USED TO PAG OFFYING OFF CAMPAIGN
DEBT, SOMETHING ELSE WE HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT.
>> MONICA AT THE WHITE HOUSE,
THANK YOU.
LET’S BRING IN PETER BAKER,
WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT FOR
THE "NEW YORK TIMES," AND CHUCK
ROSENBERG, FORMER ATTORNEY AND
OFFICIAL.
I WANT TO BUILD OFF OF MONICA
ALBA’S REPORTING THERE ABOUT THE
TRUMP TEAM’S STRATEGY.
WHAT ARE YOUR SOURCES IN THE
WHITE HOUSE TELLING YOU, PETER,
ABOUT HOW THE PRESIDENT PLANS TO
SPEND THESE DAYS AHEAD?
>> YEAH T IT’S, IT’S A GREAT QUE
HE HAS 70 DAYS TO GO, AND THERE
DOESN’T SEEM TO BE A GENUINE
PATH TO WINNING THIS THING.
IT IS GETTING FROM THIS POINT OF
DEFIANCE TO A POINT OF
ACCEPTANCE.
YOU SAW MICK MULVANEY, FORMER
ACTING CHIEF OF STAFF, WROTE IN
THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" THIS
MORNING THAT ONCE THE OUTCOME IS
CLEAR, HE THINKS PRESIDENT TRUMP
WILL ACTUALLY CONCEDE THE
ELECTION GRACEFULLY.
WE HAVEN’T SEEN ANY EVIDENCE OF
THAT SO FAR.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE’S A
DESIRE ON THE PART OF THE
PRESIDENT TO PLAY OUT THIS
STRING A LITTLE BIT MORE WITH
THESE CHALLENGES.
THERE’S NOTHING IN THE COURTS
RIGHT NOW THAT WOULD OVERTURN
THIS ELECTION, IT LOOKS LIKE.
I MEAN, THERE’S NOTHING THAT
SEEMS TO BE ON THE PATH TOWARD
MAKING ANY MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE
IN THE KBROUT COMEOUTCOME.
WHAT IT REALLY IS, IT’S TRYING
TO GET A PRESIDENT WHO HATES THE
IDEA OF BEING SEEN AS A LOSER,
TO COME TO THE FACT THAT THIS
CONTEST IS REALLY OVER.
>> CHUCK, TO PETER’S POINT
THERE, I MEAN, WHEN IT COMES TO
THESE LEGAL CHALLENGES BY THE
TRUMP CAMPAIGN, WHAT’S THE
BOTTOM LINE ON THESE LEGAL
PLAYS?
>> RIGHT, PETER IS EXACTLY
RIGHT, CRAIG.
I MEAN, THERE’S A HUGE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FILING A
LAWSUIT AND FILING A MERITORIOUS
LAWSUIT.
ANYONE IS CAPABLE OF FILING A
LAWSUIT.
A MERITORIOUS LAWSUIT, ONE IN
WHICH YOU COULD SUCCEED, YOU
NEED EVIDENCE.
SO FAR, THERE DOESN’T SEEM TO BE
A LOT OF THAT.
I AGREE WITH PETER.
I THINK THIS IS A POLITICAL
STRATEGY, NOT A LEGAL STRATEGY.
IF IT IS A LEGAL STRATEGY, IT’S
DOOMED TO FAILURE.
>> CHUCK, I WANT TO PLAY AN
INTERESTING POINT THAT FORMER
REPUBLICAN HOMELAND SECURITY
MICHAEL CHERTOFF MADE ABOUT THE
ELECTION RESULTS AND GET YOUR
TAKE ON THE OTHER SIDE.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT THE FACT THAT
THERE WAS APPARENTLY A FAIR
AMOUNT OF TICKET SPLITTING,
WHERE PEOPLE VOTED FOR JOE BIDEN
FOR PRESIDENT, BUT THEN MAY HAVE
VOTED FOR REPUBLICAN FOR THE
HOUSE OR FOR THE SENATE, THAT
REINFORCES THE IDEA THAT THERE
WAS NO FRAUD.
>> CHUCK, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT
ARGUMENT?
IS IT A POLITICAL POINT THAT
COULD BE CONSIDERED IN COURT?
