Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump Indictment Could Drop ANY MINUTE and his Defense is a DISASTER

Episode Date: March 16, 2023

The midweek edition of the top rated legal and political podcast Legal AF is back for another hard-hitting look at the most consequential developments at the intersection of law and politics. On this week’s edition, Anchor Michael Popok is joined by his regular weekend anchor and co-founder of Meidas Touch, Ben Meiselas (filling in for Karen Friedman Agnifilo who is “on assignment”), as they discuss: This week’s developments in the Manhattan DA’s criminal investigation of Trump for the Stormy Daniels’ hush money coverup including Michael Cohen’s testimony, and Trump’s defense team unsuccessfully trying out new defenses that actually implicate their client for the crimes to be charged; developments in the E. Jean Carroll civil rape and defamation case going to trial in early April, including the Judge strongly considering using an “anonymous jury” and its implications for the defense; a new report on a NY federal criminal investigation this time of Trump’s media company and whether it obtained $8 million dollars in Russian funds traceable back to Putin; Trump firing back at DeSantis and filing an ethics charge against him in Florida to force him to declare his candidacy; the DOJ indicting a Chinese business person for running a billion dollar fraud scheme with ties back to Steve Bannon, C-PAC, and MAGA “public interests” groups, and so much more. SUPPORT THE SHOW: Shop LEGAL AF Merch at: https://store.meidastouch.com Join us on Patreon: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Remember to subscribe to ALL the Meidas Media Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://pod.link/1510240831 Legal AF: https://pod.link/1580828595 The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://pod.link/1595408601 The Influence Continuum: https://pod.link/1603773245 Kremlin File: https://pod.link/1575837599 Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://pod.link/1530639447 The Weekend Show: https://pod.link/1612691018 The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560 American Psyop: https://pod.link/1652143101 Majority 54: https://pod.link/1309354521 Political Beatdown: https://pod.link/1669634407 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're watching and listening to this week's Midweek edition of Legal AF on the Midas Touch Network on today's episode. We discuss the Manhattan DA's criminal investigation of Donald Trump related to the cover-up of the $130,000 Hush Money Payments paid to her by Michael Cohen, where we are in the indictment process, and what we think of Donald Trump's various new defenses, he trial ballooned on TV and on social media over the weekend, including the Melania defense, the Statute of Limitations defense, and the Iowa's Extorted Defense. And we've got some special audio tapes for you so you can make up your own mind. And then we move to the E. Jean Carroll Civil Rape and Defamation Cate case,

which is going to be picking a jury just in a few weeks and the hits keep on coming for Donald Trump. This time the judge on the heels of letting the jury hear the access Hollywood tape and have two more women testify about being sexually assaulted by Trump. Now judge Kaplan is strongly considering protecting the jury by making it anonymous and wants to hear from the lawyers this week on their opinions. What does that mean? And what does that mean for the defense, even before they step into a courtroom? We'll discuss that.

We'll talk about did Donald Trump launder $8 million of Russian money through his truth social media spec, the federal prosecutors investigating the spec want to know and we explore. Then we're going to move to the battle between Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis, which is now going to another level where the super PAC for Donald Trump apparently has filed an ethics charge with the Florida Commission on Ethics against Ron DeSantis and a multi-page letter. And we're going to talk about that as well.

And then finally, the Department of Justice doesn't sleep. And it's going after bad people, no matter where they are. This one, a Chinese money-larger banan associate, I think you own the boat that Bannon was taken off of and a big funder of CPAC has been indicted in a $1 billion fraud. And we'll talk about that. I'm your anchor, Michael Popok, along with my regular anchor, Ben, my Salas standing in for Karen Friedman, Ignifalo, who's on assignment for another edition of Legal IF Midweek, where we curate the most important legal and political issues at the midweek. Ben, how you doing?

I'm doing good. You know, I'm in Manhattan right now. I'm here for Trump indictment watch. I feel like I have to be in Manhattan and just kind of an interesting personal story about one of the topics that we're going to be covering today. So I was at a meeting and I started smelling smoke and I looked at the building next to me, the building next to me was like on fire. And I was like, wow, you don't really see it that frequently here in Manhattan like that. And so I took some photographs of it as I left.

There was a ton of fire trucks, fire department trucks outside. And I had talked to my brothers in real time and I had said, hey, you know, there are these fire trucks and there's this fire in this building, you know, that was really weird. You know, and looked dangerous. And I said, don't worry, everything's okay here.

I'm fine. And I sent a me photograph of it. Then I went back and I saw this story about the banan backer, this Chinese billionaire who was arrested today, and when he was arrested shortly thereafter, I think not so coincidentally, the place where he lived, he lived at this hotel. That's what was burning. And so apparently the penthouse or whatever the floor was that he lived on, coincidentally burned down and with documents and things like that, which is being investigated, of course, as a suspicious fire, but just

a strange coincidence that kind of all ties together. Then I was right there when that happened. This is what we do on the Midas Touch Network. Ben, my salary is reporting from a flaming pen house, burning documents in a Department of Justice fraud investigation. We go the extra life. That's it. Yes, we absolutely do.

But to kind of draw from that, things are heating up, huh? And then, and as things are heating up in Manhattan, I let's just put it this way. I mean, the Trump lawyers are not ready for prime time. I mean, of course, Alina Habba and Christina Bob, and we know that crew, but the new lawyer, Joe Takapino, who's done this mediator, I called it a self-flagulation

tour because it was just going around making one embarrassing appearance after the other further incriminating Donald Trump. I'd love to hear your take about that in the defenses. Yeah, let's talk about it because now they're trotting out. I think it's a self-immolation tour. I think he was completely, it was, I never saw a vivisection live where somebody was shown his own heart and George Stephanopoulos did an amazing job just by asking three simple questions that Joe Takapena was totally flumixed by, not prepared to answer.

And when he did answer them, actually implicated his client in the criminal scheme for which he was the defense lawyer, which I don't even understand. I don't even understand. Right, so let me frame this. Just so we, and then we'll back into the video, scheme for which he was the defense lawyer, which I don't even understand. There's the question. Right. So, so let me frame this just so we will and then we'll back into the video, which is amazing.

