Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump LOSES ALL CONTROL and Gets CRUSHED in Court

Episode Date: October 8, 2023

Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok are back with a new episode of the weekend edition of LegalAF. On this episode, they discuss: week 1 of the NY Fraud Case of the Century against Trump and all his entities and executives, including his being DENIED a stay of the trial by the appellate court, and blockbuster testimony against Trump by his most senior “money men” executives; Trump’s delaying tactics to dismiss ALL his losing cases at the last minute including to avoid giving testimony; developments in the Mar a Lago criminal prosecution and delays caused by the South Florida federal judge; the DC federal judge keeping the May 2024 trial on track by contrast as she considers a new Trump motion to dismiss the indictment; updates in the Georgia Trump criminal prosecution and how Judge McAfee is handling his courtroom, as the case turns towards a trial in about 2 weeks, and other breaking legal news from around the US.  DEALS FROM OUR SPONSOR! MOSH: Try Mosh today and use LEGALAF to save 20% plus free shipping at https://moshlife.com/LEGALAF! RHONE: Head to https://rhone.com/legalaf and use code LEGALAF to save 20% off your entire order! SUPPORT THE SHOW: Shop NEW LEGAL AF Merch at: https://store.meidastouch.com Join us on Patreon: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Remember to subscribe to ALL the Meidas Media Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://pod.link/1510240831 Legal AF: https://pod.link/1580828595 The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://pod.link/1595408601 The Influence Continuum: https://pod.link/1603773245 Kremlin File: https://pod.link/1575837599 Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://pod.link/1530639447 The Weekend Show: https://pod.link/1612691018 The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560 American Psyop: https://pod.link/1652143101 Burn the Boats: https://pod.link/1485464343 Majority 54: https://pod.link/1309354521 Political Beatdown: https://pod.link/1669634407 Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://pod.link/1676844320 Uncovered: https://pod.link/1690214260 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At Salesforce, we're all about asking more of AI. Questions like, where's the data going? Is it secure? Are you sure? Are you sure you're sure? Get answers you can trust from Salesforce at AskMoreVai.com. At Public Mobile, we do things differently. From our subscription phone plans to throwing a big sale right now when no one else is. Well, maybe they are, but who cares? Our sale is better. And it's on

right now, no waiting necessary. You have the latest phone. Now, take advantage of a great price on a 5G subscription phone plan. It's the perfect deal for anyone who could use some savings right now. Subscribe today at publicmobile.ca. Different is calling. We start in New York where the first week of the New York Attorney General Civil Fraud trial against Donald Trump has come to an end. Only week one, but it feels like year one with all of the developments. Partial summary judgment was already granted by the judge in the case judge Arthur and Goran against Donald Trump before trial even started finding that Donald Trump and the

Trump organization and his adult kids, Eric and Don Jr. Reliable for persistent fraud. So what this trial is really about is the disgorgement or the monetary damages, among a few other causes of action. Donald Trump spent two and a half days attending the trial, ranting and raving like a lunatic attacking the prosecutor and the judge before getting a gag order imposed on him for threatening judge in Goron's Law Clerk. Trump then fled New York to his safe space at Mar-a-Lago in Florida while devastating testimony

against him continued throughout the week, including Perry Mason-like moments where one of his top executives just admitted to the underlying fraud. Also, Trump dismissed his $500 million lawsuit against Midas Touch Network host Michael Cohen because Trump was too afraid to show up for his deposition that was supposed to take place in New York early next week. Next, we go to Washington, DC, where federal judge Tanya Chutkin rejected Donald Trump's attempt to delay the proceedings in the prosecution by Jack Smith for Trump's attempt to overthrow the 2020 election. Donald Trump also filed a motion to dismiss the indictment in the case before Judge Chutkin. Trump cited presidential immunity for his ability to try and

overthrow our democracy, which is frivolous on its face. We will discuss trial as scheduled in that federal case for March of 2024 and no indication judge Tanya Chutkin is going to move that date. Compare and contrast the law and order judge Tanya Chutkin with the corrupt and incompetent judge Eileen Cannon because next we go from Washington DC and we head to Florida where judge Eileen Cannon, the Trump-appointed corrupt stooge, ordered a temporary stay or basically a indefinite delay of the classified discovery deadlines as she contemplates moving the entire discovery and trial schedule. Trial is scheduled in the Florida case for Trump's theft of classified records for May 2024,

but based on what Judge Cannon is doing, I think that will be delayed. Finally, we go to Georgia in the Rico case against Donald Trump and dozens of other code defendants where Judge Scott McAfee presiding over the Fulton County District Attorney case is controlling his docket seems to be enjoying his job a lot and denying efforts by Trump's co-defendants to play games and try to get their cases dismissed.

The first trial of Trump's co-defendants can Chesbro and Sydney Powell is only a few weeks away and guess what folks? It will be broadcast live right here on the Midas Touch Network. I'm Ben Myceles joined by Michael Popak. Excited to be here this weekend and share with you another busy week. You know, on Legal AF, there's a lot of episodes that we do that lead up to big things going down. This is a week where big things went down and because you've been following all of the trials, tribulations, developments, everything that's been going on over the past few years by watching Legal AF.

You all know all of these developments, so it all makes a lot more sense when the events go down. Michael Popak, how are you? Ben, I'm doing great. It's a breathless week. We have a prime example of Donald Trump continuing to confuse spectacle of a train wreck as his cases careem with political viability and electoral viability. Just this week off the list that you just made and I'm sorry if everybody I'm in transit

usually carry around my little popok porter board. I don't have it today. We'll tell you why later Ben and I are having dinner together in the same time, same time, same time zone, same place after AF. Just this week, just this week, we've got Donald Trump filing a motion to dismiss the Stormy Daniels hush money, cover up business record fraud case in New York. He dismissed the Cohen case. He dismissed the case against the trial judge in the civil fraud case judge Angoran.

He has moved to stay and lost the civil, the attempt to stay that case that's already in the second week of trial, which was denied. He has moved to delay the Mar-a-Lago case and seems to have a willing participant in Judge Cannon and that. He's moved to delay or dismiss the District of Columbia Judge Chuck in case. That isn't for the month of October or the quarter. That was for the week as his team of lawyers, which consists of about four people, as they battle against

the heavily resourced the United States of America, scramble to try to outflank Jack Smith, which Andorra Fawney-Willis, which is almost an impossible measure. They've decided, obviously, they had a checklist that they wanted to do to kind of narrow the issues and try to apply their resources as they try to play zone defense against the United States of America. And so you know there was a list that said, we got to dismiss the article 78 against Judge Angkoran. We got to dismiss the case against Cohen so we doesn't give a deposition. We got to delay Mar Mar-a-Lago, we got a delay, hush money, a delay, delay.

And that was the list. And somebody like some young associate was like, got it, and started drafting. And then they started firing it all out, hoping to catch Jack Smith's flat foot. We know that's not gonna work, but we got a lot to unpack and analyze here to explain what that list means.

But as I said at the top of my piece here, this is just a political train wreck and a legal train wreck, which we're Donald Trump once again confuses that he's getting notoriety from acting out and lashing out and violating all the gag orders with some sort of electoral viability. So Donald Trump's been engaged in the exact conduct that we're seeing kind of jam packed in this one week over four decades. He is the definition of a vexatious litigant. He files lawsuits on frivolous bases to try to harass and destroy people's lives, and he puts tons of money into it.

But then when his bluff is ultimately called, he dismisses those actions. And then when Donald Trump is a defendant, he tries to delay, delay, delay, use every type of scheme. There is no shame. Like where certain people would feel like, I can't possibly do that in a court of law I will be laughed out of there. He doesn't give a crap

He will just do whatever it takes to try to undermine the judicial system not just the litigants involved and so we saw this $500 million harassing lawsuit that he had filed against Michael Cohen back in April. Michael Cohen, my co-host here on the Midas Touch Network of the political beat down podcast and Cohen's like, bet, okay, I'll take your deposition and let's schedule it. And Trump tried to delay. And his lawyers made all of these arguments that legacy media doesn't cover. We cover here on the Midas Touch Network, but this is where I mean, you know, you have no shame. Trump's lawyers argued knowing that legacy media doesn't pick it up, that Trump would be too embarrassed to show up for his deposition, that Trump thought it could harm his reputation even more.

And then Trump said in another filing after he got an extended once, Trump said that he was going to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, even though he says it's only the mob that pleads the Fifth and I can't wait to testify. Legacy media picks up the part where he goes, I can't wait to testify. Not the part where his lawyers are filing in court that he's saying he's too scared to testify. He's saying it in court filings and Legacy media just ignores it. But when push comes to shove, Donald Trump always surrenders. He has this Teflon Don B.S. crap that the media projects to try to further his fascist ends. But he's not. He's very, very weak in here. I'll give you some

receipts. Here's the dismissal of the case that he filed against Michael Cohen, Donald Trump, I am through his counsel dismisses that case. In the same week, Popo, you mentioned before, he dismissed the article 78 lawsuit that he filed against Judge Ingoron. He filed a lawsuit against the judge presiding over the case that the New York Attorney General has just brought to trial. He dismissed that lawsuit, stipulation, withdrawing special proceeding.

