Trump’s Trial Date Has Huge CONFLICT OF INTEREST





Liz enthusiastically shares her upcoming interview with Jenna Ellis, a co-defendant in the Fulton County Georgia indictment involving President Donald Trump and others. She expresses strong support for Ellis, highlighting her resilience in the face of government weaponization. She discusses the indictment, emphasizing that Ellis, who served as Trump’s lawyer, faces similar charges due to her legal opinion conflicting with Fulton County prosecutor Fani Willis.

Switching gears, Liz criticizes the trial date set for President Trump’s trial in the Jack Smith case, scheduled right before a significant cluster of primaries on Super Tuesday. She accuses this timing of being intentional election interference, suggesting that the prosecution aims to distract Trump’s campaign efforts.

Liz asserts that conservatives need a more strategic approach in their political battles. She criticizes Republican handling of progressive prosecutor appointments and advocates for placing conservative district attorneys to counterbalance. She stresses that the focus should be on reclaiming civil institutions like education, media, and religious bodies to prevent ideological poisoning.

Further, Liz calls for the abolishment of the administrative state, emphasizing that it’s necessary to eliminate deep state elements to prevent government abuse. She asserts that recognizing the reality of the political enemy is crucial for effective counteractions.

Shifting gears, Liz critiques the media’s handling of a racially motivated shooting in Florida. She points out the disparity in coverage between a white man killing black victims and a black man killing white victims, highlighting the media’s bias. She emphasizes that solving such issues requires addressing mental health, psychotropic drugs, and potential abusive backgrounds of the shooters.

Concluding the episode, Liz calls for a focus on mental health, studying the effects of psychotropic drugs, understanding the role of family abuse, allowing armed citizens in gun-free zones, and examining the overall factors that contribute to mass shootings. She stresses the importance of looking beyond the media’s political narratives and addressing the root causes of such incidents.

Show Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain typos, mistakes, and/or incomplete information.

Guys, I got to tell you, I just finished an interview with Jenna Ellis. She’s one of the co-defendants in the Fulton County Georgia indictment. It’s President Trump and like a dozen others. Jenna Ellis was his lawyer, was Trump’s lawyer. She has been indicted on essentially the same charges, Rico charges and giving her legal opinion, which Fulton County Georgia prosecutor, Fannie Willis doesn’t agree with. I had Jenna Ellis on the show. We prerecorded this episode. It’s going to come out Friday. Oh my goodness. You guys are going to love this. Jenna’s fabulous. I support Jenna a hundred percent in the sense that she is the victim right now, even though she does not have a victim mentality, which is incredible. She’s the victim of the weaponization of government against her based on the fact that the deep staters who run our government hate conservatives and hate anybody associated with Donald Trump. 

So we talked about what it was like when she went into the Fulton County Jail. The moment she walked in the door, she was arrested, she had her fingerprints taken, her mugshot taken. She was taken into the general population. What was that like? She told me everything. She told me what it was like interacting with the other inmates, what inmates said to her as she was being held in a holding cell before she was released on bond. I asked her if she was mad that President Trump isn’t paying her legal fees, even though she’s being targeted because of her association and her defense of him. Her response was very interesting to that question, and I asked her, I think one of the things that Fannie Willis is trying to do, aside from pit these co-defendants against each other and against Trump, I think she’s trying to coerce them or bully them into recanting their claims that the 2020 election was stolen or that something fishy happened. 

And so I asked Jenna, does she believe that the 2020 election was stolen this episode? I think you’re going to like it. I had a great time. It was one of those episodes where we started filming and we had a goal for how long we wanted this interview to be. And I didn’t even look at the clock once. I wasn’t looking at it saying, okay, we got to fill the next 10 minutes with this kind of question. It just flew by. It was so fascinating, such a good conversation. It’s airing on Friday. It’ll drop at six 7:00 AM on all the podcast platforms on YouTube and rumble and audio platforms like Spotify and Apple Podcasts. So make sure that you are subscribed so you don’t miss that episode because it really is a must watch episode with Jenna Ellis coming out on Friday. Okay, for today, a trial date has been set for not the Fulton County Georgia trial, but the other trial of President Trump, the one, the Jack Smith trial, the Special counsel trial, the charges that are essentially that Trump fomented an insurrection by speaking outside of the White House on January 6th before the certification of the electoral college, the speech in which he said Go and march peacefully and powerfully at the Capitol. 

