's lots of Twitter messages that you and I don't know what's in them. But they could come up in the Department of Justice trial.

[00:15:30] And so there's a lot of evidence we don't know. When we get to the tampering issue, if we get to that, the tampering of the voting machines, there, there's a whistleblower named Mike Ryan. And he has met with the Department of Justice. And he acted as a what shall I call him? He didn't disclose. What he was going to do, and he gathered documents, and he's turned them over to the DOJ, and you and I haven't seen them.

[00:16:08] So there's a lot of evidence that hasn't come out yet. We don't know what Sidney Powell's full role was. There's an attorney in Michigan who's been indicted named Stephanie Lambert. She had something like 1, 500 text messages. With the cyber ninjas. We haven't ever seen those. My point is that there's a lot of evidence that we're not aware of.

[00:16:40] Having said that, I think that he will be convicted in the trial just because of the overwhelming amount of evidence. That we do have and the fact that the trials in the District of Columbia, where you're going to get a jury that's more prone to convict him than the jury in Georgia or the jury in Florida.

[00:17:06] So that's my prediction. 

[00:17:08] Bob Gatty: You've been quoted as saying that the federal trial will take six to eight weeks. That if, yeah. That if Trump is convicted, he'll appeal to the Court of Appeals. If he loses, he'll petition to the Supreme Court and the chances of success there are less than 50% that 

[00:17:28] David Moskowitz: his chances of success. His chances less than 50, 50% there. Yes. However, I don't think that all of that will happen before the election. 

[00:17:40] Bob Gatty: Uhhuh. Yeah. I was just gonna ask you if you thought it would happen before the election. You said no. 

[00:17:46] David Moskowitz: No, I don't think it will happen before the election and sitting here today, I'm surprised even that there isn't a decision yet by the Supreme Court on his eligibility to be on the ballot.

[00:18:00] Bob Gatty: Yeah. That's obviously if the Supreme Court should say sorry, there Don, you can't do it. The that's gonna throw, that's another case that's gonna throw the Republicans into a huge mess which would be so sad. Anyway let's go to Georgia. You say in about Georgia. That trial will take six to nine months, that if Trump is convicted, he'll appeal.

[00:18:26] If the Georgia Supreme Court confirms the conviction, Trump will once again petition the Supreme Court. But his chances of success there are less than 15 percent in that case. 

[00:18:40] David Moskowitz: Yes, I think first of all, that's the kind of case that the Supreme Court really shouldn't take. Because it's a question of state law.

[00:18:51] All the proceedings are in the state. Georgia has a very good RICO statute. Racketeer Influenced Organization statute. It's a copy of the federal statute. It's one of 30 states that has a state RICO statute. But it's much broader than the federal statute. The federal statute lists approximately 30 crimes that would fall within the statute.

[00:19:21] George is tackled on another 35 crimes. So it's a very broad statute. And once again, we don't know what the evidence will be. But it's a very well written indictment. It's what they call a speaking indictment. It has lots of details in the indictment, including provisions where there are quote marks, quotation marks.

[00:19:49] And when they do that, they obviously either have a recording or they have a document that they're quoting from. That's going to be an interesting trial. I equate, and I've only done one RICO trial in my career, but it was like no case I ever tried, and I've tried a vast variety of cases, because I equated to when I was growing up and would go down to the basketball court at the schoolyard on a Saturday, and you'd get there and there'd be a bunch of kids, you didn't know which team you'd be on, You'd play the first game, the next game, you'd have different teammates.

[00:20:32] You couldn't tell how the day was going to go. That's what a RICO trial is like, unlike a civil trial where you have potential admissions, you have depositions you have the ability to get much more information before the trial, but in a criminal trial, you don't know in a RICO case exactly what your co defendants are going to testify to.

[00:21:07] So you don't know whether they're on your side, whether they're going to confirm what your client's going to testify to, or whether they're going to contradict your client. So in addition to trying to figure out what the evidence of the prosecution is, you also have that unknown of What are my co defendants going to say?

[00:21:32] And that creates a lot of pressure. The other aspect of the RICO trial, which doesn't occur in any of the other trials is that of course if you're on trial you have to be there at the trial. So if you're a defendant, one of the lesser involved defendants of the 19, four have pled guilty, so there are 15 left.

