to all the other judges that are not putting their finger on the scale for Donald

Trump what you're seeing is let's throw everything on the wall I mean there is a legal

theory right it's called the spaghetti theory you throw everything on the wall

maybe it's catch up for Donald Trump, and you see what sticks.

And when you try to go against the prosecution or the judges and you allege bias or you allege

some type of partisan action that's being taken by the judicial system that then rigs the

outcome right so when Donald Trump is convicted he could just point to that and

say well judge marshan was biased or d a albin brag had it in for me because brag is racist how that works I have no idea and so when you do that

You can try to end run the legal outcome of a judicial system and that gives you the cover that you need for your less educated lower valued

voters that are going to buy into that saying that there's no way that this outcome could

have occurred other than something being wrong with the prosecutors or the judges in the case.

I have one follow-up, it's just that you have said that this plan is about instituting

institutionalizing Trumpism.

Because I also know you all, not just the president of the Heritage Foundation, you're also president of the Heritage Action which is the Political Action Committee.

And so is it tied to Trump or not?

I said the context for that comment to the New York Times was that the work of

the Heritage Foundation was to institutionalize Trumpism. Trumpism as a new

version of conservatism, a conservatism that recognizes that by every

objective measure the United States is weaker in 2024 than it was in 1984.

We also happen to think that's reversible by the way we're ultimately optimists and by institutionalizing Trumpism

what we're saying is that even though we are known as Ronald Reagan's think tank

I'm the son of the Reagan Revolution I'm very proud of that that's 40 years ago

...