Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Legal AF Full Episode - 11/1/2025

Episode Date: November 2, 2025

Lindsey Halligan puts her law license in jeopardy, as lawyers and judges demand to see what she exactly told the grand jury when she obtained her first ever federal indictments against Trump’s political critics. The Supreme Court may be ready to reign in Trump and his abuse of power through the take over of State National Guard, with a landmark decision on the validity of Trump’s Tariffs coming up for an oral argument this week; Trump turns his back on fragile Americans facing starvation and holds a multi million dollar “Great Gatsby” theme Halloween party at Mar a Lago primarily with taxpayer funds. Kash Patel moves closer to be axed as FBi Director. And so much more on the top rated Legal AF Podcast with Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Boarding for flight 246 to Toronto is delayed 50 minutes. Ugh, what? Sounds like Ojo time. Play Ojo? Great idea. Feel the fun with all the latest slots in live casino games and with no wagering requirements. What you win is yours to keep groovy. Hey, I won! Boarding will begin when passenger fisher is done celebrating.

19 plus Ontario only. Please play responsibly. Concerned by your gambling or that if someone close, you call 1866-3-3-1-2-60 or visit comixonterio.ca. Get no frills delivered. Shop the same in-store prices online and enjoy unlimited delivery with PC Express Pass. Get your first year for $2.50 a month. Learn more at pceexpress.ca. You know what's better than the one big thing?

Two big things. Exactly. The new iPhone 17 Pro on TELUS's five-year rate plan price lock. Yep, it's the most powerful iPhone ever, plus more peace of mind with your bill over five years. This is big. Get the new iPhone 17 Pro at tellus.com slash iPhone 17 Pro on select plans.

Conditions and exclusions apply. Now streaming on Paramount Plus. It's the epic return of Mayor of Kingstown. Warden? You know who I am. Starring Academy Award nominee Jeremy Runner. I swear in these walls. Emmy award winner Edie Falco.

You're an ex-con who ran this place for years. And now, now you can't do that. and BAFTA award winner Lenny James. You're about to have a plague of outsiders descend on your town. Let me tell you this. It's got to be consequences. Mayor of Kingstown, new season now streaming on Paramount Plus. That's annoying.

What? You're a muffler. You don't hear it? Oh, I don't even notice it. I usually drown it out with the radio. How's this? Oh, yeah? Way better.

Save on insurance by switching to Bell Air Direct and use the money to fix your car. Bell Air Direct, insurance, simplified. Conditions apply. It's going to be a very busy week. in federal courthouses across the country in the United States Supreme Court this week and in general as the Trump regime's attacks on law and order attacks against the world with tariffs against the world. We're going to come to this a moment, Michael Popak, where we're going to have to deal with, you know,

the Supreme Court's hearing about Donald Trump's invading these blue states and blue cities. We're finally going to get rulings, I think, coming down the past. pipeline very soon. We have the oral argument before the United States Supreme Court on Donald Trump's trade war against the world where he claims all of these emergency powers. And, you know, we're going to see what happens now as well as federal courts have ruled against Donald Trump's claim that he's not able to utilize the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program's contingency fund. And Trump's regime wanted to starve Americans. They had Trump and Maga Mike saying, We absolutely cannot give this money.

Our legal opinions say we're frozen with these funds and multiple federal judges. And what the hell are you talking about? No, the contingency emergency fund is precisely for this purpose. And we should also talk about Popak that Cash Patel, the FBI director. I can't believe I say that, that that's his title. You know, the FBI rank and file is pissed off at cash, just put it mildly. Apparently, Cash like gave away one of their big. operations before they even filed the criminal complaints and or brought the indictments and lots of

people suspect the reason that cash did that out in Michigan and leaked it to like the press is because he was embroiled in his own scandal of using a $60 million taxpayer private jet which costs about $10,000 an hour and fuel costs to fly with his 26 year old girlfriend from an event that she was at at Penn State University, back to where she lived in Nashville. And now all of the public records about this private jet, which you can usually track on a private jet public tracker, because these aviation records are public, that's now gone private as well. So a lot to discuss Michael Pope. Let's bring you in right here in this episode of Legal A.F. Great to see you.

Donald Trump, of course, holding a great Gatsby-themed Halloween party. nobody ever died partying was the nobody ever died with a little bit of partying was the theme roaring 20s i guess donald trump doesn't realize what happened in 1929 it's it's beyond like it's beyond let them eat cake it's let them starve to death essentially right now but that's the country we live in i guess michael popach not the country we want to live in it's what we got to fight against yeah this is the marie antoinette moment you got donald trump who decides to spend, Huffington posted a good analysis of this, he has spent $60 million since the beginning of January on golf trips,

a taxpayer dollars, including $10 million to go to Scotland to promote one of his business ventures, including $6 million, the weekend when food stamps and government assistance for 42 million Americans, many of them in red states below the poverty line are threatened with starvation because they're going to lose $350 a month on average in SNAP payments. He has his Department of Justice and his Department of Agriculture fight against making payments starting today to Americans to prevent their starvation while he goes to Mar-a-Lago with people dressed as flappers and roaring 20s and cocktails, Think about this split screen if this was the Democrats that were doing this.

Playing golf, partying with this crass, you know, a line from Leonardo DiCaprio's movie about the Great Gatsby. A little party never killed anybody. People are dying because of the Trump administration. He's golfed. You've done a lot of great cover on this. He's golfed 30% of his days that the American people, people send him to do an honest day's work as the president of the United States, and he's out golfing and rubbing elbows with his billionaire buddies. And then while the government is

shut down, meaning that many Americans are suffering without the federal funds they're entitled to. 700,000 federal workers are furloughed. 700,000 federal workers are working without pay. he goes off and spends tens of millions of dollars to do a Asian swing and a second swing. He was just overseas for the Middle East in order to fix all of the damage that he's done where China takes advantage of him once again. He announces, oh, because it's a great deal.

It was an 11 on a scale of 1 to 10. Yeah, for the Chinese in terms of the deal that they were able to strike with Donald Trump, who everybody knows is vulnerable. So that is the backdrop as Donald Trump, not only during the shutdown, tears down the legacy of first ladies, which is the East Wing. No, no, that should come as no shock. We don't have a first lady. I defy anybody in Mago World, any troll that joins us tonight to tell me one thing that Melania Trump has done as a first lady for the American people.

