Latest / Serious Trouble / Rudy Got Served!

Transcript

Rudy Got Served! · Serious Trouble

0:00
SPEAKER_00: Hey, this is Josh Barrow back with another episode of Serious Trouble.
0:03
SPEAKER_00: This week for free subscribers,
0:04
SPEAKER_00: we have an update on Donald Trump's criminal trial in Manhattan,
0:07
SPEAKER_00: the cross-examination of Michael Cohen.
0:10
SPEAKER_00: Who's a crying little shit?
0:12
SPEAKER_00: That is literally one of the questions that came up.
0:15
SPEAKER_00: The judge sustained an objection, but it got the got the cross-examination off on an interesting foot.
0:21
SPEAKER_00: Maybe not a very good cross-examination overall.
0:23
SPEAKER_00: We talk about that and we talk about more shenanigans with the gag order.
0:27
SPEAKER_00: And we have a little bit of conversation about Rudy Giuliani, who got served for paying subscribers.
0:32
SPEAKER_00: There's much more this week.
0:33
SPEAKER_00: There's also a discussion of Rudy Giuliani's finances.
0:35
SPEAKER_00: He's bankrupt.
0:36
SPEAKER_00: The bankruptcy judge is mad at him for not cooperating in the way that he tends to
0:41
SPEAKER_00: not cooperate in legal proceedings.
0:42
SPEAKER_00: And some discussion of,
0:44
SPEAKER_00: you know,
0:44
SPEAKER_00: at what point will he lose control over the assets that he's supposed to be trying
0:48
SPEAKER_00: to sell?
0:49
SPEAKER_00: When will the court step in and, you know, auction off one of his apartments, for example?
0:53
SPEAKER_00: So we talk about that.
0:54
SPEAKER_00: We talk about David DePapp, who assaulted Paul Pelosi.
0:58
SPEAKER_00: He's been sentenced to 30 years in prison,
0:59
SPEAKER_00: but the judge screwed up a little bit at his sentencing and the government is
1:03
SPEAKER_00: trying to clean up that mess.
1:05
SPEAKER_00: And then Hunter Biden,
1:06
SPEAKER_00: his benefactor,
1:07
SPEAKER_00: Kevin Morris,
1:08
SPEAKER_00: this Hollywood entertainment lawyer who's been providing him financial support to
1:11
SPEAKER_00: pay his back taxes and to pay his legal bills.
1:14
SPEAKER_00: Kevin Morris has spent over $6 million and now says he's out of money to spend on
1:17
SPEAKER_00: Hunter Biden,
1:18
SPEAKER_00: which is inconvenient as Hunter Biden is about to go into two criminal trials.
1:22
SPEAKER_00: The first one coming up very soon in Delaware over these gun charges and his
1:27
SPEAKER_00: attorney saying,
1:27
SPEAKER_00: we're not ready.
1:29
SPEAKER_00: We don't have our expert witnesses lined up.
1:30
SPEAKER_00: It seems like,
1:31
SPEAKER_00: you know,
1:31
SPEAKER_00: one of the reasons for that is they don't have the money to pay the expert witnesses.
1:34
SPEAKER_00: So this is a serious problem for Hunter Biden.
1:37
SPEAKER_00: Might even mean he ends up in the hands of the federal public defender for at least
1:40
SPEAKER_00: one of his cases,
1:41
SPEAKER_00: though,
1:41
SPEAKER_00: as Ken discusses,
1:42
SPEAKER_00: the federal public defender is actually pretty good and pretty well positioned to
1:46
SPEAKER_00: do this sort of thing.
1:47
SPEAKER_00: So if you want to hear all of that, go to SeriousTrouble.show.
1:49
SPEAKER_00: You can upgrade for $6 a month or $60 a year.
1:52
SPEAKER_00: You'll get the full episode.
1:53
SPEAKER_00: You'll get every full episode, approximately 50 episodes a year.
1:56
SPEAKER_00: And it'll be part of our community.
1:57
SPEAKER_00: You'll be able to join our discussions and our lively comments section.
2:01
SPEAKER_00: And you'll be helping to make this podcast possible.
