The MeidasTouch Podcast - BREAKING: Corrupt Trump Judge IGNORES LAW and Rules for Trump in Mar-a-Lago Search - Full Breakdown

Episode Date: September 5, 2022

Aileen Cannon, the Trump-appointed federal judge from the southern district of Florida just issued an order granting Trump’s motion for a special master and granted an injunction stoping the DOJ from using the documents it seized from a lawful search warrant in its investigation until the special master process is completed. Judge Cannon ruled that one of the main factors for her equitable jurisdiction to hear the case came from the fact that Trump’s reputation could be hurt from the search. This is an appalling ruling and an embarrassment to the judicial system, and will likely be appealed. Shop Meidas Merch at: https://store.meidastouch.com Remember to subscribe to ALL the Meidas Media Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://pod.link/1510240831 Legal AF: https://pod.link/1580828595 The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://pod.link/1595408601 The Influence Continuum: https://pod.link/1603773245 Kremlin File: https://pod.link/1575837599 Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://pod.link/1530639447 The Weekend Show: https://pod.link/1612691018 The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most? When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard. When the barbecue's lit, but there's nothing to grill. When the in-laws decide that, actually, they will stay for dinner. Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer. So download the app and get delivery in as fast as 60 minutes. Plus enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart. Gro delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees,

exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart, groceries that over-deliver. This has been my sell-us from the Midas Touch Network, and this is a breaking news alert. Judge Eileen Cannon, a Trump-appointed judge in 2020, she has just ruled in connection with Donald Trump's motion for judicial oversight and additional relief initially filed on August 22nd in connection with the search warrant that was lawfully executed at Mar-a-Lago on August 8th of 2022. Judge Eileen Cannon has ruled to appoint a special master, which was one of Trump's requests. Judge Eileen Cannon granted an injunction in favor of Donald Trump, stopping the government from pursuing its criminal investigation into Trump by utilizing the documents at issue. They can still pursue the investigation.

They just can't use anything relating to the documents that they obtained at Mar-a-Lago until the special master is able to review and sorts through it, which can take weeks, if not several months, at the earliest. Judge Cannon noted that the Office of Director of National Intelligence, ODNI, however, may still continue their intelligence assessment regarding the threats to our national security. But for all purposes, this ruling would otherwise slow down and put to a halt the government's investigation of Donald Trump in connection with him stealing top secret sensitive compartmented information. The court has ordered the parties to meet and confer to submit possible candidates of who can be a special master

by September 9th. Based on the way she rules, it will probably take her days, if not weeks, to rule on that list, the earliest. And then the court has also reserved its decision about whether or not to return documents to Donald Trump that he stole from the government. This is a preposterous order, an order that goes against all precedent, an order that is legally completely unsound. I will give a further analysis of the order, but wanted to highlight those key points. In the ruling itself, some of the key legal findings that this judge made to get to that order, the judge found that executive privilege may be able to actually be asserted by former presidents, that former presidents can

actually steal documents, hide them, conceal them, and then claim them. I'm summarizing, but that's essentially one of the things that the judge said. The precedent that was established in this Nixon versus GSA case that was very well established, that executive privilege is held by the current administrations, not by previous executives, because we don't live in a country of kings and emperors. But this judge, Kat, and this Trump appointee said, I don't know about that. That may not be the law. I don't think the law says what you say it does. The judge also, in asserting equitable jurisdiction, had to apply certain factors. But the main factor the judge

relied on was the possible reputational harm to Trump that could be caused by a criminal investigation where items that he stole from the government were seized by the government pursuant to a lawful search warrant. More on that I will break down, but the court's main factor about why she should exercise equitable jurisdiction, extraordinary jurisdiction under these circumstances, is because of Trump's reputation, and she says it in the order. I will read the order from you where that is actually said. The judge also ruled that she doesn't trust the Department of Justice's filter team. There was a few instances where the filter team found documents that could have found

their way into the investigative team, flagged it, which shows that the filter team is actually working and doing its job. And the filter team, again, was focused on attorney-client privilege because there is no executive privilege held by former administrations. But nonetheless, the judge said, well, the fact that those documents may have found their way into the investigative team means I can't trust the filter team. The filter teams are used in search warrants over and over and over again throughout the country every single day. But this judge clearly doesn't understand the way the processes and search warrants work at all.