It just happened. We've got basically six or seven witnesses that have already testified in front of the grand jury since it was empattled in Manhattan in January, looking at the Stormy Daniels hush money cover up in crime related to Donald Trump. And the very every prosecutor, including the ones that work with us on this show like Karen, will tell you that the request to then have the actual target Donald Trump come in and testify, drop immunity and testify to the grand jury is basically the last step before the actual

asking the jury to return an indictment. So that's where we are. Michael Cohen, three hours testified on Monday, your co-anchor on political beatdown. I'm sure he spoke about that there. He went in for three hours and testified. Stormy Daniels has reported, I think we've got with our producer,

we got a tweet about it. Stormy Daniels confirms that she met with the Manhattan prosecutors investigating the Trump hush money payments. I don't think she's going to go in. I don't think she needs to go in, but we know that she's also cooperating. Now we have all of that done. We also have reporting that and Joe Takapina, they're putting him out front and center as the mouthpiece, as poorly as he's been doing. But he is not apparently the lead defense lawyer for Donald Trump in this criminal matter. It is instead Susan necklace.

Susan necklace, you'll probably recall on legal AF, because Ben and I talked about the fact that she was the lead defense lawyer against the same Manhattan DA's office in August in which she lost 17 times when the Trump companies got convicted of 17 counts of tax fraud. That Susan necklace is the real person, the real defense lawyer, not the ones that are being played on TV by Alina Haba and Joe Takapina.

She's the one that has admitted that she's gone in already to speak to the Manhattan DA's office to try to convince them not to indict. Obviously, that's not going to happen. She wasn't successful there. I think they're bracing themselves in Trump world now for the indictment. They're trotting out then all of these defenses. You have the Melania defense, which is I wasn't doing it for a campaign violation or to win the campaign. I did it because I didn't want my wife to find out about all of these women who claimed to have had sex with me. And so I paid them all off. That's the Melania defense. So that's one. And we'll talk about that when we showed Joe Takapina too, is the extortion defense.

That's what Joe Takapina tried. That people like Stormy Daniels is extorting Donald Trump and he is the victim and he only paid the 130 because he was extorted. So why is he being, and then he slipped into, well, he is the defense lawyer. He said, why is my guy being prosecuted for being the victim? None of this is gonna fly, but let's see how it came out in this garbled way by Joe Takapina who conceded that his client

committed the crime. Let's roll that tape. This morning, is the president gonna go to the grand jury? We have no plans on participating in that proceeding. It's considered that needs to be made still. There's been no deadline set so we'll wait and see. But you have met you and other attorneys have met with the prosecutors? Susan Neckless is leading the charge in this case to Rific Lawyer and she's dealing with them and she's met with the prosecutors correct. See you expect an

indictment? I expect justice to prevail and if that's the case George there shouldn't be any diamond. I mean, this case is outraged, really. There should be a healthy dose of disgust from the bar, the legal community, prosecutors, defenders, lawyers alike. It's not what we do. This is not what we do.

We are distorting laws to try and beg President Trump. I don't know what's supposed to be leading all the polls. I don't know what it is, but clearly this prosecutor, and this prosecutor's office has made an agenda of trying to get him. They've scoured his personal life and business life for seven years to try and find something. And this is what I thought was.

Well, this case is pretty well-known though, and there are three questions, simply yes, no questions at the heart of the case. I wanna put them up on the board right there. Number one, did Trump authorize the payment to Stormy Danows? Number two was the payment properly recorded. And number three was it connected to the election. So let's take all three of them in turn. Number one, did Trump authorize the payment to Stormy Danows?

First of all, all we need to do is start with number three. Because it's not- Let's answer number one first. It's not directly related to- Did Trump authorize the payment? It's not directly related to the payment. Did Trump authorize the payment? It's not directly related to the payment.

Regardless, we're going to get to that. Let's assume we did. For the argument. Let's admit it. So the answer to that is yes. Let's assume we did. Okay. This was a plain extortion. And I don't know since when we decided to start prosecuting extortion victims.

He's denied, vehemently denied, this affair. But he had to pay money because there was going to be an allegation that was going to be publicly embarrassing to him regardless of the campaign. And the campaign financials are very, very clear George, that you cannot have something that's even primarily related to the campaign to be considered a campaign. But he did direct the payment, be made. Number two, the second important question is, was it properly noted in the Trump Organization records or was a false record made saying this was legal representation? There was absolutely no false records made. The my knowledge was no false records made. To your knowledge.

To your knowledge. I was in there at the time. Stop right there. All right, Ben. You got the lawyer who just admitted that his client made the payment and he can't vouch for the weather. It was a fraudulent entry in the books and records, a crime in New York, because he quote unquote,

wasn't there. What do you think about this defense so far? Well, I think he just admitted to the crime number one. I mean, I guess to his credit, if you wanna call it that, so far he only admitted to the misdemeanor. The only part that he hasn't admitted to yet is the felony, which is in connection with or related to the election, which brings it from a misdemeanor to a felony.

And everyone says it's going to be charged as a felony. And all you need to know is the proximity of what it was made right before the 2016 election, which is proof that it was in connection with the election. That's why it was made. But one thing I want to ask your opinion, because you and I haven't talked about. I talked about it with Karen. The press automatically goes that the second crime

has to be related to the election. And of course, the defense has taken the bait. But that's not what the statute says. What the statute says is the entry, the false entry, in the books and records, has to be in furtherance of a second crime, a cover-up of a second crime or related to a second crime. I can think of a lot of second crimes that are related to the election. We have one of, or that are, but are already proven.

Michael Cohen's conviction related to the federal election crime. That's one, money laundering, the way it was recorded on the books, the tax break that they got as a result of listing it as legal expenses when it wasn't. That's tax evasion. That's money laundering. That's federal election crime. I'm not sure. I know George Stephanopoulos. He's very good at what he does. I'm not sure that number three has to be that number three. What do you think about that? I think it's a great point, actually, because in connection with election assumes that the third crime or that the subsequent crime that would turn it into a felony is a campaign

finance violation and a state campaign finance violation at that. But you're right, all it has to do is be relating to actually another crime. And you're right, there are multiple other crimes that Donald Trump certainly has engaged in, which kind of goes to my broader theory, though, is that I've always thought that Alvin Bragg, and we've talked about this on our other legal AFs, was taking this in steps. First, you go after the Trump organization, you succeed there, you basically get your single. Then you file this one where I think the maximum prison sentence is about four years, likely you would get less time.