[00:22:02] And one of those defendants faced with the RICO trial, if they're in the same trial as former President Trump, They're looking at what's been estimated to be a four month trial. That's four months sitting in court, no income, paying a lawyer to represent you, which will be about half a million dollars.

[00:22:28] And if you're found guilty, of course, all of that is lost. Yeah. If the district attorney is offering you a plea deal similar to the ones that the four defendants who have pled guilty received. That's hard to resist. They're paying a $10,000 in fine and costs. And if you have no other criminal record, they're not going to jail.

[00:23:00] They're going to plead guilty to misdemeanors or felonies. But it's not likely even to involve house arrest. That's hard to turn down when you have in front of you a half a million dollar legal fee, four months sitting in jail, and you may be found guilty anyway.

[00:23:22] Bob Gatty: Are you suggesting that Trump might do that?

[00:23:25] David Moskowitz: Before we get to Trump, I will tell you that I published the book, The Judge and the President, in September of last year, before there were any guilty pleas. And I predicted in the book that Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell would plead guilty. I had different reasons for those predictions, but, I believe that before there is An actual Georgia Rico trial, there will be more guilty pleas.

[00:24:00] Bob Gatty: All right, Georgia, the election, will the Georgia thing be decided before the election? 

[00:24:07] David Moskowitz: No, right? Yeah, I think there will be another Georgia. There will be not another. There will be a Georgia trial, I believe, before the election. Oh, okay. Sometime in the summer. Okay, 

[00:24:19] Bob Gatty: all right. Now, does Trump risk jail time from either the federal case or the Georgia case?

[00:24:27] David Moskowitz: No, I don't think Trump ends up in jail from any of these cases. You don't? No. Because first, it's his age, second of all, the mechanics or the systematic procedure for having the Secret Service protecting him in jail is so very complex and confusing. I don't see him ever being In jail. I do think it's possible that there will be a global settlement of all of these cases.

[00:25:05] And I can go over what I think the terms would be or how they all would come out. But I think that if Trump sees money flowing out the door, if he gets a single conviction that is on appeal all this pressure from the trials. I think Trump could make a deal where he pleads guilty to some offenses, he settles the civil liability cases, the E.

[00:25:43] Jean Carroll case and the New York civil liability case, and he agrees not to run for president. Or the president, the sitting president Biden, pardons him as part of this overall deal, and he agrees never to be involved in politics again. I don't know if. If he commits to a gag order, or if that's any use.

[00:26:14] Because he doesn't seem to be able to control himself. But I don't rule that out as being, I don't say it's probable. But on the other hand, I wouldn't be at all surprised. If how, if that's how all this ends, 

[00:26:32] Bob Gatty: okay so if he's not sent to jail, what would be his punishment?

[00:26:39] David Moskowitz: What would be, I'm sorry, his punishment? His punishment in the civil liability cases is a large amount of dollars. You can see that already because those have gone through trials. In criminal trials, one interesting question I haven't seen discussed by anyone. I, obviously I've watched these interviews on television of former prosecutors who are really excellent, very knowledgeable.

[00:27:11] What would happen if he's convicted of a felony in virtually every state, I'd say the thing except two of them, if you're convicted of a felony. You can't vote, right? So you get this unusual situation where you might have someone who's eligible to be president because that's what the Supreme Court decides, but who can't vote for himself because he's been convicted of a criminal offense because felons can't vote in most states. 

[00:27:45] Bob Gatty: You can't make this stuff up. It's incredible. 

[00:27:48] David Moskowitz: So that's a scenario waiting for somebody to write a novel about it. Yeah. 

[00:27:54] Bob Gatty: How about the classified documents case? Is this as serious 

[00:27:59] David Moskowitz: as the I think the classified documents case is not going to be successful for the prosecution.

[00:28:04] Okay. I think there's a very real possibility that the judge dismisses the case on a pretrial motion of some sort that trial, it just never occurs. Yeah, and if it occurs, I think there's a significant likelihood of a hung jury. The trials in Florida. I don't know what kind of jury you're going to get in that trial.

[00:28:34] You need a unanimous verdict from the jury. And there are two things that aren't really completely relevant to the trial, but will affect it, I believe. One is that there are other former officials who have documents. including the present president, who also had classified documents. And there's several others who've had classified documents after their term in office was over.

