Kimberly Adams interviews Breitbart’s editor-in-chief on the six Trump legal cases—two civil, four criminal—claiming they expose "lawfare," a weaponized justice system tied to the "Joe Biden justice system." Unknown 2906 argues selective enforcement violates equal protection and due process, targeting Trump politically with fines risking bankruptcy. They describe a "lawfare superstructure" reshaping legal norms since his 2016 presidency, framing it as an attack on free speech and electoral fairness. The episode suggests these cases aren’t about justice but silencing dissent through unprecedented legal tactics. [Automatically generated summary]
So I was watching the law fear against President Trump play out.
And I'm editor-in-chief of Breitbart News.
I have a very powerful newsroom.
We have millions of readers on radio.
I get to do podcasts.
I get to speak to all sorts of interesting people.
I would like to think I'm not a stupid person.
And even I was having a hard time of keeping track of all the major cases against President Trump.
There were six in all.
I think if you polled your average person who even reads the news, I don't think they would have known there were six major cases against President Trump.
A couple of them were civil cases.
The rest were criminal cases.
And I found that even some of these basic details were getting muddled in my mind.
And I thought, well, people need help to understand what's actually going on and what it all means and what we can extrapolate out from some of the clear change in our judicial system and the way we've approached it, where it's not necessarily just about law and order, that laws are being selectively applied based off of people's political purposes, where that came from, and is there any way of stopping it, et cetera.
But also helping people understand all the efforts that were being made by the Joe Biden justice system against President Trump and whether or not they were unprecedented, trying to answer some of those basic questions.
No one had done that in book form.
And so finally, when I saw that Trump, I think it was the moment where he got the 37 odd convictions, I thought this is crazy.
Someone's got to write this, and I'll be the one to do it.
Both sides of the political aisle talk a lot about law fair, in this term in particular.
And you have a definition for it in your book.
You define it as the use of the legal system against political and cultural adversaries and the weaponization of the legal system for partisan political purposes.
Can you talk about why we're hearing this term so much and why that's your particular definition of what it means?
unidentified
Yeah, so one thing that's really important to state at the outset is that I love C-SPAN.
It's one of the networks I watch the most often because I do feel like you get, if you watch an hour C-SPAN, you tend to get all perspectives, which is pretty rare across the TV dial and radio dials.
And so I will say that law fear is something that both sides use.
This is not something that is only used by Democrats.
Republicans use as well, but it's using the legal system against political cultural adversaries, weaponizing the legal system for partisan political purposes.
We all do this, but it was very clear to me that this was egregiously ramped up in the interim between President Trump's two terms.
And trying to understand how that accelerated was a really big point.
And to try to make a convincing case to people that this is inappropriate.
And in fact, I believe it's actually unconstitutional.
It's pretty clear that equal protection under the law is protected under our Constitution.
Due process rights are protected.
And President Trump was not afforded any of that.
And it amounted in total to legal harassment, which was done in order to try to, I believe, subvert the democracy and make us that he couldn't run for president, or was hamstrung when he ran to the point where he was being forced to campaign from a courthouse, was on the brink of, I don't know, perhaps going bankrupt if all the fines were assessed and the way they were.
And this was something that we'd never seen that before ever.
And there's nothing even close comparatively.
And so going through that history, and I do quite a bit of history the first couple chapters of the book to give people a sense of how accelerated things got over the last few years.
You also talk about something called lawfare superstructure, which you describe as the constellation of principles, people, and entities that the left has used to break our legal system as we once knew it.
Kind of getting to that point that you were just making about your assessment that this is a pretty unprecedented change in the way that the legal system is being used.