But nonetheless, I mean, Donald Trump would be facing jail time. I think by the time you got to sentence and sentencing, you'd be looking at a year, a year and a half of hard time at Writers when all is said and done, which I think is a good thing. But then I think there is still the broader case, the civil version of that case is being pursued by New York Attorney General, Leticia James, that set to go to trial for money damages

for at least $250 million. Against Donald Trump, his adult children in the Trump organization, that set for trial, October 2, 2023. It'll also be an injunction there, which would basically children in the Trump organization, that set for trial October 2nd of 2023. There'll also be an injunction there, which would basically shut down the Trump organization effectively from ever doing business again in New York, or at least for a very, very, very long period of time. But I always thought, and Alvin Bregg said this, that's why it's not like we speculate

here, that he's still investigating the criminal conduct relating to that. And what he can file, once he files this, is what's called a superseding indictment. And I do think at some point in time, you will see a superseding indictment with those other charges brought. And this is kind of just another step. So I think your point is astute and accurate. And I think the broader issue though of all those other crimes that you that you talk about to actually could relate to a superseding indictment later about other crimes that I think are also going

to be persistent. Yeah. I think you're so right about that. Now let's blow up you and me. One of their new defenses, which is that this this guy was extorted by stormy Daniels as opposed to it being the way we've reported it, which is accurate based on the facts that have already been deduced both the Michael Cohen's prosecution and otherwise. And the timeline is that Donald Trump used the National Inquirer and its publisher to operate a catch and kill program to find people out there with whom he had sex who would come forward and embarrass him during the campaign and pay them money to either to buy their story from them, have them sign an NDA, a non disclosure and confidentiality

agreement, and then kill the story. And so that is that went on because it didn't just go on with Stormy Daniels for a very similar amount of money. And when I was Susan McDougall, a playboy, a playmate who also similarly claimed that she had sex with Donald Trump, maybe one time like Stormy Daniels. And for which she was paid $150,000 direct from the from the publisher of the national inquire a friend of Donald Trump's the only difference here is that Instead of paying the national inquire directly to store be Daniels They use an intermediary in Michael Cohen the fixer at the time the in house person at the time for Donald Trump who coordinated it with stormy's lawyer and made the payment that way

but they had to set up a, you know, they have to find ways to make Trump have his fingerprints on this from a criminality standpoint. And what I want to do now and put it in front of you, Ben, is put two things back to back. One of them is Donald Trump's tweeting war with Stormy Daniels. And then we're going to play a secretly recorded audio tape involving Michael Cohen, which kind of blows the doors out of all these defenses. Can we put up the the tweet first? So here's Donald Trump trotting out recently a defense, and he says with respect to the

Stormy nonsense, it is very old, and it happened a long time ago. And then he mentioned Statue of Limitations, which he's totally wrong on. That's not a defense here. I placed full reliance on the judgment spelled wrong in British style with an E in the middle. And advice of counsel also spelled wrong, who I had every reason to believe had a license to practice law was competent.

It was able to appropriately provide solid legal services. He came from a good law firm, represented other clients over the years, and there was no reason not to rely on him. And I did. So he's trying to set up with his poor spelling, a reliance on counsel. I assume Michael Cohen is being referenced there. The problem is he was also secretly recorded interacting with Michael Cohen in tapes that

were ultimately seized by the FBI and that prosecution and that have been played already on CNN. But let's let's bring it forward. And let me set the stage. This is Michael Cohen secretly tape recording Donald Trump about setting up a secret company in order to make payments like the one to Susan McDougall and ultimately to Stormy Daniel through Alan Weiselberg's knowledge, the CFO who's sitting at Rikers for the next four and a half months, all in one package and one two minute clip.

Let's roll the tape. I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend, David, so that I'm going to do that right away. I've actually come up and I've spoken to Alan Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up with funding. Yes. And it's all the stuff, all the stuff. Because you never know where that company never knows where

he's going to be. It's in there. Correct. So I'm all over that. all the stuff, all the stuff, because you never know where that company never know where he's going to be. He gets it right. So I'm all over that. And I spoke to Alan about it when it comes time for the financing, which will be, listen, we'll have to pay you. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no,

no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, Let's break that down. Donald Trump is telling Michael Cohen that that he acknowledges that payments have to be made through David, who's David Picard at the National Inquirer, through the hands of Alan Weisselberg, his CFO and and the Donald Trump suggestion and

agreement, his tacit agreement, expressed agreement to make these payments to pay off people like McDougal and ultimately stormy Daniels is let's do it in cash So there's no record and Michael Cohen says don't know no no not cash Can't do it by cash and we know what happened ultimately with the Stormy Daniels is that Michael Cohen out of his own bank account Stroke to check for a hundred and thirty thousand dollars not not because out of his own magnanimous heart. It's because he knew he was going to get reimbursed by his client, Donald Trump. He did, except what he got reimbursed. Here's the false record.

It was recorded by Alan Weiselberg and the controller on the official books and records of Trump organization as a legal retainer from Michael Cohen. He also got another few hundred thousand dollars on top of that for pulling this off. What you think about Michael Cohen recording Donald Trump and the conversation about cash setting up the company, Alan Weiselberg and David Picard, all in one audio package. Well, it's incredibly incriminating and it sounds like Donald Trump has done it over and over and over again, where he was like, that just that just, just, just, just do the cash, just pay the cash.

But that's something that the grand jury is listening to. And frankly, Donald Trump's posts, the way you just use that as evidence, it's actually something the grand jury may have seen as well. Like Donald Trump is doing himself no favors. And this is a good thing. Keep on posting on social media. Keep having your horrible lawyers go do interviews

because you're just creating an evidence trail that is deeper and deeper and deeper. The strange thing about it though is, you go back to some previous major kind of criminal prosecutions and, you know, people have to find the smoking gun, right? It's like, where's that one email or where's that one hand written note? The reality is when it comes to Donald Trump, it is right there in the open. I mean, he says all of these things publicly and all the evidence is right there.

