Judge Trashes Trump For Trying To Subpoena Documents That Don't Exist

Donald Trump's legal team wanted to issue subpoenas for a treasure trove of "missing documents" that they claim were not turned over to them at the start of discovery. The only problem with their request, according to Judge Tanya Chutkan, is that the "missing documents" don't even exist. She went on to say in her ruling that Trump and his legal team don't even dispute the fact that they received all the documents, making their request that much more confusing. Farron Cousins explains what happened.

Listen to our videos in an audio format by subscribing to our podcast

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.

Judge Tanya Chut. Ken was forced to shut down Donald Trump and his lawyers this week after they tried to subpoena a set of documents that, according to Chut, Ken simply doesn't exist. Hmm, I mean, not the weirdest thing we have ever seen from Donald Trump's legal team, but certainly kind of up there towards the top, right? Like we demand access to these documents that don't even exist, but we want 'em go ahead and throw in Bigfoot two. We want him, he's our star witness. Since we're basing our entire defense on things that aren't real, that is exactly what Trump's lawyers are trying to do. Here's what happened. Trump's lawyers went to Judge Tanya Chakin and they said, Hey, judge, we got all this stuff from the January 6th committee. We got all this stuff from the Secret Service from the DOJ, from the White House.

We got all this stuff, right? We think they're not giving us everything. So we demand a subpoena so that we can go basically on a fishing expedition to find these quote missing documents. That is what they called them the missing documents. And Shakin in her reply was rather cordial, but still kind of sticking it to him. This is what she had to say. Defendant has not met his burdens with respect to his proposed rule 17 C subpoenas. He has not sufficiently justified his request for either the missing materials themselves or the other five categories of documents related to them. Uh, the first prong of this test, relevance requires the court to assess whether the documents sought, have any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action, more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence according to the letters defendant cites.

However, the select committee did not actually send any material under these subcategories. So we're looking at the congressional record, we're looking at the materials from the January 6th committee. You're asking from stuff from these groups, and there's literally nothing there. You are asking for things that aren't there, so they cannot, 'cause I'm, I'm translating this for you. They cannot be material to your case, right? They're not going to en enhance your defense because they aren't real. Judge is telling them, she continues with regard to the subpoena, uh, uh, decos, TEUM for the written interview, transcripts, subcategory B, the government represents that at quote, obtain these materials from the select committee, the White House and the Secret Service Senate produced them to the defendant in its first discovery production more than two months ago, itemized in a source log. Defendant does not dispute that report.

The written transcript transcripts are thus pro curable, reasonably in advance of trial by exercise of due diligence, and therefore a Rule 17 C subpoena for those transcripts is unnecessary. So she's like, listen, you're asking for this stuff and it's not real. Like, go ahead and ask for the tooth fairy to come on too. Now you're asking for this stuff, but you've admitted in this letter right here, you already got these things. So first of all, you want things that aren't real. Second of all, you're asking for more things that you actually already have. So why are we here? I'm sure that's what Chuck and wanted to say. Again, I just read you what she wrote, so it wasn't as bad, but you can tell, right? You kinda get the sense that she really wants to just write in her next, you know, ruling like, you are a bunch of morons. Please shut the F up. Here we go. Here's. Here's my decision. Because you're wasting everybody's time by asking for documents that you either already have in your back pocket or asking for things that simply do not exist.