2:04
SPEAKER_00: We rely on the support of listeners like you in order to bring you this podcast nearly every week.
2:09
SPEAKER_00: So again, if you would like to hear that, go to SeriousTrouble.show and upgrade.
2:22
SPEAKER_00: Hi, it's Ken White.
2:23
SPEAKER_00: And it's Josh Barrow, and this is Serious Trouble.
2:26
SPEAKER_00: Ken, didn't you go on TikTok and call me a crying little shit?
2:30
SPEAKER_00: I would never do that, Josh.
2:31
SPEAKER_00: TikTok is for much younger people.
2:35
SPEAKER_00: This, of course, was Todd Blanch's opening question to Michael Cohen.
2:39
SPEAKER_00: Todd Blanch, the lead attorney for Donald Trump in his criminal trial in Manhattan.
2:44
SPEAKER_00: had the opportunity to spend days cross-examining Michael Cohen.
2:47
SPEAKER_00: And that's what he opened with.
2:49
SPEAKER_00: Didn't you call me a little shit on TikTok?
2:51
SPEAKER_00: Ken, is that a normal way to open your cross-examination?
2:54
SPEAKER_00: First of all, it's a crying little shit, Josh.
2:56
SPEAKER_00: Crying little shit.
2:57
SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
2:57
SPEAKER_01: So,
2:58
SPEAKER_01: you know,
2:58
SPEAKER_01: one of the rules of cross-examination is you want to save really good questions so
3:02
SPEAKER_01: you can start strong and end strong.
3:05
SPEAKER_01: This is not starting strong.
3:07
SPEAKER_01: This is more or less saying...
3:09
SPEAKER_01: In fact,
3:09
SPEAKER_01: haven't we established that you've shown that I'm a weepy little bitch,
3:15
SPEAKER_01: which is not really a way to establish dominance over the witness in front of the jury.
3:19
SPEAKER_01: Cohen,
3:19
SPEAKER_01: to his credit,
3:21
SPEAKER_01: immediately answered,
3:22
SPEAKER_01: well,
3:22
SPEAKER_01: that sounds like something I'd say,
3:23
SPEAKER_01: which is a good line.
3:25
SPEAKER_01: And the judge immediately sustained that objection and says,
3:27
SPEAKER_01: why are you making this about you,
3:29
SPEAKER_01: which is exactly the right question.
3:31
SPEAKER_01: Todd Blanch said that he was trying to establish dominance.
3:34
SPEAKER_01: Cohen's bias, but he had tons of things to establish Cohen's bias against Trump.
3:40
SPEAKER_01: Starting with a question about how you were mean to me,
3:43
SPEAKER_01: the lawyer asking the questions is kind of a sign that Cohen got under his skin.
3:48
SPEAKER_01: Right.
3:49
SPEAKER_01: And he made a bad decision about it.
3:51
SPEAKER_01: That is not a good way to start a cross-examination.
3:54
SPEAKER_00: How did the rest of the cross go?
3:56
SPEAKER_01: Well, there were some good moments.
3:57
SPEAKER_01: I mean, he did a workmanlike job on stuff that he needed to do.
4:02
SPEAKER_01: He demonstrated all the ways that Cohen has come out very strongly against Trump,
4:07
SPEAKER_01: is biased against him,
4:08
SPEAKER_01: has a financial interest in his rehabilitation tour,
4:13
SPEAKER_01: all these things.
4:13
SPEAKER_01: But there were a few problems.
4:16
SPEAKER_01: One of them is it was an interminably long cross-examination.
4:20
SPEAKER_01: Most lawyers would say that a cross-examination should be short and crisp.
4:26
SPEAKER_01: A friend of the show,
4:27
SPEAKER_01: Mitch Eppner,
4:28
SPEAKER_01: said that you wanted an hour,
4:30
SPEAKER_01: half an hour if you can,
4:31
SPEAKER_01: because after that,
4:33
SPEAKER_01: you lose the jury.
4:35
SPEAKER_01: And if you let it go that long, it's not going to be crisp.
4:37
SPEAKER_01: You're going to be self-indulgent.
4:39
SPEAKER_01: You've got to ask concise questions that control the witness.
