Trial Judge Issues A Gag Order After Trump Launches Wild And False Attacks On His Court Clerk

Posted on by Hunter Walker

On the second day of his civil trial in New York City, former President Trump and his campaign let loose a series of false and inflammatory attacks on Arthur Engoron, the judge presiding over the case, and his court clerk. The barrage went beyond even what we have previously seen from Trump, who has had a habit of making incendiary statements about prosecutors and others while being involved in multiple court cases. 

Engoron responded with a gag order that specifically barred Trump from discussing the judge’s staff.

“Consider this statement a gag order forbidding all parties from posting emailing or speaking publicly about any of my staff,” Engoron said, according to the Guardian. “Personal attacks on members of my court staff are unacceptable, inappropriate and I will not tolerate them in any circumstances.

Engoron further said a violation of the order would result in “serious sanctions.” 

Trump’s wild series of attacks came as he and his lawyers were in Engoron’s courtroom. The former president is currently in the midst of four criminal prosecutions related to his efforts to stay in power, his handling of classified documents, and alleged hush money payments to cover up an affair. The former president’s comments have led federal prosecutors in the Jan. 6 case to seek a limited gag order due to what they have described as Trump’s “sustained campaign of prejudicial public statements” against witnesses and others involved in the trial. A judge is set to rule on that request later this month. 

The civil case in New York, which was brought by state Attorney General Letitia James, is related to alleged fraud connected to Trump’s real estate company. Among other things, James has accused the former president of inflating the value of his assets to secure favorable terms on loans. Trump, who denies any wrongdoing, has repeatedly attacked James, accusing her of unspecified corruption and of being “a terrible person.” After the trial began on Monday, Trump briefly spoke to reporters outside the court and declared to reporters that someone “ought to go after this attorney general.” 

James, Engoron, and the judge’s clerk did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 

Along with leading to potential sanctions and setbacks in the courtroom, Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric creates a clear danger of threats against others involved in the cases. A slew of prosecutors and judges have faced threats from Trump and his followers amid the extensive legal drama that followed efforts from the former president and his allies to falsely question the results of his 2020 election loss. The dangers have led to stepped up security measures at some of Trump’s trials. 

The barrage unleashed by Trump and his team on Tuesday included a social media post baselessly describing Engoron’s clerk as Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s “girlfriend.” Trump posted the claim, which mirrors a storyline that originated on a defunct conservative satire site, on his Truth Social platform along with a link to the clerk’s personal Instagram page, a move which increases the risk of targeted harassment. A spokesperson for Schumer did not respond to a request for comment. Trump appears to have deleted the post. 

Along with Trump’s attack on the court clerk, his re-election campaign sent an email to their press list with a dossier that attempted to cast Judge Engoron as partisan, based in part on completely incorrect information. The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.. 

In New York, supreme and civil court judges are elected. As a result, they often receive endorsements from local political figures and clubs. The dossier sent out by the Trump campaign highlighted Engoron’s past donations to Democratic politicians and a message he sent expressing gratitude to local political clubs including Democratic organizations. In a stunningly poor example of opposition research gone wrong, the Trump campaign mistakenly characterized the list as showing “a list of Democrats including Barack Obama” receiving gratitude from Engoron. However, former President Barack Obama was not actually on the list. Instead, Engoron had thanked the “Barack Obama Democratic Club,” an organization based in Upper Manhattan. 

Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, a Democrat who founded the club, told TPM former President Obama has nothing to do with the group. 

“In New York City it is very common for Democratic clubs to be named after former presidents, from Thomas Jefferson to JFK. I was proud to found the Barack Obama Democratic Club of Upper Manhattan in that tradition,” Levine said in a text message. “I’m not sure  President Obama ever was even aware of the club’s existence.  To imply that Obama himself endorsed Judge Arthur Engoron in a Manhattan judicial race in 2015 is laughably absurd.”

In a separate message, moments after he found out his club was the basis of an attack from the Trump campaign, Levine offered a raw reaction to the spectacle of a former president attacking a sitting judge. 

“This is insane,” Levine said. 

What’s Next

Posted on by Josh Marshall

Kevin McCarthy lost the first procedural vote. It now seems almost certain that he’ll lose the real vote and be ousted from the Speakership. Then the House Clerk will reveal a letter in which McCarthy placed a list of names of people who could serve as Speaker pro tem if McCarthy could no longer serve. The first name on that list will almost certainly be a loyalist.

So we’ll have McCarthy ousted but almost certainly still determined to reclaim the chair. The temporary Speaker will be one of his loyalists. It’s unclear whether that new temporary Speaker will have to start holding elections for a new Speaker literally immediately or whether he has a bit of flexibility. That person will almost certainly make that choice in the interests of McCarthy regaining the Speakership.

Watching these speeches though you get a strong, strong sense that the overwhelming majority of Republicans not only don’t support this but are really pissed about it. I’m certainly not the audience for these speeches. But the Gaetz group’s speeches don’t seem terribly persuasive even in a Republican context – at least not to fellow members of Congress. The members speaking up for McCarthy span the whole ideological range of the caucus. Each speech basically amounts to “I wanted this cool thing but didn’t get it”. It’s Kevin McCarthy’s fault that he couldn’t get every Republican to support the Good/Bigg/Gaetz line.