I think what sets this unique time and history apart from other times in history, though, is even though it's right there, you sadly have a major political party that has been infiltrated by Trumpism. It's become a cult. And 25% of the population looks at horrific heinous, traitorous, criminal conduct, and they go, yeah, we like that, we're cool with that, cool, let's do it. And it's disgusting, but it's right, it is so shockingly right there in front of our faces, the crimes that he committed, which is why though,

and here's the gray point when you go talk about that Takapina interview, because Trump is the cult leader there, Trump can maneuver in the cult, because the reality is, if that was one Trump wouldn't do that Stephanopolis interview. But assuming Trump did do the Stephanopolis interview and he was asked those questions, he would just go something like, George, shut up, George, you are a liar. You are fake news, shut up, right? That's what he would do. He wouldn't even address the questions. But Taka Pina has to address the questions the same way

when you're in a court forum. You have to address evidence and facts and you can't do what you get away with on Fox propaganda. So you put Taka Pina into a place with Stefan Opelis who asks very basic questions. He looked flatfooted on the most basic of questions. The only person who looked more flatfooted, I don't know if you saw this, Pope,

though the woman who, no, not hobba, yes. But the Maggi Republican who writes in the New York Post, they her name is Bethany Mandel. And she's like one of the main people who talk about woke. She writes a chapter on this is woke and that's woke. And she was on a a news network. And she was asked, Hey, do you know what can you just define what woke is it's the only person who looked more flat, but here just watch this Popeye. It's unrelated to love. But I got

a shot. I got to show this deal. I'm from Americans consider themselves very liberal and probably fewer of them consider themselves to be woke. So, you know, when, when, when, what is that meeting you? Could, could, would you mind defining woke? It's come up a couple times, I just want to make sure we're on the same page. So, I mean, woke is sort of the idea that, this is gonna be one of those moments that goes viral. I mean, woke is something that's very hard to define and we've spent an entire chapter defining it.

It is sort of the understanding that we need to re-totally reimagine and re-reduce society in order to create hierarchies of oppression. Sorry, it's hard to explain in a 15-second sound bite. Yeah, look at your time. Oh my God. Well, so I felt bad for her and I don't even like her writing. But let me ask you.

I would feel bad normally. Anyone who's in that position, I truly empathize. Just look, can happen to anybody. Sometimes you just lose your thought process again, but that's not what happened there. She's weaponized a word to victimize people and to destroy people's lives and it was the biggest stop. But anyway, let's go back to the video. But I want to ask you a question because we do this for a living too.

Joe Takapina doesn't have to go on George Stephanopoulos' show. Alina Habba doesn't have to go on CNN. They could lay low. Let Susan Necklace do her whatever her work is as the real criminal defense lawyer in this particular case for Donald Trump. I have a working theory. Why is the Trump camp trotting these people out on these shows, trying out these themes? Why do you think I have a theory? I think they perform for Donald Trump. They have an audience of one.

I think that they know he watches these shows. And I think that they go in. Like if you noticed, Takapino went in with a plan, which is he only wanted to talk about element three. Right? And similarly, the the MAGA Republican lady who spoke about woke, they go in with the preconceived plan. And because the media's so broken,

they get away with it a lot, right? But you just get, and both of those situations, the question was fairly basic and fairly open-ended. Like, just tell me about element one. I don't wanna tell you about element one. We're going element three. It's like, no, just, can you tell us about element one. I don't want to tell you about element one. We're going to element three. It's like, no, just, just, can you tell us about element one?

But he's only prepped for element three. Well, well, you're right about, you're right about that. It's performative in that I've got a show coat leader that I'm a tough guy so that he uses me again or to feed his ego. I also think, and this is related, that it is a part of the Trump campaign for reelection, right?

He wants these people to go on because he's not, whether he gets indicted or doesn't get indicted, he doesn't think any of this matters to that, but he's trying to win the Iowa caucus. He's trying to win this or that. And the, in E-fields, he has to push back against these narratives, these criminal indictment narratives, which are soon going to be more than narratives. If we're right, they're going to be actual indictments that he's going to have to deal with.

But I think it's that also. He's basically, he doesn't feel because he can't, he can't, he has to chase every shiny object. He can't let it sit. If he was just citizen Trump worrying about criminal jeopardy and his, in his liberty, and he was normal, he would not, this would not be happening. This is because he's candidate Trump all the time. And he wants these people to go on there and, and chill for him as a candidate. So, um, we got Michael. So let's, let's get down to what everybody wants.

Cause Monday, Michael Cohen, I assume he's done three hours of testimony, any indication that he needs to go back or he's done. So he went Monday, he went Wednesday. So he went twice. And I think Wednesday he's he's done and in full disclosure, I haven't heard from him. I haven't heard from him yet. And so I don't know, but we'll have it. Well, we'll be doing a political beat down tomorrow where where I'll talk about as much as as much as he

can. So he's done as of, let's say he's done as of today, as of Wednesday. And so let's assume Michael Cohen was the last witness. It's very difficult to follow Michael Cohen. You wouldn't follow a Michael Cohen. They've already checked the box at the Manhattan D.A.'s office in speaking with and giving Donald Trump an opportunity to testify He's already indicated he will not no surprise drop his immunity and testify and they've spoken to Susan necklace his lawyer Assume to try to convince them not to indict the odds of March are the 15th of March and

There's been a rumor that that would be when the indictment would come of March. And there's been a rumor that that would be when the indictment would come. A, how confident are you, Ben, that there is going to be an indictment of Donald Trump off of this grand jury based on what we just discussed on this show and other shows. And when do you think the indictment will be? I will not say 100% purely because I always want to carve out at least that 1% or 2% but I'll say this and I would rarely make such a prediction. I am 98% confident that there will be an indictment soon. There will be an indictment. My prediction at this point will be next week. I predict by this time next week that Donald Trump will be criminally indicted and charged. So I think that will happen. I think it'll definitely

happen in March. My previous predictions, if you go back, I had said that I thought the Manhattan district attorney would be the first to indict. So I would say that I feel like that was going against conventional wisdom. And it was a very unpopular opinion to hold when I held it. We've been following the data, though. I think I think by next week, Donald Trump will be indicted at least by the end of this month. Okay. Let's move on to another Trump event. This time, a civil rape and defamation case that is going to trial in less than three weeks. There's no stop in this locomotive. It's being driven by Southern District of New York federal judge Lewis Kaplan. He's already made his rulings on the motions and eliminate pre trial, meaning the evidence that he was going to allow in. It's

all gone terribly and horribly against Donald Trump and for democracy and for justice in the sense of what is going to be able to be presented by the lawyers. There's no stop in the jury selection. It's going to happen within the next several weeks. Now, it looks like Joe Takapina, the same guy who, frankly, based on reporting, I was sort of worried about in terms of, oh, this could be like a legitimate guy. He's got a track record. He's done well in courtrooms around the country, but he's obviously not ready for prime time when it comes to Donald Trump and representing that particular client, maybe because he criticized Donald Trump when he wasn't representing him in the past and criticized him pretty hard in the in the public. So whether it's Joe Takapina and or Alina Haba, hard to believe she would still be involved

