Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump CAN’T ESCAPE his CASES as Campaign CRASHES

Episode Date: August 25, 2024

Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok are back for the weekend edition of the top-rated Legal AF podcast. On tap? 1. A treacherous September for Trump the Defendant and Candidate, as Courts around the country make big decisions about his freedom and finances; the NYAG’s new appellate brief to demand that Trump pay the $500 million dollar civil fraud judgment to the People of New York; the disgraced MAGA House member George Santos pleading guilty to ALL THE CRIMES, and heading off to federal prison; the DOJ bringing more Jan6 insurrectionists to justice, as Special Counsel Jack Smith plots his way forward in the DC Election Interference Case; another Federalist Society Conservative Icon endorses VP Harris, and so much more at the intersection of law and politics. Join the Legal AF Patreon: https://Patreon.com/LegalAF Thanks to our sponsors: Zbiotics: Head to https://zbiotics.com/LegalAF to get 15% off your first order when you use LEGALAF at checkout. Miracle Made: Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to https://TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGALAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF. BetterHelp: This is sponsored by BetterHelp. Give online therapy a try at https://BetterHelp.com/LEGALAF today to get 10% off your first month and get on your way to being your best self! PolicyGenius: Head to https://policygenius.com/legalaf to get your free life insurance quotes and see how much you could save. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Your teen requested a ride, but this time not from you. It's through their Uber Teen account. It's an Uber account that allows your teen to request a ride under your supervision with live trip tracking and highly rated drivers. Add your teen to your Uber account today. Go back to school with Rogers and get Canada's fastest and most reliable internet. Perfect for streaming lectures all day or binging TV shows all night. Save up to $20 per month on Rogers Internet.

Visit Rogers.com for details. We got you, Rogers. Every Canadian dairy farm is unique. That's why every farmer takes charge of their own unique environmental farm plan. Also drawing from 57 environmental practices. My plan starts with soil health. And part of mine includes biodiversity. Why care so much?

Because Canadian dairy farmers hold themselves to higher standards. That's what's behind the blue cow logo. Dairy Farmers of Canada. Wow, there are so many pans at HomeSense. These are non-stick, made in Italy. It's a sign, we need a new pan. We already have a pan, it works. What we have is an extra stick pan made of, I don't know what, everything sticks and burns.

Do we seriously have to eat burnt food to save 20 bucks? It's 20 bucks? 20 bucks, need I remind you, made in Italy. You don't need to tell me. We're getting this pan. Deal so good, everyone approves. Only at HomeSense. You know what's great about ambition?

You can't see it. Some things look ambitious, but looks can be deceiving. For example, a runner could be training for a marathon, or they could be late for the bus. You never know. Ambition is on the inside, so that goal to be the ultimate soccer parent? Keep chasing it. Drive your ambition. Mitsubishi Motors. Now, will justice be delayed in the Manhattan District Attorney criminal case against Donald Trump? Sentencing set for September 18th. The Manhattan District Attorney's Office filed a very important brief earlier this week.

It's now in Justice Mershon's hands. We will break down what we expect will happen regarding the September 18 sentencing. New York attorney general, Letitia James filed her office's brief in connection with the civil fraud judgment against Donald Trump, that Donald Trump is appealing. Salty finds the best photos of Donald Trump right there. We'll break down what New York attorney general

Letitia James is arguing. Also, the department of justice has filed a lot of important briefs in the various cases following the decision by the United States Supreme court on the obstruction of official proceeding charges. You'll recall that the United States Supreme court made a ruling that really narrowed what obstruction of official proceeding actually means.

It has to be, you know, relating to the destruction of documents. Is it a limited effect? Like the graphic that we're showing intent. That's probably why we're showing you the graphic or is the effect more far reaching Michael Popak and I will break it down. And Michael Popak, I think we should also start at the show talking about our good friend, Judge Ludwig, this week as well.

He made a very important endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. And I thought that, and he also pointed out all these other Republicans who also endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris and you know when I went to law school and I graduated Georgetown law in 2010, Judge Ludwig was such a prolific and prominent figure and he always was, he always had been, but if you told the 24 year old Ben Mycelis that Judge Ludwig was going to be endorsing a

Democratic candidate, I would tell you that you were probably smoking something. And perhaps at that time in my life, I may or may not have been as well, but so be it. Things are changing right now and the pro-democracy community has united in a very big way. Michael Popock, how are you doing, sir? I'm doing great. I am feeling so energized off of what we just watched for the week with the Democratic National Convention.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, there's a number of ways to judge the candidate and how they run their campaign. Kamala incorporated as the CEO, that's straight A's. How she organized and ran her convention, don't think that was thrust upon her. That was all every last detail is a reflection of a decision made by Kamala Harris and her team. That was A plus and I've seen a lot of conventions in my life. I'm a 91 Duke Law grad for those that are playing at home, playing how old this pop-up game at home.

That was A plus. Who she picked for her vice president, another factor that goes into who you wanna pick for president, that's A plus across it and all of that. And to paraphrase the great Reverend Al Sharpton, who I bump into occasionally in New York, he said, we may weep in the night, but joy comes in the morning. And joy has arrived.

And at the intersection of law and politics, we're going to talk today about Judge Ludwig, who I'm going to have back on the show. I've interviewed him a few times here about his momentous decision for the first time in his life as a Federalist, as a conservative, a real conservative, as a rock-ribbed Republican. Not only saying that he's not going to vote for Donald Trump, that was a given, given the position he's taken about the attack on our constitutional republic, the Supreme Court failing in its role in protecting our democracy

and doing the bidding of Donald Trump. We knew he wasn't gonna vote for Trump. The fact that he endorsed in a four or five page letter, single space, that's only Judge Ludican, Kamala Harris, along with all of the Nikki Haley voters for Kamala Harris, the Republicans for Kamala Harris, people on this network that are Republicans

are for Kamala Harris and all that. Or as Kinzinger said during his, I was saying his acceptance speech, during his speech, he said a version of voting for Kamala Harris doesn't mean you're a Democrat. It means you're a patriot. That whole thinking where people are happy and have a song on their lips about going to the voting booths was missing, obviously, from this election. We heard Michelle Obama say in her speech, we can say it now, that dread, that ominous feeling has lifted from us now that our choice is the leader of our Democratic Party being Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.

And we're going to talk today back at that intersection of law and politics. It's going to be a busy, joyous coming to September for those that love law and politics and love bringing Donald Trump to justice because he's going to have a very, very busy September in state and federal and appellate courts. And we're going to cover it all. It starts on the 5th of September with a big hearing. You and I are going to talk about it at length today in front of Judge Chutkin about how to get the wheels back on that wagon in the DC election interference case and move it towards a trial. We're going to talk about how Jack Smith is going to approach the September 5th hearing in front of Judge Chutkin and how he's going to regroup to get his indictment to survive the immunity decision of the United States Supreme Court.

