Gag Orders

Smith before Judge chunkin to discuss a gag order. And in this conversation with Glenn, we go and we talk about all of Trump's legal woes, but in particular between what is happening in down in Georgia this month, as well as what will be happening as you're listening to this in Washington, d C. You know, and here's what I will say, folks, as you've been, you know, listening

to the show. There are so many more important things that are happening in the world and in this country, but it is still really important to keep an eye on the person that ushered in this political healthscape that we are currently living with, where you know, lawlessness reigns supreme.

And you know, again, while I recognize and you know, through the conversations that I have on this show and have stated, particularly over last week, that we know that there are more important things and more important places to be putting our energy. But it is important also to keep an eye on and a foothold in what is transpiring inside of our judicial system. For right now, it continues to hold and I'm just looking friends, you know,

at the the Federal Circuit. I'm not even going to touch what is happening at the Supreme Court and what continues to happen there in that grifting, you know place. But how these judges move with regard to recognizing the threat and the danger to our country that Donald Trump continues to impose is going to be important because what they are doing is setting the stage for how we

will measure things moving forward. And what we know is that Donald Trump has continued to break the rules, move the gold posts, understanding that the rules don't apply to him. And you know, you can look no further than George Santos right in Congress. You can look at Bob Menendez in the Senate. You can look at these people who have broken our norms right and broken the law and

are currently indicted. But why did these people think that they could get away with certain behaviors and certain actions. Well because what's good for the goose is good for the gander, And so it's really important for us to keep an eye on what is happening and how our judiciary shakes out, because this is our last hold, you know,

between this andful fledged authoritarianism. So what happens over the next several months and the course of twenty twenty four is going to have deep implications as to where this country ends up come, you know, a year from now, which, frankly, sometimes I do wish I had a crystal ball, But then sometimes I'm really glad that I don't, because a part of me doesn't want to know, but then a part of me wants to know. So I can tell us all how to prepare for what is coming next.

But coming up next with this conversation is our friend Glenn Kirshner. Folks, it has been a while since we've had our friend MSNBC legal analyst and the host of Justice Matters, Glenn Kirshner on Woke a f Daily to give us a primer into where we are in the

legal dull drums of Donald Trump. Glenn, let's start out with Georgia and what is transpired there, because Jim Jordan, who just well, as of this recording, has lost his bid to be the news speaker for the Republican Party, has been weaponizing his position as the chair of the House Judiciary Committee in many ways. But I would love for you to give us a primer into what he's been trying to do and what Fannie Willis has called him out on.

overturn the results of a presidential election. Instead of providing that evidence to a Congressional committee and by extension, to the American people, he criminally defied the subpoena, thereby hiding from all of us the evidence of Donald Trump's January sixth crimes. That is something for which he has never been made to account. I hope the hell he is someday.

But against that backdrop, he then tried to interfere, misuse his office and his power as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to try to interfere in Alvin Bragg's prosecution up in New York. He didn't make a lot of

headway there. Now he's trying to interfere in Fonnie Willis's RICO prosecution of Trump and others down in Georgia by basically demanding that she'd turn over all of the information and the documents and answer all kinds of questions about why she is choosing to prosecute somebody who violated the laws of the State of Georgia. He is abusing his position,

his power, his authority. He, in my opinion, is very likely committing any number of crimes, including being an accessory after the fact to Donald Trump's crimes, because he's trying to help Donald Trump avoid and evade accountability prosecution. He's trying to cover up the evidence of Donald Trump's crimes. And it is mind boggling to me that the Department of Justice thus far has let him do it with impunity.

So Fawnie Willis pushed back hard, sent the letter, i think her second letter just yesterday or in recent days, saying you either don't know, oh that the Constitution actually separates the powers of the federal government from the States, and you, mister fed have no right interfering in the state court prosecution of a criminal former president of the United States or anybody else. Either you don't understand the way the constitution works, or you're just affirmatively trying to

obstruct justice and try to help Trump avoid accountability. Which is it? So she's not giving an inch, and now we have to see what the next move might be.