And then with respect to standing, the government's argument was Trump doesn't have a possessory interest in these documents. These documents are the government's. You can't steal records from the government. They belong to us. And to the extent there are other documents that were found in a search warrant, where the other documents were found next to stolen documents, all of those documents can be obtained because that's search warrant 101, where commingled personal property and stolen property is found together. guess what? Your interest in potentially personal property falls by the wayside because you stole stuff and the fruits of the

crime, which were allowed to be obtained through a lawful search warrant, were obtained. And here we're talking about state documents. We're talking about the documents that belong to the executive branch, not Donald Trump at all. But nonetheless, the judge found, you know what? It's premature to say that these documents may belong to Donald Trump. So let's have a special master come in and let the special master decide whether or not these documents belong or don't belong to him. And here's the thing. Donald Trump never filed an affidavit, a declaration under penalty of perjury in connection with this motion saying what was his. I don't want to lose the forest for the trees here, people, because at the end of the day, Donald Trump in all motions across the country, you don't just get lawyers to say, oh, this may be mine.

Let me get it. Please give it back to me. You have to have someone do a declaration and say, that's mine. That's mine. That's mine. That's mine. This document's mine. They took that document mine. It's not just some fishing expedition where a special master could come in and halt criminal investigations. I mean, this upends every precedent, the most basic search warrant 101 about how the Department of Justice engages in search warrant. This is one of the worst rulings, if not one of the worst rulings I have ever read. And certainly the Department of Justice is going to appeal this. Now they're going to appeal it to the 11th Circuit. And the 11th Circuit, though,

has a lot of Trump-appointed judges on it as well. They'd have to ignore, again, all precedent and all law, but we've seen radical right extremist judges, and we see it in the Supreme Court who have done that. Now, one further alarming factor is that there is a Supreme Court judge for each of the circuit courts that kind of sits over the courts in the event very special emergency relief is requested. You know who sits over the 11 in the event very special emergency relief is requested. You know, who sits over the 11th Circuit? Clarence Thomas sits over the 11th Circuit. So if this issue goes on an emergency basis and it has to be decided through what's often

been referred to as like a shadow docket where one Supreme Court justice can make an emergency decision one way or another on the motions. It's a little complicated of a procedure, but that would actually go to potentially Clarence Thomas, which is also deeply concerning. But here you have judges who are just not filing the law, and specifically Judge Eileen Cannon here, but radical right judges are doing this across the country. Just some background on Judge Eileen Cannon. She was appointed by Trump in 2020. She's now 41 years old. So when she was appointed, I believe she was slightly under 40 at the time when she was appointed. A member of the Federalist Society. She never made partner, I don't believe,

at her law firm. She doesn't, to my knowledge, have any significant trial experience. And she's one of these inexperienced judges who Trump appointed to undermine our judiciary. I think some of us held hope that she would do the right thing here because hope springs eternal. But for those who have watched the Midas Touch podcast, The Legal AF, we've warned from the very beginning, Trump appointed judge. We talked about the weird hearing that took place on September 1, where Judge Eileen Cannon was asking Trump lawyers and DOJ lawyers questions that indicated she was going to make an order exactly like the one she made. We said, don't rush to conclusions.

We need to see the written order. But this is not looking good in terms of her following what the law is, the most basic law, may I add. And sure enough, she ruled completely at odds with the law, at odds with very basic search warrant ideas. And let me just break it down a little bit further for you. The judge began analyzing the situation. She did a factual recitation, and her factual recitation really leaned very heavily in favor of Trump's version of events. Basically, hey, Trump was cooperating, and they turned over these documents very nicely in January of 2022. And this was just this ongoing, fairly nice conversation that they were having where they were turning over documents. And then all of a sudden, on August 8th, the Department of Justice executed this search warrant and found probable cause.

And how did that happen? Not explaining that there's evidence that Trump lawyers signed declarations under penalty of perjury saying they returned top secret documents and they were not returned. They were found during the August 8th search or all the other layers and levels of obstruction that took place where these documents were concealed and hidden for more than or almost two years by Trump and his inner circle. So that's the factual recitation. Then the judge goes to jurisdiction next. And in the jurisdictional section, the judge basically says says under federal rule 41G, which deals with searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment, 41G involves returning property pre-indictment. And the way she assesses her jurisdiction, as opposed to this being an issue

for Judge Reinhart, the magistrate judge, to decide. She goes, well, as a federal judge, she believes, but she's wrong, I could exercise equitable jurisdiction if these five factors, these factors from a decision called Ritchie v. Smith, which is a Fifth Circuit case from 1975, if these five factors are met, I should be able to exercise equitable jurisdiction. And under Rule 41G, I can begin this process of returning property potentially to an aggrieved party. In this case, she believes the aggrieved party to be potentially Trump. As a more trusted, more secure payments network, Visa provides scale, expertise, and innovative payment solutions. Learn more at Visa.ca slash FinTech. Discover the magic of BetMGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer.

