Transcripts For CSPAN2 James Zirin Plaintiff In Chief 20240713

Law and we are delighted today, to have jim zarin here at the law school to celebrate his book. Plaintiff and chiefs. And we will have the format of our team anthony carl who will ask questions of jim. I would like to just introduce jim. He is fundamentally a trial lawyer. His book flames and chiefs, is he trial lawyer news book. Theres an Opening Statement that theres evidence by category and relevance a sneak closing argument. Jim has always been a superb trial lawyer. We met first in 1968, would we both will criminal prosecutors at the Southern District. Jim about my age arrived about 18 months earlier and he by the time, was already a start litigator and prosecutor. In those days, the prosecutor news office in the Southern District was small about 50 lawyers in the Criminal Division. We wash each other and we learn from each other. And jim was my mentor. He took me out of my first trial. Prosecution of young men letters from a mailbox five of them. I think he was a guilty verdict. In those days, we learned from each other by watching. And jim was one of the trial lawyers that we all wanted to watch. In his trial. Then early history bears on his book today. I had the opportunity to see jim at the top of his game a sneak young prosecutor. Jim dominated the courtroom. His Opening Statements will always clear and to the mic. Crossexamination was always effective. Summations will always so persuasive and he always returned a guilty verdict. We wanted to hear more about plaintiff in chief. I turn it over to anthony. And jim. [applause]. I guess will all guilty. Can everyone hear me. Thank you so much. For lovely dirt introduction ensuring that introduction in the mentorship with jim and french. You both played such a large role in history for over five decades and new york law school. We are incredibly fortunate to have you both. You are wonderful as leaders. I want to thank everyone for joining us here today to discuss this exciting and extremely timely book. Like offensive. A corporate of donald trump. 3500 losses. His other two books, both of which are highly relevant to Current Events as well, they tell cases the matter and americas greatest trial quote and supremely partisan. The power of politics is the sales of this United States Supreme Court. For me, i believe that time i get to sit with you to talk about your wonderful works. It is both meaningful and always fun to have a conversation with you. You are someone who is as i described an extraordinarily great mentor. You tell a story we have the facts as well. Youve been a wonderful person is given so much to this institution. Your weather news grandfather to the law school. You are also somebody who i think is given so much to the people of new york a sneak host and producer of the critically Acclaimed Television talkshow, conversations in the digital a age. In order metro area. Guess on the show range of personalities from the redeposit text laws to foreign nations and National Security counter intense terrorism yet, and military. That plus your experience as lead blue litigator and prosecutor. Youve really given a tremendous amount of perspective and you share that perspective readily and fairly and joyfully. Youve written hundreds of articles to the la times, the london times, washington times, and new york led juvenile and counsel on foreign solutions. So i cant think of a more for perfect person to tell a story like this and provide very unique insights about our president , donald trump. Truly unusual history a sneak litigant. The book also is he story about new york city. It takes place during times of great change. Real estate booms changes in culture and explosion of catalyzed media. These are just a few of the themes that you cover. Much of the action in the book taking place in the courts just a few blocks from here. Supreme court, the das office, Southern District, and Financial Institutions such as deutsche bank. So after we set out application for this. I received a for life from someone on the invite list. And he came to my website it is called journey. Sometimes you can i still sometimes you get such nice notes. Someone wrote, dear dean, and do not see that this book is part of the study of law. Large enterprises conduct much business and includes litigation. I think this is he good place to start. What would you say in response to the statement. Ive not yet responded. [laughter]. I would say agree being in business with the society and inevitably involves a great deal of litigation. Trump has an extraordinary record of loss colluded to my record as we to say in the u. S. Attorney news from a Criminal Division he had the record did of the record. [laughter]. Trump record of 3500 losses, that is more lawsuits the top three real estate operators in the United States combined. He tune at the drop of hat. It was a plaintiff, slightly more often he was a defendant. On the receiving end but he used the legal system to achieve ulterior objectives which will quite unusual. There are the heart of our legal system as you know, is the adversary system. Different from youre up, civil law method with the judge conducts the inquiry and we inherited the adversary system from english. A sneak crown juul of their legal framework. The idea was that with two partisan sides, they were arguing an issue, arguing the facts, that was the best way do you get at the truth. Trip weapon eyes the legal system. In the record is that hes not use it do you get at the truth, he used it to prove a lie. And often he was successful in doing that. He was to someone, they would fear being bankrupt by the legal fees, they would back down. And whatever the merits will of the suit, they were disregarded, it was really to destroy the adversary. So in essence, he was a typical and you can tell your friend dear jane, you should say that