Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Seditious Conspirators, Trump Crimes & SCOTUS Vax Wack

Episode Date: January 16, 2022

You come for the law and stay for the truth. Anchored by MT founder and civil rights lawyer, Ben Meiselas and national trial lawyer and strategist, Michael Popok, the top-rated news analysis podcast is back for another hard-hitting, thought-provoking look in “real time” at this week’s developments. On this episode, Ben and Popok discuss: 1. DOJ’s grand jury indictment of 11 OathKeepers including its founder for Seditious Conspiracy with its 20 year maximum prison sentence. 2. SCOTUS’ split decision on President Biden’s vaccine mandates. 3. The Fulton County (Atlanta) Georgia prosecutors’ criminal case against Trump and why it might be the strongest of all the cases. 4. The progress of the civil cases brought by House members and the Capitol Police against Trump for conspiracy under the KKK Act. 5. Gaetz’ x-girlfriend (and potential co-conspirator) testifying in the grand jury against him in his criminal case. 6. Voters seeking to disqualify Rep. Madison Cawthorn under the 14th Amendment for his participation in the Jan6 “insurrection and rebellion” against our country. 7. The RNC’s new case against New York City and Mayor Adams for its new law allowing legal residents (but non-citizens) to vote in the City’s municipal elections. 8. Trump moving to dismiss Mary Trump’s fraud and fiduciary duty breach case against him. 9. “Pharma Boy” Martin Shkreli receiving a lifetime ban from participating in the pharmaceutical industry and a $64mm fine in a case brought by the FTC and NYAG among others. 10. An update in the motion for new trial and sentencing of G. Maxwell regarding her role in the Epstein scandal. And much more. Support the show! Blinkist -- Right now Blinkist has a special offer just for our audience. Go to https://Blinkist.com/LEGALAF to start your free 7 day trial and get 25% off of a Blinkist Premium membership. AG1 by Athletic Greens -- Athletic Greens is going to give you an immune supporting FREE 1 year supply of Vitamin D AND 5 free travel packs with your first purchase if you visit https://athleticgreens.com/legalaf today. Hello Fresh -- Visit https://hellofresh.com/legalaf16 and use code "LegalAF16" for 16 free meals and 3 free gifts! Stamps.com -- Go to https://www.stamps.com, click the microphone at the top of the page and enter "LegalAF" to get free postage and a free scale! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to Midas Touch Legal AF. If it's Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, it is Legal AF. Ben, my cell is joined by Michael. Oh, cock breaking down. Critical legal issues of the week in ways you could understand getting that legal AF degree, the community of AFers keeps on growing. PoPoc, how you doing this weekend?

I'm doing good. This is legal AFLV style. I am in Las Vegas at my new office there. I've been here the whole week with my partners. And this is this new backdrop is not a new podcast studio. This is my hotel room coming to you live tonight. So really looking forward to it. And we're on the same for a while for the first time in a while. We're on the same time zone. Poe Pock is in Vegas. Things may get wild.

Fortunately, we are both lawyers. And on the last live podcast tell everybody who is listening. Also, you can check out our podcast live on YouTube Saturday nights, 8 p.m. Eastern, 5 p.m. Pacific last time we had over 1.1,000 people in the chat at the same time, about eight and a half, 9,000 people ended up watching that live. Pretty cool pop-up speaking to a 9,000, 10,000 live audience at one time. And of course, these podcasts then reach hundreds of thousands of people. But make sure also you subscribe on the YouTube channel so you get updates and we can continue to grow the live podcast. There's a very nice cultivated network of like-minded people that show up on

live and participate in the chat. And I think they find a commonality with the people that are there. You and I enjoy it. We're on there, you know, chatting away when we're not doing our podcasts at moments, but it's been great. I mean, look, you know, every podcast in the world gets a troll or two, but we spot them pretty quickly and shoot them down. It is 99.9% people of the mightest mighty and legal a furs and popuckians and Ben Mysalis lovers who are, you know, there for democracy and I learned about the law. And it's really heartwarming to see it and we enjoy it. We love the law. Let's get into the law. You remember that guy, Popak, Farma Bro, Martin Shrekelli. He was sentenced on federal charges of wire and

security, Sprottie serving a seven year prison sentence. All these ridiculous stories about him, he bought a Wu Tang album, you know, for a million five, you know, just so that other people couldn't have him. Remember, he was, he was known as Farma Bro. He was the CEO of a company called Turing, Far Masutikos, which is now called the era of the YERA, Far Masutikos. They raised the price of a drug that was used to treat rare

parasitic diseases that affect pregnant people and cancer patients and AIDS patients. The drug was called daraprim. They raised this drug from 1350, a tablet to 750, a tablet. Stop, stop right there. Stop right there. $13 a tablet to $750 a tablet. This is what happens when an unscrupulous hedge fund executive takes over a pharmaceutical company and starts figuring out where he can exploit people's illness in order to increase the bottom line. He was found guilty on the criminal side. And this week his name pops up again in the news.

He was ordered by a federal judge out of the Southern District of New York to pay or to return $64 million in profits that were made from this scheme and he was permanently banned from ever returning into the pharmaceutical industry. So a very harsh sentence, both monetary and in terms of just preventing him from being back in this industry to quote from the rule in quote,

Shurekelli does not dispute that it was his intention to impede generic pharmaceutical companies from launching competitive products that would threaten the price of Dara premium US district court. Denise coat wrote quote, the plaintiffs have shown that the restraints via a implemented that's shirkelli's company succeeded in doing just that. And this was a 95 page ruling, the plaintiffs, in this case, it started with the Federal Trade Commission, also joined by several states, but Latissia James and the state of New York played a very prominent role in this prosecution and it was in New York. So a big win for Tish James, as we talk about

Tish James encircling the Trump family. And it was brought under antitrust laws that we talked about on the last podcast. Yeah, I like this for a lot of reasons. One, it shows you that the prosecutors and the FTC, and in this case, the New York Attorney General, and a trust bureau at a New York, stayed on this case, even though Martin Scarelli, Farma Boy had already been sentenced and has been serving seven years of a sentence that he was sentenced to in 2018.

They knew he's coming out soon. I mean, his release date, assuming he gets a little bit of time off for good behavior is probably 2023, maybe 2024. This guy is going to be back in circulation. And so the FTC said, yeah, you went in jail for seven years, but we don't want you to come back to the pharmaceutical company. And we don't want you to come back with the same wallet that you had when you went in.

So you know, he hired a firm, I actually know this firm out of Philadelphia. So he had real lawyers involved. But, you know, 64 million, I don't know how much the guy had left when he went to prison because he made a lot of money as a hedge fund executive. I'm sure this is not his last 64 million dollars, but the good part of the decision is he can go into many industries, I'll have some difficulties now having been a felon and being barred by the FTC and one, but he is never going to return to the pharmaceutical industry to exploit the weakest in our population who have medical conditions. And it's spanned three presidential administrations, this prosecution by the FTC, Obama, Trump, and now Biden, but that goes to show you also that you have within these administrations professionals who pass the baton

from one administration to the other. And when Donald Trump and his lackeys refer to the deep state, what they are trying to attack is really the heart of our democracy, which is very smart, intelligent bureaucrats who work diligently, maybe not the heart of our democracy, the heart of our government, but very smart, intelligent people who are career people who take their jobs very seriously, who aren't swayed by political wins, and who go after bad actors, very diligently thoughtfully on them. Yeah, doggedly, it's stay on them.

And that is exactly what criminals and crooked people like the Trumpers. Hey, they want to destroy that. Part of them, tarnishing the rule of law, is basically to make their supporters believe the people in the FBI and people in the CIA and people and administrations like the FTC are all corrupt. There is high level corruption that does take place, but they want to destroy the overall institutions. And it's just, it's just an interesting thing kind of how the polls have changed, Pope Akbar, the Democrats, because we support democracy, independence, who support democracy. We support institutions, and it's Republicans who are just doggedly against our strong institutions.

They tear down. Yeah, you're totally right. They undermine the credibility of these institutions, the FBI, the prosecutors, because they themselves are pushing the envelope or even be out, they're throwing out, they're ripping up and tearing up the envelope of their conduct. When you have a grifter president who's never seen a fraud that he hasn't embraced with the rest of his family, traips his way through the presidency, he of course wants to destabilize all of the

guardrails and institutions as you as you refer to them that support our our constitutional democracy, our representative democracy, and our legal system. I mean, Trump bashed the FBI, I think day two on the way in. I mean, I don't know how he addressed the FBI or the CIA. He bashed. He put lackeys in at the top of these positions in order to hollow them out and to destabilize them. And you do that when you yourself are criminal. Because then you want to make sure that no one's going to catch you in your bad acts. And I think what Trump is chafing at, and we're going to talk about it later tonight in another segment, and it's starting to freak out over, is that, especially as ex-president,

he has no control over these things. And lifetime civil servants and dedicated professionals that remain in these positions throughout administrations and over administrations are staying on the case. And they're gonna bring him down. It's like pinning down the giant in golver travels. You know, it's one pin at a time,

but eventually Trump's gonna be pinned down. And he's either going to be facing financial ruin at the hands of these civil cases by private citizens, attorney generals and the like, or he's going to be sitting in a jail cell or being a convicted ex-president. We're going to talk later in the podcast also about the Rogues Gallery of Republican criminality, which may be the same thing as a Rogues Gallery is a collection of photographs of known criminals. But when we talk about people like Matt Gates, when we talk about people like Josh Hawley, when we talk about people like Madison Hawthorne, these are people who are front and center in attacking the FBI

police our institutions because they're all under criminal investigation for doing things that are obviously wrong and they're about to go to jail and so that's why they're engaged in that conduct and we will of course get there later But let's now talk about just a quick update. We talked about this on the last podcast, Gilein. Max, right there. Popeye. All right. I want our might as might need to know. And people tonight with us in the chat, because they're following this. I get so many. I went online and I found three different websites on how to pronounce her name. Yes, it's French origin, but she's a British citizen.

