Legal AF 8/30/2026

22:02Ben Meiselas:But remember, he wasn't telling you who's behind Freedom Fuel. It took investigative reporters at Politico and elsewhere to say, oh, it's this KRSM entity. Who are they? right? When Donald Trump posts, we're going to be able to extract 65 billion barrels of oil from underneath Venezuela with private business. Who? Who are the private businesses? Who are you talking about? Where's the deal? Is it on paper? You know, that's the way deals work. Is it documented? Can we see it? Is it going to be sent to Congress? Like what the hell are you doing? I'll give you just another example because there's litigation over this as well.

22:42Ben Meiselas:There's litigation regarding the golf courses in the Potomac in Washington, D.C., the public golf courses that Trump wants to destroy. A federal judge has ordered, look, you can be doing routine maintenance. I can't stop you from that. But you can't demolish this golf course without court approval and without understanding what's going on. So you know what the Trump regime does? They say routine maintenance. They start cutting down the freaking cherry trees. They cut down the cherry trees on the 14th hole, protected cherry trees and 60 other trees in the area. Like, why are you cutting down trees?

23:19Ben Meiselas:They're evil people. We know that they're also doing a deal to sell portions of Yosemite to a private equity company to build private roads through Yosemite. Again, while they attack Canada, while they do all of this stuff. And why? Because he's a predator. You want to talk? What did E. Jean Carroll sue him for? Sexual assault. Was Trump found liable for it? Yes, by a jury. And then he was found liable for defaming her regarding the sexual assault. Not only did he sexually assault her, he defamed his sexual assault victim multiple times where she had to file multiple lawsuits and won multiple lawsuits because he kept on harassing and defaming his sexual assault victim.

24:07Ben Meiselas:That's sick. That's sick. And sometimes these conversations happen through gamified political lenses. Oh, the Democrats are here. Do you denounce your relationship with a podcaster that streams in California? Who cares? What are you talking about? The American people are going bankrupt right now. The American people are hungry. They can't afford food. The American people are seeing a criminal rogue regime engage in catastrophic wars and slaughter little girls in iran and elsewhere in the country it's being led by a sexual predator who defames his sexual assault victim as adjudicated and found by federal jury juries when it comes to the defamation case it's a bankruptor who's bankrupted our military and oh but do you denounce someone who streams for seven?

25:03Ben Meiselas:What are you talking about? What world? That's why people hate corporate media. That's why people hate politics right now. But it doesn't mean you should not engage in politics. It means we have to build new structures. We have to build things like the Midas Touch Network, where we call this behavior out, which finally brings me on this segment to the lawsuit by the Stars and Stripes reporters, they exposed the Trump regime's horrid conditions for our service members in the Middle East. And so what did the Trump regime do? Well, they first wanted to harass them by putting in a chaperone. So Stars and Stripes has some ownership by the Pentagon in terms of funding, but it gets funding outside as well with outside sources.

25:49Ben Meiselas:The Pentagon never actually put military people to oversee the reporting. Well, that's what Hegseth does. Why? Because Hegseth couldn't even run a small veterans nonprofit. He shouldn't be running our defense department. Okay. These are bad people who have been losers their whole life, who have been kicked out, who are outcasts because they're bad. So notably, Treasury Secretary Besant, who himself is an outcast in the financial community. He's a loser in the financial. He ran funds into the ground. That's how he found his way into this MAGA orbit. He's a loser. Hegsitt's a loser. Trump's a loser.

26:27Ben Meiselas:These are losers who are not leaders, who do not win. They don't carry them. These are losers in life. So then they do project economic outcast. And China's like, we're not following that. Pakistan's like, we're not following that. Russia's like, we're doing a$25 billion freaking nuclear deal with Iran. So not only are we not following it, but we can't wait to meet with Iran at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to give a$25 billion investment in Iran's nuclear programs. And then Besant's like, well, we are going to sanction a tiny branch of an Egyptian bank, but we're not going to sanction the whole bank, just a branch.

27:09Ben Meiselas:And we're just going to sanction certain transfers. D-Day, everybody. Again, we should never be in this catastrophic war at all. End your behavior of these threats. And then the Trump always chickens out. It's just so pathetic. Any event, I digress. These reporters reported on the horrible conditions in Bahrain. It's the publisher, the editor-in-chief, and a writer. And they were all fired by the Trump regime. The writer focused on this Bahrain and how the service member families aren't being communicated with by our military. You know, the military base was destroyed, so the families had to leave.

27:45Ben Meiselas:But like, where do we go? And there are so many families who were around these bases in the Middle East. You know, there's schools, there's colleges, there's a whole life, there's apartments. Trump doesn't care about people. He doesn't think about people. He doesn't care about the people of Venezuela. He doesn't care about the people in the United States. He doesn't care about our service members. He's called them suckers and losers. He doesn't care about them at all, not one bit. And so the question is, is where do they go? What do they do? They're going out of pocket right now. They're spending their own money.

28:14Ben Meiselas:And they don't, are they going to be reimbursed? They're out of money. I can't even imagine how. And then there's what's going on on the aircraft carriers. Stars and Stripes reported on it. Aaron Parnas, who's affiliated with the Midas Touch Network, subscribed to his YouTube channel. We love Aaron over here. So Trump attacks them. They file a lawsuit, violation of First Amendment. First, it got assigned to an Obama judge who said there was a conflict who didn't want to take the case or whatever. So it got transferred to a Trump judge, McFadden. McFadden looked at the case and seemed to indicate he was going to support the reporters over the Trump regime.

28:50Ben Meiselas:And so he gave the Trump regime a week to try to sort it out. So the Trump regime said, all right, we're going to hold off firing you for about a week. We're going to hold off for a week. You want to guess, will that become two weeks? Will we be in the two-week loop over there the same way? By the way, remember earlier in this episode, I talked about the$15 billion amended complaint that Trump filed against the New York Times? That lawsuit was initially filed in 2025 by Donald Trump. It got struck by the judge because it was too long. They filed an amended complaint in October of 2025. Trump's been delaying it ever since.

