OA 738: Trump Flops, Proud Boys Drop

Today, Liz and Andrew check in on three stories we’ve previously covered: the conclusion of the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit against Donald Trump; the recent convictions of the Proud Boys in connection with the January 6 insurrection; and what’s going on in Fulton County, Georgia. It’s a whirlwind and you don’t want to miss it!

In the Patreon bonus, Andrew and Liz discuss what really happened in Hawaii in 1960 and why it doesn’t help the insurrectionists no matter what John Eastman tells you.

OA 728

Wikipedia on Georgia post-election lawsuits

Fake electors transmittal

Fulton County docket

July 2022 Motion to Quash subpoenas

Oct. 2022 1st Motion to Disqualify Debrow and Pierson

April 18, 2023 2nd Motion to Disqualify Debrow

Opposition to Motion to Disqualify Debrow

Barr Jan 6th testimony

3 USC 12

-Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/law

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

-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

OA252: Constitutional Conventions & the “Proud Boys”

Today’s episode features a deep dive into a listener question about Article V Constitutional Conventions.  Are they dangerous?  (Yes.)  Are they a good idea?  (No.)  We also discuss the latest ridiculous defamation lawsuit.. and discover why this one is a little different.  How?  You’ll have to listen and find out.

We begin with a little bit of news you might have missed regarding Attorney General nominee Bill Barr.

After that, it’s time to answer a listener question about liberal and conservative groups that are angling for an “Article V” Constitutional Convention to overturn Citizens United (or do other things).  We delve deeply into this provision of the Constitution and discuss the plusses and (mainly) minuses of this procedure.

Then, it’s time to dissect the recent lawsuit brought by Gavin McInnes, founder of the “Proud Boys,” which Wikipedia calls “a far-right neo-fascist organization that admits only men as members and promotes political violence.”  Find out why at least one formerly respectable lawyer thinks it’s just crazy (and actionable!) that the Southern Poverty Law Center called this a “hate group.”  And find out why the real question in this lawsuit involves something called “tortious interference” and not defamation.

After all that, it’s time for the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #113, which involved the constitutionality of abortion regulations.  As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!


Andrew was just a guest on S3E6 of the fabulous Mueller, She Wrote podcast; go check it out!  And, as always, 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. This is the lawsuit filed by the “Proud Boys” against the SPLC.
  2. This is the Wikipedia entry on the “Proud Boys.
  3. Here’s the full text of Article V of the Constitution.

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!

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

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com


Download Link