Legal AF by MeidasTouch - The Intersection with Michael Popok Full Episode - 7/8/2025

Episode Date: July 9, 2025

Michael Popok is back at the Intersection with breaking news at the hot corner of law and politics and tackles: 1)  Trump's Big Beautiful Bill's attempts to defund and put Planned Parenthood out of business being blocked by a Big Beautiful Temporary Restraining Order; 2) Judge Xinis telling the DOJ, effectively, that they can't be trusted and ordering that they go under oath in the witness box this week about the Abrego Garcia case; 3) how one Federal Judge in Boston is single handily blocking the Trump Administration's Birth Right Citizenship cancelling executive order; 4) Marco Rubio is a "Deeper Fake" than we thought with a new Signal scandal rocking the Trump Administration and undermining our national security, and so much more. Support our Sponsors: Tushy: Over 2 million butts love TUSHY. Get 10% off Tushy with the code LEGALAF at https://hellotushy.com/LEGALAF! #tushypod Moink: Keep American farming going by signing up at https://MoinkBox.com/LEGALAF RIGHT NOW and listeners of this show get FREE WINGS for LIFE! Check out The Popok Firm at: https://thepopokfirm.com Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@LegalAFMTN?sub_confirmation=1 Legal AF Substack: https://substack.com/@legalaf Follow Legal AF on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/legalafmtn.bsky.social Follow Michael Popok on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/mspopok.bsky.social Subscribe to the Legal AF by MeidasTouch podcast here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/legal-af-by-meidastouch/id1580828595 Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

No frills delivers. Get groceries delivered to your door from No Frills with PC Express. Shop online and get $15 in PC optimum points on your first five orders. Shop now at nofrills.ca. Well, you're here again on The Intersection. And so am I. I'm Michael Popak, and we do this podcast only on the Midas Touch Network. I'm traveling, but I don't have the luxury of taking time out of defending democracy, defending our constitution, or our constitutional republic. So here we go. Let's start right off with CBS Paramount slash Skydance settling with Donald Trump. That settlement is getting smellier by the moment. We've got new reporting coming out that there's a side deal. It's not just the $16 million that the family

of Sumner Redstone owning Paramount is apparently going to be paying to the Trump administration for doing absolutely nothing wrong in their reporting. They didn't even do reporting. They did an interview with Kamala Harris and Donald Trump doesn't like the way it was edited because they shrunk and shortened up her answers the way they do for anybody else

while making the entire interview available online separately. What's this really about? This is really about just a bribery scandal. The Donald Trump got back into power, used his Federal Communications Commission headed by Brendan Carr to squeeze the balls of Sumner Redstone and Sherry Redstone,

Sumner Redstone's family and Sherry Redstone, his daughter, who wanted to do a deal that needed regulatory approval between her company and Skydance, owned by, wait for it, David Ellison. Who's David Ellison? He's the young son of Larry Ellison, who owns Oracle, a huge Donald Trump supporter. So the young David Ellison, I mean, this is right out of,

this would be the fifth season of succession if there was one on HBO. David Ellison at Skydance, I don't think he's ever run a company of the size of Paramount, wants to do the deal and buy it. They need regulatory approval. Donald Trump gets back in power and said, I'm not giving regulatory approval through FCC

unless there's a major payment made to Trump. And so that's why Sherry Redstone needs to make the payment because she needs to make this deal in order to get cash for her assets she inherited from her father who died. And so who is the victim in all this besides the American people? 60 Minutes used to be the crown jewel of the Tiffany network. Remember when CBS and CBS News was known

as the Tiffany network, Edward R. Murrow's network? They're all spinning in their graves for having made this settlement. But now the new reporting is, it's not just the $16 million in cash to Donald Trump effectively. There's not just the $16 million in cash to Donald Trump effectively. There's another 15 to $20 million in public service announcement ads

that was promised to Donald Trump and the administration, according to an insider in reporting, including through a Rupert Murdoch newspaper, by the way, that that 15 to $20 million in public service ads are going to be for the benefit of anything Donald Trump wants to have advertised on the network. So now when you're watching CBS, one of your favorite shows,

you're going to see an ad that's run for the Trump administration, bragging about the Trump administration. And who's bragging about that side deal? Apparently, David Ellison. So David Ellison, the son of Larry Ellison, the owner of Oracle comes up with the great idea that when he finally gets control of CBS,

he's going to force it down its throat, public service announcements and effective campaign ads for MAGA and Donald Trump. Does anybody not see this? Who doesn't see this $30 million in total payments and compensation and consideration to be a bribe to the Trump administration to get them to approve give them the regulatory approvals for the transaction.