29:32Ben Meiselas:He bragged that the court dismissed the case, but gave him leave to amend. I've never seen in my legal career where a litigant gets a motion to dismiss. Granted, they lose, but they get leave to amend and they go out and they brag like they won the case. The judge said you lost. And in our legal system, whether we like it or not, you often get one more shot that the judge gives you to try to plead your case because most people don't behave as vexatious litigants like Donald Trump. So the judge gave him one final chance for leave to amend. And Trump's like, the judge didn't dismiss it. The judge liked what I said.

30:13Ben Meiselas:And that's not what the judge did at all. The judge gave you leave to amend one more chance because your case got dismissed. and people get one more, you get one mulligan basically in lots of federal cases, which is stupid, you may say, especially in a case like that. But sometimes, you know, people make a mistake in the filing. So the goal is we shouldn't have a harsh system that just dismisses meritorious cases because a mistake is made. So you get one extra shot. It's not as simple as that, but I'm oversimplifying. So Trump uses it to then file a 60 page complaint when the judge back in 2025 says it's got to be a 40-page complaint.

30:55Ben Meiselas:And this is what he does. And this is what they did with the BBC, right? Rather than turn over the discovery, the financial documents that he was required to, Trump files an amended complaint, says, I'm not actually claiming my businesses are harmed. It's my reputation. I need to file an emergency judge. I need to file an amended complain. And you know, these are games. These are bad faith games. And he does this stuff in international affairs as well. Bad faith behavior. But it shows weakness. It shows loser behavior. This is why historically you see how he interacts in law and in life. That's why I wanted to do this segment together.

31:33Ben Meiselas:People always viewed Trump as a scumbag, not in a political way. He wasn't even a Republican before like the two, he was a Democrat for most of his life. So it's not like, oh, well, people just didn't like, no, he's a fraud. He's a fraud in everything he's doing. People didn't like him because he probably wasn't even a Democrat. He was just a scumbag. That's what he identified with most of his life. But he's just a scumbag. That's it. And that's who he is. That was his reputation in Atlantic City, in New York. Anyone who worked to them and said, this guy's a scumbag. And until the apprentice created this, you know, fake facade about him, that's how people, he was a loser.

32:15Ben Meiselas:He was an absolute loser. Anyway, you see the behavior, those reporters not, as of now, not fired. We will keep you posted because they fired the, they filed the lawsuit. And for now, the termination is paused. All right. I want to remind everybody, if you or somebody who knows has been injured in a car accident, auto accident, trucking accident, him, reach out to the Popak Firm. We'll put the Popak Firm number over here, the Popak Firm website. Check it out. Subscribe to Michael Popak's YouTube. Subscribe to Michael Popak's Substack. Subscribe there. And get WTF America, the book I wrote with my brothers.

32:53Ben Meiselas:Thanks, everybody. We appreciate you. We're grateful for you. And we'll be right back after this quick break. I'll bring in Michael Popak.

33:00Popok:Do you snore? Did somebody hand you a CPAP and did you quietly stop using it? The mask that never quite seals, the hose tugging at you every time you roll over, and a machine sitting abandoned in a closet. Packing it for a trip and then deciding it's not worth it. Excite OSA works a different way. It treats a root cause instead of managing the noise, and you use it while you are awake. In clinical studies, 90 % of patients saw a reduction in snoring. Thanks to today's sponsor, Spring Sleep. Excite OSA is an FDA-cleared prescription-only device for primary snoring and mild obstructive sleep apnea.

33:38Popok:Go to springsleep.com slash legal AF and unlock 20 % off with the code legal AF. Excite OSA is an FDA-cleared prescription-only device for primary snoring and mild obstructive sleep apnea. Not for everyone. Individual results vary. Risks and benefits at springsleep.com. Before I found Noble, I never really thought about how easy it could be for someone to get into a regular zippered suitcase. Between airlines, hotels, and overhead bins, your bag is out of your sight all the time. That's why I've been loving the Noble All-in-One Carry-On. It's completely zipperless with secure latch locks that close like a safe, so when it clicks shut, you know it's locked.

34:22Popok:On top of that, it's packed with smart features, a built-in charging port, a front laptop pocket that makes TSA so much easier, a flip-out cup holder that I use constantly, and smooth 360-degree wheels. They've sold over 500 ,000 suitcases. They're the highest-rated luggage brand in the category on Trustpilot. Over 12 ,000 flight attendants and pilots swear by them, and even TSA agents say it helps prevent theft and tampering. Every suitcase also comes with a lifetime warranty, a 100-day money-back guarantee, and free 3-day express shipping. Noble gives you real travel peace of mind, security, design, and convenience all in one.

35:07Popok:Head to nobletravel.com for up to 46 % off your entire order. That's nobletravel.com for up to 46 % off. after you purchase. They'll ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that our show sent you. Thank you, Ben, and thank you to our pro-democracy sponsors. And welcome back, everyone, to Legal AF. I'm Michael Popok. Let me kick it off with mail-in ballots, all in the news because of a series of cases, two in Massachusetts, two in the District of Columbia. And we're looking like we're going to get a round trip back to the United States Supreme Court in less than about a week.

35:51Popok:Because Donald Trump entered an executive order about mail-in ballots, which he hates, although he constantly uses them. He thinks it's a Democratic Party advantage, and he wants to undermine it and undermine people's reliance on it, their belief in it, by sowing seeds of discontent and chaos. And what's a better organization to, and I apologize in advance for people that work there. What's a better organization that symbolizes a little bit of chaos and a little bit of disarray? The United States Postal Service. Donald Trump decided he'll make the Postal Service in charge of deciding whether you and your ballot live or die, whether you'll get a ballot or not, and what shape it's in and what the envelope looks like, and then try to force down the state's throat a requirement that they use a citizenship testing portal that was just created like minutes ago and try to all use this within the next 70 days to get ready for the midterm elections, including about elections that have already really begun in states like North Carolina and other places.

