Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump and Co-Defendants SUFFER Everything they DESERVE

Starting point is 00:00:00 Donald Trump surrenders in Fulton County, Georgia, self-reporting that he is six foot three and weighs 215 pounds just for reference. That is the same height and weight as Muhammad Ali in his prime. Donald Trump takes that horrifying, weird and deranged mug shot, which he is now selling as merch on his social media platform, and the mega cult and propagandists loved it. One problem, most Americans were utterly, utterly repulsed by this entire ordeal, especially that deranged mugshot. A lot is happening, folks, in the Fulton County, Georgia, Rico, criminal case. That's being prosecuted by Fawni Willis.

Starting point is 00:00:57 That's to be expected, right? This is a case involving Donald Trump and 18 other co-defendants for trying to overthrow a free and fair election in Georgia and throughout the country. So a lot of motions, a lot of filings, a lot happening. Don't worry, we will keep track of it all for you. Trump's former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and disgraced ex-Department just in a just as official Jeffrey Clark, both co-defendants. They tried to block being arrested this past week in federal court. That failed, and then they and some other

Starting point is 00:01:35 co-defendants have been trying, and they continued their efforts with some evidentiary hearings being set to try to remove the criminal case that was filed in state court in Bolton County Superior Court the financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial

Starting point is 00:01:48 and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial

Starting point is 00:01:56 and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial

Starting point is 00:02:04 and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial and financial will tell you everything you can expect about that hearing and then we'll cover some of these other removal filings by these other co-defendants, which make some of the most frivolous arguments, I think imaginable. I'll get Popeye State. Also, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has set trial for October 23rd, 2023. For at least one Trump co-defendant, Ken Chesbro, after Chesbro demanded a speedy trial and Foni Willis was like, okay, I'm ready to go. In fact, let's try every one of these defendants, October 23, 2023, as well. Then Trump co-defendant, Sydney Powell,

Starting point is 00:02:44 said release the crack and again, she requested a speedy trial, which must have pissed Chesbro off, who clearly does not want to be shoulder to shoulder with Sidney Powell. Then Trump had to file a motion saying, wait, wait, wait, I'm not ready to go October 23rd, 2023. So that all took place. We'll break it down August 28th, which I mentioned is that big evidentiary hearing for Mark Meadows is also the date of a big hearing in the Washington DC federal case against Donald Trump

Starting point is 00:03:17 being prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith, where Donald Trump is accused of trying to overthrow the 2020 election and our democracy federal judge Tanya Chutkin in that matter as set a trial setting conference. She's expected to set trial on that date. Jack Smith has requested January 2nd, 2024 for the case to proceed to trial and Donald Trump has requested April 20, 26. We'll talk about what we expect to go down there. Jack Smith responded also this

Starting point is 00:03:52 past week to Judge Eileen Kenan's request that she made on her own, which is called Suasponte, to explain. She demanded that Smith explain the propriety of having a Washington, D.C. grand jury still exists, by the way, no longer exists, but at that time still exists while he prosecutes Donald Trump in Florida before Judge Kenan for Trump's conduct in stealing top secret and classified government records and other national defense information, engaging in obstruction of justice and making false statements. So, special counsel, Jack Smith responds to Judge Cannon with a very powerful reply brief, explaining, here's what happened in Washington, D.C. and the Grand jury.

Starting point is 00:04:38 You see the key witness employee number four, Yussel Tavaris came back to us in July and admitted that he lied to that very same Washington DC grand jury back in March of 2023 when he was still being represented by a lawyer paid for by Donald Trump. That's why we still had to go to that DC grand jury. In other words, Canon, be careful what you ask for. So then after Jack Smith files, that very powerful brief, what happens? That Trump paid for an appointed lawyer for use Sulta Varys, who's also representing a code defendant,

Starting point is 00:05:15 then goes and winds to Judge Canon and says, Judge Canon, Jack Smith is talking about what took place in the grand jury, he's violating everything. Judge Canon asked for this to happen. And then Judge Cannon says, okay, I hear you. I know we may have screwed, basically, which says this. I know we may have screwed this up. Trump paid for a lawyer. So submit another brief to me. Tell me what you think I should do. Well, break that down. And finally, John Eastman, Trump's former lawyer and current co-defendant, make attorneys get attorneys, make attorneys get arrested, loses his

Starting point is 00:05:49 effort to a bait and delay the state bar proceedings taking place in California, where his law license will likely be revoked. Shortly, a pretty scathing order by the state bar court there. Michael Popock, always an honor and a pleasure to spend these weekends with you breaking down all the events of this weekend, an eventful one indeed. Yeah, the problem, the problem Donald Trump's gonna have in Fulton County, and we're gonna get to it in Georgia,

Starting point is 00:06:20 is that, and I'm so actually surprised he hasn't tried to remove it, and he's basically waived his ability to remove at this point. Once he's filed his motion with the judge to ask for a status conference, allowing McAfee to take jurisdiction, he's going to be stuck in Fulton County. And the problem with being stuck in Fulton County is that he's stuck with a lot of people who don't line up with his interests in terms of strategy. Although I wanna talk about Ken Chesbro, cheese borough, whatever his name is, and why he may be a stalking horse for Donald Trump, but he's got 718 other defendants who all are not.

Starting point is 00:06:56 There's a mismatch, or could be a mismatch between their goals and desires and his own. And he's left having to sort of figure out strategy as he retains a new lawyer, fires the old lawyer after the old lawyer drew Finland worked out the conditions of release for him. And then he was promptly fired and replaced because Donald Trump, when things don't go his way,

Starting point is 00:07:23 he just fires the lawyers. And so we're gonna see what's gonna happen, but this stark comparison, and I'm gonna do a hot take on it, between federal practice in the hands of a judge like Judge Chuckkin put Canada side for a minute because she's suy generous, she's by herself. And what's going on in Fulton County and the things that we're seeing, that Fawni Willis is in complete control

Starting point is 00:07:45 of and an expert on how to pull the levers of justice in a state court system. It's a stark contrast. And they're going to whipsaw between Jack Smith and Tonya Chukka on one hand and Judge McAfee, maybe Judge Jones and federal court and Fawni Willis on the other hand are just going to whips saw the same criminal defendant in the middle, which is Donald Trump. I'm excited to talk in a little bit about Ken Chesbro because he made that speedy trial demand in state court, ostensibly trying to call Fawni Willis's bluff by saying, hey,

Starting point is 00:08:18 I'm ready for trial right now. Chesbro before becoming a criminal co-defendant of Donald Trump was actually a fairly decently respected, you know, a pellet lawyer. He litigated in federal court. And I think that he, to your point, there's a big difference between litigating and being a criminal defendant, especially in state court versus federal court. So the moment he was like, all right, I want my speedy trial. Funny Willis was like, okay, October 23rd, we're ready to go. Here's all the discovery.

Starting point is 00:08:53 You're going to trial, buddy. And not only that, you just potentially screwed over in a good way for justice. All of your other co-defendants, because now I want, yeah, I was saying that maybe these other cases should go to trial in March, March 4th of 2024, but Chesbro, you're ready. So everyone else should be ready, Judge McAfee, order them already. Here's your discovery. She said that two terabytes of discovery are ready and you're right. She knows that court better than anybody and an ain't like federal court as well. And I like that. I mean, the way I like to kind of think about it, you know, and this is, you know, it may not be an apt comparison, but state court in general is a little bit more like a street fight, right? And federal court has

Starting point is 00:09:39 kind of all of these rules and, you know, and things like that. And so Ken Chesbro, I think, was not prepared when he did that to try to call her bluff, that she was like, you just handed me the biggest gift ever. And then the judge was like, yeah, okay, October 23rd, 2023, we'll set the date. There's two, there's two or three things to unpack from that that I like what you just said. One is Scott McAfee, the judge, surely, only been on the bench six months, 34 years old. He's asserting jurisdiction right out of the box. Nothing, you wanna see a judge who is indecisive

Starting point is 00:10:14 and sitting on a knife's edge, go down a judge can in Florida. You wanna see a judge who's decisive, knows the rules in his courtroom or is least being properly coached by his staff. It's judge, it's judge McAfee. He's like, bond conditions. Let's go.

Starting point is 00:10:29 You guys negotiated, bring it to me. I'll sign them. Conditions of release, social media, don't, don't interfere with witnesses. Don't use social media for that purpose. Don't do bad things while you're out on probation without a hearing. No hearing as opposed to federal court where everything's a hearing. So you got Judge McAfee asserting jurisdiction, you want to take cases away from me and bring me to federal court, we got hearings next week, we're going to set trials, we're setting trials right now, that's one. Secondly, the question on chess, bro, and I want to get your opinion

Starting point is 00:10:59 on this is one of two things. He either miscalculated, although we haven't, about the preparedness of full steam ahead, Fawni Willis. We said that one of the reasons she had that delay for which she took a little bit of late night TV show criticism because people said, oh, I thought you said it was imminent, March to August, that's not imminent, but what she's doing from March to August between the time she ended her special March to August between the time she ended

Starting point is 00:11:26 her special purpose grand jury and the time she got her indictment, once she opened the regular grand jury three weeks later, is that she was continuing to develop her case. She got eight fake electors to cooperate with her. She got new evidence that wasn't present before and she fine-tuned the claims that the criminal counts she was going to bring. And she wasn't going to go for the indictment until she was ready to go to trial. And as opposed to I'll go to I'll get the indictment, but I'll have a year to prepare because there'll never be a trial before that. Fawney Willis knew better and outplayed that. Now there's there is one issue that's been raised in the media. I don't want to get your opinion on this, Ben.

