Serious Trouble

The goat is back. You can thank Rudy Giuliani, who — for some unknown reason — sat for a voluntary interview with federal investigators. This week, we talked about The Tape — the recording of Trump bragging about his possession of a classified Iran war plan he now says he didn’t possess at all. Trump says it’s a misunderstanding: he’s a “legitimate person,” and if he was talking about having “plans,” they were probably for buildings or golf courses. But what the documents were or weren't about is, as far as his legal case goes, unimportant. The key legal thing about the recording is what it shows about his knowledge about classification. After all, the government never found the war plan document, and it never charged him for possessing it. Speaking of never finding that document — maybe it’s at Bedminster, right? Ken and I talk this week about news about Bedminster, and why the government never executed a search warrant there like they did at Mar-a-Lago. We also talk about early orders coming down from Judge Aileen Cannon — so far, they seem pretty sensible and appropriate. Finally, we talk about Hunter Biden and the IRS whistleblower who says prosecutors protected him from the felony charges he should have faced. Visit serioustrouble.show to find a transcript of this episode and other relevant links, and you can also become a member and support the show there. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

We’re back with another episode of Serious Trouble. And this week, Ken feels compelled to summon the scream of a goat to express his feelings as we add two more items to the list of contexts in which one should just shut up if under criminal investigation. One of those contexts is a televised interview with Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier. We look at the admissions Donald Trump made about which documents he retained and why, and how those could help the government, particularly if Judge Aileen Cannon were to throw out other evidence of Trump’s knowledge and intent that is needed to prove the charges against him.Another such context is Hunter Biden’s 2021 tell-all autobiography, in which he made admissions related to a gun purchase for which he has not yet been charged with a crime. The issue is that Hunter falsely claimed not to be addicted to any illegal substances when he purchased a gun in 2018. As Ken notes, this is a crime that’s rarely prosecuted, and one that prosecutors might never have thought of if he hadn’t written the book. Also this week, we look at news reports about internal disagreement within the Department of Justice about whether the January 6 investigation should have turned sooner to the question of criminal liability on the part of Donald Trump, we also look at initial orders from Judge Aileen Cannon in the documents case — boilerplate so far — and at the complicating role that the Classified Information Procedures Act could play in the case’s early days.Visit serioustrouble.show to find a transcript of this episode and to support our work. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.showWe got a lot of listener feedback about last week’s episode, especially about Kenny Raincloud’s take on how Judge Aileen Cannon could tank the government’s case against Donald Trump if she cares to. This week, for paying subscribers, Ken responds to a lot of that feedback — getting especially specific about the attorney-client privilege issues that are likeliest to trip up the government, and how the government could (maybe) get an appeals court to remove Cannon from the case. We also talked (for all subscribers) about Trump’s arraignment, and the especially lenient conditions of release that were offered to the former president.Plus, for paying subscribers: drama between the large law firm Lewis Brisbois and a pretty large new firm founded by 140 (!) attorneys who simultaneously left Louis Brisbois. No one looks good. And we have an update on the ChatGPT case, where attorneys Steven A. Schwartz and Peter LoDuca have been in the unfortunate position of pleading stupidity to a federal judge.Visit serioustrouble.show to become a paying subscriber ($6/month or $60/year) and unlock all of our episodes.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.showThere is no such thing as an emergency podcast. But… this is as close as we get. Serious Trouble is back for a second time this week because Donald Trump has been indicted. Again. But this time in federal court — and on a set of charges that can’t (easily) be dismissed as chickenshit. The 49-page indictment has remarkable and hilarious detail, including Trump making the sorts of statements prosecutors can only dream of when trying to prove a crime with a challenging intent requirement. As Ken says in this episode, it’s a set of facts a prosecutor could reasonably feel cocky going into court with against a normal defendant. But Trump isn’t a normal defendant, and it won’t be a normal case.This week’s show is more than an hour — for paying subscribers. Everyone gets the first half hour. Visit serioustrouble.show to become a paying subscriber and get access to the full episode and all the other episodes we make too.

In this eye-opening episode of "The Legal Brief: Beyond the Machine," renowned attorneys Ken White and Josh Barro explore the potential risks and limitations of using AI, specifically ChatGPT, for drafting legal briefs. Joined by esteemed legal professionals and experts, they delve into the allure of technology, the nuances AI may overlook, and the potential ethical dilemmas and risks of inaccurate information. Discover why relying solely on ChatGPT for your legal briefs may not be as foolproof as it seems. Tune in to gain valuable insights that challenge conventional perceptions and reshape the way you approach legal writing in the digital era. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