this is the dean you dont know what you are talking about. [laughter]. Reading the book is clear that there are a few victories in those 3500 since. But do you think it pops up approach and financial reputational. Where has been some success. It. Many of the suits was stupid and silly suits. My favorite i shouldnt say favorite because is he horror show. There was an elderly weather and daughter were in the travel business involved in one, long island. They had a storefront travel agency. They called trump travel. They called it trump travel because they sold british tours to people and trump they thought was like ace hardware, it was signifying excellence. Somehow or other, trump got wind of this business and he said them. Anything you cant use the trump name and a travel agency even though he never been in the travel business in any way shape matter of forum, he never been in business anywhere in long island unless you count queens and brooklyn. He brought this suit and they had to defend it. There are a Small Business people, and they literally expended their live savings litigating the suit was trump. Finally, as what happens the legal system is notoriously slow and would describe the law of the late, and this to be or not to be. They got to the courthouse and the judge said, why dont you settle the case. The settlement was that they had to reduce the size of the Trump Travel Agency sign and they settled the case. Trump passed by there again and he was dissatisfied with the side even though they reduce size and he brought them back to quote and the judge it had enough of it and said to sell the case and the second case is dismissed. I have the story in the book and is always my love to tell. Otto con, this travel agency flap reminded me of otto con, the German Jewish finance, one of the founders of a company and he was walking in a certain neighborhood and he passed a tailor shop. There was a sign that said joe con, taylor. Otto con news cousin. [laughter]. And he was absolutely outraged. He stormed into the tailor shop. He said i am out of con, take that sign down. You are not my cousin. So taylor said, certainly mr. Con. So the next week, he is walking in the same neighborhood and he passes the tailor shop and it says, joe con, taylor, formally otto cones cousin. [laughter]. I got a kick out of that. They were able to continue but interestingly enough, trump is he bully. And there will two brothers from south africa who will actually named trump. And they headed trump pharmaceutical chain. Very successful, they were billionaires, unlike tofu is he funny billionaire. And he said them because theyre a he of pharmaceutical newsweekly crosses, is never ever been in the pharmaceutical business. And he said them for using the trump name. In the quote threw that out. But they had the funds really to fighting. A significant character in your book is roy cohn. You talk about roy coin a lot. Its all of us never a conversation that doesnt come up. Is he fascinating figure. And as many of you know, roy cant chief counsel to senator mccarthy and went on to become a political fixer and counselor to a wide array of criminals and questionable characters. Destroy many lives along this way sadly. Interestingly enough, we discovered recently and mike like professor michael, was one of our law reference, he discovered this. We discover a lot of connections account had to this also. He knew that he taught in the late 50s and 60s. His weather is he Supreme Court justice. And obviously both his weather and eight alumni of the school so they graduated about years apart. And cohen had a very colored history here. You described him a sneak defining mentor and president in trump news live. And specifically i want to read a passage directly from your book that i thought was really interesting. I would love for you to comment on it. It says understanding count is central to understanding the rise of donald trump. Trump wanted to make inroads and News New York society and politics. His weather had mayday fortune in real estate in the outer part. He never ventured insisted ticketed manhattan. Cohen, a prominent lawyer could get some entree to brave new world of politicians. No dealers, monsters, wellheeled men. Beautiful women. Conan trump would cut an unholy and enduring bargain. Cohen it was a priest and trump was the acolyte. Cohen brought trump, had make common cause with the darkest angels in america. Very powerful statement. How much impact did cohen have on trump and why, to think about. Trump you had a wage asymmetrical warfare. A sneak lawyer, you never seem to address the issues. He seemed to address the judge, often he would say to his sub associates, the laws are against us, screw the law, is the judge. He would address the adversary. See what dirt he could fling at the adversary. And try to dissuade the adversary fighting. Trump met cohen in a bar, in 19793. Cohen is anthony, said didnt mention that he was the prosecutor in one of the prosecutors in the rosenberg case. In the facts of the rosenberg news have became chief counsel to senator mccarthy, he was a horrible character. He was terribly hypocritical. Most gate lawyers will prominent and had to be in the 50s and 60s and 70s and 80s. He was unbelievably hypocritical about his identity and when he was with mccartney he spearheaded something called the lavender investigation. To identify days in the state department and get rid of them. And later on when he was political power broker in new york, he was able to throttle the proposed bill that would give gay people equal rights and public accommodations. And tony questioner and is by angels in america, will really records the depth of his hypocrisy. Interestingly enough, it was a supporter of the right wing even though a sneak registered democrat. And indeed, donald trump for many years was a registered democrat. Say theyll of these cross