Starting point is 00:12:06 Either Ken Chesbro is completely without coordination with anybody in the Trump camp, just decided what's right for him is to go as quickly to trial as possible. And Sidney Powell now has said me too. And he got what he wished for. He's either done that on his own because he just cares about his own self interest or he's decided in coordination with Donald Trump to let him be the first test case because if the judge does bifurcate this and sever the case, which is going to be the next big issue for judge McAfee to decide is whether any or all of the 19, along with Donald Trump leading, are going to be severed and tried in their own case or cases.

Starting point is 00:12:51 If, because that's what that's what Trump's also seeking, he wants a scheduling order to talk about trial date, he also wants to cut himself off from all the others, including Ken Chesbro. If that's the case, and Chesbro goes first in October and Donald Trump goes later and Chesbro wins, in other words, he gets acquitted, then that's helpful. Of course, to somebody like Donald Trump further down the line. If he gets convicted, then that's the first domino to drop against Donald Trump. But it's a lot of pressure on Fony Willis's office. She's ready and up to the test, but I want to get your opinion.

Starting point is 00:13:26 Do you think Chesbro is just on his own fuck effort? I'm going to try to stampede the prosecutor into trying a case she's not ready for, or is he the stalking horse for Donald Trump to see if he can get acquitted and that helps Donald Trump down the path. I'm going to answer that question, but let me kind of frame it this way first. The Chesbro trial is going to be on TV. In Georgia, cameras are in the courtroom.

Starting point is 00:13:55 There's already been an order approving cameras in the courtroom. So the Chesbro trial in October, because it's part of a Rico criminal enterprise, we're going to see on trial together, and we're going to broadcast it live here on the Midas Touch Network. All of the criminal acts of this enterprise, and a lot of the evidence is going to relate to Donald Trump. Chesbro was a lawyer for Donald Trump and a criminal, co-conspirator and now a criminal,

Starting point is 00:14:26 defendant with Donald Trump, who was inextricably involved and intertwined in the fake elector scheme and having state legislatures try to overthrow the results of their election. There are memos, there are emails from Chesbro, where we've done hot takes on it. So I just wanna let people remind them, this is all gonna be on TV. Here's what I think Chesbro where we've done hot takes on it. So I just want to make let people remind them this is all going to be on TV. Here's what I think Chesbro's calculation was. Now salty pull up the photo of all of the mug shots of

Starting point is 00:14:53 all of the co-defendants that were recently booked in Fulton County. We have that right there. Okay, so this is the crew right here. And on the top right, you have Ken Chesbro, just, and I think Ken Chesbro looked at this. But this hadn't been created yet, but he knew the players, right? And Chesbro's like no to borrow your word, popock, no effing way. I am not going to be doing a trial

Starting point is 00:15:28 with the Stanley Kubrick Google. I agree. He's like, he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like,

Starting point is 00:15:37 he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like, he's like,

Starting point is 00:15:44 he's like, he's like, he's like, he's even if I were innocent and he's absolutely not in my opinion. He's like, they're going to convince me just by being next to these people is, you know, because these are a, it's a criminal enterprise right there. And so I think that was part of his calculation. The funny reason right there, salty, salty reads by mine now, why it backfire though, is then Powell requested the same thing. So now Chesbro not only may get this, you know, he will get this super speedy trial by George a lot has to take place in October of 2023. He's now going to be shoulder to shoulder

Starting point is 00:16:19 with Sidney Powell like the worst of the bunch. And so that's ultimately why I have back bars well. And just for those wondering, what is this speedy trial thing in Georgia? Let me just kind of break it down for you, you know, like this. You're gonna answer my question eventually, right? I'm gonna answer. All right, I'll just make sure. The, the, the, well, I think I, to be fair,

Starting point is 00:16:40 I think I answered the question. I think that his whole, that the reason that he did it was because he does not want to be in a, he's not coordinating it because he does not want to be with those 18 other people. That was his plan. I think he actually wanted to call the bluff of Fulton County District Attorney Fony Willis and this other part with the building blocks that I was building to, I think also answers your question because in Fulton County, Georgia, in Georgia, in general,

Starting point is 00:17:09 if the case does not go to trial within the term that the court currently is in, where a speedy trial demand is made, or in the next term, which would be what's called, Fulton County is the September term, which ends November 1st. If a jury is not seated by November 1st before Judge Scott McAfee in that case, it automatically gets dismissed under Georgia law. So it's a long-winded answer, Pope

Starting point is 00:17:40 Ock, but I wanted to give people, you know, the, you know, what I think the strategy was, and I think specifically, though, it was to call her bluff, I do not believe it's coordinated, because everyone's doing, like we're gonna talk in a little bit, Meadows is doing this, Jeff Clark is making this argument, then you have these, you know, and then you have these fake electors,

Starting point is 00:18:02 like David Schaefer and others right there. Kathy Latham stills the state senator and they're making arguments to a federal judge that by virtue of being fake and fraudulent electors that they're federal officers. That's their argument for federal jurisdiction. I think it's interesting that we said last week, I said the most interesting thing to me last week was that 19 are not coordinated or at least didn't appear to be. Trump has decided and it hasn't gotten much press,

Starting point is 00:18:34 maybe we'll do a hot take on it, to stay in state court. He's effectively decided to stay in state court and let the federal and let meadows and others try their hand at an Obama appointee judge, Judge Jones. And it's not even like he gets the opportunity to see what will happen and then follow behind. He's already now invoked the jurisdiction of the state court with his recent filing.

Starting point is 00:18:58 He's got to stay with McAfee. So he's calculated with Steve Seidow, the new lawyer that he's hired, whose last case with Fawni Willis resulted in a conviction under Rico. Just, I know everybody's saying Sadow's a master trial lawyer, and he may know his way around the Fulton County Courthouse, but the last rapper that he represented pled guilty to a Rico statute with Fawni Willis on the other side, or it's convicted. So, let's put that aside for a minute.

Starting point is 00:19:28 He has decided that Donald Trump's decided, I think he's had enough with federal court, even though he's got a favorable judge selection that appears to be in Judge Cannon. Chutkin, of course, he doesn't like at all. We know that from his own social media postings. And here he's willing to roll the dice in state court, maybe with this new horse that he's now decided to ride, which is Scott's say now. I don't know. I'm still I'm going to do a hot take on it. I'm still thinking about whether we're not giving enough credit to, although say how's new. So it would be hard to coordinate when you're newly, you're newly in. But, you know,

Starting point is 00:20:05 if that, if they didn't coordinate, there is a benefit to Donald Trump that somebody goes first and it's not named Donald Trump. If, if they're able to win. Now, the chances of winning have, for me, have gone down tremendously since Sydney Powell got tied to cheese to Chesbro. I'm not sure how much of the conspiracy they were involved, although, you know, Sydney Powell along with Giuliani is one of the co-captains of Team Crazy and the litigators out there while Chesbro was the captain of Team Fake Electors with his memos and his analysis and his scheming and all of that along with John Eastman. So they're not as natural of a pair, but they, you know, this is a shotgun, this is a shotgun

Starting point is 00:20:52 wedding. Sidney Powell said, me too. And others still haven't been heard from. So he's not going to be alone. And the more he's not alone, as you said, Ben, and the more he's with the other crazy co-conspirators, the better it is for Franny Willis. But I still got to wrap my mind around if there is a benefit to Donald Trump.

Starting point is 00:21:10 There is one if they win. There isn't one if they lose, and you're right. He's probably, it doesn't look like it could be Donald Trump the puppet master, not with a new lawyer. Just got brought in the last week. It's a great point and the waiver argument by you right there. I'm not sure if it is officially would be deemed to be a waiver, but I can assure you that if Donald Trump does say, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. The evidentiary hearing went in Mark Meadows

Starting point is 00:21:39 favor on Monday, which I don't think it will, but you know, it could be a close call, and you and I will discuss that the, at least the meadows hearing is not frivolous, it's not frivolous. An 11-circuit law is, 11-circuit law could make it go either way, which is why I think, I mean, that's the court of appeals that oversees Georgia. But Popok, these people are not, you want to know how I know they're not coordinated. This is not a sophisticated group. Just as you know, like as we're recording this live, this is what event is being held by the Magga Republicans and this is one of their leaders with Eric Trump. You're just playing this clip. Okay. Okay. Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay.

Starting point is 00:22:46 Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Why are we blowing the shofar?