[00:29:08] So that's one factor that will conceivably affect the outcome. The other factor is the Presidential Records Act. Now the Presidential Records Act Requires that the president's not destroyed the documents and turn them in to the National Archivist or to a library after their term in office is over, but it contains no penalty.

[00:29:41] Now, it's not really applicable in the case because the case is about documents that are required to be confidential. However, I could see that being argued as this is our system. The president has, there's no sanction. There's no penalty in the Presidential Records Act. It's completely aspirational.

[00:30:11] It's like the Congress telling the President, it would be nice if you did this. There's no penalty at all. Which raises the question, and I discuss this in the book, before even he was indicted, about whether it really qualifies as a law. It's adopted by Congress. So it's a law in the sense of its origin, but if it has no penalty, is it a law?

[00:30:44] If you're, if there's no sanction, then what is it? So that's an interesting question. I think that will come up in the trial. It's not exactly relevant. But I think that will raise the possibility of a hung jury if the judge ever lets it go to trial. Okay. So that one I'm pessimistic about having a favorable outcome for the prosecution.

[00:31:16] All 

[00:31:16] Bob Gatty: Now how about this Hush Money case involving the payoff to Stormy Daniels? 

[00:31:23] David Moskowitz: That's another case which I think may result in a hung jury because a, he has this all I did was pay her. What's the big deal, approach that may have some appeal to a juror.

[00:31:40] You only need one juror to have a hung jury. And the falsifying of the records. The jury is likely to know he's already been held liable in the New York civil liability case. So there's a kind of double jeopardy aspect to it. You've got the witnesses. Who are the key witnesses? Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels.

[00:32:08] Yeah, they're not the strongest witnesses you could have in a trial. Michael Cohen's already been convicted of perjury. So I would see that one likely to be unsuccessful. Okay. Unsuccessful in the sense of a hung jury. 

[00:32:23] Bob Gatty: Okay. Now you, yeah, I, you're aware that Trump is appealing this 450 million, $54 million judgment against him in this New York business case.

[00:32:37] What do you think the likely out you can, he's gonna, he's appealing that is that appeal likely to be successful? 

[00:32:45] David Moskowitz: First of all, is that appeal likely to be heard? Okay. Because if he doesn't file an appeal, bond, or post the cash, it may never be heard. I think there I, if I had to guess, look, I don't know exactly what his financial state is.

[00:33:07] I don't know if anybody knows I, I think he'll find the money somewhere. Maybe it's a Russian oligarch. Maybe it's Putin himself, who's the richest man in the world, probably. I think he somehow, someway, and he's very good at this, somehow, someway will find the money. However, I think the appeal is not likely to be successful.

[00:33:37] The judge did an excellent job. I've read the opinion. He makes the findings of fact and you very rarely, almost never, will an appellate court reverse findings of fact. He bases his decision on the credibility of witnesses. He has very good reasons for determining the credibility. The way he determines it, he goes item by item in terms of where the appraisal is not really an appraisal.

[00:34:15] In fact, Trump's own appraisal witness admitted, he said something like this. There's a difference between an as is appraisal and an as if appraisal. I appraise them as is. This is what you can do. This is the zoning you have. This building is already built or not already built and so forth.

[00:34:43] And he said how do you explain the figures that the Trump organizations used? He says they do as if appraisals, but there is no such thing in appraisal technique for as if appraisals. In other words, you have a property, the zoning allows you to put five houses on it, and you claim you're going to put 25 houses on it.

[00:35:12] Or the property will sell for a million dollars and you claim it'll sell for 10 million dollars because it was once owned by Donald Trump, right? This stuff never works. It won't work in this case. Obviously the documents were. If I'd say exaggerated to a degree that they became fraudulent. Okay. So you're there for, I'm sorry.

[00:35:44] It'll be affirmed. The decision of the court below will be affirmed. And I don't think the Supreme court takes the case. 

[00:35:52] Bob Gatty: So that means that Trump is going to have to cough up this money one way or another. 

[00:35:56] David Moskowitz: Trump is going to have to come up with his money. And by the way, one possible way of this coming up with it.

