Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump and Santos BROUGHT TO JUSTICE at last

Episode Date: May 11, 2023

The top-rated legal and political podcast Legal AF is back for another hard-hitting look at the most consequential developments at the intersection of law and politics. On this Special midweek’s edition, anchors national trial attorney Michael Popok and former top Manhattan DA prosecutor Karen Friedman Agnifilo, are joined by their co-anchor, civil rights attorney, and co-founder of Meidas Touch, to discuss: 1. The jury’s verdict in favor of E Jean Carroll, finding Trump guilty of sexual abuse and defamation, and awarding her $5 million dollars; 2. The Brooklyn US Attorney’s Office indicting, arresting and arraigning Rep. George Santos for wire fraud, charity fraud, and unemployment fraud, among other things, 3. Trump’s efforts to take his 34-count business record fraud case away from a Manhattan state court judge and send it to a Federal judge instead; 4. Updates in the Manhattan DA’s criminal prosecution of Trump with the judge setting a February or March 2024 trial date, and entering a protective and gag order against Trump; and 5. Michael Cohen filing a motion to dismiss Trump’s Miami federal case against him, and so much more. DEALS FROM OUR SPONSORS! BAMBEE: Go to https://BAMBEE.COM right now and type in LEGALAF under podcast when you sign up! MIRACLE MADE: Head to https://TRYMIRACLE.COM/LEGALAF and use the code LEGALAF AG1: Head to https://athleticgreens.com/legalaf to get a FREE 1 year supply of Vitamin D and 5 FREE Travel Packs with your first purchase! SUPPORT THE SHOW: Shop LEGAL AF Merch at: https://store.meidastouch.com Join us on Patreon: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Remember to subscribe to ALL the Meidas Media Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://pod.link/1510240831 Legal AF: https://pod.link/1580828595 The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://pod.link/1595408601 The Influence Continuum: https://pod.link/1603773245 Kremlin File: https://pod.link/1575837599 Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://pod.link/1530639447 The Weekend Show: https://pod.link/1612691018 The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560 American Psyop: https://pod.link/1652143101 Burn the Boats: https://pod.link/1485464343 Majority 54: https://pod.link/1309354521 Political Beatdown: https://pod.link/1669634407 Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://pod.link/1676844320 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump found liable in the E. Jean Carroll federal trial. E. Jean Carroll is awarded $5 million by a unanimous jury, a big day for justice. George Santos arrested the Department of Justice just brought a 13 count federal indictment of Maga Republican George Santos a big day for justice also Might as touch network host Michael Cohen filed a motion to dismiss Cohen filed a motion to dismiss Donald Trump's $500 million federal lawsuit in the southern district of Florida. Donald Trump looks like he's headed for another big court law there. A big day for justice.

And Donald Trump's attempts to delay the Manhattan district attorney's criminal case has backfireed again. Yes, a big day for justice. Justice, justice, read all about it. This is legal AFI'm Ben Myceles joined by Karen Friedman Agnifalo, who is in an undisclosed location. Maybe she'll disclose it. Maybe she won't out of the country. Popok is not in the country. I'm not in California. We're all traveling, but we can't let the legal a effort is down. I think Popok will be joining us soon.

It is possible that Popok is in Popokian vacation mode, so we'll cut him a little slack. We'll just say that. But Karen, how are you doing? I'm great. What time is it where you are, Ben? By me, it is now, well, we won't reveal all of the locations because we don't want to specifically let people identify. I just said what time is it where you are?

Eastern time zone. Which time zone are you in? I'm in Asia Okay, well just leave it. We'll leave it at that carrot carrots in Asia. I'm on Eastern time zone Popo is on some Caribbean time zone stuff of course popo would be on Caribbean time But let's get let's get right into it the Donald Trump trial, Donald Trump, a defendant in the E. Jean Carroll case, Donald Trump found liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll. Donald Trump found liable for defaming E. Jean Carroll, a unanimous jury 920. The jury awarded E. Jean Carroll $5 million.

There's no other way to say it. And this was a big win for justice, a big win for E. Jean Carroll, who has demonstrated courage and strength, and has really just been against all that Donald Trump and Maga through her way what she's had to endure. I mean it is just so impressive and a big win for her legal team led by Roberta Kaplan some of the best the lawyer I've ever seen ever. Just incredible lawyer in Karen, what's your take on what went down? Yeah, so Robbie Kaplan is a little bit of a celebrity in New York, not just

from this case, but from other cases that she has handled. And for anyone who's ever had a girl crush on somebody, Roberta Kaplan is like a girl crush. Like she's amazing. She's as good as it gets in terms of lawyers. And she took on this case's as good as it gets in terms of lawyers and and she took on this case and you know she got it across the finish line and you know at first

it was a little bit confusing because he was charged with multiple different theories of liability and the jury did not find him liable of rape, just of sexual abuse. And sexual abuse has to do with the sexual touching of an intimate part of the body. So, for example, she testified about how his hands were, in her vagina. And so clearly they believed her story and they found for that.

And it's the question is, why did they not find him liable of the rape? It could be because she wasn't 100. She couldn't see the penis. You know, she testified, but I mean, you know, most women would argue or would say, you still know when it's a penis, even if you don't see it, excuse my language,

but you know, when you're talking about sexual assault, there's no other way around it, other than to talk about it in graphic detail. And she talked about it in graphic detail, and boy did she have courage, and did she withstand just the most horrific cross-examination from Joe Takapina. And interestingly, the reason they did not find him liable for rape, we're going to have to scratch our heads and say why, right? Because they clearly believed her story and didn't believe Trump's story. And hopefully one of the jurors or some of the jurors will come forward and explain what their reasoning was.

Popoq and I have talked about this case for the last couple of weeks and I was concerned about the DNA issue that everybody heard that she saved the dress, everybody knew that she saved the dress. And in this day and age, people know that DNA exists and can exist for a long time. And for various reasons, DNA was not allowed to be mentioned here because there was a male profile that was found on the dress and it was a mixture. And Donald Trump refused to give his DNA. And as a result, discovery and the time to give it closed a long time ago, and at the very last minute on the eve of trial, he said, oops, I'll give over my DNA. And the judge said, no, it's too late. And because it would have delayed the trial. And I had a

concern about that is, juries will have come to expect testimony about DNA. And in a criminal case, you would always either put on a DNA expert or an expert to explain why there's no DNA. You wouldn't just leave it out there and not have any discussion of it. And so I had a serious concern about this. And we talked about it for the last couple of legal apps. And here we are, they didn't find him guilty of rape. And I would, I will be interested to hear from the jury if that's one of the reasons was because of the fact that there was this inexplicable DNA,

regardless. They believed her clearly. They found him liable clearly. They found him liable of a sexual assault and they are They they have damages for both the sexual assault and the liable are the definite defamation I should say and So he's going to have to pay five million dollars, you know, interestingly too. He's just you know He's he spoke out about how he wanted to be present, but he couldn't be present. And it's such a lie, because they gave him every opportunity. He said he's going to come.

He didn't show up. He called no witnesses. But yet, recently, I think it was today, or yesterday, depending on what time zone you're in, I don't even know when it was. You know, he talked about how, how he wanted to come, but he couldn't come. I mean, he's just a liar.

He was given every opportunity. He chose not to come. And the jury answered and found him liable in three hours, which, to me, is lightning speed. And Ben, I have a question for you. Not only did they find them liable in lightning speed, but they found the dollar amount so quickly. Is that normal in civil cases to be so clear, so quick?

