OA110: Gun Control After Las Vegas & Two Trips To Yodel Mountain

Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments Media LLC

Law, Opinion, Politics, News, Liberal, Legal, Supremecourt, Harvard, Atheist

4.3 • 3.7K Ratings

🗓️ 6 October 2017

⏱️ 74 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Today's rapid-response episode begins with a discussion of the tragedy in Las Vegas and whether we can do anything about it. Before you dig in, you might want to take a refresher on our two-part masterclass on the Second Amendment in Episode 21 (Part 1) and Episode 26 (Part 2). Then, we take our first of two separate trips to Yodel Mountain with the recent revelation that the Trump DOJ disregarded decades of advice before issuing an opinion memo that authorized the (blatantly illegal) hiring of Jared Kushner. Is this really a Hillary Clinton story? Listen and find out! After that, we trek back up Yodel Mountain with the breaking news that the New York Attorney General's office was about to indict Donald Trump, Jr. and Ivanka Trump in 2012... until the AG received a visit (and a bag of money!) from Donald Trump's lawyer, Marc Kasowitz. Finally, we end with a new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #44 about hearsay... and Thomas is joined by next week's guest, Andrew Seidel of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode Tweet along with your guess. We'll release the answer on next Tuesday's episode along with our favorite entry! Recent Appearances None! Have us on your show! Show Notes & Links

Our two-part masterclass on the Second Amendment begins with Episode 21 (Part 1) and continues in Episode 26 (Part 2).
After that, we discussed Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017), which we also covered in depth in Episode 47.
You can read the Trump Administration's talking points on Las Vegas here.
This is the breaking story by Politico about the DOJ ignoring precedent.
The case Andrew discusses at length is AAPS v. Clinton, 997 F.2d 898 (D.C. Cir. 1993). It is being grossly misreported in the media; see, for example, this NPR story.
This is 5 U.S.C. App. § 1, the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
You can read the ProPublica story here that suggests that Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump were about to be indicted in 2012.
The federal bribery law is 18 U.S.C. § 201; the relevant case is McDonnell v. U.S., 579 U.S. ____, 136 S.Ct. 2355 (2016); and you can check out our friend Randall Eliason's great analysis of the bribery statute here.

Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Fancy a fever tree and vodka.
0:04.0	Yes, vodka, not gin, because this is
0:07.4	Fever tree Mexican lime soda.
0:10.0	Yes, soda, not tonic.
0:13.0	With Mexican lime and Japanese Yuzu for a zesty,
0:16.2	refreshing lime soda, that's just sweet enough.
0:19.6	Delicious with vodka or on its own.
0:23.0	Fever tree Mexican lime soda, mix with the best.
0:27.6	Mmm, now that hits the spot.
0:30.6	Is that why you hit your wife with drawn?
0:35.6	Is that why you drink and pop pills with drawn?
0:37.6	Are you a virgin with drawn?
0:40.6	Fancy a fever tree Mexican lime soda, mix with the best.
0:49.6	Fancy a fever tree Mexican lime soda, mix with the best.
0:52.6	Fancy a fever tree Mexican lime soda, mix with the best.
0:55.6	That's not what the other lawyer said.
1:00.6	Actually, I was going to stay in my office tonight
1:02.6	and work on my law block.
1:04.6	Of course, the Bob-La-La-La-La-La-La-La-La-La-La.
1:07.6	Wow, you, sir, are a mouthful.
1:15.6	The jury is instructed to disregard its own testimony.
1:18.6	Your honor, the prosecution rest.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Opening Arguments Media LLC, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Opening Arguments Media LLC and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.