And then if you just go back at it, you take a look at some other examples as well, not only is the article 78 dismissed, there is also the dismissal of the case that he had brought against. And this was a little bit a while ago. When he sued New York Attorney General Letitia James, that was dismissed.

He dismissed the case against her in the Court of Appeals. He dismisses all of these cases when push comes to shove. And so you could be sure that if you just stand your ground and you keep going going that accountability will be here, but Donald Trump relies the same way fascism relies on people being worn out. So with that setup, I want to talk about what took place in New York this week. We had two major witnesses who testified this week. We had the outside accountant at the

Mazers' Virm who testified. We had Donald Trump's in-house former controller, Jeff McConney testified, who went above and beyond the testimony that he had given at the Manhattan District Attorney Criminal Case where the Trump Organization was convicted of over a dozen felony counts. This was some like pop-up. I know we like the Perry Mason style moments on TV where a witness goes, we did it. I committed the fraud. It went down. Let's start with the witnesses. Let's start before talking about Trump's ranting and raving like a lunatic and the fact that he can't control himself and he attacked everybody and got a gag order and posed on him and that just looked like a, who he is, a reprehensible human being like these witnesses, it was Perry Mason moment after Perry

Mason moment. You've got McConey going, yes, Eric Trump told me to inflate the valuations and deflate it. Yes, we committed fraud. Weiselberg told me to do fraud. Eric told me to do fraud. The testimonies that they all committed fraud. Popeye, this was an explosive first week. Yeah, it's, it's, it's a mastery of the, of a trial process that we're watching in the

hands of the office of the attorney general doing a lot of things that would be a normal high-wire act where you're calling just have a little breakout session for legal AF law school. It is the Attorney General's case in chief right now that we're in. We'll be in that case in chief where she has the burden. For probably the next, oh, I don't know, 60 or so, 60 trial days. We only saw week one of the trial, five days or so, broke a little early for the long weekend, but there's gonna be like another 95 trial days. And so she has to figure out with her legal team,

Leticia James, how she's gonna present her case and to get momentum, because you and I are travelers, to figure out with her legal team, Latisha James, how she's going to present her case and to get momentum because you and I are travelers, how to get momentum for your case. And usually you only call in your case in chief while you have the case witnesses that are friendly, that you control, that you know are going to testify because you prepared them and you know what they're going to say. What you don't normally do is you don't call adverse witnesses, hostile witnesses, the defendants in the case, like Alan Weiselberg, the longtime disgraced, jailed, convicted CFO,

chief financial officer, and his, basically his subordinate, the controller of the company who reports to the chief financial officer. These are the two bag men and money men that are within the Trump organization and have been there for 40 to 50 years. Okay, so they are defendants in the case, but Latisha James' team called them as witnesses in their case in chief. Weisselberg will be going next week.

McCannie was brought in as a hostile witness, but the high wire act had a net underneath it for safety, because the Office of Attorney General knew what their testimony was going to be, because both of these gentlemen testified in the successful 17-count conviction of Trump organization entities for tax fraud last year. People forget, I don't want anybody to get justice fatigue. He's not the Teflon Don. He's 91 felony indictments beyond that.

He is losses at the E. Jean Carol rape and defamation case. He is 17 counts of tax evasion conviction beyond being a Teflon Don and other cases to come, including another E. Jean Carol case that's going to start and other civil fraud cases. So she had the benefit, even though her office didn't handle the case. The prosecution was handled by the Manhattan D.A.'s office. She had the transcripts of the sworn statements under oath, the testimony of Jeff McConney and of Weiselberg.

And so if they deviate from their testimony, and I said this in a hot tick, this is how I used to discipline my witnesses at trial. I would just hold in my hands, and I would just fold my arms like this, showing them that I had the transcript. I wouldn't even use it. I would just rock back and forth at the podium

because they knew, and then I would just, like sometimes if they were testifying, I'd open it, so they saw me opening it. This is my theater, political, my trial theater, and I would just look and then lower my glasses and then they'd get back on track without me having to impeach them by saying, well, didn't you testify in front of the, in front of, in Judge Mershon in front of a jury and didn't you admit to tax evasion on behalf of the Trump organization?

They didn't have to do that. And they didn't have to worry about getting access to those two witnesses, which I'm sure they did not have, because they are defendants in the civil fraud case. All they needed to do was call them up and make them one way or the other, conform and track the testimony they already gave last year. But even with that, the lawyer handling it for the Office of Attorney General, there were surprise moments because McConey, who got immunity to testify against the Trump organization in the tax case, he just gave it up really quick in the first two hours of

his testimony admitting that he participated in tax fraud at Donald Trump's and Alan Weiselberg's behest. And in response to the question, what do you think would happen if you didn't commit the tax fraud? And he said, I probably would have been fired. And this is a guy who's waiting on a $500,000 severance package because he recently left the organization. I'm not sure he's getting that Severance package anymore. Note to Jeff McConney. But the great thing about what we're watching is that she has decided as the attorney general that there are certain elements that she's got to address and carry the burden on

in her case in chief, namely intent. That is the big, when people ask me on the street, pardon me, which they do, about the case. And I say, what's the difference between what happened last Tuesday with the summary judgment and the first count of the complaint against Donald Trump and all the Trumpers for fraud and what they're trying right now.

I said, the biggest difference is intent. Last week, the judge was able to grant some re-judgment to find persistent fraud over a at least six-year period by all Trumps and Trump entities in New York business practice, but he didn't have to find, and the Attorney General didn't have to prove intent for that particular count. All the rest of the counts that are now up for trial for the next 95 or 100 days, is insurance fraud, financial record fraud, financial statement fraud, and conspiracies around that

have to, you have to prove intent if you're the attorney general. So to prove intent, what better way to do that than to pull your first insider witness, one of the bag men, the money men for Donald Trump, stick them on the stand and keep him on track with his prior Testimony Otherwise you they will impeach him and show that he's purging himself and McCondy didn't want it

That was like the third rail McCondy didn't want anything to do with purgery or impeachment They never had to do that with him He just gave it up in in a package right away So that was a bombshell moment. It's one of the reasons Donald Trump didn't want to be there for that. Everyone's like, well, he left because he left because, first of all, he was never going to go for any real portion of this trial. It's a hundred day trial. He shows up five more times. I'd be surprised. He made a statement. He made it a political campaign stop with all of his breaks, but he

wasn't going to sit in the room for people that think he's there to intimidate people like he'll intimidate the judge That backfired and I don't think that's what he was doing and you would think he if he was gonna intimidate somebody It would be Jeff McConee his longtime controller who's testifying against them But he decided not to even be in the room during that testimony In fact, Chris Keiss one of the lead trial lawyers even be in the room during that testimony. In fact, Chris Keiss, one of the lead trial lawyers, wasn't in the room. He was busy filing his appellate papers, and they left it to Alina Habba.

Talk about turning it over to somebody who's herself trial incompetent. You know, she's my favorite moment then, and then I'll turn it back. My favorite moment is when they're cross-examining McConney because he is whenever is just another quick breakout. When you have your own witness, you can't lead your own witness. You have to ask them open into questions and let them testify not yes or no unless it's naturally a yes or no question. You can't do what we do like you said on Perry Mason or these law shows. Isn't it a fact that on November 5th

You were and you know yes or no that's cross that's called leading you can lead Adverse witnesses when when they get to the case on the defense or if you call a hostile witness Who's obviously hostile you can start crossing and if're challenged, what I normally do is I'll start my cross by turning to the judge and say permission to treat the witness as hostile. And it'll be permission granted. And then you just go into cross. Now they skipped that step because it was obvious to everyone but Alina Haba that when you call a defendant in the case into your case in chief, they are automatically by their very nature hostile.

She had a stand up and say they're leading. They're leading the witness. And the judge was like, he's a defendant. He's obviously hostile. It's called cross. Try it. Alina, have you represent him? No.

Right. Who do you think is the client? I used to be your client. Yeah. He looks like Captain Kangaroo, but he is your client. I mean, that's the thing in all of the Trump filings. He's at least listed as somebody who's being represented by the Trump lawyer. So think about that when Alina Habba makes that objection.

But I got to hand it to Alina Habba. I thought her cross examination of Jeff McConee was her best performance yet to date. I'm just joking. She didn't... She didn't. She was too afraid to cross-examination Jeff McConee and there was no cross-examination of Jeff McConee. So, I'm not even going to...

