Alison.
Headlines are
swirling that the former president's
trouble with the law has many troubles.
Have his political action
committee, the Save America
pack on a massive massive spending spree.
$40 million so far this year.
That's how much the PAC
has reportedly spent on legal fees.
So much
that the new York Times first reported
the PAC
gave 60 million to a superPAC
supporting Trump
and now wants that money back.
By comparison,
the Federal Election
Commission shows
Save America spent much less than half
that amount on lawyers for all of 2022.
All of those millions
just for Donald Trump's defense.
No it's not all just for him.
With so many cases
coming down on Trump, sources
tell CNN
his team is creating a legal defense fund
to help defend
some of the people
who have worked with him
and have also come under legal scrutiny,
for example.
Those two men
you mentioned a minute ago,
the Department of Justice,
has accused them, along with Trump,
of trying to delete
security camera footage
in the classified documents case.
Ed Walter,
not an Mar-A-Lago property manager.
Carlos Silveira,
of course, Trump denies
those accusations Alisyn.
Tom, where's the money coming from?
Most of it is coming from small donors.
His campaign has been relentless
and very effective
into tapping into them.
And Team Trump says it's fine
to spend their money
fighting what Trump calls
political persecution.
Look at the statement
in order to combat these heinous actions
by Joe Biden's cronies
and to protect these innocent people
from financial ruin
and prevent their lives
from being completely destroyed.
The leadership PAC contributed
to their legal fees
to ensure
they have representation
against unlawful harassment.
Some legal and political analysts,
however, are raising ethical eyebrows
over Trump's team
paying the bills of some
who might be wanted as witnesses
against the former president.
Alison
Tom, thank you very much
for all of that explanation.
So we wondered how Republican voters
feel about Trump's political PACs
spending millions for his legal problems
rather than on his campaign.
So we gather a small group together
tonight to ask them.
None of these voters
say Trump is their first choice
in the primary.
But wait until you hear what they say
about the general election.
Here's our pulse of the people
So with this news that Donald Trump's
super PAC has spent $40 million,
at least on his legal bills,
show of hands.
How many of you are bothered by that?
Ryan, tell me your thoughts.
All right.
So 40 million is a huge sum of money.
And his bucket for the campaign
has got a giant hole in it.
And that's just going to be a problem
from a strategic standpoint.
I think it's going to hurt him.
Jeff, your thoughts?
So if you go to donate to President Trump
and his campaign,
10% of that money
is going to that super PAC.
It's the small donors
that are donating to the campaign
thinking it's
going to fund political activity.
That is where I have the problem
with Naresh.
Governor Chris Christie,
one of Trump's competitors, calls
it disgraceful
because basically his point is, is that,
you know,
Donald Trump is a billionaire
and why can't he pay for his own
legal fees?
So I don't have a problem with Trump
using campaign donation
for his legal defense fund
because his legal issues
have everything to do
with his reelection bid.
Do any of you think that
this will hurt him,
that his legal
entanglements will hurt him in
the general election?
It's going to hurt
him because it's going to be a sideshow.
It's going to be a constant distraction.
It's a distraction.
That's that's purposeful.
His legal problems
started when he went down the escalator
and it will continue
until he gives up political office
and any ambitions of that.
Is any of this his fault
or his responsibility?
Has Donald Trump
been reckless
with the law and with the boundaries?
Well, I think we still have to wait
for more information to come out there.
So obviously,
everyone's innocent until proven guilty
in a court of law.
Guys, I'm just curious. Show of hands.
How many of you would have been upset
if Barack Obama had taken boxes
of classified documents home with him
and when the National Archives realized
it moved them around
so he didn't have to give them back?
And Joe
Biden took documents
after he left office,
many of them back home,
or presumably the senator,
and gave them back
when the National Archives
asked for them.
Gave them back. Do you not?
Is there no distinction
in your mind between giving them back
and what the prosecutors say
was obstruction of giving them back
and for a year
and a half refusing to give them back?
Is there no distinction
between those two with the FBI?
They asked
Donald Trump
to add a different lock
on his safe or whatever,
but it wasn't one location.
They said, on the Hillary
Clinton stuff
that there was evidence
that it was likely hacked by both
the Russians and the Chinese.
So it was a lie.
That's not true.
The FBI decided
their server was not hacked.
That's not true.
It was our personal server.
It wasn't even a government server.
What do you think is more secure?
The Clinton server
that they built in their home
or the cardboard box
in the public bathroom
that was next to the toilet
in Mar-A-Lago,
That's a point.
I don't have an answer.
Here's my last question for you guys.