11 days later, Judge Mershon, speaking of immunity, is going to make a decision, and we will speculate here with pretty good gut feeling about what he's gonna do, about whether immunity, the immunity is decision about evidence at all, is gonna jeopardize any of the 34 felony convictions of Donald Trump or not. And two days later on the 18th of September, he is going to sentence Donald Trump, I believe. And then he's

going to, at that time, he may suspend the sentence. But I think we're talking about real jail time and incarceration, not before the election, but certainly after that. And if you thought, whoo, that's a lot, Popak, for September, you can stop now. Nope. On the 26th of September, we're going to have oral argument back in New York in front of the second highest court in New York about Donald Trump's $500 million judgment on the civil fraud case brought by the New York Attorney General. We'll talk about that here too today. And that's not all that's up for grabs in that appeal. People forget banning Donald Trump, Eric Trump, and Don Jr. from being officers in New York corporations, banning them from doing business with New York banks, banning

them from doing real estate transactions in New York as a New York development company are all still up for grabs related to that appeal. Now we're not going to get some of these results until then, for grabs related to that appeal. Now we're not gonna get some of these results until then, but we're going to, I'm laughing at something we're writing up on the chat, but we're going to get, the wheels are gonna be clearly in motion for a ruling sometime after that

about the New York Attorney General decision. And these are important, because I wanna make one thing clear up before we get there. That $500 million, that doesn't come out of the bonding company. Bonding company only stands behind in case Donald Trump fails. He's going to have to scrape up $500 million and that's the domino effect of him crushing his stock to sell enough stock in order to pay this $500 million because they have not done Ben any new business as a Trump organization or otherwise

for over a year and a half. They're living off of old money. They're living off of old deals. They're living off of weird things they can't reproduce like selling Bibles, selling sneakers, selling trading cards, giving speeches. That's not reproducing. You can't reproduce that, especially when you're gonna be

a losing, two time losing failed presidential candidate, pushing 80, okay? And that's, and we'll cover all that today on Legal AF. You know, first off, Popak, I'm glad you clarified when you went to law school. I know a lot of people thought that you and I are in the same class. We're peers. We're peers. We're peers.

Yeah. Um, second, one of the things that was interesting at a personal level to me regarding the Democratic National Convention is some people may know my backstory of when I practiced law, the types of cases that I litigated often involved excessive force by police officers. And I handled a case, and you all may remember this case, in Mesa, Arizona, where an unarmed individual named Daniel Shaver was at a hotel.

The police were called to the hotel. One of the police officers had an AR-15 and then shot and killed the unarmed Daniel Shaver as they were marching or as they were shouting orders at him. And, you know, raise your hand, put your hands on your shorts, raise your hand, put your hands on your shorts, and then shot him with an AR-15. So I have a lot of familiarity with Mesa, Arizona, and knowing what a conservative city Mesa, Arizona is, knowing the mayor, John Giles of Mesa, Arizona, knowing the city council there.

And so it's a really big deal. I settled that case, it was one of the last things I did as a practicing lawyer. We actually settled that case for I think $8 million. Was one of the largest, if not the largest civil rights settlement in Mesa, Arizona history, I believe, and also in the surrounding Phoenix area. There may have been one or two bigger, but it was definitely, I believe, in Mesa in terms

of the settlements there. So I know what a conservative city Mesa, Arizona is. So to have John Giles, their conservative Republican mayor, stand on stage. By the way, I always knew Mayor Giles as someone with incredible dignity even though that was a very hard-fought litigation. But the fact that you have John Giles in Mesa, Arizona endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris very publicly at the DNC, it has that personal connection for me as well. You know, the City Council had to approve that settlement and he was always a man of dignity,

but to see that there has that personal connection I wanted to share. All right, let's show you George Santos crying right now. The George Santos saga is, is pretty much conclude that book at this point officially. You know, and I'm debating whether or not we even talk about Santos or not on a show like this, but we've covered when the, we were one of the first people who were looking at those FEC filings.

I'm not sure if the legal efforts remember it. Before people were even talking about criminal charges, Michael Popok and I were going through line, but go back three, two years ago, we were going line by line through those FEC filings. And we were saying, that doesn't make sense, that doesn't make sense. Here's the treasure relieving. We gave the roadmap of the prosecution.

Now, the DOJ probably figured out the roadmap on their own, but the early legal efforts may remember that we called every step of this in very careful detail. So that's why I wanna bring it up as well, close that chapter. I'll be brief because George Santos doesn't deserve all that much of our time, but I think it's worthwhile on this Saturday

that we all collectively in this legal AF community, watch him cry, play this clip. I'm taking responsibility because I have to. There's no other way around it. in this legal AF community, watch him cry. Play this clip. I did so to the best of my abilities, but you also trusted me to represent you with honor and to uphold the values that are essential to our democracy. And in that regard, I failed you. I know that my actions have caused disappointment, frustration, and a loss of faith in me, and for that I'm truly sorry. I also want to acknowledge the many people who have stood by me during this difficult time, my family, friends and legal team. Your support has been a source of strength and I am determined to repay your faith in

me by becoming a better person. Moving forward, I am dedicated to making amends for the wrongs I have committed. I understand that there are legal consequences for my actions, and I accept them fully. This plea is not just an admission of guilt, it's an acknowledgement that I need to be held accountable, like any other American that breaks the law. I hope that by facing these consequences head on, I can begin to demonstrate my commitment to change and to earning your forgiveness. I do not ask for forgiveness as I know that must be earned through actions not words. I want to be a part of restoring the integrity that I helped diminish and I

will work tirelessly to regain the trust of those I have let down. As I move forward, I am committed to living a life that reflects the values I should have upheld all along. Truth and integrity. I know that we built- So I want to say this though, before turning it over to you. Let me just give some data points. I almost poked my eyes after you, go ahead. He pled guilty to two federal counts,

wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. There's a two year mandatory minimum, but the judge estimated that the sentencing range would likely be between six and eight years. So Santos is learning at that moment before he sheds those crocodile tees or tears or real tears, whatever you think that is, that he's going to jail, not for six months, that he could

be doing about 18, and he's going to serve it. That's one of the things. He's not Trump. These other figures in Trump's world who go MAGA and do these crimes, they go to jail. Trump needs to be treated like them. This guy's going to go behind bars for six to eight years. I know he may have made that money on Gab or whatever those apps are where people would have him read ridiculous things, but he's going to go to jail.

But I will say this before turning it over to you Popeye. What he did say there though are it was at least refreshing to hear someone in a MAGA world say words like that. Now he's a fraud in everything he does. Do I believe his words are genuine? Absolutely not. Actions speak far louder than words and his actions show that he lies about everything. But at least those words are things that you and I are used to seeing when it comes to federal sentencing. Well, a couple of observations, thanks. It was going long.

I almost wrote on our chain. I'm about to poke my eyes out with this. I like the fact that we don't leave loose ends on Legal AF. We followed this story, as you said, from the very beginning. We didn't break the story, but we did a deep dive of the analysis like no other channel, I believe, out there. We need to follow it to its logical conclusion, which we always knew was coming. The logical conclusion, once his partner, his treasurer, and those around him all either pled guilty or testified against him and flipped on him. We knew this was coming, no matter his bravado.

