Transcript of OA349: Bolton Will Testify; Iran, Soleimani & So Much More

Listen to the episode and read the show notes

Topics of Discussion:

[Show Intro]

Thomas:         Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments, this is episode 349.  I’m Thomas Smith, that’s Andrew Torrez.  How’re you doing, sir?

Andrew:         I am fantastic, Thomas, how are you?

Thomas:         I’m good but I’m just realizing does this mean new intro quotes soon?

Andrew:         Ooooh!

Thomas:         Is that how the numbers work?  I can’t remember.

Andrew:         Yeah, it is how the numbers work.

Thomas:         Okay.

Andrew:         Yeah, we’ll have to get that up and running awfully quickly over at patreon.com/law where people can submit their own 15 second intro quotes for the show.

Thomas:         It’s definitely a lot shorter than 15 seconds, but that’s okay!

Continue reading “Transcript of OA349: Bolton Will Testify; Iran, Soleimani & So Much More”

OA349: Bolton Will Testify; Iran, Soleimani & So Much More

Today’s episode takes on (some of) the two biggest pending news stories right now: (1) the U.S. assassination of Iranian Gen. Soleimani, and (2) the pending impeachment of President Trump. Oh, and we also cover a bunch of other things along the way, including the latest CNN settlement regarding the kid from Covington Catholic, and, well, you’ll just have to listen to find out everything!

We begin with a pre-show grab bag of mini-stories, including the “drain the swamp” news that outgoing Energy Secretary Rick Perry has joined the board of a holding company that owns a pipeline company. Is this 100% the same scandal as Burisma hiring Hunter Biden? (Hint: yes.)

Then, we delve into some disturbing background information on the Solemani strike and answer the first of many listener questions about it: was the strike arguably justified by the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) against the 9/11 hijackers?

After that, it’s time for some Yodeling! We look at the current state of the House/Senate standoff on articles of impeachment and what the likely way forward will be. You’ll learn that former NSA Director John Bolton is willing to testify; the question is whether two more Republicans care about that at all.

Finally, we cover the latest news that CNN settled the defamation lawsuit brought by Nick Sandmann of Covington Catholic relating to the video shared by CNN nearly a year ago.

After all that, it’s time for a brand-new #T3BE 161 — this one is a constitutional law question regarding anti-discrimination laws. Can Thomas get it right??

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

  1. Pre-show links: (a) Rick Perry rejoins the board of a pipeline company; (b) the Hofeller Files; and (c) the 5th Circuit’s decision on Trump’s stupid wall, which we last covered in Episodes 243 and 255.
  2. Iranian strike links: (a) Washington Post story on Pompeo masterminding the strike; (b) the Heather Timmons piece in Quartz warning us that Trump was listening to Rapture loons like Pence and Pompeo 18 months ago; and (c) Mary Lee Bigham-Bartling’s 2018 doctoral dissertation on Rapture theology.
  3. This is the 2001 AUMF, and you can also verify that Solemani is named in neither the 9/11 Commission Report nor the 2019 State Department Fact Sheet. We also quoted from a VOA News report on Sunnis “celebrating” the death of Solemani.
  4. On impeachment: the important thing is to click here to read John Bolton’s public decision to comply with a Senate subpoena.
  5. Finally, although you can’t read the CNN/Covington Catholic settlement, you can still watch both the original Sandmann video, and the updated video released a few days later.

-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

OA175: Defending a Client In the Shadow of the Death Penalty (& So Much More!)

Today’s episode takes a deep dive into two important Supreme Court opinions decided last week:  McCoy v. Louisiana, which prohibits attorneys from conceding their client’s guilt over that client’s objections in a capital murder trial, and  Murphy v. NCAA, which struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), 28 U.S. Code § 3701 et seq.  In both cases, we hope to show that these cases have two legitimate sides.

We begin, of course, with sportsball.  What is PASPA, why did the Court strike it down, does it make sense, and most importantly:  when can you bet against the San Jose Sharks?

In the main segment, we break down the difficult questions surrounding the representation of capital murder defendants.

After that, we head back overseas with a really insightful listener comment that takes us deeper into the law of treaties.

Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #76 about present recollection refreshed.  Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent 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

  1.  The first case we break down is  Murphy v. NCAA, which struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, 28 U.S. Code § 3701 et seq.
  2. After that, we turn to McCoy v. Louisiana, which prohibits attorneys from conceding their client’s guilt over that client’s objections in a capital murder trial, distinguishing the Court’s earlier decision in Florida v. Nixon, 543 U.S. 175 (2004).
  3. We discussed treaty obligations in Episode 173.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

 

Direct Download

OA173: The Foreign Policy Show – Korea, Iran, and… Ann Coulter?

Today’s episode heads overseas to discuss foreign policy; specifically, the Trump administration’s actions with respect to Iran and North and South Korea.  Is there a common thread here?  Listen and find out!

First, though, we update you on the Young America Foundation lawsuit against the University of California at Berkeley regarding Ann Coulter and an (alleged) hidden Secret Evil Cabal Conspiracy to Silence Conservatives.

After that, we crank up the time machine and go back… all the way back to World War II to discuss what happened on the Korean Peninsula that paved the way for the recent Panmunjom Declaration.  If you’ve ever wanted Opening Arguments to go all Ken Burns, well, this is the show for you!

Then, we take a look at the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action signed in Vienna on July 14, 2015 — or, as Trump calls it, the “terrible Iran deal.”  Is it a terrible deal?  What are the legal ramifications?  We’ve got you covered!

Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #75 about subsequent oral modifications to contract.  Don’t forget to listen and find out why Andrew would have gotten this question wrong!  Also, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent 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

  1. We first discussed the “Ann Coulter” lawsuit during Episode 73; if you want to read the latest ruling, it’s embedded in this article.
  2. Click here to read the Howard Levie law review article from the Akron Law Review, and here to read the final Armistice Agreement (drafted by Levie).
  3. This is the text of the original JCPOA; and click here to read the CFR’s backgrounder on it that was referenced during the show.
  4. If you want the Washington Post‘s fact-checker article on Trump’s statements about the JCPOA showing that virtually everything he’s said is a lie, that’s here.
  5. This is the link that contains the letter written by the Obama Administration to then-Rep. Mike Pompeo describing the JCPOA as a “political document.”
  6. Finally, if you want to read the 1969 Vienna Convention, grab a tall beverage and curl up with it right here.  The actual treaty begins on page 384.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

 

Direct Download