Because it wasn't just like $5 million, right? It was $2 million for the sexual assault, plus $20,000 in punitive damages for the sexual assault plus you know, $200, $2.7 for damages for the defamation plus $280. It was very specific, like a math equation, equaling 5 million. Is that please give us some context in a civil case about what that means and how quickly they came to these numbers. Not only will I give you the context, but our third co-host, Michael Popack,

has joined us from an undisclosed location, somewhere in the Caribbean. We're not giving our exact locations. We simply said that Karen, somewhere in Asia, you're somewhere in the Caribbean. I'm somewhere on the East Coast. We're all traveling. So I thought it was, they definitely came back quicker than would normally be the case

in something like this. I thought that they were, that they'd at least go maybe further into the afternoon. You know, the case was handed them sometime around like 10, 11 a.m. Eastern time since we're all about time zones on this episode. And so they basically took a lunch and then like right away had the numbers. And one of the interesting things to point out there too though, in the closing argument E. Jean Carroll's lawyers specifically said they're not even going to be asking for a number.

They had an expert who went up there and you know tried to quantify what those damages are and the experts, projections of reputational harm and other lost income and other losses and emotional distress types of losses, generally were what the jury embraced. But the fact that the jury came back so quickly and found that Donald Trump did engage in the sexual abuse, did engage in defamation, then came back with the number was quicker than I had anticipated. I thought it would go at least two or three hours later on that question and perhaps even into the next morning. Popock, what do you think? It's even faster than that. The jury went out at 11.50 AM just before lunch

and the legal AF team joked and I joked about it. I said, here's how it's going to go. They're going to go into their deliberation room. They're going to pick their jury for person. They're going to order lunch and then they're going to roll really, really quickly. And by three o'clock, less than three hours of real deliberation time. And even though we've talked about on legal AF, whether it's me and you, Ben, or Karen, and me, or on hot takes,

that the jury is not supposed to begin their deliberations or thought process, the real deliberations until they're charged by the judge with the law, they have the exhibits back with them, and they start a deliberation, a formal deliberation process. They are forming opinions. They may not be talking about it. They're supervised at lunch. They were anonymous jury that had to be for safety concerns, how to be shepherded and supervised by federal marshals to and from the courthouse at lunch and when they left at the end of the day. So they didn't have really much time in the hallway to talk about things or at all. And they were not sequestered, meaning they were not put up in a hotel for this entire duration for the seven days. They were able

to go home every night and their foreman opinions and their right and notes. And it's clear to us that we were originally worried of the nine jurors, six men, three women. We were worried on the demographics of one, the male juror who said he had all of his dues from right-wing podcasts. But look, there is an organic process of a jury deliberation and how those disparate personalities come together in a jury room is literally what jury science and jury scientists are made of and how that organism reaches consensus and reaches conclusions and how they orderly do that so that they could not only go down that jury verdict form, which we'll show if we haven't already to the audience, and

click off in the decision-making tree that is embedded in the jury verdict form, but they were also able to then think embedded with that decision, intertwined with that decision, they're aware that they have to award money. I think they did a quick poll of the table of nine, right? Three left, they were alternate, they did not get to deliberate. The nine did a quick poll about, are we going to find for E. Jean Carroll or not? Technically, they're not supposed to do it exactly that way, but you know that's what they did. Everybody raised their hands reasonably quickly. I don't think that two and a half hours, 245 deliberation included a holdout who they

had to beat up to get over to consensus. I think they got consensus really, really quickly. Then they were just going through the verdict form and then it was about money. And I thought it was actually quite courageous of the plaintiffs lawyers, especially the ones who closed. I know that Robbie Kaplan, who is the owner of the firm, runs that firm, is the lead lawyer. She's the one in all the photos. We have the photos of her holding hands with Eugene Carroll on the way out. She did the closing, but her partner, Mike Ferrara, former US attorney, did what's called the rebuttal close because the way it goes in a civil case is plaintiff closes, so one or two hours, whatever that is, then the defense closes.

That's their last time to talk to the jury, that was Joe Takapina for what that was worth. And then there's a rebuttal close, the plaintiff gets to have two bites at the apple, two times to talk to the jury to try to rebut whatever the defense defend it said, at least in a civil case where the reponderance of evidence standard is applicable. And they did not put, I was surprised, because I have said in hot takes, and I know we talked about it on the other shows. I thought they were going to put a number. I put up numbers on the board. Like here is a number 2.5 million was our expert for reputational damage. Then you are really free on punitive damages to punish because

that's what punitive damages are the other side. And then between emotional distress or whatever the other categories of damages were. And then total that number up. They didn't do that. They really trusted the jury. It also demonstrates that this was not about the money, right? This was not about the money. You know, I said there might be a settlement in this case because, you know, frankly,

where she was in her career, her being unemployed, I don't really know what her sources of income were. And she had legitimate damages to her reputation and ability to, at 79, to get income, to get money. But this obviously wasn't because if it was, and I think that resonated with the jury, I think it resonated with the jury that they didn't put a big fat number up on the board. And they left it to the jury. Could they have gotten to the jury to a slightly bigger number? I said in a hot take it was going to be north of three, summer three to ten. It landed right in the middle. Could they squeeze the ten if they had made a pitch during the closing? Maybe. But I think they watched that jury the way none of the three of us could do. They saw

something in that jury that said to Robbie Kaplan, I'm not putting a number on the board. And that kind of stuck into Donald Trump and the team of Takapena, Haba who we never saw at all during the trial, except for sitting at council table, the three of us did as much as she did at that trial. And we weren't even there. And Perry Brandt, who came out of Kansas City to cross-examine one witness and didn't even do a great job at that in Lisa Bernbach, the author, one of the two corroborating witnesses for E. Jean Carroll. The, but I don't think anybody should be disartened.

I'll leave my point on this. I don't think anybody should be disartened about rape versus sexual assault. It has to do with the nuances of New York law, Karen's better at it on this podcast, talk about that having been a violent sex crimes prosecutor in her day. But it came down to that.

It showed a thoughtfulness about the jury that they listened to the evidence at her testimony about what did happen in that dressing room and what didn't happen and what she wasn't sure happened. And that, again, it showed a very thoughtful jury, not the jury that Joe Takapina in his press conference on the Tordow Steps said, this just demonstrates that you can't get a fair trial in New York City. Well, we carried an eye at least to try cases in New York City and that's a lie. And E. Jean Carroll's jury did an amazing job of sifting through the evidence presented primarily all by E. Jean Carroll to reach their verdict and they should be commended for what they did.

I'll just say this, a five million dollar verdict also sends a message, right? It is a big number that says the jury thought that Donald Trump engaged in very, very bad conduct, right? It wasn't a dollar, it wasn't a hundred thousand dollars. I mean, ultimately for Donald Trump, he'll just go out and grift more and come up with other ways to try to raise that money. But the jury was also sending a message. Now, a lot of people say, oh, well, Donald Trump's just going to appeal.

Well, first, if he's going to appeal, he's going to have to post a bond, usually in almost all circumstances like this, of at least the number equal to satisfy the judgment or close to it. But the appeals going nowhere, right? This is a case where a jury reached a verdict where Donald Trump did not even show up to his own trial and then lied about wanting to show up. And now he's going to file an appeal and claim that he didn't get a fair trial at all when he never showed up. If anything, the only prejudicial things that could have led to actually reversing this

case on the appeal would have been if it went the other way based on his extra judicial statements that violated court orders where he said all of these things that the court would not allow in as evidence because they were false or not relevant at all. I think that that is really, really, really important to note that P. L. is going nowhere. And finally, it's also important to note as well that Donald Trump is not out of the woods yet in general here. I mean, number one, Donald Trump's bad behavior in the trial. He can still be held accountable for that.

