About midway down the written transcript, Brooks claims the AP did a study, and in 70 years of similar cases with no clearly stated victim, assets have never before been seized. I did a half hearted search for that specific study, came up empty, but for argument’s sake, let’s say Brooks is accurate in this claim (he usually is).

It raises the question if true, and if these seizures begin - Trump should not be above the law, we totally agree. But do we also agree that he shouldn’t be below it?

Note Capehart didn’t refute Brooks’ claim, but disagreed on grounds that seizures will be tangible evidence of accountability for Trump. Ok, but does that justify putting him below the law?