>> FIRST OF ALL, MIKE IS A VERY
SMART GUY, AND I HAD THE
PRIVILEGE OF WORKING WITH HIM IN
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
HOWEVER, WHAT HE IS SAYING IS
THAT IF THEY NEEDED TO, THE
BIDEN FOLKS COULD INDUCE
EVIDENCE THERE IS NO FRAUD,
STATISTICALLY IN THE WAY HE’S
DESCRIBING.
THEY DON’T HAVE TO, CRAIG, AND
HERE’S WHY.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ALWAYS ON
THE PERSON BRINGING THE LAWSUIT,
THE PLAINTIFF, THE COMPLAINANT.
IN THIS CASE, IT’D BE THE RNC ON
BEHALF OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO THE BIDEN FOLKS DON’T HAVE TO
PROVE ANYTHING IN COURT.
RIGHT NOW, THE BURDEN OF PROOF
IS WHOLLY ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN
TO PROVE THERE WAS SOME FRAUD OR
PROCEDURES THAT WEREN’T
FOLLOWED, OR SOME REGULATION
THAT WASN’T ABIDED.
IF THEY CAN’T DO THAT, AND I
DON’T THINK THEY CAN FROM WHAT
I’VE SEEN SO FAR, YOU DON’T HAVE
TO WORRY ABOUT THE SECOND HALF
OF THE EQUATION.
AGAIN, THE BIDEN FOLKS DON’T
HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING.
BURDEN IS ON THE PLAINTIFF, AND
THE PLAINTIFF DOESN’T HAVE
EVIDENCE.
>> PETER BAKER, PRESIDENT TRUMP
GLIDING DOWN THAT GOLDEN
ESCALATOR IN 2015, IT SORT OF
SET THE TONE FOR HIS FIRST
CAMPAIGN.
HIS ADMINISTRATION, AS WELL.
A MOMENT FROM SATURDAY STANDS
OUT FOR HIS RE-ELECTION
CAMPAIGN.
HERE’S THE HEADLINE FROM THE
"PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER."
QUOTE, NO, NOT THAT FOUR
SEASONS.
HOW TRUMP TEAM’S NEWS CONFERENCE
ENDED UP AT A NORTHEAST PHILLY
LANDSCAPING FIRM.
HOW DOES THAT NEWS CONFERENCE,
WITH THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL
LAWYER, RUDY GIULIANI, STANDING
IN FRONT OF FOUR SEASONS TOTAL
LANDSCAPING, NEAR A SECRETARY OF
STATE SHOP AND A CREMATORIUM,
HOW DOES THAT ENCAPSULATE THIS
CAMPAIGN, PERHAPS EVEN THIS ERA
OF OUR POLITICS, PETER?
>> WELL, CERTAINLY A BAD
METAPHOR POLITICALLY.
IT IS HARD TO IMAGINE A
POLITICAL STAFF ON ITS GAME NOT
SEEING THAT THAT WOULD BE A BAD
IDEA, TO HAVE IT AT A PLACE LIKE
THAT.
ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE
PRESIDENT HIMSELF SEEMED TO BE
CONFUSED ABOUT WHERE IT’D BE.
HE INITIALLY TWEETED IT’D BE AT
THE FOUR SEASONS OF
PHILADELPHIA, THEN SOMEBODY
OBVIOUSLY TOLD HIM OR GOT HOLD
OF HIS TWITTER ACCOUNT AND SAID,
NO, IT IS THE FOUR SEASONS TOTAL
LANDSCAPING FIRM.
SOMETHING OF A DIFFERENT IMAGE.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, ANY ADVANCED
STAFF WORTH HIS WEIGHT WOULD
HAVE RECOGNIZED HAVING THE EVENT
AT THIS PLACE, WITH THIS, NEXT
TO AN ADULT BOOKSTORE, WAS
SENDING THE MESSAGE OF A
CAMPAIGN THAT WAS OVER, SORT OF
ENDING IN A PARKING LOT RATHER
THAN IN THE GRANDEUR OF THE
TRUMP TOWER, AS YOU POINTED OUT,
WHEN THEY ANNOUNCED FIVE YEARS
AGO.
YOU’LL SEE THAT, I THINK,
WRITTEN UP IN HISTORY BOOKS
SOMEDAY, AS KIND OF LIKE A,
HERE’S HOW IT ALL CAME TO AN