And a way she officially pronounces her name. So I want to get it right. I don't want people to think we're purposefully not getting it right because for whatever reason, we're not. It's just that she has a strangely spelled name and it wasn't obvious to us. And so we butchered it. But I think now we've established it's Ghee hard Ghee Lane Maxwell. Okay. Ghee Lane Maxwell. Go ahead, man.

That's what people like about the podcast you know, we admit to our mistakes and we try to improve and we try to get better. Ghee Lane Maxwell was convicted on five counts on December 29th for aiding, assisting, facilitating, Jeffrey Epstein's sexual assault, abuse, rape, of girls, some as young as 14. Elaine Maxwell's team has filed for a new trial. We talked about this on the last legal AF podcast. Go back to the last podcast if you want more detail on that, but basically, by the way, bad before you move on, they're going to file for the motion for neutral by the 14th of January.

Well, I think they've already indicated to the judge that they're going to make the filing. And she went on that note before you move on and the judge yesterday or the day before has set June of 2022 as her sentencing to give the defense team enough time to file their motion and have it ruled upon. And if they lose, and then I want to talk to you about what the prosecutors have offered to do, if that is unsuccessful, because they are going to throw a bone to Maxwell, if the defense loses the motion for new trial. But the judge, Nathan, who we've already said said is going to be elevated to the second circuit at some point, has pushed off the sentencing of Maxwell until June. And he put off the sentencing to June because there are serious issues here.

Right. Serious issues. We talked about them on the last podcast that there are now multiple jurors at least two who do not properly disclose in their juror questionnaires in the juror selection process that they themselves were victims of sexual assault and abuse, and not only that they fail to disclose, but they've now given interviews with the Guardian in the UK with the New York Times here in the States that they used their background

in their own personal experience to persuade other jurors to reach a guilty verdict. But they're really focused. Yeah, but on that then, I was surprised that the only, they're only focusing because I've seen the statement by the defense. They're even though there were two, as you accurately, uh, uh, over viewed, they're only focusing on one what they call juror number 5050, which I believe is the juror who used his own experience of repressed memory to convince the jury in the deliberations that Maxwell or other witness, sorry,

other witness is not Maxwell, other witnesses against Maxwell had legitimate reasons to have repressed memories. And that reinforced the repressed memory expert that the prosecution used. I think that's journal number 50. That seems to be the focus of the future motion for a new trial. Because it's a slam dunk case. I hate to break it to people.

Look, I think Elaine Maxwell should go to jail for the rest of her life for the conduct and anybody who assisted Jeffrey Epstein should go to jail for the rest of their life. Period. Both stop, but it is a slam dunk because it's not assuming the jurors says exactly what they said to the guardian because it's not mere harmless error when they just forgot to check a box and it had no impact. The statement itself was not only did I have this experience, but I changed the entire jurors' mind is when experts interview. They became an expert. Yeah, they became an expert in the deliberation room.

And shout out to the media. You and I do, I think, a fair job of calling out the media favorably when they do good things. And we had a president that spent his entire presidency calling the media and operations like Midas Touch, enemies of the people. You know, God loved them. This is what the founding fathers envisioned with having a free, the free press and the power of the free press because if it wasn't for the guardian doing investigative work

and talking to this juror, you know, that issue would not have come to light. And we don't, you and I don't want to live in that society. I think, I think the evidence is overwhelming that she did all of those terrible things to help Jeffrey Epstein sexually abuse girls. No doubt, but, but the, if this happened, we, and, and it had a, and this is what the appellate court will have to decide if the judge rules against emotion for new trial. Let's just talk through that. Judge says, no, I find it wasn't reversible error or wasn't error that would, so substantially impact the jury's deliberations that they wouldn't have concluded that she, that she was convicted on five counts without it. Then the second circuit appeal and Nathan judge Nathan when she

hits the second circuit will like will have to recuse herself. She won't be able to year her own appeal. But the second circuit's going to have to decide at the end, is that true or not? I mean, yes, there was such overwhelming evidence, but did this last moment of a robe juror, you called it, what you call it, stealth juror? Is that what you called it last time? Stealth juror, yeah. Yeah, if that's stealth juror, so overwhelmed, the deliberative process of a fair and impartial jury

whose only job is to weigh the evidence presented and not to independent research and not service quasi experts in the room, that's gonna be the issue. So, you know, it's, it's, I feel a little sorry for the prosecutor, because they put on a good case and they didn't know the, unless it turns out they didn't do a good job in Fwadir screening out these people. But I think they did. And then they, but you can never police and just to answer questions that our, our chat group might have tonight or others. The prosecutor, we are not privy. Prosey prosecutors, defense, the public or anybody to jury

deliberations. Those are in a closed sealed room. There's a deputy, you know, a sheriff's deputy or a courtroom deputy outside guarding the room. There's no videotape. There's no audio tape. There's no notes that are presented. The only way the judge will know what happened in that room is by taking testimonies toward testimony from people in that room, one by one, not just that juror, but the other jurors now are going to have to go before the judge and say, did that person his expert testimony out of the blue about his own repressed memories? How did that impact your decision

making? Or would you have made the decision to convict regardless of those statements, if those statements hadn't come out, if a parade of jurors in that jury room say, well, I was sort of on the fence, but then juror number 50 told me all about his experience, and then the prosecution has got a big problem. I think the prosecution knows where this is going. I think, unfortunately, I think a new trial is going to be granted in light of what happened here. I give the media a little bit less credit. Popackle, they did a good job in reporting it.

I think the stealth juror wanted to seek media attention. They got their five minutes of fame. He used to be called 15 minutes of fame. I think that's five. I think it's even less than five. I think it's now a TikTok of fame. So it's somewhere in the range of, it's a tweet of fame.

It's somewhere now you get your 30 seconds or your, here's what I would say is the true. You get your one day of fame. That's pretty much what it is now. It's a new cycle. It's a new cycle, you know, you, you know, but it's about an hour, a new cycle. So when from 15 was it 15 minutes of fame was originally 15 minutes is the phrase. I forget it. I don't know. It was Andy Warhol. So we'll look it up. I'm gonna bring it down now to your five seconds of fame Yeah, you know in in your modern day, but pop up just briefly. There's another trial that was going to happen based on Purgery counts that was not tried it severed, meaning it was removed from this trial. It was going to have a separate trial.

The prosecution here says that if no new trial is granted, they will do the severed, the other, they will not be doing the perjury trial. They will agree to dismiss the perjury cases and just let this conviction stand and not do a whole another trial. But interesting. Yeah, good. Sorry, finishing that I'll tell you what's interesting. Yeah, because when I first read the headline, I was like,

oh, look, the prosecutors trying to horse trade, trying to tell Galein and her team, if you don't move to mistrial, we will drop the perjury trial, the separate perjury trial. But the prosecutors did the right thing. They're not making a horse trade, a quid pro quo. They're not saying drop it. They're saying litigate your motion for new trial. If you lose it, we're going to drop the, we're telling the judge, we're not doing the second trial.

This podcast is brought to you by our partner, Blinkist. Popok, I love Blinkist. People who know me know that I'm a reader. I love to go through books. I love audio books, but sometimes I don't have the time to like just listen to like just books that last 30 hours or books, you know, and I like to consume a lot of information and I like to know sometimes is this a book that I want to read by finding kind of the key concepts? And what I love about Blinkist is both in an audio form and a written form. They give you those key ideas, the top seven key ideas, or they break down in 10, 12, 15 minutes, sometimes less like what the critical elements of these books are. And so the one that I got on Blinkus that I rave about is by an author named

Mel Robbins. It's called the five second rule. I'm not sure if you've heard about the five second rule. This is a different five second than the five second of fame. It's different than the five second of fame. But this five second rule is a motivational trick that basically gets you out of the bed early in the morning. For me at five a.m. so I could start that day. And basically it's a countdown where you as soon as you wake up or as soon as you have something that you wanted to do that you've been procrastinating about, you basically go

five, four, three, two, one, and just do it no matter what. And it actually works. And it breaks down and the blinckest summary of it breaks down why it works. And it goes into the science of it. And it provides other kind of motivational tips. But I also did on Blinkist and read the five a.m. club on Blinkist. And so it was a short version of the five a.m. club. How high performers wake up at five a.m. to accomplish their tasks. And so I'm reading all of these books to be highly motivated in 2020. But there's also a lot of other great titles there. I read what I read. What have you read? I did one on Blinkist. I did a promise land, which is Barack Obama's first film of his memoirs. And I've done audio versions of

his books or other books of his, you know, you know, his first one that really put them on the map. I like, I like Blinkist. To be frank, I didn't know anything about that, that app or that program before you and I became a sponsor and really dove into it after, after we signed up. And you know, I'm on the go. Literally, I'm in Las Vegas today. You're on the go with all of your clients. And, you know, I don't want to, if it's a choice between not reading the entire hardback or audio version of it, or getting a very good summary of the book. And then from there, if I want to read the entire book cover to cover, I still have that opportunity, but I've got the more than just the gist. I've got the whole gist off of the book through Blinkus. So I really enjoyed that app of that program. Right now, Blinkist has a special offer just for our legal AF audience.

Go to blinkist.com slash legal AF. You spell that B L I N K I S T dot com slash legal AF. And now start your free seven day trial and get 25% off a blinkest premium membership that's blinkest spelled B L I N K I S T blinkest.com slash legal AF get 25% off and a seven day free trial. Blinkus.com, legal AF. This is 2020. This is about empowering people to grow personally, professionally, and discovering that content

that inspires, motivates, and gives you new perspective and meaning in your life. Wanna talk Popoq about these rogue slate of electors as the January 6th committee starts to dig in deeper. We learned that these states and these legislatures within these GQP controlled states were preparing their own certificates, which were, have been posted on the National Archive website. There are real certificates, which, sorry, there are real certificates which were posted on the National Archive websites,

but what these rogue GQPers were doing was creating these fake certificates and sending them to the archives for processing before they would be sent to Congress so that they would be utilized by Congress in this plot as part of the overall coup where the GQ peers were going to object to the counting of the votes. And we saw Ted Cruz and Holly and a bunch of other people, they were going to hold that up. Why did they send it to the National Archives?