Roberta Kaplan has left open the possibility of filing additional motions and seeking to hold Donald Trump in contempt. Judge Lewis Kaplan, as well, has also indicated that he would take up those issues after the case as well. He didn't want to disturb the jury's deliberations with all of these statements that Donald Trump's made. Donald Trump is continuing to attack the judge.

The judge still has jurisdiction, not just over this case, because there's always post-trial motions that will be filed. But remember, there's still E. Jean Carroll won. This was considered E. Jean Carroll too, which was Donald Trump's defamatory statements that were made in October of 2022, and the sexual abuse and rape allegations based on the New York Adult Survivors Act, which allowed claims that had statute of limitations to laps to be brought. But the original defamation case was based on statements that Donald Trump made in 2019 when Donald Trump was in office.

That case has gone through all the court of appeals and will now and has now worked its way back to Judge Lewis Kaplan, who Donald Trump is now attacking as well, the same judge who presided over this case. So E. Jean Carol one is another defamation case that E. Jean Carol can pursue. And not only that, Donald Trump's recent statements are defamatory as well. So there may be E. Jean Carol three and four

and other cases that she can bring based on him now making the same defamatory statements that a jury just found him liable for and there's already been a finding by a jury that he engaged in the underlying sexual assault. So all of his statements now are just defamatory per se and E. Jean Carroll may be able to win these future cases on just summary judgment motions alone if she brings these other cases. Popo final work. Yeah, that's a very good point. For people who have been asking us in social media,

what about all these other statements that he's been making after the jury verdict, attacking the jury, saying it's a hope, it's a lie, it's untrue, it just shows you that, well, she's a grifter, she's a liar, that's not what the jury in New York, a jury of nine people in the state of New York have returned to verdict concerning. That is now not only law of the case, that is what we call

race judicata or issue and claim preclusion, meaning in the future. For people that ask, he can keep litigating this, even though he's already lost. He's lost on the issue of whether he sexually assaulted her at Burkdorf Gupin department store. The answer is no. He can't keep litigating that. It's already been finally decided. And I agree with you Ben that he's just earning himself new counts of future defamation against her. And the law firm on the other side is not to be trifled with. Robbie Kaplan has not only gone after and successfully brought down Donald Trump here. She's gone after him and filed suits on behalf of clients and done well in other places. So this is the worst law firm on the other side. He's not going to get any slack.

If he continues to defame EG and Carol, they're going to continue, I think, to bring these kind of lawsuits. And then the last thing on that particular point, the appeal, I agree with you. I think the second, it has to go to the second circuit, which is not gonna be a friendly court. Hasn't been a friendly court for Donald Trump at all. It's made up of a similar group of democratically, mainly democratically appointed judges

before the second circuit before. There's really, I mean, that motion for mistrial because, oh, the judge was mean to me because I couldn't ask a proper question, Joe Takapina. He shot me down a few times and he wouldn't let me pursue it. They'll try to say letting an access Hollywood tape shouldn't have been let in. It was reversible error or the two women who were similarly attacked by Donald Trump in the past shouldn't have been led in under a certain type of evidence that's allowed. That's going to be their fight and that's reasonably confident. The second circuit is going to go, say, go scratch, but you're right.

To go for that, he's going to have to put the $5 million up in a super CDAS bond to stop the enforcement of the judgment. Because as of next week, she's going to have a money judgment for five million dollars where she can go to Donald Trump bank accounts He helped and put put him in a seat for another deposition for a deposition in aid of execution of the judgment to ask him Where his assets are so she can go and force the judgment if he wants that stop till have to ask for a stay He's not going to get it from Judge Kaplan. He'll have to ask for the second circuit and he'll have to put up the money or a Robbie Kaplan to be like, I'll see you next week to tell me what are your assets are so I can bring this judgment and go collect on it.

Karen, you get the final word. Yeah, so one more point I'll add is, you know, the jury had an option, right, to find Tim libel of rape or sexual abuse or forcible touching. Those are three separate criminal sexual assault charges, and they couldn't find any of those, and they found sexual abuse. And I think on the one hand, when I first saw that, that they didn't find him libel of rape, I was at first slightly frustrated because I didn't want Trump to be able to then go out

and say, see, I'm not guilty of raping someone. But on the other hand, I think it's very good for a peel because it shows the jury was thoughtful. Any of the claims that they're going to make on a peel that this was a bias jury. They didn't get a fair jury. The jury just took the Axis Hollywood tapes and these other sexual assaults and just found me guilty.

The jury just railroaded me. The fact that they actually had a verdict sheet that was thoughtful, that it wasn't just sweeping everything, the highest, everything, shows they were paying attention and that these things weren't necessarily prejudicial. And I think it makes it on a fairly iron clad, which I think in the long run is excellent. So it's a very good thoughtful jury. A good thoughtful jury and a very law and order oriented department of justice, which just brought a 13 count federal indictment

against Maggiere Public and George Santos. I gotta get your take, Karen, and your take, Opoch, but we gotta take this quick break before your takes. When running a business, your employees can create all kinds of interesting situations. Like getting complaints because someone on the team always smells horrible. Bambi helps small business owners with their most complex HR issues and employment nuances across all 50 states. Bambi helps you implement HR policies to protect your business and give you HR peace of mind. Bambi's dedicated HR managers will know your business and your specific

concerns and implement the most important HR practices for small businesses. Somebody isn't showing up when they're supposed to, talk to Bambi. And employee reports a serious issue like harassment and you're not sure if you have a documented policy talk to Bambi. With Bambi get access to your own dedicated US-based HR manager starting at just $99 per month. They're available by phone, email and real-time chat. So onboarding and separations run smoothly. Team members reach peak performance and your business stays compliant with changing HR

regulations. And with Bambi's HR autopilot, you'll automate important HR practices like setting policies, training, and feedback. Bambi's dedicated HR managers are a US-based person dedicated to your business, giving you access to the HR expertise and personal touch you need. This allows you to be freed up and focused more on what you love. HR managers can easily cost 80 grand a year, but Bambi starts at $99 per month. Schedule your free conversation today to see how much Bambi can take off your plate. Bambi spelled

b-a-m-b-e-e-e.com. Go to bambi.com right now and type in legal a f under podcasts when you sign up, which also helps the podcast. That's bambi.com and type in legal a f under podcast. Welcome back to legal a f. So George Santos was arrested today. And for those watching legal AF and the Midas Touch Network regularly we've said 90 days ago that you could expect it in 90 days. You can look at the hot take that we did earlier in the day where we announced the arrest of Santos

where we showed the past clip. But this is big news. The indictment, which is 13 counts out of the Eastern District of New York focuses on three main categories, fraudulent campaign-related contributions, unemployment insurance fraud, or unemployment fraud based on the CARES Act money

that was not supposed to go to George Santos when he actually was employed and he claimed that he was unemployed and then lying about his financial condition and claiming that he was making less money than he was and then claiming that he was a very wealthy individual He's saying he was making $750,000 and one million to five million dollars in dividends Which people were like how did he go for making like 50,000 in the 2021 to like five million dollars in the 2022? And 750,000 plus all these dividends. He was lying, okay, he lies about everything. He was lying in all of them, just making up lies in the financial statements. Karen,

what's your reaction to this big breaking news? Yeah, like my flip sometimes the criminal just like sometimes the criminal justice system isn't just the charges that you bring or the cases that you bring. People have to have confidence in faith in the criminal justice system. And honestly, sometimes when things take too long and things are obvious and justice isn't coming swiftly, it can be very frustrating to people which can impact the faith people have in the criminal justice system.