37:01Popok:So four sets of plaintiffs ran into court. Two sets up in Massachusetts got Judge Talwani. That ends up at the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Two, led by Mark Elias and his organization as a Democratic Party, ended up with Judge Nichols in D.C. Judge Telwani has been out in front and she issued for the second time in less than five days a block against Donald Trump's executive order, putting the the Postal Service in the middle of running elections. There's only two entities who are constitutionally permitted to run elections. It's the states first and Congress finally. That's it. Not the executive branch, certainly not the Postal Service, a point noted by Judge Telwani.

37:55Popok:And so a series of Democratic blue states led by California ran to Judge Telwani. That's the one case. The other case is public interest groups like the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts led by the American Civil Liberties Union, our friends here on the Legal AF YouTube channel. So all of it was in front of Talwani. She originally blocked the Postal Service from implementing any aspect of the executive order, requiring that the ballot envelopes look a certain way and have a scannable code. And then if that isn't done properly and the ballots aren't approved by the post office in due time and they're not using the portal, then the post office won't deliver the ballot to the person who's a registered voter and won't deliver the ballot back to the election office.

38:50Popok:Ridiculous. She blocks it. But then the United States Supreme Court in that case, in a case, decides that because the Postal Service hadn't yet issued their rule that was required under the executive order, that the states were too early to come to for an appeal. We call that issue justiciability or ripeness. It has to do with standing. Oh, you're too early. Oh, you're too late. You have to be just on time. It's like Goldilocks for the United States Supreme Court or for federal courts. So procedurally, about a week ago Monday, the Supreme Court kicked the case out and said, come back when the post office issues the rule.

39:33Popok:Except we all knew that the post office had issued the rule on the Friday before the Monday the Supreme Court ruled. So the state Bates ran back to court. The public interest groups ran back to court. The Democratic Party ran back to court to challenge directly the substance of the Postal Service order, which set up the ballots got to look this way. The envelopes got to look this way. You got to use the portal. Which brings us back to Judge Talwani. Judge Talwani enters in the last 24 hours a new block granting the temporary restraining order, finding that the Postal Service regulation violates the United States Constitution and puts the states and public interest groups, or the states particularly, in the jackpot because they can't comply with their constitutional obligations because they're being hindered and hampered by the executive branch and the post office rules.

40:29Popok:She also noted that the post office regulation doesn't put a time limit on how long the post office can take to get back to the states about their envelopes. This is going to be chaos and a disaster, plus unconstitutional. She grants the temporary restraining order for the second time in five days. The cases now with Judge Nichols in D.C., led by Democracy Forward or Democracy Docket's Mark Elias, haven't really gotten out of the starting blocks the way that Judge Talwani's cases have. And we have that. So I recently interviewed two Democratic attorneys general, one Nick Brown of Washington State, the other Rob Bonta, who were instrumental in these cases up in front of Judge Talwani to get their view.

41:16Popok:First, let me lead off with AG Nick Brown, head of the Voter Protection Task Force for the Democratic Attorneys General. Let's play his clip. You'll get an order out of Judge Talwani. So will the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, the ACLU. That'll come up to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, I guess, on an expedited track, back to the Supreme Court sometime in September. What do you think they're going to do?

41:39Ben Meiselas:Well, first, I would start by, you know, as you were going through that, it's just a good reminder that we would benefit from having more judges on our Supreme Court with trial judge experience who actually know what happens at a district court level and have been there and done that because it was a good reminder of just sort of the absurdity of it. I mean, the court did have to rule based on when the challenge was filed and the status of the process then. You know, I cannot imagine that we lose on the substance of this case. It would be directly contrary to the explicit words of the Constitution and all sorts of precedent because we control our elections.

42:18Ben Meiselas:Congress obviously can implement laws to amend various portions of the elections, the timing and such. But the president certainly cannot be executive order. And that is what he is attempting to do. And so it would be quite absurd for the Supreme Court to rule against the states.

42:33Popok:And then right on cue, the day of Judge Talwani issuing her temporary restraining order now appealed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals by Trump. I had A.G. Bonta on of California, whose case is sort of leading the way. Here's a clip of my interview with A.G. Bonta. United States Supreme Court. And what do you think they're going to do? This is the second time now they've taken on Donald Trump's attempts to screw with mail-in ballots.

43:00Ben Meiselas:Yeah, the federal government probably is eager to get back to the United States Supreme Court, but I just, I think this is an open and shut case, Michael. It's, you know, there's a clause of the U.S. Constitution that's right on point that governs the issue, just like in birthright citizenship. In birthright citizenship, it was the citizenship clause which showed that the executive order of the president trying to undermine the components of that clause were unlawful. And here, it's the elections clause, which says that the states, and to a degree Congress, determine the manner of our elections, determine how they are administered and how they occur, not the president and not the United States Postal Service.

43:39Ben Meiselas:So the president and the United States Postal Service are trying to take over a key component of our elections across this country, vote by mail, and the elections clause of the U.S. Constitution doesn't allow them to do that. I think it's very clear. You're right that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision earlier this week was procedural and procedural only. It just dealt with the timing. But the substance, and in that order, that emergency docket order by the U.S. Supreme Court, they went out of their way to say, we are not addressing the merits. We're not addressing the legality of the underlying substance of the conduct of the president and the U.S.

44:12Ben Meiselas:Postal Service. They said, time will tell.