You remember that speech where he told people to be peaceful? Yes. Well, he’s been indicted for that speech for fomenting an insurrection. His trial date has been set. Judge Tanya Chut set the trial date for March 4th, 2024. That is Judge Chuin on the screen March 4th, 2024. Now, you might be thinking, well, that date sounds a little familiar. That date seems like it’s a significant date, and so it is. This is the day before Super Tuesday, the day before. Look at all these different primaries that happened on March 5th, the day after this. We have the Alabama Primary, the Alaska Primary, the caucus in American Samoa. We have the Arkansas primary, the California primary, the Colorado primary, the main primary. The Massachusetts primary, Minnesota primary North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia all have primaries on March 5th, one day after President Trump’s trial begins on March 4th, 2024. Do you think that this is a coincidence? 

I do not think this is a coincidence. I think that this is election interference. How is this not election interference? Of course, this is election interference. President Trump’s team had requested a trial date of April of 2026 significantly after the election, so that none of this would interfere with his campaign or election. And the federal prosecutors had asked for a date immediately, essentially, and this is what Judge Chut and said, these proposals are obviously very far apart. Neither of them is acceptable. And she said that she will not accommodate Trump’s third bid for presidency in setting this date. She said, no more or less deference than any defendant will be treated essentially that Trump is going to be treated like a common criminal. How is this not election interference? If Trump and his folks are going to have to be focused for the next six months on their defense on discovery, there are 12 million pages of documents that they have to catalog and read and make sure that they know the contents of to form their case, to prove his innocence. 

How is this not going to interfere with the election if Super Tuesday is the very next day? And here’s another question. How come President Trump, even though there are 12 million documents that need to be cataloged and viewed and are part of the discovery, how come President Trump’s trial is set for March of 2024 and yet January 6th, defendants are still sitting in pretrial detention? How is that constitutional? How is that just this is Judge Chuts response to when Trump attorneys said, well, wait a second. This is not a very long time for us to go through 12 million documents. This is what she said. She said, let’s take the temperature down. I understand Mr. Trump is presumed innocent, as is every defendant, but let’s not overlook the fact that Mr. Trump has considerable resources that every defendant does not usually have. So she is punishing Trump because he’s wealthy. 

She is treating him differently than the common criminal that she claims he will be treated no differently than because he’s the former president of the United States. He is facing less advantageous circumstances. This is political targeting of President Trump. Of course, this is election interference and they have one goal in mind, one goal. So one of the hardest lessons for Republicans and conservatives to learn in this political battle that we are engaging in is that we must recognize the reality of the political enemy that we face. And if we don’t, then we’re essentially going to be Mitt Romney. We’re going to be David French. We’re going to be all these squishy Republicans who think that we are engaged in a negotiation with well-intentioned opposition who are just unwise about policy. And if that’s what you believe, then you’re going to be as dumb as Mitt Romney or as unwise as David French. 

But if you understand the reality of the political enemy that you face, then you can calibrate your tactics and your strategy effectively to not only stop the enemy, but to make sure that we have secured our institutions from ever being assaulted by such an enemy. Again, this is what Republicans and conservatives do not understand. They don’t want to believe that we are in an existential battle for our country. They don’t believe. They truly don’t believe that America can fall. We might say it. We might constantly talk about crossing the Rubicon. We might talk about it being a crisis. We might talk about the chaos like never before, but do you actually believe that the United States of America states could fall and become like the Soviet Union or like Cuba, like Venezuela, like China? Do you believe it? If you don’t believe it, then you’re doing a disservice to our country because what the Democrats want in their prosecutions of President Trump is they want to prevent him from being president. 

