Thread by @SenWhitehouse

Well, I told you to watch the Florida proceedings about whether a “fraud on the court” was committed in the slush fund case, and we now have the federal judge’s decision, and it’s a doozy.

Here’s how she framed the question:

🧵

Whether Trump and the defendants “ignored ethical norms, court rules, and legal authority to manipulate the judicial process …. to gild their efforts to gain unprecedented access to the public fisc with the patina of legitimacy.”

Punchline: they did. “Plaintiffs [Trump et al] improperly employed this lawsuit to justify … access to taxpayer funds and exemption from audits and other investigations … accomplished by leveraging control over Defendants [Blanche et al].”

“Plaintiffs [Trumps] acted in bad faith and for an improper purpose by ‘collusively filing a lawsuit with claims subject to multiple dispositive defenses solely to provide cover for a collusive settlement.’”

“[T]hey filed a multibillion-dollar lawsuit asserting claims that they knew, or should have known, were time-barred and for an amount of damages unsupported by facts or law.”

“Accordingly, the Court expressly finds that Plaintiffs [Trump et al] acted in bad faith,” and defined bad faith thus: “fraud has been practiced upon [the court], or that the very temple of justice has been defiled.” That’s the Trumps.

On the defense side, DOJ did not get off much better: “Defendants’ conduct is equally untenable,” rooted in “obeisance to the mandate of [Trump’s] Executive Order,” and “abdicating its responsibility to zealously defend the interests of the United States.”

“Indeed, the DOJ seems to have purposefully adopted the strategy of creating a ‘slush fund disguised as a settlement, and then doling the money out to whatever constituency the Executive wants bankrolled.’”

As to the amnesty for Trumps, she said “acquiescing to any such demand is wholly incompatible with the duties of DOJ attorneys,” and may be an unconstitutional Emolument to the President, “a glaring omission.”

“[T]he Government entered into a ‘settlement’ that deviated from its litigation posture in similar actions, disregarded DOJ policies, and accomplished objectives … specifically prohibited, by law.” Ouch.

In her final round-up the blame fell on both sides: “the Parties and counsel” tried “to use the Court to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity … and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law.”

No surprise, since she found collusion, and it takes two to collude: “the Parties worked in tandem and were never actually adverse.” Blanche’s conduct showed “only one party whose interests were being represented throughout this case.”

The finale: the Court found “‘this lawsuit non-adversarial, collusive, and jurisdictionally improper,’” and “‘part of Mr. Trump’s pattern of misusing the courts to serve political purposes.’”

The judge directed her order be sent “to the State Bar of New York, of which Acting Attorney General Blanche is a member,” having flagged what she called the “the stain of political interference” in reference to DOJ.

Postscript: in this case, “Defendants never appeared, never challenged Plaintiffs’ claims, and never filed a single pleading …. they actively avoided such an undertaking.” Did filing nothing show consciousness of the sham, hoping to avoid reach of the court?

“[T]he Court may reasonably infer that the Government failed to defend this lawsuit or respond to the Court’s jurisdictional inquiry because its position would not withstand judicial scrutiny and because resolution … would not have favored its preferred outcome to this case.”

The action now moves to the Bar examiners in New York and whatever investigation they choose to pursue now that they have this stunning and unprecedented federal court reprimand before them.