That's part of the processing that it takes place. Thankfully, the National Archives, why I misspoke at the beginning, the real certificates go to the archives for processing. And then they're certified, oh, did the governor sign this or did the person at the state sign it? These ones were not signed by the governors, but that's what Trump was doing to pressure, you know, the governors and all of those states that we saw happening. Can you imagine the day, Ben, just picture this. You're at the National Archive at some level,

and the envelope comes in and you open it. You're like, um, hello, Hey, George, can you come by here for a minute? Look, look at this, look at this, uh, certificate unsigned that they're trying to slip through the National Archive as being something that electors have done. I mean, it is, I mean, the levels of crazy cray cray that went on here at every level. And just, it's just like a pressure hose that they just fired at the court system, the National Archive, hoping any drop of water

would get through as a monkey wrench to screw up this process and to interfere with, and we'll talk about this later with the peaceful transition of power for the first time in over 250 years. So, so who actually called this out? Who's, who is prosecuting this issue? So right now, so it's the, the Georgia prosecutors are looking into this as well. But I wanna talk about though is the slash,

and when people talk about kind of slash and burn, this was part and parcel of the Trump coup plan, though, of what they were going to do. And they resorted to every aspect and beginning with these baseless, total bullshit cases in the court system. And then holding these fake hearings in the hotel lobbies and Giuliani giving it part of the four seasons gardening place or whatever that was.

But you had real state legislatures who were coordinating and real Republican electors who were coordinating. How do you know that? Because these certificates of electors all look alike. The states have very different certifications of the actual electors with the state seal and their own version. These were all coordinated.

And what makes this extra wild pop up though, and it had just extra deceitful though, is that this is what the plan was by actual, like, Republican senators, like people like Ted Cruz were objecting so that it could be thrown to the house and that these slates of electors could actually go into effect. So when I was 19, my roommate nine college decided that we were going to make fake drivers license. We had no idea, and this is before internet, start to say that, this is before the internet. And we decided we would take some random state, we picked Michigan, because we had no idea what the Michigan license looked like.

We figured nobody else did either. So we picked brown colors and we made a giant board that looked like what we thought of Michigan license would look like. So people could stand in front of it in our dorm room, snap a photo and they'd, and we had a laminating machine. By the way, at 19 halfway through this process, knowing that I wanted to go to law school, it literally a light went on and said, stop, I can't do this. I mean, we were so in tune of trying to get the board to look great

that I lost sight of morality and the law for a moment. But my moral compass kicked in, we ripped up the board and we never produced one. That was it. 19. I wasn't trying to overthrow a government in a seditious fashion and send in fake and phony, uh, electric sheets to the national archive. So we have two investigations going on just to clarify my earlier statement. So we have within Georgia, in Fulton County, we have an investigation going on into Trump's phone call though, but all these

things are related. And then we also had this week the news that Michigan's attorney general has asked the justice department and she was actually on the mightest touch brothers podcast. Yeah, I saw that one back and watch Dana Nessel, attorney general Nessel and her interview there.

But she said, quote, obviously, this is part of a much bigger conspiracy. And she asked federal prosecutors to open up a criminal investigation there into 16 Republicans who submitted false certificates stating they were the states presidential lectures, electors despite Joe Biden's 154,000 vote victory in 2020 in that state. And then this also happened in Pennsylvania and and five other states, total of seven states. I mean, it's just really so we'll keep everybody posted about what's going on there.

And Pope, I want to go to New York, though, this was an interesting one and get your take on it, though, the Republican National Committee, other New York, the GOP party in New York, which is a very interesting party structure and leadership structure there, which won't get into on this one, but we'll get into maybe on the brother podcast, because's totally re-envisioned in Trump's image that GOP, that New York GOP, and it's like completely off the rockers. But what's going on with this lawsuit, though, over a New York law that would allow non-citizens, but as long as they're permanent residents of New York to vote, it would actually

create about 900,000 plus new voters in Manhattan. And it's specifically in Manhattan. This would be in the largest city. This exists actually in some other cities across the country, never as big as Manhattan would be the biggest one. Not just Manhattan, all five burrows. All into New York City. Yeah. And so tell us, Popak, what is going on here with this vote, with this law, and what's the lawsuit? And do you think the lawsuit has likes?

Yeah, and listen, I'm going to kick it off, but we'll talk at the end of the podcast about the exciting news that starting Wednesday, we're launching legal AF Wednesday with Karen Agn, uh, Friedman Agnafilo, uh, uh, KFA as my co-host on a, uh, a little bit of a spin-off a special edition of what you and I do. And, you know, we're going to be able to talk about things from her long history as a prosecutor in the men at Manhattan DA's office. Yeah. Karen, who's going to be hosting that with you just so everybody knows.

She was sivances right hand. She was literally the top prosecutor in Manhattan, other than sivances. And she's going to be hosting this show with hope. She's going to be great. I mean, we're not going to be able to touch on things because she's only a year or two out of the office that involves the Manhattan D.A.'s, where you and I can do it, but she and I won't be able to do it. But she has such a wealth of knowledge when it comes to New York politics, New York law, and around the country, her own, you know, 30 years as a prosecutor

is gonna be an invaluable insight and contribution to the show. I just thought of it because we're talking about New York here. So New York, all five burrows from Brooklyn, Brock, Staten Island, the New York itself Manhattan. And the rest are have just passed a law that Eric Adams is the mayor of New York assigned or actually submitted to the council without signature meaning it's going to pass to allow non residents or, sorry, non-citizens who are legally here, so they're not illegal, but they're not citizens to vote in municipal, but not statewide, not national, but municipal elections. So they're not going to be able to vote for president.

They're not going to be able to vote for state senator or things of that nature, but municipal elections, these people are going to be allowed to vote. And Adams is supportive of it when he became mayor two weeks ago. And he signed it. The Republican National Committee in picking where they brought this suit, and I think you may have caught this,

filed the case in the trial level, which we call New York Supreme, just to confuse everybody, in Richmond County, which is Staten Island, and why Staten Island Ben, why do you think? Tell us, Popeye. It is the most Republican of New York City, which is historically supremely liberal. It is the last bastion of Republican holdout in all of New York. It's the Isle of Staten Island. And they filed the case there on purpose, the RNC, they didn't do Manhattan, of course.

They didn't do federal court either, which was interesting. There's an argument they could have done federal court. But they're doing it under the New York Constitution and the section of the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution, which addresses citizens who can vote. And they're saying it's a violation of Article 2, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution and the RN that's how the case is styled if you want to file it. And it also against the board of elections for the city and against the city council. And we'll see I think it's interesting. I mean, they, I, you're the RNC better. I think you got to do this. I mean, you and of course, nationally, the people are going to pick up the Republicans

are going to pick up the gauntlet and say, ha ha, look, these liberal democratic cities, look what they're doing now, illegal aliens, which is not the case, but that's what they're going to say. Illegal aliens are going to be able to vote. And now we have to come up with a new, we have to come up with a new state law to avoid that, you know, even in states where this is not an issue, they're going to use it as voter suppression. that, you know, even in states where this is not an issue, they're going to use it as voter suppression. So we have, you know, this is the problem, you know, when we do avant-garde phase, you know, you know, when the, when the new Manhattan prosecutor, Alvin Bragg, issues a first day memo in which he says, I'm going to do a nuanced approach to prosecution. I'm not going to prosecute all victimless crime. You know, the Republicans picked it up and said, see lawlessness in the city of New York

and in Manhattan. The prosecutors are going to look the other way on violent crime. If you look at the memo, which is 20 pages, and I did look at it, that's not exactly what it says, but it's an easy talking point against the progressive democratic position. So, you know, we're going to try these novel things like letting, you know, non, non-citizen residents vote, immutable elections in New York, but you know what that's going to, you know what, that's going to have a domino effect. It's going to get picked up in Texas, Alabama, DeSantis, and Florida as saying, look with these crazy pinko liberals are doing

in New York, allowing illegal aliens to vote. Yeah, but I think that this is where Democrats need to also have a spine and need to forcefully argue our positions and truly champion voting rights. I mean, these are people who qualify as permanent residents. These are people who will therefore have licenses, right? Republicans are always about, hey, you need to have a license to vote. Guess what? Lots of these people will probably have thing.

They pay taxes. They pay taxes. They have accounts. Right. And that they are major contributors to those communities. And just serve in the armed forces. Serve in the armed forces. Yeah, they are. Serve in the armed forces.

And so we should take those talking points, which are more than talking points. Those are real live, lived life experiences of our community neighbors, people who are who we interact with, and we want to empower them to make the decisions for their communities that they're thriving members of. And so when you go into communities, and if that is a dissantist point, I'll just take that argument because you mentioned dissantists.

