Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump BEGS Court of Appeals to IGNORE His Latest THREATS on Judge

Starting point is 00:00:00 Black Friday continues a real Canadian super store with deals on electronics, home and holiday staples like lean ground beef at $368 a pound and ten pounds of farmers market care to onions at $399 until November 29th see fly for details This is Michael Popeye legal a forget the holidays the lawyers for Donald Trump and the Department of Justice are fast and furiously filing New papers with the DC Court of Appeals. On one hand, you have the Department of Justice on Thanksgiving Day that wanted to inform properly one panel, the DC Court of Appeals about death threats on the judge in New York and the principal law clerk in New York caused by Donald Trump and his lawyer's violent vicious merciless attacks on the

Starting point is 00:00:45 principal law clerk and the judge, which has resulted in, according to an affidavit that was filed in New York, by the captain of the Department of Public Safety responsible for threats against the judiciary has resulted in hundreds and hundreds and thousands of death threats, assassination threats, anti-Semitic attacks, misogynist attacks, racist attacks of all types, since the gag order was lifted in New York. Seems to be something that would be relevant and pertinent to the record that's being reviewed by the District of Columbia Federal Appeals panel.

Starting point is 00:01:20 I mean, we know that Donald Trump wants all the judges to be blind. Justice is blind, not the judges. And they could of course make observation and you take judicial notice of what's going on with Donald Trump around the country. As he attacks, every time he gets a gag order state, he then tries to pound the person that was the, the, the reason the gag order was put in place in the first, in the first place. And so of course, Donald Trump woke up to Thanksgiving day. It didn't like the fact that the, that the Department of Justice, the lawyer that argued at the oral argument, oral that earlier this week in front of this same DC panel took the opportunity as he would have to do to send into the appellate panel while the decision

Starting point is 00:02:03 was sub Judas, meaning under under advisement hasn't yet been ruled, all the material that was just filed by the New York Attorney General in her appeal. How can you ignore the declaration, the affidavit of the captain of the Department of Public Safety about death threats and assassination threats against a judge and a law clerk when the issue up at the DC court of appeals is about whether Donald Trump's threats and his violent rhetoric leads to assassination threats and death threats. How can you ignore that? And the Department of Justice isn't going to ignore it and sent in under a rule of a pellet, uh, pellet procedure, uh, 26 J, a supplemental submission,

Starting point is 00:02:48 uh, which, which is, uh, since the briefing based on an issue that was there or that was raised at the oral argument with the three judge panel, here is an update, your honors of what's going on in New York. New York came up time and time again on the oral argument and on the briefing by both sides. The gag order there, you know, they like to brag on the Trump side. The gag order got stayed by one of the justices while they consider the full thing, which is not a big deal. They often get stayed while full adjudication on the merits happened, but they bragged about that in their paper.

Starting point is 00:03:20 So they open the door to what really is going on in the New York appellate court related to the gag order. What's the update there? Well, once you open the door, you can't argue, I don't want, I don't want any updated information sent to the DC panel. It's irrelevant. That's going on in New York. I mean, that's like saying, well, he killed a man in New York.

Starting point is 00:03:38 So it's not relevant to whether he killed a man in the district of Columbia. But come on. So that they knew they were going to have a very hard time trying to defeat the submission. It's relevant. That submission that happened on Thanksgiving by the Department of Justice is relevant to the very same issue about the stochastic call and response between Donald Trump and his followers. He tells them to do something or encourages them to do something, foments them to do something, and they do it like attacking judges and jurors. And so we had a submission today.

Starting point is 00:04:09 It will take me long to cover it. It's only a page. This is the opposition by Donald Trump's lawyer, John Sauer, Mr. Sauer, a MAGA right-wing lawyer who frequently appears, including in front of Congress to try to talk about conspiracy theories that are ripped right out of the pages of QAnon, but putting that aside for a minute, he filed on his James Otis law group LLC letterhead. No, I never heard of them either. A letter to the clerk in response to the special counsels rule 28J letter. And it says, the prosecution's 28J letter, cites a submission in a completely separate case to the New York Appellate Division containing

Starting point is 00:04:53 new information that dates to October 3rd of 2023. Two weeks before the gag order in this case was entered on October 17th. That's untrue. First of all, let me stop right there, that's untrue. The submission is off of Mr. Hollins Declaration, which outlines all of the 275 single space pages of threatening and harassing voicemail messages that have been transcribed by the Department of Public Safety, including transcripts. Here's from the actual affidavit transcripts of those of threats of assassination.

