'Threatening the president is a crime': Weissmann on why Trump may have violated his bail conditions
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses the challenges facing the court system and the potential implications of former President Donald Trump's actions on social media, particularly his posts about judges and their families. The conversation highlights the importance of judges and prosecutors speaking out against attacks on the judiciary and the rule of law. It also touches on the issue of gag orders and the need for stronger measures to protect judicial integrity and the participants of trials, considering the intimidation tactics that could influence the legal process.
Takeaways
- ðš The court system is facing challenges in functioning efficiently, leading to a sense of tyranny.
- ð¡ Donald Trump's recent social media posts about the judge's daughter are seen as a potential strategy to influence the judicial process.
- ð€ There is debate over whether these posts could provide grounds for recusal, but it is generally believed that they do not meet the criteria.
- ð¢ The discussion highlights the importance of judges and prosecutors speaking out against attacks on the judiciary and the rule of law.
- ð The Manhattan DA has requested clarification on the gag order, specifically whether it applies to the judge's family members.
- ð« The gag order may not explicitly cover the judge or their family, but there are broader legal considerations at play.
- ðïž The principle that while on bail, one must not commit a crime is a standard condition across various jurisdictions.
- ð¯ The potential threat posed by Trump's actions towards the president and judges is a legal and factual question that needs to be addressed.
- ð¡ïž The judge has the authority to tighten the gag order to protect not just the court but also the jury and witnesses.
- ð The situation calls for unprecedented measures to protect the identities of jurors and maintain the integrity of the judicial process.
Q & A
What is the main issue discussed in the transcript?
-The main issue discussed is the concern over the efficiency and fairness of the court system, particularly in relation to former President Donald Trump's actions towards judges and their families, and the potential impact on the rule of law.
What is the significance of Trump's social media post about the judges daughter?
-The significance is that it raises questions about whether Trump is attempting to intimidate the judge or create a basis for recusal, which could undermine the judicial process.
Outlines
ð¢ Media and Legal Analysis on Trump's Social Media Posts
The first paragraph discusses the legal and media analysis on former President Donald Trump's recent social media activities, particularly his posts about the daughter of a judge involved in his upcoming criminal trial. The conversation involves a former FBI general counsel and legal analyst who co-hosts a podcast, who suggests that Trump's actions are an attempt to intimidate the judiciary and undermine the rule of law. The discussion also touches on the broader context of attacks on the media and the Department of Justice, and the importance of judges and prosecutors speaking out against such actions. The legal expert argues that Trump's posts could potentially be seen as violating the conditions of his bail, which prohibits engaging in criminal activity while out on bail.
ðš Concerns Over Gag Order and Intimidation of Judicial System
The second paragraph delves into the implications of the gag order in the context of Trump's social media behavior and the potential impact on the judicial process. The discussion highlights the importance of protecting not only the judge and their family but also witnesses and prospective jurors from intimidation. The conversation suggests that Trump's actions could deter potential jurors from participating in the trial due to fear of retribution. The legal expert emphasizes the need for judges and prosecutors to take proactive measures to safeguard the integrity of the legal system against attacks from the former president. The paragraph also touches on the unprecedented measures taken to protect the identities of jurors in other high-profile cases and questions whether Trump has crossed the line of plausible deniability with his repeated pattern of vilifying individuals and inciting supporters to attack targets.
Mindmap
Keywords
ð¡Viable Court System
ð¡FBI
ð¡Social Media
ð¡Recusal
ð¡Rule of Law
ð¡Prosecutors
ð¡Gag Order
ð¡Bail Conditions
ð¡Intimidation
ð¡First Amendment Rights
ð¡Plausible Deniability
Highlights
The discussion revolves around the efficiency and functionality of the court system and the concept of tyranny.
The guest is a former General Counsel at the FBI and a legal analyst, as well as the co-host of the MSNBC podcast 'Rescued in Donald Trump'.
Trump's recent social media activity, specifically posting about the judges and their family members, is highlighted.
The possibility of Trump's actions being a strategy to create grounds for recusal of the judge is discussed.
