G. Zachary Terwilliger – Opening Arguments

June 11, 2020June 12, 2020

OA394: The Amicus Show!

Today’s episode takes an in-depth look at the concept of an amicus brief, explaining why we filed one in the Flynn case, what it means, and what’s next for the guy who sold out his country… and his partner.

We begin with a brief update on the Flynn trial (in the District Court for the District of Columbia) and the mandamus action pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Then, it’s time to talk about all the various amicus briefs that were filed, with special attention to a pro-Flynn brief filed by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Why does this liberal group want Judge Sullivan to grant the government’s motion? Listen and find out!

After a breakdown of all the amicus, we talk about the case in which Lt. Gen. Flynn was supposed to be the star witness for the government — the case against Flynn’s partner, Bijan Rafiekian. Find out what’s up next for Kian, and how this all involves friend of the show G. ZACHARY TERWILLIGER!

After all that, it’s time for a brand-new #T3BE, this one involving… real property. Can Thomas manage to figure out the relationship between a buyer, a mortgagor, a developer, and an unsigned deed? Listen and find out, and play along if you want on social media!

Patreon Bonuses

We posted six separate updates to the amicus brief in progress, and there’s more where that came from!

Appearances

Andrew was just on the latest episode of the Daily Beans Podcast. And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group (virtually!), please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

Make sure you check out the Opening Arguments Amicus Brief!
You can also click here for the reply brief just filed by G. Zachary Terwilliger in the Bijan Kian case.

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs

-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed! @oawiki

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!

Download Link

August 8, 2019August 9, 2019

OA304: Chelsea Manning & More

Today’s pre-LIVE SHOW episode breaks down exactly what happened with the recent news story regarding Chelsea Manning being held in contempt of court. What’s going on? Listen and find out! Oh, and we also revisit Katy Perry, discuss how Thomas Was Right! regarding John Cage, and take a brief visit to Yodel Mountain. You won’t want to miss it!

We begin with a couple of updates to the Katy Perry lawsuit we discussed last episode. First, as it turns out, Thomas was prescient in thinking that someone might have copied John Cage’s famous 4’33” composition of silence and been sued over it. Does this mean Andrew Was Wrong? There’s only one way to know for sure. But that’s not all! We’ve also got a full discussion of the damages awarded to Flame, which gives you some insight into the profits of the song industry.

Then, it’s time for the main segment breaking down the recent court order regarding Chelsea Manning. If the grand jury has already issued its indictment of Julian Assange, how can she be kept in contempt? And what does this have to do with (almost) friend of the show G. Zachary Terwilliger? Listen and find out!

After that, it’s time for a brief trip to Yodel Mountain to discuss the recent filing by the Department of Justice in the Trump/Mazars lawsuit. Does this mean Bill Barr is corrupt? Yes, yes it does.

And finally, it’s time for #T3BE, this time involving a multi-structure contract in which one party simply gives up and goes home 1/3 of the way through. How does that person get paid? Can Thomas continue his improbable one-question winning streak??

Appearances

None! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

Click here to read the Billboard article about the 2002 Mike Batt/John Cage settlement, and here to read the Katy Perry jury verdict on damages. And don’t forget that you can refresh your recollection by reading all the Katy Perry pleadings, including (a) the lawsuit; (b) the jury verdict; (c) the proposed jury instructions; and (d) the proposed damages instructions.
We first discussed Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange in Episode 269, and you can read all of the pleadings we discuss on the show including (a) the March 6, 2018 initial (1-count) grand jury indictment of Assange; (b) the May 23, 2019 superseding indictment (18 counts); (c) the G. Zachary Terwilliger application for an order compelling Manning to testify; (d) the Court’s order requiring Manning to testify; (e) Manning’s motion to quash; (f) the Court’s denial of Manning’s motion to quash and imposition of sanctions; and (g) the recent denial of Manning’s motion for reconsideration. (Phew!)
Assange has been charged under 18 U.S.C. § 793, which we last discussed way back in Andrew’s Favorite Episode, #13, “Hillary Clinton’s Damned Emails,” which was so jammed-packed with information it had its own separate blog post!
We discussed the Trump-Mazars lawsuit in detail in Episode 281, and you can read the DOJ’s amicus brief embedded here.

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs

-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed! @oawiki

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!

Download Link

January 17, 2019January 18, 2019

OA245: More on Barr and the Shutdown

Today’s episode covers the William Barr confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee to become the next Attorney General, as well as the ongoing legal battles regarding Trump’s shutdown of the government.

We begin with Barr, who’s proven to be a complex individual. How did he fare in his testimony before the Senate? Are there reasons for optimism? Is his notorious memorandum (which we covered in Episode 237) not really that bad? The answers… are all over the map, and will certainly surprise you.

Then, we discuss the ongoing shutdown, which looks to prove Andrew Wrong by not ending tomorrow. What are the legal implications? How are they going to be resolved? Is there any hope, either politically or legally? Listen and find out!

Finally, it’s time for Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #110 which involves a dentist being sued for malpractice and product liability. As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 138 of the Naked Mormonism podcast. Give it a listen! And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

1. Kamala Harris’ statements regarding her opposition to Barr’s nomination.
2. Former Justice Department official of the George H.W. Bush administration Zachary Terwiliger and the speculation that he will once again be Barr’s deputy.
3. Barr’s concerning views on executive power and reasons he has drawn so much criticism.
4. We discuss our past Episode OA 237: Lowering the Barr (Memo)
5. Jonathan Turley, GWU Law professor and gadfly, arguing about Barr
7. Jack Goldsmith, HLS professor, has written a response. “A Qualified Defense of the Barr Memo: Part I”
8. The 1995 OLC memo: Application of 28 U.S.C. § 458 to Presidential Appointments of Federal Judges
9. 28 U.S.C. § 458: Relative of Justice or Judge Ineligible to Appointment
10. Marist polling data on the Shutdown
11. NTEU v. Mulvaney
12. Barr’s written testimony

Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Download Link

September 24, 2018September 25, 2018

OA212: Rod Rosenstein and… G. Zachary Terwilliger?

Today’s episode is that rare Rapid Response Tuesday, necessitated by the persistent rumors that Donald Trump is about to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Is it true? How bad are things if it is? And who is this mysterious G. Zachary Terwilliger? You’ll have to listen to know for sure!

We begin by examining the New York Times reporting that predicated the efforts to force out Rosenstein. Listen and you’ll learn why is Andrew confident that these reports are false — and get a rare “Randall Was Right” segment to boot!

After that, we look to the statutory line of succession if Rosenstein is indeed fired, and we wind up at Noel Francisco and… Sideshow Zach? How did THAT happen? Bonus: Is Francisco a Trump hack? All signs point to…

Then, we look to the statutory protections for Mueller even if Rosenstein is fired. Will the entire Russia investigation be fed into a Fargo/Deadpool 2-style woodchipper?

And, if all that wasn’t enough, we also have a mini-deep dive into the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, 5 U.S.C. § 3345 et seq. Does it matter if Rosenstein was fired or if he resigned?

Finally, we end — at long last! — with Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #94 regarding the Forest Service’s new rules. Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

Lots! Thomas will be at QED in Manchester, UK on Oct. 13 and 14.

Andrew will be debating originalist (and Kavanaugh clerk!) Justin Reed Wilson in Louisville, Kentucky on September 27 at Impellizzeri’s Pizza; to attend, just RSVP on this Facebook link.

Show Notes & Links