44:15Popok:I was going to say, there was so cavalier and smug, though. Time will tell. A little bit of a programming note. Day after Labor Day, I am going to be in Detroit, where the Democratic Attorneys General are holding their next quarterly meeting. It's going to be all about voting. It's going to be all about voter protection. And I'm going to be interviewing upwards of 20 attorneys general, one-on-one or in panels, about the protection of the right to vote and your right to vote as we head into the midterms. And these issues are going to be front and center. So look for that programming up on the Legal AF YouTube channel as I get some exclusives with the attorneys general, the Democratic attorneys general.

44:58Popok:Talwani, back to Judge Talwani. She enters her order as expected. She's going to rule on a preliminary injunction in about a week or so, giving herself some time. Let me do a quick tutorial on stays and blocks because it also matters for appellate purposes. If you need, sometimes courts without even hearing from briefing from either side will enter an administrative stay, put a pin in it, hold the ring so they can figure out things in the hours or maybe a couple of days until the parties can get briefing done, administrative state to preserve the status quo. You got to figure out what the status quo is, but then you can preserve it.

45:44Popok:Then they get the briefs in. Somebody asked for a temporary restraining order, four elements. Likelihood of success and the merits, you're going to win. You have an inadequate remedy at law. Money is not going to help you on this. Irreparable harm kind of goes hand in glove. And balance of equities, tips in your favor, public interest type tips in your favor. You then get a temporary restraining order, either on the papers, on the papers, meaning both sides file briefs. Maybe there's a hearing, maybe there isn't. Maybe there's an evidentiary hearing where witnesses are put on or documents are put on.

46:21Popok:Maybe there isn't. Judge then rules on the temporary restraining order. The next thing, the next stop on the train is the preliminary injunction, which is sounds like the temporary restraining order similar factors the difference is time if the preliminary injunction is granted that lasts for the duration of the case until the end whatever the ruling is and then a permanent injunction it comes after judgment with judgment after the case is over fundamentally temporary restraining orders are very difficult if not impossible to appeal too early in the case. Speaking of timing, once they move maybe a week or two later to preliminary injunction, then parties can run to the appropriate court.

47:10Popok:But Trump hasn't waited. He's decided he's going to jump the gun on a temporary restraining order and jump to the First Circuit Court of Appeals that sits in Boston, Massachusetts, to try to get Judge Talwani, who also sits in Boston, Massachusetts, reversed. I don't think so. I think it's too early. And I don't think they're going to grant a stay either. If he gets a ruling out of it or he gets it off the preliminary injunction, then we've got our round trip back to the United States Supreme Court. And even though the Supreme Court is not in session until the first Monday in October, they'll, I assume Trump will take it up on an emergency injunction.

47:48Popok:And that will make them get together over the summer. Of course, emergency injunctions are also known as shadow dockets. It's an expedited process. It's a short track. It's short circuiting the normal deliberative process of the Supreme Court. You don't get oral argument. There's only two briefs and not three. Doesn't really give time for the Supreme Court to deliberate to do anything other than political knee jerk reaction to whatever the Trump administration is asking for. But I think that's where this goes next. And this is important because the number one thing in the last two years that we've talked about, if you had to do one of these graphs of the size of the words, depending upon how often they've been mentioned, it's voting and voter protection and maps.

48:36Popok:because this is what bothers people. And they want their sacred right to vote protected. They want to be able to vote thumb up or thumb down on this administration, on this presidency, on their policies, on their lack of values, on their rogue assault on the rule of law. And so they want, you know, the only tool that is ready at hand to defeat the tyranny of the Trump administration is voting. So protection of voting is really, really important. So these cases by extension and what happens to the United States Supreme Court matters for the midterm and beyond as Trump tries to rewrite the owner's manual for our country about who's in charge of elections, states and the Congress, not Donald Trump or the presidency.

49:27Popok:And it's a precedent that we have to make sure that the Supreme Court knows from us has to be maintained. We're not going to tolerate a president for his own personal benefit effing around with our mail-in ballots or absentee ballots or any kind of ballots or ballot counting. Because any of these actions, you know, a screwed up federal database that misses people, that means people aren't going to be allowed to vote. You show up on election day and there's some sort of mail or you're waiting for your mail-in ballot and the post office, who can't think straight, screws up the database or the delivery in or out.

50:08Popok:You just got disenfranchised. You just had your vote taken away from you. So we're going to continue to follow all of that. That's a very, very important case. And now I want to talk about Katie Fang and her. really, it started as almost quixotic, right? Don Quixote, you know, the journalists tilting at windmills, going after the entirety of the Trump administration over the Epstein files. Forget that. This has been marked by nothing more than uninterrupted success, levels of success for Katie Fang and her Lawyers of Public Integrity Project. And I want to update you on what's happening in that courtroom with Judge Sullivan with a brand new filing that just came in.

50:56Popok:Now, based on what I just read in that Katie Fang versus Todd Blanche case, I think Judge Sullivan is about to find the Blanche DOJ and maybe Todd Blanche in contempt of court. They are not responding appropriately and properly to a judge's commands, his fiats, his orders. particularly now the fight is over four FBI interviews of a woman who is claims to be a Trump survivor and that she was sexually abused at the age of 13 by Donald Trump. We got the typewritten notes, but we don't have the handwritten notes of the investigators. And that's important. And the judge ordered them to be produced and they refused the Department of Justice.

51:47Popok:Then the judge ordered them to tell him why they were not being produced. And then they didn't tell him why they weren't being produced. Then the judge asked the question of the Department of Justice in court. Have you ever produced FBI handwritten notes of interviews not involving Donald Trump? And he was lied to and misled by Andrew Block, the lawyer for Department of Justice, who said, I don't think so. No, never. A hundred examples were then presented by Katie Fang's lawyers in a notice filed with the court to prove that they're liars. And then I waited to see, because the judge gave the Department of Justice one last chance, literally one last chance to avoid contempt.