Starting point is 00:05:34 And that was just filed. That was just filed on the 23rd of November, not back in October. So already, Sauer is off on his wrong foot and he never catches up. He then says that on the first paragraph, the letter is an impermissible attempt to supplement the record with a relevant information that could have been but was not submitted to the district court below. Wrong. The gag order and the removal of the gag order and what happened after that in New York is all detailed in an affidavit that was just prepared on the 23rd of November. I mean, they needed time to say it's stale information

Starting point is 00:06:26 when it is not. It is highly, highly in real time evidence that this panel needs to know about. He goes on to say that to date the prosecution has never submitted any evidence of alleged threats or harassment to any prosecutor, court staffer, or potential witness in this case. to any prosecutor court staffer or potential witness in this case. Right. Like I said, if you kill a man in New York, it may be relevant to whether you killed a man in the district of Columbia. The prosecution and here, in here we go, they can't help, they can't help themselves. They have a, they have a tell, they have a tick, they can't help themselves, but to attack the New York principal, Locklark,

Starting point is 00:07:06 once again, this poor woman, once again in their DC filing. And while they're at it, defame and libel her by accusing her of a crime, which is an element of defamation in New York. Let me read it for you. And the fact that I believe it's been filed in a litigation is not going to give them privilege. If this law clerk wants to sue them for defamation, it's defamation per se to accuse somebody of a loathsome disease or crime or something about their business, a business defamation. That is that means she can sue and not have to prove damages for the following statement in this letter. The prosecution ignores that the New York trial judge and the principal law clerk are judicial officers and the principal law clerk has violated New York law by engaging in new in forbidden partisan activity while that case was pending. Let me unpack that.

Starting point is 00:08:03 That is a defamation per se. It accuses her of breaching the law, committing a crime. You don't have to prove damages to support your case there. She's not a public figure. So she won't have to prove actual malice on behalf of John Sauer. I don't believe he'll get the protection of the litigation privilege because he filed it in a court filing. I think rather it's potential libel here. And then he's wrong on the law. She is allowed as a principal law clerk who happens to be a Democrat to also campaign or do fundraising because she's running for office.

Starting point is 00:08:38 She ultimately wants to be a judge on that court. And he's mistated the law. Of course, there's no citation to the proper law in New York where I practice because he's not right on the law. So he just ignores it. Did you know that poor sleep can cause weight gain, mood issues, poor mental health, and lower productivity? Sleep is the foundation of our mental and physical health and performance in our days. Having a consistent nighttime routine is notondegosable. When I don't get enough sleep, trust me, you don't want to be around me the next day. Introducing Beam Dream. You know we've been raving about Beam's Dream Powder, their healthy Haku Koko for sleep.

Starting point is 00:09:19 And today my listeners get a special discount on Beamams Dream Powder, their best-selling healthy hot cocoa for sleep, with no added sugar. Now available in delicious seasonal flavors like Cinnamon Coco, Seasol Caramel, and White Chocolate Peppermint. Better sleep has never tasted better. Dream contains a powerful all-natural blend of Rishi, Magnesium, Elphanine, Milatonin, and Nano CBD, to help you fall asleep, stay asleep, and wake up refreshed. A recent clinical study revealed Dream helped 93% of users wake up feeling more refreshed,

Starting point is 00:09:58 and 93% reported that Dream helped them get a more restful night's sleep. Just mixed-beam Dream into hot water or milk, start or froth and enjoy before bedtime. I've personally tried beamed dream. It certainly lived up to the hype, it was delicious and just a lovely night time routine, and secondly and most importantly it helped me fall asleep and stay asleep. Find out why forms and the New York Times are all talking about beam, and why it's trusted by the world's top athletes and business professionals. If you want to try Beams best-selling Dream Powder, take advantage of their biggest sale of the year and get up to 50% off for a limited time.

Starting point is 00:10:37 When you go to shopbeam. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion.

Starting point is 00:11:00 I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about the the general public opinion. I'm going to talk about public concern, which we agree with. Now, look, Donald Trump has said that this principle law clerk has does drugs. That's defamation per se as committed crimes, defamation per se is broken. The law defamation per se has is in a romantic relationship and has had sex with the Senate, Senate leader, a Schumer because she was in a photo with him and posted on her social media, just so you know how low Donald Trump and his lawyers have sunk. And then the lawyers who don't understand New York practice, have never really regularly

Starting point is 00:11:36 practiced there, think there's something wrong with a law clerk helping the judge do his job, which is exactly what the law clerk who who's a lawyer, is being paid to do, especially in a seven or eight week bench trial with tens, tens of thousands of pieces of evidence and dozens and dozens and dozens of witnesses. That's what law clerks do. But every time she passes a note or whispers in the judge's ear or he turns to her and asks her a question, oh my God, he's consulting with a partisan Democratic hack that sleeps with Chuck Schumer does drugs and breaks the law. All that a lie, all that defamatory.