And the fact that there's this close link again between one of these tech bros, I mean, the original tech bro of Larry Ellison and his son, who I'm sure he's the puppet master for, David Ellison, and gave him a lot of the money to start Skydance, which is now buying Paramount. If anybody doesn't think this is basically insider trading and a bribery scandal all wrapped into one,

tell me in comments. I think this is why people are on independent media. I think this is what attracts you to Midas Touch, to Legal AF, to shows like The Intersection. I'm not controlled by corporate media. Sumner Redstone's family's not rolling up Midas Touch Network or buying us. We have no outside investors for a reason.

And now you see how it influences journalistic integrity because CBS just threw its journalistic integrity into the trash or at least Paramount, its parent company did. And through 60 minutes, which used to be highly respected, the crown jewel of the Tiffany network is now in the trash as well. And so we've got that settlement.

Now I want to turn to a new development related to, this is no easy segue here, Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood was on the balls of its backside about 10 days ago, when the United States Supreme Court in a case we call Medina, and all this is up, these kind of cases I'm talking about are all up on the legal AF sub stack. A great way to support this podcast, by the way.

So the case of Medina comes out, and we all have a collective sigh, and it puts Planned Parenthood potentially in life support because South Carolina had cut the Medicaid funding between the state and Planned Parenthood. Now let me just get rid of all the misinformation out there about Planned Parenthood that could be used against you

when you're having your conversations around the kitchen table, in the streets, social media or whatever. Planned Parenthood is not in the abortion business. Planned Parenthood does not perform abortions. I mean, I can't say it any plainly, any more plainly than that. Planned Parenthood provides reproductive counseling,

including perhaps recommending to the person that they seek an abortion, if that's what their choosing is. They counsel, they don't provide the service. They also do things like supply birth control at low cost or no cost to millions of women and men. They do cancer screening, they do sexually transmitted disease

and infectious disease screening. And if they get cut from Medicaid, they're going to have to close 200 planned parenthood centers around the country, including in 90% of the states where abortion is allowed. So anybody that tells you the Planned Parenthood is an abortion provider, they are not. And so we saw the South Carolina ruling, the Medina ruling by the Supreme Court 10 days ago, in which the Supreme Court said, well, South Carolina made a decision to cut Planned

Parenthood out of Medicaid funding, but Planned Parenthood, you don't have the right under the statutes, the Medicaid statutes, to run into court. You don't have standing, we call it, because Congress didn't give you the right to enforce your rights under Medicaid in a private right of action in a courtroom.

That sounds, I know that sounds counterintuitive, that if you're injured and you receive funding under a statute and somebody cancels your statute or cancels your statutory right, you should be able to run into court. We do have other ways to do that, but the Supreme Court said no. You, in this scenario, Congress did not wanna have people

and organizations suing over Medicaid funding, so you have no right to challenge this. We're not gonna address whether they were right or they were wrong under Planned Parenthood or under the Medicaid ruling in South Carolina to cut off Planned Parenthood. We're just gonna say you don't have the right to litigate this in court.

That was bad for Planned Parenthood. And then there's a silver lining. That big bill of Donald Trump's that became a 90 page, 90 page campaign ad for the Democrats at the midterm. But buried within the pages, sorry, the 900 pages of the bill that have now become law in Donald Trump's budget. Which if we are doing things right,

we need to put as a millstone around his neck and sink this administration. But buried in there was a defunding mechanism against Planned Parenthood. Yeah, targeting Planned Parenthood. Calling, you know, and labeling them in such a way that they would be denied Medicaid funding. That's in the bill.

So Planned Parenthood ran, I mean ran, July 7th, filed a new lawsuit up in Massachusetts in front of Judge Talwani, an Obama appointee, Indira Talwani, very fine judge, and got an emergency temporary restraining order. So big, beautiful bill, meet big, beautiful temporary restraining order, so big beautiful bill meet big beautiful temporary restraining order.

And why are they able to do that? Because if you're thinking about what's happened in the last 10 days, Supreme Court tells federal judges you can't do nationwide injunctions, except maybe when states are involved. You can't do nationwide injunctions. And two, Planned Parenthood, you don't have the right to sue about Medicaid funding under the Medicaid statute.

Then how, Popak, can you tell me that there's a temporary restraining order on proper jurisprudential grounds up in Massachusetts that will survive appellate review? How? Okay, I'm gonna tell you. One, it's not a nationwide injunction. Judge Talwani issued the temporary restraining order in favor of only the parties that were in front of her.

