Search Posts

You know, I'm going to tell you something, Sean. I've spent most of my legal career, not as a former federal prosecutor, although I served as a chief of staff to an attorney general, I've spent most of my legal career fighting these people, suing the federal government, the DOJ, the IRS, the Treasury Department, the EPA, suing campaigns, fighting over voting rights laws and so forth. And one thing I don't think our audience understands, and you need to understand, we have too many lawyers who are risk averse, too many lawyers who will whine and complain. I have spent 40 years sitting down with people who put on legal brass knuckles and take these bastards on in court. I'm at the appellate and Supreme Court level. That's where my focus has been my entire career. So what they need to do now, in my view, is to go up the appellate chain in New York. We need to stop whining about how long that's going to take, seek any emergency, immediate appeal that you possibly can. That's one lane. And the other lane is to try like hell to get to the Supreme Court. People say, well, they're not going to take it. You know what? If George Patton was said, I don't think I can get to the Battle of the Bulge in time, we would have lost World War II. I am sick and tired of these legal defeatists. We need to stop whining, stop complaining. We know what the hell we're up against. It's not news. It's a fact. We got to fight these people with our smarts. We have to take some risks. We need to push the edge of the envelope. I don't mean in a way that that kooks do it. We need to look at Bush versus Gore. Why did the Supreme Court take that case from the Florida Supreme Court? We need to look at things like common law rifts, which I know the audience don't understand, but a lot of lawyers do. Not rifts of certiori based on statute, but common law rifts based on judicial decisions. We need to give the Supreme Court the opportunity to fix this. Why? We cannot have local acting judges, Soros DAs, 15,000 district attorney's office, God knows how many state judges, destroying our federal election system, influencing how we elect the President of the United States. And if we have a pathway to bring it to the Supreme Court, even though it's rarely used and by God, we use it, we use every legal quiver that we possibly can muster rather than sitting around and saying, well, it'll take three months. Fine. Follow that. Preserve the state appellate system. And as for this idea that I have a faith in the system, what is a judge? He's flesh and blood. He's a person. He's a lawyer who happens to have a role. If the judge doesn't respect the rule of law, why the hell should I respect the judge? If the prosecutor doesn't respect the law rule of law, why the hell should I respect the prosecutor? So far, the judicial system so far has let down the American people and the Supreme Court needs to step up. This is a federal matter, a presidential matter, and it's going to go worse before it gets better.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Thank you so much for joining us. So, Judge, tell us your thoughts in this moment. I don't know, predictions, what we're leaving out, what should we be looking at as this jury is deliberating? - I'm flabbergasted by the charges to the jury. You may have already gone through that, but I was doing something else. I have never heard a jury charge like this judge's charge to this jury. We knew the judge was flaky. We knew that he hated Donald Trump, but this judge is beyond the pale. To say that he's gonna take dead misdemeanors and raise them to felonies when they don't have to unanimously agree on what that felony is is stunning to me. It is absolutely stunning. I wanna be clear about something. In New York State, when I was a DA, if I wanted to raise a misdemeanor, and by the way, not a misdemeanor that is expired in terms of the statute of limitations, but if I wanted to raise a misdemeanor to a felony, the only way to do that would be to file a certificate of conviction of another crime. It could be a DWI, it could be a gun possession, to prove that in this particular case, this misdemeanor would end up as a felony, and that is done outside of the presence of the jury, where it's very clear that there's another real committed convicted case that raises the level of misdemeanor to a felony. This judge is making stuff up as he goes along. This is a kangaroo court. I'll tell you that the level of reversible error on this is stunning, and this judge, unfortunately, is connected to the jury in the sense they see him as this calm, reliable guy who is as out of control in terms of the law, and he doesn't know it, or he's making it up as he goes along, so that this defendant, a former president of the United States, is convicted of dead misdemeanors that, like magic, is turned into a felony. This is unheard of, Sandra and John, and I gotta tell you one more thing. It's almost like it's a rabbit show. You're gonna pull a rabbit out of the hat, but don't look over here, look at Stormy Daniels. Look at what she said. None of that had anything to do with this. It's all about destroying Donald Trump, and this jury charge has set me over the edge in terms of the law that's being made up as we go along in a felony that we have no idea of, but now it's New York election law, but it could be federal election law, too, or it could be a tax violation, and even if he didn't underpay his taxes, it could still be a crime. What is this man talking about? Right, and then, Judge, there's the other aspect of this, which is the multiple choice aspect of the predicate crime, that the jury does not need to unanimously agree on what the predicate crime was. When you were a judge in New York, did you ever instruct the jury to say, here's a smorgasbord of things that you can find him guilty of, and you don't all have to find him guilty of the same thing. Some of you can find him guilty of one thing or her. Some others can find him or her guilty of something else, and then the remainder of you can figure out something else to find him or her guilty on. Have you ever issued an instruction like that? It's not done. John, it's not done. And let's talk about the one of three. One is a federal election campaign violation, the other is a tax violation, and the other is the creation of additional records. Federal election campaign violation, they did not let Brad Smith testify, but you heard David Pecker testify about a federal election campaign problem. You heard Michael Cohen testify about that, but Donald Trump in his defense was not allowed to talk about it, but now, all of a sudden, the jury has the ability to go in and not agree that that is one of the felonies that is necessary to resurrect these dead misdemeanors, but there's no evidence. The defense couldn't defend themselves on it. That's bizarre, John. No one has heard of this. It's like a menu, A, column A, B, or C. You don't all have to agree on it, whatever, folks. This is a kangaroo court. This is unheard of. I'm telling you, I've done this for 32 years. I'm not a federal prosecutor. I'm a state prosecutor. I'm not a federal judge. I'm a county judge, just like Mershawn. This is New York law. This is my wheelhouse. He is wrong. - All right. - Judge, thank you. - Thanks, Judge. - And the problem is, okay, guys. - Nope, finish your thought. Finish your thought. - No, and the sad part about it is this jury is gonna think they're doing the right thing based upon a charge that no one has ever heard of and that he created. - All right. - Thank you, Judge. - Thank you. We'll be right back after this. Stay tuned.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Because what's happening to the New York legal system is truly alarming. This was one of the premier systems in the world for businesses. And now people are fleeing New York. They see what's happening here. And this is a judge who could have resolved this. He could have come up with an easy solution. This is just because of Trump's portfolio being real estate. It's the nature of his business. But those are fixed assets. Trump Towers isn't going to go anywhere. He's not going to abscond with it. They could take the $100 million that he's offered and then take other agreements that he won't sell or change his interest in these fixed assets. Anyone looking at that would say, well, yeah, that seems fair. But that's not the profile of this case. This judge has done nothing to introduce any element of fairness through this. And so you're really in between a rock and a hard place. If you're Donald Trump, you've got a portfolio with real estate and people don't take real estate in order to float a bond.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Let's not forget whose move this was. The New York Times reported that Joe Biden directed his attorney general to prosecute his rival. Quote, Mr. Biden privately told his close circle of advisers that Mr. Trump posed a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted for his role in the events of Jan 6th, according to two people familiar with his comments. He also told confidence that he wanted Attorney General Merrick B Garland to stop acting like a ponderous judge and to take decisive action. This is not an independent Justice Department. This is not an independent special counsel. This prosecution is being directed by the commander in chief.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.