Trump WAVES THE WHITE FLAG in MAJOR defeat

Major news here as it looks like Donald. Trump's Department of Justice has waved. the white flag. Glenn, can you explain. what just happened here in a major. reversal? >> Brian, the New York Times just clobbered. Donald Trump, Todd Blanche. This just. shows what a grotesque clown show the. DOJ leadership air quotes is. They. subpoenaed New York Times reporters. Why? Well, because New York Times. reporters had the nerve to publish a. piece about the true circumstances.

surrounded this, you know, Qatari jet. that was a gift to Donald Trump that was. going to cost the taxpayers $1 billion. to retrofit so it could be secure and. kind of be tandem out to Air Force One. And of course all of that went sideways. and and they they bungled it badly. And. the New York Times published what by all. accounts seemed to be a truthful, accurate story about that. And so Donald. Trump's DOJ leadership just started. flooding the New York Times with. subpoenas. That may not sound bad to the.

uninitiated, but I will tell you in a. minute just how bad it is. But let me. start with the really grotesque part. They not only subpoenaed New York Times. reporters, they they subpoenaed the. mother of one reporter, they subpoenaed. the spouses of two reporters. And the. New York Times wouldn't stand for it. Indeed, the lawyer representing the New. York Times said, "You know what, judge? Even the mafia has a rule against going. after family members." Which I thought.

was some colorful lawyering. And so the. judge started wearing out these DOJ. lawyers who went into court and tried to. defend this abject abuse of. prosecutorial power. And after about an. hour of the judge pinning them down at. every turn, he said, "Look, you can. either withdraw these subpoenas or I. will quash them. In other words, I will. cancel them. I will throw them out.

because they are an abuse of. prosecutorial discretion and power. And. after about an hour, according to to the. reporting from inside the courtroom, the. DOJ attorneys gave up the ghost. And. then, Brian, it goes from bad to worse. So, the judge pressed them on, you know, why in the world are you subpoenaing. family members, relatives of the. reporters? And the DOJ attorney had the. temerity to say, "Well, judge, that was. an error. We didn't intend to involve".

and these are quotes now from the. hearing, "We didn't intend to involve. the reporters' relatives or family. members in the investigation." To which. the judge shot back, and I'm going to. paraphrase here, "What the hell are you talking about? You subpoenaed them." And you know what. DOJ's explanation/excuse. was? And I want to quote this. Quote, "It was an error. It was a consequence. of trying to move quickly." Close quote.

Now, Brian, I can envision the judge. saying, "Let me get this straight. You drafted, you executed subpoenas for. New York Times reporters. And then, because you were moving a little too. quickly, you sat down and drafted and. executed subpoenas for their family. members. Do I have that right?" The. judge threatened sanctions for. misstatements or incorrect statements. It was a bit of a bloodbath. And the.

reason all of this is so out of bounds, take it from this old career prosecutor. who worked inside the Department of. Justice for decades, we generally don't subpoena reporters. When we find ourselves, Brian, in a. position where we think we have the. lawful authority to subpoena reporters, there are tests that have been set out. in the law and in the precedent, the. case law, including a case called New. York Times versus Gonzalez. And it says, you only subpoena a reporter as an.

absolute last resort after you have. exhausted all other investigative. efforts and attempts to get at the. information you need without potentially. running afoul of the First Amendment. freedom of the press. You know what? They exhausted exactly no investigative. measures. They went right to subpoenaing. the reporters and subpoenaing the. reporters' family members. This is a. grotesque clown show. The judge let them.

know it, and this is another instance. where DOJ can't find its ethics with two. hands. >> Well, you know, Glenn, in fairness, who. among us hasn't accidentally filled out. and submitted a subpoena? You know, it's. just as common as taking the wrong exit. on the highway. You accidentally. subpoena the entire family of New York. Times reporters. Um it's worth asking here because you. said that the judge pushed back, called. this an abuse of power, suggested the. idea of sanctions. Talk a little bit.

about what the consequences for the. people who who were involved in this. whole process may look like. Is the. judge just going to allow this to be one. more instance of prosecutorial. overreach, or does it look like there. might actually be some accountability. for this abuse of power? >> Brian, we are forever chasing the. elusive accountability for the. transgressions of DOJ lawyers, aren't. we? And we haven't seen a whole lot of. accountability come home to roost for. these people. But what we have seen are.

judges who have um repeatedly, early and. often, um referred DOJ attorneys to bar. counsel, their state bar, for ethics. investigations. Some of them are up and. running. You know, the problem is that. is a very long drawn-out process with. lots of rights that the attorneys enjoy. when they're the subject of an ethics. investigation, but you know, ultimately, I suspect you're going to have these. attorneys go the way of the Rudy. Giuliani's and the John Eastman's and. the Kenneth Chesbro's and you know,

others who have been disbarred because. of the dirty dealings they did for. Donald Trump during his first. administration. So, I suspect the. attorneys who were just caught engaged. in this prosecutorial abuse and ended up. having to cry uncle. They withdrew the. subpoenas because they knew the judge. was about to rule against them for good. reason. I suspect you're going to see. them, you know, sent off to their state. bar for an ethics investigation. You're. going to see them investigated, sanctioned up to and including. potentially disbarment. The problem is,

we're not going to see it for a very. long time and therein lies some of the. problem because it seems like Donald. Trump and the people who are willing to. do his corrupt and unethical bidding. know that they can always kind of stay. several steps ahead of accountability. In other words, let's do something. lawless, abusive, and unethical today. because the courts might take months or. maybe even a year or more to catch up. and contemplate holding us accountable. So, you know, this is a recurring. pattern that we have been suffering, the.