in the case, but the problem I have with Joe Takapina is now watching him in action. It's a terrible set of optics for him to be cross examining E. Jean Carroll. It's just a mismatch, which in front of the jury could really blow up in the face of the defense. He's just too much of a pit bull. He's too much of a bulldog. He doesn't have a light touch. And here you're dealing with a woman in her 70s or late 70s, who claims that she was sexually

assaulted by the president and has been very consistent. And all of her story has tracked every time that she's told it, which is usually an indication that it is true. And now the latest bombshell brought by not the lawyers for E. Jean Carroll, but by the judge, the judge over the weekend issued an order, and we have it. It's only half a paragraph long, in which the judge on his own issued an order to show cause for both parties to tell him why an anonymous jury should not be used. And I did a hot tick on the anonymous jury process, which has been used since the 70s and 80s,

almost exclusively in criminal cases, generally criminal cases in which the defendant is a terrorist, a drug kingpin, a mafioso, a, you know, the unibomor, the world trade center bomber, somebody who is, who is the threat of bribery is ever present of jurors and the like don, the Teflon Don Don, Don Gotti, John Gotti. He had an anonymous jury. The judges have the power under under a federal statute where appropriate to tell the jury upfront and the media, we're not going to disclose anything about your identity, your jury questionnaire.

This is for your safety and your protection. And he wants to hear from defense and the and the plaintiffs lawyers about what do you think about my idea? It's a great idea, right? Now, look, if I'm Robbie Kaplan and I'm the lawyer for E. Jean Carroll, which he is, I would say your honor. That sounds good to us. Whatever you think is proper to run this, the administration of justice in your courtroom, we're in favor of it because they're automatically tags the defendant, Donald Trump, with the terrorist,

mafia, drug lord, you know, impromotor, you know, the halo effect, the devil effect over him before he even steps into the courtroom. What do you think that defense is going to do this week when they have to say whether the jury should be anonymous or not? They're definitely going to object to the jury being anonymous. I could pretty much, I will put less odds on that than the odds of Trump being indicted, but I will say the, the, there's good money on the fact that they will absolutely object to that. And by the way, one of the reasons that they'll object

to that, though, too, is that they do want to cause certain amount, I think, of jury intimidation. And I think they do want to try to cause anything that could derail this, anything that could cause a mistrial, anything that could, you know, put this thing off track, they want to do. Now, one of the things I'll also say though about Takapina though, now seeing him in action, who knows what this guy's gonna do. This guy is an idiot. Like, and by the way, I didn't know how much of an idiot was until he started speaking. I heard mixed things about him in the legal community. There were some people who said, hey, he's good. He represented meek Mills or whatever and did a good job there.

I've heard real trial lawyers who have said, no, the guy is a clown. He's always been a clown. But I'm kind of reminded of the Mark Twain quote, right, that it's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt. That's kind of how I feel about Taqapina, you know, or another quote about speaking softly and carrying a big stick like good trial lawyers don't need to act like that. Like that's that that that that that stick is cartoonish and weird. And the fact that he even thinks he has to go there and do that to shows to me that his judgments impaired. So honestly, I I thought though that with his entry into this case, I thought that Roberta Kaplan, E. Jean Carroll's lawyer was going to at least have a formidable opponent.

And actually now I think as much as I think Habba is a horrible lawyer, I think Habba would probably be a better, you know, and I said, Habba's like the worst lawyer. Habba may actually strategically be a better choice than this guy. I mean, this guy is the worst person for this type of case in that year. That's, all right. Great. That's the mismatch that I, he's going to have to solve. I don't know if he has a female partner or associate in his office that he, that can help him do the cross examination of E. Jean Carroll, but if he, this is, this is brain surgery for the defense. And he will screw

it up. If this is his demeanor and his approach to being a defense lawyer, that may work in some, you know, rapper athlete, you know, world. This is not going to work with with E. Jean Carroll, former gossip columnist for L magazine, who's pushing 80 years old and has a very authentic and truthful story to tell in a court of law that's been consistent from day one. Let me just throw one interesting piece about anonymity of juries. And when I was doing my research for the hot tick that I felt very interesting. And I don't I don't think you know this one. Do you know what happened with the John Gotti anonymous jury?

No, what happens? Well, one of the reasons that the press fights back against anonymity is because they feel they have a job to do as well, which is sort of investigating, you know, some of the jurors to make sure they're on the up and up and they say, we don't have a runaway jury situation where somebody tries to get on there on purpose in order to throw the jury. And, you know, there is a transparency issue there that goes away if they're anonymous. Well, the John Gotti, the Teflon Don, the original Teflon Don, anonymous. Well, the John Gotti, the Teflon Don, the original Teflon Don, trials in the 90s in New York were done anonymously, what they didn't know and the press couldn't figure it out because they didn't know who the jury was, is that one of the jurors was tied

to an Irish organized crime and was a member of it. And at some point, using the cover of anonymity reached out to the Gotti family and actually took a bribe and that trial went for John Gotti because of the cover of anonymity. So we don't want that to happen. And I don't think that's what Lewis Kaplan is worried about. What Lewis, the judge is worried about, obviously. And you and I have reported on it extensively

on this network, is that Donald Trump has a history noted by the JAN-6 Committee and others of trying to interfere with influence and temper with witnesses. And that is not that hard to do to cross that over to jury tempering. And the judge, you know, he knows who he's dealing with. And so he's worried that the MAGA supporters of Donald Trump, once they get the names of the jurors, will dox them and worse, swat them and worse and put their lives in danger because they're performing their civic and constitutional duty of being a juror in a civil case. And so I agree with you, the defense is going to object to it because it stigmatizes their client from day one before he even takes his seat in

the in the courtroom. And by the way, for those that have asked, Donald Trump is a defendant in a civil case. He can't phone this in. He can't send a representative. He has to sit in the courtroom. I mean, I'm not aware of a ex president, maybe candidate Trump exception to this rule, Ben, he's going to have to sit in that courtroom next to his lawyers at the defense table every day and stand up when the jury comes into the room and stand up when the judge comes into the room, just like any other defendant in a case, period. And so they're going to fight that they don't want him stigmatized because the jury's

going to plant in the jury's mind bad guy, bad guy, bad case. And I need to and I need protection. But at the end of the day, what do you think? You think it's going to be an anonymous jury? No. I think ultimately there'll be objections to it. And then I think someone's going to object to it. And I think for the sake of the record, there will be an admonition that will then be, you know, a statement, something

like any type of effort to threaten will be subject to contempt. I just think that Judge Kaplan, I could be wrong about this, is kind of setting up a two step here, figuring both with the media and with, you know, Trump's lawyers to basically put it out there, see kind of use it as bait to see what the response is going to be. He didn't say for sure he's going to have it. He wants an order to show a cause why one shouldn't be. And then to basically say, look, I issue this order to show cause. And now violations will be subject to contempt. It's a way of, I think think just him asserting control over his court. And you raise a great point there as well, just the optics of Donald Trump showing up in

that courtroom. I wonder if he will though show up every single day. I mean, you know, it's not a criminal case, right, where he like kind of has to be there. So there is a world where he just says, I'm not going to be be there But how does the jury feel if he doesn't show up every single day and if he's not there during jury selection You and I would never have a situation where we're okay with a client not being at their own civil trial Every single day, but I just can't imagine a scenario. They'll wear Trump will sit there Literally every single day and do nothing but sit there. I could be wrong about that. I agree.