The panelist believes there is no basis for recusal and that Trump cannot manipulate the judge into recusal.
The importance of judges speaking out against attacks on the judiciary is emphasized.
Attacks on the media, the Department of Justice, and the judicial system by Trump are linked to his attempts to evade accountability.
Prosecutors and the Attorney General are encouraged to speak out about the unusual circumstances and threats to the rule
Transcripts
WE DO NOT HAVE A VIABLE COURT
SYSTEM THAT IS ABLE TO FUNCTION
EFFICIENTLY WE HAVE TYRANNY.
>> JOINT IS A FORMER GENERAL
COUNSEL AT THE FBI AND A LEGAL
ANALYST.
THE COHOST OF THE TERRIFIC
MSNBC PODCAST RESCUED IN DONALD
TRUMP.
JUST LAST NIGHT TRUMP POSTED
ONCE AGAIN ON SOCIAL MEDIA
ABOUT THE JUDGES DAUGHTER.
POSTING THIS TIME A LINK TO AN
ARTICLE THAT PROMINENTLY
FEATURED A PHOTO OF HER.
THERE ARE NO COINCIDENCES.
HE IS ON THE EVE OF HIS FIRST
CRIMINAL TRIAL.
DO YOU THINK HE IS TRYING TO
GET HIM INTO DOING SOMETHING
THAT HE COULD USE AS AMMUNITION
FOR RECUSAL?
>> I DO NOT THINK THERE IS ANY
BASIS ON THE RECUSAL FRONT.
YOU DO NOT GET TO GO TO
SOMEBODY INTO RECUSAL. YOU COULD INTO REQUIRING THAT
YOU COULD INTO REQUIRING THAT
YOU HAVE TIGHTER RESTRICTIONS
UP TO AND INCLUDING BE REMANDED
TO GO TO JAIL, BUT I DO NOT
THINK THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO
CLAIM LATER THAT THERE SHOULD
BE A RECUSAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE
RESPONDED TO THE LITANY OF THINGS THAT YOU JUST SAID.
THINGS THAT YOU JUST SAID.
I ACTUALLY THINK IT IS ABOUT
TIME THAT YOU HAVE JUDGES
SPEAKING OUT.
AS YOU KNOW, I THINK THE WAY TO
LOOK AT THIS IS YOU SEE THE
ATTACKS ON THE MEDIA AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
YOU NOW OF COURSE SEE ATTACKS
ON THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM BECAUSE
THAT IS WHAT IS HOLDING DONALD
TRUMP AND BEGINNING TO HOLD HIM
TO ACCOUNT CIVILLY AND
CRIMINALLY, SO OF COURSE HE IS
LASHING OUT IN THE SAME WAY HE
HAS AGAINST ALL OF THOSE OTHER
FORCES WHETHER IT IS THE MEDIA
OR NO JUDGES, AND I THINK THEY
HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT.
I THINK PROSECUTORS ACTUALLY UP
TO INCLUDING ATTORNEY GENERAL
GARLAND SHOULD BE SPEAKING OUT
ABOUT THIS.
I DO NOT THINK THIS IS NORMAL
TIMES WERE YOU SAY I WILL JUST
SPEAK IN COURT.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT NOT TO
HAVE UNILATERAL DISARMAMENT AND
FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS
GOING ON AND JUST HOW UNUSUAL
THIS IS.
WE BOTH KNOW TO HAVE A FEDERAL
JUDGE ARE GOING ON THE AIRWAYS
IS A SIGNAL OF JUST HOW SEVERE
THIS THREAD IS TO THE RULE OF LAW.
LAW.
>> THE MANHATTAN DA HAS ASKED
IN A PROMOTION LETTER FOR THE
JUDGE TO CLARIFY OR CONFIRM
THAT THE GAG ORDER APPLIES TO
FILM THE MEMBERS OF THE COURT.
THE TRUMP TEAM HAS RESPONDED
WITH AN OBJECTION TO ANY
EXPANSION.
EXPLAINED FOR THE VIEWERS WITH
THE DA IS ASKING FOR HERE.
