Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump CRIMINAL SENTENCE is NEXT and He’s FREAKING…

Episode Date: June 6, 2024

Michael Popok and Karen Friedman Agnifilo are back for the midweek edition of the top-rated Legal AF podcast. On this episode, the anchors discuss and debate: (1) what happens next in the aftermath of Trump’s felony convictions in New York, including a potential appeal’s impact on sentencing, the sentencing options available to the judge; and what happens to the gag order and other conditions of Trump’s release in the meantime; (2) whether the Georgia election interference criminal case against Trump and 13 others will be tried before the November election and what happens if it isn’t, and the impact of Trump’s appeal of the trial judge’s refusal to disqualify the prosecutor; (3) how Judge Cannon is administering justice in her courtroom, that’s supposed to be about the Mar a Lago crimes for which Trump has been indicted, but is increasingly becoming about the conduct and even legitimacy of the Special Counsel; (4) the new Wisconsin indictment against former Trump attorneys’ and key aides for their role in the fake elector scheme; and so much more at the intersection of law and politics. Join the Legal AF Patreon: https://Patreon.com/LegalAF Thanks to our sponsors: Smalls: Head to https://Smalls.com/LEGALAF and use promo code: LEGALAF at checkout for 50% off your first order PLUS free shipping! HumanN: Find out how you can get a free 30-day supply on bundles of new SuperBeets Heart Chews Advanced and save 15% for a limited time only by going to https://SUPERBEETSRADIO.COM, promo code LEGALAF Lume: Control Body Odor ANYWHERE with Lume deodorant and get $5 off your Starter Pack (that’s over 40% off) with promo code legalaf at https://LumeDeodorant.com! #lumepod Fum: Head to https://TryFum.com/legalaf and get a FREE GIFT with the JOURNEY PACK today when you use code LEGALAF 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 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://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/coalition-of-the-sane/id1741663279 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How do stop losses work on Kraken? Let's say I have a birthday party on Wednesday night, but an important meeting Thursday morning. So sensible me pre-books a taxi for 10 p.m. with alerts. Voila! I won't be getting carried away and staying out till 2. That's Stop Loss Orders on Kraken, an easy way to plan ahead. Go to kraken.com and see what crypto can be. Non-investment advice. Crypto trading involves risk of loss. See kraken.com slash legal slash ca dash pru dash disclaimer for info on and see what From producer M. Night Shyamalan.

Written for the screen and directed by Ishananite Shyamalan. Let them see you. What are they doing? Applause. For you, Mina. The Watchers. Friday. At Bet365, we don't do ordinary. We believe that every sport should be epic. Every goal, every game, every point, every play. From the moments that are remembered forever to the ones you've already forgotten.

Whether it's a game-winning goal in the final seconds of overtime or a shot on goal in the first period. So whatever the sport, whatever the moment, it's never ordinary. Atbet365 must be 19 or older, Ontario only. Please feel responsible. If you or someone you know has concerns about gambling, visit connexontario.ca. At Miele, our partner is the planet. Until June 30th, every Miele dishwasher purchased supports the planting and preservation of Canadian forests through the Miele Forest Initiative. Join us in making an impact today for a better tomorrow. Visit Miele.ca to learn more.

That's the sound of unaged whiskey transforming into Jack Daniel's Tennessee whiskey in Lynchburg, Tennessee. Around 1860, nearest green taught Jack Daniel how to filter whiskey through charcoal for a smoother taste, one drop at a time. This is one of many sounds in Tennessee with a story to tell. To hear them in person, plan your trip at TNVacation.com. Tennessee sounds perfect. Oh, it's that time of the week. One of my favorite times of the week.

It's the midweek edition of Legal AF with Michael Popock and Karen Friedman at Niflo. We got at least four hard hitting news breaking stories to the intersection of law and politics. We got to talk about today. We're going to kick it off with the Trump trial part two and its aftermath. The gag order. What happens to it? Donald Trump wants to have it removed before the June 27th debate with President Joe Biden. Prosecutors don't and have set up and asked for a briefing schedule related to the continuation of the gag orders in order to prevent the undermining of the administration of justice in New York while he is released and before Donald Trump is ultimately sentenced and how those two

things sort of fit together, who better to talk about it with and kick it around with than my colleague, friend, and former prosecutor in that office, number two in the Manhattan DA's office, Karen Freeman-Iknifilow, will talk about sentencing and the sentencing options, what goes into the sentencing process in a state court proceeding in New York and what would happen if Donald Trump were to appeal which we know we will and how would that impact sentencing we'll talk about all of that and talking about cases that did not get tried and look like they're not going to

get trial before the November election we got to move down to Georgia. In March, Judge Mack, if he ruled in a long-winded opinion after several days of an evidentiary hearing, that Fawni Willis, the prosecutor in the case, did not have to be disqualified under certain conditions. Donald Trump didn't like that, took an appeal that was certified by the trial judge and it's moved up to the intermediary appellate court in Georgia, the Georgia Court of Appeals just under the Georgia Supreme Court. Unfortunately the hearing on whether Foddy Weller should or should not have been disqualified or the oral argument if you will has been set for June as a control date. I'm sorry, has been set, that was wrong, has been, let's try that again, has been

set for October as a control date, which sounds good at first blush, like all right, well they'll take it up in October, except that will impact ultimately the trial setting for the case and whether or if that case ever gets set for trial before the November election. We'll walk through the appellate arguments, what's happened and what it means for the case. And speaking of cases that have been delayed, this time by judicial foot-dragging, we've got Judge Cannon down at Mar-a-Lago with the espionage and national defense information purloining case of Donald Trump and we got our as Ronald Reagan would say we've got our

here we go again moment. Canada's decided that she finds the argument whether the special counsel has been properly appointed and funded to be really interesting. Despite the fact that that argument's been rejected expressly by multiple appellate and federal district courts around the country and has been implicitly rejected by the United States Supreme Court, but not the Judge Cannon. She finds it so interesting. She's going to hold a hearing at the end of June and why not invite a bunch of other quote unquote scholars, most of which are Trumpers, to argue why the special counsel has been improperly appointed and the whole thing should just disappear. Doesn't that sound fun?

While she's doing that she's postponed other hearings related to Donald Trump's request to interrogate and depose members of the Department of Justice and the FBI about the investigation. You know what? Every criminal defendant, run-of-the-mill criminal defendant, would love to do and is regularly granted in criminal court. Every criminal defendant gets to sit the Department of Justice leadership down and the FBI and talk to them and interrogate them about his or her individual criminal case.

The answer to that is no, they don't. And but then another thing that Judge Cannon finds interesting, so interesting, she hasn't even set that hearing yet. And you know what that means for the setting of the trial, which has been indefinitely postponed by Judge Cannon. We'll break it all down. We'll talk about what's going on there. We'll contrast it to some other trials going on around the country that happen to involve Democrats. And then finally Wisconsin has finally woken up the Attorney General there taking the lead of the Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays who broke the glass ceiling about a month and a half ago as we reported here on the

Midas Touch Network and brought the first criminal prosecution against fake electors and those that helped fake electors like many people surrounding Donald Trump in a conspiracy. The Wisconsin prosecutors have decided, hey that probably happened here too. We should maybe do that also. Although they did not indict any fake electors, they have indicted again Ken Chesbrough, Jim Troupis, and Mike Roman. Those names are familiar probably because you remember that or should know that Ken Chesbrough, one of the architects of the fake elector scheme along with Jim Troupis, was not only indicted in Georgia which we'll talk about today, but already pled guilty to a felony and

is allegedly cooperating with certain people but not cooperating enough for some people. Jim Troupis has been indicted already once before. And Mike Roman also indicted in Georgia and was an unindicted co-conspirator in some other cases as well. And we'll talk about what that means and for the other battleground states that continue to investigate, even though we are X amount of time beyond January 6th, the investigations and prosecutions at state, attorney general and department of justice levels continues. You know what else continues?

Legal AF, a little podcast we invented four years ago, just for this particular historic moment apparently. And I couldn't ask for a better midweek host or host period than Karen Friedman-Iknifilo who is, because life always intrudes on all of us, is away but has decided in her generosity to join us at the regularly scheduled time. Karen, delight to have you back. Yeah, I seem to be on the road a lot so it's's good to be here. So it's always some, for all of us, it's always some pale green indiscriminate room with an electrical outlet and some... Yeah, exactly.

Right? People might be thinking, how successful are these lawyers? Look at the rooms they operate in. My favorite is when people see you on the set of Law and Order where you are the legal advisor on the law side and they think you're in some sort of caged, look how bad New York is. She has to have, poor woman has to have pages on her window. I've actually saw that in one of the times. It's because I like to be in the set of the police precinct. That's where I like to be more than the DA's office set or the courtroom set. So I don't know why,

I feel comfortable in the police precinct. Because you're an order person, you're law and order and you like the order part. Let's talk about what's going on. Speaking of order and orders of operation, let's dive right in to the Trump trial. We all know what happened. Now we're going to figure out what happens next. And again, I think you and I batten this around now is great. Is there anybody waking up and think what happened? He actually got

convicted? Yes. We're now talking about the aftermath. You know, let me tell you, just going back for a minute to the conviction, you know, there is no feeling more stressful than the moments between when you are told the jury has a verdict and the time that it takes to get the jury to come in, to get all parties assemble, to stand, to get all parties assembled, to stand, and to literally, your heart is pounding so hard you can feel it in your throat, you can hear it in your ears, and I'm sure for the defendant, it's worse, and everyone's standing there

to find out what your fate is, and it's one of the hardest moments and one of the most stressful, intense moments of being a prosecutor or a defense attorney or a defendant. And it's one of the hardest moments and one of the most stressful, intense moments of being a prosecutor or a defense attorney or a defendant. And I had that feeling waiting for this verdict. I was sitting actually on a panel on CNN, and CNN had people in the courtroom and they were live chat or live streaming, I should say, people were typing, reporters were

typing and they were live streaming and just the waiting, knowing that okay, the jury's in the room, the judge is on the bench, parties are standing, all of that, I had that same feeling again. And sometimes what happens is with a multi-count indictment, sometimes the first count or the first I had that same feeling again. And sometimes what happens is with a multi-count indictment, sometimes the first count or the first couple of counts are not guilty and you just, your crest fall and only to find that the rest are guilty. And so I was thinking, okay, what if the, you know,

it's torture, the 34 counts, it takes a long time if the first one is not guilty. If the first one's guilty, you're like, okay, whatever happens next, it happens next. And I'll just, it's one of those times in your life where you'll always remember where you were. I remember in 1982 or 83 when the space shuttle exploded, I remember where I was and it's like a moment frozen in your brain.

