Video

'Seismic' Trump insurrectionist ruling opens door for Supreme Court surprise: legal expert

The Colorado judge who handed Donald Trump a win by keeping him on the state's ballot may have set things in motion for the Supreme Court to help the plaintiffs, a former prosecutor said on Saturday.

Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman appeared on MSNBC's Yasmin Vossoughian Reports, where he was asked about the Colorado decision, which kept the ex-president on the state ballot but affirmed that he participated in insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.

Keep reading... Show less

Jack Smith 'chess move' could place Judge Cannon under new scrutiny: expert

Jack Smith could make a strategic move that would place the Trump-appointed Judge Cannon on higher scrutiny in connection with her rulings in the ex-president's criminal prosecution over sensitive documents allegedly hoarded away at Mar-a-Lago, a former prosecutor said on Saturday.

Charles Coleman, a former Brooklyn, New York, prosecutor, appeared on MSNBC and was asked about Judge Cannon's recent scheduling moves that some say are designed to delay the former president's criminal trial beyond the 2024 election.

Keep reading... Show less

'A get-out-of-jail-free card for insurrection': CO secretary of state ​rips Trump ruling

Colorado Secretary of State Jenna Griswold (D) blasted District Judge Sarah B. Wallace on MSNBC on Saturday morning for agreeing that Donald Trump participated in an insurrection against the United States government but that it did not preclude him from running to be the commander in chief once again.

Appearing on MSNBC with host Ali Velshi less than 24 hours after Wallace issued her ruling that some constitutional scholars called "preposterous" and "bizarre," a visibly upset Griswold accused the jurist of giving Trump a free pass.

Keep reading... Show less

CO judge's 'bizarro' Trump eligibility ruling ripped apart by constitutional law experts

A ruling by District Judge Sarah Wallace requiring that the Colorado secretary of state must place Donald Trump on the state's primary ballot next year, because he is not ineligible according to her reading of the 14th Amendment, was ripped apart by two constitutional law scholars appearing on MSNBC on Saturday morning.

Former federal Judge Michael Luttig and constitutional law expert Laurence Tribe spoke with host Ali Velshi less than 24 hours after the ruling came down where Wallace agreed the former president took part in the Jan. 6 insurrection but didn't feel he was covered by wording in Section Three that would bar him from running for office.

According to Tribe, the judge made an "egregious error" in her ruling which Tribe also labeled as "bizzaro."

"The court did egregiously error in holding that the office of the president is not an office under the United States, turning constitutional interpretation upside down, by finding the unambiguous text of Section Three ambiguous because of a sliver of debate history that is not only itself ambiguous, but is rendered singularly unpersuasive by other exchanges in the debate history," Luttig explained. "That reflects the understanding that the office of president is of course an office under the United States, from which a person can be disqualified by Section Three."

"You suggested that this was a narrow interpretation of section three," he told the MSNBC host. "It is that and more. It is the narrowest possible interpretation of Section Three, it's the interpretation urged on the court by the former president's lawyers. But it's simply incorrect as a matter of constitutional law."

ALSO READ: What is Trump planning if he gets a second term? Be worried. Be really worried.

Tribe added, "In paragraph 100 of the opinion, she [Judge Wallace] concludes he knew he [Trump] lost the election. so what accounts for this bizarre, actually, bizarro upside-down holding that the highest office in the land, the one of the greatest power, the one whose danger to the republic is at its maximum, would somehow be exempt?"

"That the judge herself says, she admits that sounds preposterous, that's her word," he continued. "She says it would carry the preposterous application that Jefferson Davis, who took an oath to the Constitution, before becoming a senator, then became a senator, then turned on the Constitution, then became a Confederate and the president of the Confederacy, that he could then become president of the post civil war United States?"

Keep reading... Show less

Trump 'acted a fool' in Manhattan courtroom and now his 'bloviating' will cost him: expert

Judge Arthur Engoron's decision to let Donald Trump argue, "bloviate" and shatter the normal restrictions on testimony in his Manhattan courtroom was a shrewd move according to one legal analyst who predicted the transcripts will kill any chance of a successful appeal by the former president's lawyers.

Speaking with MSNBC host Jonathan Capehart, legal analyst Catherine Christian agreed with the host that Trump "acted the fool" during his testimony in the $250 million financial fraud civil suit filed against him and his Trump Organization.

"This acrimonious back and forth between Judge Engoron and Trump, is this going to be a factor on appeal?" Capehart asked his guest.

"It will be a factor on appeal," the legal analyst quickly replied. "But what Judge Engoron did, I thought very well, when Donald Trump acted a fool at the beginning, the judge was getting upset and engaging with him, and then suddenly stopped and let him — let Donald Trump just go on and bloviate and say irrelevant things."

"Why? Because there was not a jury there," she continued. "There was no jury that you had to protect from hearing prejudicial irrelevant testimony. In a jury trial, the judge would have to constantly have the jury removed from the room, and warn the defendant. In this case, I think the judge decided, 'Do you know what? There is no jury here. I'm the decider, I'll let the defendant go on and on, to a limit. and so he can't say on appeal I was cut down, I wasn't allowed to say what I wanted to say,' because the appellate court will look and see what actually the defendant said, and most of it was irrelevant."

