Podcast Summary
Donald Trump's Disruptive Behavior at Fraud Trial: Trump's disruptive behavior outside the courtroom, including attacks on prosecutors and judges, has led to warnings and a gag order in the ongoing fraud trial. Some defendants in related cases are cooperating as witnesses to secure deals, while Trump's attorneys and others face potential gag orders.
The fraud trial against Donald Trump and his entities is underway in New York, with the first witness being an accountant. Trump has been behaving disruptively outside the courtroom, attacking prosecutors, judges, and the justice system, leading to multiple warnings and a gag order. The New York Attorney General's case requires proof of intent and materiality, and the judge has cautioned against interference with the trial. Meanwhile, some defendants in related cases are cooperating as witnesses to secure deals. Trump's attorneys and others involved in election interference cases are also facing potential gag orders. Despite these efforts to maintain order, Trump's public attacks on the justice system continue.
Growth of The Legal AF Podcast and Coverage of Trump Fraud Case: The Legal AF podcast has seen exponential growth and now covers the Trump fraud case, with potential funds going back to New York if successful, and the power of the NY AG's office to protect the public.
The Legal AF podcast, which started with 5,000 viewers a year and a half ago, has grown exponentially to reach millions of viewers, and the hosts are humbled and grateful for their success. They're currently covering the fraud case against Donald Trump, which was filed by New York Attorney General Leticia James and resulted in a judgment last week. The first count of the complaint, which doesn't require a finding of intent, alleges persistent fraud and misleading the public. The money, if the attorney general is successful, will go back to the people of New York due to the fraud perpetuated on them. The Trump team has filed a notice of appeal but didn't ask for a stay or an injunction, and there's a clock ticking for the trial. The hosts are impressed with the power of the New York attorney general's office to take fraud seriously and protect the public.
Appealing a ruling during an ongoing trial in New York: In New York, a party can appeal certain rulings before the final judgment, but it's unlikely the appellate court would rule quickly during an ongoing trial, so the trial continues while the appeal process runs.
During a trial in New York, unlike some other states, a party can appeal certain rulings before the final judgment is issued. This means that if a defendant, such as Donald Trump in this case, is appealing a summary judgment ruling on one count of a multi-count case, and the trial is ongoing for other counts, the appeal process could potentially take several months. If the appeal is successful, it could impact only the appealed count, leaving the remaining counts to be tried and judged. However, based on past appellate division rulings in this case, it's unlikely that the appellate court would move quickly to rule on an emergency basis while the trial is still ongoing. Therefore, the trial is likely to continue as planned, with the appeal process running concurrently.
Legal proceedings against Trump involve financial fraud allegations: Defense filed interlocutory appeal during ongoing trial, potentially leading to two separate trials if unsuccessful
The ongoing legal proceedings against Donald Trump and his associates involve multiple allegations of financial fraud, including insurance fraud, business record fraud, and financial statement fraud. If found guilty, the potential remedies include disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, dissolution of businesses, and the appointment of a monitor. However, the recent appeal hearing focused only on the legality of the judge's decision to grant summary judgment on one specific count of the indictment. From an observational standpoint, it's noteworthy that the defense chose to file an interlocutory appeal during the ongoing trial, which could potentially lead to two separate trials if the appeal is unsuccessful. As a seasoned trial attorney, I would have advised against this approach, as it could lead to unnecessary time, resources, and risk. Overall, the complexities of the case and the unique aspects of the legal proceedings make for an intriguing and educational trial observation.
Donald Trump's Unique Role in His Civil Trial: Trump's presence in his civil trial is driven by his desire for media coverage, not legal necessity. The defense is attempting to sway public opinion by focusing on the banks making money, but the case is about fraud, not theft.
The ongoing trial involving Donald Trump is unlike typical trials due to its heated and fiery nature, with the defendants seemingly trying to please Trump by rehashing rejected arguments and grandstanding. Trump's presence in the trial, which is not required in a civil case, is believed to be driven by his desire to control the narrative and gain maximum media coverage. The defense is attempting to sway public opinion by arguing that no harm was done as the banks involved made money and had their loans repaid. This case highlights the difference between theft and fraud in the law, with the former involving the taking of someone else's property, and the latter involving deceit or false representation. Despite the defense's emotional appeals, the case is not about theft but fraud, which is a legal concept.
Fraud vs Theft: A Matter of Manipulation and Deception: This trial highlights the importance of accountability for fraudulent actions, which undermine the economy and fair business dealings. The focus on intent and ethical behavior is crucial in fraud cases, and the defense's weak strategy may not distract from the real issues.
While theft involves directly taking something tangible from someone, fraud is about manipulation, deception, and misrepresentation. Fraud undermines the economy and fair business dealings, and this trial is about holding someone accountable for their fraudulent actions. The attorney general's office is making a strong case by putting key players on the stand and highlighting their failure to act ethically. The focus on intent in fraud cases is crucial, and the defense's strategy of targeting these individuals instead of Donald Trump is perceived as a weak attempt to distract from the real issues. The trial is not being taken seriously by the defense, and they seem more interested in personal grievances than in mounting a strategic defense.
