Trump Epstein Nightmare Grows…

0:00Got some breaking news that has to do with Judge Emmett Sullivan and Katie Phang's lawsuit against Todd Blanche about the Epstein files.

0:07Michael Popok:Well, when you're Todd Blanche and the DOJ and you miss deadline after deadline after deadline and you refuse to turn over FBI handwritten interview notes about a woman who claims that when she was 13 years old, she was sexually abused by Donald Trump. and the judge had enough of your refusal to turn over these documents to make your deadlines, you're going to get a series of orders like just came out from Judge Emmett Sullivan's chambers against the Department of Justice. Here's the headline. The FBI interview notes of the four interviews of the woman who claims to have been sexually abused by Donald Trump when she was 13 years old, probably dozens and dozens of handwritten pages produced and prepared by the FBI have to be turned over by the 24th of September to Judge Sullivan for his own review.

0:57Michael Popok:You know what that means. He's going to end up producing to Katie Fang and to the public those handwritten notes redacted appropriately concerning the victim and the survivor. That's happening. Also on the September the 24th, they have to tell the judge that they have begun the task of reviewing and producing the foreign language documents. This was an international child sex trafficking ring, and they tried to get away. The Department of Justice was saying, we can't figure them out. They're in a foreign language, right? That's why you have to have them translated. Now, interestingly enough, the judge didn't order them to translate them.

1:35Michael Popok:He ordered them to review and produce. But how are they going to review them if they're not translated? I mean, rule number one in law school and in litigation discovery, never produce something you don't know what it is. So he hasn't ordered them to translate, but by ordering them to review and begin production, that necessarily inherently means they're going to have to translate them. I just thought that was a very skilled way for the federal judge to handle that particular aspect. And he wants a report by the 24th and not trusting the Department of Justice. Judge Sullivan has said, you know, you've said before you don't understand my orders.

2:11Michael Popok:I mean, Andrew Block, the lawyer for the Department of Justice, actually said to the judge, if you could just write it clearly in an order, he said, what would you like me to do? I mean it this time. So he told Department of Justice, if you think any part of my orders are not clear and not unambiguous, let me know by the 21st of September and I'll clear it up for you. Separately, the judge entered a second order in which he went through the whole litany of missed deadlines by the Department of Justice to file the answer in the suit. See, once you file a complaint like Katie Fang did, the other side has to either file a motion to dismiss or some sort of other motion or an answer.

2:50Michael Popok:Once you have a complaint and an answer, you can move towards summary judgment. They blew the deadline, not by a little, by a lot. And then they came to say, oh, we missed the deadline, but we still want to be able to file motions. No, the judge has ordered that an answer be filed by a date certain and that they've waived their right to file a motion. They have to file an answer, get this case moving towards summary judgment and final disposition. Because this is not just about the FBI notes and the foreign language documents and other documents. This is about 3 million produced documents and whether they were properly produced, about another 3 million that were never produced, and about a court-ordered monitor.

3:33Michael Popok:Yep, an officer of the court, a former federal judge likely, who will take over and review what the FBI has already done with all their protocols, review the documents that haven't been reviewed, and make determinations in a report to the federal judge. That's what we always have wanted for transparency, because the Department of Justice has forfeited its right to be responsible for the full production of the Epstein files. I'm Michael Popok. You're here on the Midas Touch Network and on Legal AF. Let's get to the reporting. Let's start with the FBI interview notes. Now, there were a series of things that were in front of Judge Sullivan in his 20-page memorandum opinion and order, which we have up on Legal AF Substack.

4:19and in some places he sided with the government

4:25for instance he found that they did properly redact certain documents to take away the names of law enforcement and he discharged the order to show cause as it related to those categories when it came down to the fbi notes and it came down to the foreign language documents he was not having it here's what he here's what he wrote here's what he ordered about the fbi interview notes on page 12 and 13 of his order. The court rejects defendant's assertion that the underlying handwritten FBI notes that form the basis of certain 302s, that's the official form number for FBI interview notes that are eventually typed up, that they were properly withheld because

5:05Michael Popok:they are substantially similar to and therefore duplicative of the typewritten reports. He then hoists them up on their own protocol. He says, you have a review protocol. You gave me a copy of your review protocol. And in the review protocol prepared by the Department of Justice and the FBI, it doesn't say you can withhold something because it's duplicative or substantially similar at all. The underlying handwritten notes, he says, are not duplicates of the reports. They're separate documents. Furthermore, plaintiff has identified, that's Katie Fangside, nearly 100 additional examples of handwritten interview notes produced by the defendant.