Name one, this term, none. So she allows the tear down of the East Wing, which is dedicated to the first ladies. We now have, get this, marble and gold in the Lincoln bedroom. This is a Lincoln who lived in a log cabin now has a marble and gold ensconced bathroom with American taxpayer dollars after he's already cemented over the Rose Garden. It looks like a budget motel now, Motel 6, as he's building a golden, ballroom, jagoff room that he calls the ballroom in its place. While Americans are dying and suffering, does he think nobody is noticing this? The polls are in the trash. Every special election

since he got in has gone the Democrats way in terms of overperforming, and we're moving ever closer to the midterms. And this week, and I know people have heard me say this before, this week, is one of the most consequential landmark cases that's going to be heard by the United States Supreme Court about whether Donald Trump's presidency effectively lives or dies because it's about the tariffs. And if they tear down the tariffs, and you and I'll kick it around about whether we think they're going to,

and there's a number of ways they could, there goes a trillion dollars, there goes the linchpin of the entire Trump administration, and all that he's done is based on the tariffs, which are now in jeopardy. it's an interesting thing though right because if the supreme court rules against him that's actually better for the country and he will actually do better i think in terms of what the economy will look like if the supreme court rules against because his tariffs against the world are just a complete

and utter disaster i mean a complete catastrophe i mean inflation is surging he could pretend that it is and i mean things are not going well as a result of these the tariffs are who's going to ask the question, is it going to be Sotomayor? Is it going to be Kagan or Katanji Brown Jackson, who says, let's do this hypothetical to John Sauer. You know this is going to happen. Donald Trump wakes up and let's just say he gets angry at a country. Let's call it Canada because they run an ad that he doesn't like. He says that's a national emergency. Under the emergency tariff power statutes, are you saying that he does not need to go to Congress? What do you say about that, Mr. Sauer?

And then John Sauer with that sour voice, you know, and so what's he going to say there? But you know that question's coming, Michael Popak. Let's talk about that anymore. But first, why don't we start off by talking about what's going on in this Comey case and the Letitia James case and the consolidated motions on disqualifying Lindsay Halligan. Just a reminder, pull up the photos of Lindsay Halligan right here. She was Donald Trump's personal attorney.

She was an insurance lawyer, before that she was a beauty pageant contested, never a federal, all the way on the left right there, never was a federal prosecutor at all in her life. I'm not sure she's done a single trial in her life, yet alone a criminal case, but she's now the top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia because all of the other federal prosecutors there thought the case against Comey and Letitia James was utterly frivolous and they refused to sign their names. She's the only person who signed her name on the pleading. She's the only person who attended the grand jury. She was the only person in the room in the Comey and Letitia James grand juries. No one else, no judge, no defense lawyers, no prosecutors. So who the hell even knows what she even told the grand jury? Well, the federal judge likes to know what she told the grand jury.

And that grand jury testimony has been submitted to this federal judge. it's not the same judge who's going to be hearing the criminal cases because that could potentially be a conflict if you're ruling on disqualification. So the case of Comey and the case of James was referred on the disqualification issue of Lindsay Halligan to another judge. I'll toss it to you there because there's a lot of motions flying around, not just the disqualification of Halligan, which is about to be here, but lots of motions. Oh, yeah. We got a lot to talk. Like you said at the top of this podcast, it's going to be a busy this coming week and a busy.

November. We've got trials already about the National Guard issue that went on for three days in Oregon. We'll talk about that at some point. We got a trial that starts this week about Abrago Garcia and whether his indictment gets dismissed. And now we've got the motion practice that's being, you know, we've got the inevitable shutdown litigation that we'll talk about because of SNAP and other things. And then we've got all of the Letitia James and James Comey emotion practice, our audience now is going to learn more about the grand jury process than they ever thought they ever wanted to know. As we like to joke on legal AF, it's sort of a TED Talk meets a law school class and here, classes in session. Everybody wants to know what really went on

in that grand jury room when Lindsay Halligan by herself for the first time only hours after being made into a federal prosecutor. It was like a Halloween costume. They gave her a costume, and it was in a box that was marked federal prosecutor. She put it on with a mask, and she went in by herself to do it. Look, Karen Freeman, McNifalo,

who's with us on Legal A.F., who was a 30-year prosecutor in the Manhattan DA's office, we talked about this on midweek. And I said to her, is your first, when you're a prosecutor, a young prosecutor, is your first prosecution like the former FBI director of the United States or the attorney, general of a state. She said, no, it's like public urination or some other, you know, low-level

case that you learn with somebody next to you who teaches you. It's like brain surgery. This would be like you and me, Ben, we're reasonably intelligent, is scrubbing in to a surgical theater in order to do brain surgery because we did, we DIYed it on YouTube. I'm ready. Let's go. So she goes in to do this, to do this. Lord knows what she said or didn't say to, the grand jury and two different entities want to know more about it. James Comey filed a series of motions. We're now up to almost, I think we're up to five motions in the last week and a half for people that are tuning in tonight going, is this like a repeat? No, it's not a repeat. He did his motion to dismiss for vindictive prosecution. He has now brought a motion to dismiss the indictment

because it is incoherent. It is ambiguous and sloppy. Talk about that in a minute. But my favorite one is the motion to get the grand jury transcripts and all the documents around it, which is similar to what Judge Curry in South Carolina is asking for because she wants to know what went down in that grand jury room, too, as she decides whether Lindsay Halligan as a prosecutor lives or dies, because she's handling the motion to disqualify Lindsay Halligan, a consolidated motion brought by Letitia James and James Comey assigned to this Judge Curry for this sole, this sole discreet issue. She's demanded that by Monday, and I've been checking the docket, and there hasn't been an opposition by Donald Trump or an appeal taken. She's demanded Monday in South Carolina

on her desk in her chambers. All documents related to Lindsay Halligan and the grand jury, including the transcripts, get delivered to her office. She doesn't want to rely on media reports about what went down or who went in with her, who didn't go in with her. We think she was alone. I think Meg Cleary might have been with her on one of these. She subsequently got fired. She was a young prosecutor anyway, but she wants to know. And what was said, the Comey motion takes it one further, because they argue, and the reason for our audience, the reason the party, even though they're indicted, don't have an automatic

right to the grand jury transcripts at the moment, is because we still find grand jury proceedings to be sacrosanct, and they're shrouded in secrecy. Judges can see things in camera, meaning away from the prying eyes of the public and the press, and that kind of thing. But they want the transcripts because their theory is the following. She, an inexperienced prosecutor, who screwed up royally procedurally in even obtaining the indictment,

she signed two different indictments. Only one could be real. She signed two true bills of true bill of indictments, one having three counts, one having two counts. How did that happen? Why did it go to seven o'clock at night? What was told to the grand jury were they held effectively hostage by Lindsay Halligan, who after she couldn't get them to return an indictment on the main charge, she then basically kept them hostage until they returned an indictment. And she barely got the indictment with 14 votes. So they want to know

what was said, what was done, how they were pressured. And then there's a a very interesting thing towards the end of the motion that I had never heard before. It has to do with the attorney-client privilege of James Comey. And their argument that the sole witness, apparently that went on in the Comey case for the indictment, was an FBI agent who also had interviewed Professor Daniel Richmond. Why is he important? Because the government has revealed that he's the person number, whatever, in the indictment about being the potential leaker to the press on behalf of James Comey.

Now, it shows you how convoluted that indictment is. Professor Richmond, who now is at Columbia, used to be an assistant U.S. attorney under James Comey in New York, and then became a special employee for the FBI consulting for the director, which was Comey at the time, was used, and it's admitted to leak certain memos to the New York Times when Comey got fired for not stopping investigations and Donald Trump's friends like Michael Flynn and the like. And he wanted to get it out, his story out. And Comey's very public.

