Up next in 10
Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsMSFwBF-4SWD5msARwYkdw/join
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Hey ladies and gentlemen, this is Carmine Savio for Explain America and Letitia James is facing
0:05
massive issues in her case against Trump. This thing could go to the Supreme Court
0:11
It could end with her being disbarred. Before we get started, please make sure you like
0:15
comment, share and subscribe. Those little things really help us out and they help our
0:20
channel continue to grow. A lot of legal experts have said there is a possible 8th Amendment
0:26
violation here in the fine against Trump. Now if you don't know the full text of the
0:32
8th Amendment, basically it says you cannot have excessive bail, you cannot have excessive fines
0:39
you cannot have cruel and unusual punishment. Well if almost a half a billion dollars is not
0:44
an excessive fine, you'd be hard pressed to find what would be an excessive fine. In fact
0:52
some people are predicting, including the person I'm going to show you
0:56
that if this goes to the Supreme Court it's going to be a 9-0 debacle for Letitia James
1:02
That even the Democrats would be like, wait a second, this is too far. That person is Vivek
1:08
Ramaswamy. Now Vivek Ramaswamy says that the Supreme Court not only could rule 9-0 in this
1:14
case, but this whole case could end with James being disbarred. And I think she should be
1:20
She's absolutely got a target on Trump. She campaigned on getting the man. Brings up this
1:26
archaic law to go after his business and then pushes for this massive ridiculous fine in a
1:33
victimless crime. Absolute ridiculousness. Vivek explains it in great detail and I want you to
1:40
listen to him and then please like, comment, share and subscribe. I'm Carmine Sabia for
1:45
Explain America. We love you guys. God bless you. Take care everybody
1:50
The Letitia James crusade against Donald Trump is disgusting and is a threat to every American
1:56
When you have prosecutors who are elected to office on a promise of going after one particular
2:02
individual as she campaigned on, then go on to keep a campaign promise using the legal system
2:06
to do it, it's unjust. And this particular case reveals how ugly that is. In this case
2:12
you're talking about a crime for which there was literally no identifiable victim. The people who
2:16
did business with Donald Trump weren't individual consumers. They were sophisticated financial
2:20
institutions who made money from their dealings. And yet Letitia James is using a consumer
2:26
protection statute to literally make up numbers and say, hey, you have hundreds of millions of
2:31
dollars in penalties that you owe. You have bond post by a particular date of an unreasonable
2:36
magnitude that even no billionaire is going to regularly able to meet and to say, if you don't
2:40
do it, I'm going to start seizing your property. It's disgusting. And it is a threat to not only
2:44
private property, but threat to the justice system and to the rights of every American
2:49
But the good news is there is an argument to push back against this in short order. And that's the
2:55
eighth amendment. The eighth amendment prevents the imposition of excessive bail or excessive
3:01
fines. And if there's ever an example that meets that to a T, it's the bond that's been demanded
3:06
of Donald Trump in this disgusting New York Letitia James led prosecution. This is an
3:12
opportunity for the Supreme Court to step in and say, no, we're not going to stand for this kind
3:16
of lawfare, whether it's against Donald Trump or a Democrat, it's wrong. We don't want to empower
3:20
prosecutors to be able to use bond and bail or bonds as a way of effectively achieving a goal
3:28
that they couldn't achieve through the front door, which is bankrupting an opponent, even stopping
3:33
them from being able to appeal those decisions. That's un-American. It needs to end now, not just
3:38
for the protection of Donald Trump, but for the protection of every American. And in this disaster
3:44
I at least see a silver lining of some hope that that's exactly what we'll get from the Supreme
3:48
Court. It's not just the current justices, not even the conservative ones that would necessarily
3:52
agree with this principle. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a staunch defender of this part of the eighth
3:56
amendment as well. She's no longer with us, but the other justices are. And I hope this can be
4:01
another nine to zero rebuke of the kind of lawfare that we're seeing against Donald Trump and
4:07
indirectly against every American in this country today. And I think it could be the most important
4:13
eighth amendment case of the 21st century. I hope they bring it and I hope they succeed
Government
Legal