The indictment of George Santos today now is exactly what should happen. This was, he lies about everything, everything. Every little thing, every big thing, every medium-sized thing, go ahead, pick your lies, the guy is a complete fraud. This is a case, though, because there's so many lies, they could have investigated this to death.

They could have investigated, you could go down every rabbit hole. This could have taken six years to investigate every single lie, every fraud, everything he did. But you know what? You got to bring cases sometimes quickly. He's a member of Congress, he's influential, he goes about his life, you got to bring the case. Yes, you can supersede, yes, you can bring other charges, but you got to bring the case.

And it's important, and it shows exactly what prosecutors can do and should do. And I say it like that because I, unlike other people in this podcast, and frustrated that some of the other cases are taking so long, it is time to pull the trigger, and it is time to pull the trigger on some of these cases. And I think, for example, the Mar-a-Lago documents case, time to pull the trigger, right? Like, you can investigate that to death, but that case is pretty much cooked in the books.

And so there are other, I just want to say exactly, that this is what you can do. You can investigate a case to death. I've been there. I've done it. I've been with prosecutors who you just keep going and going and going, especially someone like Santos, who's a complete fraud. It's not a discrete case, like I had classified documents, and then I refused to give them over. This is lies about his entire life. This guy, again, I was worried that this case could take years because there's so many lies.

But prosecutors, good ones know how to pull the trigger. And Jack Smith is extraordinary and excellent. And so it's time for him to pull the trigger. Yes, you can literally investigate things to death. Jan 6, that's a big case, that takes time, right? That's a huge case. But there's other cases that need to happen, you know? Fanny Willis, let's go.

Mar-a-Lago, let's go. Like, it's time. All right, I'm ready. So, I don't disagree with my respected podcast host, co-podcast host. I just think that there is a difference in what Santos was just charged with. We're going to put it up on the screen, which was five counts of wire fraud. And I put on my Twitter, I heart wire fraud. I heart mail fraud. And we've talked about it on legal AF. It is the federal prosecutor's main weapon. I've seen it in every case I've ever been involved with, a wire fraud and mail fraud count under 18 USC 1343 and 1342.

It gives them the most leverage, the most power, and it's so simple to prove. It has very few moving parts. You just have to say that there was an email or a mailing that was fraudulent, that was used to separate somebody from their money upon which they reasonably relied, and you did it with willful intent, you did it with a criminal knowledge. And they lay it out here, we'll put up that chart, one, two, three, four, five.

There are, we all know that George Santos' complete body of work is a lie, but that's not the focus of the indictment. The indictment is on a very specific set of lies, including unemployment fraud, 501C4 fraud, charity fraud, and the intermingling of that too. And it identifies the existence of at least three

cooperating witnesses whose identity, quote unquote, is known only to the grand jury. So people have flipped on no surprise. He's a sloppy guy. We know that. So people have flipped on George Santos, but the actual counts is an email on October 4th and email on October 12th and email on October 20th and email on October 21st and an email on October 25th. That's the case.

Those were fraudulent and criminally done, he's cooked. And that's the indictment that was the arrest and the enraignment. In terms of the broader cases, I posit something else. This might only be a thought experiment, a thought experiment, but I posit something else. Where a prosecutor like Alvin Bragg had a relatively straight line between,

once he decided to prosecute, between the events, the facts, and the crimes, in this case Alvin Brack and the hush money case for Stormy Daniels, and did that from January until the indictment, which went very, very quickly. Once he decided to indict, it went very quickly. Fony Willis has, as we all know, a much more complicated case where she's just getting now cooperating witnesses like the fake electors to flip. If she had gone, as we all know, a much more complicated case where she's just getting now cooperating witnesses like the fake electors to flip. If she had gone, as we've always said, if she had gone too soon, right, it's the old joke which I won't tell about the two bulls at the top of the hill.

If they went too soon, they wouldn't get all of this great evidence. And so she's got that in a conspiracy that spans the entire state and every county and the Republican Party of Georgia and people like Donald Trump, Mark Meadows, Lindsey Graham of all things, it's complicated. And she's got these every two month intervals to get her act together to go into the grand jury. So I think, as she has said, it is going to be July or September. And we would be shocked on the show, all three of us,

if she doesn't seek the indictment of Donald Trump in a conspiracy at one of those two grand juries. Jack Smith, here's the thought experiment. We've always assumed that he'll do each one, one of four probably grand juries. We just talked about one last week last Saturday with that in me that may now be out there that because it doesn't fit with any of the other grand juries. But if he we always positive that he would like to do them when they're ready like Mar-a-Lago is ready like now we all agree.

It's cooked in the book this as as our illustrious podcast just said Karen. But does he wait though if he's close on the others and he's going to do the momentous thing, the historical thing, to go to his department of justice head, his his merit garland, his his attorney general, and make this recommendation, which he has to say, yes or no on, isn't it better to put it all on the table at the same time? So that it's all done at the same time? And if that's the case, then the one that's not ready is the lagging one.

And they got to wait for the all of them to come in. What's been, you're either umpiring or you're dying to say something. No, I love midweek additions. Can I be on every time? I mean, that's just, we're back and forth is robust, Karen. Look, you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The presidential election is happening. And if you get too close to the election, they will uncover and dust off the DOJ policy that says you can't interfere with the election, etc. You can't get too close, right? That and that was the whole thing that happened with Jim Come interfere with the election, etc. You can't get too close, right? That was the whole thing that happened with Jim Comey and Hillary Clinton, etc. We've been down this path before. It is getting too close. It is getting too far along. They need to start bringing these cases. Everybody needs to start bringing the Alvin Bragg did the courageous thing and he brought the case. He did. You know, he didn't wait until the whole thing was ready. He

didn't wait until the case that, you know, carried on in Mark Pomeran's resigned over the one that's the Tisch James, you know, value asset valuation case that he still has open. He could have waited and said, you know what, I'm going to do the Stormy Daniel, you know, value asset valuation case that he still has open. He could have waited and said, you know what, I'm gonna do the Stormy Daniel, you know, election interference case and then wait until I also have that other case, the one that he waited until Donald Trump actually was deposed and gave statements over hoping that he would

and he did, it was a chess game and it was something, you know, Alvin Bragg, if everyone recalls, comes from the Attorney General's office. He's very aware of the Attorney General's companion civil case that's identical to the criminal case that's at the Manhattan D.A.'s office, regarding asset valuations. That was the case when Alvin Bragg took office and said, I'm not ready. I don't think the case is ready. I'm going to let it proceed on a civil track. And his brilliant chest move was there's a chance that Donald Trump will speak. There's a chance that he'll give a deposition. And PS, he did. And now he has more evidence. But he could have easily said,

you know what, I'm not going to bring the Stormy Daniels hush many election interference case. I'm going to wait until I have all of it and bring one big thing wrapped up in a bow. But he didn't because again, like I said, you can do the, I'm going to let the perfect beat enemy of the good. I'm going to investigate everything to death to the point where you don't bring a case. At a certain point, sometimes you have to go. And the Manhattan D.A.'s office, an Alvin Bragg, he did it.

He went. He brought the case. And I think the same is with Jack Smith, given where we are, given the fact that Donald Trump only declared his candidacy in order to avoid being prosecuted so that he can say with every case that he's a presidential candidate. He created this. All these cases existed before all these cases were under investigation before before he declared but but because they're taking so long Frankly because the Department of Justice waited until the courageous Congress select committee did the Jan 6 hearings and brought to everybody's attention the horrific nature and conspiracy of Jan 6th.

Thank God they did. The Department of Justice woke up and started investigating that case. So they were a year behind. And frankly, at a certain point, you got to go. You got to do it like Alman Bragg did because time is clicking away. This country is getting more divided. We can't get too close to this election. They got and George Santos is a perfect example of how you can just bring a case. You got a case, bring it.