He's written about it. He's talked about it. He said, I did it because I wanted there to be evidence in the public record to support a special prosecutor being appointed to go after Donald Trump for what he did and what he said to me. So that has already been admitted. But that's not the premise of the indictment. The premise of the indictment is a leak to the Washington Post about Clinton, about Hillary Clinton.

And I'll talk about that in the second motion. So the grand jury, the question is, what was the grand jury told and did the FBI agent who interviewed Richmond, who had an attorney-client relationship with Comey, did he reveal attorney-client? privilege information in violation of Comey's rights to the grand jury. Very interesting. We're going to be hearing a lot more about Daniel Richmond. So that's the grand jury one. Again, separate from Judge Curry demanding the grand jury information in order for her to decide. Not only, she doesn't, Curry doesn't need it to decide whether under 546, the vacancy reform act, whether Lindsay Halligan was properly appointed or not, because that's just the facts are undisputed. You know, there was a U.S. attorney who resigned when Donald Trump was inaugurated.

There was a second, there was a new acting interim U.S. attorney, Eric Seabert, who was a Republican. Donald Trump didn't like him, even though he was put in the position because he wouldn't prosecute Lindsay Halligan, wouldn't prosecute Letitia James or James Comey. fired. Now it goes to the judges of the district to pick the new one, but they didn't do that. They picked Lindsay Halligan. So that's, that factual record is undisputed. And then you just look at the statute in the legislative history and you go, yeah, she can't be it. But to go further for the grand jury, see, now I think the judge is trying to get to the bottom of the remedy, which is if I find that this happened, is this indictment, does this indictment have to be

dismissed because of her role as an illegal prosecutor prosecuting the case and, you know, other charges against Lindsay Halligan that breach ethics. So you got all that going on. And the other motions that Comey brought had to do with how sloppy the indictment is. And fundamentally, that we've talked about this at length on legal AF and might as touch, his entire indictment is about a Q&A between Cruz and Comey, Comey sitting in his home during COVID, about whether three years earlier when Comey testified in a separate hearing to Chuck Grassley about who was the leaker, whether he was the leaker, whether he was the leaker, whether he stood by

that testimony or not. And their argument is he could, that cannot create perjury because first of all, the question is unclear. It, it wraps in an earlier testimony three years earlier and he mangles it. Cruz can't ask a proper question. He mangles Clinton administration and Clinton Clinton investigation. It gets it all wrong. And then all Comey says is, I stand by my earlier testimony. That in and of itself cannot be perjurious because it has to be true. He stands by his earlier testimony. That's not a new perjury. So they've got this whole thing. And look, this is going to go fast. When you said, we got a lot to do in November. this case is set for trial and will go to trial or so the first week in January.

This Judge Curry's got to make the ruling about whether Halligan lives or dies, like soon, like in the month of November. Judge Nakmanoff, who's presiding over Comey, he's got to make the decision on all these motions, really quick, like November about the case. And then, and we haven't even touched on, but, you know, I'll turn it back to you, Letitia James, who has parallel motions because she's going to trial in the end of of January. What's interesting is that normally the grand jury testimony is not made available

to the defense until such time as the witness who testifies before the grand jury, who testified before the grand jury is called during the actual trial itself, and then the defense makes a motion. We want to see the transcript so that you're able to cross-examine that witness. That's usually the first time when it's made available. What's interesting here is that what took place at this grand jury is so suspicious. It's so odd that the grand jury testimony itself is becoming a prominent part of the pre-trial proceedings. And I mean, what if Lindsay Halligan never even actually secured a real indictment, you know, on what the actual charges are?

Who even knows, because it's such an odd situation that the initial indictment was rejected by the grand jury. But then there was another one where the grand jury agreed to it. Like, what did Lindsay Halligan tell these people? Because we know what Andy McCabe has said before, that he was never authorized by Comey. McCabe says, I didn't need to be authorized. I was the deputy. I could do it on my own. What did Richmond?

You know, we know what Richmond has said. during the inspector general's investigation, that he was never authorized, that Comey never told him to do it. Those two people, McCabe and Richmond, never went before the grand jury. Like, how do you do a case where there could only be two people and neither of those people go before the grand jury? So you've relied on an FBI agent, what, to recount Donald Trump's version of events? I mean, when this judge, this is what we said from day one. I said, I just think that Halligan either found an FBI agent who had no clue what was going on in this case and just basically would do, you know, wanted a promotion in the Trump regime and said

whatever, or Lindsay Halligan just made up the facts because we know what the facts are. There's a reason why everybody rejected all the federal prosecutors said there's no case here at all for hundreds and hundreds of reasons. But the two main witnesses don't support what the Trump regime claims they've said. Just think about it if this were to go to a trial. Lindsay Halligan are going to call McCabe? We've had McCabe on the Midas Touch Network multiple times. We know what he's going to say.

I played for you what he's going to say. He's going to say I was never authorized at all. I did it on my own. That's what he says. You're going to do Richmond, who was, who was the, like, Comey's lawyer? Like, you think. Who's already admitted that he spoke to the New York Times? Like, you think that's a helpful witness?

So who, who's your case? And yes, in the grand jury, the FBI agent can testify to the hearsay, but not at the trial. At the trial, you're going to have to call one of these two people. And then what Trump's going to say is, well, liberal judge, well, you know, the court system hates me. No, you're just a loser. You're just a freaking fascist. You hate our legal system. And this is why you and I, Popat, got involved in legal AF in doing this, not because I'm like

a political person, but I'm just sharing with the facts. It's just idiotic what's going on here. I don't care what side of the. political aisle you're on. This is a dumb, frivolous case that sets dangerous, dangerous standards for how people can get prosecuted. This is what exists in freaking Putin's world. Anyway, we got a lot to discuss. We got a lot to, and these lawyers need to be accountable. Like, after this is done, Halligan should lose her legal license, in my opinion. Like, this is not okay behavior. This is not why I went to Georgetown Law School, why you went to Duke. It's not

why I've gotten into this profession. Pisses me off. Anyway, let's take our first quick break of the show. A reminder, Michael Popock started his own law firm. Check it out. It's called the Popock firm. Go to the Popokfirm.com or call 877 Popok AF. If you've been in a car accident, if you've been in a trucking accident, if you've been the victim of somebody else's negligence, if you know someone who's the victim of wrongful death or the victim of somebody else's negligence, sexual assault, sexual abuse cases. If you think you have a case, call the Popok firm, see if you've got a case. They have lawyers across the country. They're representing lots of legal AF listeners and viewers. So make sure you give a

call. Also, go check out Michael Popock's substack, the legal AF subsstack, and subscribe to the legal AF YouTube channel. That's on its way to 1 million subscribers. I really want that legal AF YouTube to hit 1 million. All right. We just crossed 900,000 this weekend. Right there. All right. First quick break of the show, we'll be right back. Let's talk about SCOTUS. You know that feeling when your morning coffee is supposed to kickstart your day, but instead your stomach's grumbling, your focus isn't sharp. And by 10 a.m., you're already craving a nap. It's frustrating because the ritual matters.