I obviously will always remember 9-11. And one of the other times in my life that I will never forget is that feeling of Donald Trump being found guilty. It just felt like a relief and like the fact that truth sometimes still matters and that our democracy matters. And sometimes it's not like a celebratory feeling. Some people ask, is that what does it feel like to get a conviction? Do you pop champagne? Do you go out and celebrate? At least for me, it was never like that and still isn't. It's never a good feeling. Obviously, the fact that somebody is convicted felon and could go to prison is a terrible

feeling because it's sad, right? It means something bad, really bad happened. So you don't feel joy, but it's like a feeling of relief that it's hard to explain unless you experienced it Anyway, I just I just don't want I don't want that moment to be forgotten because it was so historic and so important and so Just heartening actually that the truth still matters in this world of Misinformation that is coming from so many people so many of the MAGA people So eloquently put.

Yep. I mean, that's, um, for all the naysayers that said, I'll never see the inside of a courtroom, he'll never be indicted to the appeals. Well, apparently according to polling 54% of at least Republicans, because they believe the Pablo coming out of Donald Trump and his proxies believe that he would never be convicted. They really thought that was not happening. And so there's a little bit of a shock going on in MAGA world. They're like, wait, what? And then of course, he gives them the talking points. It's kangaroo court. It's rigged. It ain't rigged. It's not a

kangaroo court. It's 12 honest, hardworking jurors picked at random, selected through an arduous selection process, doing their civic duty, who listening and weighing the evidence that's presented to them with 22 witnesses over six weeks, combined with documentary evidence and recorded evidence and everything else, relatively quickly, given the fact, as you've described before, is sort of the creaky process by which they have to have certain items brought back into them to consider, made a relatively high velocity decision,

even though it was nine and a half hours, it really wasn't, of deliberation time. And as you and I had talked, and Ben and I had talked about, I always thought it was binary that they were either gonna find for all 34, it was gonna be 34.0 or it was going to be 034. And as soon as I heard the first one, I think Ben and I were on the air at the time when

I was filling in with a bunch of other people on political beatdown that happened to be playing at the moment of the, that was regularly scheduled. I was like, oh, this is going to go fast. This is going to be 30. All right. And then within five minutes we had all 34 accounts. And let's move it forward though, because I think the audience is interested and concerned

at the same time about things that could happen next. Let's start with the gag order, then we're gonna get to sentencing, because I think that's very, very important, as I know you do, about what this judge on July 11th is gonna do in terms of sentencing. Let's start with the gag order though. Let me just, I'll frame it and then I'll turn it over to you.

Conditions of release, and let's all remember that in every court that Donald Trump is a criminal defendant or in this case a felon, a convicted felon, he is released subject to the discretion of the trial judge who administers the criminal justice process for that individual defendant. His liberty is at the discretion of that trial judge and the conditions of the release, whatever they are. In every state that we talk about during this podcast, Georgia, New York, DC, and Florida, Donald Trump has been released on his own recognizance

subject to conditions of his release. And they're a little bit different in every place, but there are some fundamental things that are the same. In New York, as I said, as soon as he was out, unless the judge work, as I said, as soon as he was out, unless the judge modifies them, he is still subject to all of the conditions of his release, including the gag order on the way out. And he sort of, Trump, you could tell, was mindful of that because although he thinks that if he says the shitty thing about the person, the family member, the prosecutor or the judge, and just leaves out the name, that

that somehow doesn't violate the gag order. Like when he calls Michael Cohen a sleazebag, but doesn't use Michael Cohen's name, but identifies him in every other way. My former lawyer took the stand, has got a podcast, it's a sleazebag. I don't think that technically complies with the spirit of the gag order, but we'll leave that to your old office to figure that out with Judge Machon. But the gag order is still in place as it is with every defendant.

Whatever the conditions of release are, they continue. Of course, Donald Trump doesn't like that because A, he's got a debate coming up on the 27th of June, which he wants to be completely, apparently, completely reckless and freed of any constraints other than the laws of defamation to go after Joe Biden. And they, oh, Joe, the president finally after two years said something about my case, I get to say something disgusting back.

No, you don't. And your old office, and I'll turn it over to you now, your old office in response to the letter brief, which was filed by two out of the three lawyers for Donald Trump, Todd Blanch and Emil Beauvais, but not Susan Necklis, who's not even listed on a CC there, as we can see. We'll talk about Susan Necklis slowly receding into the vapors behind this case about what that means. But your old office has already responded about that request. So why don't you take it over from there?

Yeah. So look, I mean, Trump, as you said, really wants to be able to say whatever he wants to say and criticize people. And the Manhattan DA's office said, not so fast. They said, look, we have to protect. The court still has an obligation, a broader obligation to protect the integrity of these proceedings and this case and the judicial system.

And it should remain in effect at least through sentencing and maybe through appeal or post-trial motions. And so they want to brief it. They want the same briefing schedule for post-trial motions. And so they want to brief it. They want the same briefing schedule for post-trial motions that the judge already set. And so keep it in effect until sentencing. And look, many of us have been wondering why Todd Blanch didn't, at the time of conviction,

ask that the Gag or to be lifted. Maybe he did, and we just didn't hear about it. So this is not a surprise. And then and then they said well because they're also appealing it right at the court of appeals Because they it they they had appealed it and had gone to the appellate division And then they rejected it during the trial and then um, they're appealing it to the court of appeals Which is the highest court in new york. Um, The Supreme Court is actually the trial level court. I know it's very strange. And so I think that's where they thought they had to go

was that route. But they could also just ask the judge now to lift it, which they finally, I think, woke up and decided to do. It's interesting, as you said, Susan Necklis is basically distancing herself. But you know, she was always, first of all, she's a real lawyer, She's a real defense attorney. Todd Blanch just became a defense attorney.

I think this is the second client since he's been a defense attorney. He was a federal prosecutor for a long time and and Emile Boves similarly. So Susan Eccles, who's been around for a very long time, if you notice, she never stood next to Donald Trump during his mid-break press conferences. Todd Blanch always did. She's always in the background because she's just a defense attorney who believes in representing clients. And she doesn't get involved in any of the stuff

that Trump likes to use his lawyers for, which is smart. She just does her job and does an excellent job. And she's very, very good in court. And I think she's starting to distance herself even more now that the trial is over. So at least I certainly don't know why she didn't put her name on it, but it's consistent with, I think, how she's been.

She didn't do the opening or the closing, which are the two most important parts of a trial, people would argue. She also didn't do the cross of Michael Cohen. She did do the cross of Stormy Daniels, but that's typical. A lot of people think that women should do the directing cross of other women, that men could look too harsh,

all that kind of stuff. So, and so it's just now we're at the point where the judge is gonna decide what to do. I think where the judge is gonna land ultimately is, I think he's going to continue the gag order for the jurors indefinitely, because the jurors never should become a free game for the defense ever. They should not, I mean, all they have to do is cite to Seamus and

Ruby Freeman to show what could possibly happen, what Donald Trump does to people who are literally just doing their civic duty. If you remember, they were the election workers, one of them was a volunteer election worker who in the whole, I don't even know where to start, it's such a long story, but it's the Rudy Giuliani defamation election workers whose lives were turned upside down

and who were doxed and threatened and harassed and all of the above. There's so many examples of people who are just doing their civic duty. And I think that the judge is going to want to protect them and all future jurors who might be hesitant and reticent to sit on a jury if they know that that's what could happen to them. So I think that's going to stay, I think same with the family members of public servants, whether it's Juan Marchand's, the judge's family members, or the DA's office family members. I mean, they should never ever be harassed or threatened. And I'd say the same with the public servants who are the line prosecutors.

The witnesses, of course, there's an interest in protecting the witnesses, but I could see the judge modifying the gag order to the extent that, like Michael Cohen, for example, is already talking about Donald Trump again. I could see the judge thinking that he is somebody, it would be fair game for them to lift the gag order for for him but Stormy Daniels has not spoken and so I would be surprised if she doesn't continue to be protected as are the other witnesses again it's just about in protecting the integrity of the judicial process and witnesses in general no one's gonna come forward if they know they can get threatened and harassed etc after the fact so so that's where we are with the gag order. So it's a stay tuned thing.

No, I agree with you. The judge has already sort of laid the foundation for lifting the gag order as it related to people like Michael Cohen. He implied that he's not going to allow his gag order to be used as a sword and a shield where the witness, particularly in that case before the trial even happened, sort of hides behind the gag order, but then reaches out and attacks the defendant and then says, oh, they put you out of gag order. So he's not gonna allow that.

