Podcast Summary
Ex-President Trump's Legal Challenges: Indictment, Conviction, and Criminal Hearing: Donald Trump faces multiple legal issues, including an indictment, criminal conviction, and ongoing investigations for business crimes, defamation, and mishandling of classified documents.
Former President Donald Trump continues to make legal history, becoming the first ex-president to be indicted, criminally convicted, and ordered to appear in a criminal hearing. The Manhattan District Attorney's office is relentlessly pursuing Trump for business crimes, and his former COO, Allen Weisselberg, has agreed to cooperate. Trump's defamation of E. Jean Carroll, following a jury conviction, is now subject to an amended lawsuit seeking up to $10 million in damages. The special prosecutor Jack Smith's investigation into Trump's handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago is ongoing. Despite these legal challenges, Trump has not shied away from making defamatory statements, leading to potential further legal consequences. As the legal proceedings unfold, it underscores the significance of accountability and the rule of law in American politics.
Donald Trump makes virtual court appearance for ongoing criminal investigation: Former President Trump appeared in a Manhattan courtroom for a hearing regarding a protective order in his ongoing criminal investigation. The trial date is set for March 25, 2024, but no discovery agreement has been reached yet.
Former President Donald Trump made a virtual appearance in a Manhattan courtroom for a hearing regarding the protective order issued by the judge to prevent him from discussing evidence related to the ongoing criminal investigation against him. The trial date for this historic case was set for March 25, 2024. Trump's lawyers, Todd Blanch and Susan Nechtem, were present in the courtroom, but no agreement on discovery has been reached yet. The judge wanted to ensure that Trump understood the terms of the protective order, leading to this unusual court appearance. The case could potentially move to federal court for trial, but the Manhattan DA's office will still proceed if it stays in state court. The hearing also saw some debate about the likelihood of the case being moved to federal court.
Judge explains protective order to Trump: Judge communicated serious order's terms to Trump directly, emphasizing potential consequences for violation, not a gag order.
The judge in the Trump case felt it necessary to explain the protective order directly to Trump, as it's a serious order restricting him from sharing certain materials on social media. This is unusual as it's typically the court's role to address the defendant directly in criminal cases regarding important matters like orders of protection or bail conditions. The judge made it clear that this is not a gag order, but Trump's first amendment rights are still respected. The potential consequences for violating the order were emphasized, including contempt of court. Trump's history of disregarding court orders was mentioned, and his immediate response was to deny the charges and claim election interference. Despite the challenges, the court felt it essential to communicate the requirements directly to Trump.
Changes in Donald Trump's legal representation: Despite departures and investigations, Trump remains involved in his legal proceedings and is expected to attend the upcoming trial in March, with limitations on his comments.
Key takeaway from the recent court hearing involving Donald Trump is the evolution of legal representation for the former president. With Todd Blanche's surprising comments about Trump being the leading candidate for president, and Joe Tacopina's absence, there have been changes in Trump's legal team. Juan Mershawn, known for his sober demeanor, presided over the hearing. Trump himself sat quietly in the courtroom, aware of the judge's power. The hearing also highlighted the departure of Evan Corcoran, one of Trump's lawyers at Mar-a-Lago, and the ongoing investigation into the handling of documents. Despite these developments, Trump is expected to attend the upcoming trial in March, and there are limitations but no technical gag order on his comments regarding the case.
Manhattan DA's intense pursuit of Trump and associates: Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is pressing charges against Donald Trump and his associates, focusing on Allen Weisselberg's cooperation for tax fraud, loan, insurance, and asset fraud cases.
The Manhattan DA, Alvin Bragg, is intensely pursuing the prosecution of Donald Trump and his associates, with a particular focus on getting Allen Weisselberg to flip. The judge in Trump's ongoing Stormy Daniels case has cautioned Trump about his speech towards witnesses, but has not interfered with the prosecution. Bragg's team is putting significant pressure on Weisselberg, who is facing tax fraud charges, to cooperate in the larger case against Trump for business dealings involving loan, insurance, and asset fraud. There are two separate cases ongoing at the Manhattan DA's office: one involving the Stormy Daniels case, which is set for trial in March, and another investigation that has been pending for a long time, which Bragg is looking to build evidence for with Weisselberg's cooperation. The Trump Organization has already been convicted on 17 counts related to tax returns.
Donald Trump's Business Dealings: Allen Weisselberg's Role and Ongoing Investigation: Allen Weisselberg, a former Trump Organization executive, testified in a criminal case and resigned, raising questions about his potential cooperation in the ongoing investigation into Trump's business dealings, focusing on insurance fraud and financial statement inflations.