And we talk about different communities within Florida itself, whether we're talking about Cuban communities, Venezuela and communities. And Democrats need to realize that the Latin community is not just simply one Latin ex-monolith of people. It's unique communities that we have to make sure we're

identifying and addressing all specific issues and empowering. But this is actually an issue that we can champion and win voters by saying we want to empower you to control what's going on in your communities. If, and you've done this well on the Brothers Podcast, if we find a way quickly to control the narrative, that's been a, that's been a Biden problem. He's lost the narrative on an

amazing set of accomplishments in the first year, which is why he's struggling with a 40% approval rating. It's not because he hasn't accomplished anything. Same thing with Marik Garland. It's not that the Department of Justice hasn't accomplished anything. It's that they're not out there and I really don't want the DOJ to be out there, you know, tooting their own horn about, they do it. They do it on press releases, indictments, press conferences. They do do that. But, but they don't, you know, it's the democratic's approach of sort of speaking softly and not blowing their own horn, which is getting us into trouble because it's allowing the Republicans who are loud and brassy and brazen to say anything about us and then turn it into law. They're very good as the party out of national

power in turning it into law. They took all of our election wins and turned that into the boogie man to pass voter suppression laws and gerrymandering so that they never lose again. Well, a few different concepts there. we touch upon it in the brother podcast, so I won't belabor the point here, but Democrats are held to the highest standards while Republicans are held to literally no standards where Democrats, I think, need to be focused on is the state legislatures and on the local level.

Democrats David Pepper did a great video about this. He's out in Ohio led well a leader in the Democratic party there. How Democrats because Democrats are focused on a democracy and winning based on the fairway and election supposed to take place that Democrats put their resources at a federal level into swing states, whereas Republicans who are trying to undermine the very existence of democracy are focused on all states, but at state and local levels to try to get state legislatures, which often have very little accountability. We're focused on the presidency and they're trying to win the local school board election. Two undermined democracy, though. Two undermined democracy. And one of the things that I think, you know, Karen and I are in you and I are going back and forth a bit about the first, the first docket of case that we're going to drill down on this half an hour Wednesday show,

we're going to do one or two topics and really drill down on them and maybe have a guess, not this Wednesday, but maybe have a guess in the future. One of them is that, you know, and I'm not disclosing anything conspiratorially that's not true. You know, George Soros, who is a huge Democratic fundraiser and donor, has supported, he's focused on district attorneys and prosecutors around the country and those races in order to ensure that a certain type of prosecutor ends up being elected. Alvin Bragg, actually, I believe took some sorrows money as well. So there is a group of Democratic donors that's trying to influence the, and I'm not saying in a nefarious way, but it's trying to influence the outcome, outcome, determinative, of who

is our prosecutors. And that's an area that Democrats can focus on. And that's one area that I know Karen and I have kicked around this last week about, is that, let's make that an interesting topic, how prosecutors get elected and the money behind those elections? Hope, good luck with you and Karen. I'm looking forward to the podcast, but we got to focus our people on today's legal AF this,

maybe I'm getting a little jealous, huh? That sounded like a little jealousy, huh? You will always, you and I will always have Saturdays and Sundays. And you and you will always have my heart for those that know Ben and me, you know, that's it. And a little jealousy by Ben right there. This podcast is brought to you by Hello, fresh.

I love Hello, fresh with Hello, fresh. You get farm fresh pre portion ingredients and seasonal recipes delivered right to your door steps. Skip those trips to the grocery store and count on hello fresh to make home cooking easy fun and affordable. That's

why it's America's number one meal kit. Hello fresh delivers those pre portioned ingredients right to your door, including farm fresh produce. It arrives within a week. So you get that convenience without skimping on quality, skip that trip to the grocery store, save, save you waiting those long lines and ensuring you don't waste money on excess food. Can I talk about waste?

Can I talk about waste because I have it in my personal life? Talk about it. So, hello, fresh. They've done the analysis is 72% cheaper than a restaurant meal of the same quality. So apple, literally apples to apples. And you can save on average. And I'm going to tell you, my number will be much higher than this. You can save on average over $65 per month when you order a Hello Fresh instead of grocery shopping. And that's more

money to put towards, you know, other things in your life for 2022. Now, I will tell you, because we were doing the math, I dine out between, you know, work, client development, and just dining out, I live in New York, five times a week, at least four times, if not five times a week. Hello, FreshNow provides me with a healthy alternative of the same quality ingredients, but at a much lower price point. I'm just below and money out of a fire hose eating out all the time, especially in New York now, with all of the, you know, logistical impacts on pricing that have happened at that level. And hello fresh is just kept kept the meals really, really healthy recipes like

a bachi sweet soy, but that steak and shrimp. Come on, that's restaurant quality meals right to your kitchen that we can't have any other way. So I'm a believer and I'm an adopter of the Hello Fresh model. And popo. I made Ben Myceles made cherry balsamic sirloin with herbie fingering potatoes and rusted brussel sprouts. It was easy for me to follow. And if I could follow these instructions and just make it look gourmet, I promise you any one of you can. So please go to hello fresh dot com slash legal a f 16. Okay, I don't know why it's 16 but but but but but make sure that may register in your brain. It's hellofresh.com slash legal a f 1616 and use the code legal a f 16 for up to now. I know I 16 free meals and three free gifts. See, you thought I didn't know. I

faked you. I did know to reinforce that you will be getting 16 free meals and three free gifts. So go to hello fresh dot com slash legal a f one six and use that code. If you want 16 free meals and three free gifts, I mean, who would want that? Pope, have you ever seen an ad read right that? At the beginning, middle and mystery. And I solved the mystery right there for everybody. That was great. I was confused. I thought you were

I thought you're going to tell me like when you pick an email handle, there were 15 other legal AF podcasts out there that we did not know about. There's only one. It's this one. No, it's

America's number one meal kit. Again, go to HelloFresh.com slash legal AF one six. Use that code. Get those 16 free meals and three free gifts pop up turning to Washington DC, the district court there judge meta Obama appointee heard oral arguments in Trump and others in this case,

trying to dismiss the lawsuits brought against them by capital police officers, members of Congress, these cases were all heard together. They sued him for his involvement, civilly. This is a civil lawsuit. The end of the day would be money, but they sued him civilly for inspiring the insurrection, encouraging the insurrection, being the leader of the insurrection and the damages that he

caused to these police officers, physical, mental, emotional, and to the members of Congress. Judge Meta wasn't having it at all with Trump's lawyers, Trump's lawyers. We're trying to do what the Trumpers always do when they go on CNN. Well, what about Bernie Sanders? Well, what about Black Lives Matter? What about, what about is, that doesn't work in the court of law and most federal courts of law, which is why we need to protect our courtrooms, Pope, and Judge Mehta said, I don't want to hear about your what about isms. And it sounds like Judge Mehta is not buying any of Trump's arguments, Trump's arguments are, I'm the president. You can't sue me for anything. When I gave a speech out there,

I was doing what presidents do. Presidents should have executive immunity from all of that conduct. You can sue us whatsoever and the judge wasn't buying it. What's your analysis of what's going on there? Yeah, I just remind everybody, this is the case that was originally brought by Benny Thompson, who's the chairman of the Jan 6th Select committee that we talk about at length every episode. And we're gonna be talking about it throughout this year, especially when the JAN-6 committee

starts holding public hearings, which is gonna happen. According to Jamie Raskin, who was on the talking head news shows last week, really soon, maybe first quarter of, first quarter of Benny Thompson, and another group of Congress people who were all subjected to the insurrection and the potential violent overthrow, attempted violent overthrow of the government, along with the Capitol police who have brought civil suits. So there's about five or six suits that are all sort of joined together in front of Judge Metta, MEHTA,

that are all sort of joined together in front of Judge Metta, MEHTA in the district court for the, in the District of Columbia. And again, just to remind our legal aifers, we're opening up a course here again on the KKK Act, the KKK Act of 1871, which was used in the Charlottesville case that we talked about about six or seven podcasts ago. If they're,

you know, if through force and intimidation, a group of people try to violate the 14th amendment and equal protection, it gives rights to a civil, to civil remedies and civil damages. And that is what Judge Metta, the sobhama point, as you rightly point out, is hearing. So the president and his lawyers have brought a motion to dismiss arguing, as you just mentioned, that he can't do anything and be sued civilly. That's effectively what they said. Absolute immunity for anything that he does. So if he gives that, that is insightful.

And I mean, I N C I CIT insightful insurrection speech at the ellipse on Jan 6th. And he says, you can have to go get him and take the house. And you go in there. And if you don't fight and arm yourself against this, you will, we'll lose our country. Now I'm going to walk over there with you now go and he just fired them up and like a weapon, like a loaded weapon, a cannon pointed them at the Capitol. And then of course, he went, he walked back to the White House and had a, and had a McDonald's in the dining room watching it while they went and broke down the barricades and started, you know, beating Capitol police and trying to hang and assassinate whoever they could find once they got inside there.

So the NAACP, Benny Thompson, Capitol police have this lawsuit. And what you are relaying is the oral argument or the hearing that Judge Meta just had on the motion to dismiss. And you're right, I do not think he's buying. He said to the one of the lawyers for Trump, let me get this straight. Is there anything the president of the United States could do during his administration until he's no longer, you know, the next person sworn in,

that would rise to the level of civil liability. And, you know, they got to like stay on message. So the response was no. Now, there's nothing he could do to subject himself to civil liability. And the judge said, well, what about when he's on the campaign, you know, he's not an executive when he's firing up his supporters, he's, is it he wearing his campaign hat? And of course, he's well, yeah, but he's the executive and he's the only occupant of the executive branch. And he gets a free pass for any of that. And he's got First Amendment rights and all this other stuff. I would be shocked if Judge meta dismisses the case based on an application of absolute

immunity. He might allow them to continue to have that as a defense. I don't think he's going to strike the defense, meaning if it ever gets to trial, which it will, he'll allow the jury, I believe, to be instructed as to whether that defense and the elements of it apply. He'll let them put on his evidence. He'll let them instruct the jury, but he's not going to dismiss the case now before the jury even has heard it based on an application of absolute immunity, you know, based, you know, I got a summary judgment standard. What do you think, Ben? When I, I agree with you, the case is not going to be dismissed. It's going to move on to the next step, which means there's going to be civil discovery, which will be a win in and of itself. Means Trump's going to have to sit for depositions. Documents are going to have to be

produced. And there's going to be that robust questioning. In addition to what Jan 6 is doing, in addition to what the DOJ is doing, one thing to flag, though, which may be interesting as we make a legal AF prediction now, that could take place months and events. No one's even talking about this. But if it's obvious that the DOJ is pursuing criminal charges against Trump and others, what Trump may do to try to delay the civil case is invoke his right against self-incrimination, his Fifth Amendment right.