And now that the case is over and moving towards sentencing, what I wanna talk about when we come back from our first break is, okay, the judge modifies in some way after some sort of briefing schedule here that the prosecutors are proposing, which seems reasonable. He modifies the gag order, keeps in keeping certain elements of it in place about certain aspects of the criminal justice system, administration of justice, which all makes sense, considering that's still going on even through appeal. And he hasn't even been sent,

Trump hasn't even been sentenced yet. But then I wanna talk about a little bit when we get into sentencing. Now that that's lifted, all of these how Donald Trump's post conviction conduct, even now sort of complying, it is in his own weird upside down way with the gag word or as modified, or not complying with it, goes into the mix of the sentencing and sentencing options by the judge.

In other words, it's not as if the judge just, you know, puts his hands over his eyes and his ears between the 34 count conviction and the day of sentencing and just sentences him as if nothing happened in between. We're gonna talk about the in-between because I think with a guy like Donald Trump that becomes very very important. So modifying that gag order could just be enough rope to hang Donald Trump on the sentencing but of course I want to kick it around with you Karen. Georgia. Georgia. Yeah, we're going to talk about what's going on in Georgia,

and including a new order that's popped out that is going to make it so that trial is not happening before November. And we'll go into the details of that. We'll talk about Judge Cannon and the here we go again moment where she's decided to find lots of things interesting and invite lots of nonparties in to come in and talk about it

over the months of June and July, making that case of virtual uncertainty of not happening. And then we'll talk about Wisconsin attorney general getting around to indicting people around Trump. Is that the last group in Wisconsin? And what about the fake electors? What about Donald Trump? What about Rudy Giuliani and all the other people?

Why Trupus and I mean why only Trupus, Roman and Chesbrough? We'll talk about all of that. We got a great crop of pro-democracy sponsors curated by this channel, by this network, by Jordi Mycelis and the rest of us. And now we're going to take a break for a set of them right now. I'm a parent and a grandparent. I want to live a healthy lifestyle in order to be around for my kids and my grandkids for a very, very long time. And living a more heart healthy life will fuel everything you do. So this three in one blood pressure support that Super Beats Heartchoose has created is

just a absolute game changer. So if you pair it with a healthy lifestyle, the grape seed extract in Super Beats is clinically shown to be nearly two times more effective at promoting normal blood pressure than a healthy lifestyle alone. New Super Beats Heartchoose Advanced Support Healthy COQ10 levels are an important nutrient for heart health. I love SuperBeat heart chews first of all, they taste absolutely delicious.

They help you be mindful about your heart health. And I just feel good knowing that I'm having something that's good for my body every day. I literally eat one or two or three of them every single day. I look forward to them. They are healthy. They are good for me.

And like I said, it's like having a nice little sweet treat. So it's just this absolutely delicious, effective and clinically researched product, Super Beats. It's the number one doctor, pharmacist and cardiologist recommended beat brand for cardiovascular heart support health. Something important at my age for sure.

So they also support healthy circulation and there's no stimulants, which I love. So find out how you can get a free 30 day supply on bundles of new SuperBeat HeartChoose advanced and save 15% off for a limited time only by going to superbeatsradio.com promo code legalaf. That's super B E E T S radio.com promo code legalaf. Don't tell anyone, but I'm actually a cat person and I don't like cat food. It's disgusting. Either it smells bad or those little hard,

terrible things with hard food that cats don't like. My cats don't love that food, and I don't like it either. I don't like giving it to them. But our next partner has truly made a positive impact on my little kitty cat, who I love, who you've seen jump into some of our podcasts or into my hot ticks or even my ad reads. And I'm talking about my kitty, Cooper, who's

just a sweetheart. And so I am so, so happy that Smalls is is absolutely one of our great new sponsors. It's a cat food that is protein packed, and these recipes are preservative free. These ingredients that you would find in your own fridge and it's delivered right to your door. And that's why veterinarians, veterinarians dot org, they rate smalls 10 out of 10 for ingredient quality. And when I gave Cooper Smalls, he loved it.

He ate it all up, unlike those little hard crunchy nugget disgusting things or that smelly food. He absolutely loved it. He prefers it more than he preferred his old food. And I even put side by side his old food and Smalls because I wanted to see, you know, is it true? I'm going to be doing this ad read. And guess what? Cooper chose the Smalls. Yay. So I love Smalls. It's definitely made it more pleasant for me to feed Cooper.

And it also makes it so that the house doesn't stink like cat food. And I don't know. I just feel better knowing that I'm giving Cooper a really good quality with good ingredients cat food. So I love it, it's great. And I think you will love it too. I think you'll love this protein packed meal

for your loved one too, if you love your cat as much as I love mine. So after making the switch to smalls, 90% of cat owners reported overall health improvements in their cats. And I think that's a really big deal. This team at Smalls is so confident your cat will love their product. You can try it risk free. That means they will refund you if your cat won't eat their food. Pretty great, right? So now's the time to switch to Smalls. Head to Smalls, S-M-A-L-L-S dot com slash legal AF and use promo code legal AF at checkout for 50% off, five zero percent off your first order plus free shipping. That's the best offer you'll find out

there, but you have to use code legal AF for 50% off your first order. So that's promo code legal AF at smalls.com. That's plural S M a l l s.com for 50% off when you insert code legal AF plus free shipping. We're back. It makes me so happy to like see a picture of my cat. I'm like, oh, Cooper, in the middle of an episode. Puts me in a good mood. That's good. We thank the Pro-Democracy sponsors for being here, including a new one there.

Smalls, we'll talk about sentencing. I'm going to give you some options, former prosecutor. And then we'll talk about this gap of time and what it could mean for any of these options. Probation, they're not exclusive. Home confinement, jail, community service, and fines. That is the toolbox. You'll probably tell me there's something else I missed, but that is the preliminary toolbox of what Judge Mershon can put together in his powers to sentence somebody who just got convicted of 34 counts, 34 class E felonies in New York with an outside upper boundary of 20 years total for all of those things. And then at the other extreme,

which is some sort of probation or community service. And I wanna ask you to comment on that. And particularly, whereas in the federal system, you've got the federal sentencing guidelines that sort of guide the court. State and New York, I want to hear what is the alternative to that. Is it the parties getting together and looking through the way just security did and looking at all of the cases over the last 30 years or 40 years in which somebody

like Donald Trump or anybody was convicted of this particular class C type felony and then what was the range of sentences for that does that go into the mix and how so how does the judge with the information that he's provided between probation parole or probation and the parties and then makes his own Research and decision and then those elements probation home confinement jail community service and fines. What do you think? What do you think is going to happen here? So it's a great question. You left one option out though, which is that you get well, no, but I mean, he really doesn't

have to give him anything. He could just say, you know, conditional discharge, the condition being that you just stay out of trouble and don't get whatever. So number six is conditional discharge. All right, so far end of the extreme is this conditional discharge. Other end of the extreme is top end 20 years total. Okay.

There's a big rain in this possible sentence that Judge Marshawn, look, Judge Marshawn has a very, very tough decision here. I will say he is one of the best judges I've ever been in front of. He's one of the most thoughtful judges I've ever been in front of. He volunteered and is the head of both the mental health court in Manhattan as well as the Veterans Court. Those are courts where people come before him charged with pretty serious felony cases, violent crimes and other crimes.

And those are people who come to him who are filled with remorse and want help and wanna change. And he shows them mercy and he helps them. And he will sentence them to treatment or alternatives to help them get on toward a path of changing their life and transforming as opposed to incarceration and punishment. And I bring that up because I just want people to know what kind of person he is and what he will do. He always does the right thing and that's what I've seen. So whatever he decides, I'm sure is going to be the right decision for this case. He's lived it, he's breathed it, he knows what the legal issues are and he will make the right

decision. What do I think, what would I guess he's going to get. I don't think he's going to put them on probation because I think just it's very tricky to supervise someone on probation. Also, you don't put someone on probation unless you think they are going to comply with probation. And I think the idea of having a just absolutely civil servant, you know, type person who will have to supervise Donald Trump who's guarded by the Secret Service and may be president, I think is just almost a ridiculous proposition.

So I don't see that happening. I don't see Donald Trump listening to some person who he's not going to necessarily respect. So I just don't see probation happening. I also don't know how that would work if he's president, you know, etc. That's on one extreme. On another extreme is jet time or prison time. On another extreme is jet time or prison time. The difference between jail and prison is jail is 364 days or less. And then that's called city time. Or if you get a year or more, it's called state time and you serve it in a state facility versus Rikers Island,

which is the New York City correctional facility. I don't see him getting jail or prison either, even though if his name was not Donald Trump and you just stripped that away and you had a case of somebody who has been convicted of 34 felonies and the underlying bump-up crime was that he had to steal an election or at least conspire, I should say, to try to steal an election. I can't think of a more serious class E felony. In addition to that, Donald Trump violated the gag order 10 times and was held in contempt. So in front of Judge Mershon, he's also shown and demonstrated just an F-U approach to the criminal justice system

and to authority. So if it was saying it wasn't Donald Trump, the judge would say, look, I don't think you are someone, you were someone who puts your own interest above that of societies. You break the law, you bend the law, you don't listen to authority, you do whatever you want.

