All right, second hour of playing in buck kicks off now. Andy McCarthy is with us of national review and Fox news.

20 plus years federal prosecutor Southern District of New York.

Andy, Andy, I feel like I haven't talked to you in about two days. So what, what do you, what do you see here, man?

I mean, so this one comes down just first, you know, the indictment was posted before it was done.

What do you make of that? Is there any issue there that creates for this process?

And then just the 98 pages and what sticks out to you? What are your biggest takeaways right now?

Yeah, I don't think much of the, um, the misfiling or the mispublication by the clerk's office.

I think we probably did. Yeah, we should probably deduce that that's part of why they stayed so late.

They didn't want that to be a continuing story. They wanted to just sort of get on with it,

but I don't think it'll amount to anything. As far as the case is concerned, I just think that, you know, I had an open mind about this because, um, in our system, it's really up to the, um, to the states, to police elections and, uh, to carry out elections.

So I thought that she would have a better array of statutes than Jack Smith did in trying to like sort of force of federal.

Um, election interference case on using statutes that really aren't designed to police elections.

Um, and there is, you know, I think there is some of that in her indictment, but I think by and large, she makes a big mistake going the Rico route.

I don't really, I know she says that she's had experience in that regard. I don't, I don't grasp here.

We're getting a reading list that she has a great grasp on, on what Rico is and why you use it, but it just seems to me that, um, the big hole in her case that I'm talking specifically about count one, the 71 page 160 something acts over at the conspiracy, which is the framework.

She wants people to understand the, uh, her case and, um, I think the problem that she has is any good prosecutor would want just a plain old conspiracy like straight line conspiracy is just two or more people agree to do something that is a crime under federal under the penal law of the jurisdiction.

Um, and the problem is the objective here of this, this kind of rambling group that she's put together as if it were one entity.

Uh, the objective was to retain Trump in office, which in and of itself is not a crime, and that's not a problem she can make go away by trying to turn the thing into a Rico, as opposed to, you know, some other kind of a conspiracy.

So how much jeopardy do you think Trump is in and, you know, what you've given us, I think, is right, your assessment of the legal realities of this as it pertains to what should be the case, but she's brought this, there's a lot of people, I think 18 other people, including 18 other people other than Trump, um, do you think Trump should be his

his team be concerned? I mean, it feels like he can't get pardoned on this one. At least he can't pardon himself. It's not federal, you know, is your, is it you wrote the piece right in the New York Post that this one, this one is concerning in terms of the, the threat to the legal threat to Trump or no.

Yeah, I did. And what I said, the headline on that column didn't quite match up with what I argued what I said was it's not so much the most perilous threat to Trump, as it is the most enduring threat threat to Trump. I don't mean to be legalistic in that distinction.

It's not so much the strength of the case. It's the thing you just refer to. If he gets convicted here of anything, and he's, you know, the 41 counts, the 41 counts here, I don't know how many he's charging off the top of my heads, probably like six or seven or more.

...