Welcome back to the Dershow in my book with some of you think I mentioned too much, but

I'm very proud of it in my book, Ed Trump.

I go over all four of the charges that are being investigated against Trump a couple of

days ago on the show.

I went over to the New York charge and found that I don't even think of what came down as

an indictment.

I was 34, or whatever, checks and invoices in search of a legal theory.

I just don't understand it particularly.

But I went over to the New York one first, then yesterday I went over from county Georgia

and found also that if that's all they have, I mean they have more, who knows, I'm just

talking about what's in the public record.

I've listened to the entire recording of the conversation between the Secretary of State

in Georgia and the then president of the United States and I just don't see anything

that can form the basis of a criminal prosecution.

Yes, he did say I need to find 11,000 votes.

Even if you believe he meant by that, I need to manufacture a concoct that's not enough

for a criminal prosecution.

You can't prosecute people in the basis of ambiguous statements in which you infer from

what they said, what they must have believed.

And what was intended to be conveyed to the person with whom he was speaking too much

of a stretch and the concept of lenity and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Make it clear that there cannot legitimately be a prosecution based on what we know about

...