Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Michael Popok and CA AG Rob Bonta on the Rule of Law & More

Episode Date: October 18, 2025

As Trump counter programs the peaceful 10 million strong No Kings Day protest today by firing live missiles at California, Popok is joined by Cali Attorney General Rob Bonta for an exclusive interview on how Blue States are firing back. In the first LEGAL AF live stream ever, AG Bonta briefs our audience on the 3 C’s to victory and to defeat Trump: COURTS. CROWDS & COURAGE. Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@LegalAFMTN?sub_confirmation=1 Legal AF Substack: https://substack.com/@legalaf Follow Legal AF on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/legalafmtn.bsky.social Follow Michael Popok on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/mspopok.bsky.social Subscribe to the Legal AF by MeidasTouch podcast here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/legal-af-by-meidastouch/id1580828595 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When you're with Amex Platinum, you get access to exclusive dining experiences and an annual travel credit. So the best tapas in town might be in a new town altogether. That's the powerful backing of Amex. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at Amex.ca. grab a coffee and discover Vegas level excitement with BedMGM Casino.

Now introducing our hottest exclusive, Friends, the one with MultiDrop. Your favorite classic television show is being reimagined in your new favorite casino game, featuring iconic images from the show. Spin our new exclusive because we are not on a break. Play Friends, the One with Multidrop exclusively at BedMGM Casino.

Want even more options? Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games from blackjack to poker. Or head over to the arcade for nostalgic casino thrills. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only, please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you,

please contact ConX Ontario at 1866-531-2-600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BEDMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming, Ontario. Thank you, Mr. Good morning, everyone. I'm Michael Popock, Legal A.F. Podcast, and we've got the distinct honor and pleasure together to welcome California's Attorney General Rob Bonta. And what a moment in time for us to have this conversation together. It's being live streamed on the Midas Touch Network and on the YouTube channel for legal AF as we speak. I'll be taking some questions and comments along with A.G. Banta from our audience. And think about this moment in time. No Kings Day protests. 10 million people across America are protesting against the Trump administration exercising their First Amendment right,

their freedom of expression and speech, their right to peaceably assemble, their right to seek redress of their grievances against the government. Mr. Banta, A.G. Banta, along with 22 other Democratic attorneys general, are in the courtrooms every day in more than 50 lawsuits against the administration, its violations of civil liberties and civil rights, violations of the Constitution. We're going to talk first about No King's Day and the missiles and ordinance that are being fired at California over the I-5 as we speak. This happened to be the day of counter-programming for the Trump administration to do a marine review of the troops led by Pete Hegseth and our vice president.

I don't think it's a coincidence. I don't think anybody in this room or on the live stream believes it's a coincidence that this is the day military muscle is being flexed against a political critic of Donald Trump in the governor of the state, Gavin Newsom. We're going to talk about No Kings Day. We're going to catch everybody up on what's going on in the National Guard cases going. on around the country that A.G. Banta is helping to lead, whether it's in California, in Oregon, at the Ninth Circuit, at the Seventh Circuit in Illinois, and now with an emergency application to the United States Supreme Court just yesterday by the Trump administration. And then who better to talk about the indictment of Letitia James, an attorney general of New York, who works closely

with A.G. Banta on all of her cases, then Rob Banta. Ladies and gentlemen, the attorney General for the State of California, Rob Banta. So, A.G. Banta, last week I've had you on before. It's always been a pleasure. We were talking about, I wonder what we'll talk about next week during San Diego. We thought about the National Guard. And then all of a sudden, we've got Donald Trump's

decision to do a military flex during No King's Day. Talk about what's happening at your local Marine base and the administration's position, your administration's position concerning it. Well, first, let me say thank you, Michael, for having me. I'm honored to be here with you again. I also want to say I'm grateful to all the patriots who are coming out in Moss across the country, millions of people standing up for what our country stands for. There are many articles, sections, and clauses in the U.S. Constitution, but at its core, the U.S. Constitution

stands for the proposition that we shall have no kings. We shall have no tyrants or monarchs and people exercising their First Amendment right, showing that people power is the most potent power that there is, and doing it peacefully is powerful and it's necessary right now to stand up for those core principles of the U.S. Constitution and our country. The Trump administration's decision to fire live military equipment over I-5 shutting it down, it seems to be nothing more than a vanity parade by weak men with big, fragile egos who need to show, I think a show of force is something powerful. It's, as our governor has said, multiple times, it's weakness masquerading as strength.