Is Rudy Giuliani in serious trouble? He’s facing two lawsuits. One is for getting a supermarket employee arrested. The other is… well, it’s for a lot of stuff. Ken and Josh discuss the prospects for ShopRite employee Daniel Gill’s lawsuit over Rudy crying “assault” over a tap on the shoulder. s for Noelle Dunphy, she has some pretty shocking claims about several areas of alleged misconduct, and we want to see what does (or doesn’t) come out in discovery to support them. We also talk about Mark Pomerantz — the former Manhattan prosecutor who somehow took the Fifth when House Republicans tried to question him about the investigation into Donald Trump — and John Durham, whose own prosecutorial endeavors have wound down with a fairly underwhelming report. We talk about signs of activity in the Trump documents case that are maybe being over-read in the press, and about new infighting in Trump’s legal team. And we talk about E. Jean Carroll’s other lawsuit — the one that’s still tied up in questions about whether Trump can be sued personally for statements he made about her while he was president — and what significance that lawsuit holds now that she’s already won a multimillion dollar judgment on closely related claims.Visit serioustrouble.show to find a transcript of this episode, relevant links and to support our work. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

Ken and I started this week talking about the CNN town hall with Donald Trump. On CNN’s air, Trump repeated his denials of his assault of E. Jean Carroll — denials for which he was ordered (the day before the town hall) to pay a defamation judgment. Carroll has mused about suing him again, and she could, though her main challenge in court would be showing that his fresh denials further harmed her, beyond the damages she’s already been awarded compensation for. We also talked about the legal considerations facing CNN or any other network that might interview a person who is likely to make defamatory statements. We talked about George Santos, who appears to be quite enjoying his role as a federal defendant, and about whether you should give a hyped-up press conference explaining why it was okay for you to take the unemployment benefits the government has charged you over (no). And we talked about Nina Jankowicz, former head of the short-lived Disinformation Governance Board at the Department of Homeland Security. That board was dissolved after extensive attacks on Jankowicz in conservative media, and now she’s suing Fox News for defamation. Ken and I discussed her uphill legal battle.Visit serioustrouble.show to find a transcript of this episode and to support our work. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

This week, Ken and I discussed the verdict — and the $5 million judgment — in the Carroll v. Trump case, and whether Donald Trump erred, in retrospect, by not showing up for trial. We also talked about his prospects for appeal (slim) and when E. Jean Carroll can expect to get her money. We talked about Rep. George Santos, who has been indicted for crimes including unemployment insurance fraud. (How pedestrian!) We talked about his best strategy going forward from this point, and the major bargaining chip he holds — his ability to resign from the office he olds (for now) as part of any plea deal.Visit serioustrouble.show to become a support of the show — you'll find a transcript of this episode and the rest of the Serious Trouble episodes there too. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

This episode of Serious Trouble, live and in person with Ken and Sara! This week, Ken and I talked about the Walt Disney Company’s lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, which raises an interesting legal question: When is an otherwise-constitutional government action made unconstitutional by the motive that elected officials had for acting? The Disney case also gave me an opportunity to make Ken talk about the rule against perpetuities, which was almost as enjoyable as when I make him read out the RICO Hotline email address.There’s more in this episode. We also talked about developments in E. Jean Carroll’s civil lawsuit against former president Donald Trump over the rape she says he committed against her in the 1990s. And we talked about developments in other proceedings — Trump’s loss in the suit he brought against his niece and The New York Times, Mike Pence’s appearance before special counsel Jack Smith’s grand jury in Washington DC, and the dismissal of the involuntary manslaughter charge against Alec Baldwin.This episode is free for all listeners. It also includes questions and feedback from a few of you — we appreciate all your emails and comments. Of course, if you want to join those comments, you have to be a paying subscriber… so if you’re not, maybe consider an upgrade? We’d love to have you on board. serioustrouble.show This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.show*This episode contains un-bleeped profanity, as usual, but the swear jar is used once.Tucker Carlson has been dismissed from Fox News. Media accounts on why he was fired differ, but the departure looks like it was, in one way or another, downstream of the lies Fox broadcast about Dominion Voting Systems and the legal proceedings that ensued. Ken and I talked this week about the stresses that litigation can impose on any organization, and about what you can do when you want to fire an employee who’s also a key witness in a lawsuit you face. Meanwhile, the civil trial over E. Jean Carroll’s rape allegation against Donald Trump has begun in New York. We talk about the opening statements, which reflect quality representation on both sides of the case, and about when a defendant should and should not show up to court.That’s the show for free subscribers. Paying subscribers also hear about Mike Lindell, who offered up a $5 million reward to anyone who could “Prove Mike Wrong” and an arbitration panel has ordered him to pay up, which he didn’t want to do, even though he was proved wrong. Paying subscribers also get an update on Hunter Biden, who’s made some dumb choices in a custody proceeding that could hurt his position vis-a-vis the ongoing criminal investigation into his finances. And you hear an expert listener’s answer to our question about Afroman, “Under the Boardwalk,” and intellectual property. We knew the RICO Hotline would come through on that one.Visit serioustrouble.show to find a transcript of this episode and to support our show.