From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more, make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit bet MGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager Ontario only please gamble responsibly.

If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor for your charge. Bet MGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. And so the five or the four factors of this Ritchie case, one is a callous disregard for plaintiff's rights. And so here, one of the assessments was, did the government engage in a callous disregard of Trump's rights? And here the judge says there's no evidence that supports that at this stage. The next factor is individual interest and need for property. Now, with this specific factor, if you don't analyze this factor in good faith, it will always be in favor of a party who has

their property seized, right? A drug dealer who has their drugs seized will clearly have an individual interest and need for their drugs back, right? It doesn't mean that that individual interest is a valid individual interest. So the way the judge analyzed this was kind of like the drug dealer example that I just gave you. Like, well, he clearly has a need for these documents back. I mean, yeah, they're stolen documents that he has. People would like the things that they have stolen back. It doesn't mean that their need is a valid one. So she assessed that one completely incorrectly. The next factor, risk of irreparable injury is another what's called a Ritchie factor. And here she says, as a former president, his reputation

is on the line here. And she literally, this was the main factor, if you really look at it honestly, about what the decision was based on about her exercise of jurisdiction. She goes, quote, as a function of plaintiff's former position as president of the United States, the stigma associated with the subject seizure is in a league of its own. A future indictment based to any degree on property that ought to be returned would result in reputational harm of a decidedly different order of magnitude. So what she's saying here is that this is about stroking Trump's ego and his reputation, and that's a factor.

Wouldn't that be nice? Look at the drug dealer's example. I'm sure the drug dealer's reputation would be harmed when the drugs are seized. But guess what? You're committing a crime. And the justice system is not a justice system of snowflakes. This justice system is a justice system of law and order. Law and order prevails against criminals' reputational interests in being

mob bosses. Judge Cannon just has no clue what she is doing. It is beyond offensive. And then the fourth factor, no alternative remedy in law. And she finds that there was no alternative remedy in law. Of course, there's alternative remedies in law. There's a filter team in place, which is reviewing the records and setting aside documents. An alternative remedy of law is a suppression motion if an indictment is actually brought. An alternative remedy of law is proving that you didn't steal the documents, is showing in an affidavit, hey, I didn't steal top secret sensitive classified documents, rather than him going out and bragging about it and saying he hid them in cabinets and didn't put them in the way that the government took the photographs as

their standard practices to take photographs of fruits of crime. That would be an alternative remedy. So again, the judge has no clue what she's doing. So after determining she has equitable jurisdiction, she then also determines that Trump has standing. The next section of this order is all about standing. And the government's argument is that you can't have standing because you don't have a possessory interest. You don't own these documents, Trump. So you can't ask for a special master over documents that belong to the government because we're not a country of kings and emperors. And you can't just say, mine, mine,

mine, mine, mine, and steal things and ask for a special master. Well, the judge basically said, if we want to use the example of the drug dealer, you know, the judge basically said, well, maybe we need a special master to determine, are those drugs? Are those not drugs? We don't know at this point. They may be drugs that may be cocaine, Maybe baby powder. Maybe baby powder. We don't know. That's basically what the judge said here. We don't know. Could belong to him. Maybe not. Let's get a special master and then let's decide because it's premature for you to say that Trump doesn't have standing at this stage, even though he clearly doesn't have standing and he doesn't possess documents that belong to the government. And then she says there's a need for further review by the special

master. And then despite the fact that Trump filed no affidavits, no declarations under penalty of perjury, like in a normal injunction anywhere in any court in this country, you have to demonstrate one that which property you're talking about. You have to list it. The burden's on you. You have to demonstrate, one, which property you're talking about. You have to list it. The burden's on you. You have to say, this belongs to me and I need it back because of this. They stole my hard drive. They stole my car. That was not subject of the warrant. Return the property that belongs to me if I'm going to make a motion under Rule 41G.