Planned Parenthood Federation and Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts and Utah. Okay, define parties. So it doesn't violate the Supreme Court's recent ruling. That's one, because just to be clear, if there is a act of Congress, a law of Congress that's passed, it can be challenged as being a violation

of the Constitution and being discriminatory in a federal court of law. Happens all the time. Not a lot with this particular Supreme Court, but it generally happens all the time. So no violation of nationwide injunction because it's not a nationwide injunction, that's one. Two, they're not suing under the Medicaid statute. they're not suing under the Medicaid statute.

They're not suing under the Medicaid statute. They're suing under the new budget that was just passed and the defunding mechanism. All right, so they can bring a constitutional challenge under the First Amendment, freedom of association. I get to hang out with people that I want to hang out with, that's a First Amendment, freedom of association. I get to hang out with people that I wanna hang out with, that's a First Amendment right. And First Amendment freedom of speech

because they're attacking the Planned Parenthood for their viewpoint, it's viewpoint discrimination. They don't like what Planned Parenthood does in their counseling sessions because it offends the, I don't know, the Christian Mago right of this administration. So they're challenging it under First Amendment, freedom of association, and First Amendment freedom of speech,

and under the Fifth Amendment and equal protection. That's different than the case where Planned Parenthood was on the losing end 10 days ago, which was suing under the Medicaid statute. So the temporary straining order is in place. Judge Talwani has determined that there's more likely than not that they're going to be able to prove their constitutional violations.

The irreparable harm is obvious. Planned Parenthood told Talwani in their filing, they'll have to put 2.1 million people off of their, out of their offices. They'll lose the services if 2.1 million people off of their, out of their offices. They'll lose the services. If 2.1 million people will lose the services of Planned Parenthood, 200 offices will be shut.

And 90% of the places they operate, abortion is legal. And so I see this as a winner for Planned Parenthood and a really great result. What's going gonna happen next? Judge Talwani said, I'm gonna block it. You're to continue to fund the way you've been funding on the same timeline. And lastly, I am going to hold another hearing.

You submit your documents in about two weeks and tell me Trump Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, which is the sort of the parent agency for Medicaid and Medicare. You tell me why I shouldn't extend this to a preliminary injunction. Trump administration, I mean, they could try to take an appeal

on the temporary restraining order up to the first circuit. I just don't see them doing that. I think they'll wait another two weeks. They'll get a win or a loss, likely a loss with Judge Talani. They'll take it back to the First Circuit and then they'll get a loss at the First Circuit, just my prediction. A court of appeals up in Massachusetts. Then they'll take an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. Probably another emergency application that'll go up to the United States Supreme Court sometime this summer while they're on summer holiday

and we'll get some sort of ruling we may or may not like. That's the best way for me to put it. I don't think there's no, what they did in the Medina case about the statute in South Carolina is not gonna bear their analysis here, but we're to see if they're going to block the temporary restraining order of Judge Talwani and cut off funding to Planned Parenthood and effectively put them out of business

while the niceties of the appeal continue. And I'm not confident enough at the moment without seeing the briefing to predict what the Supreme Court's gonna do. I'll pick that up as I gather more information between now and over the summer as the case moves up on appeal. When that goes up on appeal and when they have an oral argument,

we will put the oral argument, the actual audio, up on Legal AF, the YouTube channel. Here's a moment. Here's a great way to continue to support what we do here. Legal AF the YouTube channel just rolled the odometer to 700,000 subscribers in a very, very short amount of time. But we could continue to use your help. Come on over there, hit the free subscribe button

and help us continue to grow Legal AF the YouTube channel. All right, moving from Massachusetts back to Maryland. We've got a brand new development in ruling and order in breaking news coming out of Judge Zinnis' chambers about, chambers about Abrego Garcia. Let me catch you up there. Yesterday, Judge Zinnis held a hearing in her courtroom, one that the Trump administration tried to postpone.

What were the topics? Well, it was wide ranging. One was Donald Trump's attempt to the Department of Justice to move to dismiss the Abrego Garcia case in Maryland, arguing that she wanted him back from El Salvador and they finally brought him back to stand charges in Tennessee.

On a set of charges, it looks like the Trump administration has abandoned against Abrego Garcia for human smuggling. And isn't that good enough judge? Can we go home now? You exerted jurisdiction to get him home. He's home and we're done. And she said in the hearing, no. I deny your motion to dismiss. First of all, we have to put him, I have to put him back in the place he was in terms of status quo before you deported him. And he wasn't in Tennessee standing charges before you deported him.