Trump's legal team behaves like a riverboat gambler: Despite knowing they're unlikely to win, Trump's team disrupts trial with grandstanding and deceitful actions to appeal to political audience
During the ongoing trial, Donald Trump and his legal team are behaving like a riverboat gambler with nothing to lose, throwing "popcorn at the screen" through grandstanding and disruptive behavior. They are doing this to appeal to their political audience, despite knowing they are unlikely to win. The intent behind their deceitful actions during business deals might not have been material enough to sustain a serious case. This strategy was exemplified in a past arbitration case where an opposing lawyer attacked the arbitrator during the opening statement, which either earned him favor or further antagonized the judge. Trump's behavior, including avoiding depositions and causing disruptions in court, is seen as a desperate attempt to get attention and make headlines, rather than a genuine effort to change the judge's mind based on facts and the law.
Judge Goran's impartiality crucial for Trump fraud case outcome: Judge Goran's reputation for impartiality and careful decision-making could help insulate him from appellate review in the Trump fraud case despite past bias accusations. The trial's meticulous nature and Trump's forced engagement with the evidence are captivating Judge Goran.
Judge Jeng Goran's impartiality in the Trump fraud case may be crucial for the outcome, as his reputation for careful consideration and thoughtful decision-making could help insulate him from appellate review despite past accusations of bias. The trial, which involves financial fraud allegations, has been described as methodical and mind-numbing to the uninitiated but captivating to Judge Goran. Donald Trump, who has been accused of various crimes and has previously avoided watching evidence presented against him, is now being forced to do so, and the experience appears to be taking a toll on him. The trial's meticulous nature and the attorney general's skilled presentation of evidence are hanging on every word of Judge Goran, who is known for his media attention and is trying to get to the bottom of the financial fraud allegations.
Trump's Infrequent Attendance at Impeachment Trial: Former President Trump is expected to make only a few appearances at his impeachment trial due to his absence from Washington D.C. before its start. The trial also highlighted the issue of criminal defendants targeting prosecutors and judges, with attempts to impose gag orders.
Former President Trump's attendance at the ongoing impeachment trial is unlikely to be frequent. Trump left Washington D.C. before the trial began and it's speculated that he might only make a few appearances throughout the trial. The discussion also touched upon the issue of criminal defendants targeting prosecutors, their families, and judges, and the attempts to impose gag orders. Michael, who is passionate about this topic, shared his opinion. In a lighter vein, the episode featured sponsor messages for Miracle Maids bedsheets and Roan's commuter collection, which promise to enhance sleep quality and provide comfortable clothing options, respectively.
Discussing Trump's Threats to the Justice System: Understanding the limits of free speech and potential consequences of threatening behavior is crucial.
The Commuter collection from Roan is a must-have for any workday, and you can save 20% by visiting roan.com/legalaf and using the promo code legalaf. The podcast, sponsored by Roan and other advertisers, provides insightful discussions on various topics, including legal matters and the importance of advertisers in sustaining the show. The hosts discussed Donald Trump's history of attacking judges, witnesses, and other stakeholders in the justice system, often inciting violence through his rhetoric. Despite the numerous protective and gag orders issued against him, Trump continues to make threats, normalizing such behavior and raising questions about the limits of free speech. The hosts also considered the possibility of a supplemental request from Jack Smith's special counsel regarding recent threats made by Trump during the ongoing trial. The discussion underscores the importance of understanding the boundaries of free speech and the potential consequences of threatening behavior.
Trump's Rhetoric: A Threat to Public Safety?: Former President Trump's inflammatory rhetoric and social media posts, including calls for harm and violence, have raised concerns for public safety and should not be tolerated.
Former President Donald Trump's rhetoric, as discussed in the conversation, can be seen as inciting violence and threatening public figures. His posts on social media, including calls to harm specific individuals and law enforcement personnel, have raised concerns about safety and potential repercussions. These actions should not be dismissed as free speech, especially when they have the potential to incite harm or violence. It's important to hold individuals accountable for their words, particularly when they have a large following and the power to influence actions. The use of threats and intimidation should not be tolerated, regardless of political affiliations or positions.
Balancing First Amendment rights and fair trials for high-profile defendants: Judges are taking steps to protect fair trials and witnesses from intimidation by high-profile defendants like Trump, despite his history of threatening behavior and political influence.
The judicial system is struggling to balance the First Amendment rights of a high-profile defendant, like Donald Trump, with the need to ensure fair trials and protect against intimidation of witnesses and judges. Despite a history of threatening behavior and clear warnings, Trump's political power and influence have allowed him to avoid prosecution in some cases. However, with the ongoing trials in New York and Georgia, judges are taking steps to protect the judicial process, such as making juries anonymous and issuing gag orders. The question remains whether Judge Chutkan will take further action against Trump and if the Department of Justice will provide evidence of his past bad conduct to support such an order.
