MMR November 22 1963 - Oops, 2023

A panel of three judges on Monday appeared highly skeptical of arguments from Donald Trump's legal team seeking to revoke a gag order that bars him from attacking potential witnesses in his election interference criminal case.



D. John Sauer, Trump's attorney in the hearing before the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, took a highly expansive view of the former president's First Amendment rights.



Depending on "the context," Sauer argued, Trump would be permitted to pressure possible witnesses not to cooperate with prosecutors.



Judge Patricia Millet, an Obama appointee on the panel, repeatedly pressed Sauer to explain if Trump could ever be restricted from saying anything. She appeared annoyed when he avoided articulating any such standard.



"So is it your position that if he communicates through a social media post: 'Hey, Witness X, I know the prosecutor is bothering you, trying to get you to say bad things about me — be a patriot, don't act treasonously, don't cooperate'—" she began to ask Sauer.



Sauer interrupted the judge, saying it would "depend on the context" if it would be OK for Trump to pressure a witness in a public setting, and declined to answer the question directly.



After several minutes of back-and-forth with the judge — What if it was a "fair response" to something Witness X said? What if it was in the "political arena"? What if it was about former Vice President Mike Pence, who until recently challenged Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination? — Sauer finally conceded that there were possible circumstances where Trump would be violating the order.



"It seems like the way you've described it, that would be a violation," Sauer said.



"But with the caveat that some additional facts would lead to a different conclusion," Sauer rushed to add, interrupting another question from the judge.



The appellate court hearing came after US District Judge Tanya Chutkan found Trump violated an earlier gag order setting limits on his speeches and social media posts attacking witnesses, lawyers, and court staff.

House Speaker Mike Johnson backed up Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' suggestion last year that the court revisit its landmark rulings on contraception and same-sex marriage.



CNN's KFILE unearthed an audio clip this week in which Johnson said that what Thomas was "calling for is not radical."



"In fact, it's the opposite of that," he added.



Johnson, who is now the Speaker of the House, made the comments in a podcast interview with right-wing commentator Todd Starnes on June 24, 2022 — the same day the Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade.



Thomas joined the court's other conservative justices in the 6-3 decision, a historic and far-reaching ruling that immediately gutted abortion rights in nearly half of all US states.



Thomas went even further in his concurring opinion, writing that the court "should reconsider" its rulings in three landmark cases: Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right to contraception; Lawrence v. Texas, which legalized same-sex sexual activity; and Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage.

WASHINGTON — A Jan. 6 rioter who represented himself during a jury trial and advanced sovereign citizen arguments that a federal judge described as "bulls---" and "gobbledygook" was found guilty Tuesday and ordered into government custody.


Judge Royce Lamberth had grown frustrated with Johnatakis during a pretrial conference last week that took place the day before jury selection began. Johnatakis repeatedly said that he wanted to accept "full liability" for the charges. “I would like to come to a resolution,” Johnatakis said, though he refused to plead guilty to the charges.

Johnatakis “could get a lesser sentence" if he "weren’t so hardheaded," Lamberth said.

"I have repented all my sins," Johnatakis said during the trial, saying he requested that Lamberth "discharge" the matter — a common phrase from sovereign citizens — since, he said, there was no "controversy" before the court.



During the trial, Johnatakis questioned an FBI agent, Michael Kiley, on whether he accepted Johnatakis' apology for his actions. Kiley responded that it wasn't his place to accept Johnatakis' apology.More than 1,200 people have been charged in connection with the Capitol attack, and more than 400 have received sentences of incarceration. Online "Sedition Hunters" say about 1,000 additional rioters have been identified, but not yet arrested.