And I have to make sure that due process is properly administered to him because my bosses at the United States Supreme Court supported me nine zero on this issue. So motions to dismiss are denied. Then to get to the bottom of what is likely bosses at the United States Supreme Court supported me nine zero on this issue. So motions to dismiss are denied. Then to get to the bottom of what is likely to be a contempt finding by Judge Dennis,

she wanted to know what the Trump Administration Department of Justice's position was about Abrego Garcia because they've been speaking with forked tongue lately. On one end, they tell the court and outside the court, they say that they're gonna try a Brego Garcia for human smuggling in Tennessee on some charges that they did over a two week investigation

about something that happened at a traffic stop two years ago where he was released. And they first, they said, we're gonna try that case. We believe in our case, we're gonna try it. He's a human smuggler. Pam Bondi went off and said all sorts of things that weren't in the indictment. He's a child pornography, child exploiter,

wife abuser, murderer. Like where is that in the indictment? Well, it's not there, but you know, it was a lot of the co-conspirators told us about these things. Okay, well what's in the indictment? Human smuggling, which is not human trafficking. It's not exploitive.

It's like a transaction. I need to get across the border. I pay you to do it. Thank you. It's a crime, but not quite the crime that they made it out to be. So you've got one statement that's made that says we're gonna try that case first,

then we're gonna remove him and send him to a third country not named El Salvador But then you had lawyers at the almost the exact same time telling judges innocent and stating in other places that no We're not gonna deport him I mean, we're not gonna try the case the criminal case as soon as he gets out of federal detention for the criminal case We're going to start the process to remove him and set him out. And you'd think they'd be able to get their story straight

in a court to make the judge comfortable, but they never did. Remember, this is the same guy that's sitting in federal detention right now under the federal marshals because he asked for any federal magistrate found grounds to protect him from the Trump administration and hold him in federal marshal protection until the 16th, at least of July.

That's why they ran over to judge a Zinnis, the lawyers for Abrego Garcia, to say, hey, we got him safe now in Tennessee, so he's not gonna be sent to South Sudan or Libya, but can you help us out here? You still have jurisdiction. She called everybody together and she was not getting straight answers.

She says, first of all, you said to me that you could never bring him out of El Salvador. And then six days later, you brought him out from El Salvador. Why is it like, this is her quote now from the hearing, why is it like stapling Jell-O to the ceiling and getting the questions answered? So she got very frustrated and found it not believable.

You also have the other subtext, which is, or context, which is that lawyers in her courtroom, it's been alleged in a whistleblower complaint, lied to her, lied to her. Lawyers that are no longer there, by the way. Drew Ensign, who was, who one of the whistleblowers claimed lied to Judge Zinnis to her face, he's not showing up in court anymore.

I'm not sure where he is. He's buried somewhere in the bowels of the Department of Justice, maybe never to see the light of day again. Erez Ruveni, who was the lawyer who told Judge Zinnis the truth, which got all this thing started, that a judge, that Abrego Garcia had an order of non-removal in his back pocket that ICE knew about

and sent him to El Salvador in the middle of the night anyway, he got fired for telling the truth. So that's the context, right? That the Trump administration, and we've got the whistleblower allegations that Emil Bovi, Donald Trump's former criminal defense lawyer, number three in the Department of Justice,

and who's up for a lifetime appointment at the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, that he got a group together in March of Department of Justice immigration lawyers and told them to effectively not tell the truth to federal judges and to tell them to go F off his words. Yeah, so you got that. Judge, no wonder she doesn't trust anybody.

So here's what she's decided to do with her new order. She is going to, she is now ordered from today that there be a hearing on the 10th of July that the government, Department of Justice, Trump, whatever, needs to identify somebody with knowledge, with personal knowledge, or can get up to speed about what is the administration's position about what they're going to do next with Abrego Garcia. That's fair, but she wants it under oath, not just a representation of an officer of the court because she doesn't trust them So she wants in her courtroom on the 10th and will report on it

Somebody on a stack of Bible Bibles penalty of perjury To be cross-examined by the court by the defense by the prosecution whatever By the plaintiffs to answer the question. What are you gonna do next with Abrego Garcia? Are you gonna try him in Tennessee, or are you abandoning that? Because it looks like they're abandoning that lawsuit. I mean that criminal complaint against Abrego Garcia. After much fanfare, he's terrible, he's MS-13.

Well, oh my God, he's a human smuggler, he's a human trafficker, all pan-Bondi. Now it's like, well, sorry, we're not using that anymore. It even led the judge to say, well, did you just create a criminal complaint in order to get him out of El Salvador? And you couldn't get a straight answer on that either. So now I want to know what, with a person on the stand,

what you're going to do, put them in the witness box. How you're going to do it, when you're going to do it, what notice you're going to do. Put them in the witness box. How you're going to do it, when you're going to do it, what notice you're going to give, or you're planning to give to Abrigo Garcia and their lawyers in due process as a result, right? Are you going to remove, what country, what's the process, what's the logistics? Be ready to answer these questions on the 10th.