Yeah, there. So, just think about that, everybody. So Jeff McConee goes up there. He's a defendant. The New York Attorney General's office cross-examines him. They get him to admit or he voluntarily admits, Eric Trump told me to commit fraud. Alan Weisselberg told me to commit fraud. It's basically all fraudulent, the enterprise that I work. Trump would have fired me if I didn't do it. Trump would have fired me. The Trump organizations of fraud.

This is the guy who's worked there since like 1989. The guys worked there his entire life. He's the controller of the Trump organization. Then the New York Attorney General sits down after that questioning. Then Judge Arthur and Goran goes to Alina Habba who acts like she's so tough in that she's this expert trial lawyer and she's she attacks the judge. Okay, Alina Habba,

the witness is yours. We're not going to ask any questions right now. We reserve your honor. We reserve. She sits there in front of that gamer laptop, which she claims is not her laptop or whatever. And she doesn't ask a single question. And then they go out these Maga Republicans and then they wind. Oh, but the judges say it's a fraudulent valuation. And Mar-a-Lago's really worth this. Your controller just testified and admitted to fraud. Your organization was convicted of felonies about a year ago.

Your outside accountant said that you committed fraud. In your depositions, your chief financial officer, Alan Weiselberg says he doesn't know generally accepting accounting principles, despite certifying that all of the financials they conform with GAP generally accepted accounting principles. Donald Trump says that all of the financials they can form with gap generally accepted accounting principles. Donald Trump says that he doesn't know generally accepting accounting principles and that Eric Trump was the one who handled the statement of financial conditions.

Eric Trump on his deposition states that he's never looked at the statement to financial conditions. And Don Jr. thought the lawyer for the New York Attorney General's office was flirting with him when she said, you don't know anything about generally accepting accounting principles. Do you? He's like, I don't know. I don't know anything. I just know that they're generally accepted.

I mean, that's who we're dealing with. And wait, wait, wait, and their CFO went to jail for six months for tax evasion related to payments that he received under the table for which they did not declare it for which both Bender, so back to Bender for a minute, we didn't talk about Don Bender. The mastery, the masterfulness of this momentum that Alicia James is creating, because as trial lawyers, it's not just random selection.

Like who we're gonna call first, who we're going to call second. It is a methodical thought process that every trial lawyer undergoes about who's my best set of witnesses. The fact that after Don Bender and another outside accountant, Don Bender being not only their 20 year outside accountant for the Trump organization, but personal accountant for Donald Trump, Alan Weissselberg, Matt Kalimari, the head of security, his son, Alan Weissselberg's son. I mean, this guy knows everything and testified that he told them in no uncertain terms, which McConney confirmed that they couldn't do the bonus system because they were evading taxes criminally, putting their then general council's bar license at risk.

This was Don Bender, who went on for a day and a half, just dumping on Donald Trump and also reminding Judge Angron as if he needed reminding. As there's nobody in the state of New York who knows the facts about the Trump organization Donald Trump in tax fraud and civil fraud than the judge judge and Goran who has sat through dozens of evidentiary hearings read and listened to every deposition transcript. I mean, I told I said on one of my hot takes, I practiced in this courthouse and in this courtroom. And I've never had a judge who's more prepared for a summary judgment. My judges are half as much prepared and summary judgment is still being considered. There's nobody

that was better prepared than him. And so with the testimony of all of these people and now linking it together, when you start, with think about the momentum pen, Bender comes on and says, yeah, I was with an organization called Mazers. That was an accounting firm and we had to disclaim 12 years of our audits with the Trump organization because we found the information provided by them was unreliable. Okay, let's dive into that and tell me who did you tell in the Trump organization that they were committing tax fraud potentially and and what was their response? And then go through Weisselberg, go through McConney with them,

go through Trump himself, where how about this signature? Is that Donald Trump's own signature certifying the information that went to you, is accurate and truthful? Yes, did you rely on that? In order to prepare the accounting statements and the tax forms, I did.

What did it turn out to be true? No, there were things that were left out that I wasn't told. And then, and then, and then, and then, and then, let's call the next guy who's an outside accountant. And then, let's take two insiders who were convicted or have immunity from prosecution, who were at the very heart of all financial decision

making along with Donald Trump. And let's go to them next, even though they're coming over from the other side of this case. And then this is only week one. Wait till the 60th day of her handling her case in chief. And this one last thing done, because we say this all the time. But I want our listeners and followers and watchers to understand this. And because you and I have been there,

when the wooden doors of a courtroom close in the back, and you as a member of the bar are standing in the well of the courtroom, along with your counsel, along with the opponent, and you're putting on not the stuff that you're talking about at press conferences on the courthouse steps, but you're doing the at press conferences on the courthouse steps,

but you're doing the painstaking, slow, and methodical presentation of evidence through witnesses, through documents, through transcripts, through videos, with a judge who was hanging on every word. I said in one of my videos, this is a bench trial. Normally you put on a guy like McConney or somebody and you go through checks and the jury starts to flatline after the fourth check. Is this a check that was deposited in the endorsement on the back, but with this judge, he's like,

tell me more, tell me more about where that check went. When you have that in contrast to the shit show, sorry, that's outside with Donald Trump, there's a big difference because when you're in that courtroom watching the mastery of the presentation of evidence, right? This, as I said, this is like a boa constrictor who is just around its victim and squeezing the life out of it over the next 50 days. Donald Trump can jump up and down and throw food on and throw food at the computer screen and do whatever and attack staff members and get gagged and do whatever he wants. But the doesn't change, does not change the immutable facts that are being presented painstakingly by the lawyers and the judge that's gonna decide it and the appellate court that's gonna back them up.

That's what we're watching. That's justice. What's going outside during breaks and tweeting in social media, that ain't it. That's running for office. And we need legacy media to talk more about what's going on in the trial with these bombshell revelations than asking Donald Trump when he's outside

attacking a prosecutor, hey, what do you have in for lunch, Donald? I mean, like you see the media doing that. It just makes me so glad that we created our own media network. And if you heard the term mansplaining before, I've coined a new term, magasplaining, which is kind of a form of mansplaining. It's when these maga Republicans or maga cult followers

try to explain away Donald Trump's fraud or everything that he does. That's called mega-splaining. So when they go, everybody knows that the fair market value is substantially higher than the tax appraisals to which I respond. Okay, let's accept your argument as true. Number one, Donald Trump was the one who gave the valuation at what it was. So it's not the judge saying Mar-a-Lago is valued at this. The judge is restating what Donald Trump claimed it was to pay lower taxes. Number one, number two, Donald Trump's employees, his executives for the past 25, 30 years, say he engaged in fraud, Maga splainers.

And number three, even if you told me fair market value is higher than tax assessments fine, I'll agree with you there. Not 5,000% higher, okay? That doesn't exist. And you don't just get to make up square footage. You don't get to say it's this size when it's actually that size. And so, no, stop with the ridiculous magazine and let's focus on what the actual evidence is to arrive at the truth.

And that kind of brings me to this final point on this topic, at least, which is Eric Trump announced that this was a big victory because the Appellate Department first division, which is like one of the appeals levels court, granted the Trumps and the Trump organization in Erick's motion to stay or just press pause for now on the dissolution of the Trump organization, the cancellation of the LLCs. Here's the thing about that. The main thing that Trump wanted was to stay the trial. That got rejected, as Popox said earlier in this episode,

with respect to the dissolution and staying that New York Attorney General, Leticia James, was not even fighting that. No one was arguing really even that the dissolution should have to occur immediately before the court of appeals makes its ruling. So it's not a ruling on the merits. It's actually, and if you've been following us here on Legal AEP and the hot takes, we said that's what we thought was going to happen, and that's what we said we thought should happen. The fact that I think Donald Trump is a massive fraud doesn't cloud my sober analysis that you can't dissolve the business while an appeal is pending. Because ultimately, if the court of appeals over rules or

over turns, what a trial court judge, which I don't think is going to happen here, but if that did happen, you can't unring the bell if a dissolution had already taken place. So naturally, if you're appealing a dissolution order and a dissolution takes place before an appeal can be heard, that would be unfair to any litigant. That's why as long as you just request the motion to stay, any court is going to grant that pending the appellate process. We said that's what's going to happen. That's what happened.

Let me give a cry. Let me give a cry. It's not a, it's the furthest thing from a victory. It's just the standard procedure. And then the Trump square looked the court of appeals agreed with us. We are. They love us now. And it's like, that's not what they're saying.

So here's what happened. I mean, we just from my perspective, because I practice in front of the first apartment, I'm a member of the first department of the Appellate Division of New York. They finally got around, as you said, the Trumpers to filing their motion for stay, which should have happened September 26th, the day.