5:41Michael Popok:Pursuant to the court's inherent authority to review material, the court has now ordered the defendant, that's Todd Blanche, and the Department of Justice, to submit to the court, Judge Sullivan, the underlying FBI interview notes. That's the handwritten notes that form the basis of the interview reports. That is going to lead almost immediately to the judge releasing these files. We are one step closer to seeing the, with some redactions to protect survivor privacy were to getting the handwritten notes of a four-day interview, four-part interview of the same victim who claimed she was sexually abused by Donald Trump when she was 13.

6:23He then takes apart all of their arguments and defenses.

6:27Michael Popok:He says defendant contends that ordering that kind of review would set a bad precedent and then reminds them they've already submitted documents to him for in-camera review on the other topics, so they sort of have waived that argument. it. He also says, I'm not going to stay my order while you have an appeal. You have an appeal. There's a briefing schedule up there. There's no stay in this case, and I'm not going to stay my order. Then he moves on to the foreign language materials. Remember, international child sex trafficking ring. Of course, there are going to be documents that are in a foreign language.

6:59Michael Popok:That's not an excuse. It's not an excuse in any criminal case. If the Department of Justice is prosecuting a case against another person. They have an obligation under laws that we call Brady material, Brady laws, to turn over all those foreign language documents if they are either inculpatory, tend to prove somebody's guilt, or exculpatory, tend to prove somebody's innocence. Now, if they don't want to translate it, then just turn them all over. They normally have to translate it so they know what they're producing, know what's inculpatory, what's exculpatory. Here, they just went, it's too tough for a first-level reviewer to figure that out.

7:38Michael Popok:No. Here's what the judge said about his order to produce. On page 14, she says, in plaintiff's response, she argues that the court should find defendant in civil contempt for having not thought that. The judge says, I'm not going to find you in civil contempt at this moment. But on page 15 says the court concludes that the defendant's rationale for not initiating the review of the foreign language materials is without merit. The Epstein File Transparency Act, the judge continues, is an unprecedented disclosure law requiring the attorney general to make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable database all unclassified Department of Justice files related to its investigation of the notorious sexual predator and child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and the child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and their associates.

8:30Somebody in the White House might be getting nervous on that phrase. subject to certain exceptions and permitted withholdings. Recognizing the obligation, the defendant informed Congress that there were foreign language materials that had not been reviewed because it was not practicable for first-level reviewer to determine the responsiveness of it. Defendant cites no authority for the proposition that administrative inconvenience excuses him from his statutory obligations. Having rejected defendant's rationale, this is page 16 of the order,

9:02Michael Popok:The court will order defendant to initiate review and production of the foreign language materials and inform the party about when on a date certain that review has started. Doesn't say translate them. You want to produce them without translating them? Go ahead. Leave it to AI and crowdsourcing to translate all those documents for you, I assure you, overnight. So his order is as follows. Lots of things in this first opinion of two that happened on the 24th of September. Ordered, page 19, the defendant shall submit to the court for its in-camera review those FBI interview notes about the alleged Donald Trump a victim or a survivor on the 24th.

9:42Michael Popok:Also on the 24th, start your review and production of those foreign language materials and tell me that you have done it. And then finally, a little dig, because he had a weird exchange, Judge Sullivan, with Andrew Block, the lawyer for the Department of Justice at the last hearing, in which he said, something along the line of, well, why haven't you done it? And Andrew Block said, well, if you would just enter an order, the judge said, should my order say I really mean it this time? He's entered orders. So to cut him off at the pass, the judge has said, if the Department of Justice and the defendant find that any aspect of his order is not clear and unambiguous, like, can't figure it out, judge.

10:24Michael Popok:Let me know that by the 21st of September, will you, by order so I can clear it up for you? Life insurance. We all know we need it, but it's easy to put off because it seems complicated or expensive. SelectQuote makes it simple. Their licensed insurance agents work for you, not one insurance company. They compare options across multiple carriers to find you the right coverage at the lowest price. They've been doing this for nearly 40 years and have helped over 2 million people find coverage. Even if you have health issues, they can help. Their agents know which carriers will give you the best rate for your specific situation.

11:02Michael Popok:And if you're healthy, they can help get you same-day coverage with no medical exam. SelectQuote. They shop. You save. Get the right life insurance for you for less at SelectQuote.com slash Legal AF. Go to SelectQuote.com slash Legal AF today to get started. that in a separate order also issued today. The judge took on why the Department of Justice has missed deadlines to file an answer in this case. Now, if I were them, and I had this back and forth with a lawyer for Katie Fang, Brendan Ballew, I would have filed a motion for default judgment. You miss your deadline, it's a default judgment. And if they don't like it, they can move to vacate the default if they have proper and good cause.