This is extraordinary. In my entire career, I've never seen, except in this administration, federal judges not believe the Department of Justice when they speak as officers of the court under ethical obligations, and instead force them to put a witness, whether it's a lawyer, Department of Justice person,

some sort of a civilian, somebody to tell her under oath, because if they violate it, she's going to find them in contempt. Now, what are they going to do next? Good question. Based on their track record, and especially against Judge Zinnis,

even though she's been defended and confirmed and affirmed by the Supreme Court, nine zero, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals twice, they're gonna defy her. They're gonna do it two ways, right? We can do the script. We know the script, we could do it ourselves. We're so fatigued and bored with their routine.

Right on cue, social media attack, social media influencers for Donald Trump attack Judge Sinis as being a Marxist, a leftist, a radicalist, never, wasn't elected, you know, that's how federal judges work in this country. And then the Department of Justice is gonna file a motion for a hearing, a reconsideration.

They're gonna say it's all privilege. We can't tell you what we're gonna do. We're not gonna tell you what we're gonna do. They've said that before. We're gonna, where we have the presidential privilege, we have the state secrets privilege, we have the diplomacy privilege, they'll make up privileges along the way.

And we're not gonna tell you, and don't make us tell you. And then she's gonna say, F you, you're showing up on the 10th in her own way, I wear the black robe. And then we're not, they're not gonna show on the 10th. She's gonna start contempt proceedings. They're gonna run to the DC Court of Appeals or skip a step and try to go to the United States

Supreme Court and see if they can lob another Hail Mary and get a positive result from the United States Supreme Court. That's what's going to happen. That doesn't mean that I don't believe that Judge Zina should do exactly what she's doing. She should do exactly what she's doing. She should do exactly what she's doing. We should make this hard work for judges.

I mean, for the Trump administration and the Supreme Court justices. It's not a sterile exercise. It's important. She can't just allow all of these actions and all of these conducts and behaviors against her to chill what she wants to do, to influence or impact her decision-making as a jurist,

I'm just giving you the likely outcome. And I'll know more when I see the next filing by the Trump administration, which should happen, I would think sometime by tomorrow, come back on a hot take here on the Midas Touch Network or on Legal AF. Look, there's lots of different ways to support what we do here on Legal AF, the YouTube channel, and here on Legal AF. Look, there's lots of different ways to support what we do here on Legal AF, the YouTube channel,

and here on the intersection. First of all, the intersection is brand new, right? And it needs love and care. It needs a little more oxygen to kind of get liftoff, yeah? We're doing well. We get 15, 20,000 people watching the YouTube. We get a couple hundred thousand people who listen to it or watch it on the audio downloads.

We're always ranked somewhere in the top couple of hundred of podcasts. But we could use a little turbo boost. Here's your chance. Download the intersection on the audio podcast platform of your choice. I don't care what it is, Apple, Spotify, Google, whatever it is, that's one.

Two, leave a comment here. Leave a comment here, leave a comment here and send this clip off to people in your life and ask them to watch the intersection. So downloads and views are really important. Reviews are really important. I think I got about 100 reviews already. They're doing well, I appreciate it,

but leave a five-star review and leave comments. I read all the comments, really important to the show and where it's going. That's a way to support us. Then we've got Legal AF, the YouTube channel, which just rolled the odometer on 700,000 subscribers in well less than a year and on our way to a million. Hit, we have no paywall.

There's no outside investors either. So you might be thinking, well, how do we keep this network on the air and these channels on the air? Yeah, we need a subscriber base. Hit the subscribe button and continue to help that pro-democracy channel as well. We got a dozen amazing contributors over there that I curate, including a couple of new ones.

We got Rachel and Tiara, who do a show called Pragmatic Optimist from sort of a Gen Z perspective, but for the generations. They're not just speaking to their generation, they're speaking to all generations. Rachel Cohen, a true thought leader and somebody leading the charge of opposition

and defiance against the Trump administration as a young lawyer and Senator Tiara Mack, who's a state Senator up in Rhode Island. I think you're gonna love that new show. And then of course, we've got, it's complicated. Asha and Renato, foreign, sorry, national security experts, former FBI, former prosecutors, they come together and they make it not complicated. So that's a way, come over and support Legal AF,

the YouTube channel. And then of course, we've got our sponsors. And our sponsors are really important. And now here course we've got our sponsors and our sponsors are really important. And now here's a word from our sponsors. This episode of Legal AF is brought to you by Moink Box. Did you know four companies control over 80% of the US meat industry? And that the largest share of US pork

is now controlled by China? These meat giants use mobster like tactics to crush American family farms, flooding our food supply with sketchy additives and low quality meat. So what can you do about it? Here's where Moink comes in. Featured on Shark Tank, Moink is standing up

for family farms and your food security. Their meat comes from animals raised outdoors, like nature intended. Their farmers get an honest day's pay and Moink delivers straight to your doorstep at a price you can actually afford. This is real American meat, born, raised and harvested right here in the USA.