Or in California State Court, I had this case actually happen where an unlawful warrant was searched. There's actually a valid warrant that was in one lot. They then searched the wrong lot, the lot belonging to my client. And the warrant was for lot A. They searched lot B and they took a hard drive. It wasn't the government. It was a state county officer. They took a hard drive that belonged to my client. And my argument was, I didn't go, well, I just want a special master. I said, they went to plot B instead of plot A, and they stole the hard drive. Give me the hard drive back. And I got the hard drive back because I identified what was invalid and what belonged very specifically to my client. And this is not

what took place here. Trump, there's no affidavit. He's not even saying what's his. He's conceding that this is government documents and these are top secret sensitive information. And nonetheless, she's saying that there is irreparable harm and that an injunction should be given. So the judge ordered an injunction. So with a temporary injunction, the judge says, government, you can no longer conduct any criminal investigation into Trump using these documents until the special master completes their review. And just judging by the way this judge operates, it took her from August 22nd to September 5th to make this ruling. She asked the parties to submit a

list of special masters by September 9th. Then the judge is going to rule on who the special master could be. That will probably take a week to two weeks. Then the special master's review could take a significant period of time, submit a report to the court. And so this could drag this out to 2023. Because the judge granted this injunctive relief, that also triggers an ability for the DOJ to go and seek an immediate appeal, which they are going to. They're going to seek an emergency appeal, I think perhaps as early as today, but certainly in a day or two, from the 11th Circuit, which is the Circuit Court of Appeals, laying out everything that this judge did wrong. One thing the judge said could continue, although the government can't continue its investigation,

again, so unprecedented, saying that the DOJ can't complete a criminal investigation where life and death matters could hinge on this criminal investigation. But stop your criminal investigation right now, even though you've already reviewed all of the records anyway. You can't do any investigation based on these documents until the special master finishes their review process. The judge did say that the Office of Director of National Intelligence, ODNI, may continue their national security threat assessment of the documents, and she wouldn't hold that up. But the DOJ would be held up until the special master process continues. So the DOJ will definitely be appealing

that. I mean, you want to know, okay, what is the remedies for this judge? Can this judge be held accountable? I mean, in theory, the judge is a federal appointee and could the judge be impeached? Sure, that's not going to happen. I don't want to get your hopes up. That's not going to happen. The judge literally lacks all credibility now. What a laughingstock this judge is. I mean, you go into her court and just be like, whatever her

rulings are, are just going to be Trump rulings. Or maybe you could just write her letters now instead of filing affidavits because her courtroom is now a clown house. Utterly, utterly absurd. And she'll be a laughingstock amongst federal judges forever. I mean, an absolutely despicable, despicable ruling in federal judge. But as a federal judge, there's not much relief. I mean, an absolutely despicable, despicable ruling in federal judge. But as a federal judge, there's not much relief. I mean, you file the appeal, she can be overturned on appeal. I wonder in the future if people are just going to file certain disqualification motions against her that she literally has no clue what she's doing, although federal judges get to determine if they're the ones who are disqualified from their own cases, which is a whole other discussion that we could have at another time with not a lot of

accountability. But the key things from this order, again, is that a special master, she's ordering a special master to be appointed. Unless this is appealed, she granted an injunction stopping the government from using these documents until a special master completes their review, pretty much halting the investigation efforts, because if you can't use the documents, how can you follow up? The parties will confer and submit a special master list by September 9th, and the court will reserve the decision on the return of property. That's the breakdown here. Horrible, horrible ruling, goes against all precedent, goes against all law, really, really despicable, but it shows the consequences of elections.

Trump appointed this judge. He's appointed many judges like that. And so when you watch this, you better not be discouraged and go, oh, I give up. This should make you angry. This should make you upset. This should make you feel rage. But you should use that productively and use that to get out the vote. Use that to support our democracy peacefully. Use that to make sure that we are louder than these radical right extremists and that they are not able to take power ever, ever

again. These are the consequences of it. These are the consequences of it. You look at the Dobbs overturning Roe v. Wade, overturning precedent, taking away rights, judges giving you the middle finger. That's what's happening here. That's what's happening here. Judge Cannon just gave the whole legal system the middle finger to protect the frail and fragile reputation of a wannabe dictator. Truly a despicable day in the law. And for someone who went to law school, I went to Georgetown Law studying constitutional law. It's sad. It's shameful to read this, to have such despicable people and positions of judges right there. It hurts. But let's turn that rage into something productive right now, and let's just fight harder

together. Make sure you hit the subscribe button. Hit subscribe right now. Join the Midas Mighty movement. We need you now more than ever in this fight for democracy. Join the fastest growing pro-democracy movement in the world. The fastest growing YouTube independent media channel in the world. The fastest growing independent media channel in the world. We're not both sides in it. We're calling balls and strikes. We're telling it as it is. But to do that, you call fascists fascists. You call bad judges corrupt and bad judges. And you explain why

with the facts. Hit subscribe. This has been my cell is from the Midas Touch Network signing off. This November is Rovember. Midas Touch just released its brand new collection of Rovember t-shirts and pins to let the country know what's at stake this upcoming midterm election. Go to store.midastouch.com to grab yours. That's store.midastouch.com.