Starting point is 00:22:54 Why are we blowing the shofar? That was at an event that was that was that was led by Eric Trump and Michael Flynn kicking off the festivities by attempting to call for the armor of God for Donald Trump by blowing the shofar and it did not go up. That's what was taking place there. Well, to Europe, to your point though, when you put that, we don't have to put the picture back up, but look, they were not great at coordinating the activity

Starting point is 00:23:18 that led to the indictment for the conspiracy. Okay, they were lousy at it, And this is one of the reasons they got caught. And they got, you know, we're gonna talk later about the things that when we get to Meadows and Removal, and I agree with you, it's on a knife's edge a little bit under the case law. But I think it, funny Willis is gonna put on a great show on Monday that will not be televised,

Starting point is 00:23:41 we'll have to report on it. But we can tell from the witnesses when we get there how she's going to put on her case about this, is not about presidential activities, federal officer supporting a president. This is about campaigning activities as candidate Trump tries to cling to power and pointing to the things that Meadows did

Starting point is 00:24:00 that were really bad within the state that he can't possibly argue our chief of staff activities. Having said that, all, you know, the fact that they even had, let's just talk about the fingerprints that they left all over the glass related to their crimes. The fact that Donald Trump, who was allergic to having any piece of paper in his career,

Starting point is 00:24:23 this is why he used to rip papers up as a matter of habit and shove them down toilets and whatever else as his staff in the White House tried to piece it back together again because they're presidential records because he never wrote emails. He never, he never did recorded things and he never did anything on paper except what he got so desperate that he then, then he started, he got sloppy and he made phone calls arranged by Mark Meadows into the various states. He, Mark Meadows flew into states like Georgia. I mean, this is the work of a sloppy group

Starting point is 00:24:57 that's leaving evidence and proof against them all over the place. So you're right, why am I shocked at now when they're all facing trial with 19 different attorneys, all represented by different attorneys, including one guy who can't even figure out a way to get out of jail because he couldn't meet his bond conditions, one of the 19's still sitting in jail.

Starting point is 00:25:18 Right, why would I think there's any level of coordination currently going on? And the one who you mentioned is Harrison Floyd, who's still sitting in jail. Harrison Floyd was involved with Trevian Cuddy, or Cuddy, who is at one point Kanye West publicist, and but known as kind of a right wing extremist type person, and they collectively engaged in the harassment and threats. It's alleged to

Starting point is 00:25:47 Ruby Freeman and Shane Moss. I mean, there's video of it as well of what they did and they threatened them that if they didn't basically lie and say that the election was stolen and lie about themselves, that bad things were going to happen to them that was all part of Giuliani's plan. So you see why this is charged as a criminal rico enterprise because all of these kind of tentacles, ultimately at the top, it's being run by kind of Donald Trump and Meadows and Eastman and Giuliani

Starting point is 00:26:27 and Chesbro, but then you have even kind of foot soldiers like Trevian Cutie and Harris Floyd, who are threatening Georgia election workers and threatening their safety and their security. If they don't lie and further this absurd conspiracy to overthrow the election. By the way, Harrison Floyd, we have learned when the Department of Justice FBI served him with the subpoena back in February of 2023, attacked the FBI agent, like assaulted the FBI agent and then was arrested for that as well. Just so you understand, like, what's all going on here with the ballad? And he was a former fake astroturf leader

Starting point is 00:27:11 of black voices for Trump. This is how we got involved in all of this. So yeah, but your point is well made, which is, and now we're going to look as Donald Trump now does, because he's sitting on the sidelines on this issue as we move over to what's going to happen Monday in a federal court hearing, which is now going to become a full-blown mini trial evidentiary hearing, much like what you and I talked about when Judge Hellerstein in the Southern District of New York held a very

Starting point is 00:27:46 similar evidentiary hearing in which Donald Trump tried to drag the Stormy Daniels criminal prosecution. We don't talk about that much lately, but that's still on a criminal docket for March in state court. Donald Trump didn't like state court then, although he seems to have fallen in love with it now, and tried to drag it across the street to the federal court, but pulled Judge Hellerstein, a Clinton appointee who held a full evidentiary hearing, which gave the prosecutor, in that case, the ability to put on a mini version of their prosecution, and have a federal judge say, yes, more likely than not he committed a crime. This is what could happen again on Monday when Mark Meadows tries to get

Starting point is 00:28:26 out from under and argues I need to be tried in federal court, not in state court. Although he's already been arrested and processed because Judge Jones, the federal judge, didn't bail out him or bail out Clark or anybody else. There was like, don't make me get arrested. Don't make me get processed in state court. I've got good arguments for dismissal in federal court. And the judge was like, yeah, I'll see you Monday. Go get processed. And they're going to have this full blown, untelevized hearing that that we can jump into now about the witnesses that we already know Fonnie Willis is going to bring in because she subpoenaed them.

Starting point is 00:28:59 Right. So just building the timeline for everybody, right August 14th the Fulton County Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump and the 18 co-dependence for this sprawling Rico racketeering case, right? The next day August 15th and that includes all of the individuals you've seen in the mug shots. The next day literally the next day August 15th you've seen in the mug shots. The next day, literally the next day, August 15th, Mark Meadows files a notice of removal to bring the state court criminal case to a federal court before the Northern District of Georgia District Court. And then it got assigned to Judge Steve Jones. And then throughout the week, a bunch of other people have also made

Starting point is 00:29:46 arguments to try to file notices of removal making arguments why they think their case should be removed to federal court as well. But Mark Meadows was first. And so Mark Meadows, because he filed it first, he got the first evidentiary hearing on August 28th. So on Monday of next week. Jeffrey Clark, the disgraced ex-doj official, also filed a notice of removal saying that he was a federal official, so it should go to federal court, and also a numerous of these other fake electors from David Schaefer, from David Schaefer, who Kathy Latham, that's the state senator, Magger Republican stills.

Starting point is 00:30:35 And a few others also filed for removal. Let's deal with kind of the meadows first, and then we could kind of, I think, summarily dismiss of the fake electors arguments because I think theirs are so frivolous. And then we'll give some attention to Jeff Clark. Although the evidentiary hearing for Jeff Clark has been set by federal judge Steve Jones for mid-September, so it's not as imminent.

Starting point is 00:30:57 And we will cover that, of course, in more detail as we get closer to that evidentiary hearing. And a lot of our learning will be informed by what Judge Jones ultimately does with Mark Meadows. So in order for a case to be removed from state court to federal court in a criminal case like this, a criminal defendant must prove three things.

Starting point is 00:31:21 Once that they are a federal officer, two that they are acting under the color of authority of federal law that they are, have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer.

Starting point is 00:31:38 They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. They have to be a federal officer. all three elements. So going by what Popoq said before as a related to when Donald Trump tried to remove the Manhattan District Attorney State Court criminal case against Donald Trump for the hush money payments and fraudulent classification of business records to federal court. Judge Hellerstein said, look, for the sake of argument here, we'll say Donald Trump is a federal official. But let's go to number two. Was this done under the color of authority

Starting point is 00:32:07 of his official duties as that federal officer? And Judge Hallerstein was like, no way, hush money payments to porn star that you had three seconds of intercourse with and then you wanted to cover it up for a 2016 election. What does that have to do with being a federal officer? Denied and then what happens is called a remand where the case gets then remanded, sent back to state court. In criminal cases, unlike civil cases, when a notice of removal

Starting point is 00:32:40 is filed to federal court, the notice itself does not stay or pause the state court proceedings. In a civil case, it would serve to pause it. So the state court criminal proceedings can continue to go while the court is holding these evidentiary hearings. So it doesn't slow down the state court criminal proceedings. So Donald Trump's in New York was not slowed down at all. It didn't affect the trial date, which is May 24th or 25th of 2024.

Starting point is 00:33:12 It didn't impact it at all. And then the court granted the remand. Here, Jeff Clark and Mark Meadows, though, in their own unique ways, tried to get the federal judge to intervene before the evidentiary hearing, to block Fulton County jail, to block the Fulton County sheriffs, from trying to even arrest menos and Clark, and judge Jones, before even getting to this issue

Starting point is 00:33:39 of the removal, heard the arguments from Fondiwellis, and she made the arguments correctly that until the federal court makes a determination that there is jurisdiction, the principles of federalism apply and a federal court cannot intervene and stop state court criminal cases from proceeding until there's a determination through an evidentiary hearing or otherwise that there is federal jurisdiction. So because that finding a federal jurisdiction has not been made, that's why Mark Meadows got booked, that's why Jeff Clark got booked, and that's why they're request to try to block

Starting point is 00:34:18 or pause. The state court proceedings was rejected by Judge Jones under principles of federalism, kind of ironic, right? People who talk about states rights like meadows and others actually don't mean it when it comes to them and they want a federal judge to block state criminal prosecutions when they find themselves and their privilege being challenged when they are involved in a criminal enterprise. So I wanted to just frame it. I'm going to toss it over to Popok to now that we now that we have the law. Remember it's this three step process. Are you a federal officer under color authority of federal law? And do you have credible federal defenses? Mark Me he does not satisfy that test.

Starting point is 00:35:05 Menos filed a reply hearing on Monday. Popox is going to break it down right after we take our quick first break. Hard health and staying healthy, especially when you have a family that you want to be able to spend as much time with as possible is so, so important. We all have a heartfelt reason to support our blood pressure. In fact, more than half the US population would benefit from blood pressure support. Superbeats heart-choose are an easy and convenient way to support healthy blood pressure, and they promote heart-healthy energy. Paired with a healthy lifestyle, the antioxidants and superbeats are clinically shown to be nearly two times more effective

Starting point is 00:35:45 at promoting normal blood pressure than a healthy lifestyle alone. And with over 30,000 5 star reviews and counting, superbeats heart chews are having their moment. Superbeats heart chews are incredibly delicious and so much better than any alternative supplements out there. I take my superbeats heart chews each morning and it really kick starts my morning routine. After taking my superbeats heart-choose, I feel like I have more energy and I'm ready to take on the day.