currents running in their lives. Conan trump met in a bar. Those in 19793, it was a chic nightclub called the club. A sneak place where older married men will seen with younger women. I actually met both of them there. [laughter]. And there is a story in and of itself. It wasnt married sign and it was the younger woman. I had an interesting conversation with cohen that i recall that why he pleaded guilty. And i had and met donald trump i think from the first time and was nuzzling women at the bar. In any event, they met at the club and trump had a problem. In a legal problem. His weather will being sued for race discrimination. In housing on the Fair Housing Act and they were obeying prosecuted by the Civil Rights Division in the next in Justice Department ironically enough. The evidence against trump was overwhelming. Testers, we go out to the trump houses, a black tester wouldbe told there will no apartments available at half hour later and white test probably an fbi agent, would ask if there apartments available and they were shown apartments and they were told, that they could have all of us any apartment they wanted the trump split to a number of lawyers. In all of us any reputable lawyer would say, look, this is the case and should be settled. With the Justice Department, well gives off arrest. And that went out admitting or denying, the allegations of the complaint, you agree not to discriminate in the future and maybe even take an ad staying that you fair housing landlord. And cohen said, screw the advice you are getting from these of the lawyers, we can fight the case. In trump like that. He retained going, and the first thing that he did was call the press conference. And he said this was a terrible mess character of justice of the Justice Department used Storm Trooper tactics that it was a witchhunt. In a phrase that cohen had borrowed from mccarthy would others accused mccarthy and cohen of engaging in a witchhunt. And so there was his paranoia about the case. In the second thing, was that he counterclaimed against the government 400 million. Now counterclaim, gets back to this question u. S. What is this have to do with law. The counterclaim is supposed to be a goodfaith device on the defendant can assert a claim heres because against the plaintiff. Cohen used the counterclaim and the counterattack, is like the art of war. They would set the up on the back is on her heels, to make them feel vulnerable, to what they both made statements like in particularly, the rich are the bureaucrats of the politicians, they dont like the idea of a counterclaim. They dont like the idea of having to pay a large sum of money. And so in any event, two weeks later, judge neera and the new york dismissed the counterclaim. It was frivolous. Why he and sanction trump, i will never know. And the next thing they did was they attacked the Justice Department attorneys. One later became the respected judge in california. Any accused them of custom vote Storm Trooper tactics. In the judge put that matter on her hearing. Then got up to the time of the hearing and cohen knew he had nm trooper tactics and it was irrelevant anyway so you are the judge to market off of the calendar the justice said, do market off the calendar judge. We want to hearing. You accuse these principal lawyers of misconduct, and we should have a hearing on the mic. So the judge said okay will hold a hearing. So thats what judges do. So they had a hearing, then the judging exonerated the lawyers is all that have been the case in two years. Then finally, the judge said, pointing to settle the case. And he said oh yes, maybe we should settle the case. What was a settlement. They entered into a consent that went out admitting or denying the allegations and ignoring that not to discriminate in the future and agreeing to take an ad in the paper which the trump said was to wordy it would cost much so they change the ad so that was a little more brave. So they got the same settlement three years earlier that the trump was advised he couldve had with the department of justice. That was the end of the race discrimination case except one thing. Three years later, the Justice Department determined that they were violating the Consent Decree and they would continuing this discriminate against blacks and latinos in housing. Now that ended, no one is really sure. Sort of buried in the quote file. That was how they first met. Those who trump began to admire cohen and his tactics. Going i dont want to delay to the point about him but he was someone who had beaten the system. That is what attracted him to trump. In been indicted three times by robin, and he served and had the honor to serve. He had been acquitted three times. One of the occasions was where trump was able to sum up in his own behalf, about taking the stand and in any event, he beat the system and trump loved that. So there was one aspect of the relationship. The other aspect was, the term sent never operated in manhattan. They really knew no one in manhattan. Im going knew everyone manhattan. He left town. He knew the pellets of the catholic church. He knew the politicians, he knew the social people and he had a Birthday Party every year and you wouldnt believe who would attend the Birthday Party. Mobsters, city councilman, judges, and they were all there and many of them will people who will awaiting trial. Joey adams said if you are indicted, you are invited. [laughter]. And treatment all of them. And preferably he wanted to go or build buildings in manhattan. And to do that, builders had two options. One was to use a structural steel. That was less expensive. And the other was used poured concrete. I was more expensive and principally because the poured concrete was controlled by the mobsters. That tony salerno parade castellano it was later going down a new york street printed salerno, was sentenced to a long prison term and