52:26Popok:So I'm thinking, okay, here they go. They're going to throw the kitchen sink at this. It's good, right? They're not going to leave anything to chance. We're going to see affidavits, sworn statements under oath. We're going to see evidence and documents. And you know what we got? A page and a half, once again, of gibberish. A page and a half of non sequiturs having nothing to do with anything in the case. As to the FBI interview notes, they said, well, there may have been hundreds produced, although they said a small number may have slipped through the cracks because everybody was working. And they actually wrote this very, very hard.

53:06Popok:And they were working through their holidays, Judge. And so, so bad. So, so victims' names and FBI handwritten notes may have slipped through. Sure. Sure. By the way, if you want to read their filing, I have it up on Legal AF Substack for paid members for filings AF. So I'm like, okay, so that's your excuse? You worked, a bunch of people had to work over a holiday? And then when it came, I said, okay, here they go. This is the windup now. That was the windup. Here's the pitch. This is the reason they're not producing the handwritten notes. And as we said before, Judge, it's very difficult to produce handwritten notes, so we're not going to do it.

53:42Popok:Like, are you fucking kidding? Pardon me. Are you effing kidding me? That's your response as you sit on the precipice on the knife's edge between in the twilight between alive and dead before Judge Sullivan? That's how you respond? Yeah. When you are completely without any respect for the judiciary or the court system, any wonder why federal judges have effectively said, we do not trust the Department of Justice. We cannot grant them a presumption of normality, of regularity, because they're not normal and they're not regular and they're not trustworthy. Well, this is the reason. It's filings like this one, Mr.

54:22Popok:Block and Mr. Blanche and Mr. Woodward for the Department of Justice that drive federal judges up the wall. This smugness, this insincerity, this bald-faced, bold-faced lying and not telling the truth as an officer of the court is required by your rules of professional responsibility and your sworn oath, a sworn oath that you believe you do not have to follow and bar licenses that you feel need to protect. So as to the redaction log, Public Integrity Project and Katie cornered the Department of Justice and said either produce the redaction log of the 200 ,000 pages, tell us what progress you're making towards it despite being court ordered.

55:23Popok:Or if you haven't done it, why haven't you done it? Give us an affidavit. Well, they never want Todd Blanche to testify in anything, even if it means losing the case. A judge in Middle District of Tennessee threatening to dismiss an indictment for vindictive prosecution, Kilmer Abrego Garcia. All he needs to do is hear from Todd Blanche. Todd Blanche never shows up, never testifies, never shows up in that courtroom, never sends in an affidavit. Judge Brinkema in the Eastern District of Virginia, who's presiding over the Jan 6 fund case and the next day attempt to give Donald Trump tax evasion immunity case.

56:04Popok:And she wants to hear from Todd Blanche. No Todd Blanche. Here, Judge Sullivan. Todd Blanche is the only party who has responsibilities as the attorney general under the Epstein File Transparency Act. You'd think he'd want to testify. No Todd Blanche. In fact, he doesn't even sign the pleadings. The pleadings that they signed for the Department of Justice and motions and practice thing and motions just as Stan Woodward, who's I think the acting number two or the number three in the Department of Justice. That's who this U.S. attorney apparently is reporting to because I guess an ethical conflict has come up and Todd Blanche has stepped aside for this particular case.

56:45Popok:I'm not quite sure. I'm not quite sure. So that was the last word. Judge, well, Judge Sullivan is the last word. That was the last word from the government. Sullivan is done. He's got, this is just on the preliminary injunction, by the way. This is just over the untranslated foreign language documents in an international trial sex trafficking ring. This is about the 200 ,000 pages of redactions and the redaction log. This is about the handwritten 302 FBI notes. What I was about to say about the Katie Fang's case is that their response on the redaction log and to avoid Blanche from testifying was to publish the log, apparently, finally.

57:45I mean, they were ordered to do it.

57:47Popok:They were required to do it by the Epstein File Transparency Act six, eight months ago. They were ordered to do it two months ago. And only because of Katie Fang did they just publish it, which we're going to get to the bottom of and review and all of that. I think he finds Judge Sullivan finds him in contempt for this conduct. I think he's going to write a scathing opinion about how he's being mistreated as a federal judge. I don't mean personally, I mean professionally. And then you got the broader case, because this isn't only about those four or five items. This is about three million more documents and somebody who can be trusted reviewing what the FBI and the Department of Justice already did to determine as an officer of the court and report back to Judge Sullivan and to the American people about the production.

58:39Popok:And that's where this case is going. So even though we're kind of stuck in this netherworld of the temporary restraining order and kind of getting a final answer out of the judge related to it, there is a broader case here that can't be ignored. And that's why I've said it to her face, because I'm friends with her. And otherwise, Katie Fang will go down in the history books, not just law school history books, because she brought the first lawsuit as being a historical figure that fought for her First Amendment rights and our First Amendment rights and fought for the survivors in a way that no one else was willing to do.

59:17Popok:I mean, thousands of people could have filed this kind of lawsuit, whether they were in journalism or somehow attenuatedly connected to the Epstein scandal, but no one did except for Katie. And we're a better nation as a result of it and because of it. I wanted to give you this opportunity now, a second opportunity to help support what we do. Here on the Legal Layoff podcast, we are now on all, of course, on all podcast platforms, regularly in the top 25, top 50 of US podcasts or world podcasts on law and politics. Come over, hit the audio subscribe button, download the audio version of this podcast.

59:58Popok:That's very, very important in the ratings. And then you can support Legal AF, the YouTube channel. We are 1.2 million strong. And we're a little bit of a heads up. We're going to be redoing some of our graphic packaging related to our audience. And you'll be seeing those over the next week or two. But hit the free subscribe button. Help us to continue to grow that Pro Democracy channel a dozen videos a day. Wait till you hear the roster. That's over on Legal AF YouTube channel that I curate and co-founded. You've got, of course, me. You've got the American Civil Liberties Union, regularly the NAACP, Democracy Forward with Sky Perryman.