You have the vice president of the United States, J.D. Vance, caught going up the stairs to Air Force One saying a version of, it's just routine training. Let me put this in perspective for our audience. This video of the, and we're all about celebrating the military and veterans. My dad was Army, my late father was Army. This is not about that, the 250th anniversary of anything. This video that they're producing is not even going to be used until the 9th of November. Why did they choose No Kings Day for a routine training exercise,

the likes of which we've never seen before in a state where his leading political critic is the governor? Right, come on. It's obvious. Yeah. It's counter-programming. And they're trying to do what they do, chill, intimidate, bully. And it would be humiliating for the president and shameful and embarrassing if he had shame. But it's dangerous and it's wrong.

And to all the things you said, they're trying to counter the people's voice here. And speaking of counter-programming, you see Caroline Levitt, the press secretary, all the way to the Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, all the way to the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, all reading off the same pomp card. that the Democratic Party is comprised of Hamas terrorists, Marxists, and illegal immigrants. That is how they wanted to define this anti-patriotic display of First Amendment expression, peaceful demonstrations, organized today by the American Civil Liberties Union, by the Teachers Union, and other groups. What's your response to how they're trying to characterize the Democratic brand? I mean, they are the gaslighters in chief.

That's what they do. and they're all reading from the same script. You know, up is down, black is white. They're saying the opposite. They're saying the base of the Democratic Party is Hamas terrorists and criminals and illegal immigrants. And they're trying to undermine what is really happening and undermine the credibility of this incredible movement

and raising, of course, of voices from across the country who are saying we don't accept what is happening at the federal level. We demand something different, better. We demand a return to our core principles of separation of powers and the rule of law and democracy of for and by the people. So it is the propaganda that they push out all the time. It's, you know, truly disgusting and difficult to hear that coming from, you know, the President's Press Secretary, from the White House. It's all propaganda all the time, you know, full of lies and full of attacks on, you know, clearly on blue cities, blue states, the Democratic Party, the radical leftists, whatever they say.

So this is more of the same, but I think the people see right through it. Talk to our audience who may not know how hard and doing really, I call it the battalion against Donald Trump, the 23 Democratic Attorneys General, of which you are one, of which Leticia James is one. Talk about what you're doing in the courts and the success that you've had in the more than 50 cases that have been filed just in the last 10 months against the Trump administration.

Yeah, well, I'm so proud. of our 23 Democratic Attorneys General who have been working together since before the election, you know, post-election and pre-enagoration and since the inauguration, who have collectively taken the position that if Trump breaks the laws, if he hurts one of our states, we'll sue him. We'll take him to court. We'll meet him in court. And for California, that's meant 44 lawsuits in 38 weeks, more than one a week. Not all of the 23 Democratic AGs participate in all of the same lawsuits.

So collectively, it's upward of 50 lawsuits. but we've been having enormous success. In the cases California has been involved in when an order has been issued a permanent order, including a permanent injunction or a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order, we have won over 80% of the time. A judge has said that over 80% of the time

Trump is breaking the law, violating the Constitution. We've protected $168 billion plus of funding that Trump tried to improperly withhold funding that was already congressionally appropriated for California. So we're working very well together. We like each other. team up for the maximum collective good, and we're being very successful in the court so far. And courts are holding.

I know there's a lot of views that Trump just ignores all of the laws, in all of the court orders, in all of our cases, Trump is following the court orders. That's interesting. Let's talk about him following the court orders, or as you and I talked about on a recent interview, giving you a gift in your California cases about the way he's handling the National Guard in places like Oregon and Illinois. Just to frame it for a minute, we've got a federal judge in California, Judge Breyer, who issued an initial first set of orders about what they've now referred to as the mobilization of and deployment of the National Guard in California, and whether he violated, Trump violated the Posse Comitatis Act. That went up to the Ninth Circuit. Then you had a judge in Oregon, Judge Emmergut, who recently issued a series of orders in which she stopped the deployment. of the National Guard in Oregon, in Portland in particular, because she said, effectively,

the factual record did not support the commandeering of the National Guard by Donald Trump at all, and she kept them in their barracks. That went up to the Ninth Circuit with a three-judge panel. We'll talk about what you think's going to happen with that three-judge panel in Oregon. I'm not sure that's going to go well. For Oregon, in the meantime, a series of judges in Illinois have issued their orders to also, while allowing what's called the mobilization or the commandeering of the National Guard, not the deployment. That's been supported by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. That is what got appealed last night by the Trump administration

in the emergency application. You're involved with all of this use of the National Guard, this federalized military troops for law enforcement purposes on domestic soil against other Americans. Give our audience an update about what's happening in the cases that you're involved with. Absolutely. California, Los Angeles, in particular,

specifically was the first city where National Guard were deployed. 4,000 National Guard back in June, 700 Marines after that. So the largest deployment of any state as well. And we moved quickly, the governor and I, to take the federal administration to court, arguing that there was no basis for the federalization of California's National Guard, no basis for the deployment and the mobilization. There needs to be an emergency set of facts on the ground to justify the federalization. There needs to be an invasion or rebellion or the inability to enforce the laws with the regular forces.