I had held you in contempt 10 different times because you didn't stop. And you show no remorse because he's going out and he's denying it. He's not saying he's sorry. He's saying he's innocent and he's also attacking the judge, attacking the judge's family, attacking the DA. He held a baseball bat to a picture of the baseball bat to a picture of Alvin Bragg's head, any other defendant would have been put in a long time ago and would get at least the four years. I don't know that anyone would get 20 years. I think that's extreme. I think at most maybe even get two of the counts

running consecutive to each other. So it would be one and a third to four times two would be three to eight, I guess, years. So it'd be a minimum of three and maximum of eight years. I could see that being the sentence of any other defendant. But I don't know that Judge Mershon is going to want to be in the position where Donald Trump is incarcerated during the presidential election or when he could possibly be president. That's just not, it gets a little too close to the First Amendment and Article 2 of the Constitution.

So I don't think he's going to choose that either. Fine, he will never choose because as he said, when he held him in contempt for someone rich, a fine doesn't mean anything. It's not punishment. So I think and what I would like is to see him get sentenced to a conditional discharge, the condition being that he is sentenced to 100 hours, 500 hours, 1000 hours of community service, but not community service that he gets to choose the kind of community service where you pick up trash on the subways. And that's punishment. And I think that's real. And I could see that being meaningful. And I could see Murchon doing that. So that's what I that's the type of sentence I think he might take, he might consider.

I could also see if he does want to sentence him to jail or prison, that he would consider staying the sentence pending appeal. Again, just to allow, because there is a non-frivolous, a couple non-frivolous appellate issues that I think will be upheld, but they're certainly non frivolous So I think any sentence will be stayed anyway, and I don't think he wants to touch those waters So that that's where I think he's going to land, but I've never been a judge. I don't know But that's that's where I think he's gonna land some version of that So I a couple of couple points to pick up with on there

Way back when on sentencing I would I would you know the average sentence for this type of thing is somewhere between four months to two years From from the analysis that's been done by others I'd like to see about I like to see a sentence in that range the problem is they're gonna have to size of First Amendment problems besides the Executive privilege problems this article two problems that you identified You also have the problem of when you send Donald Trump to jail you send the Secret Service to jail as well and so the while our jail and prison system in New York is robust, and very little surprises them, having to make way for Donald Trump

and a group of armed Secret Service people in jail, because that's gonna have to happen by law. He has to have Secret Service protection. He doesn't forfeit it, just because he got convicted of felonies, especially nonviolent ones. So he's gonna have to grapple with that. One of the ways he could deal with it is defer it, as you said, but maybe defer it not only

for the appellate stay, which is inevitable, but also to get over, he doesn't have to sentence him on July the 11th, on July 7th or 11th. He could say, I'm going to wait to sentence you at another time, maybe, and wait for the election to happen. I don't think he does that, but he could. Or he could say, I'm going to give you four months, but I'm going to pick up with it. You don't have to report until November the 6th or something like that. And then have those outlets for him to go do the appeal and get the stay and all of that. I agree with you. I think it's very difficult, although we don't, we're out, we'd love to have his head on a pike and we'd love to, you know, there's an element of

vindication and vindictiveness and a little bit of vigilantism that comes in with this, you know, an eye for an eye. We like to say, oh, he committed those crimes and he's a first-time offender. It's hard to believe he's a first-time offender, at least at the time of these crimes. And yes, I think that Murchon's going to have to incorporate and integrate his bad behavior, Trump's bad behavior between now, the time of the conviction, all the way through the time of the sentencing. And I'm sure the prosecutors will point it out.

And then you have those separate things that the judge hasn't yet resolved, which is the criminal contempt issues. Because in those criminal contempt issues remain important, not just because you can't let them get away with it, but because of the conditions of release in other jurisdictions are subject to him not committing any new crimes. And so there's going to be the argument there, although we're going to talk about Georgia and what's happening at that note. I agree with you on probation. I don't think he's going to discharge him. And then you're trying to find something that is an appropriate penalty

and also sends the appropriate message to community and public at large which is crime doesn't pay and that is the needle you know that is the camel through the eye of the needle that this judge has to come up with I wouldn't be surprised if it went exactly the way that you described it and I wouldn't be shocked to be figured out a way to give him some sort of jail or prison time and by delaying or deferring elements and aspects of it try to address some of the other unique issues that you raised because Donald Trump happens apparently is going to be regardless of what we all feel the nominee for the other major party in

this country to be the president of the we all feel, the nominee for the other major party in this country to be the president of the United States. And that's a problem of their own making. We didn't choose their candidate. They chose their candidate. They want to choose a criminal for their candidate. This is what happens when you do that. I hear you trying to come in.

Go ahead. No, no. Thank you. No, just look. You make some really good points. And I thought of the same thing of he could push off the sentences, but it's not like he didn't know if he was convicted, there'd be a sentence. He would have done that at the time.

He picked July 11th quick. So I kind of feel like that ship sailed. And then the other thing is the other thing, if I'm Judge Mershon, Michael Cohen went to prison for how long? Years, right? Three years it was reduced because of a little bit because of COVID. Yeah. He spent prison time because of this crime.

Alan Weisselberg is in now for his second five months stint. To have people go to prison, but not Donald Trump, not the guy who caused all of this, the reason we're here, there's a fundamental unfairness about it. So I am sure, no matter what Judge Marchand does, his remarks, his sentencing remarks, because what happens at sentencing,

so what's going to happen just really quickly, is Donald Trump has to report to probation where the probation officer will fill out a form that makes a recommendation about what probation thinks should happen. It happens in every case. It's called the pre-sentence report. Then the parties, if they want, can submit sentencing memos where they argue for one thing or another and give all the reasons why. And then the judge sentences him at a sentencing hearing where the defense gets it, the prosecution gets an opportunity to make a public statement about what they think the sentence should be. The defense is given an opportunity to make a statement of what they should think it should be.

And then the defendant gets an opportunity to make a statement and they can or cannot, they don't have to make a statement. Sometimes what they'll do is they'll plead for leniency and say they're sorry and apologize to the United States for doing this and all of that stuff, right? And hope that the judge will listen to that. And sometimes they do. Sentencing hearings can be tearjerkers. I mean, I've cried my eyes out at sentencing hearings

because that's where the victims get a chance to come and make a statement, make a victim impact statement. And the final thing that happens is the judge makes the statement. And the judge's statement is usually profound and powerful. And it explains why they're doing what they're doing and what their sentence is.

And really is incredible. And I am sure Judge Murchon's, this is going to be the sentencing speech of all sentencing speeches. And I'm sure one of the things he's going to talk about is the carnage that Donald Trump has left in his wake, including the people who have gone to prison because of him. And somehow he will also acknowledge the constraints he has if he had to incarcerate him. And if he does incarcerate him, and if he doesn't, he'll say, why not? Now, Norm Eisen, who works for Brookings and Just Security

and who's been on this pod and is a friend, he with Brookings did an analysis of all the class E felonies in the history of New York and what the sentences are. And he drilled down from that to the falsification of business records cases and what those sentences are. And only about between 10 and 30 percent of them get any jail time at all or prison time at all. So, but it's and the fact pattern of those are very egregious, but this would be even more egregious. So certainly he'd be well within, well within what's consistent with other cases and other where prison is justified. So, you know, we'll see what he does. I mean, look, the reality is the very few cases go to criminal trial and verdict. It's amazing. The funnel system in this country, federal and state, from when indictments happen to when,

you know, there's always that old line about if you're a criminal defendant, that old line about if you're a criminal defendant, don't go to trial with the prosecution because you're going to lose. Like 98% of defendants lose at trial. But the reality is that there's only about a very small percentage of those cases that even go to trial. So the chances of conviction is not high either. But once you cross the Rubicon and you're into the world of trial has set, and we're going to talk in a way we're going to talk about when we get to Judge Cannon about all the delays down there, contrast that with Hunter Biden, eight months from indictment to trial. That's the reality. So I've seen Normais since, as I mentioned before, just security analysis, but that also has

to be, for those that don't practice law, has to be put up against the prism of very few cases go to trial in these arenas. The fact that things went to trial and then, of course, went against, mainly against the defendant and as you said, somewhere around 20%, 10% to 30% end up with jail time. Certainly the theft of an election which was what the jury believed based has to believe based on the opening statements and the evidence presented by the Manhattan DA's office is right up there with one of the greatest heists of all time that you can't put a dollar value on our democracy and that jury you know

had to find that. Let's switch gears now and go to the other case we keep talking about in contrast to everything because she just finds a way to contrast herself with everything is Judge Cannon. The Mar-a-Lago case started with a search warrant two years ago and now we're still jerking around and you know what it around in June of 2024, not even talking about a trial date anywhere on the horizon, we're talking about, I think it's interesting whether the special counsel has been properly appointed or not or funded properly. And oh, there's a recent Supreme Court decision about the funding of the Consumer Protection

Board. That seems very interesting, not related at all. And I want to hear a comment on that. And oh, there's people here that have filed amicus briefs and they want to be heard and mainly Trumpers. I think that's interesting. Let's bring, why don't we all get together? Let me look at my calendar. Why don't we all get together on the 27th or the 23rd of June and let's talk about these things. Fundamentally, whether the prosecution should have even happened because a special counsel was improperly appointed and improperly funded. That's interesting. To whom? First of all, let's start there. And then if she ever gets through,

picks her way through that gauntlet of her own creation, minefield of her own creation, if the case survives that, then it will be then appeals, of course, that would result from that. And that's what the Jack Smith's been waiting for. Then it's the, oh, the gag order is also interesting. I don't think you filed it appropriately, the prosecution the first time. I think you needed to redo that and that delay, delay, delay.