I mean, they had to drag him out of the house, let's not forget. And the amount of resources that the Eastern District of New York, the prosecutor's office here in Breon Pierce had to expand of our taxpayer dollars. That tearful goodbye should have been, we should have been reporting on that eight months ago, but he pled not guilty again. The reason that they were not going to, the prosecutors were not going to let them off the hook unless he agreed to a mandatory minimum to go to jail. And they basically pled guilty to lots of different things, comes down to those two felonies,

is because they had him dead to rights when it came to the evidence. Just shows you our criminal justice system at its finest. And he's not the only one that ends up, as to touch on something you just alluded to, Ben, he's not the only one that ends up dissolved in tears in a blubbery state at the moment when he meets his maker, or in this case, about to be sentenced by a federal judge. Most, if not all, of the MAGA Chan 6 insurrectionists, except for the diehard true believers who are still flashing white supremacy signs

at their sentencing or their families are holding press conferences on the courthouse steps to still talk about MAGA conspiracies. The vast majority of them, the followers of Donald Trump, all break down into tears in front of their family before they get carted off by the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Marshal's office. And you're right, it is an irony that their fearless leader is able to use every trick in the book and every tactic at his disposal, including basically using

the United States Supreme Court as his, to do his bidding and avoid jail time to date. Although we're going to see what happens when you and I finally get to talk about the September 18th sentencing by Judge Mershon related to things that happened in New York. But the rest of the, he doesn't go to jail, but the rest of them all do. rest of the he doesn't go to jail but the rest of them all do. Bannon is in, Navarro in and now out, and all the rest of the Jan 6 insurrectionists that we're gonna talk about today and yet Donald Trump continues to go to sleep you know in a house with a golden escalator and put his head on some feather bed, and enjoy freedom for now, and run for president. And that is the reality.

And I'm hoping that what just happened to Santos and these other Gen 6 people we're gonna talk about are gonna be lessons for people as to I don't want another Gen 6 in 2025, because Kamala Harris is going to win. And if it's hopefully not a close election, but if it's anywhere close to a close election, you're going to see Donald Trump do exactly what he did before. Declare victory when the ballots are open to not when all the votes are counted,

and claim fraud in the week leading in, and get all of his crazies back attacking the Capitol. This time we'll be prepared for that, hopefully, in terms of Joe Biden will be the president, will be responsible for the National Guard, and for everything else to protect our cradle of our democracy. And the one last thing, Santos didn't have to give that speech, for those that may be wondering. That's not a requirement of his plea deal, that he stand on the steps of the courthouse and give a tearful goodbye. That's just what he's done. And I want to know what the over-under is on him running a scam

inside of the jail once he's there. I think it's six months. George Santos has been a scammer in Brazil. He's been a scammer here. He scammed Holocaust survivors. He scammed 9-11 survivors. He scammed his way all through his entire time, kicking and screaming, staying in Congress in order. And MAGA made their devil's bargain to keep him because they needed every vote they needed. I don't even know why they didn't accomplish anything as a Congress other than these ridiculous impeachment proceedings and reports, but they wanted him to the bitter end and that's where we're at. Well, we had to cover Santos there purely because we can close that chapter when he officially gets sentenced. We'll put it as a footnote in one of our episodes just to give you the amount of years he's going to jail for.

But when we get back, I want to talk about Trump sentencing coming up September 18th. I want to talk about Trump appealing the New York civil fraud case. I want to talk about what the DOJ is doing by, yes, they are dismissing and recharging some of the obstruction of official proceeding cases. But by and large, I think their plan is to do these superseding indictments and just make clearer in the indictments that there is a causal nexus, a connection between the insurrectionist and the documents. So where that hasn't been specifically pled in the indictment, just add additional

facts to show that what the individual was trying to do was destroy the documents, i.e. the certifications themselves, the electoral certificates. Patreon.com slash Legal AF is the place where you can get some behind the scenes Legal AF Intel. Also, Michael Popok and I will be holding a Zoom partnership meeting very soon. We'll be announcing that date very, very soon. So if you ever wanted to meet Michael Popok or even if you wanted to meet me, although you probably see a little bit too much of me,

I'm sure you want to see Michael Popok, meet him, ask him some questions, go to patreon.com slash legal AF, sign up there. It helps grow this independent media platform as well. We'll be right back after our first quick break. As we age, balancing our social life with next day responsibilities becomes trickier. That's why I'm thrilled to have discovered Zbiotics Pre-Alcohol, a game-changing product

for responsible adults who enjoy a drink but have plans the next day. Zbiotics Pre-Alcohol is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. Invented by PhD scientists, it's designed to address rough mornings after drinking. Here's the science. When you drink, alcohol creates a toxic byproduct in your gut. This byproduct, not dehydration, is what makes you feel rough the next day.

Pre-alcohol Z-biotic produces an enzyme that breaks down this byproduct. Just make Z-biotics your first drink of the night. Enjoy responsibly and you're set for a better tomorrow. Since I started using pre-alcohol before social events, I've noticed a significant improvement. After a night out with friends, I wake up feeling refreshed and ready for my day.

Whether I have an important business meeting or a family outing, I can approach my day with confidence. Vacations, weddings, birthdays, and reunions, there's so much going on. Get the most out of your summer plans by stocking up on Zbiotic Pre-Alcohol Now. Go to zbiotics.com slash LegalAF to get 15% off your first order

when you use LegalAF at checkout. Pre-Alcohol Zbiotics is backed with a 100% money back guarantee. So if you're not satisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked. Remember to head to zbiotics.com slash Legal AF and use the code LegalAF at checkout for 15% off. Thank you Zbiotics for sponsoring this episode and our good times. Traditional bedsheets, they can harbor more bacteria than a toilet seat.

It can lead to acne, allergies, and stuffy noses, and it's just gross. MiracleMaid offers a whole line of self-cleaning, antibacterial bedding, such as sheets, pillowcases, and comforters that prevent up to 99.7% of bacteria growth and require up to three times less laundry. Using silver-infused fabrics inspired by NASA, MiracleMaid sheets are thermoregulating and designed to keep you at the perfect temperature all night long, no matter the weather.

So you get better sleep every night. Miracle sheets are luxuriously comfortable without the high price tag of other luxury brands and feel as nice, if not nicer, than sheets used by some five-star hotels. Stop sleeping on bacteria. Bacteria can clog your pores, causing breakouts and acne. Sleep clean with Miracle.

