TrueValueMetrics ... Impact Accounting for the 21st Century

Date: 2025-05-09 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00027609

THE TRUMP SAGA The Legal Breakdown with Glenn Kirschner Brian Tyler Cohen: Trump SCREWS HIMSELF in federal court PLAY YOUTUBE VIDEO Original article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZExzolBR0o Peter Burgess COMMENTARY I do not have a formal legal training, but have lived an very active life for a long time, and have learned something of how the 'law' behaves in various parts of the world. I grew up as a child in the UK and learned from my parents what was 'right' and what was 'wrong' and that was a good start. There was pubishment, but the rules were clear and punishment could be avoided if my behavior was 'right'. A well functioning society needs rules ... and these have developed over time. When I was a student at Cambridge the law students spent the first year learning about the foundation of law in the UK which was Roman Law. I recall learning something about the difference between 'common law' and 'statutory law'. Net, net, though, I am pretty ignorant of the 'law' though do my best to conduct myself in a decent, reasonable manner within the law! During my working life, I have worked in a large number of different legal jurisdictions ... around 50! Though the 'laws' can be quite different, rules of decent behavior have considerable similarity. For a number of years I was the CFO of an international fishing company that operated in more than 20 jurisdiction around the world. We followed the legal rules on the internation laws and regulations related to the operation of ships and especially fishing vessels as well as local national rules. We also followed ... or tried to follow ... all the laws and customs of the various places where our company operated. This was not always easy. What happens when the operating laws are incompatible? People and companies and various authorities try to apply the 'law' that is most beneficial ... and the difference in outcomes in many cases is substantial. It is often said that 'the devil is in the detail' and this certainly applies in this case! The fishing company I worked for ws quite sophisticated with respect to the optimisation of it operations and their legal status from multiple ... all ... perspectives. We cooperated ... collaborated ... with a very 'competent' network of specialist lawyers to optimise the company's legal structure for maximum profit return. This was something like playing three dimensional chess! There was a huge different between the best business structure for profit and the easiest simple structure which was often not very good for profit as well as being high risk! We had around 100 fishing vessels operating around the world ... more than 20 legal jurisdictions. All of these vessels were 'flagged' in the best way we could for our corporate purposes. At various times, the company had vesels operating under the flags of many (9) different countries ... Liberia, Panama, Cote d'Ivoire. Nigeria, Madagascar, United States, Brazil, Oman, and Thailand. The company's employees were of many different nationalities. I was British living and working in the United States. The company's CEO was also British living and working in the United States. All the senior executives and Board Members were British nationality. Most ... essentially all ... of the senior staff were married to non-British spouses! The captains and engineers on the trawlers were mainly Greek, Panamanian or South Korean. Most of the fishermen and crew were local hires from the 20 plus locations where the vessels were based. MUCH MORE ABOUT CSF AND OPTIMISING FOR PROFIT TO COME Donald Trump has a track record of gaming the legal system for his own benefit going back decades. The American legal system is relatively easy to game, and most of the rich and powerful in the United States take advantage of these opportunities. Whether Donald Trump's schemes are going to stand up in court remains to be seen ... but the indications are that Trump could well avoid most, if not all, of his legal jeopardy! Peter Burgess
Trump SCREWS HIMSELF in federal court Brian Tyler Cohen Oct 23, 2024 3.37M subscribers ... 839,762 views The Legal Breakdown with Glenn Kirschner Legal Breakdown episode 399: ‪@GlennKirschner2‬ discusses the implications of Judge Cannon's name appearing on a shortlist to be Trump's attorney general on the ongoing Florida prosecution. For more from Brian Tyler Cohen: Order my #1 NYT bestselling book SHAMELESS: https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/s... YouTube (español): / @briantylercohenespanol Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/36UvEHs Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0066rKC... Twitter: / briantylercohen Instagram: / briantylercohen Facebook: / briantylercohen Newsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-up/ TikTok: / briantylercohen Substack: https://plus.briantylercohen.com Explore the podcast 401 episodes The Legal Breakdown with Glenn Kirschner Brian Tyler Cohen Podcasts Transcript 0:01 Glenn Donald Trump may have just lost himself the friendliest judge in the entire country with what I think is a major misstep can you explain what just happened here yeah Brian on the legal front Donald Trump is always His Own Worst Enemy uh there there's been some reporting that Donald Trump and his transition team are considering aen Cannon to be Donald Trump's attorney general now this is really a big deal for a couple of reasons one she has Absolut absolutely no qualifications to be attorney general but we'll set that one aside for the moment two by Donald Trump considering her and by this information being announced or being leaked being reported Donald Trump has probably finally done what is necessary to have her kicked off the case now some people might say well there is no case at the moment because judge Cannon dismissed Donald Trump's unlawful retention of classified documents 1:00 obstruction of justice Espionage case and yes she did but she did it in a lawless way she did it in a way that is unsupported by any precedent so I'm fairly confident the 11 circuit court of appeals which is where the case is presently will reverse her dismissal will reinstate the case send it back to the trial court put it back on the trial track and now I think it is all but certain judge aen Cannon