And they finally got around to filing it appropriately the way she liked it with all the hospital corners increases the way she exactly liked it. And she said, oh, we'll get around to that. But also, we'll do that on the 23rd too. And that delays the eventual appeal. That's now another, you know, 20 days away, whatever it is. And then, then also, I think it's interesting whether Donald Trump, this is the judge talking, I think it's interesting whether Donald Trump should be able to interrogate and depose in a criminal case the prosecution and the Department of Justice, and whether they should get more documents from these, from these entities

about the execution of the search warrant and his having stolen documents from the American people, including those consisting of national defense information documents. This case is quickly in the mind of Judge Cannon rapidly becoming not about the criminal defendant named Donald Trump and what he did and is becoming an indictment of the special counsel and their conduct. Same special counsel that's in other courts, same Department of Justice that's been litigating cases for hundreds of years, but to Judge Cannon, the upside-down world that she's created, they're constantly on their back foot and every request that's made by Donald Trump is complied with by this judge and she finds in an artful way and it's not by

accident, it's by purposeful calculation to just make enough rulings that aren't rulings, paper orders that aren't orders, dates and deadlines that don't get cancelled, they get extended to stop Jack Smith from going to the 11th Circuit and asking for a removal and to have her reversed. And that is in sharp contrast to what's going on against a Democratic, the son of a Democratic president, about gun charges and whether he filled out a form or not appropriately when he was using drugs for a gun that he held for 11 days.

So Karen, why don't you, from a prosecutor's standpoint and from all that, why don't you talk about what you're observing with Cannon and where you think that case ends up before November. And then you can, you know, you want to touch on what's happening with Delaware federal court with the president's son, first son, Hunter Biden. Yeah, I look, I find this hard to analyze because this doesn't look like anything remotely resembling a normal prosecution or anything in the criminal justice system. This is the most head-scratching, perplexing series of non-decisions that I've ever seen anywhere. I mean, this latest series of rulings or whatever they're called, paperless orders, are just unbelievable to me.

So just going back to this gag order request, just to contrast what's going on, this was an emergency request that the special counsel made. This was previously, but I want to contrast that with what's happening now, about a week ago, saying Donald Trump has put federal agents' lives on the line, put a target on their back, because he is going out saying that when the search warrant was executed at Mar-a-Lago, that they were authorized to assassinate him.

And that couldn't be farther from the truth. There now been congressional hearings where they talk about it and people have to talk about it. There's, this is just an absurd, absurd assertion. And it's a lie. And what does she do when they make this request? Rather than putting a gag order or putting it on the calendar right away,

okay, I see how urgent this is, this is lives on the line, I'm going to reject it because there was no what's called meet and confer, which is not the parties are required in her jurisdiction and her local rules to do what's known as meet and confer and try and work it out first. And then if they can't work it out then they indicate that in their papers. Well based on everything people were saying about it I just assumed there was no meet and confer. Well actually Jack Smith tried to meet and confer and what did they say? Sorry it's Memorial Day weekend're busy, we can't do it.

And if so, if I'm Jack Smith, I'm like, okay, but this is an emergency. I'm sorry that you won't meet and confer. And they put that in their motion, that this was their lame excuse, and that this is urgent, so judge, I need you to do this anyway. And what does she do?

Oh, we're gonna brief it, we're gonna have a hearing, we're gonna talk about this never, right going to have a hearing. We're going to talk about this. Never. Right? What is she? What else has she not ruled on yet? SIPA. There's still so many of these classified information protection protection act documents that again national security information. They have to have hearings about whether or not, what documents can come in, what can't, whether you can sanitize them, et cetera, to protect our secrets in this prosecution. She hasn't ruled on any of those either. Somehow, that's not urgent. But you want to know what she's

put on this calendar? You want to know what she thinks is important to stop the proceedings and stop this trial from happening? What did she calendar? This hearing, to oral arguments to be able to discuss whether or not Jack Smith and special counsel in the special counsel's office was appropriately created and appointed, etc. Well, guess what? The special counsel is something that's been around for and upheld by countless district courts across the country, countless circuit courts across the country, and even, guess what?

The United States Supreme Court. But no, Judge Cannon, who has been reversed twice in this case by the 11th Circuit, who's been on the bench for a hot minute, and who clearly is trying to do Trump's bidding at this point. I was trying to say for a long time and say, oh, she's inexperienced.

Oh, she doesn't know, she's new. There's no excuse anymore, no excuse that she would now, we have to have a hearing to determine this because I, baby judge Cannon, who just got here and doesn't know anything and been reversed twice, I'm gonna discover something different than everybody else, number one. And number two, I'm going to allow something

that I didn't even know was a thing. It's so rare, which is that these friends of the court, the amicus who people submit amicus briefs all the time, what they do is they ask permission from the court to be able to submit amicus briefs. And usually the court says yes. And she's allowing that. She's also

allowing them to give oral arguments their parties to the case that the children there's gonna be strangers but nothing to do with this we're gonna get to come to court and do oral arguments in addition to the parties and that's what they're gonna waste valuable court time doing not doing any of the pretrial motions that need to happen to get this trial to be to go forward. So the one thing she's doing is she's not ruling anything because if she rules something, it goes up on appeal, especially in SIPA, right?

If she makes the wrong ruling in SIPA, that's definitely appealable by the special counsel's office. The prosecution can do that. It automatically gives them a right to appeal. The statute even says it. And so guess what, next time, rather than reversing her, I think they actually yank her off the case because she is, this is ridiculous. This does, so I can't analyze this from a legal standpoint, because this doesn't have any, any resemblance to what actually happens in the law in my experience. This is just a head scratching, talk about a marriage that's conflicted

and is absolutely partisan and not objective. That is Eileen Cannon. It is not Juan Marchand or Tanya Chetkin or any of the other, you know, Arthur and Goran or Lewis Kaplan, not any of the other judges who have tried Donald Trump in the last year. Those are those are judges who are just normal judges, right? Eileen Cannon is, as some people say, a complete loose cannon. Yeah, and that trial is not gonna happen before November. So, which is probably the simplest of the trial. I mean, the one that had the case

that has the least moving parts, unlike even New York, is the Mar-a-Lago case. It's all Donald Trump. It's all Donald Trump with his fingerprints on the retention of the presidential records, not presidential records, the failure to return national defense information, top secret and classified, being caught red-handed with it. Conversations with his lawyers that have been turned over because the attorney-client privilege

has been stripped away from him. That's another issue that has not yet been decided. Pardon me, guys. Swallowed a bug there. Is the motion to suppress the evidence that they brought arguing that somehow the search warrant was invalid, the way it was executed was invalid, and everything they found there should be suppressed.

And, pardon me, trying to revisit the decision by Judge Beryl Howell, the Chief Justice of the DC Circuit Court, which she's like on the Mount Rushmore of DC and other judges, being called into question by Judge Cannon, who's been on the bench for like a hot minute, when Judge Barrel Howell, after an evidentiary hearing, decided that it was more likely than not that Donald Trump and his original lawyer related to Mar-a-Lago, Evan Corcoran, had committed a crime or a

fraud and therefore the attorney-client privilege would be stripped away from Donald Trump. And 50 pages of single-spaced notes by Evan Corcoran. His musings that he put into a recording would all be turned over to the prosecution. Well, that issue's coming back up with now Judge Cannon. Oh, heaven help us about what she's gonna do. And whatever she does, and I agree with you, the end game here that this is leading towards is a series of decisions that are appealable by Jack Smith

and that the 11th Circuit is likely trumping at the bit to get their hands on to reverse and or reassign her off the case. But by that time, by my watch, it's going to be well after November. And what we're still waiting on, even on this late recording, this late date of this recording of this live legal AF, is the decision by the United States Supreme Court who took oral argument on the immunity decision which has been holding up the prosecution of Donald Trump

in the DC election interference case before Judge Chutkin for ever, for the last nine months. And of course, they took the oral argument the last day of the last oral argument in April before they shut the doors to oral arguments at the Supreme Court and we have been waiting since the end of April for them to decide. Now they're gonna let me answer the questions in the chat. Yes the

Supreme Court has to make a decision now that they've taken the appeal, the briefings done and they've issued an oral argument. Yes, it has to be this term. And the end of the term, technically for issuing the opinions, is when they all decide they're all leaving on their summer vacations. It's usually around now. It'll be sometime between now and next week, next Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. By mid-June, this gate is closed, term is over opinions issued we're waiting on opinions as I teased a little bit on Saturday on abortion again on gun control again on immunity for Donald Trump again things related to Donald Trump on Jan six convictions and counts that can be used against Donald