he died while in custody. Trump for some strange reason opted to construct trump tower and a poured concrete. And in constructing trump tower, ed poured concrete he had to deal with mobsters. President john cody, his girlfriend got four apartments in trump tower. Even though she had no visible means of support and so, during the time of construction, the whole thing is he story in erotic book just about the construction of trump tower. But during the time of the construction, there was a citywide teacher strike. There is no construction going on. No one can get past the teamster picket lines except the one place. And that was trump tower. Would the poured concrete flowed into the construction of the building. Trump news tight to the mob and trump tower and later in Atlantic City i dont go very deep in the book, but they were all very interesting. Ive spoken much alone. No. Theres been a bit of a renaissance of roy cohen and a few weeks ago, your wonderful marlene, hosted a premier event for documentary. My wife going. It has been attributed to trump. And we certainly have seen enough of lawyers of them to fulfill roy cowans former mayor route rare giuliani pretty and attorney general parade bark. So my question is, where is my royko and actually mean. In the context of trump. What is he really mean. Amber means that you dont hire a lawyer, and have a lawyer to protect you legal rights. In trump news view. Trump is he day trader. That is only one objective and that is to win. And you hire a lawyer to win and roy cohen was someone with whom you hired to win. And divide your adversary into the dust. In fact, trump used to have a photograph of a roy coyne, a framed photograph on his desk. And would someone would come in a tradesman, or a lawyer, and ask to be paid. Trump would reach into his desk and take out the picture of roy coyne and as if it will medusa was sneaky rocks. And he would say this is my lawyer, you go tell him and wound up the kite was stiffed and never was able to collect. So he left a trail of suppliers and creditors architects, even as dennis, never got paid. So thats where is my wrote rate client, amy that sable to the white house to white House Counsel again, would Jeff Sessions had recused himself. He wanted do you get molars fired and there was no one around to fire mueller. So that was the context. Until matt uses for this wonderful movie that he himself. We offer a great commentary. Your friend and is terrific. Its in Peters National it right now. So heres another question. Consider how front and Center Twitter is another social media channels, our president trump, and her President National discourse, but wouldnt have seen of twitter been around in the right time. Hard to say. Roy cohen, was more covert than overt. I dont think roy cohen wouldve written a tweet. He wouldve had to of had attribution. He like to whisper in someones ear. Frequently, you see photographs of him in the mccarthy. His whispering in mccarthy news ear. Would i saw him stand trial, in the Southern District, he was whispering in the ear of his partner hustling. He was actually paranoid about being overheard. Either end because of that, he often talked in codes. And when he first met him in the anteroom the grand jury, theyre all sorts of witnesses who had gathered there to testify. And they were friends of his and we got around to each witness and go like that, with his hand and i naively because i was a new assistant thought that is giving them encouragement. A high five. But he was really staying take the fifth. Take that. And you see the mike and colemans testimony, lisa trump talks in codes. My gift was that i always understood what mr. Trump was talking about. And then i carried it out. So trump would never say, pay off this porn star, he would say, weve got to take care of this problem somehow. As always oblate. And the judge would say, i think an embarrassed case, enough of a bribe of the promise be conveyed with a wink. And that is the way the roy clinton operated. Thats the way trump really tried to operate. Plainly partisan, Senate Majority leader blocks the confirmation america would. Lead trump to our session and then began the semester with quote rights. So that this book was being printed, trump ukrainian leader, what are your thoughts now the president s and impeachment and response to these accusations that he wanted a quid pro quo to help himself politically. And how these play out greatest. Will first you see, the asymmetrical approach of trump, and defending against these very serious accusations against him. The first line of defense is the whistleblower who is it, he is he spy. Hes committing treason. We do know his name, and being attacked by someone who is remained anonymous. And he read the complaint and is informed by third parties and we dont know, and its hearsay. Its unless the first line of defense. Will first place that was a lawyer statute passed by congress. It assumes that the whistleblower remains anonymous. If they were not anonymous there wouldbe no whistleblowers. The second thing is, that the statute which was and is true, amended shortly before this incident, and allow the whistleblower to rely on hearsay. But after all, grand jury relies on hearsay. An agent testified before the grand jury that he or she interviewed somebody and they were the facts. But they learned in the grand jury can indict based on that. So theres nothing inherently wrong with the whistleblower relying on hearsay. Then, the whistleblower complaint first bar tried to shield it from public scrutiny staying, and investigated and there was no crime. In basis for that, really untenable requested 25000 was a ball millions and millions of dollars of aid to military aid to ukraine. And winds up in the house of representatives. So the next thing, if you threaten to sue. Someone of the things that prompted was that he said he was going