I want to take somewhat of the final word on just this topic before we move on to the next one. The first is I think our timeline here on legal AF was always that we thought special counsel Jack Smith would indict in the summer. So the timeline I think we always had was on the earlier side around June, on the later side around September or October. I still think we're consistent with that,

but I do think if this starts getting past September, I definitely start leaning into Karen, all of your views right there about, okay, we're basically in 2024 now, and then it's kind of a red alert. So I'm gonna remain patient, but guardedly patient. I want to go back very quickly though to George Santos because Popeyes to your point, I think five of those counts involved the wire fraud, the other counts in this 13-count indictment involve the unemployment fraud under the CARES Act. He just took unemployment money that was meant for individuals who were unemployed as a result of COVID when he was

Actually employed and then fraudulent representations he made on his house of representatives disclosures Claiming he made way more money than he ever did and in another time said he made way less money Then he ever did he didn't make anywhere near $5 million or $750,000 plus between one and five million dollars $5 million or $750,000 plus between $1 and $5 million in dividends, just total and complete BS. And the fraud scheme relating to, as you mentioned, this 501 C4, he just created a company which was an LLC and then he would go to donors with this company and claim it was like

a political action organization meant for George Santos. But what he meant by that, what he was lying to them about is he would take their money, 25,000 here, 25,000 there and buy himself luxury gifts and clothes and pay his credit card bills while telling donors that that money was going to Company One, and that Company One was a 501 C4. Company One was an LLC that George Santos controlled

and George Santos was making all of that money and pocketing it that directly. And so that that's what that charge about. One other point to make there is that the Santos prosecution is out of the Eastern District of New York, U.S. Attorney's office. They worked closely with the public integrity section within main department of justice, but this is being prosecuted out of the Eastern District of New York. We thought with headquarters in Brooklyn, the arrest of George Santos the earlier in the day took place in central Islip on Long Island. We still have a lot to discuss on this episode. We got to talk about Michael Cohen's motion to dismiss as well as the Manhattan district attorney's criminal case Donald Trump's efforts to try to derail that backfire judge hellerstein the federal judge is just not having it and setting an expedited briefing schedule of one of Donald Trump's new lame moves where he tried to remove

the state case to federal court, just total BS. We'll talk about that. But first, let's take this quick break. This podcast is sponsored by Miracle Mate Cheats. Whether you want to get more fit, be a better parent or get more done at work, there is one thing that will help. And that's better sleep. With Miracle Mate Cheats, you can tap into the power of self cooling temperature regulation,

which has been shown to improve deep sleep quality by over 20%. Using silver infused fabrics originally inspired by NASA, Miracle Mate Sheets are thermoregulating and designed to keep you at the perfect temperature all night long. So you get better sleep every night. These sheets are infused with silver that prevent up to 99.7% of bacterial growth, leaving them cleaner and fresher three times longer than other sheets. No more gross odors. Miracle sheets are luxuriously comfortable without the high price tag of other luxury brands, and feel as nice if not nicer than bed sheetsets used by some five-star hotels.

Stop sleeping on bacteria, clean sheets mean less bacteria to clog your pores and fewer breakouts and other skin problems. Go to trymiracle.com slash legal AF to try miracle made sheets today. And with mothers and fathers day right around the corner, this is the perfect way to give someone you love the gift of better and more luxurious sleep. Save over 40% and be sure to use our promo code LegalAF at checkout to save even more and get three free towels. Miracle is so confident in their product, they backed it with a 30-day money back guarantee.

So if you aren't 100% satisfied, you'll get a full refund. Upgrade your sleep with MiracleMade, go to trymiracle.com, slash legalaif, and use the code legalaif to claim your free three-piece towel set, and save over 40% off. Again, that's trymiracle.com, slash legalaif, to treat yourself. Thanks again to MiracleMade for sponsoring this episode. Our next partner is AG1 by Athletic Greens. Now I take AG1 by Athletic Greens literally every day. I gave AG1 a try because I wanted better gut health, boosted energy, immune system support, and I hate it taking pills and vitamins and wanted a supplement that actually tastes great. I take AG1 in the morning before working out and it makes me feel incredible

and just ready to take on my day. When I take AGE1, I know I'm doing something good for my body, like giving my body in the nutrition that it craves and covering my nutritional basis. I've tried a ton of different supplements out there, but this is different, and the ingredients are super high quality. I got started with AGE1 because I used to take all these different pills and gummies, and frankly what I was taking was expensive, and I didn't even know if it was good for me. But with AG1 by athletic greens, I know that what I'm consuming has the best ingredients

and also taste delicious. 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 overall digestion, my energy levels were up and just overall I was feeling great. It's just one scoop of powder mixed with water once a day, and it's a seamless and easy daily habit to maintain. The Midas might ask me all the time, Jordy, how do you have so much energy to do these adreads? Well, if I could only pick one thing, it's AG1 by Athletic Greens. Just one daily serving covers my day's nutritional basis and supports my long-term gut health

with 75 high-quality vitamins, minerals, and whole-food source ingredients. I can't think of another daily routine that pays off as well as H.E.1, which is why I trust the product so much. If you're looking for a simpler, cost-effective supplement routine, Athletic Greens is giving you a free one-year supply of vitamin D and five free travel packs with your first purchase. Just go to Athletic Greens.com slash legal AF. That's Athletic Greens.com slash legal AF.

Check it out. And now back to the video. Welcome back to legal AF f Ben myself is joined by The two best co-host in the business Karen Friedman Agnifalo and Michael Popak Michael Popak. I know you had a hot take on Michael Cohen filing this motion to dismiss this 500 million dollar federal lawsuit Just remind people what this lawsuit is and tell us about this motion to dismiss this five hundred million dollar federal lawsuit. Just remind people what this lawsuit is and tell us about this motion to dismiss. Yeah, Donald Trump. Thanks, Ben. Donald Trump to get out before he was stopped by the judge

in the criminal case in New York, Judge and Rashad. We're going to talk about later in the podcast with a protective slash gag order to stop him from commenting and criticizing and attacking and bashing things like witnesses, like Michael Cohen, to give him what he thought was an opportunity to continue to do that. And before he was enjoined or stopped from bashing and tampering with witnesses, Donald Trump filed this lawsuit a month or so ago down in Miami of all places and got what would be for Donald Trump not the right judge. There's very few judges in Miami Southern District of Florida that would have been right for Donald Trump, but the judge that he pulled by random selection

Darren Gales who I know well. I knew him really well when he was on a state court in Miami. He's a fine, fine judge. He was in Obama appointee. He's super smart. His tremendous integrity is all federal judges do. And he's not the right judge for Donald Trump to have been filing what again is another attempt at to paraphrase Judge Middlebrook's in Southern District of New York against Donald Trump

and his lawsuit against Hillary Clinton that led to a million dollar section. This is a political screed. This is a political attack and retribution masquerading as a lawsuit. And that got him fined, along with Alina Habba, who's nowhere to be seen on this particular filing, by the way, they found some other local lawyer

in Coral Gables near my office to file the suit, who I'd never heard of. And the suit acclaimed that Michael, when he was in his capacity as a lawyer, everybody forgets at one point, Michael was the lawyer for Donald Trump, the in-house guy, he was that year's Boris Epstein calling all the shots as the lawyer, that he breached his fiduciary duties, his his bar professional responsibilities Which is really

Well, believe that for a minute. So it's breach of fiduciary duty. There's a breach of contract Which is for this made up non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement which to this day nobody has seen Even even Michael's lawyers have not seen it. So they call it the purported confidentiality agreement, which is probably invalid and void for public policy, a point that was made in a case by one of our fellow podcasters who does her lights on with you podcast. So you've got, you know, Jessica Denson's case. So you've got all that. So they got the judge they wanted.