The investigation into Donald Trump and his business dealings is ongoing, with Allen Weisselberg, a former executive at the Trump Organization, being a key figure. Weisselberg testified in a 17-count conviction against the Trump Organization, but hasn't implicated Trump himself. Trump recently testified for 7 hours in a civil case, providing more evidence for the ongoing criminal investigation. Weisselberg, who is facing perjury charges, could potentially be pressured to cooperate and testify against Trump. The investigation is focusing on various charges, including insurance fraud and potential financial statement inflations. Weisselberg served time at Rikers Island and recently resigned from the Trump Organization, raising questions about whether the threat of further prosecution and potential prison time will encourage him to cooperate. Ultimately, the outcome is uncertain, as some believe Weisselberg may hold firm, while others think he may cooperate for his legacy.
Prosecutors targeting lower-level individuals for info on higher-ups: Manhattan DA probes Trump Org, lower-level staff may testify, Trump faces legal challenges, unusual note release in Mar-a-Lago case, Trump's letter to Garland seen as odd move
Prosecutors often target lower-level individuals in investigations, hoping they'll provide information leading to the higher-ups. This was discussed in relation to the Manhattan DA's office investigation of the Trump Organization. Another key point is the unusual circumstances surrounding the release of Evan Corcoran's notes in the Mar-a-Lago case, which could potentially be damaging for Donald Trump. Additionally, Trump's recent letter to Merrick Garland, sent on his lawyers' letterhead, attacking Garland and requesting a meeting, was seen as an odd move, coming as it did in the same week as these two revelations. Overall, these events highlight the ongoing legal challenges facing Donald Trump and the complexities of high-profile investigations.
New details emerge on Trump's handling of classified docs at Mar-a-Lago: Evan Corcoran's notes suggest Trump and associates may have mishandled classified documents, Trump was given declassification instructions but failed to follow them, Merrick Garland's team received a letter from Trump's lawyers before expected indictment, investigation reaching final stages, outcome could be significant.
Recent revelations from Evan Corcoran's notes suggest that Donald Trump and his associates, including his personal valet Walt Nauta, may have been more involved in the handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago than previously known. These notes, which were provided to the investigators, indicate that Trump was given clear instructions on how to declassify documents but failed to follow them. The fact that Merrick Garland's team received a letter from Trump's lawyers just before the expected indictment could indicate that they were trying to prevent it by negotiating or discussing the return of the documents. This letter could be a sign that the investigation is reaching its final stages, and the outcome could be significant.
AG Merrick Garland not interfering with Trump probe, Special Counsel Jack Smith in charge: Special Counsel Jack Smith, an apolitical entity, leads Trump investigation, making decisions autonomously, while AG Garland stays out of way.
The Attorney General, Merrick Garland, is not making the decision in the ongoing investigation into the handling of classified documents by Donald Trump. Instead, Special Counsel Jack Smith, an apolitical entity, has the autonomy to make decisions and follow Department of Justice policies without interference. The letter from Trump allies to Congress asking for the Department of Justice to stand down on the probe may be a desperate attempt to influence Smith, as the investigation heats up and potential actions against Trump appear imminent. The recent leaks from the prosecutor's office also suggest increased pressure on the investigation.
16 documents suggest Trump mishandled classified info: Trump faces scrutiny for potentially mishandling classified docs, with 16 pieces of evidence from reports and official docs from DOJ. Two lawyers involved have quit and criticized his actions, but Trump's defiant response adds to the complexity.
The National Archive identified 16 documents suggesting that Donald Trump may have mishandled classified information, and this information came from both investigative reporting and official documents from the Department of Justice. Additionally, two lawyers involved in the Mar-a-Lago case, Evan Corcoran and Tim Parlatore, have quit and made public statements criticizing Trump's handling of documents. The letter from Parlatore to the Senate Intelligence Committee attempted to downplay the situation and suggested that the documents were accidentally taken. However, Trump's response, which included leaving his contact information unredacted in a letter to Merrick Garland, was seen as defiant and uncooperative. The situation remains complex and unfolding, but it appears that Trump's handling of classified documents is a significant issue.
Trump's letter to AG Garland is a public relations move: Trump's team uses letter as an opportunity to label investigations a political witch hunt and rally support from base, while potentially setting up a defense strategy for future lawsuits.
The letter from Donald Trump requesting a meeting with Attorney General Merrick Garland over ongoing investigations against him is more about public perception and defense than an actual attempt to influence the decision-making process. Trump's team is using this as an opportunity to label the investigations as a political witch hunt and to rally support from his base. They understand that the decision to indict or not will be based on the evidence, but they are engaging in a pressure campaign to influence public opinion. The letter also serves as a potential defense strategy in case of future defamation lawsuits. The team's goal is to create a narrative that they were denied a fair hearing and that the investigations are politically motivated.
Endorsing Athletic Greens and Moink: The speaker advocates for Athletic Greens' AG1 supplement and Moink for their high-quality ingredients, nutritional benefits, and support for family farms, making them daily habits for overall health and well-being.