American people have been suffering and. you know, I keep saying it has to stop. Accountability has to come at some point. and we need to pull our heads out of our. you know, what's and right the American. ship because the American people cannot. suffer this kind of abject abuse from. the Department of Justice forever. >> And I want to get into that in just a. moment, but I have one more question. specifically, uh, specifically about the issue that. we're talking about. Can you speak about. the prospect of discovery? What that. would have, uh, uncovered in the event.

that this lawsuit and these subpoenas. actually went forward? >> So, you know, discovery is the enemy of. the nefarious litigant. That was a. mouthful, so let me translate my own. nonsense. If you file a dirty lawsuit, as Donald. Trump, you know, is want to do, um what. happens, like just happened in the BBC. case, the the judge said, "Oh, okay, uh. Donald Trump, you want $10 billion. claiming that you were financially. harmed by the BBC's decision about how.

to edit some interview or another of. you. Fine. In discovery, the BBC is. going to get all your financial. information. You think Donald Trump. wants anybody getting their hands on all. of his financial information given what. he has been, you know, earning off the. presidency in the last year and a half?". Oh, no way. So, what Donald Trump often. does is he ends up dismissing his own. lawsuit rather than giving the opponent. in the lawsuit information that would be. extraordinarily damaging to him, Donald.

Trump, himself. So, sometimes the best. thing that can happen for Donald Trump. is judges throw out lawsuits or he ends. up having to dismiss or move to dismiss. his own lawsuit before discovery. unearths a whole bunch of Donald Trump. dirt. >> Now, let's go back to the topic that we. were speaking about before, this idea of. accountability. In the In the aftermath of. Donald Trump and in a post-Trump world, what needs to happen with these bar.

councils and any um organizations that. issue bar licenses so that we aren't in. a position where we have lawyers who. know that they can abuse their power in. deference to some corrupt politician. and and that the process is so slow. and plotting and bureaucratic that. there's no way to stop any of this for, you know, in some instances years. because of how judicious, I think, and. well-intentioned a lot of these. processes are, but but really not um not.

built for this moment where things move. so quickly and where people can do so. much damage in in such a short amount of. time. >> You know, it's such an important. observation because the courts have been. playing catch up with Donald Trump, no. pun intended on the catch up, have been. trying to catch up to Donald Trump's. lawlessness since, I mean, in the most. recent go-round, Donald Trump the. sequel, his second second presidency, since the first day of his second term. when he tried to cross out of the. Constitution a constitutional right, a.

guarantee of birthright citizenship. Do. you know it took the courts a year and a. half, a full year and a half to finally. tell Donald Trump, "No, can't do it. It's unconstitutional." The havoc he. wrought in the interim, and you know, I. think that highlights a a real weakness. um in the sort of judicial system writ. large. There's no reason we can't do. things on an expedited basis, you know, give two-week deadlines and move a a. matter like this through the system. expeditiously rather than let nefarious.

litigants take advantage of the endless. delay. And I would put that in the um. the bucket of reforms that we need to. take up beginning in January 2029. And. you used a a phrase that's kind of music. to my ears, accountability in a. post-Trump world. Not to go off on my. own dalliance, but during the first. Trump term with all the lawlessness that. I saw as a former federal prosecutor, I. started writing a book and I did a. treatment um called accountability in a. post-Trump world. And the opening scene.

I wrote as, you know, law enforcement. actually coming for Donald Trump in. Trump Tower to execute an arrest warrant. after he left the presidency for all the. crimes he committed during the first. Trump term. How wrong I was, and I know. everybody will be shocked that that book. never did see the light of day. >> Yeah. Well, look, I I think that if. anything, um that should be a a. principal issue of reform because we've. seen the extent to which these people. rely on uh on again, how antiquated this.

system is. It was built for a different. time. I think it was built thinking uh. you know and this was correct to a point. thinking that these attorneys were going. to act in good faith and they wouldn't. possibly abuse their power to the extent. that they are right now but but Trump. has shown that there is no there's no. shame when it comes to the to the the. speed with which these people will abuse. their power and how they're so drunk. with proximity to power to him. And so I. think that we we do need to see a world. where I mean you know I I I I understand.

that these law licenses are issued on on. a state-by-state basis but some. convention. of you know these these bar councils to. come together and figure out major. structural reforms that were not in a. position where the people who are. entrusted to defend the Constitution are. instead the ones with the power to. undermine it. >> Yeah and Brian I think you focused on. this in your new book and. congratulations that it's on the New. York Times bestseller list and I read it. and you know you focus on you know the. central issue of accountability and how.

we need to to fight for it when the rule. of law comes back into the light of day. and I couldn't agree with you more and a. big part of that is court reform indeed. Supreme Court reform. Listen, we know. what the problems are that the bad. actors have taken advantage of so it's. up to us to address them to repair them. to reform them to remedy them and if we. don't if we fail in that mission I I I. hate to say I don't think we get to keep. our republic because I don't think we.

can endure another Donald Trump or what. might even come after Donald Trump that. is worse because the person will be. smarter and will surround himself with. you know more adept crooks and. sycophants. So you know we we're in a. tough spot. I do believe that we are up. to the mission come January 2029 but. it's going to put us to the test. >> Well look I think if anybody is in a. position where they can offer up uh uh. reform exact kind of reforms that we. need to rebuild the government in a.

post-Trump world, it's you. So, highly. recommend for anybody who's watching. right now, if you want to stay up on our. work, please subscribe to both of our. channels. Completely free to do so, but. a great way to support us, amplify our. voices in this ecosystem, and to show. some support for independent media. So, those links are 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.