And I thought you and I talked about this, well, I talked about it, but you might have listened about ways that Michael could have attacked that case. One of it is he doesn't live in Florida. And there's a fundamental, a fundamental first step that a trial judge has to take to evaluate whether they have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case and if they have jurisdiction over the person that's before them.

And if they're not a resident of Florida and they haven't committed a tort in Florida, breach the contract in Florida, which none of that happened, then what are we doing in Florida? But rather than move to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction, which would would have just led Donald Trump to refile in New York in the Southern District of New York, they said, you know what, we like the judge. So why don't we just do a motion to dismiss because the case has no merit? Because everything is either time-barred,

meaning there was a statute of limitations of between one and two years and all of these things are way older than that. So none of these claims are ripe, all these claims are stale. So judge, right now, on the face of the pleading, on the face of the complaint, dismiss them, or they're against public policy, or they fail to state a claim, or Donald Trump doesn't have standing, which is another legal concept, doesn't

even have the right to prosecute these claims against Michael Cohen. But they got a great opportunity in the first 10 pages to tell their story of eye for an eye and retribution, which is Donald Trump's calling card, how he's going after trying to intimidate witnesses, giving every example they could, even back in New York and the bashing of prosecutors, judges, judges, daughters, and the like, all the things that they did to Michael. And then just to show how this entire circle of life, you know, not only is Michael Cohen a podcaster and Jessica Denson's case is mentioned, who's a podcaster on my touch network, but Judge Hellerstein, who we're going to talk about next, is mentioned because in

the section where they were talking about how Donald Trump has retaliated against Michael Cohen time and time again, including to the point where he made the Bureau of Prisons send Michael Cohen out of home confinement, where he was where he was released because of COVID, and sent him back to prison to pay him back for all the things Michael was doing in social media books and podcasts. That ended up with a petition in front of Judge Hellerstein, the judge that Trump just drew for his attempt to get his criminal case to a federal court. And Judge Hellerstein said, I find from Michael Cohen, Michael Cohen gets released immediately from prison, gets sent back to home confinement. I find retaliation. And all of that is in the front end, along with a funny footnote that I'll leave it to you and

Caron to talk about that I liked as a personal dig from Michael back to Donald Trump Yeah, look, you know, this is a this is a motion to dismiss the complaint Because as you said he brought a civil complaint and they're saying that he there's a failure to state a claim the footnotes are hilarious in this. And, you know, look, I talked earlier about my girl crush, Robbie Kaplan, my other girl crush is Donia Perry. Donia Perry is a lawyer who wrote this motion.

She's a brilliant writer and a fantastic lawyer. And she was actually a guest on one of our Wednesday podcasts and we talked about what an indictment of Donald Trump could look like. She's just a great lawyer in New York who I work with regularly and she wrote this beautiful, very interesting, fun motion to dismiss the complaint under rules called a 12-B6 motion for failure to state a claim. And basically throughout this motion, she points out very brilliantly how Trump is petty,

he's a bully, he's vengeful, and he abuses the courts to carry out his vindictiveness. And he's been sanctioned over and over and over again. She says, quote, this suit combines the worst of Mr. Trump's vindictive impulses. The complaint is frivolous and scatter shot in an abusive act of pure retaliation and witness intimidation. I'll be it a ham-fisted one." End quote. I don't know why I love that quote so much. But as you said, she, they talk about the Judge Hellerstein issue, how he's the one who released Cohen

from, it was solitary confinement that he was in, by the way, for retaliation. And as you said, he's also the one who Trump drew trying to move the Manhattan DA's office case to federal court. And look, you know, this is a case that, that, you know, Donia spelled out very clearly that, by the timeline that she put in here, in addition to her legal arguments, that, look, you know, Trump, you know, he says by, by Michael Cohen's books and podcasts, he mentions, might as well work podcasts, and, you know, that basically his words, et cetera, he breached might as a network, podcasts, and you know, that basically his words,

et cetera, he breached his fiduciary duty to Trump. And he was his lawyer and that he also was in breach of contract. But what the lawyer, Daniel Perry, wrote in her motion that I think was very effective was that the timing of bringing this claim that, as you said, Popoq is, you know, either one or two years' statute of limitations, the timing of this of more than five years, right, after so much of this was done, it was exactly one week after Alvin Bragg indicted Donald Trump.

This is clearly an effort to intimidate Michael Cohen as a witness and to somehow prevent him, try to intimidate him from being a witness in a criminal case because Donald Trump's M.O. that we see over and over and over again is to attack, threaten, retaliate, and intimidate. That's his playbook. Attack, threaten, retaliate, and intimidate. And what this motion does is it sets out exactly how he's done that in the past and how he does that in this particular situation. Yes, of course, there's also all the legal arguments that you just talked about. But they also point out that there's no defamation claim in here.

But obviously, he knows how to bring defamation claims because he's done them over and over and over again. And in our prior legal AIFs, I think that was something that we talked about, PopoK, you and I about how confused I was, which is, I don't understand how either he's saying on the one hand, there's attorney client privilege. And here we are, here we are, we had an NDA, you can't talk about things, but also, you know, I'm your lawyer, you were my lawyer, you can't talk, you can't breach my privileges. So what I was saying to you was, I don't understand, is he's saying that these things are true and therefore

you can't reveal them or are they false? And then there should be defamation. And so it made no sense to me because he didn't bring a defamation claim. Anyway, Danya spelled that out beautifully in her motion as well. So look, the complaint, go ahead. No, I mean to drop. No, I was just going to say she pointed out, they pointed out that the complaint is thread bear. You know, it doesn't, in a complaint, there's two parts to every complaint, whether it's civil or criminal, right?

You first you lay out what the law is, and then you lay out the facts that support the law. It's very formulaic. And what they pointed out was his complaint is filled with extraneous information. You know, all his grievances, the way he talks, you know, he's a victim of everything. And he goes on and on about this grievance and that grievance, but that it was threadbare in terms of the facts that actually support the law

in the complaint and so that it's legally insufficient. So I think that in addition to being it, but being beyond the statute of limitations, I think they did an excellent job of showing that he doesn't even state claims that will survive a motion to dismiss. Certainly most of them won't survive whether one or two or three do, we'll see, but I think most of this gets dismissed. Sorry to interrupt. No, not at all. And the reason that Donald Trump did not bring a defamation claim here, which he was capable of, besides for the fact that it was frivolous, but the entire lawsuit is frivolous, is that he knows that when you lose those defamation claims, there's something called an anti-slap motion, where he would again be hit with probably hundreds of thousands of dollars automatically in attorneys fees for losing on that specific claim.

automatically in attorneys fees for losing on that specific claim. And so they're trying to plead around defamation, but the entire lawsuit is complete bogus and utter BS. But as I hear you talking, Karen, you mentioned you got Michael Cohen, we got the Midas Touch podcast, we've got Jessica Denson, we've got Danya Perry, we've got you who used to be the number two at the DA's office We're all what's so interesting is to see the Midas Touch Network So in it's not just like reporting on the news, but inextricably actually Intertwined in each and every one of these events hope I got Yeah, I'm gonna I'm gonna pull that straight watch this Everybody that we've talked about so far has either been on the show or is a podcast around the show. Karen and I interviewed E. Jean Carroll.