to soak nipsey pelosi and ownership for conspiring over the government of the United States. In any while the procedure, and the lax due process, because he cant confront his accusers because of taken take testimony in secret. The grand jury, we take testimony and it came from chamber. The whole idea was that they would conduct secret proceedings printed in order to claim an accusation and one of the reasons in secret was that they determined that no crime has been committed. The reputation of the possible target of the investigation is unsullied they can continue with their lives that went out having to sustain them an accusation. He attacked the procedure. No actually, more information is coming out of the house impeachment inquiry that comes out in the grand jury. Every witness is he prepared statement which is released to the public and we dont know what their testimony as but we know the thrust of the substance of it because that is been released. No grand jury proceeding has witness release his or her prepared statement to the public and thats not a requirement. In fact, it is never totally overdone. You see all of the techniques are playing out in a way that trump is confronting this. In the last statement, and exemption abrasion was that im going to sue anyone who fizzes me off. So this the president we have in this what he 3500 lawsuits. So we do prepare these 3500 lawsuits, advocates and inquiry that is an like anything youve ever seen before, what tactics you have that with really work. As the trump card being called. The trump card news control over the senate. What he has over these people is unfathomable. I think that he is he passport to power. That went out truck, they have no position at all. I think is in a position to around people against them in primary semis in a position to cut off campaign funds. Certainly ms. Mcconnell is in a position to relieve them of posh committees assignments. He is he very solid political and practical control over the Senate Republican senators. And thats exactly the kind on your price, i can control you. If i can make you do with what you to do. He learned that from so you learn these very practical lessons. Has brought much different if you will ratcheted up from the bronx to washington and how people will behave. People will bend on pressure. They will bend on threats. An appropriately graced, they will comply with the will of the person who is paying. So its the kings showing. And these are the kings men. In this behavior using the United States senate. So far it seems to be working. Lindsay graham, i dont know what is in his head, but he has become a advocate for trump in the senate trying to throttle the whole proceedings for its even begun. What is this mean for the rule of law and democracy. Early imperiled to be like trump as to Legal Process and the overall principles of the role of luck. A sneak guiding and democracy. A. Yes, will john marshall, said we will government of laws not managed. He was admitted women, the rule of law has been undermined Supreme Court has said the president has brought above the law. In the course of senate. Trump has conducted himself just though the law plans to be sidestepped, the law is meaningless. Is able to control events that went out regard to whether the rule of law. I call in the book, the anti legal president because he doesnt like judges to rule against him, the judge rules against him, is he mexican judge or an obama judge, there is no respect for a judge interpreting the law applying the laws as it is written. It undermines our whole desired society in the second area you mentioned just as julio, he was someone with whom i did not admire him anyways and admire in others the things he said, which i do admire his he said you know what really takes our liberties. Its not the bill of rights. In any republican have bill of rights protects our liberties is the separation of powers. The way of coequal branches of government and there are checks and balances on the excesses of each department. Particularly the executive. And reason for that is the medicine and hamilton, did not want the men on horseback and they did not want a king. They wanted someone who was subject to the rule of law and thats with the created the constitution which trump has sworn to preserve and protect and defend that which he proceeds to ignore. Suggest that for just that reason. So i think that will leaving in a very dangerous time and sets a dangerous precedent. And how is all going to end, because none of us knows, i prefer to think is going and as himself said, no public man can remain at the center of controversy indefinitely. At the is time to open questions. We have two microphones on either side and for those of you would like to have questions be mindful that cspan2 is recording. We have a robust discussion. Who would like to start. Forum line on either end. Give your name and any organizational organization if you like. It wouldbe great. Good morning, great talk. I read some of your books. Real treat to have someone with your stature and background. To the extent that mr. Cohen, is so litigious constantly from the book, it appears looking to be people who sue him to pay money. What is his history and what was the track record to the extent that you could tell beating lawyers out of fees. It will serve on his behalf. I this is just looking at the giuliani situation and not knowing the underlying facts, it could be to the extent the giuliani wasnt paid appropriately retainer for his legal work. He was given opportunities shall we say may have led him to bed place. So im just curious, we found was donald trump news reputational for his organization in terms of paying Legal Services and that he accessed over the years. What had of course the reputation throughout the Legal Community for not paying lawyers. A lawyer would do work for him and he would say send