But sometimes traditional coffee just doesn't play nice with your body or your brain. And for anyone juggling a busy, chaotic lifestyle, or trying to level up, focus, and energy, this is a common struggle. You don't have hours to research ingredients, experiment with supplements, or mix up different powders just to get a clean, productive boost. So, that's where everyday dose comes in. It's coffee plus benefits, coffee with mushrooms, collagen, and neutropics that fuel your brain, support focus, and provide clean, sustained energy all day long. It tastes just like coffee, but without the crash, the jitters, or stomach issues, with ingredients like lions, mane, jaga, and collagen protein. It's a simple ritual that supports your gut, brain, and overall wellness without adding any extra time. to your morning. Right now, you can get 45% off your first subscription order of 30 servings of

coffee plus. You'll also receive a starter kit with over $100 in free gifts by going to EverydayDose.com or entering legal a.f at checkout. That's Everydaydose.com slash legal a.f or 45% off your first order. Ever wake up sweaty, freezing, or just plain uncomfortable? The temperature in your bedroom can make or break your sleep. That's why I switch to miracle-made sheets. They're inspired by NASA technology and use silver-infused temperature-regulating fabric to help you sleep perfectly all night long. With Miracle Made, you'll sleep at the perfect temperature. Whether you run hot or cold, these sheets keep you in the comfort zone from the moment you crawl in to the moment you wake up. And here's what I love. They stay cleaner longer,

Thanks to their anti-bacterial, silver technology miracle-made sheets, stay fresh up to three times longer than regular sheets, meaning fewer odors, fewer wash cycles, and way less laundry. They're luxuriously comfortable, too, smooth, breathable, and soft, like what you'd find in a five-star hotel, but without the luxury price tag. So upgrade your sleep or give the gift of better rest. Go to try miracle.com slash legal a.F. to try MiracleMate Cheats today, you'll save over 40%.

And when you use promo code LegalAF, you'll get an extra 20% off, plus a free three-piece towel set. They make an amazing gift. And with a 30-day money-back guarantee, there's no risk. That's try Miracle.com slash LegalAF, code LegalAF at checkout. Thanks to Miracle Made for sponsoring this episode. Welcome back to LegalAF. Michael Popak, a lot of activity with the Supreme Court.

There's the tariff case that's going before the United States Supreme Court this week. Trump's tariffs against the world. You'll recall that the lower federal trade court, because that's who has exclusive jurisdiction over these tariffs, especially tariffs against the world, ruled against Donald Trump. But that was stayed until it went to the Court of Appeals over these trade issues. The Court of Appeals ruled against Donald Trump as well. And then it went to the United States Supreme Court. I think this process moved way too slowly because Trump's disastrous tariffs, frankly, even if the Supreme Court strikes it down, has done its damage. It's created the painful uncertainty in communities.

It's caused inflation to surge. And I think it just goes to show you that there's a lot of issues and problems in our legal system that something like this could take so long before it could be ruled on that you could engage in such blatant and lawful behavior for all these months. almost a year. And then the Supreme Court's like, oh, we'll take our time on that. But, you know, when it comes to some of these other issues, we're going to stop what the district court's doing and just inflict all of the suffering on the American people. But we don't know what this right-wing Supreme Court's going to do. You know, you would expect this right-wing Supreme Court based on following the law and also what previous right-wing views were on tariffs generally in free trade to strike these tariffs down. But, you know, who knows? They're all kind of co-operative.

opted by MAGA. But then also, Popak, we saw the United States Supreme Court make an interesting ruling requesting additional information on the National Guard invasions of blue states and blue cities. They didn't take any action other than to say, we want more briefing on this issue that really wasn't discussed in prior analysis. So Popak, why don't you take it from there, big week in the Supreme Court? Absolutely. And we'll be live streaming on legal A.F. the November 5th tariff argument. We're going to know right away. Let's start with tariffs.

Then I'll go back to the National Guard and things that are going on there. We're going to know pretty quickly from this United States Supreme Court and the MAGA 6, whether Donald Trump's on-life support tariffs or not, having already been rejected by an en banc full panel of the Federal Circuit appellate court and the Court of International Trade, we're going to know pretty quickly. which way they're going. I'll tell you which way they should go. And I'm talking about the alt-right of the Supreme Court. They should quickly go to a finding about what's called the major questions doctrine, which was a made-up doctrine in the Roberts Court a number of years ago, in order for the Supreme Court to find a way to reject overreach, what they see is overreach by an executive applying certain statutory provisions in a way that they think, no, we got to get

clear direction from Congress on that one. So no, Joe Biden, you can't use the small business administration or the educational statutes to forgive student loans because we think that's going too far and we need a clear direction, clear message from the Congress, because that's a major question that they should actually pass a law about, not just you interpreting a statute. All right, We were like, we don't agree with that, but we sort of understood it. Well, now you got Donald Trump, the entire foundation for his 138 or whatever it is, tariffs against countries, reciprocal tariffs, okay, is not, is based on one statute. There's other ways that a president can impose tariffs, but you have to go through the steps,

including involving Congress in them. But if you're going to use the international economic emergency powers out, IEPA, then there has to be an emergency, and you have to use that economic power in that emergency that Congress has given you. Nowhere in IEPA, as pointed out eloquently by the Federal Circuit in their decision, is there the word tariff that president gets to tariff? Let me give an example. You mentioned the trolling by Ontario of the Reagan speech from 1987.

Let me contrast that with what Donald Trump did. In 87, Trump, sorry, Reagan, who was a free trader, was not in favor of tariffs. In fact, no president, back to the 1930s is in favor of high tariffs. The last time we did that, we were in the Depression, or we led into the Depression. Reagan Free Trader, he gives a speech because in 1987, there was an emergency. The American chip manufacturing industry led at the time. by Intel, was under attack by Japan, who had cheap chips, cheap computer chips, that they were dumping onto the American market, threatening to put American chip makers out of business.

You know, history is prologue, right? Now we have Navidia, Intel is on the balls of its ass, but I think we own 15% of Intel now under Donald Trump. But then they were worried about that. So IEPA and things like it allowed under that emergency. not and time being of the essence didn't require a president to go back to Congress and try to lobby and get the votes oh my God we got to pay back Japan this is happening now in real time I'm going to do a effectively a temporary sanction or tariff in order to protect the American chip

industry and that was upheld because that was an emergency it was a one-off and Reagan was a free trader who didn't really want to do it and gave that now famous speech in which he said it's unpatriotic to tariff and destroy global trade, which Donald Trump hates. Fast forward, Donald Trump and the Rose Garden or whatever's left of it now in April, when he announces 138 reciprocal tariffs because there's been a 10-year creeping emergency called the trade deficit. Like what? Howard Lutnik, Commerce Secretary, come up here with the big board, Howard. Show us all the tariffs. And you and I did a lot of videos about those tariffs and the math behind those tariffs.

But fundamentally, that's an Article 1 power. I know we think that the MAGA 6th in the Supreme Court, in their pocket versions of the Constitution, there's only Article 2 and the Second Amendment. Everything else has been cut out, apparently. But there is Article 1 with Congress, and Congress's powers vis-a-vis the rest of the co-equal branches of government. They get the tariff power, not a president under a false emergency. So there's a number of things that are up for grabs here.