I agree with you, but this is what they're going to have to do because you and I have done it with regular everyday witnesses and defendants. You have to explain it to the jury, which means the days that he's not there, the judge either was some thing that they've all approved when the jury's not around to read. It's going to have to do something to tell the jury, but the read to the jury is going to be, Donald Trump doesn't give a shit about this case. And it's only going to help the plaintiff, the days that Donald Trump is in present, right? There's no doubt about it. One of the thing I wanted to mention though about Takapina, because you hit on it before. And I just this whole episode is why Takapina is,

you know, you know, an idiot and potentially very unethical too. Because Takapina, you did a hot take on this before as well. Takapina took a position previously that was against Donald Trump when he represented an insurrection as Julian Carter. He represented the insurrection as to assaulted and killed officer Siknik, the capital police officer during the January 6th insurrection, and basically in the sentencing memorandum, called out Trump. Trump's own lawyer calling out Trump here.

And here, we have him, he says, a climate of mass hysteria, this is what Joe Tucka penis says, a climate of mass hysteria fueled by the dissemination of misinformation about the 2020 election, originating at the highest level, gave rise to the visceral powder keg waiting to ignite. And that is precisely what occurred. So that's one touch point of him calling Donald Trump.

And also, and doing some research on Takapena, you know, he represented Bernard Carrick, the disgraced New York police commissioner who's very close to Donald Trump and also work with Trump to try to stop a free and fair election. But Taca Pina represented Carrick and they got into a lawsuit against each other where Carrick accused Taca Pina of of affairs drug abuse and racketeering and Bernie Karrick up the ante it says and his latest legal fight accusing his ex buddy, Joe Taka Peena

in new legal papers of extra marital affairs with TV stars prescription drug abuse and even racketeering. So just two touch points there we can go into that. Well, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, we got one more. This is like dueling banjos, Takapena style. We got one more. Ben, remember, and we'll have salty find it. Remember that before he was involved with this case,

representing Donald Trump against E. Jean Carroll, he was on CNN or one of them, and he took a pot shot at Donald Trump calling him the defamber in chief related to E. Jean Carroll. I am very happy about that one. Right, and so I did a hot take on it. We'll show, we'll let Salty find it. Put it up there for us.

And this is before he got hired. So this is the bad news bears of legal defense teams so far. Um, you know, he's mixing and Matt Donald Trump is mixing and matching his lawyers. He's putting some out in front in the media. He's putting some behind the scenes. Joe Takapina can't figure out whether he is the lead defense lawyer in the E. Jean Carroll case or, or H or Haba is, you know, a, a, Robbie Kaplan, the lawyer for E. Jean Carroll called out and told the judge that Alina Haba told her she was leaving as lead counsel. And then, and then Haba said, no, I'm not.

And then only Haba filed the motion to exclude the two other women who were sexually assaulted or claim they were and the access Hollywood tape and Takapena's name wasn't on it. I mean, this whole thing is an utter and complete mess and they better get their act together, although I don't think they will in time for this trial, which is like in in two and a half weeks. So moving on from a civil case, a criminal case involving Donald Trump, we've got another potential criminal case that hasn't gotten that much attention yet because of all the Jack Smith grand juries that are still, still in motion, still in play.

Pardon me. We have reporting from the Guardian in the UK, based on a whistleblower, who was a co-founder of the truth social media entity that Trump uses to own truth social, there is from a whistleblower who was a co-founder of the media empire that Trump owns, this truth social that has his social media platform within it, that there was a huge shortfall of capital within the company, while they awaited the merger, which has been held up by the SEC, the Securities and Exchange Commission, with a SPAC, a special purpose acquisition company, assumed to be publicly traded company that has no assets whose only purpose is to acquire another company and therefore take it public. Something the SEC has as hated and cracked down on all of these SPACs.

And one of the crimes that's being investigated by the US Attorney's Office, the Southern District of New York, along with the SEC criminal division is whether the SPAC entity, what's called the SPAC sponsor, DWAC was already coordinating with the acquisition target Trump's company before it sold its shares to investors. That is a huge no- no in the SPAC world. The SPAC vehicle taking in its investments can't know what its target acquisition is because then you're basically just getting around all the SEC regulations on taking a company public. They have one year to two years to go out and find a target. And then the investors, after they see who gets acquired,

can decide whether they want their money back or not. But you can't have coordination. That's a criminal, a criminal act. And they are investigating whether Donald Trump and his entity coordinated and properly and illegally with the SPAC sponsor, the acquisition vehicle. That's the nature of it. So the whistleblower came forward and said, at a moment last year, when the Trump entity needed cash, because it didn't have any access to the back money, all of a sudden, $8 million arrived, brokered by the SPAC sponsor, already another layer of improper interaction between the two entities, and that the $8 million came ultimately from a small Caribbean island called Dominica through a bank that traces its roots

and founding back to Vladimir Putin. So a Vladimir Putin bank with a family holding company, basically anonymous, donated $8 million into Trump world, the Trump vehicle, through Alexander Smirnoff, not making these names up, who was when he wasn't the head of a huge maritime entity controlled by Putin, and owned by Putin, called Rosmo report, was also Putin's first deputy minister of justice.