me a bill. You should be honored to represent donald trump. If you want to sue me for your feet, i will counterclaim for malpractice if my lawyer will be right coin. So most lawyers would say, live is is it too short, they would go on to the next case in the file. And they wouldnt think it was is it too good to represent him. So two instances where lawyers as for retainers in advance, because they didnt trust that they wouldbe paid in both cases, trump declined. He liked to chisel lawyers and interestingly enough, he liked right coin because he said roy never really was a big charger. And i think roy on ran with him because he thought he was a political cover and he thought that he was or would give him entree an important representation. And cohen like to be wherever the action was. He was there at the opening of trump tower. He brought the case against the National Football league even though he was dying of aids. An affliction which he never admitted he had. I think that trump news record of paying lawyers has brought very good. He thought they were people to be used and exploited. And he basically says he was an anti legal guide, it can temper lawyers except for a sneak vehicle to achieve his objective. I hope that answers your question. If does i could just briefly asked how to come and get the job with mccarthy. I was curious as we would say brooklyn, who was his rabbi. That is exactly the system that cohen grew up in. He graduated from law school before he was 21. In a way that admitted into the bar the rules. He got a job with the u. S. Attorney news office i think because his weather had political influence in the process. Are the parents. In the u. S. Attorney news office, he maneuvered it to the rosenberg case. He was not the main prosecutor, that was the u. S. Attorney. St. Paul but of course the trial a century, it brought him national recognition. It turned out later that trump had that cohen had, suborned perjury on the part of the principal witness against rosenberg news brings us, that is exposed. And sam roberts book the brother, the glatt clean glass was missus rosenberg news brother. And when he took great glee in the execution of the rosenberg. He said if id been there, wouldve pulled the switch myself. Anyway his anticommunist stance, attracted them to the archdiocese which was very powerful politically. The diocese recommended j edgar uber and jed your uber know about them anyway did and he got a special job as special counsel, the attorney general in washington. And then uber recommended him to mccarthy worried and his was Bobby Kennedy who was on the staff of the Senate Select committee. Coinage developed and later claimed the kennedy had a grudge against him. And so he became on the backs of the rosenberg case and on the backs of the rosenberg news he became chief counsel for senator mccarthy. Good morning. The dean began one of his questions with what is he mean for the rule of law and democracy. And that is the way to frame the issue. Im asking about the impeachment. What is he me for the rule of law and democracy. Im speaking a sneak lifelong democrat. The fundraiser operative who works for my party. It but what is me for the role of law and democracy. At 200 plus years of house procedure, and most importantly, the two modern impeachment president s, nixon and clinton, would the speaker comes out of her closed caucus, and announces that the impeachment inquiry is official. That went out a resolution of the house, the discussion ensuing and about. I dont buy that for one second. Im no fan of donald trump news but i think that the party in the House Majority is way behind a ball on this. Theyre going to come to regret it. Never mind the policy or politics. We can discuss that production of the constitutional operator we go to the checks first. The text is he very clear, it couldnt be more clear in the constitution. The house, your reaction. My reaction is that it is a very important perhaps one of the most important proceedings in our government to commence a proceeding which may lead to the removal of a public official and particularly the president of the nine states is wanted that is or should not be taken lightly. And it is one that should not proceed that went out evidence. In this what lawyers have committed to. All that what is what due process is about. Will here before we condemn. If we end up if we wind up condemning it all. It is really i think, to pelosi news credit, that they did not introduce a resolution for impeachment, which wouldbe viewed a sneak totally political partisan act and get enough democrats behind it so that there was a bill of impeachment. It was to her credit that she said that she wanted more evidence and it turns out they were masking some very significant evidence. Particularly with regard to ukraine and to the quite protocol. Although its not necessary. And i think a proceeding in a very fair play because they hearing these witnesses and camera which is just the way a grand jury proceeding wouldbe conducted. So i dunno, cant really pass on the political fallout and perhaps, they are doing is offensive to republicans and is it too Many Democrats such as yourself. But it is offensive to me. I think it is completely consistent with what that lawful and i think it is completely consistent with the constitution. If you want to bring up the constitution, we do have a minimally bit because in the constitution which the president of the United States calls the phony clause. Although it was enacted by democrats last week,. [laughter]. And he says or hes in the Hospitality Business so i can invite a foreign leader to his failing golf club in florida. And to me, that is much more in defiance of the role of law than anything ive seen close to do. Does anyone else have any questions. I was curious as to why trump released the transcript of that phone call to the president. Of