Joining us now, Chris Landau, former law clerk for Justices Thomas and Scalia, former ambassador to Mexico. Chris, what are your thoughts on the integrity of this Georgia prosecution, given what we know about what she's done? Laura, obviously, these allegations against Fannie Willis are extremely serious, and this just shows if you are going to break all historical norms and go after it for the first time in American history, a former president and a current leading candidate for the presidency on criminal charges, you better have your ducks in a row. You better cross all your T's and dot all your I's. So what kind of judgment does this person have who's doing this? This is the person who made this momentous decision to charge the former president, and this person is allegedly hiring their secret lover and then going off on vacations funded by taxpayer dollars. Well, she didn't disclose any of this. I mean, not that that even would have mattered, but at least she would have disclosed it. She didn't disclose any of it, and then she goes to this church and she says she's not playing the race card, but of course, that's exactly what she's doing. No one cares about the color of the skin of her lover, but we do care about the fact that he's being sent to the White House either to deliver a message or get counsel and then get paid for it handsomely. Laura, we're now in the kind of silly phase of this thing, like when the academics a few weeks ago were defending plagiarism and saying it's no big deal when Claudine Gaye was accused of plagiarism, now we're going to see some of our alleged legal experts saying, oh, well, hiring your secret lover to be a special prosecutor and going off and having that person perhaps coordinate with the White House. I think that's one of the most serious allegations. We don't know to this day, I mean, there's kind of a very general statement on the billing record of why he was there, but it doesn't reveal anything. It's kind of an odd thing for him to just show up at the White House on two different occasions in 2020. I mean, in a state criminal prosecution, it raises very serious questions. Coordination. Again, talk about collusion, right? We heard that word an awful lot in the last administration. Is there collusion between the White House and these state prosecutions in New York and Georgia? I don't know, but I mean, you'd think these people would have the judgment if you were going to go out there and undertake this moment to pass. Unimpeachable judgment. Unimpeachable, you would think so, right? And so, again, I just think, scratch your head. This is backfiring on these people, though. And by the way, it's alleged that Nathan Wade billed 24 hours of work in one day. Now, you and I are used to having billed, you still bill hours, but I used to remember doing the six-minute increment bills at Skadden Arps. I hated billing, the billing records, all that. I hated doing billing. But 24 hours in a day, is that possible, Chris? Again, listen, Laura, that is certainly questionable, and I think that's one of the things that have to get looked at, and certainly, this is going to have to be resolved before these cases can go forward. I mean, you can't go with this cloud over the prosecutor. So, you know, again, if this is their A-team that they're bringing, that just makes you -- it raises a lot of questions. And Jack Smith, in his prosecution, he's supposedly the much more professional, seasoned prosecutor. What's new in that case? Well, you know, one of the really important things on that front is that, you know, again, he did not charge President Trump with insurrection. There's a federal crime called insurrection. A lot of people in this country think that's what the January 6 case is about. It is not. There is no charge of insurrection in that statute. That's why the Colorado and Maine things are insane. But more important, he actually charged them with this novel, untested legal theory that's now in the U.S. Supreme Court. Again, if you're going to go after the president, the former president, the leading candidate, you better be pretty darn sure that you have a solid legal ground. This is not the case to be testing the outer boundaries of the law. And today we know that the Chevron case, which is another big administrative law case, is being considered at the Supreme Court for, I mean, perhaps, you know, a complete reversal. For people who aren't law geeks, tell us why that's so important. It's very important because, as we've seen in the last several decades, the administrative state, the deep state in Washington is just growing and growing. And FCC, EPA, FDA, all those three letter agencies have just started expanding their power massively. And there's this doctrine in the law. Again, it sounds boring, but it's very important to the way Americans live that courts have been deferring to agencies on question of agency power. And now that is being reconsidered as to is that really appropriate? Because these bureaucrats have massively expanded their power. And they're unaccountable. For the most part, unaccountable, once they do something, they're going to get rid of the independent contract. 100%. And, you know, our basic separation of powers and our democracy, our Republican principles have broken down because now Congress has delegated to these agencies all this legislative power. Well, I was encouraged in hearing parts of these oral arguments, they released the audio on that. Chris, great to see you. Always a pleasure. We've got a grab bag of legal topics.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Post from Truth Social
ELECTION INTERFERENCE!!!