So that's where the eight million dollars came from. Basically, cronies and direct allies of Putin invested in there. And how do we know that Donald Trump knew about this? Well, we know Don Jr. knew about it because there's already, through the whistleblower correspondence and evidence that Don Jr. approved of the two million and the six million, it came in two parts into the Trump world entity and said, I'm fine with it because they needed the money. Problem is Donald Trump, Donald Trump owns 90% of that ultimate companies of the SPAC if they ever get to merge. And they're talking about a billion or more dollars within that SPAC if the SEC ever

lets it happen, which is looking exceedingly unlikely based on this criminal investigation. So Ben, that's a mouthful Russian money. Trump world. What do you think? And you mentioned the whistleblower. The whistleblower's name is William Wilkerson, one of the first employees at Trump media, who one of the reasons William Wilkerson even emerged as a whistleblower, I believe that Donald Trump basically tried to steal his shares and give his shares to family members. And that's one of the ways he

kind of pushed William Wilkerson out with more greed. Like, it wasn't enough that Donald Trump was going to own 90% of this thing after the SPAC merger was ultimately consummated. He needed more, needed to take it from William Wilkerson. And eventually, Will Wilkerson became a whistleblower, turned this all over to the SEC. There's been SEC investigations and Department of Justice investigations that have gone into the investigations into

digital world, acquisition company into Trump media, and the merger has not taken place. Just and additionally, this SPAC has utterly tanked. It's almost back to the $10 a share, which is basically the initial level that all SPACs start out with at $10 a share. And so it's crashed by huge amounts of people and huge amounts of money have been lost there. And now here we're learning that the key loan that was made took place. One was by Paxon Bank through ES Family Trust from this island to Minica. And then there was another six million. So that was the eight million that basically kept the company afloat.

And why to keep the company afloat. Keep the company afloat though because this was a potentially billion dollar advantage to Donald Trump. Like that's the ultimate outcome. That's why to me, this is directly traceable with Trump because as you point out, if the merger ultimately is consummated, if it takes place and if the valuation of this emerged entity is now at a billion dollars or so, Donald Trump who owns 90% of it would make $900 million. So for, and again, you would say if it's $2 billion, $1.8 billion, if it was $2 billion. So Trump stood to make a lot of money. So for the Russians to give $8 million to help Donald Trump get $1.8 billion is an investment

if you want Donald Trump to keep going around and destroying American democracy. And the last point I'll make, and this is something that we've emphasized a lot here for the legal a furs out there. We've also done it on Midas Touch Network hot takes. I know a lot of people are focused on January 6th, the underlying insurrection and what Donald Trump said at the ellipse. I know lots of people are focused on the fake electors. I know lots of people are focusing on Donald Trump's threats regarding local and state election officials. All important points to focus on. But I've always said watch the money, follow the money. Jack Smith was in the

public integrity section of the Department of Justice. He led the public integrity section. His team that he's brought on were other leaders from the public integrity section and they focus a lot on financial crimes, campaign finance violations. And I said they are going to go through these financial documents, both in terms of Donald Trump's political organizations, in terms of Donald Trump's finances, and then in the parallel track with the New York Department of Justice, the Department of Justice out of the Manhattan DOJ office, their work in the Southern District and the Eastern District. These people are the best in the biz at going through financial crimes.

So I think absolutely, this is big news. And I think ultimately the Trump indictment from the feds will be heavily focused on the financial crimes. Totally agree with you. And let's stay on the money. So long as we're talking about money and funding of things like CPAC and other,

what appears to be grassroots organizations that are nothing but astro turf. We've got, and I'll let Ben, of course, you lead on this, we've got a new Department of Justice announcement of an indictment of a Chinese billionaire on fraud charges with direct links to the right wing, MAGA right wing Republicans and podcasters

and anti-patriots like Steve Bannon. Why don't you tell us about it? I mean, you remember right before the 2020 election, the news about how Steve Bannon, I mean, it came out after the 2020 election, but I think it was October 31st. Steve Bannon spoke in front of a group of people who were assembled by an exiled Chinese billionaire by the name

of Gua Wang Gui. And he told them, no matter what the results of the election are, we're going to claim, or Trump's going to claim that he won the election and that the election was stolen. He put out the roadmap of what the plan was. We did some hot takes on that here on the Midas Touch Network. But Steve Bannon's closest associate an ally is this guy Gua Wang Dui who also goes by the name Ho Wang Quak or Miles Guao as a number of Elias is also goes by the name like the principal

Goes by the name brother seven You know it gets really kind of deep and dark in terms of what these various aliases are, very mafia-esque. But you have a situation here where Gua Wang Dway was running lots of social media accounts on the far right that was spreading a lot of mega propaganda and all the disinformation, the Hunter Biden laptop stories, for example, were funneled through Gua Wang Dway. When Steve Bannon was arrested by the feds in 2020, for his involvement in the We Build the Wall scam, where he stole money from GoFundMe donors for himself and his lavish lifestyle that was supposed to go build the wall that Mexico was going to pay for

He was arrested on the massive yacht that was owned by Gua Wong Dway So that's how important Gua Wong Dway is also Gua Wong Dway Started a non-profit. I put that in quotes a non-profit with Steve Bannon called the new federal state of China group, which was the main sponsor of this past KultPak or CPAC and CPAC even did a post where they thank the new federal state of China for your support of CPAC in DC 2023 and being a partner sponsoring our event. Balloons are above us, but CCP is among us. Visit NFSC at Media Robooth, 31 and 32 at CPAC 2020.

Well, Gua Weng Dway was just arrested in New York for engaging in a $1 billion fraud scheme, basically stole this money from investors, raised a lot of money through the social media accounts that were supposed to be invested in these entities, but it seems from the allegations, Gua Wang Dui, just stole the money for himself to purchase a $50,000 square foot home to purchase a $3.5 million Ferrari. It goes on and on and on and on. But Gua-Wong-Jue, now arrested for multiple felony counts.