Trump and others again and so while that's all going on, the DC election interference case, even if Judge Chutkin were to get the ruling and it allowed her with some sort of mandate to do something with her case, pick between personal conduct and executive conduct or whatever it is that the Supreme Court rules led by MAGA, if she can get her case restarted, plus the 90 days that she said she's going to give to Trump to restart the case that's been on ice for the last nine months, she can't start her case till August, maybe even September. Could she get it done before the November election? Maybe. Donald Trump's got no other criminal cases that he's gonna be tied up in, so that could happen. But it's getting increasingly

less likely, which of course is the endgame for the United States Supreme Court to help out Donald Trump this term. Then he got Cannon. Could she have gotten her case up and running off an indictment two years ago? Absolutely. That case, by all, because of the less moving parts, that case should have been up and running and tried before the Manhattan DA case, before Georgia, before the DC election interference case was even brought. And yet, you and I and Ben have to talk about the first week in June a case that is inevitably not going to happen even on appeals that you outline and I outline because those appeals are gonna be well

beyond the time period that we said which is again does Donald Trump have a judge that's trying to bend over backwards to help them out it's obvious it's obvious that he does. You want to touch a bit on Hunter Biden? And just the eight months issue? Yeah, I mean, you know, look, the Hunter Biden case, you know, what strikes me is so ironic is that you've got Hunter Biden who is being prosecuted by his father's Department of Justice, right? There's no other way to look at this. Joe Biden could have pardoned him. He could have not allowed, not appointed a special counsel, he could have not allowed this prosecution, right? I mean, Joe Biden has the ultimate

authority to do that. But he doesn't, he steps aside, and he believes in our institutions, he believes in our criminal justice system, he believes in that, that, that preserving our institutions and not allowing partisan politics to infect the justice system is more important than any one person. And so that just goes to show you what a decent person Joe Biden is and the contrast of what of what will happen if Donald Trump gets elected. He is going to hand out these pardons like candy. He is going to absolutely pardon himself and he will go after, as he said, all his political enemies. Just one other thing to just show the difference, the contrast,

is that you were pointing out, Hunter Biden was just indicted like what, six, eight months ago? This case was just brought. How is it already going to trial? Eight months ago. How is it already going to going to trial in such lightning speed? Again, because nobody is out there doing, you know, nobody's nobody's out there on the take for Hunter Biden to try to slow it down or or the opposite, you know, to kind of get him. They're just letting the system play out. And this is how it works when people don't get involved and when partisan politics is not involved. And that's, again, just the contrast between Eileen Cannon and that case, how it's going and what she's doing there,

just so people can see the contrast. It's just unbelievable to me. If you think that Donald Trump would have one of his kids, you know, any of any of them, Don Jr. on trial and being prosecuted while he's president of the United States, not happening ever, right? He would never Where was Melania during the entire trial? But First Lady Dr. Jill Biden showing up every day to support her stepson along with his sister and all of that just shows you the difference between the two parties. We're going to talk about, in our final two segments today, we're going to talk about the Wisconsin attorney general bringing his new suit against people in the Trump inner circle, lawyers and presidential aides. And of course, we're going to touch on what the Atlanta Intermediary Appellate Court has

just done to basically scuttle the prosecution of Donald Trump. I don't know about the others, there's 13 others, but certainly about Donald Trump before the November election. We're going to take a break for our sponsors, but first let me just talk quickly about a couple of ways to support this pro-democracy network and this particular show and the contributors to this particular show.

You've got watching us, always good, not ego, algorithm, that's what I like to say. You've got listening to us on all the major podcast platforms, free subscribing to the Midas Touch Network, helping it grow to 3 million free subscribers before the November election. We're building this network without any outside investors completely independently with our bare hands with your help. So that's good. We've got, Ben and I are doing a patreon.com slash legal AF. If you want to get to the nitty gritty of the law side of the intersection of law and politics, where we can drill down more on what we can just touch on even on a full length podcast, then patreon.com

slash legal AF is for you with exclusive content you won't find anywhere else and you won't even find here on legalaf or on the Midas Touch Network. It's only exclusively there. There's membership levels, the entry level, membership levels about the cup price of a cup of coffee, two cups of coffee a month, but you get a lot of value for that. It's for lawyers and non lawyers alike equally. We have plenty of plenty of both. We try to make it informative and entertaining at the same time like we do this particular show. And so that's patreon.com slash legal AF. And then we've got contributors that, you know, we have, I don't call them spun off, but we have other podcasts devoted to law, law and politics, including one that's

now anchored by Karen Freeman Agnifilo. And that is Mistrial. And she is anchoring that along with two others. You see Danya Perry and Kathleen Rice, and they bring it from a very unique perspective and an important voice, and that's going to be appearing regularly on the Midas Touch Network. Karen, congratulations on Mistrial. Thank you. Super fun. Yeah. You know what's not super fun? Sorry about that. I didn't mean to step on you. Super fun. Yeah. You know what's not super fun? Sorry about that. I didn't mean to step on you. You know what's not super fun? Atlanta. Atlanta. And we now have a ruling by the three-judge panel as I anticipated. I did a hot take. Oh wait, I'm getting, you know what? This is why I love Salty. He's like, Popak, you forgot to do the ad break. So now a word from our very important pro-democracy sponsors.

We've all had embarrassing B.O. moments. Fortunately, Lummi, whole body deodorant is making it so none of us ever have to worry about body odor again. Unlike certain other deodorants, Lummi is powered by mandelic acid to control odor in a new way. It delivers outrageous 72-hour odor control everywhere from your underarms to your feet and yes even your private areas. In fact it was patients concerned about their private area odor that originally inspired an OBGYN who invented Lume. Fast forward six years and her game-changing whole body deodorant has now earned over 300,000 five-star reviews from people like me

who love feeling confident from head to toe. So there's a special offer here for new customers. Get 15% off all Lumie products with our exclusive code and link. Use code LEGALAF at lumedeodorant.com. That's L-U-M-E-D-E-O-D-O-R-A-N-T.com. And use code LEGALAF. I like Lumideodorant because I like feeling fresh all over and I like feeling fresh all day. I was a little bit skeptical at first about it, frankly, but I have to say I am totally sold.

I like this whole body deodorant. I like that it was created by a doctor. That was my biggest misapprehension, frankly, but once I learned that it was created by a doctor and it was all about BO being misdiagnosed and mistreated, it made me really want to try this and I love it. It's baking soda-free and par paraben free and pH balance for safe use everywhere. So they have great variety of fresh scents like clean tangerine, lavender sage or

toasted coconut. So again, go to lumedeodorant.com and enter code LEGALAF at checkout. Have you heard that the flavored air category is quickly becoming the leading alternative to vaping and smoking? It's a whole new movement towards better habits, led by the sponsor of today's video, Fume. Fume is an award-winning flavored air device, and flavored air isn't like vaping. If vapor was compared to sticky soda,

Fume cores are closer to herbal teas. Fume has lots of delicious flavors to choose from, like crisp mint and orange vanilla. With flavored air, you can satisfy your oral fixation through a passive diffusion system that utilizes no electronics, vapor, or combustion. Instead, fume draws flavor to your mouth. Fume fills the void ditching a bad habit can leave.

There's no vapor and you can use it anywhere. There's no nicotine and it's not addictive. The non-toxic flavors are a guilt-free alternative. Fume doesn't use any batteries, so you'll never need to charge it. The design is super sleek, it looks awesome, and you can truly feel the weighted high quality design. I mean, one of the fun things about Fume

is that it's made to fidget with and calms anxiety with magnets, snaps and clicks. Fume continuously invests in third party studies to ensure the safety of their products. My favorite Fume flavor is the orange vanilla. It's just as delicious as it sounds. And look, if you're trying to kick your bad habit, I couldn't recommend Fume enough.

Fume has served over 300,000 customers and you can be the next success story. For a limited time, use my code LEGALAF to get a free gift with your journey pack. Head to tryfume.com. That's T-R-Y-F-U-M.com and use code LEGALAF or scan the QR code on the screen to get a free gift with your order today. That's t-r-y-f-u-m.com and use code LegalAF or scan the QR code on the screen

to get a free gift with your order today. And we're back. And my free gift is always doing the show with you on Wednesdays and whenever else I can do it. So enough of that. Let's move on to Atlanta. It's easy. Just as we suspected, I did a hot take on this one, the Georgia Supreme, Georgia Court of Appeals, the second highest appellate court in Georgia has, without even having to be asked by Donald Trump, has decided the

issue of whether Judge McAfee back in March properly ruled that Fonny Willis should not be disqualified, although he had some pointed language in there against Fonny Willis about her testimony and that of Nathan Wade. The odor of mendacity will go down in the annals of history about what he thought was some lying going on in the courtroom that he couldn't get to the bottom of, but kept her on the case after four days of excruciating detail that I would like to forget about Nathan Wade, about Foddy Willis,

about their relationship, about his sex life, about her sex life, and all things that have nothing to do with what we're here for the criminal justice is to decide whether Donald Trump is guilty or not of crimes along with 13 other people but The judge realized that especially having basically planted the seed for appeal within the motor that he entered And certifying that appeal that the court would get around to making a decision. Fonny Willis took credit. I always faulted her a little bit. She didn't push the issue about getting the case set for trial since March. We're already in June. She never moved.

She never had a hearing. She never had a discussion about it. There was no stay in place until now, but there is one now. And now the three judge panel randomly selected, three judges not from Atlanta, and they're from a very conservative right wing part of the state. And you can do your own math related to that. Three men, three white men have decided that they're going to stay the case and they don't want any further proceedings going on, certainly not the setting of trial. So there's a pin in the case until they get around to deciding the issue. Now they've set a October, there must be so busy there about things that matter to our

democracy, they just can't get around deciding this case and having oral argument even until October. It doesn't mean actually that they're going to have oral argument in October. It's a control date on their calendar. They will decide as we get closer to October and after full briefing, so there'll be three total briefs and a record brought up to them on appeal, they'll let the parties know in advance of October whether they're even going to have oral argument in October. But if they are, and it's likely they're going to, then sometime after that October date, and at the end of the term, which happens to be March of 2025, they will enter their ruling. And in the meantime, the entire case is stayed. It's such a sad, a sad state of affairs and we had so much hope and put so much of our

eggs in Fawni Willis's basket early on. I mean, she did everything right. I'm not claiming she didn't do everything right, but she did everything right. You know, yes, Alvin Bragg broke the glass ceiling there, first to indict, first to prosecute, first to convict. I love that, especially given Alvin Bragg's having taken some unnecessary criticism and potshots at the very start of his being elected to that office. But Funny Willis, we were, you know, oh my God, she's got him. She's got the good, she's got the tape phone call.

