Judge: Trump's 34 Felony Convictions STAND!

0:00It's time for Justice Matters, with former federal prosecutor and legal analyst Glenn Kerschner. Today, Glenn speaks with Adam Klassfeld of all rise news about Donald Trump's latest attempt to reverse his conviction for falsifying business records. That's coming up next on Justice Matters. When Donald Trump was inaugurated like all presidents, he swore an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. Instead, Donald Trump has decided to swerve, deflect, and upend the Constitution and treat it like it terms and conditions page. I'm Professor Cory Brechneider. And I'm deeply unqualified comedian John Fiegelstein. We'd like to invite you to listen to the oath in the office podcast where every week we interpret the Constitution and hold Trump accountable to his oath. It's a podcast that offers real insight on how to take action against tyranny and mayhem because despair is not a strategy.

1:04Well, hold him to his pledge despite his threats to democracy and the law itself. It's a podcast that's all about hope for what a real democracy should look like from an esteemed respected constitutional scholar and a deeply neurotic comedian who thought the Amaliments clause was a breakfast item. Subscribe to the oath in the office where every week we talk about how citizens can preserve our democracy and fight back against the threat to democracy. Subscribe to the oath in the office on Apple Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, welcome friends. I'm glad that you're with us. We have our friend Adam Klasfeld back of all rise news, the best gaviled the gavill coverage in the business. He just alerted me that there's a brand new opinion that was issued by judge Alvin Hellerstein, federal judge up in New York that denied Trump's attempt, desperate attempt to try to unravel the criminal case in which he was convicted of 34 felonies.

2:09You'll remember that was a state case up in New York. So first of all, Adam, thank you. I'm so glad that you're here to break these stories down for us. My pleasure, Glen, I always love talking. So let's start with the breaking news. Judge Alvin Hellerstein just issued an opinion denying Trump's, I think, second request at least to try to undo his conviction of 34 felony crimes in that state court prosecution up in New York. What I'm going to do is read just the first short opening paragraph of Judge Hellerstein's opinion. And I think that will highlight just how confusing and Byzantine these issues are, but then Adam is going to break it down and help explain it for us. Just ahead Glenn continues his talk with Adam Klasfeld of all rise news. This is Justice Maddox.

3:10I don't think people understand what's going on right now. This thing is going to be renegotiating. Renegotiating. Urban View Mornings of the podcast with Sean Arunay, Dr. Greg Hard, the Munking and you. Wake up! Urban View Mornings, the podcast deep dives into news, politics, social justice and culture issues often overlooked by mainstream media. No spin, no lies, just facts. Urban View Mornings, the podcast start your day with knowledge, wisdom, history, truth and a dash of fun. Am I? Am I crooked? Join the conversation. Informing the culture, honoring the legacy and shaping what comes next. Across this country. Urban View Mornings, the podcast on the serious XMF and wherever you get your podcast. What I tell you is the truth is the truth. Urban View Mornings, the podcast with Sean Arunay, Dr. Greg Hard, the Munking and you. Stay engaged. Urban View Mornings, the podcast. Empowering America. Urban View, we're talking about it and it becomes action.

4:12So here is the opening salvo from Judge Hellerstein. Defendant Donald Trump moved for leave to file a second notice of removal. Removal from state court into federal court. I denied his motion, but the court of appeals vacated and remanded and on remand. I was directed to consider a number of issues. One, whether then former president Trump demonstrated good cause for filing an untimely notice of removal after the Supreme Court issued its decision in Trump versus United States. That was the presidential immunity case and diligently sought removal to whether removal under a particular set of statutes of laws is available at this stage of the state court proceedings. And three, whether Trump's prosecution is for or relating to an act under color of federal office and whether he raises a colorable federal defense.