4:43
SPEAKER_01: This went on for days.
4:45
SPEAKER_01: And the general consensus was it was not crisp.
4:48
SPEAKER_01: It was not terribly effective because sooner or later, the jury just gets bored.
4:53
SPEAKER_00: And so when you say it's important to be crisp,
4:55
SPEAKER_00: I assume what you mean is that you have a few things you want the jury to get out
4:59
SPEAKER_00: of the cross-examination.
5:01
SPEAKER_00: If it's really long, they might forget the important stuff.
5:09
SPEAKER_01: do.
5:09
SPEAKER_01: So,
5:10
SPEAKER_01: for instance,
5:11
SPEAKER_01: there was sort of a conservative media,
5:13
SPEAKER_01: a lot of crowing that Todd Blanche had landed a death blow against Michael Cohen.
5:19
SPEAKER_01: And this came out of a thing.
5:21
SPEAKER_01: Michael Cohen testified that he had made a call to another Trump organization
5:26
SPEAKER_01: employee about Stormy Daniels,
5:29
SPEAKER_01: and Todd Blanche came up with a text that
5:31
SPEAKER_01: that preceded this call that suggests that it was actually about some kid who's
5:37
SPEAKER_01: making crank calls to Michael Cohen.
5:40
SPEAKER_01: So didn't you lie about what that call was about?
5:42
SPEAKER_01: I mean,
5:43
SPEAKER_01: sure,
5:43
SPEAKER_01: in isolation,
5:44
SPEAKER_01: it's a nice moment,
5:45
SPEAKER_01: but when you put it in the middle of hours and hours of questions that don't land,
5:51
SPEAKER_01: It's not particularly effective,
5:52
SPEAKER_01: particularly when you've established that he did talk to all sorts of people about
5:56
SPEAKER_01: Stormy Daniels and this situation.
5:59
SPEAKER_01: So the jury,
6:01
SPEAKER_01: by most reports,
6:02
SPEAKER_01: was responding well to Cohen and even laughing at some of his answers,
6:06
SPEAKER_01: which is not a good sign.
6:08
SPEAKER_01: for the defense when the jury is laughing at the star witness's answers about your client.
6:13
SPEAKER_01: So, I mean, Blanche is competent.
6:16
SPEAKER_01: He's a very experienced attorney,
6:18
SPEAKER_01: but this is a,
6:20
SPEAKER_01: it's one of the hardest things to do on something like this when you have a very
6:24
SPEAKER_01: target-rich environment like you do with Michael Cohen is to restrain yourself from
6:28
SPEAKER_01: to a concise cross-examination and not get indulgent by making it go on for days.
6:34
SPEAKER_01: So I think most experienced trial attorneys say that was a mistake.
6:40
SPEAKER_01: And if it doesn't work, then all you're doing is blunting the few good points that you get in.
6:45
SPEAKER_00: So from movies and television,
6:48
SPEAKER_00: it often looks to me like cross examinations are depicted as though the objective
6:52
SPEAKER_00: is to get the witness to make a mistake,
6:54
SPEAKER_00: that there's something that the witness is trying not to say,
6:56
SPEAKER_00: trying not to reveal.
6:59
SPEAKER_00: And is one reason that you might go on a long time is that,
7:02
SPEAKER_00: you know,
7:03
SPEAKER_00: the longer you go,
7:04
SPEAKER_00: the more opportunities the witness has to screw up.
7:07
SPEAKER_01: Well, yes, the longer you go, it's true that a witness can get fatigued or upset.
7:12
SPEAKER_01: And it's true that Blanche managed to get Cohen more upset talking about Cohen's criminal convictions.
7:20
SPEAKER_01: So Cohen got a little squirrely on that subject where he wasn't on others.
7:24
SPEAKER_01: And for instance,
7:25
SPEAKER_01: when he was talking about why,
7:27
SPEAKER_01: although he pled guilty to tax fraud,
7:29
SPEAKER_01: he didn't think he should have been prosecuted for it because,
7:32
SPEAKER_01: you know,
7:32
SPEAKER_01: most people,
7:32
SPEAKER_01: they get multiple chances and a civil proceeding first.