THERE IS SOME SPECIFICITY IN
THAT GAG ORDER THAT WAS ENTERED
THURSDAY, BUT DO YOU THINK IS
THE LANGUAGE IS CURRENTLY
INCLUDED IN THIS ORDER THAT IT
WOULD NECESSARILY INCLUDE
SOMEBODY LIKE THE JUDGES FAMILY
MEMBERS?
>> I THINK THERE ARE TWO
ISSUES FOR WEATHER DONALD TRUMP
HAS SANCTIONS THAT COULD BE
IMPOSED RIGHT NOW.
ONE ISSUE IS WHETHER HIS
CONFLICT IS COVERED BY THE
CONDITIONS SENT BY HIM AND HIS
SO-CALLED GAG ORDER.
I THINK THERE IS NO QUESTION
THAT IT'S NOT BROAD ENOUGH TO
COVER THE JUDGE OR THE JUDGES
FAMILY.
IT SIMPLY WAS NOT PUT IN THE
GAG ORDER THAT THE JUDGE ENTERED, SO YOU CANNOT FIND A
ENTERED, SO YOU CANNOT FIND A
VIOLATION OF SOMETHING THAT IS
NOT COVERED, BUT THAT IS NOT
THE ONLY POSSIBLE GROUND FOR
FINDING THAT HE HAS VIOLATED
SOMETHING HERE, AND THAT IS
THAT A STANDARD CONDITION OF
BEING OUT ON BAIL APPLIES IN
NEW YORK AND IN THE D.C.
FEDERAL CASE IN THE GEORGIA
STATE CASE.
THAT YOU NOT COMMIT A CRIME
WHILE YOU ARE OUT ON BAIL.
YOU KNOW THIS VERY WELL.
IT IS IN FACT I REMEMBER THE
D.C. CASE BEING ON AIR WHEN THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE WARNED HIM
THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT
CONDITION FOR HIM WAS THAT HE
NOT COMMIT A CRIME. THREATENING THE PRESIDENT OF
THREATENING THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES IS A CRIME,
SO THE QUESTION WOULD BE THE
LEGAL AND FACTUAL QUESTION
WHETHER WHAT HE HAS ENGAGED IN
WITH RESPECT TO POSTING THE
IMAGE OF JOE BIDEN BOUND AND
GAGGED WITH WHAT APPEARS TO BE
A BULLET HOLE IN HIS HEAD
CONSTITUTES THAT KIND OF
THREAT.
THE SAME THING COULD BE TRUE
UNDER NEW YORK LAW WITH RESPECT
TO JUDGES OR FAMILY MEMBERS AND
PERSONNEL.
SORT OF AN INDEPENDENT GROUND.
THE ONE THING THAT IS CLEAR IS
THAT HE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO
BRING THE DONALD TRUMP INTO
HOLD A HEARING ON WHAT HIS
INTENT WAS BECAUSE THROUGH HIS
ACTIONS AND OBVIOUSLY TO TIGHTEN UP DRAMATICALLY THAT
TIGHTEN UP DRAMATICALLY THAT
GAG ORDERS SO THAT THERE IS NO
THREAT NOT JUST TO THE JUDGE
AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS, BUT
REMEMBER THIS AS A SPILLOVER
EFFECT OF A JURY AND ALSO FOR
WITNESSES AND PROSPECTIVE
JURORS.
THEY ARE LOOKING AT WHAT IS
GOING ON.
JUST ASK IF YOU ARE A POTENTIAL
JUROR ARE YOU GOING TO SAY I
WANT TO BE ON THIS TRIAL WHEN
MY NAME WOULD BE KNOWN BY DONALD TRUMP AND HIS
DONALD TRUMP AND HIS
CONFEDERATES? ARE YOU GOING TO
FEEL THREATENED AND INTIMIDATED
BY HAVING TO TAKE THE STAND AND
TELLING THE TRUTH?
THIS IS ALL A REASON I AM
CONFIDENT THE JUDGE IS THINKING
ABOUT THIS NOT JUST IN TERMS OF
HIS SELF AND FAMILY BUT ABOUT
PROTECTING THE RULE OF LAW.