Donald Trump once again calling an emergency, whether he calls it an emergency, a war, a rebellion, an insurrection. These are all the ways that they drummed up in Project 2025 to give Donald Trump quickly superpowers and turbocharge the executive branch. And it's taking federal courts every ounce of their being, every fiber of their being in their case law, to find ways to rein in and overgrown out-of-control president who's moving the country towards tyranny because of this false use of emergencies.

Now the Supreme Court's going to have to answer the question. Is a trade imbalance that's 15 years in the making an emergency under AEPA? And even if it was, how does he get to do tariffs like he's Congress? Why isn't that a major question that has to be resolved by Congress? like, we're okay with the president doing that, but here's a new statute that allows it.

Like, that would be the major question. Now, if they're silent, if the MAGA 6 is silent about major questions, like Amy Coney-Barrant or Roberts or somebody, then the goose is cooked, then the cake is baked. Because that should be applied in this case. They should also be troubled by the emergency declaration, and they should be troubled by the use of the tariffs under this scenario. and you've got an interesting combination of people. Chambers of Commerce, states like California,

and lots of other public interest groups have filed briefs telling the court, do not cede this territory. Don't give this superpower to a president like that. It's wrong, it's false. The Wall Street Journal came out with an editorial board article that you and I covered last week, which said, here's an example of why you don't want to have tariff power. Look what he did in Canada,

and when he got trolled by an ad by Doug Ford of Ontario. Look what he did, I mean, leading in to November 5 next week, you've got the Senate, including the Republicans, who got together and said, no, you can't tariff Brazil 50% because you don't like what the Trump of the Amazon, you don't like the fact that he's going to jail for a long time for leading his Jan 6th's insurrection. No, and they reversed him, signaling to the Supreme Court,

that even the MAGA Senate thinks that this power is not a power. Now, here's the one missing piece, Ben. And then we can turn it back to you for the tariffs before we go to National Guard, which also is important as well. The brief that's missing, no surprise, is the brief from Congress. See, in cases where you're talking about the separation of powers, and you're talking about the co-equal branches, And one branch is getting shit on by the other branch, that branch generally files a brief.

They get together with their lawyers and they go, it's our power. He doesn't have the power. We have the power. It's Article 1 versus Article 2. It's major question. But on that issue, it's deafening silence because Donald Trump has them so wrapped around his finger. They're not even doormats. That's giving a bad name of doormats.

Dormats, at least you acknowledge. Donald Trump doesn't even acknowledge the existence of the MAGA Mike Johnson-led Congress at all. And so there's no brief from them. So it looks like it's only the executive branch led by the Solicitor General Donald Trump's former federal criminal appeals lawyer, John Sauer, arguing for the executive branch. Where is the other? That's where the amicus briefs all come in. So we're going to know, like, in the first 15 minutes based on who's going to do the opening question and the follow. up, whether tariffs are going to be upheld or not.

Now, the Trump administration is crying, as you like to do, the whining their way through this with, you know, Scott Besant, the Treasury Secretary, and, oh, it's trillions of dollars in America's entire Donald Trump's entire economic policy is based on the tariffs. If it's based on a lie and an improper use of invalid unconstitutional power, it doesn't matter what the benefit is. It doesn't matter.

The ends don't justify the means if the means are illegal. And so this is a big one. I mean, I can't tell you how many times you and I have started off something about the Supreme Court saying in a landmark oral argument about voting rights or about, yes, everything with Donald Trump, we're lurching from one constitutional crisis to another, which would come as no surprise because people elected, you know, there's a majority of people who set the felon with immunity back to the White House. I think you rounded out the tariff against the world analysis, right. We're going to, as you said, live stream it on the legal AF YouTube channel. It's why everyone needs to subscribe there. But an interesting filing, posting, if you will, by the Supreme Court asking for additional clarification on the definition of regular forces and what that means in the context of Trump's

invasion with the National Guard into these blue states and blue cities. So Popak, talk to us, if you can, you know, there is this, you know, underlying statute that we've analyzed before that delineates where the president can potentially invoke the use of the National Guard, you know, and there's like issues of rebellion, and there's if the national, if other means can't be achieved and it's your last possible option that exists with the consent of the governor. None of those ever seem to meet to meet what's going on here where they're, you know, in Portland, Oregon, you've had, you know, people dressed up as frogs and, you know, dancing around.

And, I mean, look, occasionally does it get a little rowdy a little bit in the one half a block by the ice facility? Sure, but it's not a rebellion. I mean, there's people protesting. It doesn't even extend out beyond a half a block. You go to Chicago, there was the Broadview facility, again, kind of a block area where there are peaceful protests, but it's mostly the ICE agents there who would provoke the people versus the opposite way around. And then one of the things we've seen, you know, the MO, if you will, of the Trump regime is have ICE attack the communities,

gas the communities, engage in these horrific violent, bump into people, crash your cars into people, make it public and violent and messy, use chemical weapons, and then try to capture these scenes that look like they're very chaotic, but the chaos is being caused by the Trump regime. And they go, look, you see, this looks like a war zone. We've got our cameras filming it.

Let's bring in the National Guard. So what's going on there, Popeye? Yeah, and it's very interesting trying to divine from an order of the United States Supreme Court as we were waiting for an order from them. They instead issued another order that they need new briefing. I'm not sure that new briefing request, once I'm done explaining it here, is helpful to Donald Trump. I think it actually spells trouble for Donald Trump's position, and I'll explain why in a minute. You and I have covered at length the ongoing National Guard issue, which at bottom, when we use that as short,

And here, as our audience knows, refers to Donald Trump's commandeering takeover of state militia, which we call the National Guard, state guard, in order to federalize them, put them under federal command, sometimes with federal officers and troops, sometimes with the military, to go after blue states and blue cities, but not red states and red cities. In order to embarrass democratic mayors and governors. There's no other way to put it. There's no justification to go into L.A. or San Francisco or Portland or D.C. or the threats against in Chicago or the threats against Philadelphia, if they were led by red governors and red and red mayors, we wouldn't even be having this show. I mean, the segment of the show. We'd have the show. We wouldn't have the segment of the show.

But this was part of Donald Trump's toolbox to troll and undermine the Democratic brand, go after the icons of the Democratic Party, try to reduce to rubble the Democrats, and have one-party rule, like any good dictator. That's who we're watching. Whether you want to call it a slow-motion military coup, but all the factors are there. If a real, if a dictator who as a historic dictator came back or was present with a checklist, they saw everything that Donald Trump was doing with the attack on the press, the attack on First Amendment speech, the firing of generals and admirals, the getting rid of the press, the press's

ability to cover the government, the use of the military against the civilian population, they'd be like, check, check, check, that checks all the wrong boxes. But the National Guard's important. And various judges and appellate courts around the country are struggling with using the available constitution and law, the book, some of which is on the books since the late 1700s, and 1800s, to rain in and overgrown out-of-control president. So we see it in the Ninth Circuit, which sits over Oregon and California. We see it with Judge Imrigat, who held a trial this week with testimony, live testimony, about federal officers effectively firing weapons and riot munitions at local law enforcement.