7:36
SPEAKER_01: But the problem is that really it's not supposed to be an endurance contest.
7:43
SPEAKER_01: That's an ineffective way to do a cross-examination.
7:46
SPEAKER_01: It's supposed to be a series of propositions that the witness can't dispute because
7:51
SPEAKER_01: you have the documents,
7:53
SPEAKER_01: you have their prior statements,
7:54
SPEAKER_01: whatever,
7:55
SPEAKER_01: and you're getting them to admit to things that help your case or to deny things
8:01
SPEAKER_01: that make them look like a liar because you've got the proof.
8:04
SPEAKER_01: it's not to argue with them.
8:05
SPEAKER_01: If you argue with them, you lose.
8:08
SPEAKER_01: So the idea was that Blanche was a little bit too much arguing.
8:12
SPEAKER_01: And the cynics out there say,
8:14
SPEAKER_01: well,
8:15
SPEAKER_01: he's an ex-AUSA,
8:17
SPEAKER_01: and AUSAs generally aren't as good at cross-examination.
8:20
SPEAKER_01: They're better at direct and things like that.
8:22
SPEAKER_01: But everyone's a critic when it comes to a cross-examination like this.
8:25
SPEAKER_01: It's hard to be in the seat doing it.
8:28
SPEAKER_00: So as we record this on Monday morning, we're waiting to see what happens in the trial this week.
8:33
SPEAKER_00: The defense has the option to call witnesses, including Trump himself.
8:38
SPEAKER_00: It's not clear what they're going to do.
8:40
SPEAKER_00: There was this Politico story saying that Trump has been saying he wants to testify in this case.
8:46
SPEAKER_01: Yeah,
8:47
SPEAKER_01: I think you should consume that with some skepticism because Trump,
8:51
SPEAKER_01: throughout all his legal issues that you and I have talked about for the last six years,
8:56
SPEAKER_01: has consistently said,
8:57
SPEAKER_01: you know,
8:58
SPEAKER_01: I want to talk to the special counsel.
9:01
SPEAKER_01: I want to talk to the grand jury.
9:02
SPEAKER_01: I want to talk to Congress.
9:03
SPEAKER_01: So, you know, I want to testify in the cases.
9:05
SPEAKER_01: And he's only done it when he absolutely has to in a couple of civil cases.
9:10
SPEAKER_01: One of the –
9:11
SPEAKER_01: Eugene Carroll cases in a very limited way.
9:14
SPEAKER_01: And then in his civil fraud case brought by the New York attorney general,
9:19
SPEAKER_01: those didn't go particularly well.
9:21
SPEAKER_01: And in the past, he's talked big about testifying but hasn't when he doesn't have to.
9:26
SPEAKER_01: And he would be foolish to do so.
9:29
SPEAKER_01: Because he's not a good witness.
9:32
SPEAKER_01: You know, his ego gets in the way.
9:34
SPEAKER_01: His inability to answer a question gets in the way.
9:38
SPEAKER_01: I think it would be pretty disastrous for him.
9:40
SPEAKER_01: So I suspect this is a spot where he'll take his attorney's advice and not testify.
9:47
SPEAKER_01: Now,
9:47
SPEAKER_01: Josh,
9:47
SPEAKER_01: we've gotten some questions recently on social media and elsewhere about why can't
9:52
SPEAKER_01: the prosecution just call him as a witness?
9:54
SPEAKER_01: Well, they don't do that, right?
9:56
SPEAKER_01: Isn't that like the whole thing that you don't have to testify?
9:59
SPEAKER_01: Well, exactly.
9:59
SPEAKER_01: So people understand you have a Fifth Amendment right to refuse to testify.
10:04
SPEAKER_01: But some people ask,
10:05
SPEAKER_01: well,
10:05
SPEAKER_01: why doesn't the prosecution call him and make him take the fifth repeatedly in
10:08
SPEAKER_01: front of the jury?
10:09
SPEAKER_01: Well, you can't do that.
10:10
SPEAKER_01: So you cannot show the jury the defendant exercising their Fifth Amendment rights.
10:16
SPEAKER_01: So, for instance, generally, you can't tell the jury that the defendant declined bail.