Now, you may be thinking, yeah, I’ve heard that before. I know that. But do you believe it? Do you believe that they will be effective? Because if you don’t believe that the Democrats will succeed in stopping President Trump from being president, then you don’t understand the reality of the political enemy that we face. Because right now, that political enemy is winning right now, that political enemy has outmaneuvered us right now, that political enemy is in charge. And just because some of us recognize that it’s wrong for President Trump and others to be prosecuted, that’s not enough. We have not done as a conservative movement and a Republican party what’s needed to fight back effectively against this political enemy right now, you can use any kind of sports analogy you want. You want, we’re in the fourth quarter, we are down by 14 with a minute left. How are we going to overtake this enemy? 

Except it’s not sports. It’s our freedom. That’s the situation that we are in right now, and there are solutions, but the Republican party is not doing that. The solutions, first of all, George Soros is an evil mastermind, but he was right in the sense that this is a very effective political tactic. His progressive prosecutor’s project. This was no coincidence. This was no obscure, random, weird, inconsequential move from him. The millions and millions and millions of dollars that George Soros has spent funding, political prosecutors like Fannie Willis have led to this. And what did conservatives do? What did Republicans do? I know I’m harsh on our party. I know I’m critical of us, of myself, of our team. And the reason for that is because we’re losing. And if we don’t recognize why we’re losing, then we’re going to keep losing conservatives. We recognize that George Soros was funding progressive prosecutors and we spoke out about it, which is a good first step. 

But what did we actually do? Did we counter this movement? Did we educate governors in red states on how to actually get rid of these prosecutors when they were negligent in their duty? Did we fund a counter effort to put conservative prosecutors who were going to be equally bulldog ish, but in the legal constitutional way when Democrats break the law? Did we do any of that? And the answer to that question is no, we didn’t. And so now we are outgunned outmanned. We don’t have anything that we can do in this moment to fight back against this unless we start competing where competition is necessary. We have to use local conservative das to prosecute Democrats. And it’s not just a tit for tat. It’s not just, oh, if the Democrats are going to weaponize, government conservatives should do it too. No, no, no, no. The difference is that when Democrats weaponize government, they’re actually weaponizing government against people who did not commit crimes. 

President Trump did not foment an insurrection. Jenna Ellis is not guilty of racketeering because she gave legal advice to President Trump that the left doesn’t like. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton sold access as Secretary of State to foreign entities. Hunter Biden is still doing that, and Joe Biden is profiting from it. James Comey lied to the American people as he allowed the F B I to be weaponized against the political candidate Donald Trump, that he didn’t like. These people deserve to be prosecuted because they violated our laws, and yet we can’t count on Congress to do it. So what do we do? Sit here twiddling our thumbs, waiting for the next hearing, the next viral video? No, no. If we want to win, we have to actually use these tactics that the left is using. Counter them, but use them for good. Use them in the way they’re supposed to be used, not in the way that they’re being abused by the left. 

So conservatives, if we’re smart, if we actually want to win, then we need to start fighting in a meaningful way. We can use conservative das to prosecute Democrats who deserve to be prosecuted because they broken the law. We can also focus on recapturing our institutions. And I’m talking about our governmental institutions. Yes, but I’m also talking about our civil institutions. Our civil institutions being the education system, the media, religious institutions, the family. And if we do this, these institutions are intended to serve as a bulwark against this kind of evil against government overreach because the more that people rely on civil cultural institutions, the less they rely on government. And the less we rely on government, the less likely it is that government will have the power to be weaponized against us because our interaction with government will be very limited. It’s also by securing these institutions, I know it sounds easier said than done, but by securing these institutions, it allows us to prevent these institutions from being poisoned or from these institutions, from being used to poison our children’s minds and our culture’s minds so that when people in government commit evil, it’s not a matter of, oh, Democrats think the evil is fine. 