These sheets are infused with silver that prevent up to 99.7% of bacterial growth, leaving them to stay cleaner and fresh three times longer than other sheets. No more gross odors. Go to trymiracle.com slash legal AF to try Miracle-Made Sheets to try Miracle Made Sheets today. And whether you're buying them for yourself

or as a gift for a loved one, if you order today, you can save over 40%. And if you use our promo, Legal AF at checkout, you'll get three free towels and save an extra 20%. Miracle is so confident in their product, it's back with a 30-day money-back guarantee. So if you aren't 100% satisfied, you'll get a full refund. Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made. Go to trymiracle.com slash Legal AF and use the code Legal AF to claim your free three-piece towel set and save over 40% off. Again, that's trymiracle.com slash Legal AF to treat yourself. Thank you MiracleMaid for

sponsoring this episode. Great ad reads right there Michael Popak. Thank you to our sponsors. The discount codes, guess where they are? In the description below. Judge Ludig sent us the following statement that I'd like to read to everybody as well regarding why he endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris. Judge Ludig said, The first thing all of us are taught is right from wrong. We're not taught right from left. I thank God, my parents, and my country every day for teaching me right from wrong, especially in these days.

In my faith, we believe that we will one day answer for our wrongs. I have always tried to live my life in anticipation of that day, imperfectly to be sure, but I have tried. My endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris was the right thing to do. It would have been wrong for me to stay silent. And I believe I would have one day had to answer for that silence. It's really that simple. I agree.

It really is that simple. And there are a lot of people out there who are Republican, not MAGA, who are not endorsing Donald Trump, but who are not coming forward in this time in a public way, the way they should. I think that a lot of people have, and we've seen over, it's unprecedented what we saw at the DNC, right? To have all those people who worked for Trump endorse Vice President Kamala Harris, to have all those Republican leaders on the stage

at the DNC. It's unheard of, but I hope people can listen to that statement from Judge Ludic. We know that there are a lot of former Trumpers and Republican leaders who watch this show, so I hope that statement right there is an inspiration. On that note, Judge Ludic has committed to me for the Midas Touch Network to do an interview on Thursday. Breaking news. Breaking news. In fact, I just got it in an email while we're recording.

So Thursday, by the time we, you know, we don't have to polish it up much with Judge Ludic, trust me, we can just cut it and put it right on. But sometime Thursday, Friday on scheduling, we'll get it up and running. And you know, he also made it, he also made me know that other than his original interview on CNN off of the five pager and this statement, he can think of no other place he'd rather be. This is a personal comment from him to them, the Midas Touch Network, talking to our audience. Well, he's become such a good friend. He's someone who I always admired throughout law school

and my legal career. And so, you know, to be friends with him, to know him and to share that friendship and to share that joy and to share the vision of the future that you and he and we talk about with the Midas Mighty with the Legal AFers, you know, it's just an incredible experience. And every day I pinch myself how lucky I am.

All right, Michael Popock, let's get into talking about the sentencing of Donald Trump scheduled for September 18th. Donald Trump previously, we talked about this on the last Legal AF, Legal AF requested an indefinite adjornment of the sentencing, saying sometime in 2025, do it after the election. And then Trump took his usual jabs at the judge, his usual jab at the judge's daughter, and then Trump cited the pending absolute immunity motion that he filed trying to dismiss the entire proceeding.

District attorney's office had already filed in opposition to Donald Trump's claim of absolute immunity dismissing the case. The district attorney argued, well, there's no official acts, no core constitutional functions. And if there were, it's harmless error. You've seen the proceedings. We should proceed to sentencing. The jury got everything that they needed

and let's move over to sentencing. But then the district attorney took, I think, a more, an interesting position. I wanna get your take on it, is in their most recent filing, when it comes to the date of the sentencing, the district attorney's office did not say, we are absolutely demanding it proceed on September 18th.

They took a more nuanced approach and they said, we think Donald Trump's absolute immunity claims are bogus. We think that there should be a sentencing in terms of the timing of that, though Justice Marchand will leave it to you to control your docket. there should be a sentencing in terms of the timing of that though, Justice Mershon will leave it to you to control your docket. You can make that decision because one of the things that Donald Trump can do after Judge, after Justice Mershon rules, Trump can try to take out an emergency interlocutory appeal and then immediately try to stay or stop the proceedings and the

sentencing from happening because it's based on an immunity doctrine. And so Trump could try to take advantage of that. So the district attorney's position, I think is a nuanced one here. It's not let's delay. It's just as Mershon will leave it to you. What do you make of that, Popeye? What do you think is going to happen? Almost exactly what you just said. Karen and I had a little bit of a debate about this from her old office. It is a nuanced approach. I think they know that Mershon knows how a calendar works. And Mershon knew that there was only 48 hours between the 16th of September

and the 18th of September and knew when he said it that he was only 48 hours between the 16th of September and the 18th of September. And knew when he said it that he was only leaving two days between his immunity decision, which if it goes against Donald Trump, just to remind people, the way it would go against Donald Trump, which is likely, is that the judge would rule that he understands Trump versus the United States and the decision by the Supreme Court issued on July 1.

He understands its ruling as it relates to official conduct, evidence that can't be used in a courtroom to prove unofficial conduct that can be prosecuted. He gets that. Doesn't think it applies at all because I'm sure he'll find that whatever was mentioned about Hope Hicks' testimony or the person who scheduled Donald Trump's calendar when the results of his election interference happened and he became president, that's the whole basis of the prosecution, is that he interfer fear with the 2016 election by hiding from the voters and improper campaign contributions,

his affair with Stormy Daniels and the bribery scandal, bribery scheme around it, right? The payoff scheme that was led by a three-person conspiracy at least of David Pecker National Enquirer, Michael Cohen, Consolieri, and Donald Trump all mapped out in Trump Tower, the Trump Tower conspiracy, as they called it. The fact that it worked and he became president and did a couple of things where he used his private checkbook to pay off private invoices about his private conduct and met with Michael Cohen privately about

this private conduct. It sounds like a lot of private things that are an official conduct or constitutional core presidential power. I think that's where the judge is going to go. If knowing that, I think what the Manhattan DA is saying is we're going to get a win here anyway. Why do we even have to take a position where he can argue that we're going to get a win here anyway. So why do we even have to take a position where he can argue that we're weaponizing?

In fact, we'll take a neutral position with a footnote that says, Judge, you know how a calendar works, 16th is the 16th, the 18th is the 18th. And this way they goad Donald Trump into filing this threatened appeal. Donald Trump consistently loses on his appeals. Let's be frank. He won some aspect of one once about the New York attorney general's case that we covered, but fundamentally

he's lost every appeal that matters that he's ever brought in criminal matters or in civil matters. That's just the reality. He's over 70 on things involving the election. He's lost everything that matters, including multiple appeals. I think they number up to 10 now or 12 in this particular case involving this particular appellate court. So I think it was more of a goading, playing chicken a little bit with Donald Trump. Like you think you got an appeal? State, federal, you don't really know what it's over. You claim immunity. You don't even get the immunity. They said that Donald Trump didn't even get the immunity frame properly in the papers he just filed with the judge. It's not about

whether Donald Trump's immune from prosecution, it's about whether some straight pieces of evidence fall into the immunity category. And then even if they do, you have to figure out whether it mattered to the outcome of the case. Did the jury really convict Donald Trump of 34 felony counts because of how Hope Hicks held a press conference? Or how Madeleine Westerhout scheduled his lunch that day? I don't think so. We covered that trial every day, including having some of our people, including Karen, in the courtroom. That's not how the jury convicted Donald Trump. And if you remove those pieces of evidence from even from the equation, those stray pieces, he gets convicted and that's the point. So what is the Manhattan DA saying to