10:22
SPEAKER_01: to answer questions when arrested or said he wanted to talk to a lawyer or that she
10:26
SPEAKER_01: didn't want to answer questions or whatever.
10:29
SPEAKER_01: Similarly,
10:30
SPEAKER_01: you cannot tell the jury or emphasize to the jury that the defendant is exercising
10:36
SPEAKER_01: their Fifth Amendment right.
10:38
SPEAKER_01: You can't even talk about it in closing.
10:40
SPEAKER_01: This is an area where prosecutors sometimes get into trouble and break the rules,
10:45
SPEAKER_01: although they're frankly rarely held accountable for it,
10:48
SPEAKER_01: where in closing they will say something to the effect of,
10:51
SPEAKER_01: There's one person who knows what the story is and he decided not to testify.
10:56
SPEAKER_01: That would be a violation of the Fifth Amendment rights.
10:58
SPEAKER_01: So the answer to the question people are asking is the prosecution is not allowed
11:03
SPEAKER_01: to do anything to call attention to the defendant not testifying.
11:07
SPEAKER_00: So when you see circumstances where someone is in person asserting their Fifth
11:11
SPEAKER_00: Amendment right,
11:12
SPEAKER_00: that's in proceedings other than a criminal case,
11:14
SPEAKER_00: like you might see people do that before Congress or in a civil case?
11:17
SPEAKER_01: Exactly.
11:18
SPEAKER_01: This is all about what the jury can find out.
11:20
SPEAKER_01: So the jury is not supposed to be told the defendant took the Fifth at any stage of the proceeding.
11:26
SPEAKER_01: The only way the jury would see it is the defendant decides to testify and then
11:30
SPEAKER_01: take the Fifth as to some question partway through,
11:33
SPEAKER_00: which is disastrous,
11:34
SPEAKER_00: of course.
11:34
SPEAKER_00: Wait, are you allowed to do that?
11:36
SPEAKER_00: I thought if you were testifying, that was a waiver of your right not to answer questions.
11:40
SPEAKER_01: It is.
11:41
SPEAKER_01: It's a waiver in that proceeding, which is one of the reasons that it's disastrous.
11:46
SPEAKER_01: It's ineffective.
11:47
SPEAKER_01: I see.
11:49
SPEAKER_01: So generally,
11:50
SPEAKER_01: you don't want any witness to take the fifth,
11:53
SPEAKER_01: although if you as a lawyer can get an opposing witness to take the fifth,
11:59
SPEAKER_01: that is like a career high point generally and a great moment.
12:05
SPEAKER_00: How often does that happen for you?
12:07
SPEAKER_01: Only once or twice, but it's fun.
12:10
SPEAKER_00: There's also the, you know, we've talked some about this workaround for the gag order.
12:15
SPEAKER_00: We talked about this in last week's episode.
12:16
SPEAKER_00: You had these various Republican elected officials,
12:19
SPEAKER_00: many of whom would like to be vice presidents,
12:21
SPEAKER_00: showing up and saying things to the press outside the court that Donald Trump is
12:25
SPEAKER_00: not allowed to say about how Michael Cohen is a liar or the judge's daughter is a
12:29
SPEAKER_00: political activist or whatever.
12:32
SPEAKER_00: And so now there's been more news about that,
12:34
SPEAKER_00: including one journalist who claims that he saw Donald Trump editing talking points
12:38
SPEAKER_00: for these people,
12:39
SPEAKER_00: that basically Trump was sitting there in the courtroom during his own trial,
12:43
SPEAKER_00: producing notes for other Republicans to go out and read.
12:48
SPEAKER_00: And as we've discussed, the gag order doesn't apply to the other officials.
12:52
SPEAKER_00: It applies to Donald Trump, but it prohibits him from directing other people to make statements.
12:56
SPEAKER_00: So if he's actually writing up talking points for Republicans,
12:58
SPEAKER_00: whoever it was,
12:59
SPEAKER_00: Rick Scott or Doug Burgum or all these different people who were speaking there,
13:03
SPEAKER_00: that would be a violation of the gag order,
13:05
SPEAKER_00: right?
