OMG: Justice Department makes DISGUSTING announcement

You're watching Legal Breakdown. Glenn, I don't know that we can get a better. example of the overt corruption of this. administration, this vindictive. administration, than what just happened. with E. Jean Carroll. So, can you give. some an overview here about the DOJ's. latest action? >> Yeah, Brian, it's corruption. It is the. grossest form of prosecutorial abuse of. power, and it may very well be criminal. But, what just happened was [snorts]. there was reporting that Donald Trump's. Department of Justice has opened a.

criminal investigation into E. Jean. Carroll, claiming that there, you know, there may. be some indication that she lied in one. or both of her trials against Donald. Trump. To to say this is a gross abuse. of prosecutorial discretion really. doesn't do it justice, Brian, because, you know, I suspect, just like the, you. know, great seashell caper, James Comey,

and when they went after Letitia James, and when they went after Jerome Powell, and when they went after six members of. Congress who spoke the truth, the that. military law provides that soldiers, sailors, airmen, military members must. disobey unlawful orders, and they tried. to prosecute those six members of. Congress, though they have committed no. crime. Here we go again. And I don't. want to be ageist here, but they're. going after an 82-year-old woman that a. jury found Donald Trump had first.

sexually assaulted and then defamed to. the tune of a total of more than $80. million. in damages, and those cases were long. ago over, and now all of a sudden Donald. Trump's Department of Justice is opening. a criminal investigation into her. This. is beyond just weaponization of the rule. of law. This is dictatorial This. is the stuff of banana republics. You. know, I don't know, this is going to. sound hyperbolic, Brian, but I don't.

know that there is such a thing as. hyperbole when you're trying to describe. what Donald Trump might try to do next. to his perceived enemies. I'm waiting for him to just order his. Department of Justice to start rounding. up and imprisoning his perceived enemies. with no charges, no evidence, no. indication that they'd committed a. crime. Because, you know, right now all. he's doing is abusing the process, the. criminal justice system, the grand jury. process. He's using that that process as.

a weapon to punish people, to make them. get lawyers, to probably, you know, cause sleepless nights for them and. their families. Ultimately, nothing will. come of the E. Jean Carroll criminal. investigation, but that really is not. the point. You know, the process is the. punishment, and that's what Trump's. dirty, dirty DOJ leadership is doing. right now to E. Jean Carroll, who, let's.

face it, mopped the floor with Donald. Trump in trial after trial up in New. York. >> Is there a world where E. Jean Carroll. could counter sue in some way? Like I. know that this is a criminal. prosecution, so it's not the same as as. a as a civil as a civil case where. there's normally counter suits, but is. there a world where E. Jean Carroll can. get hers. by virtue of being the target of a. vindictive prosecution? >> Well, first of all, this isn't Yeah, it's not a civil suit, so there really.

is no opportunity to counter sue. >> Yeah, I was going to ask like is there a. world where she could if if this is. found to be a a vindictive prosecution, could she sue. in a civil suit after the fact by virtue. of being the target of a vindictive. prosecution? >> Yeah, and the answer is yes. Now, the. question is would that suit be. successful? There are lots roadblocks. and hurdles that somebody has to. overcome if they're going to. successfully sue the United States. government or officers of the United.

States government. It's difficult, but. not impossible, and I think, frankly, it's probably getting easier every day. with how Donald Trump, Todd Blanche, and. all of the DOJ leadership is so plainly. and inarguably and in the harsh light of. day weaponizing the rule of law. So, you. know, it it may very well be she'll have. a suit for a conspiracy against rights. because, you know, everybody in the. United States has a due process, a Fifth.

Amendment constitutional due process. right against the government criminally. prosecuting us or selectively. prosecuting us. Those are due process. constitutional rights we have, and it. sure looks like those rights have been. violated by what sure looks like a. conspiracy to me. That just means. multiple people have agreed to do it. together, and, you know, I think Comey. and Letitia James and the members of. Congress and Jerome Powell and now E.

Jean Carroll and perhaps others have. available to them that claim. Now, you. know, I think my personal opinion is. that E. Jean Carroll's best revenge. might be to just continue to move. forward in the courts and ultimately. collect on her 83. I think 88 million dollar in aggregate. with both jury judgments added together, her 83 million dollars that she won from. Donald Trump because of his wrongful.

conduct. But the other thing she can do, and this might feel like an outlier, but, you know, former CIA Director John. Brennan is also being pursued, it looks. like vindictively, and our viewers may. remember that Donald Trump's dirty DOJ. leadership actually tried to steer the. investigation from DC where it would. most properly be conducted down to. Florida and maybe try to squeeze it into. Aileen Cannon's courthouse. And so, what happened was. John Brennan's lawyer sent a letter to.

the chief judge down in that district. saying, "This is wrong. This is abusive. This can't be allowed to go on." But, I. think letters like that are more sort. of, you know, atmospherically important. than they are legally important, but. they do paint a picture and they try to. expose what the dirty Trump. administration is doing here. >> In terms of allowing this vindictive. prosecution to go forward, obviously. Todd Blanche has to sign off on this, or. there's going to be some line.

prosecutor, some sucker who has to put. his name on it. Whoever does allow this thing to move. forward, would they be a target for. for for a bar review from their. respective bar, considering this is so. overtly abusive that it should put their. law license in jeopardy? >> A bar investigation from the state bar, wherever the person or people are. licensed who are involved in this, you. know, corrupt mission, what sure seems. like a corrupt mission to retaliate.

against E. Jean Carroll, they absolutely. not only should, but I'm pretty. confident will be referred to their. state bar for an ethics investigation. And, you know, we're talking about this, Brian, on the same day that a brand new. complaint, and let me tell you, it is a. compelling complaint, was just filed. with a Florida State Bar detailing and. documenting all of Pam Bondi's unethical. conduct while she was Attorney General. It is, you know, it it's important.

reading, I think, for folks. And the. other thing that I I think I would. hasten to add, based on the reporting, they claim at the Department of Justice. that Todd Blanche doesn't have his. fingerprints anywhere on this sort of de. facto assault on E. Jean Carroll, at. least figuratively speaking. Why? Well, because he was representing Donald Trump. in some of the appellate litigation in. the E. Jean Carroll case before he, you. know, joined the Department of Justice.