the judge? Let Donald Trump take his own appeal, whatever it looks like, and let the appellate court make the decision whether to stay. Let them do it in between the 16th and the 18th, because then he can go run to court. Now, if you're Donald Trump, you have to presume that you're going to get a negative ruling against you on the 16th of September. You should already have, you and I have talked about this, as good practicing lawyers, conscientious practicing lawyers, they should have their papers already drafted. I mean, with some blanks in it to see exactly and plug it. I've done that before. I've known there's a chance I'm going to lose on an injunction hearing that's moving very quickly. I've had a brief ready to go

on opposition to take on an appeal and then you spend an hour and a half plugging in the language from the actual order that you know is coming. They're not going to do that, but that's what you're supposed to do. And then you file on the night of the 16th or the morning of the 17th an emergency application, you get one judge at the appellate division, the duty judge to issue a stay, maybe, but it puts the onus on Trump to file a legitimate good faith appeal. Let him go run to federal court. I don't see how that's going to help him. Second Circuit's not going to take it. It'll have to go up through a federal judge and he can't go to the Supreme Court. I mean, he could try, but I think this is just like, you know what? Let the Trump show play out. Judge, you go forward.

You do you. Let the appellate court do the appellate court. There's a stay to be had. It comes from the appellate court. And let's go forward on the 18th unless the appellate court stays your action. Now, if the appellate court stays it for a short period of time, that will delay the 18th sentencing. If the appellate court takes one look at his papers and say, yeah, I don't see anything here that's worth a stay of the sentencing, I think we're gonna get to sentencing on the 18th by Judge Mershon with some prison time included that's gonna be suspended or stayed to allow Donald Trump the full appeal. And I don't think, I don't think a, what's called an interlocutory

appeal is necessary on this immunity decision. I think we just let, I think the I don't think what's called an interlocutory appeal is necessary on this immunity decision. I think we just let, I think the appellate court will be like, look, you got issues that happen at trial. You got issues about the judge not recusing himself because his daughter happens to work. You've got issues about, you got a lot of issues. You guys, as Barack Obama said during the convention, he's got a lot of issues.

You got all those issues. You got issues with the sentencing. You got issues with the immunity decision. Great. Take it all up in one big tie ribbon around it, and that's your appeal. And we'll deal with the appeal over the next six, eight months, 11 months, including on your sentencing, which they'll suspend while they're dealing with that issue. That's what I think happens between now, the 16th and the 18th, subject to any new information

that you and I receive or Karen receives that we bring to the attention here on Legal AF or during a hot take. Do you think there's something deeper going on here though, Michael Popak, I guess? What's the opposite of weaponization? Because has Donald Trump sufficiently weaponized the media to believe that everything is weaponization such that there is a prevailing view among prosecutors that let Donald Trump go out there, campaign, talk about Hannibal Lecter, let Donald Trump talk about being eaten by sharks, let Donald Trump say the reason you should vote for him is because he's better looking than Vice President Kamala

Harris. Let him run around and say all of those, oh, can you believe that Vice President Kamala Harris said thank you? She said, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. You know, just let him do that. You know, let him tank himself. But when you bring him back into this legal framework, the failures of the corporate media, and frankly, the fact that 43% of America doesn't care

that he's a sexual assault or felon can literally do anything. When he said he can shoot someone at Fifth Avenue, that core amount of Americans truly don't care what he does, and the corporate media won't report accurately what's happening. So do you think, and we'll talk about this when we get back, that there's just kind of a prevailing view that, you know what, push all of these

proceedings, de-weapon, like the opposite of it, like Trump's weaponized it with, the Supreme Court's weaponized it with their ruling interfering with justice. Judge Cannon has weaponized it, who Trump appointed to dismiss the case on grounds that are solely based on the fact that she's doing Trump a favor, which I could prove to you very simply. She's the only judge in American history who said that the concept of a special counsel, which has been used by Democrats and Republican administrations as a way to try to bring independence

to the process is unlawful that special councils don't exist, but her ruling says it just relates to Donald Trump. So she's going to dismiss the case where Donald Trump stole nuclear records and codes and secrets and war plans, because she says special councils don't even exist and shouldn't even be allowed. However, in the Hunter Biden case, when Hunter Biden brings up the issue that, okay, well, I've got a special counsel.

The judge goes, yeah, but special councils are okay when it comes to you, Hunter Biden. So to me, that is called weaponization right there. So my overall point, Popak, though, is knowing that it's actually Trump who's weaponized it, everything he says is projection and confession. Is it just strategically more beneficial to say, you know what, just let him go out, you know, let him melt down in these public appearances, these, I like to call them WWE cosplay, fascist traveling

circus events that he calls rallies. Let that happen and then deal with this stuff in 2025. Well, let me prove your point in addition to the lack of work. Can you prove it after we take our last big break? Yeah. When they come back, I'm going to prove this point with something that DOJ just did that shows you they're not weaponized. We weren't going to talk about it, but it makes your point. So we come back from our ads. Let's do it.

This show is sponsored by BetterHelp. In the world of politics and law, it's easy to get caught up in the constant news cycle and forget about taking care of ourselves. But just like we never skip a breaking law and politics news story, we shouldn't skip on our mental health either. When my schedule is packed with analyzing new court rulings

and political developments or diving into trial prep, it's crucial to make time for self care. That's where therapy comes in. It's not just for major crises, it's a tool for everyone to become their best selves. I found that regular therapy sessions helped me process the intense world I operate within in a healthier way.

It's given me strategies to manage stress and set boundaries, which is crucial in my line of work. If you're considering therapy, better help makes it incredibly convenient. It's entirely online, designed to fit into your busy schedule. You just fill out a questionnaire and get matched with a licensed therapist.

And if you need to switch therapists, no problem. There's no additional charge. Never skip therapy day with BetterHelp. Visit betterhelp.com slash LegalAF today to get 10% off your first month. That's betterhelp, H-E-L-P.com slash legal AF. My family's growing with the addition of our baby daughter this summer.

And it's more important than ever to make sure they're protected. That's where Policy Genius comes in, the leading online insurance marketplace that helps you find the right life insurance policy at the best price. With Policy Genius, you can find life insurance policies that start at just $292 per year for one million of coverage.

Some options offer same day approval and avoid unnecessary medical exams. What I love about Policy Genius is their unbiased approach. They don't have an incentive to recommend one insurer over another, so you can trust their advice. Their technology makes it easy to compare quotes from top insurers, and their expert license support team is always there to help. Be ready for the future with Policy Genius.

Head to policygenius.com slash legal AF or click the link in the description to get your free life insurance quotes and see how much you could save. That's policygenius.com slash legal AF. Welcome back there, Michael Popak. Let's prove the point. Oh, I want to give a shout out to those sponsors though too.