13:05
SPEAKER_01: It would be.
13:06
SPEAKER_01: So the mere fact that some of these people have admitted that they're there to
13:11
SPEAKER_01: circumvent the gag order,
13:12
SPEAKER_01: that they're there to say the things that Trump is not allowed to say under the gag order,
13:17
SPEAKER_01: that isn't a violation of the gag order because,
13:19
SPEAKER_01: like you said,
13:20
SPEAKER_01: they're not bound by it.
13:21
SPEAKER_01: But to the extent there's evidence that Trump is himself directing people
13:27
SPEAKER_01: what to say and to speak.
13:28
SPEAKER_01: And I think editing their statements goes far enough into that.
13:33
SPEAKER_01: That would be evidence of violation of the gag order.
13:37
SPEAKER_01: And it would just be a question of how you prove it up.
13:40
SPEAKER_01: So this reporter wrote a story about it.
13:42
SPEAKER_01: So it's not that they're trying to keep it secret.
13:45
SPEAKER_01: But importantly, the DA has not made a motion
13:50
SPEAKER_01: claiming a violation of the gag order on this basis.
13:53
SPEAKER_01: So I think probably the DA does not necessarily want to provoke this confrontation.
13:58
SPEAKER_01: Remember that it would be extremely disruptive to pick this fight in the middle of trial,
14:04
SPEAKER_01: incredibly disruptive to take Donald Trump into custody,
14:06
SPEAKER_01: which is more or less what everyone thought would happen the next time he's found
14:10
SPEAKER_01: in contempt.
14:11
SPEAKER_01: And I think the DA probably is just kind of putting their head down and wanting to
14:15
SPEAKER_01: finish their case since it's been going well.
14:18
SPEAKER_01: So there's a lot of caterwauling out there about, you know, why is he getting away with this?
14:21
SPEAKER_01: Why is he allowed to do this?
14:23
SPEAKER_01: The answer may be,
14:24
SPEAKER_01: frankly,
14:24
SPEAKER_01: that they think it's better to finish strong and finish the case than try to hold
14:30
SPEAKER_01: them in contempt for these type of shenanigans.
14:32
SPEAKER_00: Right.
14:32
SPEAKER_00: I mean,
14:33
SPEAKER_00: so the reporter who saw this,
14:34
SPEAKER_00: Andrew Rice,
14:35
SPEAKER_00: who was writing about the case for New York magazine,
14:38
SPEAKER_00: suppose that the prosecutor did decide that they wanted to pursue this issue.
14:43
SPEAKER_00: And I and I completely understand your description of why they would decide that that was not worthwhile.
14:49
SPEAKER_00: Would they then would there be a hearing?
14:51
SPEAKER_00: And would this journalist have to testify?
14:53
SPEAKER_00: I mean, usually journalists prefer not to testify in court about their work.
14:57
SPEAKER_01: That's true, and often they have various legal privileges not to.
15:02
SPEAKER_01: However,
15:02
SPEAKER_01: when the journalist has basically revealed the information,
15:06
SPEAKER_01: they've made themselves a percipient witness,
15:08
SPEAKER_01: a witness who personally saw things and said they saw him.
15:12
SPEAKER_01: It's not like keeping a secret source confidential or anything like that.
15:17
SPEAKER_01: So, yes, they would probably prefer not to, but there would be a hearing.
15:20
SPEAKER_01: The judge would assess their credibility,
15:23
SPEAKER_01: might call Trump to the stand and then make a call about whether or not he violated
15:27
SPEAKER_01: the gag order.
15:29
SPEAKER_01: I bet Judge Mershon is smart enough that he would put the hearing out a couple of
15:34
SPEAKER_01: weeks so that he could be seen to be enforcing the gag order through a hearing,
15:40
SPEAKER_01: but not disrupt the trial during its course.
15:44
SPEAKER_00: Even if a gag order doesn't apply to you,
15:45
SPEAKER_00: can you be in trouble for like conspiracy to violate a gag order if you know that
15:49
SPEAKER_00: you're taking direction from Donald Trump and you know that he's subject to the gag order?