ukraine. Note that post in the New York Times published half of it. It didnt publish the investigating might impart the didnt publish the important path of who cited the russia agent. What is your thoughts on would the media wont report that half of it. Or printed. Will come to pass on why the media does on what it does. The i think the idea that somehow or other that the Mueller Investigation started or that interferes with the election started in ukraine, i think that is a Conspiracy Theory this been publicly discredited and i think the newspapers are supposed to stress what is important. I think what is most important about the transcript was his staying to president s zielinski, i need a favor. The favor was to get some dirt on biden news son and derivatively on biden. And that was the important part of the trip. We have a parade it is really made the whole soap lower complaint irrelevant because the whistleblowers reporting and others told him occurred in the telephone conversation we have perhaps an incomplete but a significant enough transcript so we know what was said. Another smith of their evidence through this process that we question. Which i think is very important to the public. Thank you. Ricer thank you for joining us. With regard to frequent litigator, words to the library about abusive process and serial litigator yet get permission from the quote to sue. In these defenses have they ever been proposed and this first question. The second question, we are dealing with roy, probably properly a professional response and obligate advocacy for your client. So have those issues been addressed. Will we are required advocacy and the other one was disbarred for unprofessional conduct. For defrauding his client from stealing money from clients. So it was pretty disreputable figure. And i think that in one case that occurs to me, group of tenants, in a building that trump acquired, trying to resist trumps forcing them out so he could convert the building to condominium. Trump is the former tennis group in the retained reputable lawyers and truck broderick rico case, for billion dollars against lawyers. That was thrown out. And the lawyers represented by paul weiss. At the conclusion of the case, paul suggested that the truck be sanctioned. For a baseless care claim. This would suggest the quote, said well. In the deposition of trump to discover what his bases was for sewing these lawyers and rico. And trump although he said he would never settle a case settled with them. Any paid six figures in legal fees. In the whole thing was hushed up. And didnt come until later would the lawyers for the law firm disclose that in the book he wrote. Yes sir. You just mentioned attorneys sanctioned against him in the frivolous counterclaim in the housing case. Roy coyne, thought that that was dismissed. And recently a federal judge referred to trump news position is repugnant. His attorneys are continuing to push the claim that he can even be investigated. To defeat somebody on fifth avenue. It seems he has a history of asserting criminal or frivolous flames and defenses which you have discussed somewhat already. Wanting to what extent throughout his thousands of lawsuits these men involved in, judges have actually called him out on these frivolous flames or perhaps easement sanctioned to them. Im unaware of a case against the tennis lawyers where hes in effect been sanctioned because he settled the case and paid sanction. But certainly, and socalled brocade case which arose out of the construction of trump tower, where he retained undocumented polish workers and then denied even knew they were there. Even though he told lawyers that he knew the there and said these fullest guys, they really know how to work hard. They testified before judge judge stewart said his testimony was unworthy of belief. So they did not react well to trump. The course of not. And you brought up the most interesting recent case, which i have commented about and its a toll arrange and thats the case that he brought in the federal quote to enjoin subbands from subpoenaing Business Records of his Company Including stacked returns. And subpoenaing his outside accountant for Business Records including stacked returns. Which among other things it appears to the secret payments to stormy daniels. And to mcdougall mcdougal. In the first reset, ive actually said publicly that thats with those lawyers should be sanctioned because i dont think theres a basis for the soup. And the first thing is the injection statute which prohibits the federal quote with interfering with state proceedings. They amended would advanced brought that up they amended the complaint and they said that the trumps civil rights will being abridged. So therefore, there was a federal question and the judge that will that seems very amorphous but a move on to section. And he said that there was a federal quote was, really should abstain and not get involved in this fake quote proceeding. At the time the criteria and then he went on and reach the merits in the claim extraordinary claim, the truck was making was the president has brought only immune from prosecution and indictment, he is immune from investigation. And ruth decided this trump is on appeal in the second corner and the state had to appeal let the oral argument said you know, joe sawyer your client news order to say he could shoot somebody on fifth avenue and people would still vote for him. He said that. Only ask you, suppose he shot someone on fifth avenue, you see the police could investigate number. Interview witnesses, they couldnt see if they could get a statement from him. In the credit gathered to see if there was surveillance tape. The show the shooting. And that is much more complicated. Much more intrusive and here they just asked him for documents. Now the five years i guess i was the seven years, stacked retur returns, the advanced