will not not be the presiding judge you know Brian we've all waited for a very long time to see if Jack Smith would file a motion to recuse to remove her from the case after one she was appointed to the bench by Donald Trump her benefactor a very cushy and prestigious lifetime appointment as a federal judge two she was reversed by the appeals court not once but twice early on in these proceedings why because she abused her judicial 2:01 discretion and did something the law did not allow to the extreme advantage of Donald Trump and now she's gone and done it again she dismissed his classified documents case with no legal basis to do it so now that she is apparently being considered to be Attorney General of the United States and that decision resides in the hands of Donald Trump the defendant in the classified documents case I don't think there is anybody who can say you know what her impartiality cannot possibly be questioned it can be questioned and with good cause so I think this seals the deal and I do not think we're going to see alen Cannon presiding in the classified documents case any longer once the 11 circuit court of appeals Returns the case to the trial court well Glenn you know that the Trump team is going to look at this decision this this inevitable decision 3:01 um not to return it to judge Canon and just say we don't stand by any of that reporting it was just the fake news is just the perception of of her impropriety is just the fact that this story exists enough unto itself for uh for the 11 circuit to still regardless of what Trump's team says to still refuse to give it to judge Canon great question and the answer is no why is the answer a definitive no because if you had to sort of jump every shadow of reporting that was unconfirmed maybe it was a product of Russian disinformation who knows but if anytime anybody sort of put in the Public Square oh a president is considering something with respect to a judge just you know by virtue of the fact that that information is in the Public Square doesn't make it reliable enough for a judge to order um a lower court judge to remove herself from a case but here's what by the way is is a is a good thing by the way because then 4:00 any purveyor of disinformation can just say something hoping to sway the case one way or the other but then that raises the obvious question why is this different why will the ABC News Report um actually have some heft as opposed to just as opposed to just you know the story being put into the news by anybody yeah great question a couple of reasons one it is the cumulative effect even if no one fact standing alone would open her impartiality up to being questioned which is the Federal Federal standard let me recite it even though we've done this before and our viewers may be familiar with the statute 28 United States code 455 for those of you scoring at home the language that requires a judge to recuse from a case is if the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned then the judge shall disqualify themselves remove themselves from the case it's a fairly low bar and it can be courtesy of the cumulative effect of lots of different facts like 5:02 being appointed by the defendant like abusing your judicial discretion twice in favor of the defendant like dismissing the defendant's case with no legal basis to do it and then being reversed again and now on top of it being considered for an enormously prestigious job the Attorney General of the United States the cumulative effect of that I think warrants um at least serious litigation now let me get to the litigation peace Prime cuz I think we just discussed how you know a rank rumor or completely um unreliable reporting about something doesn't mean that judges have to recuse or be removed from a case in knee-jerk fashion however I think if there is a motion to recuse filed and perhaps even if there's not there will have to be litigation just because ABC News reported it as coming out of or you know being a product of Donald Trump's transition team Boris epin is the person 6:02 that I saw named in the reporting as being involved on the transition team um there will have to be litigation to drill down and see if this reporting is accurate is factual and if in fact Donald Trump has considered or will consider aen Cannon to be the attorney general in the extremely unlikely event Donald Trump retakes the Reigns of governmental power wins the election so this matter will have to be litigated and there will have to be a ruling and then you know I suspect given the cumulative effect judge Canon will never see another day presiding over Donald Trump's classified documents case Glenn who will ultimately make this decision to remove judge Kennan from the case we have you know you and I have sat here and kind of puzzled at the fact that Jack Smith even despite all of these instances where judge Cannon's impartiality might reasonably be questioned isn't isn't the statement of the century and yet all that time he 7:01 refused to go ahead and attempt it even up to and including the point at which he just dismissed the case outright on some bogus pretense that all of a sudden special councils are unconstitutional even though they've been used since the 1800s but but that aside he has refused to do it and so and so who ultimately is going to make this decision is it going to be the 11 circuit supon or is it going to be Jack Smith who will finally Dain to acknowledge objective reality that perhaps uh judge Canon is not an impartial Arbiter of the law here yeah another great question um and this will probably be an unsatisfying answer because there are four possibilities regarding who will make the decision so the first is the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals they have the case right now on appeal regarding judge Cannon's Lawless in my opinion dismissal of Donald Trump's criminal case so they could very well say listen one we reverse judge Canon for yet again getting it wrong to Donald Trump's extreme advantage and we 8:02 are supon on our own sending this case back remanding it to the trial court with the direction that it be assigned to a new judge a fair independent impartial judge I have seen federal circuit courts of appeal do that um so that's the first possibility the 11th circuit does it on their own the next possibility is the 11 circuit sends it back to a judge and orders