10 days ago, you and I, if we were handling the Trump case, which we would never in a million years ago, but if we did, I would, I, you and I would have typed up a motion, a stay, and an appeal, waiting, we knew Angora was going to rule against us. So we'd have like 30 pages ready to go. Soon as we saw the order, we spent an hour to conform our papers to what was in there because we knew what was going to be in there. And we would file it within a minute and ask for the stay. They didn't do that. A week went by, you and our scratch and our head like, what are they doing?

If they wanted to stay, you don't wait until like the second week of the trial to go ask for it. So they, they, they got another order. You, you did it on a hot take. We did it on the mid week of the trial to go ask for it. So they got another order. You did it on the hot take. We did it on the midweek of legal AF from Judge Engoron, who then thought better about a wait a minute. I don't want them moving assets and changing corporations and to try to beat out my future judgment where the judgment that I've just given.

So I'm going to issue a supplemental order that requires the Trump organization and Trump and all the Trumpers to reveal their corporations that they're thinking about incorporating and the ones that they have and any assets that they're planning on moving and report that over to the Barbara Jones, the monitor who's been in place for almost a year on the original injunction that the judge entered related to persistent fraud way back when. And so they didn't like that order, including that in fact, that it addressed entities that they said were not in front of the judge. And so they went, ah, now we're going to file our emotion for stay. And so they filed papers with the first

department. What happens there is one justice, in this case, Milton, one justice looks at the papers and makes a decision, but wanted a hearing first. So while the courtroom trial was moving forward with the bombshell testimony that you would not just described, the lawyers had other lawyers, including Latisha James, had a high-tailed over to Madison Avenue and the first department to go argue in front of Judge Moulton in person. And we knew, and there's going to be a video, I'm going to look for it on YouTube, actually, for the first department, for the oral argument. But that argument has to be where Latisha James conceded that she is okay with that the entities are not dissolved and

their certificates are not dissolved at the present time. One reason, as you said, Ben, is that seems consistent with somebody, the other side trying to appeal. The other reason is she wants them to be an uninterrupted, going concern that generates money because she's going for half a billion dollars at the end of the case. So fine, you want to keep your companies up and running? You don't want to throw people out on the street on payroll? Fine, keep making money. Every dollar you make is going to be mine one day.

So I know that's why she did it. I am sure because she said it outside the courtroom. So I'm sure she said it in her oral argument to the judge. We're fine, your honor, with not having the dissolution happen, but the stay of the case, no way. You already did the the coronary denied this eight days ago, where we're four witnesses into the trial. No. And the judge, this one judge, for now said, I agree with you. No, no stay. Trial goes forward. And on the dissolution, since there's really no objection, I agree with you, no stay. Trial goes forward and on the dissolution since there's really no objection,

I'm fine with putting a pin in the dissolution of the entities only for now, but then reinforced that every other part of Judge and Gauron's order, including the requirement that Donald Trump turn over information about what his plans are to transfer assets to other companies stays in place.

Now, he's not the final, a pellet judge. There's a merits panel of five, I think he'll be one of the five, that will get assigned to the appeal on a slow track, that appeal on the summary judgment that was issued on last Tuesday. We could go Tuesday about whether judge and Goron was right or wrong on summary judgment, that's on its own track. That may just that may get decided before this trial is over. It's likely not to get decided before this trial is over.

The trial on the other six counts and all the remedies that she's seeking, the New York Attorney General, including the big fat fine of discouragement for, you know, $500 million or more plus interest likely, that continues. So to answer the question, what does the appeal do? Nothing because they asked for the stay of the trial and they didn't get it. And they're not gonna get it from the big five person panel.

Either the five person panel will take a look at the papers, they'll get around whenever they feel like it to setting a briefing schedule. They'll be briefs and six or eight months later, they'll be an oral argument. It means, I'm this trial will be over and they'll have to, if they don't like the results there, they can appeal that. Look, in New York, unlike in other jurisdictions where I practice, you can appeal anything. You don't like an order in the case on discovery, on a deposition, on a sanction

that you got hit within the case. You can take it up on appeal during the case. They don't care. I like in other states. See in other states, I can Florida where I practice, they could never bring an appeal on the summary judgment of one count. They'd have to wait till the end of the case to see when all the dust is settled, if end there's any reversible error.

But New York, you know, you can, you drop a pen, you can appeal. And that's what you're watching. But so it did piss me off. This is going to be part of a subtext of our presentation today, how pissed off I am when I read media reports. Sometimes we get hit with, well, you're just repeating what the media, we're not repeating what the media is reporting. We are our own lawyers and our own analysts of our own legal documents.

And we are, that's what you were hearing on this show, not something I read somewhere. So we get the actual legal documents and pull them from the dockets and we digest them and analyze them with our experience. That's what you're watching. So it pissed me off when everybody was some of the reporting was, Trump wins. Trump didn't win anything. You can't win that, which the other person is willing to give you, which is the dissolution issue. And I think it's for the reason I said Ben, she doesn't want to dissolve the companies right now. She wants to get the money banked so she can take it from them,

like taking candy from a baby at the end of the trial. There's already an independent monitor in place. There's already a very strong order that would prevent Trump from transferring assets, as you mentioned. And so it's going through its normal course. It's going through the process that all of these cases would take. And as I've always said, you get the lawyers

that you deserve. And Donald Trump certainly deserves these lawyers because there was a possibility too late now after the summary judgment order issued by Judge and Goran on September 26th. If you're competent counsel, if you're competent lawyers, you file a motion to stay that night on the 26th. I could see a world where the Court of Appeals, the Appellate Division First Department here, would stay this trial and say,

let's deal with the dissolution now on an expedited basis, let's hold the trial. They blew it, they're now in trial for the next 85 to 90 days. We'll see if Donald Trump shows up even ever again. Trump's supposed to be a witness. I don't think he's going to show up. I think he's gonna be too cowardly and say, oh, I'm gonna invoke my fifth, this is a clown show.

Whatever he's gonna say, he's gonna line because he knows that three days on the stand getting cross-examine, I've studied his pathology now. I know he's too big of a coward, but ultimately... But can I make one comment on that then? Because I want to manage expectations. I've studied his pathology now. I know he's too big of a coward, but ultimately, I'm gonna make one comment on that, Ben, because I wanna manage expectations. That, just because he's not gonna testify

on the fraud case, and I agree with you, he's not. He has already testified on the fraud case. He decided to waive his Fifth Amendment privilege, having asserted it 400 times in a first deposition. He waived it and sat, because he thought he was smarter than the Titisha James, which he's not. And he was going to talk his way out of this. And all she got instead was the six hour deposition transcript and video that she's both played in the opening of the

case. And we'll use if he doesn't take the stand, this isn't a criminal case. If he doesn't quote unquote, take the stand, his videos will continue to be used and put into evidence because they are sworn testimony as if he was in the courtroom. So there's no hearsay problem when you're playing the defendant's own sworn statements. So that deposition that he for whatever reason he decided to give instead of standing on his fifth amendment, and you and I speculated he was a little bit worried that under the assumption that a judge makes or a jury makes and is instructed that when somebody takes the Fifth Amendment in a civil case, you are to make an adverse inference that whatever was being asked is true, and they're just taking the Fifth in order to avoid

it. That's the big difference in Fifth Amendment application in a civil case, which is what this is, even though it often sounds like we're talking about a criminal case. And so he didn't want that. So he wanted to go and give it to his testimony. We will see Donald Trump's testimony, even if he doesn't come into the courtroom to give it.

But if he's under subpoena by the New York Attorney General, unlike in E. Jean Carroll, where Roberta Kaplan, the plaintiff's lawyer, decided that she's fine not having him show up. If you, that was a choice that was made. But if New York Attorney General, Latisha James wants him to appear, he's under subpoena, he has to appear.

So he either would have to invoke his fifth as a reason not to testify in which case she'll show the deposition, or he'll be held in contempt, but he can't just say, I don't wanna be there, it's inconvenient for him. I don't think he can take the fifth. He's already waved the fifth by testifying,

and I don't think he's gonna be able to show the basis and that he didn't waved already by giving his deposition testimony So if she does decide that talk about Ballzie. I would love to see that. I don't know I don't think she meets him by the time this by the time she gets to her 58th day of trial I mean you and I are excited and we're gonna stay excited about analyzing this trial as it goes along But by day 58 just when she makes a decision I now call Donald J. Trump, you know, she may not need them, but she may want to do it just to roast him.

I think she's going to want to do it sooner than day 58. I think she's going to do Weiselberg. I think she's going to do Eric. I think she's going to do Don Jr. And I think then she's going to want to call him in the next two weeks. I went to Vanka absolutely and we will keep everybody posted. I want to compare judge Tanya Chutkin, the law and order DC judge who's handling the docket masterfully in the case, again, Trump set for trial in March of 2024. Let's contrast with judge Eileen Kenan, the utterly corrupt and incompetent judge in the Southern District of Florida, whose various chicanery and machinations trying to delay, delay, delay.