It's all set forth in Title X, U.S.C. 12406. And we argued, and the judge agreed, that none of those necessary factual predicates existed. Those facts on the ground did not justify the mobilization. And the same was something that we argued as an amicus in Oregon, as an amicus in Illinois, and the district courts who are closest to the facts, who get the, in our case, who get the declarations and the factual presentations are all finding that there's no justification.

Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit, through an administrative stay, in our case, and then a stay pending appeal, has seen it differently and provided, in my view, undue deference to the federal administration with respect to what the facts are and what justifies the deployment. But we are seeing in the Seventh Circuit and in Oregon so far, and with the Ninth Circuit, a decision by the appellate court that the federalization for now is okay, but the actual deployment of the troops onto the streets of Portland

or onto the streets of Chicago is being prohibited. That part of the injunction is being upheld. And that really is the most important thing. to emphasize that. We don't want troops unlawfully on the streets of American cities in violation of the Posse Comitatis Act or without any justification under 10 U.S.C. 12-406. And so far that is being maintained in Portland and in Chicago. We'll see what the U.S. Supreme Court says when they get this. We'll see what the Ninth Circuit says with respect to Oregon's National Guard when they issue an order, but that the hearing did suggest that there could be an order

that is not supportive of Oregon's position in our position. And how is California using Donald Trump's conduct, his administration's conduct, as part of the record to make your argument? In other words, Trump and his DOJ spent a considerable amount of time trying to convince federal judges in California that the in real life on the ground was so terrible that they needed nationalized militia to help them guard federal buildings. They then took 200 of those people and sent them to Oregon and other places, which seems to undercut their argument that they were needed in California. 100%. A really important admission by action, in my view,

the Trump administration had argued in California's case with regard to the ongoing deployment of 300 National Guard in California that the federal government would suffer irreparable harm, that it was absolutely necessary that they had these troops on the ground in California to protect federal interests, to protect federal buildings and property. And they were so important that when there was an opportunity to send them to another state and away from California and Los Angeles, they sent the vast majority of them. They sent 200 to Oregon, and they sent some to Illinois as well. And we called out that hypocritical action to the court with an additional filing and presentation to the court saying,

if these National Guard are so necessary, if the federal government will suffer irreparable harm, then why are they being sent out of state and no longer here in California? And I think it speaks for itself. It's a very compelling argument. And it was a gift in the courts, and we have shined a light on it to the judges to make sure that they consider this. action when they make their decision. I'd like to welcome the Legal A.F. live stream audience. We've got thousands of people along with the people here in San Diego at Laudigra watching this interview. And they always welcome Attorney General Rob Bonta being here for briefing.

What I want to touch on lastly with the time that we have left, A.G. Banta is what's happening with one of your own who's been indicted by this administration, a major critic of the Trump administration and somebody who has gone after him successfully, Letitia James in New York, for those that are not from New York, the New York Attorney General has mainly civil, a little bit of criminal power in terms of prosecution, but it's mainly civil. But she is the one that obtained the judgment that now still stands, that the Trump and Trump family were fraudsters, persistent fraudsters in the state of New York, and the operation of the Trump organization. There is still a court-ordered monitor over all of the Trump.

organization activities at this moment in order to prevent future fraud and victims. That's all because of Letitia James. There's a debate now on the appellate level about how much money she's going to be able to obtain related to the fraud, but the fraud, the fraud, not conviction, but a judgment that was obtained through Judge Angkoran still stands. In addition, she worked closely with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office that obtained not the only the 34-count felony conviction against Donald Trump, but also a 19-count felony conviction against two of his companies. They work closely hand-in-glove. Now, suddenly, Letitia James,