once. I think i of the years, trump wasnt even the president. This information being saw it on is largely private information and none of it relates to him acting as president it all relates to private conduct. And the prosecutors as we know, routinely subpoenaing instructors and subpoenaing county Business Records. In a try to do this or that, i think the whole problem is compounded by the Justice Department. It is quite common in the Justice Department do you get involved in a case with the president is sued particularly over official action i dont know if he filled to pay the dry cleaners. If the drycleaner sued. Basically the underworld of new york city. The stuff that went on with mike , with the real estate in brooklyn, queens and manhattan. The underworld of new york city. Its not pretty. And now its the presidency. Theres been great harm done. Just to the public consciousness. How the partisan effect has never been like this. The lack of civility and the divisiveness that people attack each other from a partisan viewpoint. The truth is totally put aside, completely. No importance whatsoever. From the legal side. John gotti, eventually. Teflon don, eventually went to prison. How do you see this turning out. Looking at what you know now with the russian investigation. With thecurrent ukraine. Any of the tax issues. If you had , heres my crystal ball. I think you put your finger on why i wrote the book. [laughter] i wouldnt know how it will come out. Even the reluctant venture. Because trump has cheated the hangman so many times. I think whats important from the point of view of the rule of law that someone lay out there, the various crimes against the legal system. That trump has committed. The tactics he employed in the Trump University case in trying to discredit the class representative. Where there would be no real gain in getting rid of a class representative because someone else would represent the class. The attacks on the judge involved in the case because of the judges mexican ancestry. A highly respected judge. He and his family had to be under guard for five years because of his role as a judge in a narcotics case. And i think using the statute to attack his partners in order to extract money from them. Was a fourmonth extortion and blackmail. A form of. There was such a parade of horribles here, i wanted to write it down. This is not a political book. I guess its a legal book because im a lawyer and im offended by what trump has done to pervert the legal system. My politics are middleoftheroad republican. My father ran for office as a republican for the state senate and was defeated by a ticket headed by Delano Roosevelt in 1944. Whenever we got into a taxi, he would say, take the east river drive. He would never say the fdr. [laughter] lou ai didnt intend it as a political book. The core of the whole thing is we see ourselves in a period of what i call truth decay. What we read is challenged as not being true. Facts are disputed even though theyre incontestable. To be informed in a democracy, you have to know the truth. I hope in some small way, my book contributes to the truth and i think articles of impeachment that layout crimes that are unquestionably high crimes and misdemeanors. Beyond that, really intrude on what our framers intended at the time of the constitution which is there should be no foreign interference. I think that has to be laid out and exposed. If hes acquitted and reelected, and we have four more unconscionable years, then it serves the populous right. I hope that will happen. I dont think it will happen. I think the American People will understand it. I think there will be backlash against just the kind of environment youve described. Thank you. I want to thank you all for your questions. Such an engaged audience and thank you jim for such extraordinary work. [applause] timely, relevant, interesting. We have books outside. You will be given autographs. I just want to tell you all how honored i am to be here. Thank you so much. [applause] thank you. [inaudible conversations] the new cspan online store now has booktv products. Go to cspan. Org to check them out. See whats new for booktv and all the cspan products. Over the years, booktv has covered several authors discussing president ial impeachment. Heres a portion of one of them. If the president is impeached, must he leave office and if not, how does it impact the administration of the office . Of the impeachment is like an indictment. We had some indictments this week and that doesnt mean anybody has to do anything except face a process. Then theres a trial in the senate where the senate acts and its very majestic if its working right. The senate is acting like a court and has to convict by a two thirds majority. Thats the point at which the president has to leave office. Even a serious impeachment inquiry, lets say, a sufficiently loud signal for the president to remain office voluntarily would be a mistake. There are other places like clinton, where the evidence was so highly politicized that the president stayed. Is it simplistic to say, the house does the charges and the senate does the trial. [indiscernible] the house helps manage the proceeding in the senate which has to convict and thats the term by a two thirds majority. Lets say because congress doesnt like him. We talked about how that can be met by things like invading liberty or abuse of pardon power or interacting with other countries. Its a high standard. To access the cspan end booktv archives on impeachment, visit cspan. Org impeachment. Next on booktv, Jodie Adams Kirshner looks at the impact detroits bankruptcy has had on that citys poor. And then Brian Fitzpatrick offers his thoughts on class action lawsuit. Later, civil rights lawyer discusses what he calls the injustices of the u. S. Judicial system. Check your Program Guide for more information. Good evening everybody