And rather than say, I don't wanna be put in a position where I have to invoke my fifth in the civil case, but to ask the judge to stay or to halt or stop the litigation, if indeed there is a criminal investigation taking place, that frequently happens in civil cases sometimes. But it'll just be stayed. It'll just be stayed pending the outcome of the criminal prosecution. The argument though it would, it would then be an interesting argument

if Trump made that argument of what the DOJ's position would be, it would kind of put the DOJ on the spot, though, to say whether or not there is or isn't an active criminal investigation going into Trump because that would impact whether a federal judge may grant a stay on the basis of a potential criminal investigation. Now that's a very good observation. I like that observation. If you're Trump and you want to sniff out whether you are currently the target of criminal investigation, you're right. The DOJ, who's not involved in the case, could intervene or be asked

by the judge about the issue if they're trying to grapple with the application of the Fifth Amendment, we're not there yet. And I think the prosecutions will happen a lot later in time and won't necessarily impact the progress of the civil suit. But to your point, because I was a good one by Judge beta, this is where what was the quote that you like as you and I did a little talk before this? The quote you like from Ada like, let's not rewrite history here. He had the what about isms. I don't want what abouts. It was also, it was one where he was like, let's stick to the facts. Let's stick to the facts. Trump at the ellipse did the following. You know, he encouraged people to march, you know, he, he, he, he tweeted about it. He exacerbated

it. And he asked, he asked them he asked them, because one of the debates during the motion to dismisses can Trump be found to be in a conspiracy? What was the coordinated activity between the Janssick insurrectionist and the president? Because we're going to talk next about what may be, even though it's gotten little press, the strongest case against Trump from a criminal standpoint, may be the Georgia Fulton County Atlanta prosecutor case because there's no doubt or dispute that he picked up the phone and made the phone call. So he's in there, right? He's in the jackpot. The prosecutors of a conspiracy involving Jan six have to connect with their connective tissue. And they can do it through implication and they can do it through circumstantial

evidence, but they're going to have to connect the leaders of the Jan six insurrection, the proud boys, the oath keepers and, and then these members of Congress who are involved and the president of the United States. And this came up in a debate with judge made up on the motion to dismiss. They said the defense for Trump said, you can't connect him. You know, he, he wasn't there. He didn't do it. There's not an email that we know of that can, you know, where he was exchanging emails or other. And the judge says, yeah. But he lit the match effectively. And then he encouraged it while it was happening. He didn't call off the

dogs when he could have at the moment of time. So let's stick to the facts. And then I'll analyze whether civil conspiracy is appropriate against this president. But he's not, this complaint is going to continue. As you said, discovery doors are going to fly open depositions are going to be taken. In this case, it's going to go to trial. Do not sleep on Georgia, Popeyes. And I know you're not. We are not on legal AF. And certainly the Fulton County District Attorney Fanny Willis is not sleeping on her prosecutorial duty. She was recently interviewed by the Associated Press this past week That her team is making solid progress and that she's leaning towards asking for a special grand jury With subpoena power to aid in the investigation

Into Trump's election interference while Willis declined to speak about specific. She did confirm the scope that it include her investigation includes, but is not limited to the January 2, 2021 phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensberger, a November 2020 phone call between Senator Lindsey Graham and Raffensberger, a November 2020 phone call between Senator Lindsey Graham and Raffensberger and the resignation of the U.S. Attorney in Atlanta on January 4th, 2021. And comments made during December's 2020 Georgia legislative committee hearings on elections. Now remember, these issues in the legal AAP pocket, they're all related. This relates to what we said at the top of the show regarding the bullshit perjurous Ford certificates

that they were trying to do. They were trying to get these election officials like Secretary of State Brad Rathman's burger to actually decline to endorse the actual slate of electors from the state that based on the actual votes that would give the electors to Biden. And they were either telling Raffin's burger, hey, either find me the votes or don't do anything, don't certify the electors and allow these bullshit electors to go forward or endorse the bullshit electing slug. It's only it's all but remember this phone call, which is not in debate. It was recorded. We heard it.

You remember the first time I heard that thing. I was like, holy shit. President, that has just happened in secret. It's all out there. President of the United States picks up the, like, please hold for the president. And then he gets on the phone. I forgot who was, I don't know if Giuliani was on there or who else was on there. But he calls Raffisberger and the attorney general for the state and threatens them. This is the extortion issue that Fanny Willis is looking at. Threatens them. You got to find me for for like, what's 40,000 votes among friends?

Find me 40,000. It wasn't that it was 11,000 or whatever it was. All right. It was a very specific number. What's 11,482 votes among friends? Go find it. And if you don't, this is the extortion. This is the threat.

If you don't, it is the extortion. This is the threat. If you don't, it is a criminal conduct by you, meaning I as the president of the United States are going to prosecute you as an enemy of the state. If you don't find me these votes, that's the extortion. And that is, we don't have to worry about Fannie Willis having to convince the grand jury that Trump was involved. This wasn't like a liaison for Trump because later Lindsey Graham makes a phone call to try to and he's going to be prosecuted potentially too. He makes a phone call to try to influence the election as well. But this is Trump on tape.

And he was pissed off the media reported when he found that he was being taped a later on. But, but she's, she is the only prosecutor. Latisha James, Alvin Bragg in New York, the prosecutors at the Department of Justice, the prosecutors of Jan 6, the Jan 6 committee, only the Fulton County Georgia prosecutor has Trump dead to rights in participating in the actual conduct that is potentially criminal. Popo, do you remember what you probably don't remember?

No, I'm probably remembers because fortunately Donald Trump doesn't have a social media account anymore. But last month, Trump released a statement that had like no explanation around it. But this is what his statement was, quote, all Democrats want to do is put people in jail. They're vicious, violent, and radical left thugs. They are destroying people's lives, which is the only thing they are good at. I mean, this is just really a disgusting, indispensable man. I mean, as a past president to even talk like that, this man wants to send the United States, he already has,

but his goal is literally to destroy our country. Like, Korean, Koreaning off the cliff. I mean, it's just an unhinged wild, just absurd person that our country, but you know, here's the thing, there's a portion of our country, And this is why I'll tell everybody you need to listen to the new Midas Touch podcast. It's not legal a F. It's not the new pop-ok one that pop-ok is going to go off and start doing other ones. It is called. It is called the influence continuum with Dr. Hassan. Steve Hassan's been the preeminent scholar and culty programming, cult behavior, and he has the top guests, people who never go on podcasts,

academics who wrote papers in the 60s, 70s, 80s on mind control. But what this podcast does, I'm not sure what you're going to do on Wednesday, Popeye, but what this one does, I'm not sure what you're the one's going to do on Wednesday, Popeyes. But what this one does is it empowers people with the tools to speak to Trumpers, to speak to family members, and how you could get them out of the cult of Trump. Because it is a cult. They do everything that's opposite. If the earth is round, which it is, they say it's flat. If vaccines are helpful, they're anti-vax. Any single issue,

they take the wrong answer and the ultimate embodiment of the wrong answer for the moment is a Donald Trump. He embodies wrongness from a moral ethical, scientific, all standpoints is he embodies. Sorry for that rant, but go listen to the Influence Detainment on the Midest Such podcast. But anyway, this statement by Trump, this is a long-winded way of saying this statement came after Trump's lawyers met with the Fulton County Prosecutors Office, we now learn, which is why that statement happened and why Trump is sweating and coming up with those statements. So anyway, that.

Yeah. Yeah. You're right. And Rachel Maddow did a good job of reporting on that because when we first saw the from the I always love his stationary because he can't do social media. He liked somebody takes a old. I once saw a Jordi when you were doing something to podcast acting like he was typing on something even did the return, which I was surprised because givenuredy when you were doing something to the podcast, acting like he was typing on something, even did the return, which I was surprised because given his age, I'm

surprised he remembers when a typewriter actually had a return. So I gave him a lot of credit for that. But it's like from the office, from the desk of the 45th president of the United States with some phony seal that he created, you know, because nobody calls themselves that. Jimmy Carter doesn't call himself, you know, the former whatever president. It's just president Jimmy Carter. But he we were like, he look, he's normally unhinged, but what is this rant all about? And then of course, Rachel Mowd all reported that the Fanny Willis, the Fulton County prosecution,

you know, he cares so little about it. And he's worried so little about it that his own lawyers and I can't believe they went without his approval. His own lawyers went down, I guess, to try to convince her not to prosecute or not to call the special grand jury to think that lawyers got on a plane or video zoom without his knowledge in a major prosecution in Georgia. I mean, do you believe that Ben that the lawyers just got up one day and said, Hey, that's called fatty Willis. I can't imagine that being

the case, but in Trump's world, it's all about, I mean, Trump throws people under the bus all the time. So yeah, I'm sure I'm sure he was aware. I'm sure this is a top of the mind issue for them. And you can tell by Trump's tweet how it impacted him, but we're gonna be following up more with what's going on in Georgia, New York, what's going on with the special committee right now investigating Jan 6th. And we will keep you updated on all developments.