Starting point is 00:36:12 Superbeats heart-choose are effective and clinically studied. They are the number one pharmacist-recommended beet brand for cardiovascular health support. It's blood pressure support you can trust. Double your potential with super beats hard shoes. Get a free 30 day supply of super beats hard shoes and 15% off your first order by going to get super beats.com and using promo code legal a f that's get super B E E T S dot com code legal a f. Our next partner is HG1, the daily foundational nutrition supplement that supports whole body health. I drink it literally every day. I gave HG1 a try because I was tired

Starting point is 00:36:52 of taking so many supplements, and I wanted a single solution that supports my entire body and covers my nutritional basis every day. I want a better gut health, a boost in energy, immune system support, and wanted a supplement that actually tastes great. I drink AG in the morning to start my day, it makes me feel unstoppable and ready to take on anything, and on top of it all, I'm doing something good for my body. I'm giving my body the nutrition it craves, and I'm covering my nutritional basis. I've tried a ton of different supplements out there, but this is different.

Starting point is 00:37:26 And the ingredients are super high quality. I got started with AG1 because I used to take all these different pills and gummies, who knows what, and frankly what I was taking was expensive, and I didn't even know if it was good for me. But with AG1, I know what I'm consuming has the best ingredients, and also taste delicious.

Starting point is 00:37:44 AG1 makes it easier for you to take the highest quality supplements, period. When I started my AG1 journey, very quickly I noticed that it helps me with improved digestion, energy and overall, I just feel great. It's just one scoop of powder mixed with water, once a day, making it a seamless and easy daily habit to maintain. I'm asked all the time about the one thing I do to take care of my health if I could only pick one. It be foundational nutrition, and AG1 is a top foundational nutrition product.

Starting point is 00:38:13 Just one daily serving gives me the comprehensive foundational nutrition I need and supports energy, focus, strength, and clarity with 75 high quality vitamins, probiotics, and whole food source ingredients. I can't think of another daily routine that pays off as well as AG1, which is why I trust the product so much. If you're looking for a simpler, effective investment for your health, try AG1, and get 5 free AG1 travel packs and a free one-year supply of vitamin D with your first purchase. Go to drinkag1.com slash

Starting point is 00:38:45 legal AF. That's drinkag1.com slash legal AF. Check it out. Michael Popak, where we last left off, I talked about the three part test for removal of a criminal case to federal court. Do you think Mark Meadows satisfies that test? I think it's actually going to be unfortunately under 11 circuit case law a close call because it is a low threshold and Mark Meadows lawyers made clear to probably say low bar low threshold. I don't know 50 times in their brief. Well, let me do it this way. I don't think it matters a hill of beans. I don't want anybody. Do you want to manage expectations here?

Starting point is 00:39:28 Mark Meadows ends up in federal court. He, Fawney Willis comes along for the ride. Georgia state law comes along for the ride. The reason they're trying it, because we talked about mechanics, let's talk about rationale strategies, because they think they've got a better shot at ultimately arguing supremacy clause immunity under the US Constitution to argue that you can't you

Starting point is 00:39:53 can't indict a federal officer for committing a crime for doing his job under the federal under the federal case law, the constitutional jurisprudence related to it. And they'd rather do that in federal court, not so much because they'd love Judge Jones, not the greatest pick for them. There were four trumpers that could have got pulled up by random selection on the Northern District of Georgia, which is where Atlanta sits. But and the 11th Circuit is a little bit of a mixed bag, at least how they've handled Judge Cannon, who also reports to her bosses at the 11th Circuit in Atlanta. But Judge Prior, you know, is a good judge.

Starting point is 00:40:33 They want to try to get a good judge prior decision and then go fast track to the US Supreme Court. That's the reason that they're fighting for it because they think they'll never see a trial. They're hoping if they go federal, federal, federal. Now as to the case law, let's talk first about what the hearing is going to, the shape and contours of the hearing. Funny Willis is going to argue that there is no way, which is their best argument, there's

Starting point is 00:41:01 no way that Mark Meadows was performing his duties as chief of staff, like in his job description for chief of staff that didn't include politically getting involved with candidate Trump's attempts to cling to power and stop the peaceful transfer. They try to argue, well, this is just elect electoral certification. And okay, but even if it is electoral vote certification, the president of the United States

Starting point is 00:41:31 under the Constitution has no role in electoral vote certification. And therefore his chief of staff doesn't either. The vice president as the president, tempore of the Senate has the has some sort of constitutional duty in that world, not the guy that's on the potential losing end. He's just, yes, he's president of the United States until he's not, but he's just candidate Trump at that point. And the witnesses tell me that she's going and we know she's going, Fawni Willis, what's called the Hatch Act. And we haven't reallyie Willis, what's called the Hatch Act.

Starting point is 00:42:05 And we haven't really talked too much on our show about the Hatch Act. Hatch Act was passed in 1939. It's the name for the Hatch Act is the the Act to prevent pernicious political actions by federal officers. In other words, your civil servants, you got a day job. What you're not allowed to do, unless you're running for office yourself, is you can't campaign and get involved

Starting point is 00:42:30 with political activity. Because that's a violation of the Hatch Act. Fawney Willis is going to hit them where they live and say, Mark Meadows, when the three big events that you did in Georgia, when the three big events that you did in Georgia, none of them are a part of you being a chief of staff. All of them are you wearing your political hat and Donald Trump wearing his political hat. And if that's the case, then let's judge Jones. Let's take this out of being he's a federal officer, but not doing something under the color of his office.

Starting point is 00:43:02 And therefore, under the three things that Ben, you laid out, you need to have cherry, cherry, cherry to hit the jackpot. She's going to try to say he doesn't have the second one, which is that he was doing his job wearing his chief of staff hat. Now the two witnesses are intriguing. One of them is Brad Raffin's perger, who's the current secretary of state. And he's going to testify, obviously, about the phone call that was made with Mark Meadows and Donald Trump, with Donald Trump refers to talking about a projection as the perfect

Starting point is 00:43:34 phone call in which Donald Trump wanted Brad Raffin's burger to find a way to throw out almost 12,000 votes and give the state over to Donald Trump and threaten him during that phone call. And Mark Meadows and threaten him during that phone call. And Mark Meadows arranged and was on that phone call. So Raffinsberger, I'm sure, and they've already spoken to him. So they know what his testimony is from the grand jury is going to say, just, just predicting here that he did not think that Mark Meadows or Donald Trump were calling because of something related to a presidential issue as part of chief of staff

Starting point is 00:44:06 duties. They were calling because they wanted the candidate Trump to win in Georgia, and they were pressuring him in order to accomplish that. But the witness that could really blow a hole into the battleship of Mark Meadows' argument is the inspector or the chief investigator for the Secretary of State's Office of Investigation under Brad Raffinsberger. Francis Watson has three different Mark Meadows events that he's going to testify to on Monday. All of them are bad for Mark Meadows in arguing that he didn't violate the Hatch Act and he's within his chief

Starting point is 00:44:45 of staff duties, not his political operative duties. And they go in order and they're very short in time. On December 22nd of 2020, Meadows flew to Cobb County, Georgia, right? To try to get into the room as the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, along with the State Department of Georgia's Office of Investigation, of which Watson was the Chief Investigator, were doing a signature match audit of the votes in Georgia. And this was in Cobb County.

Starting point is 00:45:28 And Meadows tried to get in the room to observe. And he was strong armed and stopped by Watson. So Watson's going to testify about 1222 in meeting Meadows in Cobb County and why he thought Meadows was there. And what Meadows told him about who he was there representing. And I bet you what Watson's going to say is that he was told that he was there on behalf of the Trump campaign, not the Trump presidency.

Starting point is 00:45:57 And that's one bad thing against Meadows. But then the next day on 1223, meadows arranged a phone call between this investigator Watson and Trump that meadows participated in, in which Trump said to him, I won. And if you help me, it'll be a good thing for you. And he's going to testify about who he thought he was talking to there. A president about presidential issues or about a candidate trying to get votes to be changed in his favor. But the one that I think is the home run ball for Farnie Willis is three days later, four days later on the 27th of December. Watson's going to testify that Meadows texted him.

Starting point is 00:46:43 So now you got a, you got a gotta meet a phone call in a text. He texted him and asked if the Trump campaign volunteered financial assistance. In other words, paid him to help with the vote counting in Fulton County. Would that make sure that it happened before or by Jan 6th? And in the text, Trump Meadows said he was there advocating up

Starting point is 00:47:10 behalf of the Trump campaign. If the campaign paid you, well, campaign is hatch act. Hatch act takes you out of being a federal officer, doing a federal color of law thing. And this is gonna be the, along with whoever else she brings in, but those are the two we know by subpoena. That's gonna be the focus on Monday that Jones is gonna have to listen to.

