Fed up judge drops MAJOR WARNING on Trump prosecutor

I'm joined now by All Rise News's Adam. Classfeld. Adam, there was a moment that. happened in court today where it shows. that one of Trump's top prosecutors has. finally gone too far as far as judges. are concerned. Can you explain what just. happened in court? Absolutely, Brian. Not only has Lindseay Halligan gone too. far, Todd Blanch and Pam Bondi have gone. too far in the courtroom of Judge David. Novak, a court appointee, excuse me, a. Trump appointee who found in no. uncertain terms. He said the masquerade,

and that was the word that he used, of. Lindseay Halligan as a US attorney must. come to an end. And hours before that. ruling, the Eastern District of. Virginia's chief judge put out a job. listing for Lindseay Halligan's. replacement. And so, Judge Novak here, he means business. He compared the style. of legal brief that was submitted to his. court by Trump's DOJ, co-signed by Bondi. and Blanch to uh said it was filled with.

vitrial that was similar to cable news. TV show rhetoric. Uh he said that he. cited a case of an attorney uh. disciplinary proceeding in the district. that ended in a six-month imprisonment. term. uh he did not initiate. disciplinary proceedings this time which. he chocked up to in his words Lindseay. Halligan's inexperience but if she. continues what he called a charade of. calling herself a US attorney on signed.

documents again that he is going to. initiate disciplinary proceedings. He is. saying that her masquerade must come to. an end. >> Okay. Okay. So, I think the obvious. question here, you've got Lindsay. Hallagan who was improperly appointed. Uh judges have ruled that she can no. longer uh masquerade to use that word as. a US attorney and and now on the table. are a bunch of disciplinary actions that. she herself could shoulder. I mean, she. faces real real legal exposure here. And. so why would she continue to imperil her.

own freedom, her own law license by. virtue of continuing to to perpetuate. this farce? Like what what's in it for. her? We'll see if she puts her hand on. the stove again. I mean, this is it. could not be clearer this ruling. And. I'll point out, I think we spoke about. when Judge Novak opened this inquiry, he. had her explain herself. Why are you. putting your name on legal briefs under. the signature line US attorney that.

there was a clear ruling that it hadn't. been overruled and it was binding? And. rather than apologize, your honor, say. I'm not going to do it again, she came. back with Pam Bondi and Todd Blanch and. insulted him in essence. They said that. you've committed rudimentary legal. errors, elementary legal errors. said. that uh he his inquiry was an. inquisition and he shot through each and. every argument they were making. They. compared uh the disqualification of.

Lindseay Hallan to the disqualification. of Jack Smith by Judge Cannon. Um, and. the judge here, Judge Novak, said that. not only did that not apply for. jurisdictional reasons that we could get. into, he said that Haligan shares, and. this is another quote, an unhealthy. obsession with Jack Smith that the. Department of Justice does. He warned. that the very essence of rule of law is.

on the line. It's an uh it's an 18page. ruling, one of the most scorching I've. read in the last year. And we've spoken. about a lot of those scorching rulings. I just need to give you a flavor of what. he is saying here. Um he's saying, this. is a direct quote from his conclusion. The Eastern District of Virginia has. long enjoyed the service of experienced. prosecutors with unquestioned integrity. from both political parties serving as.

US attorney. Despite coming from. different political backgrounds and. holding very different ideological. views, they all shared an unwavering. commitment to the rule of law, putting. the interests of the citizens of the. district before their own ambitions as. true public servants do. And. unfortunately, it appears that this. ethos has come to an end. He says at. another point that the very essence of. the rule of law is on the line. Again, a. Trump appointee. and he is criticizing.

Todd Todd Blanch and Pam Bondi for. contributing what he calls cable news. talk show discourse in court criticizing. their lawyering and saying that it that. you know he'll give her a mulligan this. time because of her inexperience as he. puts it her that he'll give the benefit. of the doubt and refrain from referring. her for further investigation and. disciplinary action based on her. misrepresentation. to the court at this.

time. However, the memorandum order. provides notice that should M. Haligan. persist in ignoring Judge Curry's orders. and this memorandum order in any matter. before the undersigned, the court will. initiate disciplinary proceedings. against Miss Hallagan and any other. signatory important qualification here. to an offending pleading pursuant to the. federal rule of disciplinary. enforcement. He is saying if she comes. back to court, if Pam Bondi joins her in.

a legal pleading in in in you know. flouting the judge's order, he's going. to initiate disciplinary proceedings. >> Well, you know, people are going to look. at this and they're going to say people. break the law in the Trump. administration all the time and this is. a lawless administration and nothing. matters. And so if a judge begins to. impose disciplinary action against. Lindsey Halligan, Trump will just swoop. in and save her. Can you talk about the.