Check out the discount codes in the description below. Support them. They help make this show a reality. We talked about over a year and a half ago how sometimes politics and law makes strange bedfellows, but that the Department of Justice and Biden's administration, Biden-Harris administration, were going to and have taken

the position that when Donald Trump was sued for civil rights violations, he's got so many suits to keep track of. That's why we formed this show four and a half years ago. This is the one where he cleared the park behind the White House, in between the White House and the Hay Adams Hotel and used the military to do it, and walked across the street with his Bible upside down, all of that. That was, even if we don't like it, the Department of Justice, the Harris-Biden,

the administration is taking the position that they will indemnify and pay and defend Donald Trump for having done that because they don't like the precedent of people suing presidents not named Donald Trump, who even in a wrongheaded way are exercising their official conduct, official powers as presidents stretch to its outer boundaries. And so we may not like it and nobody likes the outcome and nobody's, certainly the Department of Justice and Biden and Harris are holding their nose over this, but they don't. They're worried about the precedent that would be set by letting presidents be sued for things that are arguably within their stretched out official conduct and powers.

A weaponized Department of Justice would not do this. They would say, you know what, Donald, good luck. You get sued, you pay your freight, you were a terrible, terrible criminal president and we're not supporting you. But that's not what they're doing. That also explains, Ben, back into the story we're gonna do next about Jack Smith,

that also explains why Jack Smith and special counsel, which is not a figment of our imagination, is actually an appropriate inferior office under the attorney general, recognized by every court, as you said, since 1974, including the United States Supreme Court. That's why he said, you know what, judge? I need a few more weeks to, for my organization, my entity, the Department of Justice,

to get their minds and hands around what position we want to take about the immunity decision and how it maps onto this particular indictment against Donald Trump and maybe everything else into the future. Because we have to think about the future, forward as our next president likes to say, and we can't just worry about right now nailing Donald Trump. And so that's why it's taken him so long, and that's why we're gonna be back in court

with Judge Chuckin on the 5th of September. So you got that happening on the 5th of September, but also more broadly, you have the Department of Justice having to address the issues now raised by the other Supreme Court ruling, where the Supreme Court narrowed the obstruction of official proceeding charge, so that it has to relate to obstructing official proceedings

in connection with the destruction of documents themselves. Even though when we analyzed the statute, it clearly said, you know, or obstruct or otherwise obstruct an official proceeding. And January 6th was an official proceeding. There was a subsection A and a B, a subsection A involved destruction of documents. And the Supreme Court ultimately ruled

that you have to read A and B, subsection A and subsection B together, even though it had an or, which to me means or, but that's not how the Supreme Court read it. So in any event, the Department of Justice has had to make filings and status reports to let the various federal judges know how are they going to treat cases

where individuals, insurrectionists were charged with obstruction of an official proceeding. So in a filing yesterday, the Department of Justice said that since the Supreme Court's Fisher ruling, it dropped 18 USC 1512 C2, that's the obstruction of official proceedings that you charges in 60 cases.

So far it's elected to pursue 1512 C2 in five cases. And in the cases where it dropped 1512 C2, it often added a new charge as well to ensure that these very violent people are not like getting out. There's other charges that could be brought that just may be a little more of a pain in the neck to prove at trial, just at a technical level. But there's going to be a case by case review that will be happening. And then specifically in a case, in a brief that was filed,

United States of America versus Shondell Chilcote and Donald Chilcote. This is an example of one of these briefs that the Department of Justice filed. It says, the United States, through the undersigned counsel, files the status report describing its view of the impact of the Fisher decision by the Supreme Court on count one of a superseding indictment which charges the criminal defendant with 18 U.S.C. section 1512 C-2. As discussed below, Fisher does not bar this prosecution.

To be sure, Fisher will require an updated jury instruction regarding the elements of a violation of 1512C2. And below, the government proposes such language, but the government expects that its evidence of the defendant's conduct and the inferences to be drawn from that conduct will be sufficient to submit this case to the jury and sustain a conviction. At this time, the government intends to proceed to trial on count one on the superseding indictment. So this, Michael Popak, is how we're able to predict things that will happen in other cases, specifically what's going to happen at that September 5th hearing before Judge Chutkin. So one of the reasons, right, that Jack Smith asked for a brief delay,

I think is so that the entire Department of Justice machinery can get on the same page. So there's not inconsistent pleadings, right? And now what we're seeing is the DOJ rolling out its 1512 C2 position and now Jack Smith will be giving his 1512 C2 position as well as the absolute immunity ruling, how that figures into it. And I think Jack Smith will have a very nuanced, careful and specific view about the case against Donald Trump will proceed. Here's how we intend to deal with the Supreme Court's ruling, maybe they're gonna have to introduce

another indictment, a new superseding indictment that removes allegations, but that is my expectation there. But you know, for a lot of these insurrectionists who thought, oh, the Fisher decision, now I can't be charged with obstruction of official proceeding. The Department of Justice is saying, no, we're still gonna charge a lot of these cases.

Some we're gonna drop just that count. It's not like the insurrectionists are getting off. They've been charged with other stuff already that they've pled to just that count. They now may be charged with other stuff. And they say, you know what? There are some cases that there's evidence that this was about blocking the certification documents.

And therefore it's a document case. And if it's a document case and a destruction of documents, but Popak, what do you think, um, what do you think there? And then we'll talk briefly also about, uh, New York attorney, general Leticia James filing. Yeah. There's 24 people that were only charged with 1512 of the six insurrectionists and all of them, if they took plea deals, which most of them did have a provision in their

plea deal that says if any of their, if this 1512 gets vacated in some way by a future Supreme court decision, because the Department of Justice is really smart and they anticipate bad things happening at the Supreme Court level, which we all do. It has an automatic trigger inside of the plea deal that says, if this 1512 goes by the wayside for some reason, then we'll be able to indict you for other crimes. And there's other crimes that they could have indicted them for and will indict them for, but it only really relates to a very small subset of people because almost all the Gen 6 defendants

that were charged with 15-12 obstruction of an official proceeding were also charged with other felonies carrying very similar sentences. And we anticipated this, look, I did a hot take on it six months ago, so did you. We talked about how prepared they were going to be why they've and they've gone inside, as you said, the beehive of the Department of Justice. And they've had to think through all of this current band of Jan

six insurrectionists, the future Jan six insurrectionists, or people like them, how it impacts Donald Trump. And so there were a lot of department heads that were sitting around a table electronically or otherwise having to weigh in because this was like a 12 level chess match. And every, the law of unintended consequences they were trying to avoid, and making sure they didn't take a bad position here that could impact these other cases. The way forward was inside of the actual Fisher decision. Page eight of the Fisher decision is in the majority decision, obviously, fought for and placed there by Sotomayor who joined in that decision or actually

was in the dissent but got a part of it, I think impacted a part of the ultimate decision, cited a case of hers back when she was on the Second Circuit in New York before she became a Supreme Court justice in which false evidence, the use of false evidence and false documents could be a way to prove that particular 1512 violation. And with Trump, it's easy because the false certificates, the fake elector certificates that they wanted to use to throw out and trash the real ones and count those instead to throw,