1:00:40Popok:You've got Court Accountability Action. You've got Court of History with Sidney Blumenthal and Sean Walens. You've got Dina Dahl, you've got Melba Pearson, the resident legal diva, you've got Dave Arenberg, Adam Klassfeld, All Rise News, all contributing all day long, 24-7 with this video and that content. And think about becoming a paid subscriber. Well, then there's Substack, which is a parallel universe of legal AF supporters. another eight to 10 pieces of content a day. I try to do a live report every day, sometimes with a guest, sometimes not, over on Legal AF Substack. Hit the subscribe button there.

1:01:29Popok:Help us grow our pro-democracy channel and get into the top 10 of all U.S. news substacks. So that's the two ways. You've got our advertisers. And then I've got a law firm. It's called the Popak Firm. Ben talked about it in the first segment. it's dedicated to the Legal AF and Midas community. In fact, it's either community members or people who are one or two degrees separated from them that constitutes our client base. We're representing hundreds of Midas Touch and Legal AF's audience members in some of the most important legal matters in their lives. Legal matters because of catastrophic injury or accident that has turned their life virtually upside down.

1:02:14Popok:And my team, I've got 50 state coverage, top flight plaintiff's lawyers recovering billions of dollars, some of the best trial lawyers in the country. And it's just a phone call away or use the QR code. Go to our website, brand new website, same tireless fighters. If you've been injured in an accident or some sort of injury damage as a result of the negligence of others. I'm talking about medical malpractice, auto accident, trucking accident, rideshare, Uber Lyft accident. All of these things that where you really need a lawyer who knows what they're doing against the insurance companies in the court system, come to the Popak firm.

1:02:59Popok:And then we've got our pro-democracy sponsors. And let's take a break for them. You know what I love? Finding something that brings back those Saturday morning cereal memories without the sugar crash. That's why I've been into Magic Spoon. It's a high-protein zero-sugar cereal that tastes like the classics I grew up with, and every serving packs 12 to 14 grams of protein and just 0 to 2 grams of sugar. It's also certified gluten-free, so it's a really fueling option, whether it's breakfast, a late-night snack, or after a workout. They've got classic flavors like fruity, frosted, peanut butter, cocoa, and cinnamon crunch, and if you're feeling and extra nostalgic.

1:03:40Popok:Well, they've also got new classic marshmallow and s'mores flavors with real marshmallows and two grams of sugar that really capture those childhood cereal vibes. Look for Magic Spoon on Amazon or at your nearest grocery store. And if you want to try something new, check out Magic Spoon's protein pastries. Yes, they're packed with protein and taste like the nostalgic toaster pastries you grew up with, but without all the sugar. You can get$5 off your next order, including the protein pastries at magicspoon.com slash legal AF. That's magicspoon.com slash legal AF for$5 off. As I've gotten older, I've noticed my skin looking a little duller and less even than it used to.

1:04:23Popok:That's exactly why I started using GU Skin Care. I've been using their rejuvenation toner pads. They're like an entire Korean skin care routine in one swipe. with eight clinically backed Korean skincare actives, including snail mucin, peptides, and niacinamide. They leave my skin feeling hydrated, nourished, and refreshed without feeling stripped or irritated. For a limited time, GU is having a crazy deal for our listeners. Their glow-up bundle is already up to 45 % off right now, but our listeners can now get an additional 20 % off plus free shipping with our code LEGALAF at J-I-Y-U skin.com.

1:05:03Popok:That's J-I-Y-U, skin.com, and use code LEGALAF for an additional 20 % off. After you purchase, they'll ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that our show sent you. Welcome back, and thank you to our Pro Democracy sponsors. And just as importantly, thank you to you, our community, who's worked so hard, shoulder to shoulder with us to build this phenomenal organization, community, fellowship that we call the Midas Touch community and Legal AF community. Because without you, this is all for naught. We've got some amazing developments that have been announced recently concerning the growth and expansion of Midas Touch and of Legal AF.

1:05:48Popok:We're now up to 12 hours of recording every day, new content on Legal AF podcast. I just expanded bringing on a closer collaborative relationship with the NAACP, with the American Civil Liberties Union, with Democracy Forward, with Sky Perryman. We now have regular collaboration and reporting with Mark Elias of the Democracy Docket and the Mark Elias Law Firm, Elias and Associates, about voter rights. Who can solve the Rubik's Cube of voting issues quicker and better than Mark Elias? We have strengthened our relationship on Legal AF with the Democratic Attorneys General organization. In fact, I'm going the day after Labor Day to interview about as many of the 24 Democratic Attorneys General as who will speak to me.

1:06:42Popok:We're going to be moderating a couple of panels, a lot of one-on-ones. We're going to have our channel favorites, A.G. Bonta from California, A.G. Nick Brown from Washington, A.G. Keith Ellison from Minnesota, A.G. Chris Mays from Arizona, Dana Nessel of Michigan will be in Michigan. and that bringing them on for all of the hundreds of lawsuits that they've successfully filed against the Trump administration is an important competitive advantage that we have on Legal AF, having Sky Perryman and Democracy Forward, her hundreds of cases to be able to talk about it in real time. I regularly have Public Integrity Project, the public interest law firm that represents Katie Fang and Brendan Ballew on to advise you.

1:07:34Popok:We're going to be announcing soon another relationship with the Democratic Senator Schiff, who's on the Judiciary Committee. And so what fuels that expansion is a combination of enthusiasm and drive, and you're propelling this Legal AF brand forward. And for that, we are eternally grateful. Got some breaking news coming out of New York about Donald Trump's 34 felony count conviction, conviction and sentencing for his running a criminal conspiracy involving himself, people in the Trump organization, Michael Cohen, David Pecker, who was then the head of the National Enquirer, related to the payoff of Stormy Daniels after a sex act that she had with Donald Trump that he wanted to keep secret from not only his family, but from the American people to try to win the 2016 election.