Starting point is 00:12:11 And hopefully there's a ring and hell where they'll occupy one day for making attacks like that on this poor law clerk. But that's now reached a fever pitch in the DC court of appeals case because this often happens. I've advocated before a pellet courts. And then you finish your briefing there, you finish your oral argument, even we had an oral argument earlier in the week there where John Sauer was roasted by the panel. I think they're going to come up with, as I've said, in a prior hot taken on legal AF, the podcast at the intersection of law, politics and justice we do on the minus touch network that they're going to find the following, this appellate panel,

Starting point is 00:12:48 especially with this new information. They're going to find that a trial judge has the power and right to regulate the courtroom and the court proceedings to protect the fair administration of justice. That that means that she can issue a gag order for people that are actual participants in the criminal justice system, like the defendant and their lawyers can have their speech limited under the First Amendment, even if their speech doesn't rise the level of a crime. Something short of a crime can still be addressed by a trial judge using her inherent authority that that that there has been sufficient facts that have been accepted as true and developed by the trial of fact, the judge, which we give tremendous discretion

Starting point is 00:13:32 to. And there should be a gag order of some sort against Donald Trump. I believe that's going to be the ruling by the appellate court. And this kind of new information that helps the appellate court answer questions that were raised during the oral argument about the call and response, the threats coming off of when a gag order is lifted off a Donald Trump and how that leads not just him to mercilessly attack, to abuse the system, to try to influence and interfere with witness testimony, to try to interfere with and try to influence and intimidate prosecutors and judges and their staff. But also leads his followers, which is what he wants to go after these people, after he

Starting point is 00:14:14 six them on them. And that's what the judges are trying to get to the bottom of. So I don't think this James Otis log group one page filing today is really going to matter the panel a bit. I think they're going to be more interested in the 30 pages filed by the Department of Justice on Thanksgiving Day, including the Captain Holland Declaration and Alpha David outlining and providing transcripts of just how disgusting and despicable and murderists that comments are have been towards the judge in the principal law clerk. Donald Trump, if anything, is just proving the point by making ridiculous filings like this, saying that these are completely, this is completely impermissible and irrelevant to the

Starting point is 00:14:56 issues before this panel. There's nothing more relevant and acute than what just happened in New York during the same week is the oral argument, Mr. Sauer. And the other issue that's also here, just as a little inside, insider baseball, legal AF law school, they keep relying on a concept. John Sauer did it as oral argument and he raises it again in this letter, a constitutional concept, the first amendment log called prior restraint. It's a doctrine that only generally applies to the media, that the media cannot be stopped from running an article by the government,

Starting point is 00:15:33 especially one that's unfavorable or criticizes the government, because we refer to that as prior restraint. We don't allow it. Under our First Amendment freedom of speech, as it applies to the media. That's why if somebody leaks, let's say an internal memo of the government, or there's a book about to be written, and somebody runs into court to say that book contains something it shouldn't, something that breaches a confidentiality agreement, or that article that's about to be published is based on something that, you know, breaches a non disclosure agreement courts generally say well that may be true, but this is you can't use prior restraint To stop the media company from publishing that article even if it contains information that was stolen we wouldn't have had the Pentagon papers

Starting point is 00:16:22 Revealing what it was really going on in Vietnam have had the Pentagon papers revealing what it was really going on in Vietnam. We wouldn't have most of Watergate, if, if prior restraint doctrine hadn't stopped the government, like controlled by Nixon, going into court and trying to get injunctions against their publication. They continue to talk about that what the judges are doing in trying to stop participants of the criminal justice system from speaking improperly about the process as prior restraint. It's an improper use of the word. It's the wrong. It's a misapplication of a doctrine. But he repeats it again in the letter that he just sent in to the clerk, which he hopes to get to the judges. You know, he said, this fall short of the solidity of evidence required to justify prior restraint on page one, except

Starting point is 00:17:12 John prior restraint doctrine doesn't apply here. This is the problem with the Federalist magus when they write they just pick and choose concepts out of their law texts that have no relevance to the issue at all, but sound good, and they just try to apply them in ways that are completely inappropriate, stretching the law to fit their needs. They try to claim that they're textualists. We need to get to the bottom of what the framers

Starting point is 00:17:38 of the Constitution wanted, but they don't want anything of the sort. They reverse engineer. They just want to take a position that's completely outlandish and then throw, you know, sober sounding constitutional concepts on top of it, hoping nobody like judges that know the law will will catch him at it. Will we catch him at it here on these kind of hot takes and on legal AF on Wednesdays and Saturdays, only on the Midas Touch Network at 8 p.m. Eastern

Starting point is 00:18:05 time. And then on audio podcast platforms, wherever you can get it. If you like this kind of hot takes, I'm Michael Popak. Give me a thumbs up. It really does help keep us on the air. And then until my next hot take, until my next legal A.F. This is Michael Popak reporting. At Midas Touch, we are unapologetically pro democracy.

Starting point is 00:18:23 And we demand justice and accountability. That's why we're spreading our message to convict 45. That's right, here up right now with your convict 45 Ts and Pins at store.mitustouch.com. That's store.mitustouch.com.

Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump BEGS Court of Appeals to IGNORE His Latest THREATS on Judge

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.