or throw the entire thing over to the house to let them pick the president, like we were in the 1880s or 1870s, old timey time. That's the false evidence we're talking about. And then it also gave the blueprint as you pointed to for the Department of Justice if they think they need it to re-indict and to add particular elements if it fits for people trying to get their hands on the

certificates. Because if they were trying to get their hands on the certificates to stop the certification and it rises to the level of either destruction or obstruction of those documents, or as I said, these false evidence, I think you'll get them. But the good news is in a belt, belt, suspenders, suspenders way, the Department of Justice always indicted these people for multiple things. And so even if 1512 fell by the wayside, these people are going to jail for a long time and they're gonna be reindicted for things now that they're like you said there's no hooray. Hooray! 1512 is out Mr. Fisher. Yeah, Mr. Fisher too by the way. Mr. Fisher who's the name appellant in the case,

can have his plea deal or his conviction, and now they can just go right back at him for something else, and there's plenty of time to do that, and it's not double jeopardy. So I agree with you. I think that the three weeks, they had already spent over a month, the Department of Justice and Jack Smith,

getting ready for what position they were going to take with Chutkin. But it was complicated and they needed more time and they asked for more time. It also reinforces something that Judge Cannon can't get through her thick judicial skull, which is that the special counsel is an inferior officer and an employee of the Department of Justice. He doesn't get a 1099. He's not an independent contractor. He works for somebody. He has a boss. The boss's name is the attorney general, and he has to report into the attorney general, and he has to, as part of the actual provision that gives him life, the special counsel provision of the code of federal

regulation, he has to regularly consult with the various departments of the Code of Federal Regulation. He has to regularly consult with the various departments of the Department of Justice because he's not imaginary. He's real. And this is what you have to do when you have a boss and you're employed and you have to consult as required. So the whole thing just always brings us back to Judge Cannon. As you properly pointed out, a judge in California looked at Hunter Biden and said, yeah, no, that's the only judge in the world that's ever made that ruling, and I don't agree with that ruling. That's about the special counsel, especially in this case. Will that create a split in the circuits ultimately? Will the Ninth Circuit somehow be different than the future

11th circuit because we left out something in September there's briefing see I knew I knew we left out something there's briefing that's going on at the 11th circuit about judge cannons decision that's gonna happen September's gonna be a very treacherous and dangerous month for Donald Trump, candidate Trump, felon Trump, defendant Trump, and trying to keep that all straight. So Michael Popak, just to reinforce this point to viewers, anytime a Republican or a MAGA gives you the weaponization talking point, go, okay, so explain weaponization. Donald Trump appoints judge. Judge dismisses case against Donald Trump because she

says that special counsels don't exist. The DOJ under Biden charges his son, Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden makes argument. Trump says special councils don't exist. The judge can in dismiss case. Can I get that same treatment? If special councils don't exist for him, don't exist for me, that federal judge goes, nope, that's just for Trump. Okay, well, that doesn't make much sense to me.

You know, call me, you know, perhaps I'm just confused here, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Call me. Perhaps I'm just confused here, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Let's just talk briefly about the filing by the New York attorney general. They filed their respondents brief in the Trump appeal of the civil fraud judgment by Justice Arthur Nguyen. Remember, Donald Trump had to post a bond to go through this whole appeals process. So Donald Trump filed his brief. Now New York attorney general, Letitia James filed her respondent's brief, which is basically the opposition. And they talk about Donald Trump's fraud where he's inflated assets and engaged

in fraud by as much as $2.2 billion a year. And then it goes into say that this court, the appeals court, should affirm Justice and Goran's ruling. Supreme Court's liability determinations are supported by overwhelming evidence that in each statement, defendant used a variety of deceptive strategies to vastly misrepresent the values of Trump's assets. For example, Trump valued his apartment as if its square footage was triple its actual size.

He valued rent regulated apartments as if they were unregulated. He valued Mar-a-Lago as if deed restrictions that he signed did not exist. And he valued golf properties by secretly including premiums that defendants represented were not included. Tellingly on Donald Trump's appeal he ignores these deceptions instead Trump relies primarily on an argument that the Attorney General failed to prove the defendant counterparties relied on the misrepresentations to their financial detriment, but it is well established that neither reliance nor victims losses, which are elements of common law fraud,

are required by the statute here under Section 63-12 for disgorgement by the Office of Attorney General. Indeed, one of the statute's core remedial purposes is to protect the honesty and integrity in the commercial marketplace in New York by stopping fraudulent and illegal practices before they cause financial loss to market participants or broader harms to the public." So she kind of lays it out there and it's 168 pages. I'm kind of summarizing there. I won't go over all 168 pages there, but you know, she's saying look this is justice and Goran got it, right?

There's overwhelming evidence Trump's not even stating the law correctly here on Section 63-12 Affirm it. I think Popak the appeal the appellate division will affirm I think Popak, the appeal, the appellate division will affirm. It's possible that they reduce the judgment, which with interest and everything is like at like $500 million. I could see them potentially reducing it by a hundred million or 125 million based on what I don't know, as the 12 year old Noah said to Mike Lindell,

trust me, bro, perhaps on just a trust me, bro theory. Um, but they've seen, we've seen them before kind of lower the amount of the, uh, of Trump's bond obligation, not the judgment, the bond obligation under kind of a trust me, bro theory. So I can't describe the logic of what they did, but the law is clear justice and Goran's got it right. But I could see them saying, Oh look,

we threw you a bone or two down. Not that he should have one, but they've shown an inclination to do that for. So I'm going to go with the 12 year old Noah. And I'm going to say, trust me, bro. Well, I've got time today, Ben. So I'm going to, I'm going to read, I'm going go with the 12 year old Noah and I'm gonna say trust me, bro. Well, I've got time today Ben So I'm gonna I'm gonna read I'm gonna actually

I'm gonna read 148 pages page one preliminary statement That's it. It's too like a What's it called when you when you try to slow down the clock in Congress? Buster does on the jd-vance and I was gonna take and read Dr. Seuss while people are trying to get healthcare. But I will make one point that I, because you covered really well the others. The primary focus of her argument, the attorney general's argument, which is the winning argument, is that they still at this late date refuse to understand how 63-12, the executive law of the state of New York works and why the sheriff of Wall Street, which is the attorney general, has

that power because it's the financial capital of the world. It is probably, as I've said before, the most robust, the most muscular set of powers that attorney general has about financial fraud in all of the United States, bar none. I can't think of any equivalency to 63-12, the executive law. Under that executive law, you stop crime before it happens. Let me put it another way. You stop fraud before there are victims. There doesn't have to be a victim of the fraud if you're operating a fraudulent scheme on an uneven, unlevel playing field where you set the rules and your counterparties are harmed or not harmed. If there's a fraud that's operating, the New York Attorney General gets to shut it down through the court system under 63-12.