Also, the SEC filed a civil complaint in parallel track with the criminal complaint. But just as we talk about exiled Chinese billionaire, who's basically the Magas top donor who was just arrested for a billion dollar fraud scam. And he used those, that those monies, one to pay for his lavish lifestyle and two to basically fund Maga Republican movement and spread disinformation like you don't get any more Maga Republican than that. But that's who they are. That's who the macro Republicans are in 2023. That's

the Republican Party. Yeah. I'm old school. So if you had associations, if anybody had associations with the Chinese or the Russians, that ended your career as a politician. Here, they're able to completely grift due relationships with the Chinese who are foreign policy enemy, the Russians who are obviously are foreign policy enemy. Get away with supporting our enemy in comments like Donald Trump is frequently does conducting his own foreign policy illegally as a former president. These used to be really bad things to be associated with communism and China and Russia as a US politician. And I'm hoping that the electorate sees through all of this at the appropriate time and pulls

the lever for blue, not red, for the appropriate reason. We'll see. But you and I have to continue to follow stories like this and bring it to our listeners and followers, the frontal lobe of our listeners and followers. So they're armed with these facts when they're out in the streets and in their cocktail parties and around their dinner table, talking about these things with friends and family and maybe some people that are still on the defense about which party to support in 2024. And Popok, that's why the big lie is used by propagandist and authoritarians. And it's to your point right there. If you can tell these lies over and over again and demonize and otherwise and basically treat everyone who's not a

mega-republican, right? As basically cockroaches, that's how the mega-republicans message things, right? If you were to ask mega-republican, who would you rather lead America? Vladimir Putin or President Biden? Overwhelmingly they would say Vladimir Putin. It is not even close when you spread these heinous lies, right? When it's like, well, Democrats, pro democracy, like, okay, we're fighting for healthcare and education and, and making sure a woman can control her own body and fighting for better wages and jobs and infrastructure and

all these things. But Magger Republicans make up all these lies over and over again. but Magi Republicans make up all these lies over and over again when they lie or when they start doing things like actually doing deals with the Russian and the Chinese government, you know, or or or exile Chinese billionaires engaged in fraud, they've already spread so much disinformation out there that it's just another story out there, right? And it's just like, well, there's just so much information. They're saying this about the Democrats. The Democrats are saying this, it's just both sides. No, it's not both sides, okay? It's not the Democrats saying it. It's the mega Republicans are lying. They are making this crap up to demonize Democrats. Meanwhile, the Maga Republicans are engaged

in these heinous, despicable, traitorous act and crimes. It's not a both sides issue. And the media always bites the bait on the both sides. I'll give you a perfect example of, proves your point on this JD, JD Vance, right? The new senator who wrote Hill, Bill, Ilegi, he actually said in an interview, or at a press conference the other day, this past week, that the Republican party is the party of the workers. The Republican party is the party of the workers. Every union supports the Democrat, the Democratic party and has for a long, long time. The Republican Party is the party of golf court, country clubs, golf courses and people like Donald Trump, not the workers.

But that went unchallenged in the media, or at his press conference. Yeah. Well, you know what? It is the real failure of the media, which has provided an opening, though, for a media network that tells the truth, ultimately, like the Midas Touch Network. But Popeye, I guess we should close with this. Are you enjoying this DeSantis Donald Trump Civil War?

Because today Donald Trump's Super PAC filed a complaint against Ron DeSantis to the Florida Commission of Ethics, basically saying that DeSantis is running a shadow campaign and that under the Florida Constitution, this part is true. Under the Florida Constitution, a sitting governor cannot campaign for the presidency and still be the governor. I think ultimately the GOP in Florida is going to change that law. So watch for authoritarian dissentist to try to watch for it. I'm telling you,

it'll happen soon. But for right now, the law in Florida is that you can't run for president and be the governor. So Trump Super PAC PAC filed this ethics complaint against DeSantis, you know, and calling him out. And DeSantis very sheepishly kind of responded and said, oh, it's just a waste of time and resources to do that. That's not what this ethics, you know, committee is here for. By the way, I think Donald Trump, even if he's indicted because the Republicans

have become a cult, I think Trump will beat the Santas in Florida. That is how much of a cult I think the Republican Party is. That's my prediction here as well. But seeing this civil war that's taking place where now Trump's super PAC is actually filing ethics complaints against DeSantis. The Republican Party is going to eat themselves up. They're going to cannibalize themselves.

And good, you know, as Lindsey Graham basically said, when he was, I guess, pretending to be a different type of Lindsey Graham many, many years ago, if we elect Donald Trump, this Republican Party is going to get destroyed. And I'll tell you, Donald Trump is not going to let ever a Republican party exist without it being a mega cult. So here's your cult folks that you wanted. You've become a weirdo fascist cult. Good luck.

We here in pro-democracy will fight for our country and every day. Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment was, thou shalt not bash another Republican. And this Republican magapartis completely lost its way. And they are doing hand-to-hand combat against each other, shooting each other in the back in order to get the nomination. And I think you're right.

Just as Donald Trump emerged from a field of 15 or 16, you know, we couldn't even keep track of the mall sleepy, dopey, dummy, you know, he was the only one that was sort of interesting on the stage. And he absorbed all of the time, all the oxygen from the room and got the nomination. And that and I think it's going gonna happen, I agree with you. It's gonna happen all over again, but to your point, if all the Republicans have is a culture war led by somebody like DeSantis making that front and center and Trump jumping onto it

about transgender people and bathrooms and athletes and African American studies. And if that is going to be their campaign, which it looks like it's going to be, they will lose a general election because that is not pocketbook issues that people care about, especially the independence and other people like women who want to pay back Trump for what he did to them and to the rest of the country in the abortion decisions and the constitutional law violations. So if that's what they're going to run on, and to Santhus or Trump is going to run on that, they will lose once again, as Nikki Halley will says, they will lose their eighth out of ninth popular vote in election for the presidency.

Yeah, look, I mean, this is dangerous. It's weird and we will not be gaslit here on the Midas Touch Network to call it out. And I'll just leave this one point because you mentioned Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan and Reagan type Republicans enabled this to happen. The Paul Ryan Reagan-esque kind of style of country club style Republican that you

talk about had no backbone. They opened the door to this. They allowed this to take place. They catered to the base. The base took over what the party was. And now it is a mega Republican cult. But I'll save the politics for the brother of the whole five. It's so fun hosting this with you too, man. It's weird where I'm on your

end of the microphone, but look, we've reached the end of another midweek edition of legal AF with special guest co-anchor, my regular anchor on the weekends, founder of Midas Touch along with his brothers Ben, my Salas. No commercial sponsors today. So making your support in the way you do it, weekends, founder of Midas Touch along with his brother's Ben Mysalis. No commercial sponsors today. So making your support in the way you do it all free, even more important. Listen, free subscribe on our audio podcast, which will drop right after this. If you watched us, listen to us on audio podcast. If you do audio podcast, come over and take a look at us over on the Midas Touch Network

on YouTube. Show your love for the show by going on to the Midas Touch merch store. We've got some great things that have legal AF logos and the wheels of justice and coffee mugs. Review us leave a five star rating. These are all for free. You can also go on for the over arching parent entity of Midas Touch and be a Patreon and you could subscribe through the Patreon account. So that's it. We've reached the end. We'll see you next week. Ben, I'll see you on Saturday. Have a great one. Shout out to the Midas Mighty. you