Dan Goldman
speaker
400 appearances
26 recordings
12 series
first heard Dec 2024
last heard 25 Jun
Dan Goldman’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsRecordings per month over the last 12 months — 16 in all, peaking in Jun 2026 with 7.
Appearances
Now, you know, things that were so fundamental that I would have never in a million years thought would be called into question are being called into question. Due process. The basic fundamentals of due process, which is you are provided with notice of what you're charged or alleged to have done. You are given an opportunity to be heard and a neutral arbiter decides it.
I mean, that's the entire legal system. That's how it works. And that is the very basis of the rule of law that is now under attack.
That's right. And your legal protections, which, yes, I think... Regardless of citizenship. Und es ist wichtig, das zu erinnern. Und das ist einer der Probleme, die ich gerade habe, mit dem, was jetzt passiert ist. Es ist ein sehr schrägere Strecke, wenn man beginnt, die konstitutionellen Rechte zu dividieren, ob man ein Bürger oder ein Nichtbürger ist.
Was unser Land groß macht, ist, dass wir eine Art von Gesetz haben, die für jeden, der in unserem Land ist, beiträgt.
That's right. And it's a very dangerous, dangerous slippery slope if you go down that rabbit hole.
Ja, ähm, ich denke, äh, eine Sache, die Donald Trump gemacht hat, sowohl am ersten als auch im zweiten Termin, ist, dass er die Schwierigkeit ausgesprochen hat, wie viel unsere Regierung wirklich auf zwei Dinge hängt. Ähm, das eine ist diese Aufmerksamkeit des Offices und dass jeder ausgewählte Offizier und bis zu und vor allem der Präsident eine Aufmerksamkeit nimmt.
To follow the Constitution and in the President's case to faithfully execute the laws. And if if you are unwilling or uninterested in following that oath to take an independent responsibility to view what the Constitution says and follow it, then you are already
in unprecedented land i don't think there's ever maybe you you're more of a historian than i know but in recent history no you have to go back to andrew jackson right you just said you know let them enforce it right you know they're back in the end of the day and that's what i was going to say but we're all bracing we're all bracing for a moment where
And so that is part of it, right? Yeah. That is a perfect example, following court orders, which we never questioned before and now seems to be something at issue. I don't know, how would you codify that, though?
No, I mean, that one you can't really. But the next one that I think, I spent a lot of time thinking about, just because I spent 10 years in the Department of Justice, right? The idea that a president... does not weigh in on any individual prosecutions was a norm created after Watergate especially, but even prior to that, that was just accepted.
Und, weißt du, da gab es, und das waren nur sozusagen verweilte Referenzen, richtig?
I think there's a good argument to support that. And now Donald Trump is literally signing executive orders directing his attorney general to criminally investigate two people whose crime appears to be that they spoke out against an opposition and disagreement with what Donald Trump said. Das ist etwas, das nicht verabschiedet ist.
Es ist nicht klar, wo die Division von Politik und Kriminalverwaltung liegt. Ja, der Staatssekretär wird natürlich vom Präsidenten verabschiedet und ist Teil des Kabinetts. But the president is supposed to be walled off under the norms of the Department of Justice, many individual prosecutions. He's obviously just blown that out of the water in an egregious way.
But there are also norms and protocols for who in the White House can talk to whom in the Department of Justice. And there was literally a whole sort of infrastructure built around these norms. that Donald Trump is just blown out of the water. And so that is one thing, I think, that needs to be codified. Enforcement of congressional subpoenas.
There was and traditionally has been a because the executive branch and the president at the top takes a an oath to follow the Constitution and to faithfully execute the laws. And part of following the Constitution is recognizing the co-equal branches of government and acknowledging and appreciating and respecting what Congress's oversight interest is and its responsibility. And therefore
Even if you are negotiating what they call the accommodations process, subpoenas from the Congress to the executive branch, there is always an expectation that you comply with those subpoenas. When Donald Trump said in 2019, I'm going to defy all the subpoenas, he blew that norm out of the water. So we are now going to have to figure out a much...
Could you could you use the fact that if you're on a tax if you're salaried, you're a taxpayer funded salary?
You can't do that right now. There's no mechanism. where you could do that. There used to be 100 years ago something called inherent contempt, which, by the way, we looked into when I was doing the impeachment investigation and because the administration was just defying all of the impeachment subpoenas. But there's no mechanism to do that right now.
And so we need to implement a much more robust mechanism to enforce congressional subpoenas, to make them meaningful again. And so that's another example. There are many more, but this is something that a lot of us are thinking about.
Yes, I mean, the way I would think more about doing it is rather than sort of by appointment, is separating the criminal division and the civil division. One of the things that the Department of Justice is not just the criminal justice system. There's a tremendous amount of both affirmative and defensive civil litigation.
Showing 301–320 of 400 · page 16 of 20
← Previous
Next →