Moink is helping save rural America. I love it and you will too. Join the Moink movement today, support American family farms and join the wait for it Moink movement today at moinkbox.com slash legal AF right now and get free bacon for a year. That's one year of the best bacon you'll ever taste, but only for a limited time. Spelled M-O-I-N-K, box.com slash legal AF. That's moinkbox.com slash legal AF. If you've ever experienced discomfort from heat and sweat,

especially during the summer months, it's time to rethink how you care for your personal hygiene. I recently installed a Tushy bidet and the difference has been remarkable. Installation was simple and took about 10 minutes. The bidet fits seamlessly into my bathroom, adding a modern touch. Using warm water to cleanse instead of toilet paper feels cleaner and gentler on the skin,

much better for maintaining natural skin health. Tushy offers a variety of options, including models with heated seats, UV sterilization, and even air dryers for hands-free cleaning. It reduces irritation and prevents micro tears that traditional toilet paper can cause while also cutting down on paper usage by up to 80%. Keep your swampiest body parts fresh and cool for a limited time. Our listeners get 10% off their first bidet order

when you use code LegalAF at checkout. That's 10% off your first bidet order at hellotushy.com with promo code LegalAF. Welcome back to The Intersection with Michael Popock. Only got the Midas Touch Network. So many great ways to support our independent, completely independent journalism and commentary at The Intersection of Law and Politics.

You saw our sponsors, LegalAF, the YouTube channel, of course, free subscribe there. LegalAF, the sub stack where we post all of the articles and commentary about things we talk about for those that want to nerd out on it. There it is on Legal AF sub stack. And then of course, support the intersection itself on audio versions, leaving a five star review

and listening to it there. And of course, continuing to view the intersection and sending it off to friends and family as we continue to build this pro-democracy channel. Let's talk about what's going on with birthright citizenship because there is a relatively new development I wanna talk about. Now that the dust has settled,

a lot of people thought coming off the order about 10 or 11 days ago about nationwide injunctions that the Supreme Court issued, that there would not be any ability to block birthright citizenship. Well, as I reported, many of the cases returned to the courts to try to argue that they should be converted into class actions with temporary restraining orders,

which are all being considered by various judges, to try to do an end run around the United States Supreme Court who said, well, we're not going to touch birthright citizenship in terms of its substance right now, but we don't like any of the nationwide injunctions that have been issued, although they left open the door. Well, what if multiple states bring an injunction motion?

Can't that therefore be a nationwide injunction? So a lot of them ran back and said, we'll do class action, all right? So that's in the works. But there was one case standing that's still law. Up in Massachusetts, there's 29 states that got together, including Massachusetts and Arizona, that ran to Judge Sorokin around the time

that other cases were filed in Washington State, in Maryland, in New Jersey, and other places. The difference is that Judge Sorokin's is not a nationwide injunction. So if you're being told all nationwide injunctions cases sit down, Sorokin stood up because he's not a nationwide injunction. He's a state, 29 state injunction. What does that mean?

That means that Judge Sirokin's temporary restraining order now a preliminary injunction, banning the Trump administration from its executive order, ripping out the beating heart of birthright citizenship from the constitution does not apply, that executive order does not apply to change the 14th Amendment while the Supreme Court one day gets around to making that decision

in at least 29 states. Now, that's not great for the other 31, but there is 29 states where if you're having babies at the moment, you don't have to worry about that state rejecting your baby's birth certificate, obviously issued in the United States and saying you're not entitled to federal rights or federal benefits, including like passports

and federal funding and children's health funding and children's health funding and children's food funding and children's education funding and the rest. Now it's the blueprint because that case is still standing for how we should handle this matter. Just create, as I've said before, just create multiple cases representing subclasses of states.

So you got 29, so do another case with 21, the other 21. The problem is the other 21, a lot of them are red. And they're not, they don't want to join together in this because they like Donald Trump's executive order. So what do we have besides a civil war and the country being divided along the Mason-Dixon line again, plus California and other places out West? What can you do?

Well, we've got protection in the blue states. We've got the cases running back on class action up to the United States Supreme Court. And one of these or all of these cases will end up back at the United States Supreme Court. And one of these or all of these cases will end up back at the United States Supreme Court. It just won't be this summer through an emergency application. They're not going to touch it.