But it did feel like the wheels of justice are starting to turn ever more methodically and quickly than in 2021. And so a lot of updates and it's a perfect time for not just one, but two legal a F this podcast is. Okay, sorry. Sorry. Well, you can want to point I was going to go into. No, no, no, I was just going to say it. I want to, you know, I'm... If I do anything on this show,

besides enjoy it with you and bring legal and political issues, you know, down in a way that people can understand it and enjoy it. One of the things I think I bring is perspective and historical perspective, maybe because I'm the silver, the silver guy on the show, the silver bearded guy on the show. But if you were a year yourself, popo as the silver fox, were you about to go? I didn't say Fox. I didn't say. I know. But I let I there was a dot, dot, dot, which you you took, you took the big one of the gaps. So easily, the, the historical perspective is this, if we were, if we, if we had a podcast, if there was an internet, we had a podcast in Watergate era, in

like 1973, 1974, and we were one year into the Watergate investigation, which was the last time other than Iran contra in our nation's history that we had anything close to violent or subversion of our democracy at the hands of a sitting president. We're one year in. People would be ringing their hands and all upset and chastising the Department of Justice and what's happening. By the time that prosecution ended, attorney generals were sitting in federal penitentiary

for their role. A dozen people went to jail at the highest office. Nixon, yes, they didn't prosecute him. And we'll go into that at another time. But he left and disgraced, you know, helicoptered out like the fall of Saigon from the from the West Portico and the White House. And all of those things happened. Why didn't they prosecute Nixon? Because for the good of the country, the Department of Justice and Gerald Ford decided to give him a pardon to have healing start and move on.

But if we were a podcaster, if that was even possible, then people would be disappointed. It has, it's only a year. Why haven't people been brought to justice? Why is it Nixon and jail? Patience, justice takes time. The best quote I heard was was the one, the one liner in Merrick, Garland is we start with small people, with small charges as we methodically and painstakingly make our way through the evidence, be patient, justice will be served. This podcast is brought to you by Athletic Greens, Athletic Greens, Pope, I'm just going to pull up the Athletic Greens for those listening. I have an empty Athletic greens, athletic greens, Popeye, I'm just going to pull up the athletic greens for those listening. I have an empty athletic greens and with just a little bit of green on the bottom. I drink my athletic greens. Look at mine every single day. I've been drinking the athletic greens on the podcast, but not just because they're response. I'm not just because they're a sponsor. I drink athletic greens every single day. It's the first thing I make up in the morning.

It gives me the energy I need and I'm looking for in 2022, which is all about healthy lifestyles before A.G. one and athletic greens, Popoq before this very simple powder that I could just put into the cup, shake up a little bit and then have the drink. What I would do is I have a cabinet just full of different pills and different gummies and I would mix and match and I had no clue. You're a gummy guy. Popoq, I'm a gummy guy.

I'm a pill guy. I do all of it. I like the tasty gummy occasionally, but no more. One tasty scoop of AG one it contains 75 vitamins minerals whole food sourced ingredients including multivitamin multi mineral probiotic green superfood blend and more in one convenient daily serving. It's that special blend of high quality bioavailable ingredients in a scoop of AG1 which work together to fill the nutritional gaps in your diet, support, energy and focus, aid with gut health and digestion, and support a healthy immune system, effectively replacing multiple products or pills with one healthy, delicious drink. I just scoop it. I drink it. I got the vitamins I need and I am good for the day. It's lifestyle friendly. So whether you're keto paleo vegan dairy free or gluten free. It contains less than one gram of sugar, no GMOs.

less than one gram of sugar, no GMOs, no nasty chemicals or artificial anything while keeping it all tasting good. Join the movement of popocheons, mycelesians, athletes, lifestyles, life leaps, moms, dads, rookies, first timers, and everyone who is in between to take ownership of your daily health and focus on that nutritional product that need in the simplest manner possible. That's essential nutrition. And to make it easy, Popeyes athletic greens is going to give you out there, not you, Popeyes, because you've got it. I've got it.

But all those listening and immune supporting free one year supply of vitamin D and five free travel packs with your first purchase. That's athletic greens, ATH L E T I C G R E E N S dot com athletic greens dot com slash legal a F take control of your health. Give a G want to try get that legal AF energy to day. Popok, I want to talk about this Mary Trump development big fan and friend of the pod. I love Mary personally. Still want to talk about news when she's mentioned in it, the Trump family.

She was involved in a lawsuit. She filed a case against Donald Trump and two other siblings charged with fraud and civil conspiracy in this lawsuit by Mary Trump. And she claimed in this lawsuit that she was defrauded out of millions of dollars to which she was entitled to after the death of her father. There was a new legal team and a new motion to dismiss file. Yeah, this one, this one's interesting and we haven't really talked about it in the past and it also remind people who who was in the Trump family. So Donald Trump has a sister.

Her name is Mary Ann Trump-Berry, and she was, and so she retired. She's in her 80s now. She was a federal judge. So people are like, wow, Trump really disrespects the federal judicial system. His own sister was a Reagan appointee federal judge in New Jersey, and so she retired. But she is, along with Donald Trump, the estate of Robert Trump, a brother of the both of them, and the father of Mary Trump are suing, or I'm sorry, are in the suit with Mary Trump

where she has claimed that she was defrauded as a beneficiary of her father's estate of tens of millions of dollars by the fiduciaries, the executors of the estate which included Trump, Mary Ann, and other. They have come in with a new set of lawyers, and these are not the Trumps usual lawyers that are, you know, some small shop you've never heard of a stone's throw from his golf course. This is actually a well-known international law firm that's representing

them. Maybe Mary Trump, Mary is foot in the bill for this one. And there are maybe the donors of those Trump 10 for 10 for 10, give me money, things that he puts out are donating to his legal defense. Yeah. And because Mary, because Mary Trump is a frequent guest of the Midest touch. She couldn't use you and I to be her lawyer. So she went out and got somebody that you and I know, well, John Quinn of Quinn, a manual is a well-known trial lawyers, trial lawyer to be her lawyer. And the argument that the Trump group has brought is a very kind of

inside baseball argument about the statute of limitations. Their argument is that if she was defrauded in 2001 or so, then she all he had, she had six years to bring her case. Unless she can argue that she did not discover the fraud until later within the six-year statute of limitations under what we call constructive fraud theory or you know our other analysis around statute of limitations. So you have the battle lines are drawn. Mary Trump says, because of the way the financial documents that were produced through my uncle Donald and my aunt Mary Ann, I could not discover the true extent of the fraud until much later. And I brought the suit in in 20 in 2019 or 2020.

Their argument is no, you should, you were on inquiry notice as early as 2001, that you may have been defrauded. And the law does say that if you're on inquiry notice, that you knew or should have known that something bad has happened to you, that starts the statute of limitations clock. And so that just means for people listening inquiry notice that you have a duty to make an inquiry. You can't just cover your eyes and ears and say, I don't know about it. What inquiry notice means is that if you suspected it,

you should have researched it and then, and then you would have found the information. And in 2018, she gave an interview, Mary gave an interview the New York Times, in which she suggested that she knew at the time, this is their argument, that she knew at the time of the actual estate being resolved, which is 2001, that she'd been had. Now they have John Quinn and the lawyers for Mary Trump have come in it's at no, if you look at the documents that she was given, there's no way any layperson or even a smart person at Mary's level would have been able to discover the fraud until much, much later. And that's why she brought the suit. But this is what the court is going to have to grapple with these esoteric concepts of statute limitations inquiry notice when clocks for fraud start to run and when they don't. And you know, whether comments that

were made and you and I do this as part of our practice, you go into social media, you go into interviews, you try to find out statements that were made on the record by a public figure. And the last argument they're raising is that there was a settlement when Fred Trump of all people, the father of Donald Trump, the one who was really the real estate genius,

when he died, all the little trumpers and all the little nieces and nephews like Mary entered into settlements with the estate of Fredpers and all the little nieces and nephews like Mary entered into settlements with the estate of Fred Trump and gave releases. And they're arguing that the release that was in the Fred Trump estate settlement somehow applies to release any claims she had against her father's estate, the son of Fred Trump. It's a more complicated issue. It's again, one that this judge Robert Reed in the United

States District Court for Southern District of New York is going to have to resolve. We will continue to follow that development. We've got a lot more to talk about on the Midas Touch legal AF podcast today. Of course, we're not going to forget about the Supreme Court blocking the about the Supreme Court blocking the OSHA employer Vax mandate or testing requirement, but allowing the Medicare Medicaid services, health department requirement for health providers that that remained in effect. So one of the mandate struck down,

one of the Vax mandates in place as it relates to health care workers. And of course, we're going to talk about oath keepers being charged with sedition. The first time a sedition charge in Jan 6 has been brought. And the first time this charge has been brought since like 1994, 1995 in connection with the bombing, the first bombing of the World Trade Center, involving international terrorists. So to apply international terrorists, addition charges here in the United States

is also just big news generally from a legal perspective and well deserved based on the conduct of these terrorists. They can call themselves oath keepers. They can call themselves three percenters, but we call them here on legal AF terrorists. And that's what everybody should be calling them. But just a few quick things to point out before getting into that. Matt Gates, you see this pop up is ex girlfriend was seen going into the grand jury. He is definitely going to jail.

The ex-girlfriend who was with him while he was paying girls for sex and ex is the operative letter without immunity. No, no, spousal immunity, no husband, wife immunity is going has gone to Orlando to the grand jury, the federal grand jury to give testimony. She's trying to secure an immunity deal on her own because they're threatening to charge her with obstruction. But right now she's cooperating. This investigation is whether gates had sex with a 17 year old for money in 2017, whether he was obstructing the DOJ and their investigation into that and a bunch of other heinous conduct that Gates has engaged into.

Yeah, look, I don't, it's real, I don't even know how he's going to fight his way out of this. I know he acts like he's immune. It's tough on Matt Gates, but, you know, the evidence is out there through Joel Greenberg, which was his wingman for all of these rapes of girls and paid sex acts, that he was a participant in a website, a dark web website called Seeking Arrangement, which was a sugar daddy website. I mean, that makes it sound sort of comical. It's not. It's a place for older men to meet and rape girls. And that's what he did.