EXACTLY THE CLIP THAT YOU
PLAYED IT IS WHAT IS GOING TO
BE ANIMATED JUDGES AND
PROSECUTORS TO TAKE STEPS TO
MAKE SURE THAT OUR SYSTEM OF
LAW IS SAFE WITH RESPECT TO THE
FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES WHO IS ATTACKING THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE RULE OF
VERY FOUNDATION OF THE RULE OF
LAW.
>> WE HAVE HAD UNPRECEDENTED
MEASURES TAKEN TO PROTECT THEIR
IDENTITIES AND SOME OF HIS
CASES.
THE LEVEL OF AN AMENITY BETWEEN JURORS THEMSELVES WHEN THEY ARE
JURORS THEMSELVES WHEN THEY ARE
BEING TOLD AND EVEN CIVIL CASES
THEY WERE NOT EVEN SUPPOSED TO
TELL EACH OTHER WHAT THEIR TRUE
NAMES WERE.
ONLY SUPPOSED TO GO BY NUMBERS.
I WANT TO ASK BEFORE WE TAKE A
QUICK BREAK ABOUT THIS.
I POSTED THIS ON MY SOCIAL
MEDIA. WHEREBY A LEADER VILIFIES A
WHEREBY A LEADER VILIFIES A
PERSON OR THEM LIKELY TO
INSTIGATE RANDOM SUPPORTERS TO
ATTACK THOSE TARGETS WHILE THE
INSTIGATOR MAINTAINS A VENEER
OF PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY.
NOBODY HAS TO READ BETWEEN THE
LINES.
I THINK EVERYBODY CLEARLY KNOWS
WHO I AM TALKING ABOUT, BUT
DON'T YOU THINK TRUMP HAS
CROSSED THAT LINE OF PLAUSIBLE
DENIABILITY?
THE IDEA OF I AM REPOSTING
THINGS OR I'M JUST PUTTING
SOMETHING UP IN MY POLITICAL
FREE SPEECH OR PURSUIT AND
PROTECTION OF MY FIRST
AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
>> I COULD NOT AGREE MORE.
JUST REMEMBER THAT MIGHT HAVE
BEEN PLAUSIBLE THE FIRST TIME
OR THE SECOND TIME HE DID THIS.
WHEN YOU SEE THAT YOU HAVE THIS
REPEATED CALL AND RESPONSE
AFFECT HE CANNOT KEEP SAYING I
JUST CALLED AND I WAS SHOCKED.
THAT IS EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT
HE IS CHARGED WITH IN
CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE.
THERE IS MUCH MORE THAN THAT
LEADING UP TO IT, BUT THOSE EVENTS WERE THE QUINTESSENTIAL
EVENTS WERE THE QUINTESSENTIAL
CALL AND RESPONSE CHARGE HERE
WHERE HE KNOWS DARN WELL HOW
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO RESPOND.
THAT IS WHY YOU CAN VERY MUCH
HAVE A HEARING WHERE THE JUDGE
CAN BRING THE PARTIES IN AND
BASICALLY HAVE THE FORMER
PRESIDENT TESTIFIED ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENED AND WHAT HE WAS
THINKING. IF HE DOES NOT WANT
TO TESTIFY THAT IS FINE, BUT
THEN HE CAN TAKE THE FACTS AS
SENT OUT BY THE GOVERNMENT.
GOING TO BE CROSS-EXAMINED BY
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)
Federal judge delivers rare response after Trump attacks the daughter of a judge
Charlie Hurt: This was a âhumiliationâ for Letitia James
BREAKING: Trump gets news he's dreaded in court
"Show Me Your Cards!" - Judge Threatens To Incarcerate Trump & Fines Him For Violating Gag Order
Maddow on Stormy Daniels graphic testimony: 'None of us will ever get this taste out of our mouth'
Trump Violates Gag Order AGAIN, Fox News Canât Believe the Injustice & No Crowds Show Up for Trial