No, Robby Kaplan. Robby Kaplan. You did E. Jean Carroll. No, no know. I just touched that E. Jean Carroll. You and I, Karen did Robbie Kaplan. Jessica Denson has a show with Ben. Daniel, Dania, Daniel, Daniel, Daniel, Daniel, you interviewed her on a Wednesday show when I was out, right? Yep.

And Cohen, you're right. We don't just report on the law. We make it exactly, exactly. And now, of course, I just want to talk about what's going on in the Manhattan district attorneys criminal case. And Karen, you have more experience than anybody on the inner workings of the Manhattan DA's office. Donald Trump filed this notice of removal where he seeks to essentially transfer jurisdiction of state law, criminal

claims, state law, criminal legal vile felony counts for falsification of business records, and Donald Trump argued, well, because the argument is that these records were falsified while I was Because the argument is that these records were falsified while I was in office as president, therefore Michael Cohen should be deemed to have been working for a president and therefore this should all be viewed as federal law and my defenses are gonna be defenses that a president, a former president can raise

and therefore these are unique federal questions that only a federal court can rule on. So let's get this case out of the Manhattan State Court where Judge Juan Moshan is presiding over at Judge Juan Moshan as has said that he wants to hold trial in February or March of 2024. Judge Juan Moshan just issued a protective order which restricts Donald Trump from commenting publicly on certain documents that he didn't have access to prior to the case being filed that he obtains in connection with this case and also restricting his access to certain types of documents unless he's in the presence of his lawyers clearly realizing the types of abhorrent behavior that Donald Trump engages in. So, Donald Trump's like, we don't want Judge Juan, Moshan, we want a federal judge.

He was trying to get Judge Viscousel, Mary K. Viscousel, who he appointed, who I suppose he thought was going to do what Judge Eileen Cannon did, which is accept jurisdiction when you're not supposed to accept jurisdiction and try to delay, delay these things. It first got assigned to federal judge Abrams. Her husband was, she's at a Obama appointee. Her husband worked in the Mueller investigation, so she recused herself and then got reassigned to Judge Hellerstein, a federal judge in the Southern District of New York and Judge Hellerstein, just, you know, he's not with it right now and he's just

saying, look, let's do an expedited briefing schedule. We'll hold a hearing on this in June, but he specifically states in his order that we don't want to delay what's going on in the courthouse in Manhattan. Judge Juan Mershon, keep your proceedings going. There shall be no delays going on in the state court case because of this. I've reviewed this motion. Well, we may not even need a hearing, Judge Hellerstein said in his order. Karen, have you seen in your experience in the DA's office attempts to try to remove state law felonies to federal court like this,

is this unique to you? Yeah, so I can recount one other time. I'm sure it's happened one or two other times, but I know of one in particular. And that was when Sy Vance, when I was in the office, when he was District Attorney, he was the DA before Elvin Bragg. If you recall, the Manhattan DA's office was subpoenaing Donald Trump's tax returns from his accountant, the mazer's firm, or mazer's firm. And that was his long-term accountant. They have since parted ways, but he, so, so, so, Sivance, you know, the DA's office, the Manhattan DA's office, subpoenaed mazers for Donald Trump's tax returns, and Donald Trump intervened and got involved, saying you can't, you can't release them, and that normally any grand jury compliance issue

would go before the grand jury judge, which it did in Manhattan, and then Donald Trump filed in federal court saying, this is not a state court. I'm the former president, and therefore this needs to go federal, not state. And the Southern District Judge actually agreed and removed the case from the state court and brought it federal, ultimately ruled for Sivance. Then it got appealed to the second circuit who also upheld the ruling for Sivance. And then it went to the Supreme Court who also upheld Sivance, got the DA's office, got

the tax returns. And after getting those tax returns brought the 17 count indictments, Syvance brought the 17 count indictment against the Trump organization that was tried under Alvin Bragg, who became district attorney after Syvance's term ended. And he, and so it ultimately worked out, but it delayed things.

And so Trump, this is part of his playbook. He's done it before successfully. And it was funny when, but it delayed things. And so, you know, Trump, this is part of his playbook. He's done it before successfully. And it was funny when he did it. You know, it was one of those things that, on the one hand, people could say, oh, you know, how dare you. This belongs to the Manhattan D.A.'s office on the other hand. You know, I was one of those people who said, you know, be careful what you wish for.

If you federal judges are not like state court judges, you know, state state, people often refer to state court is a little bit like the Wild West. It's you know a little more relaxed anything goes Federal court is very buttoned up and very serious and so you know go ahead you get you get you get a you know A federal judge on this case. They aren't you put a baseball bat next to, you know, the prosecutors' head. I am telling you right now, the federal court, a federal judge, that will not fly. So if anyone can control a courtroom, it's a federal judge.

And federal court is the big, big, big leagues. You know, State Court, like I said, it's great. You know, and that's where I grew up, and that's where I'm more comfortable and more used to. But it's a little more, you know, little wild Westy when it comes to how things are done. So, you know, look, it's in front of Judge Hellerstein who is a great judge for this case.

If it ends up there, go ahead. It actually doesn't matter. The facts are what they are. If anything, if it goes federal, it'll just go quicker, it'll stay in control, but he clearly said in his order, nothing, while this is pending, State Court, you still go ahead, your procedure still has to go.

One other thing I will just mention is, there's something called a bill of particulars in criminal cases, and that's something that a defendant can request. I think it's within 30 days of the indictment you're supposed to request it. And if you request it, the prosecutors required under a statute to give you

certain specific factual information about your case. It's a way of finding out more information because as you saw and we saw from the indictment, it's very bare bones as we call it, right? Enditement are very bare bones. They very briefly list the charges. So there's something in the law called the bill of particulars that can give more specifics. And many of us were thinking that Trump would file a request for a bill of particulars and ask for what is that other charge? Because if you remember, he's charged

with falsifying business records, which is a misdemeanor, unless you intended to commit another crime, or you did it to conceal or commit a crime, and everyone's been speculating what is that other crime? And Albumbrag said it could be federal election laws, it could be state, it could be tax, but everyone's been a little bit kind of wondering what it is.

So many of us have been waiting. Are they going to ask for a bill of particulars? And if they do, what will Alvin Bragg respond? You know, legally he might not have to identify it, but certainly we thought this was going to be a fight, right, to say he wanted it. But that time came and went, and the bill of particulars was not filed. So interestingly, they didn't do that, which I find a little bit unusual and a little bit of a missed opportunity, but that clock, that time's passed.

So, so another missed step on the part of Trump. Lots of missed steps. Popok. Yeah, a couple of things that just to bring everybody forward. So another misstep on the part of Trump. Lots of missteps, Popeye. Yeah, a couple of things to bring everybody forward. Judge Mershan is in control with the case at present, as acknowledged by Judge Hellerstein, the federal judge, and even in his order, which means he's told the parties that he wants a report back from them,

but whether it February or March of 2024 is the preferred trial date. That is the window of opportunity. That's it. February or March, they can choose between them. In other words, the lawyers on both sides can find it once that date is selected and reported back to Judge Mershon. He's instructed Donald Trump's side that he will not brook any or allow any interference of that trial date by any scheduling. He doesn't wanna hear about primaries, and this will be right in the thick of the primaries.

He doesn't wanna hear about debates. He doesn't wanna hear about rallies. He doesn't wanna hear about press conferences. He doesn't wanna hear about overseas travel. Those are the dates, and everybody will have to be committed to them. The judge also issued a protective order finally on Monday. We knew it was coming because of the hearing the judge had indicated that he was going to sigh primarily with the Manhattan D.A.'s office.