"It was just a puffing up his brand, as his kids did, when they were called as witnesses on their own case," she added. "So the judge, very wisely, just let him go: there is no jury here, I don't have to worry about the jury, let him go."

Watch below or at the link.

MSNBC 11 18 2023 09 31 19 youtu.be

'Death by delay': Judge Cannon buried over new Trump trial deadline stall

During an appearance on MSNBC's "The Katie Phang Show," former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance expressed dismay over reports that Judge Aileen Cannon is yet again making it extremely difficult for the Department of Justice to prosecute Donald Trump for obstruction of justice.

Reacting to Trump-appointed Cannon delays which has the proceedings running four months behind schedule, Vance pointed out that the jurist is doing nothing that wasn't expected of her.

"So the fact that Judge Cannon is telling special counsel, 'I'm not setting a deadline, I'm not addressing anything until March 1st of 2024,' are we reading the tea leaves directly when we say that this case is not going to go to trial in May of 2024?" host Phang prompted her guest.

"You know, I think you are, unless on March 1 we see an entire different Judge Cannon who suddenly sets fast deadlines and forces Trump's lawyers to move more quickly," Vance replied.

ALSO IN THE NEWS: What is Trump planning if he gets a second term? Be worried. Be really worried

"But this is death by delay," she added, "That's exactly what we're seeing in this case in Florida."

Watch below or at the link.

Keep reading... Show less

Troubles multiply for George Santos after DOJ warning

According to a member of the House Ethics Committee which just released a scathing report on the financial antics committed by Rep. George Santos, the New York Republican has more important things to worry about besides his possible ouster from Congress.

Appearing on MSNBC with host Katie Phang, Rep. Deborah Ross (D-NC), who sits on the committee, was asked about the details outlined in the report that recommended Santos be expelled from the House.

According to Ross, there were some allegations levied against Santos that were not followed up on, after the Department of Justice warned members of the committee off.

"Within the report I read that there's been referrals made to the DOJ," host Phang prompted. "Is that something that is the standard, or happens typically by the Ethics Committee?"

"Yes, it is," Ross replied. "And, in fact, the DOJ asked the ethics committee not to investigate several things, where they already had been interviewing witnesses."

"So the Ethics Committee confined its investigation primarily to things under the purview of the House: campaign finance issues, whether or not reports are filed," she elaborated. "And so remember, this scathing report is only limited to a few of the things that Mr. Santos has done, and so we felt an obligation to share with the DOJ information that might be helpful in their criminal investigation."

Watch below or at the link.

MSNBC 11 18 2023 08 05 39 youtu.be

DeSantis claims Trump 'couldn't spell' his demeaning nickname if he was 'put to the test'

Ron DeSantis is challenging the the former POTUS to take his juvenile name calling back to grade school.

Republican presidential hopefuls Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy talked about their faith and tackling Trump during a Family Leader’s Presidential Thanksgiving Forum in Des Moines, Iowa, ahead of the state caucuses.

Keep reading... Show less

'Curious legal ruling': Legal expert says she was 'caught off guard' by Colorado decision

In her ruling to keep former president Donald Trump on the 2024 ballot in Colorado, the judge confirmed that he indeed committed insurrection back on Jan. 6 when he revved up a crowd to "Stop The Steal" — but he wasn't an officer of the U.S.

That's the takeaway that former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance is left with in what she described as an odd ruling during an appearance on MSNBC's "The Last Word" with Lawrence O'Donnell on Friday.

Keep reading... Show less

'Not a fan of President Trump': Ex-president's lawyer slams judge that handed him a win

An insurrectionist can run for president.

Former President Donald Trump will be permitted to stay on the primary ballot in Colorado after District Judge Sarah Wallace concluded he committed an insurrection back on Jan. 6, 2021, by inciting a mob to prevent the certification of the presidential election where he lost — but shot down some state voters' attempt to invoke the 14th Amendment from banishing him from holding office again.

Keep reading... Show less

Trump's attacks on law clerk meant to 'provoke the judge' into anger: ex-prosecutor

Former President Donald Trump's persistent attacks on New York Judge Arthur Engoron's law clerk in the civil fraud trial are not random, argued former federal prosecutor Shan Wu during an MSNBC segment on the gag order against the former president that was temporarily suspended.

Rather, Wu told anchor and former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, it's a ploy to try to make Engoron lose his temper and throw the trial.

Keep reading... Show less

Colorado judge did Democrats a favor by ruling for Trump in insurrection case: ex-adviser

Friday's loss handed down by a Colorado judge denying a try by voters to scratch Trump from the ballot is a "boon" for the Dems.

"By failing here, I think that Democrats did themselves a favor by not playing right into the president's hands," former Trump campaign senior adviser David Urban said during an appearance on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360". "[Trump's supporters] would have been shouting from the rooftops."

Keep reading... Show less

'They weren't really experts': Letitia James shreds Trump's 'golf buddies' defense

Attorney General Letitia James took to social media Friday night to throw some snark at Donald Trump: That wasn’t a defense, she said, that was golf buddies.

James, the State prosecutor leading the charge in Trump’s $250 million civil lawsuit, ridiculed the panel of expert defense witnesses she said failed to refute the key charges in her fraud case.

Keep reading... Show less