And it just looks sloppy and incompetent, also corrupt, but also very, very sloppy. Want to remind everybody as well before we talk about those topics, check us out at patreon.com slash might as touch p at r e o n dot com slash might as touch. We don't have outside investors here at the might as touch network. The way we grow it is through our patreon. Again, it's patreon dot com slash might as touch p at r e o n dot com slash M-E-I-D-A-S-T-O-U-C-H. We have exclusive after-show content from the MidasTouch podcast. We have exclusive episodes that have already been posted that you can watch about Michael, Popox background, My background, Karen Friedman, Agnifalos background, how we

all met and it's a good way to support the growth of this independent media network. I would just say this, if you are a member of our Patreon, put in the comments right now in this chat if you think the exclusive content is worth it. In case anybody's on the fence, should I join patreon.com slash mightestouch, put in the comments how you feel about it and you can check that out. We'll be right back after this quick break. This is Michael Popok from Legal AF. If you like me, you understand the pains of choosing what to wear.

Let's face it, most clothes are uncomfortable or too tight or are never actually the size you really are. Not to mention the annoyance of trying to put a good outfit together. And when you do have a good fit, you can only wear it for a few hours before you have an important meeting or dinner. And then you got to change all over again. Everyone wants to dress the best and look good at all times because, frankly, it's a confidence booster. So here's the deal. Men's closets were due for a radical reinvention and Rome stepped up to the challenge. Rome's commuter collection is the most comfortable, breathable, and flexible set of products known to

man. And here's why. Rones helps you get ready for any occasion with the commuter collection, which offers the world's most comfortable pants, dress shirts, one-quarter zips, and polos. You never have to worry about what to wear when you have the Rones commuter collection. Rones comfortable for-a-away stretch fabric provides breathability and flexibility that leaves you free to enjoy whatever life throws your way from your commute to work to your 18 holes at golf.

It's time to feel confident without the hassle. With Rhone's Rakel release technology, Rakel's disappear as you stretch and wear the products. It's that easy. And with its gold fusion anti-odor technology, you'll be smelling fresh and clean all day long, and on top of that, Ron is 100% machine washable, so you can ditch the dry cleaner altogether. I absolutely love Ron. As you can see, this has truly become my go-to commuter fit,

and on the legal AF podcast recordings. We're on the move a lot, whether it's jumping for meeting to meeting or catching a flight or an important dinner, the Rhone commuter collection has never let me down. The versatility and comfort of the collection is undefeated. Even after I wear it all day, I still feel super fresh because of that gold fusion anti-order technology. The commuter collection you can get you through any work day and straight into whatever comes next. Head to rhone.com slash legal a f and use promo code legal a f to save 20% on your entire

order. That's 20% on your entire order when you head to our H O N E slash legal a f promo code legal a f. Find your corner office. Being on top of your mental health game is so important. As you know, I'm a practicing trial attorney in addition to my hot takes and co-hosting duties. And so it's easy to fall into bad habits or routines because life gets in the way, especially with your diet. Frankly, I think most people

can relate that every day life gets in the way, making a challenging to find a healthy snack without all the sugar and junk. If you're busy and constantly on the go like me, you need to try Mosh. It's a protein bar made for your brain, with six delicious flavors, each Mosh bar includes 12 grams of protein, and is made with ingredients that support brain health like ashwaganda, lion's mane, collagen and omega-3s. At 160 calories and only 1 gram of sugar, Mosh protein bars are the guilt-free snack, your brain and body will crave.

Your brain is your number one tool, which is why Mosh protein bars were mind-fully formulated by some of the top neuroscientists and functional nutritionists. Mosh now has a new line of plant-powered protein bars in three delicious flavors. For those who want all the protein and brain support in the original bar, now may be with plant-based ingredients. I have a Moshbar midday to energize my end of day, and it's totally improved my performance. I love the taste, especially of the peanut butter Moshbar delicious. Not to mention the packaging makes it super easy to take with me if I ever find myself

hungry in between meetings. Don't settle for a mediocre snack when you can nourish your body and mind with the fuel it needs to succeed. So whether you're at the gym on the go or just living your best life, Mosh protein bars will keep your brain and body fit, fueled and feeling good. Head to moshlife.com slash legal AF to save 20% off, plus free shipping on your first six count trial pack. That's 20% off plus free shipping

on your first six count trial pack, which includes all six mouthwatering flavors, M-O-S-H-L-I-F-E, dot com slash legal AF. Welcome back to legal AF. We are live special thanks to all of our pro democracy sponsors for supporting this content and round of applause to Michael Popock for those ad reads, right? They're absolutely crushing it I want to do the compare and contrast right now between what's going on in two federal cases Against Donald Trump for crimes he committed the Southern District of Florida case before judge Eileen Cannon for Donald Trump's

theft willful retention of national defense information theft, willful retention of national defense information, classified information, top secret sensitive, compartmented information, that case is set for trial, May of 2024, and then Washington, DC, the case against Donald Trump. Also being prosecuted by special counsel, Jack Smith, for Trump's to overthrow the 2020 election. And that's scheduled to go to trial the first week of March 2024

and it certainly seems like Judge Chutkin is not going to be moving that at all. I think Judge Cannon is moving towards extending the trial date. She hasn't made that ruling officially yet, but I think Judge Cannon is going to be moving the May 2024 trial date, which, look, I'm not a big fan of Judge Cannon to put it mildly. But the good news is, is that we're going to have a federal criminal trial that could put Donald Trump away for the rest of his life that's going to take place in 2024. I can say that with a great degree of confidence that the trial will take place. Everybody in our system is entitled

to a presumption of innocence. We can certainly talk about all of the evidence and my opinion about why I think he is very, very guilty in all of these cases, but ultimately it is a jury in our system that will make that determination as it should. So let's start with Canon and then we'll go to Chutkin.

I'll take Canon, Popeyes can take Chutkin. Here was the order that Judge Canon issued. Here it is right here here October 6, 2023. It's a paperless order staying SEPA section for deadlines pending consideration and resolution of defendant's motion for a revised schedule for motions to compel and SEPA for litigation and the supplemental briefs on SEPA section three signed by Judge Cannon, not a great order right there. Right?

Let me break down what that means because it probably sounds like a bit gibberish. SEPA is the classified information, procedures act, it deals with how you deal with classified information in a case like this one where there's willful retention of national defense information that happens to be classified information. Judge Cannon didn't issue a protective order pursuant to SEPA, which is necessary in all cases involving the classified information procedure. She didn't issue it until mid-September, September 13th, the indictment was unsealed in June of 2023 and special counsel

Jack Smith had the protective orders ready to go. But Judge Tannen didn't issue the protective order. Trump's lawyers dragged it on. They did their delay tactics that you see in all of these things. Judge Tannen let it take place and then finally issued the protective order for SEPA, the correct protective order, but it took her June, July, August, September. I go, you know, basically three and a half plus months before it was issued. And then Jackson Smith turned over the records right away, except Jackson Smith didn't turn over about five classified documents because pursuant to CEPA section 4, which I just discussed, classified information procedures,

Act Section 4, the government can request instead of providing the actual classified document in the SKIF, which is where all classified documents have to be reviewed in SEPA cases, sensitive compartmental information facilities. The government can say there are some documents that are just so sensitive like nuclear secrets and others. We don't even want to show the criminal defendants these records even though a criminal defendant has the right and due process rights to get discovery. They shouldn't be able to look at these documents that they stole or engaged in misconduct with ever again. So instead, CPC action force says, government, go to the judge on an ex party basis

and expedited confidential basis, and then ask the judge if you can do a summary of the documents instead of actually making the classified documents available. And so that's what Jack Smith was gonna do, the deadline to do that's October 10th, and Donald Trump argued, we haven't gotten 25% of the classified

Documents and judge Jack Smith's not complying with his discovery obligations and first off 25% Trump uses that number because what we're really talking about is five or six documents of the 30 or so counts So it's not millions of documents. Jack Smith turned over millions of documents. So we're going about about five or six documents and special counsel, Jack Smith's like, we turned over everything starting September 13th. So we did what we were supposed to do. Judge Cannon, you're the reason why there's this delay.

And we're following SEPA. We're not required to turn over those records. The very point of this deadline on October 10th is so you judge can make the determination if are withholding of these five documents providing a summary instead of the classified documents is appropriate or not. That's what we're following, what the strict text of SEPA actually says, that's not a delay, that's what the procedure is. And Judge Cannon was like, I am temporarily staying all of these deadlines because of Donald Trump whining that he didn't get these

classified records, which he's not supposed to get until when it took her three months, four months before she even executed the protective order. So it just is more delay. And if you're wondering, well, why isn't Jack Smith appealing this yet? Go to the 11th Circuit. What Judge Cannon is doing is she learned the wrong lessons from being overruled by the 11th Circuit.