15:53
SPEAKER_00: Are you conceivably in contempt of court as one of these,
15:55
SPEAKER_00: you know,
15:55
SPEAKER_00: one of these other officials who made statements?
15:58
SPEAKER_00: So.
15:59
SPEAKER_01: probably the way the gag order is worded, no.
16:03
SPEAKER_01: So it's possible to have an injunction,
16:04
SPEAKER_01: which a gag order basically is,
16:06
SPEAKER_01: that says you and anyone acting with you are prohibited from doing this.
16:12
SPEAKER_01: And then if you have notice of that, you're prohibited from doing that thing.
16:16
SPEAKER_01: I don't think this gag order has that language.
16:19
SPEAKER_01: It's only directed towards Trump and
16:21
SPEAKER_01: And it's directed towards preventing him.
16:26
SPEAKER_01: And the further away you get from the person who is the trial participant,
16:30
SPEAKER_01: the greater the First Amendment problems are.
16:34
SPEAKER_01: So I think both the DA and Judge Mershon would prefer to be – not be sort of have
16:42
SPEAKER_01: their hand forced into a First Amendment confrontation with a senator –
16:47
SPEAKER_01: about talking about a controversial trial uh that seems like a fight that they
16:52
SPEAKER_01: wouldn't necessarily win and they don't want to get dragged into and it may be that
16:56
SPEAKER_01: all this is intended to provoke exactly that fight i mean trump has been very canny
17:01
SPEAKER_01: throughout all these cases about how to use the proceedings to provoke arguments
17:06
SPEAKER_01: over things that benefit his narrative and that would be a good example
17:11
SPEAKER_00: Yeah.
17:11
SPEAKER_00: So I think,
17:11
SPEAKER_00: you know,
17:12
SPEAKER_00: the one thing that Trump has done usefully for the law is flesh out this law around
17:17
SPEAKER_00: gag orders.
17:18
SPEAKER_00: He appealed things that defendants normally wouldn't appeal and got us this D.C.
17:22
SPEAKER_00: Circuit Court of Appeals decision about,
17:23
SPEAKER_00: you know,
17:24
SPEAKER_00: what the permissible scope of a gag order is under the First Amendment.
17:27
SPEAKER_00: And so this is a set of questions that I think is going to remain academic,
17:31
SPEAKER_00: unlike some of the other ones.
17:32
SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
17:32
SPEAKER_01: And I mean, it's true.
17:33
SPEAKER_01: That case by the D.C.
17:34
SPEAKER_01: Circuit is now basically the leading case evaluating how far gag orders can go in a trial situation.
17:43
SPEAKER_01: And,
17:43
SPEAKER_01: you know,
17:44
SPEAKER_01: that's actually in a way that's helpful what Trump has done because it's clarified
17:49
SPEAKER_01: this area of law a bit.
17:50
SPEAKER_01: But I don't think that Judge Mershon or the D.A.
17:54
SPEAKER_01: are going to fall for it.
17:55
SPEAKER_01: I think they're going to keep their head down and try to complete the trial.
18:04
SPEAKER_00: Let's talk about Rudy Giuliani.
18:06
SPEAKER_00: Rudy's had quite a week.
18:07
SPEAKER_00: It was his 80th birthday.
18:09
SPEAKER_00: He had this big birthday bash down in South Florida.
18:13
SPEAKER_00: He also got served.
18:15
SPEAKER_00: You know, that's a fun birthday present to receive a surprise.
18:17
SPEAKER_00: You get your summons because you've been indicted in the state of Arizona for
18:21
SPEAKER_00: trying to steal the election.
18:22
SPEAKER_01: Yes.
18:23
SPEAKER_01: Rudy got served in the legal and colloquial sense very firmly.
18:28
SPEAKER_01: So remember that he is indicted with a bunch of other people by the attorney
18:33
SPEAKER_01: general in Arizona for various election shenanigans.
18:36
SPEAKER_01: And most other people had been served with summons, or I guess summonses, to bring them in.
18:43
SPEAKER_01: And he had not.
18:44
SPEAKER_01: And he was being smug about it.
18:46
SPEAKER_01: So he took a selfie with a bunch of young women in
18:50
SPEAKER_00: and posted it on Twitter.