because she bought a second home for 100 grand in Virginia for some of her family members, is being accused of a 30-year prison sentence mortgage fraud because somebody checked the box that she wasn't going to rent it out. Apparently, according to the fact she's not renting out the house, family members are living in Virginia. So where is the fraud? What are we watching with your peers, your colleagues being now prosecuted by this Department of Justice and President? Well, that's the whole issue. There isn't any fraud, as far as we can tell. It appears to be a witch hunt. It's an abuse of power. It's a targeting of a political enemy. Trump has targeted Tish James. By the way, an incredible colleague, an incredible person, someone I'm proud to serve with, who has serves her constituents in New York, as well as the people of the United States of America very, very well. And this is a chilling moment where

political enemies are being persecuted. Trump literally has an enemies list. He put it on social media, and he name-checked James Comey, Tish James, Shifty Schiff, he calls him, Senator Adam Schiff, the great senator from this state. And this is really an erosion of the integrity of the United States Department of Justice. It is a very frightening escalation of the political weaponization of the criminal process to go after enemies. Trump literally has an enemies list. Comey was the first stop and A.G. James is the next stop, although there's also John Bolton, on his vengeance tour. This is about a president with a personal grudge using the Department of Justice to personally weaponize to go after his political enemies. And one of the,

and just it's important to know what's happening in the Eastern District of Virginia. There was an attorney general there appointed by Donald Trump, Eric Cybert, who looked at this case involving A.G. James and decided that there was not probable cause to seek an indictment. He was pushed out or fired, and he was replaced by Lindsey Halligan, Trump's private attorney, no criminal experience, never prosecuted a case before. She's an insurance attorney, and she promptly sought an indictment against A.G. James, and she was the only person who signed the indictment, who signed the document. No one else, apparently, the career prosecutors who were overruled and ignored were willing to do so. So that's what's happening

here. Trump had a enemies list. He posted on social media, Pam, referring to U.S. Attorney General, Pam Bondi, what are we doing? Are we going to prosecute these people? We need to prosecute these people. And then when the actual U.S. attorney... And by the way, naming Lindsey Halligan in the social media post as the person to go after them. As his attack, dog, his loyalist, the person who would do his bidding. And so he replaced a career prosecutor who would uphold the ethics and the professional duties and obligations of the job, look at the law with blind justice without fear or favor, and replaced it with a loyalist, a tack dog who will do his bidding.

And so that's where we are. As far as any fraud, there's a requirement that there be, as I understand it, in the law, that there be some sort of timeshare or other ownership arrangement or a, a tenant leasing agreement, none of which are present. That is a required element, as I understand it, not even pled in the indictment. So I think, you know, I'm going to go out on a limb, and I think this case is going to be dismissed. There will be no conviction here, but I don't necessarily think Trump wants that. He wants to be able to say that she was indicted.

He wants to try to perp walk his political opponents. He wants to embarrass them. He wants them to have the personal cost, the reprimals. I think he cares less about whether she actually gets convicted. He's already gotten the headline. James Comey indicted. Senator Adam Schiff probed for mortgage fraud. Letitia James indicted for mortgage fraud.

John Bolton. And it's a lot of what about, like, it's a lot about, well, at Moralago, I took all the documents and committed espionage and obstruction of justice. But what about John Bolton? Oh, I was a judge to fraudster about mortgages and mortgage fraud in New York. But what about Letitia James and her $18,000 over 30 years? Like she threw away her entire career to save, you know, 50 bucks a month, apparently. Seriously. I know. I know it's a little.

Well, one of the things I know you wanted to end with here with our audience is about the destruction of the Department of Justice. Right now, Donald Trump's taken a wrecking ball to his own Department of Justice. He lines up the people that are supposed to be the leaders, right? Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche. He puts them in the Oval Office this past week. He embarrasses them, although in order to be embarrassed, you have to have shame and humility. So they're just standing there staring at their feet. But he says things like, let's go after Jack Smith. Why isn't Jack Smith being prosecuted? This is a career prosecutor who was an independent special counsel who led two investigations of Donald Trump

that resulted in grand juries indicting him twice. So what is the crime that Jack Smith committed other than being in Donald Trump's mind, a political enemy of Donald Trump? And Jack Smith is now, as we've seen, knowing that he's going behind closed doors because they're not going to let the public hear from Jack Smith with Congress.