1:08:35Popok:Spoiler alert, he won the 2016 election. Some may say that that cover-up, that hush money cover-up was quite effective. Alvin Bragg's Manhattan district attorney's office brought the case. That wasn't the only case. Sometimes something gets lost here. That's not the only successful conviction that Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan DA, had against Trump or the Trump organization. Several months before, he got a 17 felony count conviction through another jury in New York for business record fraud related to two of Donald Trump's companies. I mean, I know his lawyers and his spokespeople like to say it was a witch hunt.

1:09:14Popok:It was a witch hunt. I don't know. It was an 18-0-2 jury shellacking for Donald Trump, you know, totaling 34 plus 17, 51 counts of criminal conviction and felonies. That's what that is. I don't know about a witch hunt. If that's a witch hunt, then people are in federal penitentiaries and state jails talking about, I'm only in here because it's a witch hunt. All right. So at various times in that prosecution that happened before Donald Trump became president the second time and after he'd already left office, it was about conduct of Donald Trump while he was citizen Trump, not yet president, where that conspiracy was created as proven in a court of law and affirmed that appeal in which Michael Cohen, and I know Michael Cohen's back in the news these days, and I'll leave it at that.

1:10:07Michael Cohen testified under oath that he spent$130 ,000 of his own money to pay off Stormy Daniels, who was identified by David Pecker as somebody who was going to go to the press against

1:10:23Popok:Donald Trump about infidelity and about other things. And Michael didn't just do it on his own. Michael as he testified in collaboration with people of the Trump organization and his big boss, Donald Trump paid her off and then expected to be repaid. It wasn't a gift. Trump's so cheap, he used Michael Cohen to do the check writing and then didn't even pay Michael Cohen back in one check, paying him back in a series of checks so that Michael got paid more than$130 ,000, maybe three or four times more as a bonus to make up for the taxes that he might have to pay and So he ended up getting$300 ,000 or$400 ,000 worth of money to pay off Stormy Daniels.

1:11:03Popok:Those checks came into evidence. Most of those checks got paid back to Michael after Trump became president. So his bad deeds and misconduct and sexual infidelity was before presidency. and his payments to the porn star, as we say, was before the presidency through Michael Cohen. The payback of the money to Michael Cohen was after he became president. And Trump says, well, I'm president, immunity. All those meetings I had with Michael Cohen in the White House, that was presidential conduct. I get immunity. And more to the point, he wanted to transfer his case from state court over to federal court.

1:11:50Popok:And the way you do that is through something called federal officer removal, federal officer removal. And under federal officer removal, which is under 28, United States Code 1442, it says if you're a federal officer and you're getting prosecuted or sued in a state court, you have the right to seek to remove it to federal court to get a federal judge. And I mean, the state loss comes with it, but a federal judge to decide and federal and if you have a federal defense, if you've got a federal defense and you're a federal officer and you got sued in state court, we'll see you over at the federal courthouse.

1:12:27Popok:That's called removal. You remove it from state court into federal court. If it goes back to state court, it's called remand from federal court back to state court. So a couple of years ago, Trump tried to remove it kind of late in the game and it got rejected by Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who's now 95 years old, senior status federal judge, sharp as a whip, you know, sharp as a tech. So he loses on the removal. At the time, Judge Hellerstein said, payoffs to a porn star are not presidential scope of duty. Immunity decision had not yet at that moment come out. Trump goes through the trial. Along the way, he loses at the trial.

1:13:11Popok:He tries to take an appeal, but he ends up abandoning his appeal at the state court level. He asks the trial judge, Judge Mershon, to delay sentencing because now he's president again. And he wants to use the immunity decision that came out for the United States Supreme Court, giving him criminal immunity and to see how that mapped on. But remember, he already got convicted. And this is about non-presidential things. So he abandons his state appeal. He then returns to Judge Hellerstein after he's been convicted, after he's been sentenced, and says, I want to do over and go back to federal court and start all over again.

1:13:54Popok:And the judge is like, A, you're late because this is already, you've already been sent, you've already been convicted. You can't now remove it. called him out for trying to get two bites at the apple. Well, let's see what happens at the state court level. Oh, no, that's not going well for me. I'll go to the federal court. And denied his removal the second time. Trump takes an appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. And at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, they send it back to Judge Hellerstein and say, look, take a closer look at the immunity decision from the United States Supreme Court and Also answer this question for us.

1:14:31Popok:Do you think removal could even be used at all, given that he's already been convicted and sentenced? Aren't we a little bit late? And Hellerstein takes up on the mandamus or the mandate set from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals back to him. And now he just issued his ruling. And what he said is, you're not going to be able to take your, Trump, you're not going to be able to take your case to federal court after you've been tried, convicted, and sentenced. That's one. Two, you played fast and loose with procedure between the state court and the federal court to try to gain an advantage, and that's not going to help you.

1:15:11Popok:And the things that you did, that you were accused of and you convicted of, are not presidential. They're not within your powers as a federal officer. And no, you're not going to be able to, therefore, avail yourself of the federal removal officer It's a removal statute. And you don't have a federal defense to any of these things. Let me read to you. We'll put this up on Legal Layoff Substack from Judge Hellerstein's decision that just came out yesterday. It says the president's motion is denied. He then goes through the scheme on page two, just to remind you. As part of this scheme, the people allege that at Trump's request, a lawyer who worked for the Trump Organization as special counsel, Michael Cohen covertly paid$130 ,000 to adult film actress shortly before the election in 2016 to prevent her from publicizing a sexual encounter with Trump.

1:16:10Popok:Cohen, following Trump's instructions, this is what he testified to. I mean, I don't care what he's doing on his radio show these days. This is what Michael Cohen, under oath in a courtroom, testified to. Cohen, following Trump's instructions, proceeded to pay the adult film star Stephanie Clifford, a.k.a. Stormy Daniels, using a Shell Corporation. After the election, Trump reimbursed Cohen, disguising each check as a payment for legal services for pursuant to a retainer agreement, as if he was just paying Michael for normal, ordinary law, garden variety legal services. You know, so well, maybe in Trump's world, it is garden variety to pay off a porn star to make her not go to the newspapers.