Because she previously made an appealable order that the government could bring to the court of appeals to get her overturned and reprimanded. Her lesson is not let me do the right thing, in my opinion. Her lesson is let me just kind of toy with these deadlines and push them back and give temporary stays of this and that. And then they'll all add up and drag this out versus if she actually makes an order that can be appealed Like setting us a firm date that's appealable Then Jack Smith can maybe then go to the 11 circuit But none of the stuff that she's done yet he would be able to appeal to the 11 circuit the trial judge has

Discretion to do. So those are the games that she's playing. But I wanted to lead with that because that's not good news for me to deliver, but that's the real news. And I want you to understand the complexity and the dynamic the games she's playing, how Jack Smith's saying, I'm following SEPA. But then let's turn now to Washington, D.C., where you've got Judge Chutkin, who is following the law, who knows SEPA, who's like, I don't need these deadlines. I don't need these extensions. My deadlines are firm. If you want like two more weeks, find Donald Trump and you could explain to me why you think

that the strict text of SEPA isn't what it says it is or why I should ignore circuit precedent. I don't want to do anything that's going to move this March 2024 trial day. Judge Chutkin said that in her order. You have this kind of chaos and confusion in Florida and this kind of firm control of the docket in DC. Tell us, Popeye, what's going on in DC? Intro brought a motion to dismiss the indictment there too. Yeah, so That's a good segue into it. My one comment about Judge Canon is

Judge Chuck in has made her sort of irrelevant and Jack Smith is increasingly considering the Mar-a-Lago case to be less relevant to his focus on his major mega case, not MAGA, although it is a MAGA case, too, of the DC election interference case. The reason I say that Judge Chutkin has made Judge Cannon irrelevant is because she purposely Judge Chutkin selected a date hard and fast date set in stone and wet in the dry cement for her trial of May. Not even calling Judge Cannon to figure out whether that would somehow interfere

with the what is increasingly becoming the ethereal date of March for the Mar-a-Lago trial. It was almost like Judge Shuttkin said, I don't really think that trial is happening. My trial is going to happen and it's going to happen in May. I'm not even going to respect the date of Judge Cannon. Whereas Judge Chuck and did call Judge Mershan up in the New York State Supreme Court

about the Stormy Daniels Hush Money case to basically ask him for a little bit of judicial collegiality and let her take his date that he had assigned for his hush money cover up case against Donald Trump, and he said, yes, of course. So, Chuckkin cut the legs out from under Canon a long, long time ago in picking her date. And you can see, by the way, Judge Chuckkin is running her courtroom, while she'll give a reasonable, intellectually honest decisions about dates that need to be extended.

And sure, you know, you give me a reason and a proper basis. Trump sure, I will move a date here or there, but I am not. It is a, it is an immovable object is my date for the trial. And I will work within that though. If you want to, you know, the old joke about you want to move the deck chairs around on the Titanic, have at it. But we're hitting the iceberg in May. And so that was, that's been chucking from the beginning. And Jack Smith, I've, you know, I have this working theory that will only be proven one way or the other when the memoir of Jack Smith is written or by others associated with that trial team in about five years, about whether they used Mar-a-Lago

as a stalking horse to exhaust and to pin down Donald Trump's very meager trial team. And I mean that in meager in every way that that word is applicable, including resources, while they load up on everything related to the Jansic election interference. That is still and continues to be my working theory. Not that Mar-a-Lago is not an important case. Becoming even more important, when, as you did on a hot take recently, Ben, we learned

that Donald Trump shared nuclear submarine secrets with a Mar-a-Lago member who then reported it back to the Australian Prime Minister right at the scene of the crime. It's ironic that their fight is over the skiff that's being built allegedly somewhere near the courthouse in Fort Pierce for whatever reason and not apparently near Mar-a-Lago. That whole, well, it takes us time to build that. Well, this is not our problem. Are for five for five documents.

Get this case tried one way or the other. Stop slow footing your case judge can and stop dragging your feet, which is intentional in order to give a benefit over to Donald Trump in that particular case. That's why we don't see a tax on Judge Cannon or her staff or her family by Donald Trump. And we haven't seen it yet against Judge McAfee who we'll talk about later. Judge Chukkin, you want to move a couple dates around? Sure. Motion to dismiss the indictment after you tried to disqualify and recuse me? Sure,

I'll take a look at that. I don't think based on what we've seen in the motion to dismiss the indictment, there is a snowball, chance, and hell that they're gonna get that indictment dismissed on the papers, in this case, it's not gonna go to trial. But look, they gotta do their part. I'm not faulting Trump's lawyers for trying. They have to try to create possible appellate issues

and they gotta preserve the record for appeal. It would be malpractice if they weren't moving to dismiss the indictment, if they thought they had the grounds. I just don't think they're going to win that at the trial level. And their bigger audience is, I think they know they're going to lose a jury trial in the District of Columbia, presided over by Judge Chutkin, and their only hope is that the DC Circuit Court of Appeal in the future and maybe the supreme's bail them out of the likely conviction that's coming down the pike and they have

to operate in that particular universe. So we're just watching day in and day out, the mastery of two sober jurists with intellectual honesty, one Scott McAfee who's presiding over Georgia and the other Tony Chutkin who impresses you in me every day. I'm on pins and needles though and and I think it comes up next week for our reporting and how it takes along the way and when Judge Chutkin finally gets around now that it's been fully brief to issue her gag order against Donald Trump there is no way she's going to avoid issuing her own gag order, which would subject Donald Trump

to contempt and possible jail if he violates it. The only thing that I'm wondering, and I want to say your opinion, Ben, is whether Jack Smith goes through the effort of submitting what Trump did to Bash and Docs, Judge and Gorons' chief law clerk, including suggesting that she's in a romantic relationship with Chuck Schumer, and that she's in control of his case, leading to a gag order from Engoron in no uncertain terms that Trump could easily violate. And if, or does Judge, or does Jack Smith say, well, we know the Chuck and the law clerks are all over this.

They'll figure out what he's done. I don't have to send in a special submission. We know the Chuck and the law clerks are all over this. They'll figure out what he's done. I don't have to send in a special submission. But she's going to gag him in some way about continuing to attack witnesses like Mike Pence, General Mark Milley, Georgia people, and the like, and prosecutors, their families and investigators, judges, their families and investigators, and to pollute the future jury pool to give him a fighting chance at what our Constitution and Kaiselal provides that he gets a fair and impartial jury of his peers. This is to protect Donald Trump from himself. He thinks, oh, I'm going to go make a Trump or who's going to hang my jury. All you're doing is polluting the

future jury. He'll be too scared of you to rule in your favor on any given day. Well, unfortunately, we're going to have to wait until not next week, but the week after because the hearings, October 16th, when the gag order hearing. So we'll have a week to see if additional information is going to be filed by special counsel Jack Smith's team. I don't think they're going to file if additional information is going to be filed by special counsel Jack Smith's team. I don't think they're going to file anything additional.

I mean, I think putting in the post of Donald Trump threatening to execute a witness, who's the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is sufficient showing. And then I think that Judge Chutkin is going to question Donald Trump's lawyers. You wrote in your brief that you thought that this is not intimidation, that you think this is perfectly acceptable. Put the lawyers in the court, ask them the questions where their bar licenses are on the line, and see what they say in a court of law, you know, I know they're keyboard warriors, you know, and they think that when they roll with Donald Trump, like, you know, like Eastman and Giuliani and all the other make attorneys get attorneys crew. But, you know, when we say here, it was , and I'll say let me just say one more time, if you're representing Donald Trump and you

go through the normal motions that everybody who's entitled to a criminal defense is entitled to have lawyers who zealously represent them. You're entitled to lawyers who do their job try to make all of the arguments, you know, including sometimes bad legal arguments, but not unlawful legal arguments, not arguments trying to threaten witnesses, not arguments trying to overthrow our democracy. And the Trump lawyers that we highlight here in criticize and condemn are the ones that conflate their role as being legal counsel with being a criminal, with acting like Donald Trump, with acting like they are maniacs who want to overthrow our constitution. And that's why even you know, even their argument

on presidential immunity, they filed a brief to try to dismiss the indictment before judge Chetkin, which is going to be rejected. And I don't want to even give it all that much time because it's just so utterly frivolous. But they basically argue that Donald Trump is immune from trying to, from any criminal liability for trying to overthrow our democracy because they argue in their brief that this is conduct that's within the outer limits of the role of a president of the United States under article two of the Constitution, which is just beyond absurd for you to make that argument that the outer limits allows you to overthrow our democracy. And then Trump's lawyers try to analogize criminal immunity with civil immunity, which

the DC Circuit and a district judge on Meet made up have already rejected and they've already made the ruling that his conduct falls outside the outer limits of what a job function is of the president and as judge on meat made us then It would make zero sense if the Constitution provided immunity to former presidents who tried to overthrow the Constitution that would not fall within this fear of what a rolls and responsibilities are of a of a president or former president. So Judge Chutkin is going to reject that She'll deny that I think we're relatively swiftly Donald Trump will then try to file an emergency appeal

with the DC circuit. Think they're going to reject it. And then he's gonna try to file a emergency stay with the Supreme Court and we'll see what they do. But that's what he's setting up for. So we'll be probably talking about that in a few months and he'll try to maneuver and ask for the shadow docket of the Supreme Court to step in

to try to delay the trial. And that'll be Roberts. And that'll be Chief Justice Roberts who will make that decision because he sits over the DC Circuit Court. And I don't think Roberts would make a shadow decision about Donald Trump given the ethical pressure that's on the Supreme Court. I think he would refer that over to the full Supreme Court for a ruling.