This protective order, which really is also a gag order, which I will talk about for a second, against Donald Trump, applies right now, regardless, a lesson until the federal judge takes jurisdiction over the case and allows the criminal case to get transferred to federal court. And just to explain, because, you know, we know we have a worldwide audience, and an audience that follows our law school, non-law school. Even if it got to federal court, as Karen just said, the prosecutor would still be a state prosecutor.

It's not going to the US attorney's office. It's not going to the feds for prosecution. That it's only gonna be Alvin Bragg in a new courthouse, a block away from the state courthouse, trying the case in a federal court in front of Judge Hellerstein and ultimately a jury. So nothing really changes. But in the meantime, everything issued by the trial judge, Judge Morshan applies. Judge Morshan said that Donald Trump is not allowed, is not allowed to

comment in social media or otherwise, about any evidence, any discovery material that was provided to him by the Manhattan DA's office. If he has it independently, great. If he got it independently through his own sources or he produced it to the government through the subpoena process or search warrant process, fine, but he can't comment on anything that he got from the government. He also can't comment on or bash witnesses like Michael Cohen. And to make sure that the Donald Trump knows

that he can't do that, there's going to be a virtual hearing. We'll report on it. We'll probably do a hot take on it, in which Donald Trump is going to have to show up on the Zoom platform or whatever they're using. And that protective order gag order is going to be read aloud by the judge. And Donald Trump under oath is going to have to acknowledge that he is a party to it and has to comply with it.

Extraordinary, extraordinary. Treating him as Judge Mershon likes to say often in his courtroom, like any other criminal defendant in his courtroom, and that's how Donald Trump is being treated. So, and just I'll end it with this, that's the protective order. You know, I, we've all looked at the removal papers. There is an ability if the person that's been charged was operating under the color of his federal office at the time that the fundamental conduct that's being charged happened, that's a big if, then there is an argument that it should go to a federal judge and not a local prosecutor.

However, the entire fraud, the hush money cover up, the payment of the $130,000 by Donald Trump through Michael Cohen, and all of the books and records that were then altered were really done while he was candidate Trump in 2016, the repayment to Michael Cohen, plus a kicker, plus a bonus to Michael Cohen for having executed Donald Trump's plan, where he got $440,000 in a series of payments. Yes, some of those took place while Donald Trump was in the White House, but that doesn't convert this into a eye-committed a crime, alleged crime while I was a federal officer, and now I should have a federal judge preside over it.

Hellerstein is being judicious. He's going to allow briefing. I think he's going to reject this thing and send it back to Judge Mershon and then we're on all these tracks that we just talked about. And to Karen's point, it doesn't help Donald Trump. He was hoping he had in his papers, we looked at it, that and I laughed when we saw it, almost like a written invitation for the clerk to assign the case to Judge Vokasil. He put paragraphs upon paragraphs talking about Mary K. Vokasil in the case Alvin Bragg and Jim Jordan about whether Mark Pomerance was going to testify. It was just like these red neon letters,

please, please Vokasil and the clerk was like, yeah, great, we're going to put this first Arrani Abrams, which would have been a terrible judge for him, except she may have bent over backwards because as Karen said, her husband worked on the Mueller investigation. So she said, you know what, this isn't nice to watch a judge actually disqualify or accuse herself because of something that has the appearance of impropriety, hint, Clarence Thomas and the rest of the right-wing justices. But so she got out and then Trump was probably for like 10 minutes like, great, I got rid of that.

Ronnie Abrams would have been terrible for me. And then we get Judge Hellerstein, the judge that presided not only over Harvey Weinstein and his rape conviction and all the cases related to our view Weinstein, but also Michael Cohen in getting him out of what Karen said was solitary confinement and back to home confinement. So I just have a what I have one tiny slight I want to say disagreements, but I land on the other side. I think hella steam keeps it because don't forget these are falsification of business records, meaning you know these are falsification of business records, meaning the false entries into the business records, which I think most were made while he was

president. He was sitting president in the Oval Office not only paying back the money, but filling in these documents falsely. I think hellerstein will keep it it. As you said, it'll be a state prosecutor. I think Donald Trump is going to rue the day that he brought this to federal court because federal court will not put up with any of his shenanigans. I also think there's a little bit of a situation with Judge Mershon who I think is an excellent judge, but he has that small campaign donation that puts a tiny cloud into his, you know, appearance. No, it was $10. But, you know what, he's never donated ever before

and the one time he decided to donate was against Trump. That just puts a tiny little cloud into his, you know, it's, it, it, it tips on, you know, kind of his hand and, and he'll, you know, we'll want to take that issue out of the case. I think he'll keep it. I think it'll go forward. And I think Donald Trump will root the day that he did it. One other quick thing about he'll, he'll, with Harvey Weinstein, Weinstein, I read, I read that in the paper when they credited him with the Harvey Weinstein case and I was surprised because that was a state case in my office when I was there. But you are correct, there was a civil Harvey Weinstein piece

that he oversaw. But I just want to give credit where credits do the criminal conviction of Harvey Weinstein for rape happened at the Manhattan D.A.'s office when I was there. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure that that's clear. Ben, before we leave, I say removal is going to be the, the does removal and ultimately it's going to be rejected. It's going to stay with Judge Mershawn. You heard Karen. All right.

Typewriter or who? Side of y'all. Yours on there. I mean, I'll take Karen's side on a lot of other things against you, Popeye. But I'm this one, I feel very confident that he's going to reject the claims. Ultimately, the underlying statutes at issue are state law claims. And so I feel relatively confident that it will be remanded. But regardless, we can end this episode where we started, which is Donald Trump was just found liable in a federal courthouse. And he now tried to move a case away from Judge Juan Mershon. Now got a federal judge in

Judge Heller's team, who's far more no nonsense than even Juan Mershon. So Trump just kind of we would call him professional rake steppers here on the Midest Touch Network. He now just filed a motion to go in front of a judge where he'd probably rather be in front of Judge Juan Mershon than the federal judge. So if Karen is right here, I almost hope she's right because it would be fun to see Donald Trump now have walked himself into again the professional rake stepping that we talk about here on the Midas Touch Network and legal AF. You two go back to your vacations, get sleep, whatever it is that you all are doing, whatever time zones you're on, enjoy your vacations. We cannot leave the legal a-efters empty handed.

We had a deliver, we had a deliver a live show for y'all. So thank you so much for watching. We love the legal a-efters out there. We appreciate you so much for all of your support and spreading these messages of democracy and law in order. Make sure you hit the subscribe button. We're on our way to 1.5 million subscribers here

on the Midas Touch Network. For those who just watch Legal AF on YouTube, make sure you subscribe as well on the audio podcast of Legal AF. So if you listen to podcasts on your phone or whatever apps you use or whatever devices you use at home, your laptops, whatever computers, whatever, just search on your podcast device, Legal AF, and make sure you're subscribed on audio. That goes a very long way to help this show. It takes like 30 seconds to do.

So search Legal AF on audio, hit subscribe, and if you want to do us even a bigger favor, leave a five-star review. That helps as well on the audio podcast. If you just to do us even a bigger favor, leave a five star review that helps as well on the audio podcast. If you just listen on audio, subscribe to the Midas Touch YouTube channel. Just go to youtube.com, search Midas Touch and help us get to 1.5 million subscribers. Check out store.mitustouch.com for the best pro democracy gear, including the wheels of Justice Official Legal AF Gear, the legal AF podcast, official gear, the convict or convict 45 gear.

We got all of it there on store. Not might as touch that come 100% union made 100% made in the USA. Thank y'all for watching this. Have a great rest of the night or day whenever you're listening or watching this. We love y'all. Thank you so much and a special shout out to the Midas Mighty.