that there be litigation on the question of whether she should remain the judge on the case particularly given one the reversal of the dismissal if that's what the 11 circuit does and two the reporting about Donald Trump considering Canon to be his attorney general now there are two possibilities once it goes back to the trial court they could return it to judge Cannon and say listen in the first instance the federal law contemplates that you judge Canon will decide whether your impartiality now might reasonably 9:01 be questions s such that you shall disqualify yourself so they could do that and they could let judge Cannon decide in the first instance of course if you refused to recuse that might go back up to the 11th circuit and they would have that question directly before them or they could actually remand it to a different trial court judge to litigate the issue of whether judge Canon should be removed should recuse because of the cumulative effect of all of these circumstances so that's three and the fourth of course ultimately who might decide this question the Supreme Court and given that they have shown themselves not to be fair Brokers of the law you know all bets are off as to what they will do if they get the recusal issue before them but those are the four possibilities the 11 Circuit Judge Canon an independent judge to make the decision about whe whether judge Canon should be removed D ultimately the 10:00 Supreme Court so lots of cooks in that legal kitchen and for this issue to even be considered does somebody have to bring It Forward does Jack Smith have to file a motion for example or or file some evidence including this ABC news story or are the judges just going to on the 11 circuit just going to know that this story broke and so they'll do it unto themselves yeah that's another good question and so so much of this is sort of uncharted waters because we're dealing with Prosecuting a criminal former president for stealing our nation's most closely guard guarded Secrets really for the first time in our nation's history so listen if the 11 circuit reverses judge Cannon's dismissal but sends it back to judge Cannon without comment well then Jack Smith had better get his motion writing pen out and write that dang motion to recuse and litigate the factual basis for the reporting that Donald Trump is considering Canon his attorney general 11:01 because that is disqualifying with the defendant holding in his hands the possibility of giving this judge who's presiding over his prosecution you know the very prestigious job of Attorney General of the United States I'm sorry in anybody's book that's got to be disqualifying and do will we know will it be public if Jack Smith if and when Jack Smith does file this motion yes there is absolutely no basis to file this seal because it won't involve an ongoing investigation it won't compromise witness security there is no lawful basis there's actually a I believe six-part test if something is to be filed under seal and this doesn't meet any of the elements to be filed under seal given your experience as a 30-year Federal prosecutor how quickly would you expect this motion to be file filed knowing full well that the issue is being considered right now by the 11 circuit to put this back on the trial track well it's interesting because because I don't know that there's a 12:00 vehicle to file a procedural vehicle to file the motion now why do I say that because the case has been dismissed so it doesn't actually exist asending has Jack Smith has he appealed it yes Jack Smith has appealed it to the 11th circuit so right so can he can he file a motion as part of his appeal while they're which they're considering right now I think the answer is no and here's why factual matters can only be raised and litig ated and resolved ruled on in the trial court appell at courts have no what we call original jurisdiction the only thing they can do is saw the legal wood in front of them and that wood you know that cord of wood has been delivered to them once the case has been appealed that's why for example in DC once the presidential immunity uh issue was appealed judge chuin was was deprived of jurisdiction she couldn't do anything she couldn't act on motions she 13:00 couldn't litigate she couldn't set motions hearing dates none of it but this but the appeals court only gets to decide those things that have been set in stone factually speaking by the time the case is appealed to them so this would be a new motion it would require new litigation new argument new factual determinations and rulings to be made by a trial court judge so that's why this will probably not make its way into the 11 circuit court of appeal's opinion unless they decide to take note of the reporting but but as we've discussed Brian this is kind of a it's a tricky one because even if they take note of the reporting they don't have fact finding capabilities so they couldn't even say yes we find as a matter of fact Donald Trump is contemplating aen Cannon as a possible attorney general therefore we're going to rule that she is now disqualified I think that's not the way it's going AG go let me finally one more 14:01 thing Let me throw this at the viewers it could be that if they reverse her dismissal and I believe they will they won't even have to take up the fact or the reporting that Donald Trump May appoint her uh as attorney general because they could say listen we now have um this this deep well of what I would call judicial misconduct extreme favoritism to Donald Trump in a way that the law does not allow three reversals three abuses of discretion three strikes and you're out so they may not even need to get to the attorney general pece if they reverse her because they'll have ample opportunity then to supon on their own say by the way we're sending it back to the trial court but we are directing it be assigned to a fair independent and impartial judge and that's not judge alen Cannon okay well obviously a lot to look forward to here we will stay on top 15:00 of this classified documents case and its hopeful return to the trial track so for those watching right now if you want to follow along please make sure to subscribe that's the best way to support our work the links to both of our channels are right here on the screen I'm Brian tyer Cohen and I'm Glenn kersner you're watching the legal breakdown [Music]

SITE COUNT