[00:36:04] It won't be timely for this appeal, but he has a potential 4 billion payday down the road. Do you know about 

[00:36:17] Bob Gatty: that? 

[00:36:18] Yes, it has to do with his social media, 

[00:36:21] David Moskowitz: Exactly. 

[00:36:23] Bob Gatty: He's selling it to somebody or whatever? 

[00:36:26] David Moskowitz: No, there's a blank check company. And I'm familiar with blank check companies because I once was on the board of directors of one and in a blank check company, investors buy stock, but the investor doesn't know what the disposition of the funds will be. And when you have a potential company, you want to purchase with those funds. You disclose it to these shareholders. They have to approve it. I think by 80 percent vote, if you're in an investor shareholder and you disagree, you can get your money back, but there is a merger agreement between a blank check company, digital media, something or other? And the Trump social media company for $4 billion. Okay. And the SEC has approved it. Okay. So there's a payday that may come that will salvage his empire, or most of his empire. And that's another reason why I believe that there could be a settlement, because that payday may be a factor in his deciding, yeah, let's get out of these criminal cases.

[00:37:51] Let's resolve the civil cases. Let's get on with our life. I'm going to play golf every day anyway. Okay. 

[00:37:59] Bob Gatty: All right. Let's talk a little bit about you mentioned the voting machine scandal and there's all these efforts in some states to kick him off the ballot. How about commenting about those 

[00:38:10] David Moskowitz: two things?

[00:38:12] I

[00:38:12] don't think he'll be kicked off the ballot. I I believe that the Supreme Court will decide that he's eligible. I like the Maine case more than the Colorado case, but they're deciding the Colorado case. I don't see them doing what they did in the Dobbs abortion case where they said it's not in the constitution, let's leave it to the States. They could say we're not sure what this section three means. And the states are the ones that control the election for the president, so let's leave it to state law to determine. I don't think that's going to happen. I think the Supreme Court's going to find he's eligible, and He's running for office, except for this wild card I mentioned about what happens if he's a felon, a convicted felon, and he can't vote for himself, which is a whole nother story but I think he will be found to be eligible.

[00:39:13] So I don't see any reasonable possibility. of that going the other way. Okay. Unfortunately, I think the Maine case is really strong for him being ineligible. Maine's got a very unusual procedure, the best procedure in the country probably, for how you determine eligibility to be on the ballot.

[00:39:39] And the Secretary of State, Bellows, she wrote an excellent opinion for why he's ineligible. according to Maine law. 

[00:39:50] Bob Gatty: Okay. Why is it that, 

[00:39:53] David Moskowitz: Tampering was your other question? Yeah, that's right. The other question. Okay. So on to the tampering, the first instance of tampering occurred in Pennsylvania. I think it was on December 31st that the machines were taken.

[00:40:12] It also occurred in Michigan. And it also occurred in Georgia. I don't think it occurred in Arizona. I think that was more like a recamp, but I'm not sure of that. But in the other three places, the actual hardware and software was taken out of the machines. The Pennsylvania one, and here's the odd thing about this, by the way.

[00:40:43] In all three places where the election machines were tampered with, It was done in rural counties where Trump was the overwhelming winner of the election. In Pennsylvania, it was done in Fulton County, Pennsylvania, a county that has 15, 000 residents. That's it. And Trump had 85 percent of the vote. So why are they opening the machine in Fulton County?

[00:41:16] But in Fulton County. They opened the machine, they had it the results in The software and hardware examined by not one, but two different companies. The company that is most interesting is called XR Vision. XR Vision looked at what they were given and said, We don't see any fraud here.

[00:41:45] They were pressured to find what was called cheat codes. C H E A T codes. Cheat codes. And they said, we can't find them. And they weren't paid. So XR Vision sued a lawyer in Michigan named Stephanie Lambert. And the fellow who gave her, allegedly, per this complaint, A $1, 000, 000 letter of $1, 000, 000 letter of credit, right?

[00:42:21] That she could use to pay the companies that were involved in the tampering. She has been indicted, along with two others in Michigan, for this. I think there ultimately will be in Pennsylvania, they haven't been indicted. However, There's a decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court requiring that Fulton County and the lawyer in Pennsylvania who represented them reimburse the state of Pennsylvania $711, 000 in this little county, they're being asked to pay $711, 000 and they're going to have to buy new voting machines because the voting machines that they opened are now not regarded as being usable by Dominion. Dominion is also involved in the case. It's their machines. So the machines have to be moved out of Fulton County and taken to a storage place and somebody's got to reimburse the Pennsylvania government. And here's the oddest thing about this case. I've never seen this in another case.