Starting point is 00:47:31 And they're gonna have to respond to about why is Meadows talking about the campaign if he's there just doing normal chief of staff stuff. And I go back to my original point, just to be clear. If the normal chief of staff stuff is helping your boss get reelected, that's campaign. If the normal chief of staff stuff is to help the president get involved with the electoral count in which constitutionally has no role, that's a loser argument. And then why did you put in print, Mr. Meadows? Why did you put

Starting point is 00:48:04 in print that it that you were trying to provide the financial assistance of the Trump campaign in order to speed up, whether it was a bribe or not, because there's one argument that it was an attempted bribe to speed up the vote counting process. Meadows is not going to take the stand no way, no how, and wave has fifth amendment privilege on Monday. I'd be shocked if Mark Meadows takes the stand no way, no how, and wave his Fifth Amendment privilege on Monday. I'd be shocked if Mark Meadows takes the stand on Monday,

Starting point is 00:48:29 which means they're gonna have to make legal argument without too many witnesses and cross examine the chief investigator, Francis Watson, and his interaction with Meadows and Raffinsberger and his interaction with Meadows on the sideline because there's no way he's gonna be testifying. You think he testifies on Monday? Zero chance that Meadows is going to be testifying.

Starting point is 00:48:54 As the name suggests, an evidentiary hearing is just that you have to show admissible evidence, but I think Mark Meadows and his reply brief has basically previewed the arguments that he's gonna make. I don't think he's gonna put on any witnesses at all, frankly, I think he's just gonna request that the court take judicial notice

Starting point is 00:49:13 that he was the chief of staff for Donald Trump. If I was the judge, I would rule in favor of Fulton County District Attorney Fony Willis, I would grant a remand and send this case back to State Court. I think Judge Jones still made do that. He hears the issue.

Starting point is 00:49:30 The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals case law says that the showing for removal is a very low threshold to make. And so what Meadows basically put in his reply brief is, hey, I was the chief of staff. That's clearly a federal office. Even if you argue that I acted outside the scope of what a chief of staff should or shouldn't do, some of the conduct I engaged in was arguably in the work of what a federal official does. Even if I committed a crime.

Starting point is 00:50:03 So that alone no matter what Raffin's burger says, no matter what anyone else says, the mere minimal nexus to the fact that I held this position should be enough to go into federal court. And then, and this is where Meadows lawyer was smart and framing it this way, then judge, we can then decide the issue of supremacy clause, immunity issues, and whether the case should be dismissed. And then, Fawney Willis' arguments become more valid about was Meadows violating the Hatch Act, was he engaged in all of this conduct.

Starting point is 00:50:37 But Judge, right now, you have to make the minimal threshold finding. Was there some nexus to federal official duties? And even if Meadows may have engaged in some acts outside the scope, maybe some things were within the scope. So I don't even think Meadows puts on any or if he puts on any, it'll just be minimal or he'll just use Fawni Willis' witnesses and say, but you do acknowledge he was the chief of staff. You do acknowledge Brad Rafford's

Starting point is 00:51:05 burger that scheduling meetings would be the type of task that a chief of staff does. Rafford's burger, you're familiar with the way politics works, right? You're the secretary of state. You do understand that a chief of staff's role is to help the bread. I'm not trying to make the arguments for him. He is a smart lawyer, but I wanna let you all know where this hearing probably goes. And that's why I say it ultimately becomes a close call because I think the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, if not Judge Jones ultimately says,

Starting point is 00:51:37 the mere fact that he's a chief of staff, even if he acted outside the scope, is enough to keep an effective court finally, Pope, I could throw it back to you, but your point is, you're still in front of a judge. The case doesn't go away. Varnie Willis is still prosecuting him under Georgia law. Yeah. And I like, I like your observation.

Starting point is 00:51:54 I like the managing expectations we've been doing that for almost three years on legal AF because we're not blowing smoke or sunshine. I agree with you in the 11th Circuit case law. The threshold is she, she's, Fannie Willis is going to have to run the table on Monday and convince the judge that all the things that he just said, getting coffee for the president and scheduling meetings for the president and going to official buildings for the president, he's leaving out the second half of that sentence to further a conspiracy, to further, you know, a cling to power, to further a, you know, all of that. That you're not allowed to do, no matter what hat you're wearing.

Starting point is 00:52:35 He wants to argue that he was always wearing that hat. And if he's wearing it temporarily in one area, that's enough as a federal officer. She'll argue it. If she, if one of them loses, they're going to take it, I think, although let's, let's rat when we, before we turn to the, the others who are trying to gut into federal court too, and how they're throwing Donald Trump under the bus and reinforcing the conspiracy. In order to do that, back to your point, there's no coordination among the bus and reinforcing the conspiracy in order to do that back to your point, there's no coordination among the 19 and that plays to the benefit of Fawney Willis. Here's the question, Ben.

Starting point is 00:53:11 If meadows loses, I know they're going to take an appeal to the 11th Circuit. If Fawney loses, although she doesn't like to lose anything and she's, she's definitely, you know, flexing her muscle in her home court advantage of state court with judge Jones, even with the issues that are here. If she loses, do you think she automatically takes an appeal or does she say, all right, you want to stay in federal court with Jones, we'll stay here. There's no way that if she loses the 11 circuits going to overturn judge Jones and she'll know that.

Starting point is 00:53:40 So, yeah, she made she say one, but it'll be, it'll be few. The only chance is that the 11th Circuit would overturn judge Jones if he remanded it. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is never going to overturn judge Jones for for keeping the case. But that doesn't mean, right? As we go to that, that doesn't mean the fake electors and the others that are trying to say, Donald Trump's lawyers told me to be a fake elector and therefore I get to be by extension a type of federal officer under color of law and I get to be in federal court too. That doesn't mean that's a win for them.

Starting point is 00:54:17 Exactly. Meadows getting the case removed to federal court doesn't move the entire case. It just as it relates to meadows. So all of these other fake electors, the David Chafers, the Kathy Latham, the other distills, these other fake electors, some who are saying, yeah, Donald Trump's lawyers told me that we were the real electors. Okay, you are. And their arguments are some of the most frivolous removal arguments when I read them. Like you look at Kathy Latham's, for example, she's the former Republican chair of Coffee County.

Starting point is 00:54:50 She's the one who let in people who work for Trump into the Coffee County election offices to steal election data. I love the fact. There she is with her turquoise little sweater there. Yeah, and that's like that. That one's, I don't think that one is her, but she's not hurt. No, she's she's she's wearing the kind of pink one on her basis, but but but anyway here, the whole conspiracy pull up pull up pull up the mug shot salty of everybody. I'll

Starting point is 00:55:16 show you who where where where she is there. She is second row, all the way to the left, right, you know, right the left, right under Donald. That may be, it's hard to see from that angle, but anyway, she's one of those people walking in and then she's in the office and then they steal the people's election data. And she argues because she was a fake elector that she is a federal official. Like that's just that. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, because you didn't do the part where she screws Trump. That group is saying that it's like shaffer, that they were, they coordinated with Trump's lawyers, Giuliani, Jenna Ellis,

Starting point is 00:55:55 Powell. They coordinated with them and, and to become the fake electors, therefore, through extension, but through Trump and his lawyers, that can't be something that Donald Trump is happy about, that in order to get the federal court, they're reconfirming the evidence of the conspiracy. Well, yes, and it's a frivolous argument, but it's an incriminating argument for Donald Trump that that's the one they're making to remove it to federal court. But I at least want to acknowledge that because Meadows was a former chief of staff, he at least has a shot. Because Jeff Clark was a former DOJ official,

Starting point is 00:56:32 he satisfies the federal official prong, although I think Clark's conduct, as it relates to the indictment, had nothing to do with being a DOJ official. It was trying to overthrow the results of the election. And so I don't think Clark, I don't think Clarks is going to prevail at all, but we're gonna watch what happens with meadows,

Starting point is 00:56:54 because it will inform at least Clark, all the others are completely and utterly fragile. I agree with you. If meadows wins and you see, I think everybody who's listening and watching sees where we're handicapping this. The chance is the probability of Clark even getting it probably goes up a bit.

Starting point is 00:57:12 It probably moves the needle for Clark because even though he was in insane out of control member of the Department of Justice and apparently for a minute, a blip in time, the actual acting attorney general of the United States, a job that was offered to him by an accepted with a conversation with Donald Trump in the last days of the Trump administration, the Trump being in power, and him writing draft letters to elected election officials in states like Georgia,

Starting point is 00:57:44 telling them that the Department of Justice, this is all false, believe that there was fraud in the election and to put a pin in it and hold their results until there was, you know, which is all a lie, all concocted by Jeff Clark. But the question is, you know, it was on Department of Justice Letterhead and it is a part of the executive branch, does he got to say, yeah, I was out there, but I was out there as a federal official. The needle will move slightly in his favor if Meadows prevails on Monday. Do you think we get the ruling on Monday or we get it sometime later in the week? We'll get it close.

Starting point is 00:58:18 We'll have an indication, I think, where the judge is heading. We'll also see how many witnesses go because it may not wrap up in a one-day hearing. So we'll see. But yeah, Jeff Clark's argument will be, look, if you say I engaged in criminal conduct, that's fine. You can argue that I don't have immunity and I should just be prosecuted in federal court,

Starting point is 00:58:37 but make those arguments in federal court that doesn't mean it gets remanded to state court. While we're just on the topic of all of these co-defendants, it should be mentioned as well, that John Eastman, one of Donald Trump's co-defendants, just had his request to abate or to stay or to put an indefinite pause on the state bar of California proceedings against him.

