Donald Trump’s sentencing. When you look at what this judge has done, the evidentiary rulings he made, the procedural rulings he made, he begins to look like a dope. He wants to get a felony conviction before Trump becomes president, even though with the appellate court, it’s going to go away immediately.
Transcript:
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Mike Papantonio: Hi, I’m Mike Papantonio and this is America’s Lawyer where we dig behind the headlines to give you the details and information that corporate media won’t give you. As always, I’ve got Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins with me to talk about the big news of the week. Let’s jump right in. First thing, well, there’s so much to this, Trump sentencing. Okay. What is your take? What’s the judge up to? To me, it looks like, when I look at what this judge has done, I followed this case pretty well. I followed the evidentiary rulings he made, I followed the procedural rulings he made. I think he’s a dope, I think he’s a total utter dope. And so I’m not sure what he’s up to other than to say, maybe I want to get a felony conviction before Trump becomes president. Even though the appellate court, it’s going to go away immediately. The whole thing is DOA in my mind. What’s your take?
Farron Cousins: Well, Judge Merchan has already basically said, in the ruling of come back Friday for the sentencing, he also said, I’m not inclined to actually issue a punishment. So, it is a kind of a, I’m glad he’s sticking with it because he had the chance he could have just thrown them out and I thought for sure that’s what would happen. But he might be trying to send a message. That’s the only thing I can conclude here is I’m going to send a message either that, hey, nobody’s above the law, which I’d like to think that was the message. I don’t think that’s the message. I think it is, I’m going to stick it to you because you’ve me off so much. That seems to be the prevailing theory and personally, look, I’m okay with it. I’m fine with that if that is the way you want to do it. But there’s not going to be any punishment because I’ve seen a lot of folks on social media really celebrating like, oh my God, they’re messaging me, like, does this mean he could be in jail for the whole four? No.
Mike Papantonio: I know.
Farron Cousins: Maybe a fine is probably the worst that’s gonna happen. So it will have no impact on Trump’s life at all.
Mike Papantonio: Yeah. My take is a little bit different. Okay. My take is I look at it like a lawyer. I look at it like, if this were any other judge, I would say he’s a dope. I really would. His evidentiary rulings were ridiculous. Things should have been admissible. Things that should have been kept out. He without question, time after time, made rulings that other judges would look at and say, really? So that’s one appellate issue. The other appellate issue that I think is clear to me is he should have recused himself. There’s a term in the law, Farron, it’s called the appearance of impropriety. Okay. It isn’t that you did anything wrong. It is that there’s an appearance that you might have done something wrong. And this issue, whether it goes anywhere or not, with Schiff giving $12 million to his daughter’s PR firm, started off with four. By the time it was over, it was 12. With that happening, that alone should have triggered something and you say, look, there’s nothing wrong here. That’s okay.
But the appearance of impropriety was there. I think he should have reacted to that. He went in with a Supreme Court ruling where the Supreme Court gave him enough direction to say, not only is there an immunity question, which I don’t really think there’s an immunity question, but I think there’s an immunity question, a full immunity question. I think there’s a question as to what was admissible? What type of documents did he allow this prosecutor to put in that should not have been put in? I think that’s another reason this case is gone. This idea of trying to create, and he seemed to promote it, taking what should have been a misdemeanor and doing these metaphysical gymnastics to say, no, it’s a felony because you were really trying to cover up in the 2016 election. You were trying to manipulate the 2016 election, and that’s how it became the felony. I think this guy’s an embarrassment. I really do. I think he’s an embarrassment to the judiciary. I think the case is DOA. I don’t care what he does Friday, frankly, it doesn’t make any difference. Before the ink dries this thing’s going to be reversed. But, I am interested in your point. At some point there has to be some statement that nobody’s above the law. Okay. But it’s got to be a reasonable case. This wasn’t the case that I would test that on. There’s a lot better cases that trump’s been involved with that I would test that on.
Farron Cousins: Well, there was a better case that Bragg threw out, and that was the case that Letitia James did on the civil side with the fraud between the banks and the properties.
Mike Papantonio: I agree.
Farron Cousins: They actually, Pomerantz had indictments written when Bragg took office. But I will say about the recusal issue on Merchan, before he did accept the case, he did go to the judicial panel and said, listen, here’s the family ties. Here is all of this. You guys make the decision on whether you think I have any conflicts that would warrant recusal. So he went through the process that is supposed to be gone through and they said, look, we don’t see anything. Your daughter works over here for a consulting firm. You’re over here. But I also have to add though, because you may be right about the evidentiary stuff and all of that. The problem Trump has is he doesn’t hire lawyers like you.
Mike Papantonio: Competent.
Farron Cousins: If you read the motions they have filed.
Mike Papantonio: Trust me, I read it. It was a bunch of buffoons.
Farron Cousins: It is the dumbest thing. So I don’t know what happens at the appellate level just because it’s like you couldn’t even find a first year law student to write something that bad.
Mike Papantonio: I agree with you. Unfortunately, the judge was just as bad. That’s the point I’m trying to make. Believe me, I’m not in any way defending the folks who defended him. It was ridiculous. But the judge, I think other judges that were watching this are saying, really? The judiciary doesn’t play politics. We’re not in the politic game. And I don’t think a panel overcomes the appearance of impropriety, as far as the rest of the way the world’s looking at it. In a microcosm, yes. In a macrocosm, no. I just think he’s a dope. I really do. I think he’s a buffoon and he’s embarrassed the entire judiciary.
Farron Cousins: I will suggest on the Trump lawyer thing also, he’s actually, Trump has lost some cases that I do think, and I’ve mentioned in segments, he should have won, but because his lawyers were so bad, he lost. To be honest, with the E. Jean Carroll stuff, which I believe her a hundred percent. But having to pay $80 million because you called somebody a liar. No. A moderately competent lawyer would’ve won that lawsuit for him.
Mike Papantonio: Yeah. You have said this several times on your show, that why does he hire these dopes? But he does. I don’t know why. Maybe he likes the way they talk to the media, which most of the time is deplorable.
Farron Cousins: I think that’s what he goes for.
Mike Papantonio: But they’re not trial lawyers. They genuinely are not trial lawyers.
Suspicious Activity: That it had helped dirty money flow through its branches around the world, including at least 800. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants provided money and medical goods to terrorist groups, Hezbollah and Jaysh al-Adl. This is a well organized business for these individuals that carry out these attacks. Terrorism is a business and they run it like a business. They knew about what was going on for a decade. They absolutely, absolutely no question about it knew that HSBC was washing money. They had every reason to understand it was for terrorism and it was for drug cartels. Took no action whatsoever.
These banks are involved, their accounts are connected, and they’re using them to mask the transactions. The more complicated they can make the transactions, the more distance they could put between the bad guys and a seemingly legitimate purpose of these funds. They pay $1.9 billion, which is a drop in the bucket compared to what they’ve made. And nobody goes to prison. These CEOs, these bankers that made this decision, they’re safe at home. They know what they’ve done. They know it’s resulted in the death of Americans, contractors and soldiers, not just hundreds but thousands. And we look the other way because they don’t look like criminals. The die cast, the people that are responsible for it, are on Wall Street. And they don’t look like criminals. It’s almost a suspension of disbelief. Sometimes I’ll have people call me and say, is this, is this real? Do they really get away with this? Yeah, they do.