5:23And then he says, I reaffirm my former decision, the president's motion is denied my reasons follow. I hope that's crystal clear for everybody. Exactly what's gone on in this case. This is where I'm going to throw it to Adam because he's going to help unravel it all. So inside that dense legal ease is some big news. So bottom line up front, what this legal battle was all about was Trump trying to get this these state convictions up on a fast track to the Supreme Court. Essentially the trial court, which would be where judge hellerstein was sitting has already rendered its verdict. And that was a jury in the trial court in the state level finding 34 felony convictions for disguising in his cover up the hush money payments to Sermy Daniels for the purpose of influencing the 2016 presidential election.

6:23So what Trump was trying to do was get rid of the entire New York appellate process that it has to go to the intermediate court of appeals, the appellate division, then go up to the court of appeals, which is the state's highest court before he tries to find some sort of federal hook to get this case back up to the Supreme Court instead of going through that process. Trump wanted to go to the second circuit and then the Supreme Court just one stop instead of two other stops. And so judge hellerstein's ruling says, no, you have to remain in New York state courts for your appellate process. So that's where the rubber hits the road. That's a brass tax. Now inside that dense legal ease, Trump's hook for getting this case transferred trying once again when judge hellerstein said, no, no, this belongs in New York state court was that there was the immunity ruling Trump versus the United States. And in the immunity decision in all of that legal ease and that doctrine that the Supreme Court created on whole cloth, there was an evidentiary rule and that evidentiary rule was if a piece of evidence relates to official acts, then it cannot be used against a former president.

7:47He's facing criminal prosecution and among all of the legal issues that appear in judge hellerstein's opinion, the most important one, the most significant one for Trump's ongoing appeals is a finding on page 31 of this opinion where judge hellerstein said the trial evidence shows no relationship to official acts. Judge hellerstein says that you spoke to Hope Hicks and you're saying that because Hope Hicks was, you know, your White House aid, her testimony couldn't have been used against you at your trial. Well, too bad you were discussing unofficial acts. You were discussing the disguising of these hush money payments is Stormy Daniels all of the examples that he uses were in order to avoid a private scandal. And so that ruling by hellerstein is the most significant along the way he talks about other issues that were no surprise to people who were sitting in federal court watching the hearing on this hellerstein didn't buy the Trump defense teams arguments of oh well we would have brought this earlier, but we were trying to be cooperative with a federal court.

9:03He made pretty clear that he thought that this was just Trump trying to hedge his bets try to fight out the legal battle in New York court and then if they lose tried in federal court, he found they couldn't get another bite at the apple. Then there's the entire issue of why would Trump get a federal transfer because he's then at the time the former president of the United States are now currently a sitting president of the United States that's not the rule a jury already rendered a verdict what would a federal court even do at that stage. So there were all of these in the weeds issues, but the most important thing to take out of this decision is that Trump's defense team wanted a fast track to the Supreme Court and he's not going to get it. He's going to have to do this like any criminal defendant who was prosecuted in New York State courts.

10:04He's going to have to go to the appellate division first if they rule against him. He's going to have to go up to the court of appeals and if he can find some issue that provide some plausible reason for the Supreme Court intervening in a case in the New York judiciary, then he's going to have to go up to the Supreme Court. He doesn't get that fast track. He doesn't go straight to the second circuit and then to a six three super majority that he was hoping for. Coming up next, Glenn concludes his discussion with Adam Klausfeld of all rise news. This is Justice Maddings. Here's what you've been missing this week on the Stephanie Miller happy hour podcast. So as you know, Maggie here, everyone wrote that she leaves notes in Trump's private spaces. I like to shove something up his private space. I have a note for him. Here, let me write it out now.

11:05So we know the one you are all that matters to me. I don't ever want to let you down. Thank you for being my guardian and protector in this life. Holy Jesus. I think my hair extension just went up on the back of my hair extensions. She's starting to selling Mrs. Voorhees from Friday the 13th. Wow. I want to bring you joy to feel like we can get through a day without ever having to talk work. You're the alpha and the omega. This will be the be all in the end all. What would I be without you? Subscribe to the Stephanie Miller happy hour podcast on Apple podcast Stephanie Miller dot com or wherever you get your favorite podcasts. So this is both a procedural and a substantive loss for Donald Trump. Is that fair to say? I think that's fair to say because the procedural loss is intricately enmeshed in the substantive loss because in order to reach that finding along the way,