Republicans think it’s bad. Or when Republicans are in power, Republicans think it’s fine. Democrats think it’s bad. No, there’s a general consensus among people where we recognize what’s good and we recognize bad. We recognize evil, and we recognize immorality. And it doesn’t always have to be partisanship because these institutions serve as a bulwark against evil in general, not just on the individual level, but on the societal and governmental level as well. And then the third thing we can do is abolish the administrative state. Yeah, it sounds nerdy. It sounds wonky. It sounds difficult. We have to because the root of this evil, yeah, you can argue that it’s coming from billionaires pocket books like George Soros, and it’s coming from globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum. And those are both true, but it’s also coming from ideologues buried in the deep state, and we have to get rid of the apparatus of the deep state, which is the administrative state. 

If we ever want to get rid of the people, if are abusing their power in the administrative state against people like Donald Trump and Jenna Ellis and Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell and John Eastman, and all of these people who are just one step between us and the government. The government ultimately wants to get us. They’re the last line of defense before the government targets us, and we know it, which is why we’re having this visceral reaction to this particular or the Georgia indictment of Donald Trump. But Jack Smith and his indictment of Donald Trump, the one, the trial date on March in March of 2024, it’s the same thing. They’re criminalizing his free speech, and if they’re criminalizing his free speech, they’re coming for our free speech. Next. There was a racially motivated shooting that happened in Florida. It’s an awful, awful story, a horrible tragedy. A white man, a 21 year old white man named Ryan Palmer killed three black people. 

He shot them because he hated black people. He was a racist. He left a manifesto with his parents. He sent another manifesto to the media. In fact, as he began his shooting at a Dollar General in Florida, he texted his dad right before he began the shooting, telling his dad to go to his computer when his dad looked on his son’s computer and found this manifesto stating what the shooter was about to do, his dad called the cops. He called 9 1 1, but by the time the cops responded, it was too late. This young man, Ryan had this deranged young man had already murdered three innocent people in cold blood. It’s so horrific, it’s so nauseating. And yes, it makes it worse when there’s a racial element when he killed these people because of the color of their skin. It’s extra grotesque, especially given well the history of racial tension across the world and the history of mankind, but especially given the history of racism in our country. 

Nobody’s denying that. Nobody’s denying that. But there’s a valid question that we should be asking, and I know a lot of you have been asking this on X, formerly known as Twitter, how did we get the contents of the manifesto of the Florida shooter to inform us that he was a white supremacist racist against black people so quickly? When the Nashville shooter, the one who shot up Covenant Christian School, the trans person also left a manifesto. And yet to this day, we are not allowed to see the contents of that manifesto. Why is that? Why the disparity, why one and not the other? And the answer to that, of course, is obvious. It’s the manifesto of the Nashville shooter is rife with queer theory, which is a violent, revolutionary Marxist ideology that is anti-Christian, anti straight people, which is why this so-called transgender shooter shot up a Christian school. Whereas this racially motivated manifesto, this racist manifesto in Florida plays into the narrative the Democrats want to believe. The Democrats want everyone to believe that we live in a violently racist country. When of course, that’s not true. Horrific things, evil things do happen. Racism is evil. You will never eradicate every bit of individual racism because you can’t eradicate every bit of individual evil. That’s not possible. 

But institutional racism does not exist in our country, and every single person across both political parties condemns this shooting. And yet the Democrats want to associate this shooter with Republicans. They’re insinuating that the shooter embraced an ideology that’s a right wing ideology. And what the Democrats are doing is they’re lying and they’re race baiting, and that is also evil. The media coverage is another example of the race spading narrative that the Democrats want to be prevalent in this country. Last month, the black man in Georgia, we could show this on the screen, killed four white people in cold blood. And yet you didn’t hear about this on the news. Why didn’t you hear about this on the news? Well, because it didn’t fit with the Democrat narrative. The media, of course, only propagates the Democrat narrative. A black man killing white people doesn’t fall in line with the idea that white people in America oppress black people and that black people are so oppressed that they never do any bad things. You never hear about this. You only hear about the racially motivated shooting in Florida, which we should hear about. We should hear about both of these shootings. These are horrendous things. So a Democrat council woman in Florida stopped her constituents from booing, governor DeSantis who showed up at the aftermath of the shooting to pledge his aid to pledge state money. In the wake of this shooting, Democrats started booing DeSantis and this Democrat Congressman, shut them down. Take a listen to this. 