Protecting the Integrity of the Trial and Ensuring Safety: Judge Chutkin may address threats, but Trump's disregard for court orders and escalating rhetoric could lead to stronger consequences, potentially harming individuals or the judicial system.
The ongoing legal proceedings against Donald Trump involve two major issues: protecting the integrity of the trial and ensuring the safety of individuals involved. The speaker believes Judge Chutkin will take action to address threats, but may not grant all requests. However, if Trump continues to disregard court orders and make threats, there could be stronger consequences. The escalating rhetoric and disregard for the rule of law is concerning, and there is a growing consensus among judges that action may be necessary. The threats against individuals and the judicial system are appalling and undermine the integrity of the legal process. Trump's actions could have serious consequences if someone is hurt or if the jury pool is compromised.
Georgia Trial: Expected Plea Deals for Some Defendants: The Georgia trial involving disgraced lawyers and former President Trump's associates may lead to plea deals for some defendants. Prosecutor Fonnie Willis is leading the investigation into election equipment interference and software downloading for fraudulent purposes.
The ongoing trial in Georgia involving disgraced lawyers Ken Cheseborough and Sidney Powell, among others, connected to former President Donald Trump, is expected to result in plea deals for some defendants. This follows the cooperation and plea deal of Scott Hall, a bail bondsman involved in election equipment interference and software downloading for fraudulent purposes. Prosecutor Fonnie Willis, known for handling large cases, is leading the investigation. The Supreme Court is also back in session, with significant cases expected to be heard. The Georgia trial is a significant development in the ongoing investigations related to election interference.
Cooperating with Criminal Investigations: Vetting Potential Cooperators: Prosecutors vet potential cooperators to ensure their credibility and strengthen cases, while some defendants may cooperate to receive leniency.
In large-scale criminal investigations, prosecutors anticipate that some defendants may cooperate or "flip" to strengthen their case and potentially receive a more lenient sentence. The level of culpability varies among individuals involved, and prosecutors typically do not cooperate with the most culpable individuals to get lower-level ones. The process of vetting potential cooperators is crucial to ensure their credibility and avoid damaging the case. In the ongoing investigation related to the 2020 election, some individuals, like Mike Roman, have already cooperated, while others, such as Donald Trump and his associates, are still under investigation. The outcome of negotiations with these individuals remains uncertain.
Early cooperators in election probe may provide valuable info, but redundancy could make later testimonies less valuable.: Cooperators with unique insights can help investigation, but their value decreases with redundancy. Some may choose not to cooperate or have less culpability.
In the ongoing investigation into the attempted overturning of the 2020 presidential election results, the early cooperators are likely to provide more valuable information to the prosecution due to their unique insights. However, after a certain point, the redundancy of the information provided by additional cooperators may make their testimonies less valuable. Some individuals may choose not to cooperate and "go down with the ship," while others may be less culpable and opt out. Notable figures like Bernie Kerick and Mike Roman, who have previously cooperated with the investigation, may be high on Fani Willis' list due to their connections to key players and the potential wealth of information they could provide. However, their past convictions and associations could complicate matters.
Trump allies could face criminal charges, some may flip and take plea deals: Supporters of Trump in legal battles may face criminal charges, and those less connected or financially stable could flip and take plea deals, while trials could start as early as 2024 and may be limited to a few defendants per trial.
The individuals close to Donald Trump who are still supporting him in his ongoing legal battles, such as Sydney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, may be putting themselves at risk by focusing their loyalty on him rather than on the prosecutors and the jury. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is expected to bring criminal charges against some of Trump's associates, and those who are not well-off or deeply connected to Trump may be more likely to flip and take plea deals. The trials could start as early as March or April of 2024, and it's likely that the number of defendants in each trial will be limited to avoid lengthy and complicated proceedings. The prosecution process is expected to be challenging for Trump's associates, and some of them may choose to reduce the number of defendants in each trial to minimize the number of witnesses and inconsistent records.
Engaging with the Midas Touch network: Support the Midas Touch network by leaving reviews, comments, thumbs up, subscribing to their channels, purchasing merchandise, and becoming Patreon supporters for exclusive content.
The Midas Touch network, hosted by Karen Friedman and Ben, provides insightful discussions on the intersection of law, politics, and justice. They deliver their content through various platforms, including YouTube and podcasts. To support their work, viewers and listeners can engage by leaving reviews, comments, and thumbs up, as well as subscribing to their YouTube channel and purchasing merchandise from their store. Additionally, those who wish to access exclusive content can become Patreon supporters. Unlike traditional media, the Midas Touch network operates independently, allowing for a more direct connection between the creators and their audience.