They're not going to touch it because they had the opportunity to and they didn't. Which means in the next term, which starts the first Monday in October, we will be reporting on when they, not if, they take the birthright citizenship case. And then, and only then, it will be on the substance, what we call the merits of the appeal. Can a president, named Donald Trump or anybody else,

through executive order, amend the Constitution and rip out birthright citizenship? Now, their argument of the Trump side is they're not amending. They're just interpreting because they think it's been interpreted wrong for the last 100 years, even by the United States Supreme Court. These are, the 14th Amendment is part of a series of amendments, 14th, 15th, 16th, that came out

of the Reconstruction Era of the United States after the Civil War. That's why Donald Trump, you'll hear him say sometimes when he's pressed, you know, come out of that weird stew of Donald Trump, a mental state in decline, where he'll say, well, 14th Amendment was just for the babies of newly freed slaves. Yeah, that's historically where it came from.

But when you're, we're talking about amendments to the Constitution by the framers or in this case, a group of people in and around the civil war, you know, it's not just for the people. It doesn't say only newly freed slaves. It says all people, all persons. Because that's how you write a constitutional amendment. So, we'll continue to follow it.

29 states, you're okay. 21 states, I feel sorry for the blue dots within these red states because these red states will never band together. That's why you have to use a nationwide injunction, but now that's not available to us, or is it? You have to use the class action method. The reason I'm hesitant about the states joining together

is because one interpretation of what the Supreme Court did about 11 days ago is they left open the door for multiple states joining together like these 29 and being able to enter a nationwide injunction on behalf of everybody. And so there is a group that wants to argue that judge, the judge up in Massachusetts is,

Sorokin is effectively a nationwide injunction. And that could be an aspect of the appeal as it goes up to the United States Supreme court as well. Okay, now as we round out our, the intersection, I think what I want to talk about is some new developments that just came in terms of deep fakes and the Secretary of State. This is an administration that has been using

insecure communication methods for its State Department, Defense Department and Homeland Security since they got an office. They've used the Signal platform, and according to new reporting out of the Washington Post, it's been exploited again. The fact that they use not government approved, not Pentagon encrypted level communications platforms, but they use an off the shelf app

that you can download from the app store called Signal. Well, we knew that it got breached in this use three months ago in the Signalgate scandal that started by Mike Waltz, who was a national security advisor, but now has been sent to the UN, who had 30 people on a Signal Chat, including Jeffrey Goldberg from the Atlantic Magazine

about war plans against the Houthis in Yemen. Not great. So some of those people got fired, some of those people got relocated, and the rest. But the bad guys out there, Russia, Iran, China, know about Signal, and they've hacked it now twice. It looks like Suzy Wiles, the Chief of Staff, and Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State,

have both had deep fake AI used against them where somebody impersonating them, both their voice and what they look like, have contacted elected officials, foreign officials, people in the secretary of state's office and outside, federal workers, all trying to influence their decision-making. Now, the irony here is not lost on me.

This is an administration that, if it wasn't for the fact that the last minute that 90 senators, nine zero senators voted against it, the Trump administration wanted to block all states from regulating artificial intelligence, including in the area of political and electoral interference through deep, deep fake AI. They wanted to block that for 10 years.

Even the smag of senators couldn't abide that. 90 to one, they ripped it out of that big, beautiful bill thing, allowing each state to regulate artificial intelligence. See, the feds could come in and regulate it, but Trump doesn't want to regulate it because he has a warped perspective because he owes so much to the tech bros and the AI bros who supported his administration. And so it warps his entire policymaking and makes us insecure. So this administration,

administration who does not want to regulate AI just got hacked again, by deep fakes using deep fake versions of Marco Rubio's voice and Suzy Wiles, the chief of staff's voice to try to do harm to our country into the Trump administration. How do you do it? It's easy. You take, you know, 15 to 20 seconds of either of their voices from interviews, from speeches or the like, you run it through AI, artificial intelligence, and then it learns the vocal pattern, the voice patterns,

and then you type in what you want it to say instead. And in the voice of that person, the deep fake sounds exactly like Marco Rubio or Susie Wiles, their cadence, their timber, their tone, their syntax, their grammar, broken or otherwise. It's a fake Marco Rubio. Some people might think that's redundant, but it's a fake Marco Rubio

and they can do the same thing with writing. They just funnel in all of his writing or speeches or oral speeches or things he's written for op-ed pieces in the newspapers or other writings. You shovel that all in, feed it into AI, generative AI and out comes the other end. You tell it, you say, write a voicemail script

or an email or a text messages in the voice of Marco Rubio saying the following. And then you combine that with the snippet of voice. And now you know why like five different foreign ministers, an elected official, governor and everything got hit with these Marco Rubio impersonations. Now the states are onto this. They have, besides trying to fight off AI

generated child pornography, yes, which was also gonna be blocked by the Trump administration. I don't know where that fits with their Christian right values allegedly, but every state has some version of trying to stop deep fakes influencing politics or elections. And now you see why.