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is here. We’re going to ask the governor if he would come now and bring remarks. 

Well, thank you for doing this. I want to just say to the councilwoman, councilwoman, councilwoman, I got you. Don’t worry about it. We’ve already been looking to identify funds to be able to help. One, make sure there’s adequate security for Edward Waters College. We are not going to allow these institutions to be targeted by people. 

Okay, listen, y’all, let tell you, we Finn to put parties aside because it ain’t about parties today. A bullet, don’t know a party. So don’t get me started. Okay? Jacoby is nice, but Ann is not. Now, if the governor wanted to come here and he bringing gifts to my community, y’all know I’m taking the gifts because we’ve been through enough already and I don’t want to go through no more. Now y’all just be quiet just a minute and let the governor say what he going to say, and we going to get this party started. You hear me? Okay, let’s do it. 

So we have already identified funds from the state of Florida. I’ve been in touch with Dr. Fa. We’re going to be announcing some stuff tomorrow morning, which I think will help not only with security, but also an attempt to help these families. The fact of the matter is you had a major league scumbag come from Clay County up here, and what he did is totally unacceptable in the state of Florida. 

We are not going to let people be targeted based on their race. We are going to stand up and we are going to do what we need to do to make sure that evil does not triumph in the state of Florida. And that means we are going to work with Edward Waters so that they have whatever security they need In Florida, we’ve already given a lot of money to Jewish day schools because they’ve been targeted with antisemitism. Well, let me tell you this. You are not going to target HBCUs in the state of Florida and get away with it. We’re going to hold you accountable. We’re not going to let it happen. And we think what everybody’s done, tk the mayor, and just know that the state of Florida stands with the community help is on the way. God bless you all. 

So what’s interesting about these shootings, first of all, the councilwoman was correct that this should be an issue where partisanship is simply not a factor. This shouldn’t be a Republican issue or a Democrat issue. It has become a partisan issue because the Democrats race baits all the time, and B, they use these tragedies. They exploit people’s emotions after these tragedies to push for gun control. So they have become somewhat of a partisan issue every time a shooting happens. But if we actually wanted as a nation to solve these shootings, then we would address the following factors. Instead of making this about race baiting, instead of, and I’m talking about, I’m not talking about the ideology of the shooter. That is important actually to understand the ideology of these mass killers so that we can protect our communities against such a poisonous ideology. But I’m talking about the Democrat politician and Democrat media’s race baiting, acting like this is a prevalent ideology or that this is associated with a particular political belief, which is obviously not. 

But if we actually wanted to solve these shootings, then we would ask the following questions in a bipartisan manner. We would first ask, well the shooter, what kind of mental illness did this shooter suffer from? Because most likely, and this is empirically true based on the history of mass shooters in our country, most mass shooters have some kind of serious mental illness and people in their lives are aware of this. So this mass shooter, for example, was not only involved in a violent incident in 2016 that involved the police. There was a domestic call in Clay County. He wasn’t arrested after this violent incident the following year in 2017, he was subject to the Baker Act. The Baker Act is a 72 hour involuntary detention based on mental health crises. If you are Baker Acted, then you are detained against your will because of some it’s involuntary detainment. 

Yet what happened after this? That was six, seven years ago. What happened after these incidents? To the best of our knowledge, nothing yet. These are clear indications of serious mental health issues. And at this time, I mean if this shooter was 21 in 2023, back in 26 or 2017, he was still a minor. His parents could have forced him to undergo some kind of mental health treatment if he was suffering from such serious mental health issues that they had to involve the police when he became violent and they had to have him involuntarily detained under state law. And yet, we’re not talking about mental illness. We’re just talking about some crap he wrote on the internet. If we actually wanted to solve these issues, we would look at not only what mental illness he had, but what drugs was he on? Was he on SSRIs? 