Starting point is 00:59:01 That was rejected by the state bar court of California. And they said, Eastman, you waived your right to even make this claim. You've testified in this case before you invoked your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination before the January 6th committee. And then you even referenced these State Bar proceedings like two years ago. And then you invoked your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination when you were called before the special purpose, Grand Jury in Georgia, but not here before the Office of Chief Trial Council before the State Bar of California, you've testified for like eight

Starting point is 00:59:33 hours already. You don't get to now say you want to delay this indefinitely. And then the State Bar Court also said, you know, look, while this court has not yet ruled, I made a final ruling about the conduct committed by John Eastman, but he intent what has been presented thus far and what he is being accused of makes him a menace to the practice of law such that it is not in the public interest to delay this any further. So that was handed down last night. Yeah. Well, let me comment on that so everybody understands. It is not necessary for a lawyer, where you've been an eye or lawyers, Karen is a lawyer. We hold a professional license. It's

Starting point is 01:00:14 at the, it's at the will of the regulators that we report to for whatever states we're a member of the bar of. And it's not necessary that we be convicted of a crime in order for us to be sanctioned, punished, or lose our bar license. Rudy Giuliani has not yet been convicted of a crime, but he's already forfeited his bar license in New York and in Washington, DC because there's enough evidence. It's the standard for getting sanctioned by a bar regulator is not beyond a reasonable doubt. It's preponderance of the evidence and they've already sort of her finding that these people

Starting point is 01:01:00 are a menace to their society. They got to be taken out of serving clients, the only state just to leave it on this note that is not so fit to punish or discipline a leading member of Team Crazy, Eastman, Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, and Powell is Texas with Sidney Powell because they all rallied around her

Starting point is 01:01:24 and they found that no, no, we're not gonna, so she got no discipline whatsoever. She's been fined in different courts, but she hasn't had anything happen to her bar license out of Texas, and that's because we're talking about Texas. But just, I just wanted to make it clear, it, one doesn't have anything to do with the other,

Starting point is 01:01:41 whether he gets absolved or he's found not guilty in any of these criminal cases against them doesn't matter a wit. The bar regulators make their own determination based on the evidence is presented to them on the standard that's presented to them. Whether they have violated the rules of professional conduct of that state and whether they should be suspended or disbarred as a result. August 28th, or is that evidentiary hearing for meadows, August 28th will also be a big hearing in Washington, DC federal court. I'll just mention this briefly. There's not much else to discuss until the hearing itself takes place because special counsel Jack Smith and Donald Trump's lawyers will be before federal judge, Tonya Chutkin

Starting point is 01:02:22 at a trial setting conference. Just to remind everybody, special counsel Jack Smith has requested January 2nd, 2024 as the trial date. And Donald Trump's lawyers have requested in April, 2026 trial date. And just as a reminder, at the hearing that was held on Friday, August 11th in connection with the protective order that Judge Chuck Inissue, she warned Donald Trump's lawyers if he continues this conduct of harassing and intimidating witnesses, that taints the jury pool. And as a result, I am more inclined to setting an early trial date if he continues down this path. It's really up to him. It's his choice.

Starting point is 01:03:08 I thought it was brilliant how she framed it. I think special counsel, Jack Smith's lawyer, Tom Wyndham, who's been leading the proceedings before Judge Chutkin is going to raise that among a number of other issues as well, but say no, we're ready to go January 2nd, 2024. Ultimately, I think that probably more looks like a February or March trial date if I work to guess, but I think she'll set an early 2024 trial date. Yeah, a couple of things. That docket has been awfully quiet,

Starting point is 01:03:41 although there was one event about a week ago where in that case, given classified information, this is to show you that when you have a judge it's got a firm command of federal rules and jurisprudence in our courtroom. She knows how to enter a protective order. So in that case, there's already a protective order

Starting point is 01:04:01 that Donald Trump doesn't oppose about how to use classified information, which is part of even the Jan 6th insurrection, cleaning the power, failure to transfer peacefully, the reins of power to Joe Biden. Even that has classified information, not necessarily national defense information, but classified information that needs to be protected. They've already assigned a CEPA agent officer and they've already entered into a protective order while when we get down to Mar-a-Lago in a minute,

Starting point is 01:04:35 while Judge Cannon is still, I'm looking at my watch here, still in almost September, still jerking around with the protective order and what it should say. And cancelling and scheduling hearings and then re and then not scheduling them again. So we'll get to that as a compare contrast between the two judges in a moment. But lastly, for me in the only thing that I thought would have been filed already, but maybe it will before Monday, although it's already Saturday, is that the DOJ has not filed anything

Starting point is 01:05:06 to put the judge on notice about social media or other things that Donald Trump has done, which in their view be violentive of her conditions of release, I would have thought, yes, they could bring it up on their feet while they're there, but I would have thought if they really wanted to press the issue, because everybody in our audience,

Starting point is 01:05:23 and even us as the commentators, are like waiting for some judge to say enough, you have violated my conditions of release. You're beyond your first amendment rights, stop at the water's edge of criminal justice and the proper administration of justice. As Judge Chutkin says, as Judge McAfee just said, and others, but it hasn't happened yet. And I would have thought if they were gonna raise it,

Starting point is 01:05:46 I would have seen a filing on Thursday or Friday and I looked on the docket and I didn't see anything. So they could still mention it on their feet, but I think the focus, as you said, Ben, is gonna be for Monday, is let's get the trial already. The sooner we get the trial, the more control we have over him, let him keep talking, it's evidence in our favor, anyway, eventually, the more he talks, the better it is, like the Tucker Carlson interview where that in lieu of a

Starting point is 01:06:09 debate in which he said at the end, basically, it was a beautiful thing that happened on January 6th, basically promoting civil war. You know, that's just another, you know, type it up, put an exhibit tab on it. We're going to use it a trial. So, um, and I agree with you, I think she sets a trial. That's a lot closer in time and certainly with a 24 at the end of it for the trial of Donald Trump and the District of Columbia and completely rejects this ridiculous argument about we can't be done until a year and a half later in, in 2026. That's not going to happen. Nothing that Judge Chutkin has said so far.

Starting point is 01:06:47 It's the opposite of what she has said, which is I'm going to run a very tight ship here on a rocket docket, and if you step over any lines, it means I'm gonna set a quicker trial. And she can't think, you know, even though it hasn't been brought to her attention in formal filings, she's got eyes, she's got ears,

Starting point is 01:07:04 her clerks watch social media. They know what Donald Trump's done. They know the doxing that's happened I can't think, you know, even though it hasn't been brought to her attention in formal filings, she's got eyes. She's got ears. Her clerks watch social media. They know what Donald Trump's done. They know the doxing that's happened with the grand jury through his, through his proxies in, in, in Georgia. And everybody's watching her. She, for me, she's, the judges like McAfee are watching her. She's for me, the lead case.

Starting point is 01:07:24 It's the one that's the most important to our system of government and to our democracy, not so much the cat in case. Yes, George is really important, but I think it's Judge Chutkin. I think she wears that responsibility well, knows she has it. Then for me, therefore, all things point to some sort of 2024 trial date for Donald Trump. That brings us to Judge Cannon as we held as we head south to the Southern District of Florida, where on Friday she granted a motion for leave to file a surreply by Stan Woodward, Donald Trump's co-defendant Walteen Nauta's lawyer.

Starting point is 01:08:06 Donald Trump's co-defendants in that case for the Wilphal Retention of National Defense Information include his valet slash assistant, Walteen Nauta, who's represented by Stan Woodward and Carlos De Oliveira, the head of maintenance at Mar-a-Lago, who's represented by John Irving, both Woodward and Irving are paid for by Donald Trump's political action committee, both Woodward and Irving serve as co-counsel for Pete Navarro together in Washington, D.C. in the contempt of Congress case, by the way, which is set for trial, the first week of September, where Navarro refused to show up and be deposed or produced documents in connection with the January 6th Committee proceedings.

Starting point is 01:08:50 And so about two weeks ago or so, Judge Cannon on her own, what's called Suisponti in Latin, which is a court term, which means on her own initiative, basically demanded after Special Counsel Jack Smith filed what's called the Garcia motion asking the court to hold a hearing about conflicts of interest that exist by the lawyers that Donald Trump's paid for representing the various co-defendants who also represent witnesses who may want to testify as well against the co-defendants who the same lawyers are representing having a lawyers one client testify against the lawyers other client or having having a lawyer's one client testify against the lawyer's other client or having even a lawyer's former client where the lawyer got

Starting point is 01:09:29 all of these confidences testify against say Waltean in Nauta and judge Ken and on her own must have heard this argument on Fox because it took place the day before she issued her order. It was on Fox on Sunday. She made the order on Monday about two weeks ago saying and Jack Smith addressed the propriety of the Washington DC grand jury that's still been receiving evidence while at the same time, I have jurisdiction over this federal criminal case now. Again, Judge Cannon trying to do exactly what she was overturned for back in 2022 by the 11 circuit. Me, mine, I want that jurisdiction of the Washington DC grand jury. Why aren't

Starting point is 01:10:05 you bringing that to me so she can do her corrupt and incompetent judge, Eileen Cannon, things. The good news is that judge Eileen Cannon's corruption is matched by her incompetence. And she's created this whole legal quagmire in her court and Jackson, it's like, okay, it's fine. It's perfectly allowable to have a Grand Jury in Washington DC where it relates to subject matter that's relevant to what the Grand Jury was working on before and Judge Cannon's been striking all of Jack Smith's under seal filings. So Jack Smith used the opportunity by Judge Cannon asking for that response Why do you have the DC Grand Jury? Jack Smith answered the question. He goes, well, judge, it's because employee number four, who's referenced in the superseding indictment, is someone he doesn't mention the name, but it's Usal Tavares, the head of IT.

