BREAKING: Trump faces LEGAL CONSEQUENCES for $10 billion IRS lawsuit

You're watching The Legal Breakdown.Glenn, it looks like Donald Trump's effort to try and get $10 billion for himself, which he ultimately decided to compromise and offer only a mere $1 .7 billion for his insurrectionist pals, is now coming around to bite him in the ass.So can you explain what just happened in court?

Yeah, Brian, this case just took a hell of a twist, and it could be a perilous twist for Trump.So what just happened is the presiding judge, federal judge down in Florida, Judge Kathleen Williams, looked at a motion to basically intervene, to enter into a case that, frankly, is closed because, you know, Donald Trump brought the lawsuit against himself, in essence, his IRS.And then, you know, a few days later, he said, oh, I want to dismiss it because I'm going to settle the lawsuit with myself.And so the case actually got dismissed.Thirty -five former federal judges filed a motion to intervene, seeking to have the case reopened.Why?

Because they allege that this was a product of collusion from Jump.and therefore a fraud upon the court.And the judge granted the motion.So this is a pretty dramatic turn.And there are a couple of choice quotes in about a four -page order, a very terse, straightforward, no -nonsense order.You could almost hear how upset Judge Kathleen Williams seemed in this order.

So first of all, the order says that this may have been a product of collusion and therefore a fraud on the court, that was the allegation by these 35 former federal judges, and the judge ordered that the case be reopened and ordered that Donald Trump, who is the plaintiff in the case, he brought the case, one of the plaintiffs, answer three questions, and I'll talk about what those questions are in a minute, but here is a little bit of what JudgeKathleen Williams said.Under Rule 11, the rules of civil procedure, a court may impose sanctions on a lawyer for advocating a frivolous position, pursuing an unfounded claim, or, and she highlights this herself, filing a lawsuit for some improper purpose.And a party's decision to file a frivolous lawsuit for the sole purpose of forcing a settlement may qualify as such an improper purpose.And she goes on to order that Trump, through his lawyers, answer the following questions.One, the charges of collusion made by the 35 retired federal judges, the charges of collusion and whether the parties are truly adverse.

I can talk about that in a minute.Two, The assertion that the dismissal in the case was premised on deception by the parties, by Trump and Trump on the other side of the litigation, the IRS.And three, the question of whether the case should be reopened because the court was a victim of fraud.Those are pretty strong, I'm not going to say accusations, but questions that the judge has ordered Donald Trump, through his lawyers, to answer.could be a real danger zone for Trump.People will remember that Trump has been sanctioned and his lawyers have been sanctioned in other lawsuits that he brought, like against Hillary Clinton.

I believe he and his lawyers had to pay $1 million for essentially bringing a bad faith, frivolous lawsuit.So, you know, it looks like, you know, here he goes again and we'll see what happens.after he responds to these questions.

So what could the consequence that's waiting for him on the other side of this thing actually look like?

Couple of things.It could look like massive fines for unethical conduct, because let me just boil this down to its essence.Donald Trump was president the first time around when what happened?An IRS contractor, his IRS leaked some tax information about not just Donald Trump, but multiple people.And a lot of those people actually brought lawsuits, not just Donald Trump.And then Donald Trump waits until he's back into power when he again controls the IRS and he sues the IRS for $10 billion and then has his Department of Justice, who is supposed to defend the IRS against these claims, settle the case for a nearly $1 .8 billion cop.

beaters fund, a weaponization fund designed to, you know, pay people who engaged in the capital attack on January 6th and perhaps other people who file claims.So there is no There is no case or controversy or adversarial position because in a very real sense it's Donald Trump suing himself and telling the Department of Justice to settle advantageously to him.We can throw in there that he also got a promise from DOJ never to look into any tax crimes he might commit, he or his family or his businesses.This is absolute sort of dictatorial insanity and ultimately I think all of this will fall apart.But here is another really important tell, and this is cited in the judge's four -page order.Remember I said that it wasn't just Donald Trump's tax returns that were leaked, it was others, and those others, many of them, also brought lawsuits against the IRS.

And guess what?Donald Trump's Department of Justice was defendingall of those other lawsuits, and yet they threw up their hands with Donald Trump's lawsuit and decided not to defend, just give him a great big fat $1 .8 billion settlement.Brian, this is like, corruption right out in the harsh light of day.So it could involve massive fines.It could also involve potential contempt because the judge is asking questions about, haven't you perpetrated a fraud on the court?