18:51
SPEAKER_00: They're not that young.
18:52
SPEAKER_00: It's a bunch of middle-aged women, like with the sort of standard Republican Fox News look.
18:57
SPEAKER_01: Okay.
18:57
SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
18:57
SPEAKER_01: But I mean, he's 80 and it's a hard 80, Josh.
19:01
SPEAKER_01: That is not an easy road.
19:02
SPEAKER_01: So they look very young compared to him.
19:05
SPEAKER_01: Anyway,
19:05
SPEAKER_01: he took this selfie and he posted it saying that,
19:08
SPEAKER_01: you know,
19:09
SPEAKER_01: tomorrow they run out of time to serve me.
19:11
SPEAKER_01: The indictment will have to be dismissed and it will show they'll have to admit they can't count votes.
19:15
SPEAKER_01: Yeah.
19:16
SPEAKER_01: Well,
19:17
SPEAKER_00: so the is that a thing if you hide long enough from the process server or the
19:22
SPEAKER_00: whoever it is that brings the summons that you your indictment goes away?
19:26
SPEAKER_01: No, it is not.
19:28
SPEAKER_01: I mean,
19:29
SPEAKER_01: if the government makes no effort to find you for years and years,
19:34
SPEAKER_01: it might eventually become a thing.
19:35
SPEAKER_01: But right.
19:36
SPEAKER_01: Here,
19:36
SPEAKER_01: they started out with a summons,
19:37
SPEAKER_01: and what they would have done is just go back and get an arrest warrant or
19:41
SPEAKER_01: something like that,
19:42
SPEAKER_01: or a contempt order or any number of other things.
19:45
SPEAKER_01: Anyway, he posts this.
19:46
SPEAKER_01: The folks from the Arizona Attorney General's office show up at this big Rudy 80th
19:52
SPEAKER_01: birthday bash,
19:54
SPEAKER_01: and they serve him,
19:55
SPEAKER_01: and hilarity and caterwauling ensues.
19:59
SPEAKER_01: My favorite part of this story is something I pointed out to you earlier this morning.
20:02
SPEAKER_01: There's a report...
20:04
SPEAKER_00: That's the end of this week's free episode of Serious Trouble.
20:07
SPEAKER_00: If you want to hear more about Rudy and his,
20:10
SPEAKER_00: you know,
20:10
SPEAKER_00: his getting served and also his bankruptcy proceeding,
20:13
SPEAKER_00: which is not going so great.
20:14
SPEAKER_00: If you want to hear about what's going on with Hunter Biden,
20:17
SPEAKER_00: whose benefactor,
20:18
SPEAKER_00: Kevin Morris,
20:18
SPEAKER_00: says he doesn't have more money to throw at defending Hunter Biden after spending
20:22
SPEAKER_00: more than six million dollars.
20:23
SPEAKER_00: That is a problem as Hunter Biden is about to go on trial in two cases.
20:28
SPEAKER_00: And if you want to hear about David DePaff,
20:30
SPEAKER_00: who assaulted Paul Pelosi very violently,
20:32
SPEAKER_00: sentenced to 30 years in prison,
20:34
SPEAKER_00: but they screwed up the process of his sentencing.
20:37
SPEAKER_00: The government will probably be able to fix this,
20:39
SPEAKER_00: but he has now some arguments about,
20:40
SPEAKER_00: you know,
20:41
SPEAKER_00: why they should have to vacate the sentencing.
20:43
SPEAKER_00: And it's an example of,
20:43
SPEAKER_00: you know,
20:44
SPEAKER_00: how even fairly routine things in court,
20:46
SPEAKER_00: you do enough of them,
20:47
SPEAKER_00: sometimes you screw them up.
20:49
SPEAKER_00: So anyway, if you want to hear all of that, go to SeriousTrouble.show.
20:51
SPEAKER_00: You can upgrade for $6 a month or $60 a year.
20:55
SPEAKER_00: You'll join our community.
20:56
SPEAKER_00: We will be very grateful to you and you'll get every full episode, including this one.
20:59
SPEAKER_00: So go to SeriousTrouble.show and thank you.