Starting point is 01:10:54 Usal Tavares used to be represented by Stan Woodward, and when Usal Tavares testified before the Washington, DC Grand jury back in March of 2023, he lied. So in Woodward was representing Tveris, Tveris slide. Then what happened was in July 5th after the DC presiding judge, Judge Jeb Bozberg held a Garcia hearing about potential conflicts of interest that exists. Guess what happened? Yussel Tveris said, I don't want Stanley Woodward, the Trump paid for lawyer representing me. Yussel Tavaris said, I don't want Stanley Woodward, the Trump paid for lawyer representing me. Yussel Tavaris, unlike Carlos Deo Levera, who's now a co-defendant to Veris realize, wait a minute. So Trump is paying lawyers to represent me to help Trump and screw me over.

Starting point is 01:11:35 It's exactly what's going on. And Tavaris learned that when a federal public defender was appointed to him. So then Yussel to Varys, told Jack Smith the truth. Hey, Jack Smith, I lied to you back in March of 2023 into the grand jury. Here's what actually happened. Donald Trump, Waltine now to Carlos Dale, who were involved in a criminal conspiracy. They wanted me as the head of IT

Starting point is 01:11:59 to destroy surveillance footage. They asked me to do that. And that and I lied to the grand jury when I said that they I had no Knowledge about these classified records or anything about them asking me to destroy surveillance footage. So then After Jackson Smith files that then stand Woodward like acts pissed off at that and sends this whole rambling brief judge We need to file a surreply sends this whole rambling brief judge. We need to file a surreply. Jack Smith's now talking about grand jury proceedings.

Starting point is 01:12:27 I kid you not. This is what Stan Woodward said. Jack Smith's now talking about grand jury proceedings in Washington DC. He's not allowed to do that. Judge Cannon, you asked for that. That was literally the request that you made. Brief the propriety of it.

Starting point is 01:12:40 And she's been striking all of his under seal filings that Jack Smith has tried to made before. And now the Walty Nauta's lawyer is whining about it because he's like, this hurts my reputation. And now people are coming after me and saying that I'm the reason why you sold to Varus, didn't tell the truth to the grand jury in March of 23. And that's not the case. And my reputation's harmed.

Starting point is 01:13:03 It's harming all of our reputation's, wah, wah, wah, wah, wah, wah, and you just see Popoq the difference between like what's going on in this docket in canon. It's like a mess. She's like striking documents. You got people whining and complaining and surreplies and she's inviting briefing and then people are,

Starting point is 01:13:23 and then the Trump people get upset when Jack Smith responds to a brief, like it is a mess. And again, it is corruption meets idiocracy here. There is not an appealable order yet for Jack Smith to make. So when people go, why hasn't he gone to the 11th Circuit yet? Because she hasn't made an order yet that would be called an interlocutory of peelable order.

Starting point is 01:13:45 So he hasn't been able to do it, but that's coming. We'll see that. I'm sure in the next two or three weeks with all of the ridiculous orders that she's been making. And again, she's just created such disorganization in her docket. And that's kind of my overall point about that. But we learned, of course, through through that how Jack Smith was able to get usel to Varys who was not cooperating. In fact,

Starting point is 01:14:10 the lying to the grand jury to become a cooperating witness and to say, this is, this is what happened. And that was some big, big development there as well. Popuck, final thoughts on that one. Let's see. As I said last week, Stan Woodward was not going to be happy with the filing by the federal government because it calls him out as being a botan paid for, say, of America packed Trump lawyer who wasn't representing his client. And they did it by way of showing that there is an obvious conflict because one day, and you can tell from his filings, then Woodward hopes that day will never come. Employee number four, you seal Tavaris is going to take the stand on behalf of the government as a witness for the prosecution

Starting point is 01:14:59 to testify about his involvement with the conspiracy involving the Butler, the maintenance man and himself to delete the server footage at the request of the boss, which is Donald Trump. And then Stan Woodward would have to cross examine a former client of his, not just the former, the spect the spectacle of already under the under the rules of professional conduct, cross-examining your own former client who is now effectively testifying against your current client, Walt Nauta, is already not permitted under the rules from a conflict standpoint. But then to tell the complete story, the Department of Justice, because Woodward forced them to, said, there's another element here, judge, which is people only tell the

Starting point is 01:15:52 truth when they get out from under a botan-paid for Trump lawyer, which means they are impugning the integrity of Stan Woodward. And I said last week that Stan Woodward is in deep crap and was not going to like this attack on him. And if he doesn't like it, then he's going to hate it now because not only has the Department of Justice told the story about what happened in the DC Circuit Court with Chief Judge Boasberg, who was presiding over a hearing about a conflict of interest there related to the testimony of employee number four to Varys to the Grand jury in March. But the judge basically made his own decision that to Varys needed an independent lawyer to consult with. It wasn't that it wasn't so much that the client asked for it to various ways to say it,

Starting point is 01:16:47 and said, I think I need my own lawyer here, Judge, the judge as the head of the court said, you need to talk to somebody, even for a moment, about with an independent evaluation about your situation, meaning whether you lied to a grand jury. And I got to get you out from under Mr. Woodward. And so when Tveris came back, he said two things, I fired Mr. Woodward, although Woodward Ben in his papers said he's not sure that he was canned by Tveris.

Starting point is 01:17:19 That's obviously not true. And the second thing he said was, I now need to cooperate with the federal government and tell them and recant my testimony. We have a word, we have a concept in the law for somebody that allows a witness to testify untruthfully under oath. It's called subboring perjury. And the government has basically said

Starting point is 01:17:42 that Stan Woodward, newer should have known that his client was lying about the server deletion conversation conspiracy and allowed that to be given to the grand jury, i.e. subordinate perjury, which by the way, is itself a crime. When Stan Woodward jumped up and down in a very short filing to try to save his reputation,

Starting point is 01:18:04 that's when the Department of Justice said, you know what? You want to see the whole transcript of what went down with Judge Bozberg? It's not going to be good for you Stan, but you want us to do that? We'll give you the whole transcript judge in camera for you to review on your own because certain elements are still sealed and you seem to have a problem your honor with sealing things. So why don't you just take a look at it and you'll see what we're talking about. Woodward said, I want one more bite at the apple, which is quite unusual to get what you

Starting point is 01:18:30 refer to. Ben as a sur reply, normally in motion practice, 99% of the time, you have three pieces of paper. You have the initial filing, the motion, right, by whoever's making the motion. We call them the movement, can be the government, could be the defense. Then you have the opposition paper, which is the paper for the party that didn't make the motion. And then you have a reply, which is basically two briefs for the party that has the motion, one brief in the middle for the party that doesn't.

Starting point is 01:19:01 You don't normally get a reply to the reply, right? You don't each get two briefs, unless you ask for the permission of the judge for what's called the sur reply, which is to address something that you should be allowed to address not just an oral argument if she holds a hearing. And so she allowed the sur reply.

Starting point is 01:19:20 This again is a study and contrast between how judge Chutkin in the District of Columbia run circuit where there's already a protective order in place. There's already documents being in the much bigger case. There's already documented documents being provided. A trial date will be set. I'm sure in 2024 on Monday. And other than that, very little commotion, whereas everything down in Florida is a cluster, is a total cluster. And it's because, as you said, because of her inexperience slash mediocrity slash, I don't want to go as far as corruption, but whatever it is, she is, she is, I practice down there. She, let's be frank, she is inviting, inviting shenanigans and things that are

Starting point is 01:20:09 improper and then buying into it by giving people additional briefs and driving the government crazy about sealing instead of just running an orderly administration and justice. And we're seeing it. And that's why I've always, I've recently come to the conclusion and I said it on Wednesday's edition with Karen of Legal AF. I said, I am more thinking that Jack Smith has now, if he didn't before, he certainly now does, sees Florida as sort of the stalking horse. Like let's just, we'll do everything we gotta do down there.

Starting point is 01:20:44 But that's not my big case. My big case, I got Chutkin, I got Home Court Advantage, I'm in the District of Columbia where I want to be with a jury that I want to pick from. This other thing, yes, it's important to the national defense that he beheld accountable Donald Trump for the bad, bad things he did at Mar-a-Lago. But I don't think that's any longer Jack Smith's focus. He'll use that though, as we said earlier, to Whip Saw, Donald Trump and his team because

Starting point is 01:21:11 that team numerically is outmatched. Look, I've been doing defense for a long time. You're always outmatched with the federal government on the other side because they are the federal government and they have thousands of people, hundreds of people assigned to your case and they have an unlimited budget. And so you're going up against them with like your, I'll just talk a little bit about, you're going up against them with a hundred thousand dollar retainer that you got from your client, right? And you and your associate and a paralegal and you're waging war against the,

Starting point is 01:21:42 the United States of America. Donald Trump's the same boat, okay? He's got two lead lawyers, right, in, for the federal side, both of which have one associate of peace. This is the tiniest of law firms, okay? They wouldn't even register on a list of top law firms. They wouldn't even be on the top, I mean, you know,

Starting point is 01:22:03 law, so people that know that don't practice the way you and I practice, you know, mega law firms in this country have two to three thousand lawyers at their disposal. I'm in a midsize firm, medium firm. We have 50 lawyers. These guys are four guys, literally four guys with whatever budget that they've been given to think it paid against the United States of America. So I see Jack Smith not only working, even if it's not coordinated with Fawni Willis, to Whip saw him there and with Alvin Bragg in New York, but Whip saw him between the two cases. And that is only again a nurse to the benefit of the United States of America, the Department of Justice. And special counsel, Jack Smith, filed the case, the grand jury indicted, brought the

Starting point is 01:22:50 indictment, grand jury indicted in the Southern District of Florida. It was assigned to Judge Cannon. He knew that he was going to be bringing the other indictment in Washington, DC. Didn't know he was going to draw Judge Chutkin, but knew he was bringing the other one. And I just think he was like, look, we got to, when it comes to Canada, she doesn't know what she's doing. I believe, you don't have to agree with this Popeye, and she's corrupt. Let's take advantage of the fact that also she doesn't know what she's doing.