And this may be an outlier, but when the rule of law comes back into the light of day, it might also be the basis to open a criminal investigation for perpetrating a fraud on the court.What Donald Trump is trying to do, Brian, is use the court to launder this dirty scheme.Launder it by saying, well, I filed a suit, so of course my Department of Justice will engage in settlement negotiations with my IRS to give me $1 .8 billion to, you know, give to my friends and my allies and the insurrectionists, the cop eaters, as we see fit.You know, this is kind of a fraud on the court writ large, using the court and the bogus legal filing to give this kind of sheen of legitimacy to this ugly, unholy settlement that he orchestrated.And I think, Brian, at the end of the day, it's all going to fall apart.This result, Judge Williams reopening the case or looking into reopening the case for fraud upon the court, coupled with the fact that we have another judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Brinkema, who just put a grinding halt to anything involving the Cop Beaters Fund moving forward while that litigation continues.

You know, I think thisweaponization fund is destined to ultimately be struck down.

Are there any rules precluding engaging in some civil suit against the president?I understand that there is the OLC, the Office of Legal Counsel memo that that prevents a president from being prosecuted while he's in office.But if there is a civil suit that moves forward where, as you said, it might involve major fines against the president, is there anything that would preclude fines being levied or civil suits being levied against the president while he's serving?

You know, the answer is no.And there is a prime example of that.Remember that there are a series of plaintiffs who sued Donald Trump for launching the Capitol attack.And I think the plaintiffs include members of Congress and Capitol Police officers.And recently, Judge Amit Mehta, federal judge in Washington, D .C.

, ruled that that active lawsuit can continue to move forward against Donald Trump.Why?Because he doesn't have immunity against being sued for what he did on January 6, 2021, even though he is the sitting president.So the answer is yes.And in fact, there is an actual example of a lawsuit moving forward presently against Donald Trump.So at this point, Glenn, what are next steps in this litigation?

Yeah, Brian, I'm going to be looking forward to June 12th now, because that is the date on which Donald Trump, through his lawyers, must respond.He's been ordered by the judge to respond and answer these questions as to why this whole thing wasn't a product of collusion, wasn't a fraud on the court.And so it'll be interesting to see how Donald Trump and his lawyers navigate these answers, but I have a feeling we may not get sort of a truthful, accurate, supportable series of answers to these three questionsthat Judge Williams has demanded, ordered Trump to answer.But I think it's probably going to be some, let's just say, really interesting reading.

So in fairness, Glen, while we're trying to think of how in the world Trump is able to defend himself, is there any plausible deniability whatsoever?Because I mean, we've spoken at length about the idea of suing your own, the federal government that you yourself run as president.There's no case or controversy.It is basically Trump suing himself, and so I wonder what's going to happen.Is there anything whatsoever that he might lean on to give himself some plausible deniability that this is actually not exactly what it looks like to the rest of us?

You know, it's interesting, you know, maybe if he actually understood the Constitution and the constraints of each of the branches of government, he might have a minimally straight -faced argument to make.You know, he could say, listen, I don't really control the IRS.It is something, yes, it's an executive branch agency, but by law, they're exercising independent judgment.In fact, The IRS, I believe by statute, is required to audit or do some kind of a review every year, I believe, of the president and the vice president's tax returns.Don't quote me on that.I'm not a tax lawyer.

I always thought tax was a four -letter word myself.But if he were to take that sort of reasonable view, He might be able to say there's some separation between he and the IRS.But what is Donald Trump forever saying?I am the Article 2 Emperor of the United States.That's my characterization.But he says, Article 2 gives me complete control over everything.

Article 2 says I can do anything I want with the executive branch.Well, then so be it.it looks like you actually do assert that you control the IRS, so you have sued yourself. YouYou have sued an agency that you have 100 percent control over.And Brian, the Constitution requires for federal courts to have jurisdiction, to have the authority over a lawsuit.There must be a case or controversy, which means two different parties with opposing positions, adversarial positions, such that a judge has a decision to make.

Who wins?Who loses?This is Donald Trump suing himself.So I think, given who he is and the power he asserts over the executive branch, he has no straight -faced argument.And, you know, I look forward to seeing what whether the judge makes some findings about this being a collusive lawsuit that was filed for the purpose of extracting a settlement.And it really, at its core, is a fraud upon the court.

Well, we will stay on top of this.As Glenn mentioned, June 12th is when we can expect next steps here in this litigation, so we will of course cover it as soon as we have any update.For those who are watching, if you want to hear more about this story and all other legal news, the best way to do so is to subscribe to both of our channels.I'm going to put those links right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video.It is 100 % free to subscribe, but a great way to support our work.I'm Brian Tyler Cohen.

And I'm Glenn Kirshner.You're watching The Legal Breakdown.