During an interview on Fox News this week, Trump lawyer Alina Habba revealed that her client is absolutely terrified that the Supreme Court is going to rule against him on the issue of presidential immunity. Habba's comments echo what New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman has been saying all week, and it shows that Trump is scared. But Habba isn't just revealing Trump's secrets - she's actually laying out a strategy to energize Trump's cult-like supporters, as Farron Cousins explains.
Link - https://www.rawstory.com/trump-fears-...
Listen to our videos in an audio format by subscribing to our podcast: https://farronbalanceddaily.buzzsprou...
Don't forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!
Connect with Farron on Twitter: / farronbalanced
*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.
In an interview on Fox News this week, Donald Trump lawyer, and for some reason, woman who's always following him around, everywhere he goes, Alina Haba confirmed reports that Donald Trump is in fact terrified of the United States Supreme Court because there is a part of him, at least according to Haba, that believes that the Supreme Court is going to rule against him on the issue of immunity, possibly as Maggie Haberman with the New York Times reported earlier this week. He's also concerned that they will rule against him on whether or not he can be on the ballots. But here is what Haba had to say, and I want you to listen closely to this because there's some ulterior motives happening here. Listen, you know, Republicans are conservative. They get nervous. They unfortunately are sometimes shy away from being pro-Trump because they feel that even if the law is on our side, they might be swayed much like the Democratic side, right? So sometimes they're trying to look so neutral that they make the wrong call, and I really encourage them to look at the law and look at the Constitution. It's just a simple decision, and it should have nothing to do with whether you're a Republican or a Democrat.
This is probably the most judicious I have ever actually heard Alina Haba being because she wasn't stupid, right? This is not a word salad now, okay? The part where she's like, Republicans we're conservative. We get nervous that that's word salad. Like that makes no sense. Like, well, I, I'm conservative, so I conserve things, which makes me like, what? That that was dumb. You shouldn't have led with it. You shouldn't have included it, honestly. But anyway, her weird choice of words at the beginning, aside, the rest of it's actually kinda smart, because what she is doing here, and I'm assuming there's probably somebody smarter than her who explained to her how to do this, um, they're laying the groundwork for if the Supreme Court rules against Trump, it's not gonna be because the law was against him. Oh, no, no, no, no, no. It's because the Supreme Court was so zealous to not look like a bunch of conservative partisan hacks that, oops, they made the wrong call just to appease the Democrats.
So, you know, they didn't get attacked. The problem with this line of argument, and, and I'll give her credit, because this will work with Trump's base. If the Supreme Court rules against Donald Trump in either the immunity or the ballot access, it's gonna be in the minds of Trump supporters because they were overcautious and didn't wanna appear partisan. Not because the law was against him, but because they didn't wanna be attacked by liberals. Even though conservatives are the ones lobbying death threats at judges across the country right now. But what Haba did here is lay that groundwork and try to already downplay
Whatever ruling comes outta that Supreme Court. So, as I said, there's a fatal flaw in this because in order for this conspiracy to be true, you would have to have a court that has a history of giving a what the public thinks of them. And we can see by the fact that they have routinely, you know, not shown up for these congressional hearings, that the Democrats and the Senate have been trying to hold. We can already tell that, uh, the Supreme Court doesn't care what anybody thinks of them at any point. If they did, they would've expelled Clarence Thomas. If they did, they wouldn't have allowed Amy Coney Barrett to be confirmed in an election year, because Mitch McConnell says, we can't do that. They wouldn't have been okay with Neil Gorsuch being appointed because, you know, Mitch McConnell held up that seat that should have been filled by President Obama, but instead was filled by President Trump.