Now, I know that this is an unpopular thing to say because a lot of people are on SSRIs, but if you look at those drugs, there’s black labels on those drugs, and some of the side effects are suicidal ideation and homicidal ideation. And yet we don’t discuss this. We have not had a significant study about the adverse effects of SSRIs on young people suffering from certain mental illnesses. Even as we’ve seen the number of people taking SSRIs increase and we’ve seen mass shootings increase, we as a society have decided we don’t want to study this. We’ve also, as a society, decided to ignore the role that marijuana plays. I don’t know if this shooter smoked marijuana, but what I will tell you is more likely than not, he did because empirically mass shooters in our nation have smoked marijuana and marijuana, especially in people who are predisposed to mental illness, causes psychosis and violence. 

That is empirically true. You may again say, listen, I smoked pot in high school. I was fine. Smoking one joint isn’t going to cause a psychotic break. Read the evidence, read the data, read Alex Besson’s book on marijuana, and then come back to me and tell me whether you think the legalization of marijuana has played a role in the uptick in mass shootings in our nation. We also don’t know what kind of abuse he has suffered or whether it seemed like his parents were married, so maybe he wasn’t from a broken family, but broken families and abuse oftentimes play a role. One of the interesting parts that is not being covered about this particular shooting is that this shooter was turned away at Edward Waters University or Edward Waters College because students saw him and called security, and armed security turned him away. So he was unable to commit his crime because there were armed security guards that stopped him. 

So we went to a place where there weren’t armed security guards, this Dollar General, and he committed his mass atrocity there. But what should we do as a society? Should we continue to perpetuate gun-free zones? Or should we encourage law abiding citizens to arm themselves so that they can fight back when mad men come and try to terrorize our communities? Yet of course, we don’t do any of that. We don’t learn from history. We don’t recognize that guns are not the problem. Banning guns doesn’t work anyway. That this is not just a problem with poisonous racist ideology. That yes, certainly you want to understand how he fell into that, why he embraced such an evil ideology. But that evil ideology isn’t usually the tipping point for actually committing violence. Usually, it’s one of these other factors, and we as a society have ignored it. If we actually want to solve or stop or mitigate these shootings, then we would focus more on these things and less on the media’s race baiting and preconceived political agendas. Alright, on a little bit of a lighter note to end the show today we have one more random thing from the internet. This is a bear filming a commercial on ice and falling repeatedly while trying. Take a look. 

I wore the wrong socks. Take four. I wore the wrong sauce. 

When I say a bear, I mean a mascot. And this is not intentional. This mascot just keeps falling. 

Okay, have you tried the hot dogs here? Do you get to go home for the rest of the day? 

Oh my gosh, that’s hilarious. Look at that other mascot. Look at that badge. The badger is just dying every time the bear falls. 

Oh my gosh, that’s so funny. Now he’s getting mad and finally they decide to film the commercial standing still. That is so funny. That is hilarious. Honestly, they should have just released the blooper reel as the commercial itself, and that would’ve been a hit. Maybe that’s what they did. Maybe that’s why we’re watching it. Anyway, a little lighter note end the show since we talked about heavy topics today, necessary topics, but heavy topics. Guys, don’t forget to tune in Friday. My interview with Jenna Ellis premieres on Friday and you don’t want to miss it. So subscribe to the show on Apple Podcast or Spotify on YouTube or rumble wherever you like to watch or listen to the Liz Wheeler Show. Thank you for watching today. Thank you for listening. I’m Liz Wheeler. This is the Liz Wheeler Show. 


Read More


Trending stories, leading insights, & top analysis delivered directly to your inbox.

Related Stories

Related Episodes

Scroll to Top