Starting point is 01:23:19 He told his team, I have no doubt, file motion after motion, the appropriate motions, and put the pressure on the right way. But between her and Trump's lawyers, they were going to make the mistakes. And that's exactly what has happened where Donald Trump's lawyers have made requests of Judge Chutkin in DC, hey, Judge, can we file this? No, no. She goes, no, stick to the deadlines, and then we'll hold the hearing,

Starting point is 01:23:49 and then we'll show up in court, and then we'll have an orderly proceeding. You know what it's like, Ben, from our other worlds and sports? The Department of Justice has the brain power, and the horse power, and the bandwidth, to play a full court fast break basketball from the beginning of the game till the end without any timeouts and any break.

Starting point is 01:24:14 And these guys are trying to do at best man-to-man in two different courts when they're completely outmatched. And that again, a nurse to the benefit. Same thing. If we're coming up with a theme for today's show, same thing is happening in Fawni Willis's home court of Fulton County in a state court that she is supreme. She's at home literally in that courthouse, in that courtroom with Rico, which is her friend. She's sophisticated in that area. She's got an expert on her own staff that she consults with on Rico. She successfully tried up to 20 people

Starting point is 01:24:52 in a Rico conspiracy involving bribery and a school board in Georgia. She's already had a dress rehearsal for this type of big sprawling case like this. And she advantage Fannie Willis, almost at every turn. Even if it goes to federal court, she's got enough people on her staff that have practiced in federal court and they've been in federal court before. It's not going to throw her for a loop while each of these people, the best lawyers that

Starting point is 01:25:18 I have spoken about so far are the ones I guess by Donald Trump. Maybe you put Steve Sadow, the new lawyer in Georgia that really represents rappers most of the time as being in that category with Todd Blanch and John Lorrow, Chris Kice having disappeared off the face of the earth recently. So if that's his team, it goes down considerably from there as to who's representing the others. Rudy Giuliani's lawyer already said, I'm out after the initial appearance, nobody's lining up to represent Kathy Latham or the guy that's still sitting in jail because he can't figure out a way to get himself out of a bond situation, you get himself a, you know, bonded or, or these other cheese bros, probably going to try cheese, bros, probably going to be his own lawyer. Rudy Giuliani may end up being his own lawyer. So the high point of law, lawyering on the defense is,

Starting point is 01:26:18 is, is a, is a blanche and laurel. And we've seen them so far, not too great, especially in front of Judge Chutkin. And then it drops considerably the quality of loyering, whereas look at everybody on Jack Smith's team, look at everybody on Faudi Willis's team. I'm not saying the better lawyers win cases, but I'm saying the better lawyers often win cases. No, and I think the importance of law and order

Starting point is 01:26:45 and where we are in this historical moment is really symbolize, though, in that Trump mug shot and the reaction to the mug shot. You know, most Americans were repulsed by that mug shot. Most Americans look at that and see that this is a malignant, narcissistic, sociopathic, criminal treasonous trader who has spewed and spread so much hate and division in our country that is going to take such a long time to repair. And it's embodied in that gaze. It's embodied in that look. It's embodied in everything that he and this maga strand that has taken over the Republican party represents.

Starting point is 01:27:35 It is not normal behavior. Nor is the conduct about what Maga Republicans did and how they treat that situation afterwards. I mean, you have Donald Trump on social media posting mugs and merch and t-shirts that say, never surrender. He surrendered. That photo is in connection with literally surrendering to Fulton County. And they are spreading the mug shot as though this is a high point for them. They are posting on social media mug shots of them next to other people, like other people

Starting point is 01:28:15 who have been criminally convicted of things like this is MAGA right now. This is what it means. And so why I don't call these people conservative. This is the Republican party today. This is why I say there has been a paradigm shift in what just American politics are. Do not call MAGA Republicans conservative. There you have Don Jr. a leader of the MAGA Republican party showcasing Donald Trump as a criminal next to other people who have been arrested next to other mug shots here. You have Alina Habad, Donald Trump's lawyer or spokesperson saying that she thinks the mug shot is the greatest thing ever here. Play this clip.

Starting point is 01:28:56 People aren't stupid. The mug shot was probably one of the best things that ever happened to him probably at this point. So thank you, Fanny. First off, her name is Fanny and they intentionally mispronounced her name over and over again. And for them to say the mug shot is the best thing to happen to him and then the way they utilize and and weaponize that I'll show you what went down on the Fox propaganda network as well. This is Jesse Waters and Jesse Waters

Starting point is 01:29:29 is like the new Tucker there. And he says how, despite the fact that he has an unblemished record as a heterosexual that this photograph aroused him, play this clip. I am now going to book the Fulton County photographer for my Christmas card because, Judge, and I say this with a unblemished record of heterosexuality. He looks good. And he looks hard.

Starting point is 01:30:00 And yeah, and that behavior, folks folks is frankly what's inspired me to significantly reduce my own practice of law to do this and to do this education and to build the Midest Touch Network to what it is today because that's not normal behavior. And I know that there are forces spending billions of dollars, building a propaganda network to push and say things like that. And I know that all of you, like me who watch this, are tired of being gaslit, are tired of having our country of being gaslit are tired of having our country being controlled by purely evil, malignant, narcissistic, sociopathic abusers. And we need to take a stand. And that begins also with the civic education and engagement and talking about facts and data and evidence and pushing back

Starting point is 01:31:07 against this absurdity. I mean Donald Trump self-reporting that he's 6.3 and 215 pounds as I mentioned at the top of the show. The same weight as Muhammad Ali in his prime. I mean what are we talking about? What are we talking about? The same way he lies about his crowd sizes, the same way he lies about, he lies about everything. You know, when I was considering, should we do a, and by the way, when Donald Trump was a raided Manhattan district attorney,

Starting point is 01:31:37 he self reported 240 pounds back in March. I was thinking about, you know, do we do any, what should we do with that, with that mug shot? And ultimately, where I kind of came down on is, that's the face of an abuser. You know, that's the face of someone who has been found by a jury to be liable of sexual abuse. of sexual abuse. This is somebody who was handed a trust fund, bankrupted everything, screwed people over his entire life, and then screwed over our incredibly proud and beautiful democracy here that used to be an inspiration to the world. And we're rebuilding that brick by brick here, but he is someone who has caused a great deal of pain and suffering and torture. And it's not funny. It's not a humorous moment. It's not spread or share except under the appropriate context of that individual is a treasonous

Starting point is 01:32:51 trader, criminal, who needs to be reflect on their purpose and those who facilitate and spread his crimes need to similarly be brought to justice and held accountable. And our commitment here at Legal AF and on the Midas Touch Network is to provide as much resources, as much information, as much education, and as much engagement as part of this beautiful pro-democracy community that you all created to help in that task. And if we could play a small part in that, Michael Popack, myself, and all of our contributors and all of those who work at the Midas Touch network would be very grateful to play that small part in honor to be here with all of you on this episode of Legal AF.

Starting point is 01:33:57 Thank you for everyone who has become a member of our YouTube channel, everyone who has joined our Patreon Patreon.com slash MidasTouch, where we have AfterShow podcasts for the MidasTouch brother show. Thinking about potentially launching another Patreon for legal AF, we are doing one for a political beat down. I think it could be fun to have these different communities on Patreon. So that's something we are building. Make sure you go to MidasTouch.com as well. Thanks to all of your support and becoming members of our YouTube, becoming members of our Patreon. Again, patreon.com slash minus touch. Gifting other

Starting point is 01:34:39 people YouTube memberships, we've been able to take those resources and invest it into creating this website, which is now getting so many views and so much engagement on par with some of the top websites out there. We've been able to hire a whole staff, and that's thanks to, if you want to know, hey, what is the membership building? You can see the bricks building brick by brick here at the Midas Touch Network and that's just one of the many examples of where we're investing into increase our reach and to increase the reach of all of our reporting here. Thank you all so so much. Subscribe right now to the Midas Touch Network. Make sure you download Legal AF wherever audio podcasts are available. All you do is you search Legal AF. Hit subscribe. Listen to it when you're

Starting point is 01:35:31 in the car, when you're walking at home or wherever. Make sure you subscribe to Legal AF on the podcast as well. Thank you so much. We'll see you next time on Legal AF. Shout out to the Midas 90. See you next time on Legal AF. Shout out to the minus ID.

Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump and Co-Defendants SUFFER Everything they DESERVE

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.