Video transcript 5:05
Joining us now, Chris Landau, former law clerk for Justices Thomas and Scalia, former ambassador to Mexico. Chris, what are your thoughts on the integrity of this Georgia prosecution, given what we know about what she's done? Laura, obviously, these allegations against Fannie Willis are extremely serious, and this just shows if you are going to break all historical norms and go after it for the first time in American history, a former president and a current leading candidate for the presidency on criminal charges, you better have your ducks in a row. You better cross all your T's and dot all your I's. So what kind of judgment does this person have who's doing this? This is the person who made this momentous decision to charge the former president, and this person is allegedly hiring their secret lover and then going off on vacations funded by taxpayer dollars. Well, she didn't disclose any of this. I mean, not that that even would have mattered, but at least she would have disclosed it. She didn't disclose any of it, and then she goes to this church and she says she's not playing the race card, but of course, that's exactly what she's doing. No one cares about the color of the skin of her lover, but we do care about the fact that he's being sent to the White House either to deliver a message or get counsel and then get paid for it handsomely. Laura, we're now in the kind of silly phase of this thing, like when the academics a few weeks ago were defending plagiarism and saying it's no big deal when Claudine Gaye was accused of plagiarism, now we're going to see some of our alleged legal experts saying, oh, well, hiring your secret lover to be a special prosecutor and going off and having that person perhaps coordinate with the White House. I think that's one of the most serious allegations. We don't know to this day, I mean, there's kind of a very general statement on the billing record of why he was there, but it doesn't reveal anything. It's kind of an odd thing for him to just show up at the White House on two different occasions in 2020. I mean, in a state criminal prosecution, it raises very serious questions. Coordination. Again, talk about collusion, right? We heard that word an awful lot in the last administration. Is there collusion between the White House and these state prosecutions in New York and Georgia? I don't know, but I mean, you'd think these people would have the judgment if you were going to go out there and undertake this moment to pass. Unimpeachable judgment. Unimpeachable, you would think so, right? And so, again, I just think, scratch your head. This is backfiring on these people, though. And by the way, it's alleged that Nathan Wade billed 24 hours of work in one day. Now, you and I are used to having billed, you still bill hours, but I used to remember doing the six-minute increment bills at Skadden Arps. I hated billing, the billing records, all that. I hated doing billing. But 24 hours in a day, is that possible, Chris? Again, listen, Laura, that is certainly questionable, and I think that's one of the things that have to get looked at, and certainly, this is going to have to be resolved before these cases can go forward. I mean, you can't go with this cloud over the prosecutor. So, you know, again, if this is their A-team that they're bringing, that just makes you -- it raises a lot of questions. And Jack Smith, in his prosecution, he's supposedly the much more professional, seasoned prosecutor. What's new in that case? Well, you know, one of the really important things on that front is that, you know, again, he did not charge President Trump with insurrection. There's a federal crime called insurrection. A lot of people in this country think that's what the January 6 case is about. It is not. There is no charge of insurrection in that statute. That's why the Colorado and Maine things are insane. But more important, he actually charged them with this novel, untested legal theory that's now in the U.S. Supreme Court. Again, if you're going to go after the president, the former president, the leading candidate, you better be pretty darn sure that you have a solid legal ground. This is not the case to be testing the outer boundaries of the law. And today we know that the Chevron case, which is another big administrative law case, is being considered at the Supreme Court for, I mean, perhaps, you know, a complete reversal. For people who aren't law geeks, tell us why that's so important. It's very important because, as we've seen in the last several decades, the administrative state, the deep state in Washington is just growing and growing. And FCC, EPA, FDA, all those three letter agencies have just started expanding their power massively. And there's this doctrine in the law. Again, it sounds boring, but it's very important to the way Americans live that courts have been deferring to agencies on question of agency power. And now that is being reconsidered as to is that really appropriate? Because these bureaucrats have massively expanded their power. And they're unaccountable. For the most part, unaccountable, once they do something, they're going to get rid of the independent contract. 100%. And, you know, our basic separation of powers and our democracy, our Republican principles have broken down because now Congress has delegated to these agencies all this legislative power. Well, I was encouraged in hearing parts of these oral arguments, they released the audio on that. Chris, great to see you. Always a pleasure. We've got a grab bag of legal topics.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.