And there's evidence of that. Joel Greenberg, who's now the defraught felon, convicted felon, former nurse, seminal county, Florida tax assessor, who was his wingman for all these events, has already given testimony against Matt Gaetz. And now the ex-girlfriend, who because she participated testimony against Matt Gates. And now the ex-girlfriend, who because she participated in a tape recording of a phone call with one of the girl victims and refused to turn that tape over and cooperate with the FBI in the Department of Justice is now in the crosshairs and is getting dragged down to the grand jury in Orlando. And as you rightly pointed out, now they're scrambling after the fact her defense team to try to get her an immunity deal before she testifies. And you know, this is all terrible for bad. This might be the worst development for Matt gates, even more so the Joel Greenberg at the ex-girlfriend who went with him to the Bahamas, who went with him with Joel Greenberg, who was on the phone call with one of the victims and recorded it is now testifying against him.

And Popak Madison, Kothorn, or what's going on there, that North Carolina group of voters filed to disqualify him? I like this one. This is the Democrats doing to the Republicans what they've done to us, which is fight us at every angle at every moment and everywhere about everything.

And so I read the suit. I thought it was good. It's actually not a suit. It's a challenge, a written challenge that looks like a lawsuit filed by 10 North Carolina voters under North Carolina Constitutional law and the U.S. Constitution with the North Carolina Board of Elections to argue that Madison Cautorn, who is the representative from the 13th Districts, a Congressperson, who's running for re-election, is disqualified from being able to seek office under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the disqualification clause. Ben, do you know what the disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment is? We've talked about the disqualification clause, Ben, do you know what the disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment is? We've talked about the disqualification clause,

Popak, on the mitestate. It's in section three of the 14th Amendment in it. So good. And it gives Congress the power to disqualify someone who's already held a public office, from holding any office, if they participate in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States.

And so, Cawthorn was at the ellipse. He was a Jan 6 speech giver. He was, he was fomenting this riot and this insurrection. He was, he was giving cold, he was giving comfort, not cold comfort. He was giving comfort and aid to all of his supporters to go down there and to participate and tweet it about it. And then try to cover it up later by saying it was some sort of antifa, democratic group that had infiltrated Jansix, of course, after a full year of investigation, you know,

300,000 leads, 700 prosecutions, there's not an ounce of truth to that. And that's a lie. So listen, we're going to see, it's the first time the article, the the the disqualification clause, the 14th amendment is being used against someone seeking election, and they're doing it at the at the election board level. And then we'll see how it runs. I mean, eventually, I think all the people that are running who supported the insurrection, who held the door open, who gave the tours, who communicated on all of these apps and other dark web places with the proud boys and the oath keepers for their own nefarious purposes, like a Marjorie Taylor

Green and Mo Brooks and all the rest of them. This is the first opening salvo in the war against them because they are seditionists and they did promote the insurrection of rebellion against sitting against the government. I want to tell you about our partner stamps.com. If you don't have stamps.com. I don't really just don't know what you're doing at this point because you're living in another century. This is just how you deal with stamps today. If you're not dealing with stamps today, you should be dealing with stamps today because guess what, the post office still exists and we need to send mail and we need to send

packages and we use it here at LegalA to respond to a lot of the inquiries. We get that said to the mightest touch home office and might as touch we use it all the time to send out those holiday cards that y'all love stamps.com is what helped us. So if you're a small business owner, you're busy enough as it is, you don't have time to deal with the hassle of going to the post office with stamps.com skip that trip and never waste another dollar or minute stamps.com lets you print official postage right from your computer so you can spend less time at the post time at the at the post office and more time running your business stamps.com saves you time. Money, most importantly, stress. And for more than 20 years, stamps.com has been indispensable for over one million businesses giving you access to all the post office and UPS

shipping services. You need right from your home computer and get discounts. You can't find anywhere else like up to 40% off USPS rates and 76% off UPS. I mean, do you just like spending more money or do you like spending less money? I like spending less money. That's why I like stamps.com. So whether you're sending invoices, side hustles, doing like an Etsy shops and full blown warehouse operation or holiday cars like my this touch. We use it.

Are my law firm uses stamps.com. We did from day one when we opened the New York office. You know why? Because you like to make your life easier. You're a task maker, Popok, and you get stuff done. All you need is a computer and standard printer. No special supplies or equipment. And you'll be up and running in minutes printing official postage for any letters,

any package anywhere you want to send. So save time and money this year with stamps.com. Sign up with promo code, legal AF or a special offer that includes a four week trial, free postage, and a digital scale. No long term commitments or contracts. Just go to stamps.com, click that microphone at the top of the page, enter the code legal AF, that stamps.com legal AF. Popoq, we broke down the analysis of the oral arguments in the before the Supreme Court in the case about the Biden OSHA vaccine mandates. We spoke at this at nauseam on prior podcasts. We we pretty much predicted exactly what was going to happen. Again, this wasn't just a vaccine requirement. It was a vaccine requirement or testing at employers

that have a hundred or more employees. We talked about a lot of the data that was being shown too about how this would save tens and thousands of lives actually by encouraging people through mandates and testing requirements to get the life saving vaccine. And we knew based on this current composition of six radical right Supreme Court justices, three pro democracy judges that exist that were appointed by Democratic presidents in the past, that we knew where

this was headed. I mean, we did, unfortunately. And the Supreme Court ruled that the OSHA rule, and again, OSHA is involved in regulating work spaces and creating safe work environments and OSHA invoked its emergency powers because of all of the delta and Omni-Kron and all of the Strands that are that are taking place today and saying hey, it is urgent. There is an emergency that's taking place right now We can't just go through this regular notice requirement that may take months and years, which may end up resulting in people dying. Our job is to protect the workplace. But the Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom, and I say that sarcastically said, nope, you did not have the power that went outside your agency making power. If Congress wants to pass it, Congress can pass it, but of course, Congress, the House of Representatives

would pass it, but the Senate would never pass it. I mean, they would fill a buster this in a second, a law that would require a Vax mandate. We saw them attacking Dr. Fauci like crazy people last week, with those senators, those GQP crazy senators going after me. That's probably the right word. Just evil, malicious people who were trying to fundraise by attacking our medical heroes right now is a better way of saying what took place last week. But Pope,, any surprises, I'll just say the other thing quickly here, which is that the Supreme Court did allow the Center for Medicare Medicaid Services, that regulation,

which affects health care workers in facilities that take money from Medicare and Medicaid, that regulation stays in place, so So healthcare workers have to stay vaccinated, but not the employer mandate doesn't take effect. All right, so the underpinnings for the OSHA vaccine mandate, affecting employers with over 100 employees, the writing on the wall for that was the August decision that you and I talked about where the Supreme Court overturned the Center for Disease Control, the CDC's eviction ban during COVID.

And the underpinnings for the Supreme Court ruling that the federal health care workers under the health and human services department head or agency head would stand would be allowed. The underpinnings for that is, I believe goes back to Roberts, finding a way to support Obamacare and find that it was legal. Now, explain why. So it all comes down to the rulemaking authority and which agency has been delegated the appropriate rulemaking authority

or under the Administrative Procedures Act that you and I have talked about it like. And this is how the Federalists write wings six to three supermajority. This is how they use their analytic power to try to get a result that they want, which is in this case, giving Biden a black eye and removing the mandate. They look at the agency and they talk about what power it has. In the OSHA case, they looked at the law and they said that unless there is a toxic substance that is injuring people,

then Congress, if there isn't that present, then Congress requires that agency to go through the rigorous process of proper administrative rulemaking, which requires notice, public comment, and a public hearing before issuing a rule, which in a pandemic when people are dying literally hundreds of thousands a day shouldn't have to happen. But what they said was just as the CDC and its limited authority didn't have the power to issue a rule to stop evictions. OSHA, under the toxic substance rule or exception, doesn't have the ability to do emergency rulemaking in this area to affect 84 million people. That was the math that the Supreme Court majority of six to three Supreme Court majority of six to three came up with to impact their lives. The quote that is in the per curium decision unsigned, but we know it broke down six to three with Amy Coney Barrett,

Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Roberts, Alito, and Clarence Thomas against so toto-my-our, Breyer and Kagan. The comment in there was just, to me, made my jaw drop. It said that before the government can significantly encroach on lives and public health and as it do so through proper rulemaking. Isn't the disease severely impacting people's lives? What are we doing? We're preventing them from dying. And why is that a violation

of somebody's personal freedom? You have the right to die from smallpox. You have the right to infect your neighbor with Ebola. But look, what they're saying is, do the rule the right way. You could have done it a year ago, start the process, do public comment, do, do, uh, notice, and then publish the rule. And then you have a rule, but you can't do it on the, on the back end of your, on the back end of your, uh, of your process and call it an emergency rule. On the human services rule, they're like an Obamacare, they look at the Medicare and Medicaid regulations and they say, well, the federal government in Congress

is given to the federal government and the agency, the right to tie together funding for Medicare and Medicaid and entitlement to participate in the program. So we're going to find on a five to four decision with Kavanaugh and Roberts joining Kagan, Sotomayor, and Breyer and find that there is proper rulemaking because you are allowed to tie the funding of Medicare and Medicaid to how those facilities are going to operate, including making sure the people for the most vulnerable population are being, uh, healthcare

workers are being vaccinated. And, you know, already, Kavanaugh slid over to the majority of the proper decision as being attacked politically by DeSantis and others was saying, you don't have a spine. Why did you move over to the other side? But that's it then. It's just as, so just as Roberts was able to save Obamacare with an analysis of federal funding and the ability to legislate related to it. He cited again, consistently with that to find that the, that the vaccine mandate

on federal health care workers applies. And just as they shot it down with the CDC and the rent eviction, the eviction ban, they did the same thing with the ocean decision. It was once a time where our judges would travel to other countries to teach them how to be judges. And our judiciary was so exalted that it was such an honor and privilege to learn from them. But when the highest court of our land has people like Neil Gorsik, who compared COVID to the flu and tried to compare those statistics about how the flu has more deaths than COVID, which is so completely off base and so incorrect.