It's not like common law fraud. That is a fundamental misunderstanding that Donald Trump's lawyers have had a willful blindness for them to accept that truth since the beginning of this case. At every argument that they make with Judge Angoran, they demonstrated they refuse to acknowledge that this is not a civil fraud common law fraud based statute. This is a fraudulent practice disgorgement statute that can only be used by an attorney general. And that's the difference. In a fraud case, if I defraud my neighbor,

no more likely, my neighbor tries to defraud me, there has to be a victim. I have to reasonably rely on their fraudulent statement or scheme or artifice to my detriment and therefore there I am victimized. But as Letitia James pointed out at the top of her brief, there is, there doesn't have to be a victim of the crimes. Donald Trump keeps saying everybody on the counterparty side wanted to do business with me. All the banks love me. All the banks love me. I paid them all back. All the insurance companies.

I paid the premiums. All the properties. I spotters sold. Nobody was harmed in the making of this financial fraud and therefore you should just let me go, which completely misses the point of 63-12. I said it on a hot take recently. It's almost like that old movie that I loved, The Minority Report with Tom Cruise. It's the thought police. You can stop the

crime before it actually happens. It doesn't have to be a victim. And that's the point. And maybe this doesn't work in Tulsa, Oklahoma, or in some other places, but it works in New York, which is the financial capital of the world with the attorney general. And so she says in the first part of her brief, there's no need for a victim. There's no detrimental alliance. We're not talking about common law fraud. Now part of the problem is the lawyers for Donald Trump, most of them that started this case don't really practice regularly in New York.

Alina Haba, people forget, started this case. They brought in some other lawyers towards the end and put her at the kids' table. But even the new lawyers they brought in, most of them did not like Chris Kice is a Florida lawyer, doesn't really know what 63-12 is all about. Some of the other people they brought in were just there on a special admission into the courthouse. So it doesn't surprise me, but they've been taught this now for two years. They can read the case law. Some of the case law

in the area of this particular statute has Donald Trump's name on it already because his Trump organization was nailed with a 63-12 by a prior attorney general, Schneiderman, in the state. So he knows the law. He should know the law. And even if there was a requirement somehow that there be a victim or detrimental reliance relying on it, there was enough testimony of Deutsche Bank and the insurance companies and the counterparties to Donald Trump to show that they relied, demanded the personal financial statements that Donald Trump created falsely and relied on them. And whether it was the front of the bank or the back of the bank or the compliance department of the bank, they needed regular, updated, accurate financial statements and Donald Trump

didn't provide them. And neither did Eric and neither did John Jr. and that's why. And on this last part, Ben, so you have this brief, you got one more brief by Donald Trump and then you've got that oral argument that's going to be in front of the Appellate Division First Department in Manhattan. I might try to get into that one because I'm actually a member of that particular court, and I like that courtroom. So that one is going to be happening in September as well. And then we'll get a ruling four, six, eight months later. And what you alluded to earlier is that some people were annoyed or pissed off,

even in our audience, that the appellate division gave Donald Trump a break in the size of the bond that he had to put up. Because the judgment was $465 million for discouragement, meaning ripping away ill-gotten gains, clawing them back from somebody that should not have obtained them. That's why it's not damages,

civil fraud damages. It's disgorgement, equitable disgorgement under this unique statute, back to that point again. And the appellate court said, well, because Donald Trump was crying and bleeding and upset that he couldn't scrape up the $465 million despite looking everywhere, even in the couch cushions, no joke there. And the court said, all right, all right, 175 million, put up 175 million. Now people were like, oh shit, they just reduced the potential judgment to 175 million.

No, they didn't. The 175 million is just, I think, a reflection that Donald Trump's has a lot of exposed obvious assets. A lot of them have his name on it. And there is a monitor, a financial monitor that's been in place over every financial transaction, bank account and asset of Donald Trump for the last two years. Her name is Barbara Jones. She's paid for by Donald Trump, but she's an officer of the court who reports to Judge Angkoran. And so with the monitor in place, the independent compliance director in place, regular reporting to Judge Angoron in place, and assets all over New York and other places

with Donald Trump's name on it, they were like, just scrape up 175 million. But I don't think that reflects, and we had a little bit of a debate, I can't remember if it was me and you, or if it was Karen or Karen Karen and me about whether that means oh they're going to take a red pencil or a blue pencil to the judgment and start lopping off things. I'm not sure that means that at all. I mean I think Judge Angoran got it right about how to apply the statute of limitations which was the only issue that Donald Trump won on an appeal. It was an issue about what transactions were inside and outside a statute of limitations. There was a 10-year statute of limitations and it took a while

for Letitia James to work her way through this prosecution and some of the transactions fell off the continuum. They fell off the table as being stale, as outside the statute of limitations. Not all of them, just some of them. That's why Ivanka Trump, people will remember, she was originally a defendant in the case. She got dismissed because really the things she was involved with in 2017 and 2018 put her outside the statute of limitations and so she left. And that's the reason. But now with that in mind, I believe that Judge Angoran properly applied the teachings of that Supreme Court decision about the transactions and the values of things methodically in rendering his decision. He spent four months writing the decision for the time the case ended before the holidays in December until he issued the decision in sometime in March.

He had a lot of time to get it right. And I believe he got it right. Maybe because they lop off five or ten million dollars here or there. Yeah. Are they going to cut it down to 175 million from 450 now 500 million with interest. I don't think so. That's my opinion. There you hear the opinion straight from Michael Popok and I hope you you enjoyed today's show, everybody. I want to remind everybody about our Patreon, patreon.com slash legal AF, P-A-T-R-E-O-N dot com slash legal AF. Uh, make sure you join if you can, no worries if you can't, but, uh, Michael Popok and I will be announcing our next meeting with all of you. I am excited to meet you all.

Um, and Michael Popok is excited to meet you all. Store.mitustouch.com, get all that pro-democracy gear. We've got the Legal AF gear at store.mitustouch.com. And we also got the new Kamala gear as well. 100% union made, 100% made right here in the United States. Get your gear, store.mitustouch.com. Thank you to our pro democracy sponsors, the discount codes for those sponsors.

It's in the description below, Michael Popok, myself, and especially Jordy. We do as best of a job as we can, but we take it very seriously vetting those sponsors and enjoying the products before we do those ads. We always use them and make sure that it's something that we feel comfortable endorsing and selling on the show. And it helps the show. We don't have billionaire investors or any investors, you know, billionaire investors. So, you know, we're beating Fox and MSNBC and CNN on digital coverage.

And the way we build this is with emojis and Patreon and growmitus.com if you wanted to become a recurring donor of the network that's growmitus.com and our pro-democracy sponsor. So that's how we build this. We keep it independent, We keep it streamlined. We keep it efficient. Um, and we keep it a community, uh, that's been grown by all of you.

Thank you from the bottom of our hearts. We appreciate you. And, um, you know, look, buckle up. We are now in a very exciting time. We all need to do our part. Make sure people, you know, are registered to vote. Even after the show, it could take you just two minutes. Just make sure your family members are all registered

to vote and that they're pro-democracy voters. Thanks everybody for watching Michael Popak. Great seeing you. We'll see you next time on Legal AF. Shout out to the Legal AFers and shout out to the Midas Mighty.