If he is in the middle of a trial
at the time that the election,
the general election comes up in 20, 24,
or if, let's just say somehow he's
already been convicted
Would you still vote for him?
Yes.
Show of hands
Okay.
So all of you would still vote for him
even if he were convicted of a crime?
It depends on who his VP is.
So on the half hand,
I just happen to believe
that America
cannot afford
another four years of President Biden.
Vice President Harris,
you have to
pick one of those two options.
And I cannot see myself
ever voting for Joe Biden.
The cause is greater than the man.
Ultimately, the cause is furthering
a conservative governance
in the United States.
There is probably no one else who can
more keenly feel the results
of what the Deep State has done to our
our institution.
And our once proud institutions
like the FBI, the DOJ.
I'm not planning to
vote for Donald Trump,
and I think it's time to move on
from him,
put all these legal issues aside,
go for somebody younger,
some fresh new blood.
Trump had his chance to drain the swamp.
I think it's time to go
for another candidate
who can actually drain the
swamp and unite the country.
Okay, I'm back with Anna,
Jay, Joe and John.
And I'm always fascinated
when I talked to folks
outside of Manhattan and hear what?
Well, actually,
Jack is in New York
to hear what the rest of the country
is thinking.
Your thoughts when you hear this
I know some of these people,
you know, who think the same way.
Some of them are in my family.
Look,
Trump has been very effective
in portraying his Christ like complex
and talking about how he's taking this
for them.
He is suffering for them.
It is his sacrifice for them.
And there are people
who genuinely believe,
despite the fact that there is video,
audio and hard
evidence documents,
they don't believe their eyes.
They don't believe what they see.
It is cultlike behavior.
But we saw this from Republicans already
Let us not forget
that a bunch of conservative
Christian Republicans voted for Trump
after having heard him say in audio
that he has sexually assaulted a woman
and they didn't care
because they care
about the Supreme Court.
And he delivered. And they remember that.
What I heard from from these guys
wasn't that they don't believe
what's happening to Trump.
It's that they think that Democrats
have done the same thing.
So I had a slightly different take
on those three voters.
And again, I find myself I'm a pessimist.
I think the glass is half empty
and the water is evaporating.
So let me just put that out there.
By the way,
the water is evaporating, right?
It's 100 degrees in Florida.
That's right.
Having said that,
so, you know,
when these are pretty reflective counts
and I think some of the stuff
that Trump has said he would do
when made president
will really give
some of these truly conservative
voters pause.
So ignoring congressional mandates
you know,
wiping out administrative agencies,
not just the DOJ,
but a number of administrative
agencies, centralizing power
in the White House.
These are authoritarian
moves
Democrats aren't talking about just yet
because we're not yet
in the general election.
But I actually took a slight note of hope
from what those voters said
because they weren't in the kind of.
I totally agree.
You know, the.
37% this is like a cult like behavior.
And we have to
everybody should read see in essence
the cult of Donald Trump and understand
what's really going on that
this is about that.
However, it felt to me like these weren't
the true believers
and these are people who support
the issues
are people in the primary by the way
and look if if the situation reversed
I mean I'm not Joe
Biden might not be my candidate of choice
but I'm certainly going to vote for him
because I believe
in basically the values
that he stands for.
And that's what I heard
from these voters.
And I think when it becomes
more clear forgetting,
not forgetting,
but setting aside
the legal issues
when we see what the plan for Donald
Trump is for America,
reasonable conservatives
are going to be horrified.
Joe, quickly,
look, I think to your point,
there are a lot of Republicans
who recognize
that there is no conservative case
for Joe Biden,
that there are a lot of Republicans
who do believe that if you're looking at
what Donald Trump is proposing
from a
30,000 foot
policy standpoint versus
what the Biden
administration has put forth,
there is no comparison
that we should be disabused
of any notion that Joe Biden
is going to govern from the center
So I think that is
what a lot of Republicans
are dealing with.
Yeah, it's very difficult to say
put the legal issues aside
because in some ways
there are unprecedented.
It's very difficult
to put the money aside
because in some ways it is unprecedented.
But there are people who simply recognize
that to that point,
that panel's point,
that the legal is inextricably linked
with the politics
irrespective of whether you think
some of it might have been brought on
by the president.
Yes.
And, John, very quickly, is there any
Federal Election
Commission problem
with Donald Trump's
PAC paying for all of his legal in there?
Is not it's not illegal,
but there's an ethical challenge.
If an ethical lawyer
says, hey,
the third party is paying,
but my obligation is to you, Mr.
and his client,
not to the person paying, it's fine.
But if you're buying silence, it's
not only unethical,
it could be obstruction.