Jim Jordan is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. So tell me how this would make sense if, in fact, Jim Jordan wasn't just trying to obstruct the law, or is there an avenue for that to make sense?

Here is the best Jim Jordan has. He can say, you know, the prosecutor's office in Georgia receives some federal funds, some federal grants, some federal money, and in our oversight capacity, we want to question members or representatives of the Fulton County District Attorney's office just to make sure that these federal funds are being spent appropriately and aren't being you know, misallocated to bring an inappropriate prosecution against the former federal official.

As those words come out of my mouth, I don't believe them because it's bs. But that really is the only sort of legitimate potential hook Jim Jordan can hang his hat on demanding information from Fawnie Willis.

play for Jordan. He can try to subpoena her, and if she refuses to comply, I don't know if he's technically issued a subpoena or they've just been sending letters

back and forth at this point. And then if she refuses to apply and stands on the separation of powers as provided by the Constitution, he can then move it into court to try to have the court enforce the subpoena, which he did up in New York when Alvin Bragg told him to, you know, stick your subpoena, you know awhere, And then there was some negotiating and Alvin Bragg ended up presenting some information to Jordan and to his committee.

So I assume this will probably move into the courts, and then we'll have to have a court decide if this is a righteous subpoena or if it's a violation of the separation of powers and the subpoena is being used nefariously by Jim Jordan to try to obstruct a state court prosecution.

So it may very well be a Georgia federal court will take this up if it if it gets that far.

things down or to obstruct where it's a waste of the court's time.

held fairly strong. I have a feeling though this is probably slightly different than Trump and his lawyers filing frivolous federal suits or cases. And here's what I predict will happen.

Sort of much of what we saw in New York when okay, there was a little bit of negotiating, and ultimately Alvin Bragg provided some information, you know, probably that had something to do with federal money, federal grants, federal funds that were being used by the New York District Attorney's office, because that's actually a legitimate area for oversight. But we all know that's not what Jim Jordan is doing.

Has Jim Jordan subpoena district attorneys from the other forty nine states to find out how federal funds and grant money are being used, of course not because they're not prosecuting his political benefactor, Donald Trump. So this is as transparent as it gets.

name Donald Trump, Donald Trump would be in jail. He has threatened judges, he has threatened law clerks, he has threatened jurors, he has weaponized his social media platforms and put people in harm's way. There is no way that if he was not the former twice impeached president of the United States, that he would be out right now. So now here comes Jack Smith working to try and get a gag order. Talk to us about this, because

what we've seen is these limited gag orders. Judge anger On, I feel like I'm maybe butchering his name put one in place, not for himself, but after Donald Trump posted the picture of his law clerk with Chuck Schumer. So what do you make of this?

of law. And here's how Donald Trump, as you just cataloged, has been endangering witnesses, grand jurors, prosecutors, judges, and all of their respective family members. And he's been doing it with impunity. But what happens when somebody close to a judge, somebody that a judge obviously feels very protective about his law clerk, gets put in harm's way by a Donald Trump instant gag order. Well, isn't it not? See I'm not laying into Judge Ngeron here because he did the

right thing. But it highlights that if you're close to a judge, if a judge feels protective about you, in particular instant gag order, no motions and replies and oppositions and oral arguments and decisions, and written a snap gag order to protect somebody that the judge feels protective about. How about we feel protective regarding the witnesses Donald Trump is endangering every day and the jurors and the prosecutors and their family, just the way Judge Ngern felt protective

of his law clerk. And how about we use the rule of law as it was intended to be used, and we gag Donald Trump from endangering all those other people who maybe aren't so close to the judge. You know, you can see that there's more injustice than there is justice right in this snap gag order that was issued

by Judge Ngeround. But the silver lining, which I'm always looking for, and sometimes it's peeking out behind the big dark cloud that is Donald Trump, the silver lining is I think this will make it even easier for Judge Chuckkin on Monday. I'll be in the courtroom when this argument is held to impose a far more sweeping gag order.