He's coming out now and giving his first round of interviews about the destruction of the Department of Justice, about apolitical career prosecutors that are being fired or leaving or being forced to resign. We just had the major crimes unit prosecutor for the Eastern District of Virginia, Beth Ussie, who let it be known that she was not going to recommend the indictment of Letitia James. That leaked out. 72 hours later, Lindsay Halligan had her indicted. got her indicted, and I said, Beth's not going to be around much longer,

and she got fired last night, along with one of her deputies. What does this say when 5,000 members of the Department of Justice have been fired or forced to resign in the last nine months by this administration? And lastly, just to make the question even harder, we have a civil rights division

that does not protect people's civil rights and is being used as a weapon. The first time in history, We have the Department of Justice during the Supreme Court oral argument this week, take the position that the Voting Rights Act effectively is unconstitutional. It's all scary stuff, and we're in uncharted waters. And it's, you know, with respect to the U.S. DOJ, an unprecedented weaponization of the U.S. Department of Justice to seek personal vendettas and to support personal vendettas of the president.

With respect to Jack Smith, your question, what's the crime? It appears that there is not one. It's just that he's a political enemy. That is it. And these aren't criminal prosecutions. They are political persecutions. And so we have to be very clear-eyed about that. And they're not going to stop.

They seem to be, the president seems to be emboldened about it. He has the people in place that he wants to execute his weaponization of the USDA-O-J. And, you know, the morale in the USDA-O-J has to be in the basement. You know, folks are quitting, and they're leaving. They signed up to do a job. They were public servants. It is so insulting to them to treat them like this. career prosecutors with ethics, with professional duties, with legal and moral obligations,

and to ask them to do these things. And when they refuse, they're pushed out or they quit because they won't do it. With respect to the civil rights, I mean, you know, the federal government's duty and obligation to enforce civil rights law is, you know, they have thrown that out the window. So it's incumbent upon states to step in, fill those gaps, fill that vacuum, fill that space, and do more. But what's happening with the Voting Rights Act and what seems to be in the cards

for what the U.S. Supreme Court might rule there and with respect to people's rights, freedoms, their ability to not be discriminated based on race, ethnicity, the people that they love, how they pray, that we're going backwards. And Trump is leading that regressionary charge, unfortunately.

But let's leave on a hopeful note. Put the Grim Reaper away for a moment. We've got a 10 million people taking to the streets on No Kings Day today, including in D.C., they skipped D.C. the last time because there was a military parade at D.C. at the time. We always like to leave our audience here and on the live stream today with a hopeful message, a call to action. What would you say to the audience about between now and the midterms, the midterms and the 2028 election about our constitutional republic and what? what we can do as we, the people, to help hold Donald Trump accountable and his lawlessness accountable? I'd say this. I'd say don't feel hopeless because we're not helpless. We have power, we have agency, we have the ability to make sure that tomorrow is more fair,

more just, better than today. That there's a lot of chapters to be written in the story of this great state of California, more chapters to be written in the story of the United States of America and you and me and us and we are going to write it, the people, a government of for and by the people. And so today is a day when people are reminding themselves, they need to stay engaged, stay enraged about this president's abuse of power, that they need to use the most potent power that there is, the people power, and express it through peaceful means,

as the millions of people in this country are doing today. And there's more to be done between now and the elections, and so we have to fight. If we fight, I know we will win, but we have to stay engaged and active. Democracies die in the dark with neglect and with apathy. They thrive with engagement and participation and advocacy. So we have to stay focused. And just remember three things are really important.

Courts, crowds, encourage courts are where AGs and others are going to achieve justice and hold an unlawful president accountable and make sure we block unlawful actions. Crowds is what is happening today when people power is on full display. We're demanding of our leaders because we are. are their bosses, what they must do and rejecting what we will not accept. And then courage is important. It sounds obvious, but with all of the intimidation

and the bullying and the targeting, literally the political persecutions and political prosecutions, some people want to keep their head down and don't want to speak up and don't want to speak out and don't want to rise up. But it's important that we do, that we have the courage to fight for the founding principles of this nation, our democracy, our rule of law, rights and freedom,

separation of powers, checks and balance, and no kings, no tyrants, no monarch. So keep fighting, I am confident, and I'm optimistic, and I'm very hopeful that if we fight, we will win, but we must fight. California Attorney General Rob Bonta. Such an honor and a privilege to have you join the first inaugural live feed for Legal AF podcast we've ever done. I'm honored, Michael.

can't think of a better guess for it. You regularly brief our audience. I'm so glad you're here. And not only now, but I know in the future we're going to be, we're going to be following Attorney General Rob Bontas' career and his civil service towards America. Thank you so much. Wonderful to be with you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Can't get your fill of legal A.F. Me neither. That's why we formed the legal A.F. Substack. 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 a. What else?

All the other contributors from Legal A.F. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad-free versions of the podcast and hot takes where?