We see it with the Seventh Circuit and judges there, two judges there. in Chicago about whether the National Guard is appropriate there and all at bottom now at the doorstep of the Supreme Court is this this this statute we call 10 USC 12406 which only gives the which has to be read in conjunction with some other statutes that all came out the same time the Interaction Act 12406 the posse conventatus act they all kind of get read together and the 12406 one which is basically an exception to the posse conventatus statute which says you can't use the U.S. military against civilians for domestic law enforcement, 12406 says under three circumstances, one of three circumstances, the president, if he needs

back up in the form of National Guard, state guard, state militia, independent from the regular forces of the military, he can tap them, but there has to be one of three scenarios present. First one, take it off the board because everybody admits that that's not present, which is we've been invaded by a foreign country. Okay, take that off. Second one is there's a rebellion with a big R. Who gets to declare that? There's a whole fight over whether Trump gets to declare it.

What is a rebellion? What is an insurrection? So it really is the third one. The third one is that the president using his regular forces, not defined there, can't execute on federal law. can't execute the laws of the United States. And the question is, what does regular forces mean? There's two versions. There's two scenarios.

Regular forces is either, based on, if you go back to the Militia Act of 1795, and you go back to history and how that phrase has been used related to the Department of Defense, regular forces generally means the regular United States armed forces. The Marines, the Navy, the Air Force, you know, the, I'm sure I left, the Navy, the Coast Guard, the Space Force. That's regular forces. There's another argument that regular forces mean local law enforcement, in addition to that. And then only if you, if after sending in the regular forces and law enforcement, you still can't execute federal law. In this case, you still can't capture, process, detain, and remove people for your immigration policy,

which is what we're talking about, because there's a couple of people protesting in front of an ice facility. And you still need backup, then you can commandeer and take over the National Guard. And the Seventh Circuit has said, yeah, we don't see how you're able to take over the National Guard under this scenario. the Ninth Circuit, one panel of the Ninth Circuit said, you can in Portland, but then the Ninth Circuit, 29 judges of the Ninth Circuit got together, and a majority of them said, yeah, we don't like that decision. We're throwing that decision out. We're doing it all over again on bunk with an 11-page, 11-judge panel,

and we'll get back to you sometime later this month. That's all going on in Chicago and in the California and Oregon. and now the Supreme Court has an emergency appeal in front of it from Illinois. And we've been waiting around. You and I are like, when, every time I do a hot take, a video about the National Guard, I'm thinking it's going to go stale. As soon as they issue what we thought was going to be some sort of ruling and then dissents and concurrences from the judges about either supporting Trump and the National Guard or not.

But that's not what they did after 10 days. They issued a new order requiring more briefing through the month of note. November on one issue. They just want a 15-page letter brief. That's all they want. What does regular forces mean? I think that spells trouble for the Trump administration, because if they come out with, based on history, that the regular forces are the armed forces, plus or minus the law enforcement, Donald Trump never called in the armed forces to try to protect his ability to execute federal law before he commandeered the National Guard. That's why you see Donald Trump in the last 48 hours on social media saying, if they want me to call out more heavy artillery in the army, I'll do it. That's why, because he's worried about that they'll find that the prerequisite for commandeering the state militia is not present because he didn't first try.

Now, I don't love that scenario, by the way. We're going to roll out the army and the tanks to protect before. or we get to the commandeering of the National Guard. But I am a state's rights person. I am a supporter, as I think most people on our podcast are, of the sovereign power of the states. Would it take troops off the ground? No, we put new federal troops on the ground.

But we're going to have to come to some understanding through, unfortunately, the Supreme Court about what and how all of these things, the Insurrection Act, the Posse Comitatis Act, this commandeering of state militia act, how they all come together. That's what's at stake with this new briefing, and it will be imprinted on our democracy moving forward after a president not named Donald Trump is in office in 2028. It's interesting, too, if you think about the Second Amendment in the context of militias versus forces and a distinction that could be made there.

and I wonder if the Supreme Court is trying to protect its Second Amendment jurisprudence. You know, because the Second Amendment says a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. I suppose if Donald Trump is viewing regular forces now as a well-regulated militia, it kind of undercuts their view as they kind of. of read out militia from the kind of underlying, you know, so I wonder if they're worried. So now if a well-regulated militia and you're saying it's armed forces, then it's clear that the Second Amendment must absolutely mean that we're talking about the army only and not

people as well. And so I wonder if that's a consideration. But right now, the way the Supreme courts making their haphazard rulings and their granting of absolute immunity when the very origin of our constitution was a reaction against absolute immunity and the king, who knows what they're going to do. I mean, on that point, on that point, I mean, James Madison in one of the Federalist papers, who has been quoted a number of times by federal judges struggling to rein in Donald Trump, and I'm going to paraphrase it, said a version of the combination of an overgrown president with him controlling a standing army on U.S. soil is a ticket to tyranny. And that's what, you know, I always, this, the thing that chaps my backside is just,

it just pisses me off is when Roberts, when he's interviewed, you know, after the term is over or whatever, sits in this hermetically sealed ivory tower of the Supreme Court and just says, I don't know why everybody's mad at me. just reading the Constitution the way, well, we all know that's false. I mean, there's new books written by our own contributors on Legal I.F. like Lisa Graves, about the false prophet of John Roberts and the Trojan horse that he created to try to tear down the American political system as Chief Justice. But in particular, the fact that they don't recognize the tyrannical instincts of a president like Donald Trump

having been turbocharged by their own immunity decision and don't recognize the threat that somebody like that poses. I mean, if our founding fathers or framers were brought back here to watch what was happening, they'd be shocked by the fact that the guardrails that they installed against this type of thing happening have failed so miserably because of the Supreme Court to rein in and out-of-control president.

I do believe they'd be shocked or they would have thought, yeah, you know, that thing we debated, we need it, we should have added that one more part in the Constitution because look what's happening in 2025. And it just calls me that they don't see the threat to liberty and democracy the way that our audience does,

the way that might as touch a legal act. The whole point of our Constitution is no kings. like if you really were to boil it down what did we do no kings why we didn't like the king of England that's why the whole thing is based on that you and I would have British accents doing this show if we just ate so when you go

yes kings absolute immunity it's like okay then everything else you're saying so stupid because that's the most basic a concept I don't have to be a scholar to go back and go what was the purpose of the founding of this country like like hello all right let's take our last quick break of the show, a reminder to everybody that Michael Popak started his own law firm. It's called

the Popok firm representing a lot of our listeners and viewers who have cases. Go to the Popok firm.com or call 877 Popak AF. The consultation is free. If you've been injured in an auto accident, trucking accident, the negligence of somebody else has injured you, sexual assault cases, sexual harassment cases, employment cases, discrimination cases, medical malpractice cases. Give the Popok firm a call 87 Popak AF. Go to the Popak firm.com. Again, consultation is free they have lawyers throughout the country don't be shy give a call and if you have a friend or anybody you know who may have a case have them called the popock firm also go check out popock's youtube channel legal a f it's almost on its way to a million subscribers 100 000 to

go and they hit one million i'd love for them to hit a million before thanksgiving big push there and also subscribe to michael popock substack the legal a have substack all right last quick break of the show home stretch we'll be right back for those who enjoy social but aren't always in the mood to drink. Sol's out-of-office gummies provide a perfect alternative. They deliver a light, happy buzz without the hangover, sugar, or next morning sluggishness. Soul is a wellness brand that believes feeling good

should be fun and easy. They specialize in delicious hemp-derived, THC, and CBD products designed to boost mood and promote relaxation. Their best-selling out-of-office gummies were created to provide a mild, relaxing buzz while enhancing creativity and calm. With five different strengths from a gentle 1.5 milligram microdose to the newest 15 milligram gummy, these products can be tailored to fit any desired experience.