1:16:52Popok:I don't know. So he then said, and he reaffirmed it, and this is Judge Hellerstein in his new ruling. He said at the time, on page three of the order, I ruled that hush money paid to an adult film star is not related to a president's official acts and does not reflect in any way the color of the president's official duties. And he doesn't have any colorable federal defenses to give him the opportunity for removal. And he goes on to say, even the case of Trump versus the United States in 2024, in June of 2024, giving him immunity, when you map that case under these facts, does not give him an ability to claim that this was paying off hush money back to Michael Cohen when he was president, was a presidential act or presidential duty.

1:17:47Popok:And also, he didn't like the fact that he looked for a second bite at the apple. On page 11, he says, Trump's 64-day delay in finally moving in federal court for leave to remove is inconsistent with good cause. This is supposed to be for legitimate federal officers who don't want to go through a state case because they believe they're being prosecuted or sued just because they're federal officers and they think a federal judge will be better for them and they won't have to put up with the local judge, not somebody who didn't like the result and got convicted and sentenced. He then says on page 11, the Second Circuit asks of him in the return of the case to Judge Hellerstein, if removal is available at this stage of a criminal case after a federal officer has been convicted, sentenced, judgment entered, and appeal noticed.

1:18:37Popok:I hold that it is not available. He then goes through the testimony of Hope Hicks, Madeline Westerhoot, and Michael Cohen, And he says none of those interactions fall within presidential duties. They're private affairs of Donald Trump, no pun intended. And as a result, they are not going to be considered presidential for the determination of whether he can remove a case to federal court. He says on page 20 about that testimony, Trump argues that the trial testimony of Hicks, Westerhoot, and Michael Cohen and his own Twitter statements infringe on presidential immunity because his Twitter statements were let into the courtroom.

1:19:18Popok:They do not. Paying hush money to an adult film star or engaging in a cover-up of an embarrassment are not subsumed in presidential immunity. And let me just give you one example of the tweets that got used against him, including about Michael Cohen. This is Twitter thread two and Twitter thread three, in which the Trump side is arguing this is presidential. He then tries to, after the fact, cover his ass by writing the following tweet, Trump, about the Stormy Daniels payoff. Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer not from the campaign for which he entered into through reimbursement a private contract between two parties, very common among celebrities and people of wealth.

1:20:14Popok:In this case, it is between Cohen and Stormy Daniels. The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair. Okay. He then says in the other Twitter thread, if anyone is looking for a good lawyer, I would strongly suggest that you don't retain the services of Michael Cohen. Yeah. And so at the end now, the judge has now ruled, no, you don't get to bring this case after your conviction and sentencing over to federal court. I reject it, having now been told to take a closer look at it by the Second Circuit. This will now go back to the Second Circuit and maybe back to the United States Supreme Court as Trump tries to rewrite history and get rid of his 34 felony count conviction.

1:21:08Popok:And let me just read to you from the political hacks that are representing him. This was the official statement by the lawyers representing Donald Trump and shame on Sullivan and Cromwell for letting a spokesperson for the legal team say this. The Supreme Court's historic decision on immunity, the federal and New York state constitutions and other established legal precedent mandate that the witch hunt perpetrated by the Manhattan DA be removed to federal court and immediately overturned and dismissed. President Trump will be filing a powerful appeal and will continue defeating Democrat weaponization at every turn.

1:21:52Popok:I'll give it a rest. And that's not what happened. What happened is a jury of Donald Trump's peers convicted him of that fraud and hush money cover-up. He chose which appeal route he was going to take. He decided to stay in state court, and only when it looked like he was going to lose in state court appeals about the actions of Judge Morshon, which were really unassailable, did he try to flip it back and take it to federal court. Too little, too late, wrong on the law. And all of the things that he says were presidential when they're outlined in the briefs only reinforces the fact that he was doing personal nasty business on taxpayer dime to cover up for a porn star affair through Michael Cohen and got caught.

1:22:42Popok:That's all it shows. It's not presidential, and it doesn't give him the right to take his case to federal court and start a process of removing his conviction from the books. He is forever branded with the scarlet letter for his role as a 34-count felon related to the hush money cover-up, period. Just like he's branded a fraudster in the same New York court system as being a committer of persistent fraud in the operation of his business in the Letitia James civil fraud case, just as he's been branded. His companies have been branded also tax evaders and business record fraudsters in another case.

1:23:27Popok:And the list goes on. I know Donald Trump's worried about his legacy, but that is his legacy. Speaking of legacy, thanks for being here on our six-year-old Legal AF podcast. Come over to Legal AF YouTube channel. We are 1.2 million subscribers strong. Find out when you hit the button how you'll help us advance our build of our pro-democracy channel. Come over to Legal AF Substack where we have 10 or 12 pieces of content every day. Try to keep us in the top 10 of all U.S. news substacks on Legal AF Substack. Download the audio here of the Legal AF podcast. That helps with the ratings and keeps us on the air.

1:24:08Popok:And then finally, the Popak firm standing by. QR code will take you to the website. Call the 1-800 number, 1-877-POPAK-AF. Fill out the contact form. Somebody will get right back to you. Find out if you have the case. And if you do, for a catastrophic injury or illness or, God forbid, death, you or anybody in your family, not the death part, make sure you contact the Popak firm. We've got lawyers, amazing trial teams in all 50 states, and we're designed for the Midas Touch and Legal AF communities. Until my next report, until my next Legal AF contribution, I'm Michael Popak. See you on Tuesday night on the Intersection podcast on the Midas Touch Network.

1:24:47Popok:Until then, shout out to the Midas Mighty and the Legal AFers.

1:25:00Thank you.