The speaker strongly endorses Athletic Greens' AG1 supplement for its high-quality ingredients, ease of use, and comprehensive nutritional benefits. It's a daily habit that the speaker believes significantly contributes to their overall health and well-being. Additionally, they highlight Moink as a better alternative to mass-produced meat, offering grass-fed, pastured, and wild-caught options while supporting family farms. Lastly, the ongoing legal case involving E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump's comments about her allegations of sexual assault is currently unfolding, with the latest development being a motion filed for a trial on the defamation claim.
Donald Trump's Defamation Trial with E. Jean Carroll: Two Related Cases: Trump was found liable for defamation in one case for denying Carroll's sexual misconduct allegations. He's being sued again for defamatory statements about Carroll on CNN and social media, with the plaintiffs seeking punitive damages.
The ongoing legal battle between E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump involves two related cases. In the first case, a jury found Trump liable for defamation based on his denial of Carroll's allegations of sexual misconduct. The second case, which went to trial while the first was on hold, pertains to Trump's defamatory statements about Carroll on CNN and social media. The plaintiffs are seeking punitive damages, arguing that Trump's actions were intended to harm Carroll and deter future similar conduct. The legal team for Carroll amended the initial complaint to include these new allegations instead of filing a new suit to avoid potential complications and delays.
Jury verdict limits accused's first amendment rights: Once a jury makes a finding in a defamation case, the accused cannot deny established facts without potentially defaming again and may face summary judgment.
Once a jury makes a finding in a defamation case, the accused's first amendment rights are limited, and they cannot deny the facts as established by the jury without potentially crossing into defamation. The accused cannot continue to retrial the case as if the jury's findings did not exist. The jury's verdict becomes the law of the case, and any subsequent jury will be instructed to assume the truth of the established facts. The accused's only remaining decision is whether their statements regarding those facts are defamatory. This could potentially lead to summary judgment if the statements are found to be defamatory in light of the established facts. The accused had a strategic choice as lawyers and as the client to consider the potential consequences of their actions in light of the jury's findings.
Consolidated Case or New Lawsuit?: Judge may decide plaintiff wins defamation case based on undisputed facts and defamation law without jury trial, saving time and resources.
The parties in this case have the option to either start a new lawsuit with a 2023 case number and go through the entire process again, or they can move forward with a consolidated case that already has completed discovery and a jury verdict. The undisputed facts include the defendant's admission to being a sex abuser and making certain statements. The dispute lies in whether these statements are defamatory. However, the speaker argues that as a matter of law, these statements are defamatory based on the undisputed factual record and the application of defamation law. The judge may issue a judgment in the plaintiff's favor without a jury trial. This approach would save time and resources compared to starting a new case.
Jury's factual findings in civil cases cannot be overruled by a judge based on the First Amendment: In civil cases, juries determine facts, and their decisions cannot be overruled by a judge based on the First Amendment. Opinions, while not facts, can still be defamatory.
In a civil case, a jury's verdict is a factual finding that cannot be overruled by a judge based on the First Amendment. During the discussion, it was highlighted that in a Delaware case, a judge found defamation against an individual and even came close to ruling on actual malice. Opinions, while not facts, can still be defamatory. The jury process is essential in civil cases as they determine facts, and their findings are final. The speakers also shared their appreciation for each other and reminisced about starting their podcast together. Ben and his brothers had founded Midas Touch with a small following, and after a friendly relationship post-litigation, they decided to work together on cases. During the pandemic, they started the Wednesday Show to discuss the intersection of law and politics.
Two lawyers turned their website into a successful podcast: Seize opportunities, turn personal interests into something larger, and be adaptable and resilient.
The beginnings of a successful podcast can come from unexpected places. In this case, two lawyers, bored during the pandemic, started writing content for a website and eventually began creating a podcast as a spin-off. They started with humble beginnings, recording in makeshift settings and struggling to gain an audience. But through persistence and collaboration, they refined their content and eventually found success. This story illustrates the importance of seizing opportunities and turning personal interests into something larger. It also highlights the value of adaptability and resilience in the face of challenges.
The power of encouragement and belief in each other: Support from audience, whether through watching, listening, following, or purchasing merchandise, can help create something great like a successful podcast.
The power of encouragement and belief in each other can lead to the creation of something great, like a successful podcast. Karen and Michael's supportive interaction during their first podcast episode led to the formation of "Midweek Legal AF" on the Midas Touch network. The audience can support them by watching on YouTube, listening on audio platforms, following on social media, and purchasing merchandise from the Midas Touch store. While all these actions are free, it's essential to remember that your time is valuable. The team is grateful for the support of their audience, the "Legal AFs" and "Midas Mighty," and they look forward to continuing to provide entertaining and informative content every Wednesday and Saturday.