For those seeking a refreshing alcohol-free option, Seoul also offers the out-of-office beverage, ideal for unwinding or socializing with friends. In addition, Soul provides a variety of products to support restful sleep, including their top-selling sleepy gummies for deep restorative rest. All of Seoul's products are made from organically farmed, USA-grown hemp, and are vegan, gluten-free, low-in-sugar, and federally legal.

Bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to Soul today. Right now, Soul is offering my audience 30% off your entire order. Go to get-souled.com and use the code legal AF. That's get-soul.com. promo code legal A.F for 30% off. Look at me, I've been shaven for years, and for just as long, I've been frustrated with overpriced blades that dole too fast

and leave my neck irritated. I was spending like 30 bucks for eight refills. Total scam. That's why I switched to Harry's Plus, and I'll be honest, I was blown away. The first time I shaved around my beard with Harry's Plus, I could feel the difference immediately. It's got this advanced pivoting system

that actually reaches every corner of your face. German engineer blades honed at three different angles and a weighted metal handle. The heaviest Harry's has ever made for real control and comfort. You get that

barbershop quality shave without the barbershop price. And because Harry's owns their own blade factory in Germany, there's no middleman. So they keep costs low while giving you their most advanced razor ever. And for a limited time, our listeners

can get the Harry's Plus trial set for only $10 at harries.com slash legal a.F. You'll get the all-new Harry's Plus razor, one refined five-blade cartridge, a two-ounce foaming shave gel, and a travel cover to protect your blades on the go. Just head to harries.com slash legal a.f to claim this offer. And after you purchase, they'll ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that we sent you. This Trump regime, they're obsessed with private jets, Michael Popock. We had Christy Knoem buying Gulfstream, whatever, exotic private jets so that she and

Corey Lewandowski can travel the country, not one, but two Gulfstream private jets for their own travel. Then we learned that Cash Patel has been using a private jet that costs $60 million to apparently pick up his 26-year-old girlfriend. She was either performing or singing at Penn State at some. wrestling federate is like not it's called a real american freestyle wrestling excuse my ignorance if i have no clue what that is but she was attending that event and he picked her up there and then he brought her back to where she lives in tennessee this guy kyle seraphin a former fbi agent turned podcaster who's got beef with patel and all that he posted about it and then you had

Alexis Wilkins called him a grifter, and then he's like, why do you have FBI security detail? Like, you're not even the wipe of an FBI agent. Like, what the hell is going on there? And I think it's not the first time that Patel has brought her to events also. I think in April, it was hockey games and who even knows what else this regime is doing. But this became a pretty big public scandal. And what Cash Patel do to try to, I guess, create a wag the dog. kind of moment. He got ahead of an FBI investigation. FBI was investigating people for a potential Halloween attack. They were on message boards. People were talking about in these like 4-chan type chats engaging in an attack in Michigan. I think the FBI was unclear at what stage.

They had informants there, but they were, I think, unclear what stage this planning was really at? Were these just young people in cell type people being crazy? Or were these people who are actually going to act on it? And, you know, Cash Patel got access to the intelligence. And apparently he, like, leaked it to the press. And then he's like, look, we're stopped. We stopped him. We've identified them. And the FBI is like, dude, we haven't even filed the criminal complaint. Like, you've just destroyed our investigation. And actually, the Kyle Serafin guy, who I mentioned who's been in the beef with Patel, who exposed the flight that Patel was on. He predicted, he goes, expect any day now, we're going to hear about a major bust from Cash Patel.

And sure enough, boom, we get that story. You know, and rank and file FBI at this point, they're just livid with Patel, the ones who are still, you know, there. The tough thing with these FBI agents is they really kind of have a career plan mapped out in their minds about their pension, how many years before they retire. It's not like in the DOJ where you work inside the DOJ, then you work at a private law firm and make high six figures or seven figures when you leave. Your FBI career is kind of your FBI career.

You try to retire 20 plus years in once you've basically vested, you get your pension, and then maybe you do consulting work kind of after that. But like, it's hard for these FBI agents to leave, but they also know they're really under attack by an FBI director who hates the FBI. You know, it's just interesting connecting it to our first segment as well because James Comey was a, it was an FBI director, right? Like, he was the director of the FBI who's now under a criminal prosecution for how

he testified accurately before the Senate. And so if you look at as an FBI agent, they're like, they're going after the FBI director. Where do I stand in all of this? So Popak, let's talk about this cash product. To me, we've talked about these high. high-profile cases and, you know, and, you know, Cash Patel, a high-profile person, unfortunately right now after his years of grift and the K-A dollar sign H merch that he would sell, all the stupid shit. But there are so many cases, drug cases, gang cases,

sex trafficking cases that our FBI is no longer able to pursue that just we don't, no one will know about these cases ever. But there was. were so many bad guys and terrible people and traffickers who are able now to run free, basically, because of the chaos that's being created. So that's why I think we finished with this segment. Yeah. One of the things that's kept us safe, one of the major things that's kept us safe, that has been destroyed like a wrecking ball, the way the East Wing was destroyed by Trump is the foundation

of our national security. FBI, CIA, the national intelligence community have all been hollowed out, defunded, fired, reassigned, forced in retirement, both at the DOJ side, at the FBI side,

at the CIA side, at the National Security Council side. I'm talking thousands and thousands of career, people whose hands were on our controls and eyes were focused on keeping America safe are no longer in government. Does anyone feel safer now? We're talking about terrorist plots in American soil, both domestic and foreign, cyber hacking

of our infrastructure and of our financial services, electrical grid, financial services backbone and the rest, does anybody feel more secure at night, knowing that we have Cash Patel pulling his Bill Belichick by taking a 26-year-old who go to a college event on our company dime, smiling and posing for photos instead of focused on the national security of everyday Americans? Does anybody think that Cash Patel is focused on his job? job while he's chasing women on our taxpayer dime. I mean, look, I know these are guys that never got, you know what, in college or high school or whatever. I get it. And now they've got a little bit of power. Powers an aphrodisi act. And using my taxpayer dollars, along with

our audiences, they're going out and romancing women. Okay, it's disgusting. But I see it for what it is. But there's a reason that Cash Patel has one foot, as my late mother would say, one foot in a grave and the other foot on a banana peel. And that's why the reporting is that Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche want to get rid of Cash Patel because he is the weak link among an entire chain of weak links between the Department of Justice and the FBI. Cash Patel is the weakest of links because he does stupid shit because he's not focused on his job because he's mentally impaired and unqualified to be the FBI director. He announces indictments before they happen.