ways where Trump can save Lindsey. Hallagan in the event of disciplinary. action versus the places where Trump has. no jurisdiction? Trump cannot save Lindseay Halligan from. the state bar. And he has right here. Judge Novak has said that is where he's. going to refer disciplinary action if. she touches the stove again. Um this is. him making absolutely clear that what. what his intentions are should he defy.

should she defy his order one more time. and anyone who sign a legal brief uh. tried to do that once again. So there. there is that Trump has no jurisdiction. over that. uh criminal penalties, you. know, we would see how that panned out. The last time there was a criminal. contempt uh proceeding that went before. Judge Boseberg. It inst it in instigated. a long uh appeals course that sidelined.

things, but those contempt proceedings. are still ongoing. Uh, of course, Trump. has the ability to pardon people and he. has used that on a growing number of. fraudsters. Uh, but there is there is. professional peril here. And I think. anyone who reads this ruling, an 18page. ruling, uh, knows that Judge Novak means. business here. And to the point, you. know, I understand a lot of folks might.

who are watching this now might think, well, there's always the threat of. future actions. Why not now? What I see. here and what I've seen throughout this. litigation is Judge Novak understanding. what he is up against and dotting every. eye, crossing every tea and so that the. Justice Department cannot argue, oh, we. were under the assumption that this. legal standard applied. He is putting.

everyone on notice so that if he imposes. that discipline, then the it's an open. record now for an appellet court to see. exactly what happened and that every. excuse has been eviscerated. >> Adam, if I'm not mistaken, there are. five US attorneys across the country. who've been unlawfully appointed and uh. whose status has been struck down by. judges. Is that correct? >> That is correct. And that's another.

significance of this ruling. It's a very. important question, Brian, because what. we saw in this fight between Lindseay. Hallan and Judge Novak was what appeared. to be the DOJ's blueprint for dealing. with orders disqualifying US attorneys. They'd say, "Well, it only matters for. those cases that were dismissed, and. we'll keep them in that office until. they're dragged out by an appellet. court." Judge Novak is saying that that. doesn't work. The the appointment order.

for Judge Curry made it very clear that. she was judging whether uh Lindseay. Haligan was qualified for any case. within the Eastern District of Virginia. So, this has ramifications not only for. her case, but any of those five. districts. So, I know that in the other. cases that judges um and courts are just. supposed to saw the legal the legal wood. right in front of them. But to what. extent does this have even some. atmospheric precedent where other judges. can say, "Oh, now we're seeing what the.

DOJ does, we're seeing their their their. scheme basically." And so in the same. way that they're getting, you know, this. warning right now as it relates to. Lindsey Halligan, to what extent can. that apply to other US attorneys whose. appointments were struck down and yet. who might still try to sign their name. on on, you know, legal legal uh uh. documents moving forward? like to what. extent can the judges use this ruling. right here in the Lindsey Halligan case. as kind of a blanket uh precedent where.

you know they're basically saying don't. don't with us you know we we see. what you're doing and uh and you know. and it's going to apply everywhere else. not just here. >> I think it could absolutely be a roadmap. to your point Brian yes a district. judge's ruling in Virginia can only have. a persuasive effect on say the central. district of California. Yeah. The. district of Nevada or the district. northern district of New York. But we're.

seeing already in the central district. of California that US attorney has. changed his title. Um and I think any. other judge who's trying to decide what. to do with a recalcrant US attorney. who's flouting an order, there's a road. map here. And even more than that, they. see this open disrespect. uh from the Justice Department toward a. federal judge. And judges do not like. that. Uh there there is a long record of.

Todd Blanch and Pam Bondi uh ridiculing. Judge Novak's inquiry as an inquisition, accusing him of making rudimentary and. elementary legal errors and just using. very the type of disrespectful language. for a federal judge that you're not used. to seeing from the Department of. Justice. you're used to seeing, you. know, 60s anti-war activists, you know, making a point about their prosecutions.

might use some of these this language, but not the DOJ. And that's what's. different here. And so, I think uh to. your point, one, this can be a roadmap. for those other judges. And two, federal. judges have each other's backs to a very. large extent. And we've seen uh even in. this ruling uh his warnings, Judge. Novak's warnings about the rule of law, he quoted the another judge's warning. from the fourth circuit, the appellet.

court for that district uh in in this. ruling as well. So, it adds to this idea. that the rule of law is at risk if. judges don't hold down the line. >> Well, we'll leave it there. For. everybody who's watching right now, I. want you to know that uh Adam is the. epitome of independent media. Um he is. often all around the country following. these cases as they're happening, going. to arraignments, whether it's in. Tennessee or New York, uh or Washington. DC. The best way to support his work and.

to support independent media more. broadly is to subscribe to All Rise. News. I'm going to put that link right. here on the screen and also in the post. description of this video. Again, fearless independent journalism at its. best. So again, those links are right. here on the screen. Adam, as always, thanks so much for your time. >> Thanks so much, Brian, for having me. [music].