12:16the judge, hella seen had to make some sort of ruling about the nature of the evidence use against him were his tweets at the time commenting on the storm Daniels scandal and official act of his presidency that this was a distraction from what he was doing in the world. Or was this Donald Trump dealing with a private scandal? Hella steam found it was a ladder was his conversation with hope Hicks a important feat of messaging about something that was a distraction from his work in the White House know these were unofficial acts in hella steens finding so on the one level, and he's a low stakes legal battle in the sense that it was simply about where these appeals would happen would these appeals happen in the New York state judiciary or would it happen in the federal courts entirely. And so that was what it was about, but when you investigate little deeper when you see what the legal issues were involved what judge hella steam ruled on, it was a lot more substantive because it goes to the heart of many of the

13:28arguments that Trump will be making not only in the New York state courts, but if the Supreme Court decides to hear the issue of immunity, there's now an opinion stating all of these are unofficial acts. And let me give voice to what I suspect some people are thinking it seems like Donald Trump in particular gets not just one bite of the apple or two bites at the apple he's going through apple after apple maybe bushel after bushel this conviction and the sentence that he received albeit an unconditional discharge which is entirely unsatisfying because for 34 felony convictions in New York. Crimes that were committed in order to cover up deeply damaging evidence that might have impacted voters decisions about who to vote for in the next presidential election, an unconditional discharge which I've never saw in my 30 years as a prosecutor basically means you don't even get probation you get you get nothing not a slap on the wrist nothing.

14:38And you know judge mershan did that I think because he may have felt boxed in may have felt like he couldn't put the leading you know that I guess the nominated Republican presidential candidate at the time he was sentenced maybe you know he couldn't do anything but just unconditionally discharge this and and yet here we are more than a year and a half later maybe two years later and Donald Trump is still taking bites out of the apple trying to undo that old at this point conviction. That I am not looking for you to explain that or or push back though you're welcome to it does feel like the process is so painfully slow and a litigant like Donald Trump wants to take advantage sometimes nefariously of the pace of the court system can seem to run this thing out for years anything you want to say about that before we absolutely and it's not even a question about pushing back it to add to what you were saying. There's an interesting maneuvering when it comes to timing when it came to the case itself was delay after delay after delay as matter of fact the sentencing was delayed until really shortly before his second inauguration it kept getting held up for various reasons and as you said just as mershan eventually issued a unconditional discharge and the light ascendance imaginable and what is Trump doing right now.

16:07Well recent reporting in the New York Times is that his Justice Department in the district of Northern District of Illinois is now looking into a PR firm affiliated with his daughter who he does the smershan's daughter exactly just smershan's daughter was a subject of bogus attacks against justice mershan at the time that were rejected by a New York judicial commission. On ethics it was rejected by all the appellate courts a Trump was saying that Justice mershan can't rule fairly because his daughter worked for a PR firm that did fundraising for the Democrats well you know that was rejected by every court that heard it but it's a thread that's currently being pulled by a Trump appointee in Chicago so it continues even though he's getting all the bites of the apple all the good.

17:07And this time what he was trying to do that irony of this timing gain is he wanted a fast track now that he was done delaying and delaying and delaying that trial as long as possible and so that he could get elected and avert all of his criminal cases that way now he can't get it fast enough track to the Supreme Court where he thinks he stands good chance of overturning this thing. Well we'll see if that happens but that was a calculation here it was delay delay delay until let's hurry up and not have the usual appellate track that any other criminal defendant in New York would get. And I'll tell you it is especially upsetting and I would say the brave that he's having his Department of Justice investigate justice in New York is what they call the trial court judge mershan's daughter I mean the one thing I will give Trump credit for is that he is consistently vindictive in the way he has weaponized and misused the power of the Department of Justice to go after not only has perceived enemies but in this case a family member of one of his perceived

18:22justice and this is something that we will have to address when the rule of law comes back into the light of day.