He uses announcements in order to cover up scandals. And like you said, what is it with transportation and the people in the mega world? You got Nancy Mace. who starts live social media posting because TSA wasn't waiting for her as a one of 537 members of Congress show up at the airport that there's no one there to greet her BMW

and she's lashing out at officers and TSA loudly about the fact that she, Nancy Mace, should not be treated like this as a member of the House Where was she when LaMonica McGuiver and other elected officials were being arrested and thrown to the ground like Senator Padilla of California during their attempts to provide oversight about ICE detention facilities? Is that a way to treat a member of Congress? The fact that you didn't have somebody waiting curbside for you, for you and your luggage to whisk you through TSA, that's a problem? Why do we have to spend $60, $70 million of American taxpayer dollars on Gulfstream G5s so that Christine Nome and her boyfriend or whoever he is, Corey Lindowski, can travel in style

on private jets? Okay? And why do we have to talk about Cash Patel romancing his underage, well, she's not underage, she's younger than him, a girlfriend taking her to events instead of focused on the American people? there is just this lack of focus on this is what we call in the public corruption business theft of honest service it's actually a crime used to be a crime until Donald Trump got rid of the the department within the department of the bureau within the department of justice responsible for

public corruption and public integrity theft of honest service means you got elected to do something or appointed and confirmed to do something and you're stealing the taxpayer dollars because you're not providing honest service. Cash Patel is not providing honest service. Donald Trump certainly is not. Bondi, the Department of Justice, and the rest. So, we talk about at the top level

of what we observe in real time, in real life. But below the surface is what really keeps me up at night, which is the undermining of our national security, the thing that has stopped, another 9-11. The thing that has stopped another Oklahoma City bombing has been the close coordination between the intelligence community, the FBI, local law enforcement. And we have a breach in all of those things. We've got a weakened, a weak-minded leader running all of these divisions. Tulsi Gabbard, National Intelligence? Are you, I mean, you could not, if you made a

movie, if you and I, now that you have, now that you have Midas films, Midas, minus studios. Thank you, Midas Studios. Now that you're a movie mogul, a documentary mogul, if we pitch this in Hollywood, Tulsi Gabbard as the head of the intelligence, Cash Patel as the head of the FBI, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as the head, they'd be like, get,

will you, what? Get out of here. No one's ever going to go to that movie. Forget the movie. Forget the movie. This is real life. And for those that say, what can we do about it? We'll see how the internal implosion between the DOJ and Cash Patel and Pam Bondi and Dodd Blanche play out behind the scenes. But what we can do about it is what we're looking to do at the midterms. I have never in my entire life, and I'm coming up on a big birthday, which I will not reveal at this moment, in about a month. I've never in my time on planet Earth

and I've been a guy even before I became a podcaster with you who has been very mindful about our American presidency in the government. It's been a big, I've studied it in college and masters and all that. I've never seen a period in our life where the need for oversight by Congress and the checks and balance whatever's left of it by the Supreme Court is so necessary right now to control this overgrown, out-of-control tyrant that we call President Trump.

And the only way we get, it's simple, it's voting, it is exercising our fundamental right to vote, protest, yes, crowds, yes. Fight them in the courts, slow them down, make bad things happen slower or not at all. Courts, yes, that's the fundamental part of our DNA on legal AF and on might as. and courage, and it's voting, and making sure right now, not like two days before the election, right now that you are properly, whatever the new requirement is, that you are properly registered to vote in your state. I assure you, if you're in a red state, the rules have changed, and you might have been bounced from the rolls, go and check, check the database,

check the website, check your local election officials, and make sure you fix that. And whatever ways they have left us to vote early, mail-in, absentee, day-of, whatever is left, we have to. It's not even like, it would be nice if we got the House and the Senate back. It is existential that we get the House and the Senate back in order to rein in this president. And by the way, for those that troll us occasionally, I would be saying the exact same thing. if we had an out-of-controlled Democratic president and a lack of checks and balance because he controlled the House, the Senate.

I'd be talking about the office of the presidency as an institution that needs to be reined in, which is what I'm talking about. We have to get the House in the hands of blue. We've got to do the same for the Senate. We have to make Donald Trump lame duck. And if we don't, we have nobody to blame but ourselves Because if we vote in the numbers that are reflected in polling, if the 10 or 12 or 15 million people, whatever that fluctuating number is, that sat out democracy during the last election, come back, and they find a compelling message by the other party to bring them back, we will win.

And we will restore this, start to heal this country again. We can't fix everything. Not every Supreme Court precedent is going to go away overnight. But it starts with that. And that's why you and I, for the moment we get up in the morning, at whatever, at weird times with our children, with our young children, to the time our head hits the pillow and our team and our editors and our producers and our contributors, this is why we're still here.

It's not just a report on, hey, look at this crazy shit that Trump did today. That's a different show. This is about the preservation of our, democracy and how we as an audience and as a community of almost six million strong, seven million, if you add and all the other aspects of Midas Touch World, can make the difference. That's why we get people to come on our show like you do and I do to talk and brief our audience. It's to keep us focused, keep our hands on the controls and our eyes on the prize of repairing America come the midterms.

Can it agree more with you there, Popak? And when California Governor Gavin Newsom asked me about, you know, how do you deal with this kind of constant barrage of crap that Trump throws out there? And I said, you know, yes, you have to report on what's happening on a day-to-day basis, but I said, you have to be philosophically rooted in values and principles and your coverage has to be informed by that and all go through. through that lens. And for us, it's democracy. It's actually law and order, not as a mantra, but as a way of life and actually handling things. It's about our justice system. And it's about empathy. It's about our democracy. It's about standing up for marginalized communities. It's about standing up for facts, truth, evidence, science. That's what we do here each and every day. That's what's most important than what's my 5 a.m. video or my 7 a.m. video or my 10 am. video, right? It is a overall shoulder to shoulder with you, this community, our message about who we are in this world, what our place is in this world, what we want the world to be. So I'll leave you with that.

A reminder, Michael Popock has started his own law firm. It's called the Popock firm. Go to the Popock Firm.com. or call 877 Popak AF right now for a free case review today. If you or somebody knows been injured in a car accident, a trucking accident, if you've been the victim of sexual assault or sexual harassment, if you know someone who's been the victim of somebody else's negligence or somebody who was involved in a wrongful death situation,

we handle a lot of those types of very tragic cases, give a call to the Popak firm, and they have lawyers across the country who can let you know for free, if you have a case or not, Don't be shy, for real, give a call. Popok's representing a lot of our listeners. So do not be afraid to give a call or shy. These are important issues, so call Michael Popock.

A reminder to subscribe to the LegalAF YouTube channel on its way to one million subscribers. Make sure you go there and subscribe. Also subscribe to Michael Popock substack, the LegalAF substack. Thanks everybody for watching this weekend's episode of LegalAF. One of the honors of my careers getting to do with Popak and spending my time with each and every one of you, each and every day.

Thank you to Salty and our entire editorial team. It's working hard this weekend, as always. We appreciate them. We appreciate you, the legal a-effers, and the Midas-Mighty. See you next time. Shout out Legal A-Fers and shout out Midas-Might.