Trump's Lawyer Gets Shredded By Judge For Missing Hearing Then Lying About It

Donald Trump's lawyer Joe Tacopina got absolutely shredded by the judge overseeing the E. Jean Carroll assault trial this week after Tacopina repeatedly tried to get the judge to overturn the decision to have an anonymous jury. In a filing this week, Tacopina tried to claim that he should still have a hand in jury selection and that the judge was operating without the team's knowledge, so the judge had to remind Tacopina that he SKIPPED a recent hearing on jury selection. Farron Cousins explains what's happening.

Don't forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!

Connect with Farron on Twitter

*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.

Donald Trump's lawyer, Joe Taina, has had a really bad couple of days in court dealing with the forthcoming Eugene Carroll assault trial that is actually supposed to begin, uh, in a week. It's gonna begin on April 25th. So what's happened in just the last few business days is that Taina and his fellow, uh, counsel, co-counsel, Alina Haba, began trolling social media, looking for all the negative comments of people already making their decision that Donald Trump is guilty here. And they presented it to the judge last Friday, and they presented it to the judge because the judge had previously ruled that the jury is going to remain anonymous. So they said, Hey, judge, I love how that's always like how I pretend his lawyers walk in. They're like, Hey, judge, let me tell you something. No, um, they say, Hey Judge. Um, obviously a lot of people have already made up their mind.

They've determined our client guilty before hearing any of the facts. So we have to know who the jurors are to make sure they're not any of these people online saying these things. Judge said, no, that's stupid. I'm not gonna do that. So then after that unfavorable ruling, Taina goes back and he says, all right, I got a new motion. Hey, judge, uh, you gotta have me involved at every step of the process for the jury selection, you know, so that I can make sure I know who these people are. And once again, the judge said, well, well, no, I actually don't have to do that because Donald Trump, your client has a history. In fact, a very recent history of leveling threats against judges, against plaintiffs, and of course against jurors themselves. So, no, I don't have to tell you who these people are. Satina went back one more time and told the judge, Hey, judge, I should be involved in all stages, every step of the process with the jury selection, not just telling me who they are, but I need to be in the room.

I gotta, I gotta see these people. And the judge finally said, all right, listen up here, Bucko Judge didn't say that specifically. I like to imagine in my head like, that's how the scenario played out. The judge said, that ain't gonna happen. Taina. You know why? Because I actually held a meeting last week for both parties involved where we discussed the jury selection process so that everybody would know that it was completely fair that we were not picking these anti-Trump people. I am listening or, or, or, or going through your vor dir to make sure that I have done everything y'all have asked me to do. And you know what? You would know that Mr. Taina, if you had even bothered to show up to the meeting? That's right folks.

Donald Trump's lawyer has been to the judge about being shut outta the process when he's the one who chose to not go to the meeting. Let me read the ruling from the judge. I take what I understand to be material inaccuracies in Mr. TA's letter to be misunderstandings attributable to the fact that Mr. Taina was not present at the meeting attended by the Deputy clerk, Mr. Mohan and other counsel. The court nevertheless provides the following information concerning the proceedings on Tuesday. This is identical in substance to the manner in which juries were selected in this court. During the Covid pandemic Counsel for both sides have been requested to submit proposed voor dire questions, and both have done so. The court naturally is taking those requests into account in formulating its examination of prospective jurors. So the judge didn't even have to give him an explanation, but chose to do so.

But that doesn't change the fact that the judge, a week ago, couple weeks ago, whatever it was, said, all right, everybody come in. We're gonna do a meeting. You're gonna voice your concerns about jury. You're gonna gimme your vor dire. You're gonna give me everything I need. We're gonna discuss it. I'm gonna tell you how the process works so that everybody can trust it. And Mr. Taina apparently thought, nah, why?