Because even after Jack Smith filed the motion with Judge Chuckin seeking a broader gag order, what did Donald Trump do said that one of the really compelling witnesses against him, General Mark Milly, should be executed Danielle. If a defendant on release in four felony cases ever threatened to witness, that person would be in pre trial detention so fast

it would make their head spin. And this is the continued failure of our institutions of government to take responsibility for a president, former president, who continues to try to kill our democracy. And I wish I had an explanation for why we are allowing it to go.

anybody else would be instantly pending trial. Not only that, he's also on pre trial release presently, and he has been violating the terms of his release with impunity. That's a reason to revoke his pre trial release. Separate and apart from whether he's a danger to the community and a flight risk, he is either unable or unwilling to abide by conditions of release. There are so many reasons to detain impending trial, not the least of which is

it will end up taking away his megaphone. It will bring the temperature of the country down, It will give it will give the people some hope of a fair and impartial jury being impaneled to try the case against him. You know, and our system of government, our institutions, refuse to take responsibility and do what the law really demands. They're just ignoring it.

the streets and start shooting? Okay, here's the thing that would be horrific, And I don't ever want to see that happen in America. But it doesn't matter because you do not make prosecutorial decisions based on extraneous factors, because once you do, the rule of law means nothing because you're no longer applying it as it was intended to be applied. I'm not going to say I don't care if his supporters take up arms. I don't think they

will because they are by and large weaken, cowardly people. Yes, some of them are well armed, but I don't think they're going to put them in themselves in harm's way if Donald Trump is detained pending trial. But we are putting the nation in harm's way if we don't apply the law as it was intended to be applied and detain Donald Trump pending trial.

perceived as threatening, intimidating, harassing. And then she's going to have to fashion a number of restrictions to prevent him from infecting the jury pool, from continuing to flood the you know, the airwaves and continue to spew into the public square disinformation that you know, the people who are going to be jurors, they're absorbing it, they're hearing it, you know. And so she's going to have to find some creative way to limit Donald Trump's ability to poison

the jury pool. And the other thing that was just taken up in a recent motion filed by Jack Smith is with respect to once the jurors come into the courtroom, the hundreds of them who are summoned into you know, for jury selection, what Donald Trump may not do. For example, this is what Jack Smith just filed emotion regarding they said. Look, you can look at social media and look at any

publicly available information. For example, if jurors are posting publicly things about themselves, but you can't contact them, you can't communicate with them, you can't friend them trying to draw more information out of them. And you can't have your cruddy associates like Roger Stone and Steve Bannon and these other knuckleheads. You can't have them friend them or communicate them with them as your surrogates, et cetera, et cetera. These are perilous times for jurors as much as anybody else.

So Judge Chuckin, who is up to the task. I used to try murder cases against her back in the day, and I've been in her court more recently as she's presided over Jay six cases. She's up to the task. But it's going to be challenging to fashion the kind of you know, narrowly tailored restrictions on his speech and his posts that will accomplish all of this, but that won't run a foul of the First Amendment.

detained pending trial. And it's in that way they basically put the keys to the jail cell in the defendant's hand, and they warn them, if you violate the condition one more time, I will lock you up. Your freedom is in your hands, not mine. I would suspect now there may be an intram money fine, which doesn't matter because he'll just grift more money from his base pay the fine. But I suspect that is the direction in which we're heading, and it's only a question of how quickly we get there.

I do think, I do think there's a very real possibility that Donald Trump will end up in a jail cell, not just after he is convicted and sentenced, but while he is pending trial.

of weeks if there are some exigent circumstances. But I think we're going to see a trial this winter into early spring, and that will result in Donald Trump's first criminal conviction.

Fannie Willis has extended to other defendants are accepted? Did how many defendants drop out, plead guilty, flip and cooperate, and how many are left to go to trial?