Um and so, he is absolutely. conflicted out. So, I do not believe. Todd Blanche or the Department of. Justice these days as far as I can throw. him or it. But, they say he's not. involved in any of the decision-making. in the E. Jean Carroll case. All that. means, if that's true, is that whoever. is involved in the decision-making. process is the person or the people who. will need to be referred to their state. bars for ethics investigations.

>> Is there a world where. that has to be shouted from the rooftops. to let these either prosecutors or even. the higher-ups, the brass in the DOJ, know. what they risk by virtue of doing this? Because I feel like there's this sense. of impunity among these people that. whatever Trump orders, um these underlings are expected to just. carry out his wishes, no questions. asked. If they don't, they're going to. be unceremoniously discarded in very. much the same way these other. prosecutors have been discarded. And so,

there is this sense of like, "Oh, well, I'm just following orders and I have to. do it because the edict has come come. down from on high." But, but I feel like. there's there's really. not a sense of what the consequences for. these people could be. And so, should. there should should this be the kind of. thing where it's like, you know, people. come out in advance of this stuff. happening and say, "If you do this, if you engage in. vindictive prosecution, especially. vindictive prosecution that's so obvious.

that even a judge is willing to call it. out, that what's immediately going to. follow is going to be a bar. investigation." And is there some some. responsibility on the bar itself to say. to to issue kind of an announcement, unprecedented though it may be, that. anybody who abuses their law license, which was granted by each respective. bar, that there are certain standards. that have to be upheld, otherwise you. risk losing that law license. >> Brian, let me try to take on the last. question first because I've probably. already forgotten the first two, but the.

last question, shouldn't state bar. ethics organizations. make a preemptive announcement that hey, listen up everybody, you need to follow. the ethical rules in our jurisdiction, in our state, or your law license may be. at risk. You know, that's why we have a. code of ethics in each of the states. So, you know, to say it's not necessary. or it shouldn't be necessary for them to. say like we told you when you were sworn. in as an attorney in our state, here are. the ethical rules you have to follow. I.

guess I would say it couldn't hurt. because those rules are being. disregarded, violated, you know, it. seems on on a daily basis by some at the. Department of Justice, clearly not all. at the Department of Justice. How about. another question you asked, isn't there. an obligation for people to speak out. about this? Well, first of all, that's. what we do, but we do it from the. outside. I was on the inside of the. federal government for about 30 years. and 6 months before I retired, and I. wouldn't stand for this inside. government, certainly I wouldn't do it.

I wouldn't stand for it from the federal. prosecutors that I supervised at the. D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office, and. frankly, I didn't see behavior like this. in my 30-plus years as a federal. prosecutor. Um, but I think we're. screaming from the rooftops from the. outside about this. But you know what, Brian, there are also people speaking. out from the inside. I I trust our. viewers will remember a DOJ attorney. named Erez Reuvini. Who is he? He was. the one that walked into court in the.

Abrego Garcia case and told the truth. even though he had essentially been. urged to lie about what the government. did to Abrego Garcia. He stood up. He. said, "I will not compromise my ethics, my integrity." And of course, he was. fired or it may be that he, you know, he. self-selected and left before they had. an opportunity to fire him. But there. are people on the inside. There are. people who stood up to Emil Bove, the. then acting Deputy Attorney General who, God help us, is now a Federal Court of.

Appeals judge. Um when he tried to. dismiss the Eric Adams federal. prosecution in New York, former New York. City mayor. Why? Not for legal reasons, but for political reasons so Adams could. do favors for Donald Trump. There were. lawyers on the inside that when uh Emil. Bove said, "You know what? If judges. tell us to do this, that, or the other, we just may have to tell the judges, 'F. you.'" There were attorneys on the. inside who stood up and were promptly. fired or who resigned. There are people.

on the inside. What we're seeing right. now from DOJ, this has been reported by. the New York Times and other outlets. recently, there's not only a brain drain. from DOJ, there's an ethics drain. because the people who are there will. not do the dirty bidding of Donald. Trump, Todd Blanche, and others. And. people will say, "Well, shouldn't they. hunker down and stay and try to be a. bulwark on the inside?" I don't. criticize anybody for leaving because I. wouldn't want to work for that kind of. corrupt leadership. But you know, there.

are people screaming from the rooftops. about these ethical travesties both. outside government and inside. government. >> Well, we will of course stay on top of. this story and any other legal news. For. those who are watching, if you'd like to. follow along, best way to do that is to. subscribe to both of our channels. I'm. going to put those links right here on. the screen and also in the post. description of this video. I'm Brian. Tyler Cohen. >> And I'm Glenn Kirschner. >> You're watching the Legal Breakdown. >> [music].