11:49But they didn't do that. They tried to encourage the Department of Justice to file their answer. Now the judge is being heard from. He orders on page two of the second order, defendant shall file his answer to the complaint by no later than September 24th, 2026. He then recites all the missed deadlines. He said, defendant's deadline deadline to respond to the complaint was June 26th, 2026. He did not file a response, nor on page two did he move for an extension of time to file a response, nor did he move for an extension of time to file a response after the deadline had passed. Plaintiff now moves the court to enter a scheduling order, giving him time to produce the administrative record by a date certain, and he did not file a response to the plaintiff's motion about that.

12:41The administrative record, that's referring to the documents that were used in the decision-making process about what to produce and what not to produce of the Epstein files. That's the administrative record because this has been brought under the Administrative Procedures Act as a final agency action. So the judge says you file your answer on the 24th of September. You don't get to file a motion. See, when I get serve with a complaint for a client, I got a choice. I could file a motion to dismiss, a motion for judgment on the pleadings, or my answer. But if I have missed the deadlines, you generally have waived if the judge grants you relief at all.

13:24And the judge's saying, you can do the answer, but you can't do a motion, and you can't do a motion later, you file an answer on the 24th of September. As to the administrative record, the defendant conceded this issue, the judge says, in the past. Defendants shall file a certified list of the contents of the administrative record by no later than October 1st and shall produce the administrative record by October 15th. You better get all your documents together, internal documents about how you made the decision about what to produce and what not to produce and what to redact and what not to redact and they better be able to see that.

14:04So the judge says, I don't think it was an oversight on your failure to file a motion to dismiss. I'm not going to relieve you of that. And I'm going to order many things to happen on September 24th and a couple of things to happen on in October. This is a big win in a series of an unbroken chain of wins for Katie Fang and her lawyers, a public integrity project in the Epstein File Transparency Act. And I know somebody who's going to be thrilled about it, is Dani Benski, one of the leaders of the survivor movement, an Epstein survivor herself. I just interviewed her today. And here's a clip. It's so fascinating to see.

14:39I agree that people have underestimated this experience and the weight of the files, both figuratively and literally, right? When you see them, they're hard to look away from. And so, you know, I think even about what happened yesterday in the House, what a wild day it was. I was at the Cash Patel hearing in the morning. And then I ran over to the House where the House oversight decided that they would hold Leon Black in contempt, right, or that they voted. And so now that referral goes to, it should go to the DOJ. It'll go to the whole House. And hopefully the whole house will unanimously agree that Leon Black does need to be held in contempt.

15:23And then it's up to the DOJ again. So that's going to be a really fascinating display. If you have bipartisan support to hold him in contempt and our DOJ says, no, I don't know how that's going to play out. But just to come off of that experience in Dallas that felt very hopeful. And then to have that day yesterday where you did have Kennedy. And of course, you had Booker on either side talking to Patel and really going after Patel with some, it felt like a cross examination, right. In some ways. Um, and then you had later on in the house, this unanimous vote to hold me on black and contempt. And I talked to Comer after, and I mean, Chairman Comer really has been great with us.

16:02He's been like really thoughtful. Um, and I just, you know, wanted to thank him, but he said he's, you know, he's been walking through fire to make this happen. And so and of course, like, you know, I was shaking hands with the Dems, but also like with the Republicans, like there are so many Republicans that are out there saying, you know, you girls are out there doing God's work and all of this. Right. So it's like they are we are united until we get to the DOJ. Well, many good things have been happening for the Epstein survivors. Kash Patel excoriated during cross-examination by Senate Democrats and some Republicans during his Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing in the last 24 hours.

16:45Leon Black has got a finding of contempt by Congress. He was the financier that gave Jeffrey Epstein billions of dollars, also took some relationship advice from Jeffrey Epstein, helped finance Jeffrey Epstein's international child sex trafficking ring, wittingly or unwittingly, refuses to answer questions, he's going to be referred to the Department of Justice. And now we're going to see what the Department of Justice has to say about that and whether they're going to do the right thing by the survivors or not. Things are turning in the Epstein survivors' favor because justice demands it. Dignity demands it.

17:18Legal AF and Midas Touch demand it. I'm Michael Popak. Hit the free subscribe button here on Midas Touch. Come over to Legal AF YouTube channel. it's our two-year birthday it's this week we were born on constitution day two years ago we are now 1.24 million subscribers strong over 805 million views make it memorable hit the subscribe button it's all for free on legal af youtube channel until my next report i'm michael

17:44Michael Popok:popock can't get your fill of legal af me neither that's why we formed the legal af sub stack every time we mention something in a hot take whether it's a court filing or a oral argument come over to the Substack, you'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do call, wait for it, Morning AF. What else? All the other contributors from Legal AF are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad-free versions of the podcast and hot takes. Where? Legal AF on Substack. Come over now to free subscribe.