That's one good thing that came out of transparency and shows like ours is we shine the light on the shadow docket and try to get it out of the shadows. But if he does that, there may again, we're talking three months, four months down the road. There may be a bad headline that Roberts grants a temporary stay as he refers it to the full tunnel, but it will be for a week or so before there's a full panel ultimately rejects it. So that's why I want to prepare everybody for not just what's happening now, but the way our process and procedure work So we can just give you an accurate picture, but speaking of process and procedure

I want to go to Georgia right now though because judge Scott McAfee in the Rico case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fawny Willis He's he's a young judge. He's hasn't been a judge for longer than like six months now, but he's aging in judicial dog years, if you will, because he is a wise age on this bench right now. This is someone who was appointed by a Republican governor who he's made rulings that have some of them have been somewhat favorable to the requests being made by the co-defendants. Mostly they've been rejecting the gamesmanship and the jacquainery and the attempts to dismiss by Trump's co-defendants, but it seems that there was this concerted effort by all of the co-defendants to kind of swarm this new

judge with everything. And they threw everything at him, used every procedural rule in Georgia and local rule to try to throw him off. But he's kept steady. We have a trial of two co-defendants, Ken Chesbro, and Sidney Powell, former Trump lawyers, although I guess Sid Sydney Powell is gonna argue

she was never Trump's lawyer, good luck arguing that, even though you did 100 press conferences saying you are, but okay, that's Sydney Powell's argument. We've already got one plea agreement of one of the 19 co-defendants. We talked about that on the last legal AF. I'm just very impressed by McAfee Popeye. Walk us through some of the things that Mac if he did this week as we head to our first trial

That's going to be broadcast live here in the Midest of know where they're picking a jury in two weeks A jury in a case that is at the it is The criminal conspiracy against now 18 because Scott Hall has flipped and is cooperating with Fawni Willis completely and there'll be others. She's made plea bargain deals to at least six or eight that have been publicly acknowledged. She will not be trying a case of 18 people or 16 remaining people by time she gets around a trying her case I'm sure she will cut plea deals with at least half of the group that's pictured there And she'll go to trial against five or six including one Donald Trump sometime in 2024 Because that's her that's her M.O. And that's what good prosecutors do when she had the larger the larger case for a

Criminal conspiracy involving the Atlanta Public School Board for a criminal conspiracy involving the Atlanta Public School Board. And a bribery scandal there. She had 32 people under indictment, as opposed to the 19 here. She went to trial against 12 and the rest she pled out. And so we have that going on. We also have Scott McAfee, who in the beginning, you and I were a little bit reticent about, because when we saw his resume, we were like, oh God, young judge never, never served the day, you know, in his 30s, never been a judge before and was in the federalist society when he was in law school.

But what does that sound like? Sounds like Judge Cannon. And we have the anti-cannon. It's the opposite of Cannon. And now we know more about McAfee. I did a nice hot take on this particular issue. He's a law, first of all, he's a law nerd. And he's a nerd in a lot of different ways, but a nerd that has a good sense of humor,

and a deadly sense of humor when it comes to making his rulings. There's a lot of intellectual honesty in how he makes his rulings. If I agree with him, I understand why I agree with him. And if I disagree with him, I understand why I disagree with him based on the precedent and of Georgia criminal

practice and procedure, which he learned at the knee of one Fawney Willis, the Fulton County DA. Not only did they work together in the office, he was her underling. He was her subordinate in a division of that office when she wasn't yet the DA, but was working in that office that dealt with complex commercial litigation. So he has a lot of respect for Fony Wilson. He learned his craft and his trade from her. Before he got on the bench, appointed by Yassir Republican governor,

but one that is an anti-Trumper and will testify against Trump in camp. He's a Kemper, not a Trumper. And it was the inspector general for the state, which is the chief Boy Scout for the state involved with public corruption. Maccafy, and I found a clip and I used it in one of my hot dicks, 15 years ago, was doing a cello. He's the cellist, a classically trained cellist. They did it professionally, and there's a clip of him as a goof in a talent competition

doing an electric cello, Jimmy Hendrix, including dropping to his knees and using his mouth to move the cello. Which when I saw that, I understood why when he rejected this week, yet another, and this is now six or seven motions to dismiss the indictment by Ken Chesboro, who's just trying not every which way to file whatever piece of paper to avoid the inevitable,

which is his trial starting in the 23rd of October, this time the judge sort of had enough, but rather than showing his eye or did it in a humorous way, he called the argument to dismiss the indictment because the special assistant district attorney who was handling the case because sometimes prosecutors, even though they have a big offices, they appoint for limited purposes, special purpose, if you will, assistant district attorneys. They did for this case, and he is the lead trial lawyer for the case He came out of private practice And he's got you know, he's basically deputized to be for this case only

I've done that. I've been a deputy. I've been an assistant district attorney for the Manhattan DA's office when I was a second year lawyer arguing an appeal Which I took for for practice, but I was really appointed for that position for the appeal So it happens. They argue that he needed to take an oath, but there is an oath of office requirement, and he didn't take the oath of office, and therefore the indictment should be dismissed that he was involved with. And the judge just shook his head and said, you're not even reading the statute properly.

The statute says, unless it's only for a limited purpose appointment, and if it's a limited purpose appointment, you can't make the oath argument. But to pay them back a little bit, he referenced a Monty Python, the British comedy sketch team, and one of their most famous sketches, which is called the Dead Parrot sketch, where a person comes back to try to sell a dead parrot back to a pet shop and argue that it's not dead. It's alive. And you can tell where the comedy comes from there. And so the judge called the argument in the second half of his order, the dead parrot.

And he says, continuing with the dead parrot, as if the parrot wasn't already dead, you suffered no prejudice as a result of the lack of an oath even if you were right. The fact that he referenced my Nepython to tell him your argument is dead, yet you keep dragging it and trying to convince me that it's alive. It comes right out of a laud nerd who would also play the cello in Jimmy Hendrix to win a talent competition. So we like everything so far about McAfee who is keeping this case on track. You'd think this guy had handled dozens and dozens and hundreds of trials. Judge Chutkin

was a trial lawyer herself who went to trial 15 or 18 times as a trial lawyer. As a judge, she's handled hundreds and hundreds of cases since she was appointed by Obama, okay, including dozens of Jan 6th cases about Jan 6th insurrectionists. This judge, this is his first major trial. You would think that he's been doing this for like years, because he's got an answer in order, a procedure, a method for everything that he's doing in stark contrast to what you did with Judge Cannon, which is she's fumbling around in the dark to try to benefit Donald Trump with these ridiculous orders that we can't make heads or tails out of even though we get we get we get, you know, this is our job to do that.

And then, and then you see, um, McAfee, here's a question for you, Ben. It is obvious that the biggest criminal jeopardy issue for Donald Trump, because his, I'm going to be president one day, and that'll take care of my criminal problems. A defense goes out the window because you can't federally pardon a state prosecution. So even if he gets convicted, if he gets convicted in Georgia, he may go to jail in Georgia, and no one can pardon him. The governor's not gonna pardon him, and the governor doesn't pardon in Georgia.

It's a board. So why hasn't he tried to influence, I'll use that term, judge McAfee, and to go after him in any way to destabilize that justice system, and that, the Georgia criminal process. Why hasn't he done that? Even though that is the really the case that presents the biggest possibility for Donald Trump to be convicted of it in an unpartenable crime. Why hasn't made any overt ruling that Donald Trump has felt the tangible impact

of yet. He will attack McAfee at some point, and we'll probably see that in the next few months. But the usual massage and mystic tendency doesn't apply there. They're basically saying New York or Democrat doesn't apply there. The kind of anti-Semitic undertones doesn't really apply there. The racial stuff that he does doesn't apply there. And so he doesn't have his normal go-tos are usually based upon this kind of the hateful rhetoric.