She's got the witnesses. She's got the fake electors cooperating. She's got, you know, she flipped four and three of them being lawyers from Donald Trump and got theirs, whatever type of cooperation she got. This is a great case. And then this effing circus and soap opera, salacious, going through the boudoir of Fonny Willis. And some people I know are criticizing her, she brought this on herself,

why did she have to date Nathan Wade? And we've gone at nauseam here in our positions about whatever she did at her off time is not relevant to her decision to prosecute the indictment that was brought by a grand jury in Georgia, not Fonny Willis, on the recommendations of a special purpose grand jury, not Fonny Willis, based on evidence that was presented to them and then how, who gets paid when and who has a drink with who after has nothing to do with the administration of justice. And that's where that is. But of course to these three right wing white guys, this is interesting and why don't we do what Judge Cannon does and others do and the Supreme Court does, which is kick this can so far down the road that you don't

even know what road you're on. And then we'll pick up with it when it really doesn't matter any longer after the election. And if Donald Trump were to win, you know this case will be inevitably delayed until he's out of office and 88 years old. If he loses, you know, then we'll have to see what happens whether 20 Willis is still around after these inevitable appeals. I know you have very strong opinions about the original motion to disqualify and how Judge McAfee handled it and then invited this appeal. And so what where are you at with all this, Karen?

I mean, yeah, exactly. We're in this, this is much ado about nothing from the beginning. And this is just a racist, misogynistic double standard that they're applying to Bonnie Willis and Nathan Wade who are two consenting adults who are people who are, he was a judge, she's an elected prosecutor. And I mean, it was not like they were, there was no conflict at all.

And they just went after her. And Judge McAfee, who I actually really like and think he is a really good judge, I think was just didn't know what to do with it. And he just let it go. He could have, he had the circus of a hearing where there was almost nothing about what the conflict would be

and all about the salacious sex details just to embarrass them. And it just had nothing to do with whether or not there was an actual conflict of interest here. You know, again, they were on the same side of the aisle. There was no there's no prosecutor sleeping with the judge or submit the defense attorney kind of thing. And so therefore there was, you know, some kind of conflict. This is colleagues. And I met my husband in the DA's office. He was two years senior to me, you know, but whatever. Now we're married. Like it happens. And this was a consensual relationship. This was not like a boss and her underling, right? This was, whatever. Anyway, it just frustrates

me because the hearing, which I went down a rabbit hole and lost several days of my professional life, because I didn't stop watching it because it's televised, partly because I just couldn't believe it was happening the way it was. I just can't believe how much Judge McAfee lost control of that hearing. Like I said, if he needed to have a hearing,

I don't think he could or should have, I don't think there was a conflict at all. But okay, you want to have a hearing to establish that focus it on what could cause a conflict, right? What was what went into the hiring decisions of Nathan Wade? Is he qualified? And again, how about who decided what when to pay him? How did you audit his hours? All the kind of things that could you audit his hours, all the kind of things that could maybe, you know, perhaps look like a conflict, or at least somehow develop that record was never developed. They never even talked anything that was remotely about a financial conflict. And I can't imagine what other type of conflict there would be there. But he let that crazy record get made. And

then he says, Oh, well, there's an appearance of impropriety. I'm not really sure what that is, what the appearance is. Spell it out. You know, he never spelled it out. What what is the impropriety? What is the appearance of it? I just don't get it. And it's just they don't like that. But, but, you know, there are people having sex and you know, it's a woman and and you know, they're black, God forbid, you know, these white guys, like it just, I swear to God, this just stinks and reeks of racism and misogyny to high heaven. It really does to me. And here we are.

So it's the South. It's the Deep South. And and now this case isn't going ever. I mean, I'd be shocked if this case ever goes to trial. Either Donald Trump wins the election and it doesn't go. Also the presidential immunity decision that we're waiting on from the Supreme Court, that's gonna impact the conduct here, of course too, because whatever standard applies there

is gonna have to apply here too. So that's gonna impact it. And I'm sure if he, either way, whether he wins or loses, the Georgia governor is potentially going to pardon him. I mean, I know it's not completely up to him. I know it's not completely up to the governor and Georgia. I know that. But it's not up to the governor at all.

It's up to a panel. Right. But those types of panels are political. And there are people. people like governors have influence. And you never know. You just never know. They'll either feel sorry for him because he lost the election, he's been punished, he's been hurt enough, or he won and so we can't do it.

One other open question is going to be what happens to the rest of the, whatever, 14 defendants who will be left. You know, some have pled guilty, only a few. And what will happen to those with those cases, right? What will happen to the guys who have already pled guilty and what will happen to the other open cases? You know, this impacts all of them, not just Trump. So this case is dead. Don't ever expect this case to go at least against Donald Trump, in my opinion. So this case is dead. Don't ever expect this case to go at least against Donald Trump in my opinion. Yeah.

I'm just, I'm going to just take a look at something about the Board of Pardons and Paroles in Georgia. One of the reasons that just so people know that most governors are able to do with Karen outline, which is to pardon like, you know, there's been pressure on, on Governor Hokel here in New York to including by some Democrats, which was bizarre, to pardon Trump for the good of the country, not happening. But in other states that have had frequent corruption at the governor level, they've taken away the right

of the governor to do that, because Georgia had some corruption issues where people were paid bribes and governors were paid bribes. And for people who think that that stuff doesn't happen, I just caught, it's not directly at the intersection of law and politics, but there is a federal case that's going on right now that while the jury

was deliberating, a federal case about the misuse of COVID funds to the tune of 30, 40, $50 million, one of the jurors got delivered in a gift bag to her home $150,000 in cash with a note that said there's more where that comes from if you vote to acquit. This is not a John Grisham novel, although it sounds like it. This just happened in federal court.

Somebody thought it was appropriate. And you gotta think, I'm thinking when Trump heard that, is that a thing? Could I have done that? And no, it's not a thing. And now they're talking about dismissing the jury and starting all over again and looking into the crimes that were committed and trying to influence and tamper with the jury by flashing cash. But there's been that historically,

organized crime, trying to, we've had the murder of jurors in this country. So when we talk about doing your civic duty, it's not without risk, which is why we're so hot and bothered on this legal AF and I might as touch about the protection of the criminal justice system and jurors and all of that, and prosecutors like Fonny Willis from being pilloried and excoriated

and crucified by what ends up being right-wing MAGA and therefore delaying what people, everybody of every stripe and every political leaning should want, which is a public justice system that tries our people, regardless of what their political position was or what their presidential position was, but tries them in public so that we know whether they are guilty or innocent and we know that information before we have to pull the lever for them on voting. But that doesn't seem to matter anymore in Georgia, so we're going to have to continue to follow all things related to that. And linking Georgia to Wisconsin is relatively easy. It's through the person of Mike Roman. It is Mike Roman and Mike Roman's lawyers who brought and put together the original motion to disqualify Fonny Willis that

Donald Trump jumped on and ended up using. It was Trump's lawyers that did the better argument, but the papers were originally put together and filed by the stalking horse of Mike Roman, who was the election day coordinator for Donald Trump. And he was the one along with Ken Chesbrough and Jim Trupis and Giuliani and Powell and Eastman and others who developed the fake elector scheme. And then Mike Roman was the mule who got the fake elector certificates from the various battleground states, first having them meet, having them fill out these phony certificates and put all sorts of wax seals and ribbons on them to make them look official, and then have them then collect them.

And in fact, the reporting is based on emails and other things and videos and audios that have come out that Roman was getting frustrated because they couldn't get these things fast enough. They had to get them into the hands of Mike Pence because Mike Pence needed to recognize these things in order to say that they oh I can't figure it out it's so hard fake electoral certificates real electoral

certificates turn it over to the state delegations which are dominated by Republicans and make Donald Trump president that was the plot and so Roman got indicted in Georgia and led what I just said in in Georgia to the Squalifolty Willis and and you see what happened there. But he's not out of the woods yet. The Wisconsin attorney general in his office has obtained an indictment. It just came out the early part of this week. Signed by a special, signed by the, well, comes out of the DA, it comes out of the attorney general's

office. And this is a conspiracy case. It's actually a criminal complaint. I say it's an indictment, but it's really a criminal complaint not coming out of the grand jury, coming out of this office here. And in particular, they've now indicted Trupus, Chesbrough, and Mike Roman.

Each one of them had their own individual role and then collective conspiracy role. Trupus and Chesbrough are the two guys that ended up in the White House, a meeting that had been arranged by Rance Priebus, who used to be the White House Chief of Staff and came out of Wisconsin also, and got him a meeting with Donald Trump. And that's where the actual Jan 6th fake electors thing got hatched, where Ken Chesbro met privately with the president with Jim Trupas there. He was only supposed to be there for a photo op.