Can you just imagine? And you see why Donald Trump wanted to block it? Cause he wants a bad guy in MAGA to send out a fake and phony voice of somebody who's an opponent of MAGA, like Gavin Newsom or Pete Buttigieg or Kamala Harris or Joe Biden, saying crazy things about some other group

attacking Christians, attacking Jews, using the N word, whatever, or looking like he's having an affair. And then they do it in a very sophisticated way, right? They do it in a way, pardon me, they do it in a way where it sounds like it's garbled and oh, it's picked up at a cocktail party by a server walking by,

and you can only catch every other word, giving it an air of legitimacy and authenticity. That's what you do with artificial intelligence. But Trump doesn't wanna regulate that, he wants to use it. But the reality is that whoever set up Marco Rubio, a fake Marco Rubio on Signal, and using Deepfake and Suzy Wiles and the rest, they're not our friends, they're our enemies.

And they're trying to go after the Trump administration. And if we had a guess, you can leave it in comments, Russia, Iran, China, would anybody, North Korea, would anybody be surprised if it's one of those countries? Trying to collude in such a way as to undermine the Trump administration. These were the very people that wanted to get the Trump, get Trump elected and reelected

and use social media bots and trolls and deep fakes to do it. We just had during the campaign, a deep fake of Kamala it. We just had during the campaign a deep fake of Kamala Harris. That came out. And I'm not sure that influenced the election, but it wasn't a good thing for her.

So this is, it's just coming out of the Washington Post, by the way, if you want to know where my reporting's coming from on that. They got a copy of the cable that was sent out to everybody on the State Department email list that basically said, if you ever get anything from the State Department or like Marco Rubio, it may not be from Marco Rubio.

You may not be able to trust it. I'm like, that's a powerful statement to say, you can't trust what comes out of the State Department. Maybe you should stop using Signal, an insecure platform and tighten up your shop over there. And maybe you should allow regulation of AI. Leave it to the states, it's bipartisan, red and blue, because they see the writing on the wall.

I mean, they're also doing other regulation of artificial intelligence, like making sure that algorithmic bias doesn't influence decision-making. A lot of governments in making decisions use AI. But if there's algorithmic bias within it that discriminates, the output is going to be flawed. And that's been a fight within artificial intelligence

and the ethics of artificial intelligence for a long, long time. They're regulating that. New York state is leading the charge on that and other states as well. So when you have that trying to get rid of AI generated child pornography, I can't even get those words out of my mouth,

but that's out there. And then you have the attempt by bad people to use AI to influence elections and political discussion and debate. And Donald Trump standing opposed to that, that tells you all you need to know. We've covered a lot on the intersection. As most people know, I'm traveling, but I could not let a Tuesday go by

without joining you here in this community and fellowship that we have built together. We vibrate on the same frequency. Thanks for being here. Support our sponsors, hit the like button here. You come over to the audio version of the intersection. We could use the five star reviews and the comments there as well,

and pass along the word we're growing organically with our audience here on the intersection. Of course, come over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel help us continue to grow that pro-democracy channel in collaboration with the MidasTouch network. So until my next, the intersection or anything involving Legal AF, this is Michael Popok and I am reporting. I'm Michael Popok and I got some big news for our audience. Most of you know me as the

co-founder of MidasTouch's Legal AF and the Legal AF YouTube channel, or as a 35-year national trial lawyer. Now building on what we started together on Legal AF, I've launched a new law firm, the Popak Firm, dedicated to obtaining justice through compassionate and zealous legal representation. At the Popak Firm, we are focused on obtaining justice for those who have been injured or damaged by a life altering event,

by securing the highest dollar recoveries. I've been tirelessly fighting for justice for the last 35 years. So my own law firm organically building on my legal AF work just feels right. And I've handpicked the team of top tier trial fighters and settlement experts throughout all 50 states known as big auto injury attorneys

who have the know-how to beat heartless insurance companies, corporations, government entities, and their attorneys. Big auto's attorneys working with my firm are rock stars in their respective states and collectively responsible for billions of dollars in recoveries. So if you or a loved one but on the wrong side of a catastrophic auto, motor vehicle, rideshare, or truck accident, suffered a personal injury, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident,

a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, a car accident, website at www.thepopakfirm.com and fill out a free case evaluation form. And if we determine that you have a case and you signed with us, we don't get paid unless you do. The Popak Firm, fighting for your justice every step of the way.