And he'll come up with something for McAfee at that time. But I think in Trump's mind, that trial as it relates to him, is still pretty far in the future, so just kind of not wasting the energy there. Yeah. I think it probably feels like it's an eternity for him, because let's face it. This first trial of the code defendants who asked for the speedy trial, Chesaboro Powell, they filed more motions to dismiss

this week ridiculous ones that the judge again was like, no, stop it. You're going to trial. You want to this. This is the speedy trial. You demanded, make your case to the jury, stop whining and complaining to me about it. You made your bed now sleeping.

It was basically a Mac if you said, but this trial is going to take six months, right? So it's going gonna take six months, right? Like it's so, it's gonna take six months and then the net, you know, that Trump trial, just the reality of it to set expectations, that won't take place until earliest late 2024, probably 2025. And so he's focused on these targets.

I agree with you, everything you just said, I agree with you, it's too early, they're keeping their powder dry. Steve say it out of the new lawyer has been drafting behind a bicycle race term, drafting behind literally the other lawyers who are filing papers, he hasn't really filed a substantive paper of his own yet to dismiss the indictment, but they should not underestimate what would happen and what will happen if

Farnie Willis as expected wins the first trial because that shows that the age jury in Fulton County presented with evidence and witness as opposed to rhetoric and table thumping convicted to out of 19 co-conspirators for the same conspiracy. She will then learn from that. She will then use that to bludgeon other co-conspirators further down the food chain to get them to flip and cooperate as she circles and encircles Donald Trump. It doesn't mean it's not, you know, we have a lot of people that watch around the world and also, you know, in our own, about our own justice system.

The new, the next jury is not, except what they pick up in the media, is not going to know about nor be instructed that a prior jury already convicted to people. In fact, our jurisprudence doesn't allow that because the case has to rise and fall in the evidence for one defendant or how many defendants are in the room at that particular moment. So they won't know that and they'll be in motion

that will be granted by McAfee to make sure that the prosecutors don't mention the prior convictions and they won't. But it does give Fawli Willis the ability to have a major dress rehearsal before she takes her show to Broadway, right? This is an out-of-the-way, she gets to improve the way she presents evidence. It's like, forget about a mock jury where we hire people and pay them to sit and listen to us as lawyers to figure out how to fix our arguments before we go to a trial

Which happens and we do This is a real jury and so she'll say well that didn't work and then I got to bring in this witness earlier And I got to emphasize this issue or that issue because she'll end up talking to the jury Which he's allowed to do with the other lawyers present to debrief them the ones that want to participate about what worked and what didn't work in terms of evidence and witnesses and presentation. And then she'll use that like a good, you know, like artificial intelligence keeps learning, learning, learning, learning their learning with real intelligence. I've had to try the case against Donald Trump, which is always right, ever present in her mind. And so they, I am, I am, I am fascinated, I guess is the right word, that they're not trying to destabilize the justice system. They fired Drew Little, who was a Drew Finland, sorry, I was combined the two lawyers, Drew Finland, who was filing lots of bombastic

motions to attack the justice system and Fani Willis and the court system and they fire that guy. And the new guy, I guess they're listening to, which is keep your powder dry. Let's see what happens. Just in another two weeks when they pick a jury and let's see over the next three to five months, whatever that jury takes, what we can glean from that and use in our next trial. It is a moment of sober approach that I thought Donald Trump was not capable of. And so I think you're right when he finally tastes macapies, reasoning, and it goes against him. We're going to start hearing about, oh, he's a stooge of governor

camp who hates me. And you know, he's just a rhino or this, but you're right, all the rest of it. The dehumanizing comparisons to animals, racist tropes, sexist tropes, Marxists, communists, arguments, all go out the window. And one last thing about Maccathy, I caught an interview that didn't get a lot of a press in the New Yorker magazine. I talk about it in my hot take with Maccathy.

And Maccathy said two things that I think, if I was Donald Trump, we'd put a cold chilled down my spine. He said, firstly, I, yes, I joined the Federalist Society when I was in law school, but it was really a social business thing, not an ideological thing. He said it out loud. He said that, you know, when you're a young, small-seek conservative, real conservative,

and you're in Georgia, to be frank, the Democrats don't have an organization at the law school level the way the Federalist Society has. That's what the great dirty secrets of the Federalist Society has. That's what the great dirty secrets of the Federalist Society is they start from the law school level, even the high school level, and then they get it all the way up to the top as they pick their judges. Democrats don't have that comparable thing. So if you're looking around for an organization and you want to become a judge one day or stay in government one day, It's natural. He said again though It's not ideological. It is it was mainly social in business

He also said my number one goal in this trial is not to be Lance Edo the famous dancing Edo judge from the OJ Simpson I want to recede into the woodwork So I am not the story and it's and I am not, I am only making decisions on balls and strikes. This is not a guy or a judge that is going to be intimidated. That will backfire for Donald Trump. And this is somebody that does not want to make this trial about him. I love judge and go on. But there was that moment where right at the beginning of the trial, he took off his glasses and looked over to the cameras that were in the courtroom and smiled. You are not going to see Scott McAfee do that.

It will be the opposite of his DNA. Well, I couldn't agree more with you there. And I think it's why we get into the weeds here on Legal AF about everything that's going on because it's not just for this episode, you know, inherently court cases are episodic. There's a reason why it says the wheels of justice turn slowly or grind slowly. And it's bit by bit and I know everybody wants accountability right now.

But what we've been saying now, since we've been doing League of Legends for several years, is here's what leads to this, which leads to this, and we get closer to real kind of critical moments, like the one we finally saw in New York earlier this week with those Perry Mason moments where Trump's executives are like, we did it. one we finally saw in New York earlier this week with those Perry Mason moments where Trump's executives are like, we did it. We did it or you get a big partial summary judgment shutting down the Trump organization or you get a conviction.

There are so many people who said, Donald Trump will never get charged with anything. And we were saying here on legal AF, no, he's going to get charged. And people were saying, no, you're just gaslighting us, you're trying to give us hope, him, you're just saying that. I go, no, he's going to be charged. And we said he was going to be charged

in all of the cases he was going to be charged. Because that's ultimately what the data reflected. Then there were lots of people who were like, we don't like Jack Smith when Jack Smith's name was announced first or we don't like Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg and we said, okay, you're entitled to hold those opinions, but may we offer this data? Here's what Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg is doing. Here's the strategy. Here's why let's bring on Karen Friedman Agnifalo, the top number two at the district attorney's

office for 30 years. Let's see what she has to say. And by the way, she worked with Jackson Miff. Does here's data. You do what you want with the data, but I'm not going to be gaslighting you. I want to just show you what the data says and form your own opinions, but let's base it on facts and evidence and data. That's what we stand for here. You can certainly disagree with us, but let's agree here are at least what the facts are, not that magazine explaining that you're getting that legacy media is unfortunately perpetuating. And so there's a lot of work that still needs to be done. There's going to be a lot of big developments over the next few weeks and months.

And I know it's difficult to kind of keep this patience while all of the legacy media and right wing echo chambers and Trump and others continue to gas slide. But you got the best team of prosecutors across the country handling the case and cases. You've got mostly good judges on these cases. You're going to have a jury who's going to evaluate most of these cases other than the one in New York before judging Gora. You're going to be outcomes that will be evidence-based and will accept those outcomes whatever they are when the evidence

is presented and will keep you up to date here on legal AF. I want to remind everybody now that if you want to support the growth of this independent media network, we don't have outside investors. So the best way that you can help other than by just sharing these videos and making sure you let people know which is free to do and easy to do. Another way if you want to help the growth of this platform though is by going to patreon.com-touch which is a membership there but it helps grow this independent media platform. That's PATR-EN.com-touch.

Make sure you spell it correctly. MEI-D-A-S-T-O-U-C-H. So go right now to patreon.com slash mightestouch. And if you're on the fence about is the exclusive content there worth it. Just look in the comments below and I would tell anybody who's a member of our Patreon, we now have over 5,000 members were on our way to 6,000 members on the Patreon. So if you're a member, just tell people if you think the exclusive content is worth it. And if you think it's not worth it, that's fine. Tell them as well. But I think that we spend a lot of time trying to curate some special content there as a way to grow this platform. And some big stats

to report more people are watching minus touch on digital now than watch CNN or Fox. And that's thanks to your growth, not bad without any outside investor. So Patreon.com slash minus touch. As always, thank you so much to everybody who's here to have such a vibrant, unapologetically pro-democracy intelligent, compassionate community,

something that I'm so honored to be a part of that you all created. So thank you, thank you, thank you. And Popo can I are about to grab some dinner together. We're both in the same jurisdiction. So we will report on that. How about I will do a post tomorrow, because I'm going to enjoy dinner with Popo right now. One of the perks about if you joined patreon.com slash MidasTouch right now I will share for you Popock and my dinner. We'll share some photos from our dinner exclusively on patreon.com slash MidasTouch. All right Popock I'm seeing you in about 10-20 minutes. I'll see you shortly. Everybody thank you so much for watching. We'll see you next time on

legal AF. Shout out to the Midas Mighty.