How can we possibly take this judiciary as a legitimate institution? It's hard. I'm trying. You know, and we have important great judges. I mean, as we've talked about another Midas touch, legal AFs, the one we did right before the holidays, which I will tell everybody to go back on. We broke down and talked about all of the appointments that Biden has made. One of the most important things are judicial appointments,

having people who follow the rule of law, who exercise, come and sense, and prudent judgment, and come from diverse backgrounds who have diverse experiences, not just former federal prosecutors, but also civil rights lawyers, also public defenders, voting rights lawyers, and Biden's got an A plus on that. Go back, listen to that podcast, but it is critical we have a legitimate judiciary and the problem that we're going to have with all of Mitch McConnell's machinations which resulted in this perverted Supreme Court that we have today and that they pervert the law is that this year

Popok will be marked as the end to the legitimate the Supreme Court, know, one of the unfortunate things is we know that in nine months, 10 months or so, maybe less, that the case in Mississippi, dobs, the Mississippi, which wants to keep the 15-week ban on abortions in place in Mississippi, banning abortions after 15 weeks, like we know at the very least the court's going to uphold that Mississippi law, which will totally

upend Roe, be weighed. And likely the court's going to overrule Roe, be weighed. The writings on the wall, there is going to be or should be mass protests in this country in front of that Supreme Court building, demanding change, demanding reform, because we are going to get angrier and louder and our voices need to be heard. We need to wake up about what this judiciary is doing. And we need to vote. None of this defeatist loser attitude about, oh, we can't do anything, you know, because of, you know, the Senate doesn't want to pass the voting rights bill. We're fucked. We can't

do anything. I'm just going to wine. Stop fucking whining. I'm done with the whining. It's 2022. You're fucking whining. Got us Donald Trump in the first place. The people, oh, we're not going to invite, we're not going to vote for Hillary Clinton. You fucked up. You are the reason that we have decisions like this with the Supreme Corpus Trump got three ridiculous people on there who just basically said, COVID should fucking spread across the country and you're to blame. So stop being fucking whiny and defeatist and get up there in 2022 and do something and stop talking about, oh, I'm gonna do something. Just fucking do it.

Just do it now and get up and wake up. It's 2022. Your life, your family's life and your community life is on the line. So wake up and do something. And I'm glad you like this podcast. I'm glad you like the other podcast. Now get motivated and go out there and do something. And I'm glad you like this podcast. I'm glad you like the other podcast. Now get motivated and go out there and do something. Sorry. So speaking about the last thing,

Popuck, on the charges of sedition, the oath keepers were charged with sedition, that all the Republican talking points were, oh, you never charged with sedition. So why are you calling this a terrorist and seditious act? All the charges that have been brought have been low-level charges. We've talked about the charges escalating from the lower-level people to the mid-level people, and now sedition charges were brought against this group called the Oath Keepers, which is just a terrorist group. Tell us about these charges. Yeah, this is a tremendous development and a proper development along the life cycle of a major, one of the biggest and most robust federal investigations led by the Department of Justice in our nation's history

with the amount of people that were involved at the highest levels and at the lowest levels. And as Barack Garland said, and I alluded to earlier, in his speech on Jan 5, in complex cases, they often start with indictments of less severe quality as they purposefully and methodically continue to sift through the evidence as they move up the chain to the apex violators and wrongdoers and criminals. And that, I think, was also a example of what we just saw. He knew that the oath keepers were going to be indicted this week by the grand jury. And so I

think that was a small, you know, he's a very soft spoken guy in that way. He knew that was coming, but he didn't want to signal it. He didn't want to leak it. Everyone's like, there's no leaks of the media. Must be. It's not happening untrue. There are no leaks in the Oklahoma bomb, the Oklahoma city bombing either or the World Trade Center bombing, either when Maricarla was involved in those things. And so we have a 10 people, including eight that have already been prosecuted for other crimes, but 10 oath keepers led by Stuart Rhodes,

the leader of the oath keepers, the admitted founder and leader of the oath keepers, he's the one of the guys that has a patch over one of his eyes. But he shot himself. Was that how that happened? He tried to commit suicide. No, no, no, no, no. He dropped again and shot himself.

Oh, oh, of course. Thank you for making that clarification. So the one aren't one eye guy who shot himself using a firearm improperly is the leader and founder of the oath keepers. So the Department of Justice, what I call and you and I call main justice out of Washington DC, not one of the local U.S. attorney's offices for the state, has brought charges through the grand jury of seditious conspiracy against 10 people, eight men, two women who live in Ohio, Texas, Florida, and Alabama, including Stewart Rhodes, most of which have already been indicted for other charges under 18 USC section 2384,

which is a conspiracy, a seditious conspiracy to oppose the peaceful transfer of power of this country. And the way that the, and there's a press release on the Department of Justice website that outlines the indictment, the penalty for seditious conspiracy is the highest penalty other than obstruction. It's 20 years up to 20 years maximum. It's the same as obstruction, which they're using for some of the lower level people So those are the two giant cudgles that they're using against these people and basically they're saying that they have evidence Then in Nov starting in November 2020 when Biden won the election all the way to Jan 6th That this group of people using a dark web communications device called signal app

s i g n a l communicated with each other created a quick action reaction force that was armed with weaponry they called it the q r f that they they along with a guy a part of their group called Tom Caldwell, former Navy, former intelligence, former FBI with a higher security clearance as part of this group led this aditious conspiracy to both interfere with the peaceful transfer of power to overthrow or put down by deadly force, the government count two of the indictment is conspiracy to obstruct official proceedings. Count six through seven is six civil disorder. Counts nine through 17 are tampering with documents. And this is all going to lead these people to end up in jail to plead guilty or to be sentenced up to 20 years in prison. And now that they have this aditious conspiracy or one seditious conspiracy defined in a what we call a hub and spokes, like a bicycle wheel, the hub of the conspiracy

and the spokes of the conspiracy, the question is for this particular conspiracy, are they going to be able to eventually tie in members of Congress? The Trump campaign and Trump himself and people like Mark Meadows. Now, there doesn't have to just be one conspiracy. You know, Metta, judge Metta that we talked about earlier tonight, is looking at one level of conspiracy, maybe involving Donald Trump on a civil standard, but on a criminal standard, they can be multiple conspiracies defined as two or more people working in concert to violate the federal laws. But they have to be working either implicitly or expressly in concert. And the question is, are they going to be able, as the DOJ ultimately can be able to tie in at the outer bounds elected officials and Donald Trump

himself to this conspiracy, or are they going to be redefining different sub conspiracies to try to find the government? But everyone that wants, again, as you and I have talked about, Donald Trump's head on a pike and a spike and wants him prosecuted at the highest levels for the for the for these types of charges. This is what thousands of federal prosecutors and FBI agents pouring over documents, data, communications platforms, text messages, video evidence, and the like are going to be presenting. You and I keep talking about the amount of people that have testified to the Jan 6th committee.

I just saw the new numbers from Jamie Raskin when he testified last week on the Sunday shows. That number's almost doubled. They're up to almost 700 people who have given sworn testimony to the committee and provided the evidence. And Jamie's position is, yeah, I like Mark Meadows. I like, I like McCarthy to come in.

I like a few other people to come by. But we can do this Jan 6th Committee work and make findings that are substantial without them participating. But if we want criminal prosecution of seditious conspiracy, leave it, I mean, literally leave it to the Department of Justice to tie this together and connect these dots. We will keep you posted on more Jan 6 developments on new episodes of Midas Touch Legal A F want to thank everybody for tuning into Midas Touch Legal A AF this weekend, whether you're watching it live. Make sure if you do,

you subscribe to the YouTube channel. For those listening, say, how can I watch this live? I keep hearing live this live that you just go to the Midas Touch YouTube channel. You subscribe and you get the updates and you ask for alerts. And so when the show comes on, it gets delivered to your phone or your computer or wherever you have your YouTube app. That's how you watch it live or you can watch it live on. We have it live on Twitter. We have it live on Facebook. So you can watch it live on any of those platforms, but the first live we launch and we're in the chats is always on the YouTube. So make sure you check us out there.

Special thanks to all of our sponsors, blinkist, go to that blinkist.com and use the code legal AF, stamps.com, use the code legal AF. Hello fresh.com, remember it's legal AF, 16 and athletic greens.com, remember it's legal a F and all great sponsors with products that I use every single day. Popok and I are so grateful for the support of all the legal a F's out there. It's why we're adding another legal AF into the mix, which will now be every Wednesday, a new legal AF will drop. It will be a midweek review where popok and KAF will delve deeper into the issues.

into the issues, KFA will delve deeper into the issues of that we're discussing on legal A.F.A. I like KFA, but you probably call it KFA her actual name. KFA. We will do 30 minutes. We'll do a nice 30 minute. We'll keep it tight. Drill down for Wednesday,

which will be a good springboard for you and I to do our normal top seven, top 10 stories. And then KFA and I will be a good springboard for you and I to do our normal top seven top 10 stories and then KFA and I will be able to drill down. And we make listen, it may be a drill down of some of the things that you and I talk about or it may just be things that develop or that we're keeping an eye on on a slow simmer that we want to drill down on for a good 30 minutes. Well, thanks again, everyone for listening. I hope you will enjoy that extra edition.

Make sure you subscribe to this podcast. Again, give it a five star review, whether you listen to this on Apple Spotify or however you get your podcast, you can give it a review, give it a five star review right now, give it a review. I want to get to a thousand. I want to get to a thousand reviews.

We're about seven, 80. I want to get to a thousand reviews. We have 100,000 or more people, 150,000 people that enjoy the show every week. Let's get a thousand reviews. Yeah, make sure you review it and we'll see you same time, same place next time on Midas Touch, legal AF if it's Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday, it's legal AF the entire week. Ben, myself, is Pope, pop signing off. See you next week with more legal developments. Shout out to the Midas mighty.