Smart Point

Posted on by David Kurtz

Just a quick point while we’re in between votes on Kevin McCarthy’s speakership.

In an interview with the Washington Post, Congress expert Matt Glassman offered this very succinct explanation of the problem McCarthy has been saddled with since January:

Just like the speaker’s election in January, it doesn’t do any good to get a majority one time. … To run the House, you need an ongoing majority, day in and day out, in order to set the floor agenda.

That’s it. That’s the whole deal. By that way of thinking, McCarthy has arguably never had a real majority. We’re about to find it if he does now.

The Latest (January Replay)

Posted on by Josh Marshall

The latest news suggests that Kevin McCarthy simply does not have the votes to survive today’s challenge from Matt Gaetz. In other words, he’ll lose both the first procedural vote (pretty much a foregone conclusion) and the big vote that actually removes him as Speaker. So it looks highly likely that McCarthy will be out as Speaker today. But as we’ve said, that doesn’t end the story. They still have to elect a new Speaker.

Continue reading “The Latest (January Replay)” →

The (Like a) Dog Who Won’t Bark

Posted on by Josh Marshall

A TPM Reader asked me last night how much of this is shaking out in the way it is because Donald Trump is distracted by his trials and thus not getting involved. My initial response was that it might be playing some role. But I figured the much bigger driver is the fact that unlike his own power, his own freedom and his own money, who runs the House Republican caucus just doesn’t affect him that much. What we know about Donald Trump is that if there’s nothing in it for him he basically doesn’t care. That’s got to be a big part of it. But as today has played out I wonder whether this may be having a bigger impact than I thought.

Continue reading “The (Like a) Dog Who Won’t Bark” →

Supreme Court Sounds Disinclined To Rubber Stamp 5th Circuit Extremism In CFPB Case

Posted on by Kate Riga

The right-wing legal world has been salivating in advance of Tuesday’s Supreme Court oral arguments, eager for the conservative supermajority to get a chance to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

Gutting the agency’s funding would check two big boxes: (i) kill off an entity that is the brainchild of political enemy Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA); and (ii) eliminate an important institution in the post-financial crisis regulatory landscape. 

They likely came away from the arguments dissatisfied. 

Continue reading “Supreme Court Sounds Disinclined To Rubber Stamp 5th Circuit Extremism In CFPB Case” →

Coup, Me? Never! Trump Argues Against Disqualification Clause

Posted on by Josh Kovensky

As efforts to use the Disqualification Clause to keep Donald Trump off the ballot in 2024 pick up around the country, the man himself has put forth his first detailed rebuttal of the plan.

Continue reading “Coup, Me? Never! Trump Argues Against Disqualification Clause” →

McCarthy Puts Speakership On The Line With Quick Vote On Gaetz’s Mutiny

Posted on by Emine Yücel

The right-wing challenge to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) looks likely to come to a head later today.

McCarthy is wasting no time in putting Rep. Matt Gaetz’s (R-FL) mutiny against him to a vote. In a closed-door meeting with his conference Tuesday morning, McCarthy reportedly said that he plans to bring up Gaetz’s motion to vacate in the first vote series of the day, which is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. ET.

It’s not clear if Gaetz has the votes to remove McCarthy. After an internal Monday night meeting, it seemed the majority of Freedom Caucus members opposed Gaetz’s effort, Politico reports. That is a clear warning of ebbing support for taking down McCarthy, but with such narrow margins in the House, Gaetz doesn’t need many mutineers to get it done.

Even if Gaetz’s motion fails today, the Florida Republican indicated that he will continue to bring the resolution to the floor at least 14 or 15 times.

As GOP infighting continues, House Democratic leaders have been quiet about how they are going to approach the motion to vacate vote. For weeks, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) told reporters that they would not entertain a hypothetical and get involved in the House GOP’s “civil war.”

Jeffries sounded unmoved by McCarthy’s plight this morning:

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) told TPM last week that the Congressional Progressive Caucus was exploring options to demand power-sharing concessions from McCarthy if he ultimately needs their votes to save his speakership.

Now that Gaetz has made good on his threat Democratic leadership will have to decide whether the caucus should withhold their votes or — though, unsurprisingly, the appetite for that seems to be missing — help save McCarthy.

On Tuesday, McCarthy shut down Jayapal’s plan, saying a power-sharing agreement “doesn’t work.”

“I’m a conservative, I’m a Republican. I’m a conservative that want to get things done … Our government is designed to have compromise but look we’re in the majority,” McCarthy told reporters. “You don’t surrender.”

Gaetz had been threatening for weeks to try and oust the speaker if he works with Democrats to keep the government open. In recent days, McCarthy has been trying to muster some bravado, publicly telling the MAGA Republican to “bring it on.”

After weeks of threats, on Monday night, Gaetz finally filed a formal motion to oust McCarthy, bringing the House Republicans’ infighting to a boiling point. (Remember Gaetz could bring this motion to the floor by himself because of the deal McCarthy made with the far-right detractors when he was trying to get elected speaker back in January.)

From the time Gaetz filed the motion, McCarthy had two days to bring a vote to the floor. He’s moving quickly to try to put it behind him, though that may be bravado, too.