And he decided to tell Trump, hey, Jan 6 is your really your drop dead deadline. And if we get these elector certificates and these lawsuits, this might work. And really? And then that was what lit the fuse. Trupas is there. Trupus is exchanging emails that have all been made public. The reason they got made public is very unique. Trupus and Chesapeake, along with others, the fake electors, got sued civilly in Wisconsin as part of the settlement of that case

brought by normal citizens, average citizens, brought the case. They had to agree never to interfere with elections in the future, never be fake electors again, never challenge electors again, and they turned over all of their emails and texts, including with Mike Roman, that Trupas and Chesborough had. But that was civil. That wasn't criminal. And then we now have this criminal complaint. And my favorite part of it is the exchange between Ken Chesbrough and Mike Roman, who's

the Election Day coordinator. Chesbrough wrote a couple of memos. Yeah, throw it up now. Chesbrough writes a couple of, he wrote like four fundamental memos about outlining how to use fake electors, alternate slate of electors combined with lawsuits to throw a monkey wrench into the Gen 6 certification and the peaceful transfer of power. But as that is, as that continued, and as it was almost like a telephone game, by by time that Plan got reiterated to a number of other Trumpers They stripped away the requirement of any viable lawsuit and they used to have like their certificates that actually have a legend that says

some certificates only use if lawsuit successful to challenge You know voting and voting fraud in a certain state. But other states, that was stripped away. Chespero is caught in a text exchange with Roman that's now a part of the complaint where Chespero says on page 12, Mike, this is Chespero to Mike Roman. I think the language at the start of the certificate, this legend, should be changed in all of the states.

Let's look at the language carefully. He wanted a legend that said, only break glass in case of emergency and lawsuit is pending at the time of the use of the fake certificate, to which Roman says, I don't. I don't think there needs to be a change. And then Chesbrough says, I can help with drafting in a couple of hours. To which Roman says, about the fake electors and everybody participating in the conspiracy, fuck these guys. Because all he wants is the fake elector certificates. He doesn't want any legends on them to get them into the hands of Mike Pence. And they,

and this complaint also cites to lots of emails and exchanges that came out of the civil case against trupus. The trupus in Chesbrough basically were their own worst enemy. They didn't take the fifth amendment. They turned it all over along with others. And this is the result. Now, there's a couple of pending questions. Why were the fake electors of Wisconsin also indicted? Will they be indicted? Is there a grand jury? And what happens next with these three guys who need to be arraigned sometime in early

fall? What do you make of this new indictment by Wisconsin following the lead of Chris Mays in Arizona? Look, I mean, it's about time, you know, but I had all the same questions you had. Why weren't the fake electors? You know, why wasn't Donald Trump charged? You know, any any thought that Ken Chesbro is cooperating that for five minutes we all thought he was, I think it's pretty clear he's not.

You know, look, it also there's it makes it just brings up why these three and not anybody else. Sometimes it's because that's the only, sometimes because of the statutes that different states have, they could easily prove it against these individuals, but maybe the fake electors in Wisconsin, they felt were kind of duped by these guys. So maybe that's why they weren't, you know, who knows? Who knows what the actual reason is?

Prosecutors aren't supposed to bring a case unless they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt and so maybe they just thought these were the three strongest ones. But there's a lot of head scratching nationwide about why these people and not the others. I mean, why is Jack Smith not indicted the unindicted co-conspirators in Jan 6? It makes no sense. Why all the other unindicted co-conspirators? They could have done it as a separate indictment.

So it's unclear to me why it was done this way. And as you pointed out, this is a felony complaint, not an indictment, which means it's a summary. You file that with the court and you get arraigned on that, but you still have to indict it in a grand jury So who knows maybe they're in the grand jury, but why did they do it this way? Sometimes you can skip this and go to the grand jury So we just don't know enough yet

but it's clear to me that ken chesbrough is either not cooperating that we the way we kind of Thought he might be Or he tried to cooperate and he's such a liar that they just said screw that we're doing this anyway. So, you know. Yeah, that's a very good observation for our audience too about the difference between a criminal complaint, not as a substitute, but precursor to an eventual indictment by grand jury and where they might be in that grand jury process, including with the fake electors. Kudos to the attorney generals.

A lot of them stayed on the sideline waiting for the federal government, the Department of Justice, the special counsel do their job. They got big-footed in a way by the special prosecutor, special counsel, and they waited on the side. But they have their own independent criminal law enforcement duties. Many of them are the chief law enforcement officer of their state, not quite in New York, the way that's outlined. Tish James has some, but very limited criminal powers. It's really in the hands of the district attorneys, including the Manhattan DA that we talk a lot about. But in other states, it is the chief law enforcement officer, and they go after with full criminal

powers and investigate investigatory powers and that's what we're seeing there in Wisconsin but now they're they're kind of getting off the mat and they're saying we got our own election integrity to protect you know our voters were misled undermined disenfranchised and we have to do something about it i mean especially now i mean fanny willis had the most sprawling indictment. You know, she had, she bit off a lot when she filed her indictment, whereas Jack Smith was much more surgical, four counts, one guy, a whole bunch of unindicted co-conspirators, but like that was it. She did, let's talk Wisconsin, let's talk about, you know, now that case is completely

sidelined and disabled on the side of the road. And now that, in that, that is one of the reasons I think the attorney generals are stepping forward, some more aggressively than others. But this fake certificate, fake elector plan was implemented by MAGA and Trump in seven battleground states. And so far you and I have reported on two of them. And this is where we're at. So we got to continue to follow it. It's another way for justice. Just like Chris Mays did not indict Donald Trump for now,

for now, they did not indict yet Donald Trump here. They're all waiting, I think everybody's sort of waiting for the Supreme Court decision about how to shape the contours of any future indictment of Donald Trump if they're thinking about doing it. And I think that's probably proper and professional to do it that way, because you're just going to get caught with your pants down if the Supreme Court tells you to do it one day and you didn't do it that way. So I kind of get the guidance that they're waiting on. You know, we fault the Supreme Court for making this guidance come so late on purpose, but that's where we're at. So Karen, we got a lot to talk about. We got a

Supreme Court who's gonna, by the time you and I probably meet next week, we may be talking about Supreme Court rulings about abortion, whether EMTALA, the Emergency Medical Procedures Act and all of that, federal, trumps abortion bans in various states when the life of the mother is at risk. That's now been decided. The Supreme Court can't help itself, but to continue to tinker with reproductive rights and the autonomy of women. They just can't, they gotta keep taking abortion cases and making rulings about it. And they're always bad.

I saw a funny, I mean, it shouldn't be funny, but a funny thing on Twitter, it's how Justice Alito can't control his own wife, but wants to control yours. Yeah, that is a dysfunctional, abusive marriage, and I don't care. I don't either. Do you think, by the way, speaking of the Supreme Court, do you think they're going to, you know, sometimes they take similar cases or they drop decisions of similar cases

on the same day. Do you think they're going to drop the presidential immunity case and the 1512, you know, which charges can, you know, you think that you think both of them are going to be in the same day? Yeah, I think we're talking in shorthand. So abortions up there, guns, we're waiting on an opinion about guns. And listen to this one, Karen Karen to remind you and our audience this one is whether perpetrators of domestic violence can have their second amendment rights to carry a gun forfeited I think the answer

to that should be yes you abuse your spouse or others you shouldn't be able to carry a gun but it's up for grabs with this United States Supreme Court we're waiting for the decision in the next week or two. That's guns, that's abortion, and then immunity you just talked about. And then the fourth one, just about five major ones, the fourth one, which I agree with you, I think it's linked and they drop them together, so to speak, is the obstruction of official proceeding, which was the highest charge other than seditious conspiracy that was used by the Department of Justice for 300 Jan 6th defendants, including Donald Trump, although I think Donald Trump's probably survived, but who knows? And the argument there, because a trial judge, Judge Nichols, ruled that,

no, that's not what that statute's for from 2000. That's financial crime. That's white collar crime. That comes out of the Enron era. Now you can't use that unless they got their hands on the actual certificates during Jan 6 and ripped them up. That's not the obstruction of official proceeding that Congress had anticipated. And that's the argument. If that gets stripped away, 300 people, if that was their only charge, get their entire case exonerated, they get their conviction vacated, and that's it. They don't get their time back.

We've got a guy that just got out, Brandon Fellows, who went to jail for that, came out after three years of that and contempt. So that would happen. Others that had other counts, then they'd have to be re-sentenced on the other counts, but not on that count. And then the question is whether Donald Trump, if that DC election interference case ever gets back up and running, whether two of his four counts, which are four election interference, although his level of election official proceeding interference is greater than

any of the Jan 6th who are violently attacking the Capitol, But Donald Trump had a plan and that's a little bit different. But yes, I think that gets dropped on the same day. And then the others sort of get dropped. And then as soon as the one that they're worried about most, which is immunity about the shit they're going to take for what this ultimate ruling is going to be, I'm cursing a lot on this show, I apologize. That's going to be the last day because that's the day that show, I apologize. That's going to be the last day, because that's the day that they are already in. When that gets released by the clerk, they are

already in the air, flying to their respective junkets paid for by in the case of the Republicans, right wing MAGA, off to Europe, off to whoever Iceland for the summer, and you know, in the air when the opinion drops, because they're all, let's be honest, they're all cowards, at least on the right side of that aisle. So yeah, I think you and I are gonna be talking, and Ben, we're gonna be talking about a lot

as each one of these things drop either together or separately over the next week or two. Yeah, a lot going on. Karen, yeah, thanks for being with us. I know you're on the road for good reason and look forward to Mistrial watching it regularly and of course, support us by doing legal AF patreon.com. So until our next Legal AF Midweek with Karen Freeman and Nick Nifilo and then we'll catch

everything up on Saturday with the weekend edition, which is Ben, Mycelis and me. And then we of course, we do hot takes all along the way. Right here on the Midas Touch Network and on Legal AF, we've reached the end of our show today. So we're gonna have to do a shout out to the Midas Mighty and the Legal AFers.