[00:43:42] The Pennsylvania Supreme Court says that the county and the lawyer are jointly and severally liable. What that means is that each of them has to pay the whole verdict if the other one doesn't pay a share of it. And I'm anxious to see how this unfolds because here this lawyer is being asked to Come up with $711, 000 And or this small county And they have to also buy new voting buyer or lease most of the voting machines are leased. They also have to lease new voting machines to have in place for the 2024 election It's not commonly known but voting machines Have to be certified, in pennsylvania at least, by the federal government, by the state government, and by the County Board of Elections.

[00:44:47] So they go through three certification processes, and you can't use them if they're not certified.

[00:44:57] So that's, it's a criminal offense in Michigan, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, the tampering of the voting machines. 

[00:45:06] Bob Gatty: Wow, okay. What do you think of his comment that Because of all these indictments and these criminal charges against him, the black Americans should support him because after all, 

[00:45:23] David Moskowitz: It's a typical Trump approach.

[00:45:27] And he, I think he's a genius, literally a genius at spinning things, about getting press to repeat what he says and about looking at things in a way that, that is, he has one message during the primary. Which is, I'm responsible for Roe versus Wade being overruled, I'm the one who did it, give me the credit, and then in the general, he says, now, I'm not for, not having abortion at all, I have a program for the first six weeks, first four months, or whatever it is.

[00:46:11] And he spins two completely opposite messages and gets away with it. Yeah. And look the way he's turned these trials into I'm being persecuted. He's got this persecution theory going I don't think it'll work with black voters. I think they're smarter than that, but it's a typical Trump 

[00:46:33] Bob Gatty: approach.

[00:46:34] That should insult them. That's an insulting statement, just like him saying that they should love him because he came up with these gold 399 sneakers, because black people, after all, everybody knows black people like I top sneakers. 

[00:46:53] David Moskowitz: It is it's amazing that he gets away with this stuff. Look at all the hats he's sold and t shirts and what is going to happen to the other Republican candidates once he controls the national party and the The donations to it.

[00:47:11] Yeah, that's an interesting 

[00:47:12] Bob Gatty: issue. Yeah, it is. And he's placing his, he's got a relative that he's placing in his daughter in law, his 

[00:47:20] David Moskowitz: daughter in law. Daughter in law. Yeah. 

[00:47:23] Bob Gatty: Yeah. Is like second in command at the at the 

[00:47:27] David Moskowitz: national. No, she's not even second. She's co chair.

[00:47:30] Oh, co chair. Oh, wow. Yeah, she's co chair. And then he says, and I'm also putting what's her name? Kimberly Guilfoyle in Donald Jr's girlfriend. And she's also going to be active. Oh boy. 

[00:47:44] Bob Gatty: Okay. All right. So well, I guess one could say he's got we won't go there. Listen, I really appreciate Where can people find your book?

[00:47:55] I forgot to ask you that. 

[00:47:57] David Moskowitz: The book's on Amazon, and here's what it looks like. Here's the book. I don't know if you can 

[00:48:05] Bob Gatty: see that. Not yet, because you got to hold it up. There you go. There it is. 

[00:48:10] David Moskowitz: There you go. Yep. The Judge and the President. And it's in Amazon. It's in some bookstores. I don't know exactly which ones.

[00:48:20] I, I know there's one in Australia that asked me to come to do a book signing. 

[00:48:24] Bob Gatty: Oh, wait, we'll run off, we'll run off there and pick one up. 

[00:48:27] David Moskowitz: Yes, yeah. 

[00:48:30] Bob Gatty: Okay David, I really enjoyed talking to you. You've done a ton of work and you've got great insight. And from what I saw, you have info in your book that Hasn't been commonly, at least commonly reported, and I think you did just one tremendous job of research.

[00:48:48] And anyhow. Thank you very much. Yeah. Thanks for coming on to this. Thank you. Hang on a second. My pleasure.