Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump makes Fatal Error in Court to Kill Ballroom

Episode Date: June 10, 2026

The DOJ just got caught taking “inconsistent positions” in a new late-night filing in the UFC injunction case, as they basically concede that the White House is secure and doesn’t need a “ballroom-military installation-hospital” underground bunker and missile-tipped drone depot in the room to protect Trump and the White House! Popok takes a close look at the new filing and why it undermines the very same lawyers’ arguments in the Ballroom appeal. Check out the full interview with Brenden Balllou here: https://youtu.be/FK9ZHOeSqGs Blissy: Wake up with clearer skin, smoother hair, and cooler sleep. Use code LEGALAF for an extra 30% off at https://blissy.com/LEGALAF. Subscribe:  @LegalAFMTN  Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Seriously, why aren't Democrats in Washington doing more to stop Trump? I know. Have you heard about Phil Weiser and Colorado, though? No. Is he different? Yeah, A.G. Weiser sued the Trump administration 65 times. He's beating Trump in court again and again. Things like protecting Obamacare against Trump's illegal tariffs, and he even won against Ticketmaster. So he actually gets results. Exactly. As governor, Phil will fight for Colorado. Paid for by Phil Weiser for Colorado registered agent in Nand and Nosegazy.

Seriously, why aren't Democrats in Washington doing more to stop Trump? I know. Have you heard about Phil Weiser in Colorado, though? No. Is he different? Yeah. A.G. Weiser sued the Trump administration 65 times. He's beating Trump in court again and again. Things like protecting Obamacare against Trump's illegal tariffs, and he even won against Ticketmaster. So he actually gets results. Exactly. As governor, Phil will fight for Colorado.

Paid for by Phil Weiser for Colorado registered agent in the end in Nostkase. No, you don't get to take two inconsistent positions in front of the same court if you're the Trump Department of Justice, particularly the same lawyers in the Department of Justice. So Yaakov Roth is the lawyer for the Department of Justice who argued the ballroom case, making a big deal out of national security. We need the ballroom. It's national security. We got to sequester the president in a hardened shell. And that's the only way to preserve the perimeter. It's a holistic one knitted together, project, military, industrial hospitals below, ballroom above, judge. Any other questions?

Yeah. Why then did the same lawyers in the UFC case in which a group of plaintiffs is trying to stop the UFC fight in a 90-foot claw on the White House South Lawn? Why, in the 41 pages filed by the same Yakoff, Roth, is there not? not even a footnote acknowledging the security risks at the White House presented by 5,000 people on a mass horde descending on to the lawn as Donald Trump pimps out the White House for a UFC fight. I mean, I would, I mean, you could barely get away with that inconsistent position if you were a different set of lawyers, but I looked hard and we're posting an illegal AF substack. It's the same lawyers who argued, I mean,

materially, Yaakov Roth, just argued at the appellate court for the federal system in the District of Columbia. He's the one that argued that the Statue of Liberty could be knocked down and blown up by the president, and there'd be nothing the courts could do anything about it. But I looked hard, Mr. Roth, and you're filing, and I didn't find anything that you filed on Tuesday night at 9 p.m., pursuant to Judge Meda's order, that said there was a security risk. In fact, you said that the White House South Lawn has frequently been the site of state dinners and that King Charles has been greeted there. Are they all taking their life into their hands?

Somehow, I think what I'm trying to acknowledge, somehow without a ballroom, without a drone depot on top of a ballroom, without a shell on top of a military base underneath the White House, Trump seems to go about his business just fine. It seems to be no interruption in the executive branch, not in their daily life and their family life. I mean, to the extent any family still visits the White House. I haven't seen Melania Trump in a long, long time. We need to put her on the back of a milk carton soon.

But when I read to you from the critical pages of their filing, you'll see why I think this backfires for them in the ballroom case as the three-judge panel of Millett Garcia and Rayo just got the case or just considering it off of oral argument. And I expect a ruling from them, I don't know, on July 4th. You know, they're human beings. They understand what's been filed, even if it's not technically part of the record.

I'm Michael Popak. We're here together on Legal A-F and on the Midas Touch Network. Take a minute and hit the free subscribe button as we continue to grow our pro-democracy channel. let's get down to the merits of my argument, as they say. So I'm looking at the filing, which is against a complaint that is being prosecuted by the Public Integrity Project and Brendan Ballou and his team. I'll show you a clip from my discussion with Brennan Ballou just in the last 24 hours about

this particular case. And Judge Meda has said, I'm going to consider the temporary restraining order. I want Monday night, sorry, Tuesday night at 9 p.m. I want the brief from the government in opposition. And Wednesday night at 9 p.m., I want the brief in reply from the plaintiffs. And then maybe we get together on the 11th. The big red letter day for Donald Trump

is his birthday, June 14th, which is this Sunday. And then I'm looking at it, you know, among their argument, where they don't refute or even acknowledge some of the primary arguments, so they have to be taken as true. And I'm sure Brendan's team will address that. They don't deny that a Singaporean company, Crypto.com, is a co-sponsor, stands to make millions of dollars

off of the pimping out of the White House in the Lincoln Memorial and the ellipse. They don't deny that Paramount, the streaming service owned by the Ellison family, which are cronies of Donald Trump, whose family gave him hundreds of millions of dollars. In return, they got to own CNN and CBS and 60 Minutes, that they're the streaming service for the UFC fight and stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars.

They don't deny that. They don't deny even that Donald Trump is a shareholder in TKO, the holding company for Dana White and UFC fighting, and it stands to profit from this event. No, no, no. They compare it all to the Easter egg roll. Right. A 90-foot claw in a UFC fight

where people are making hundreds of millions of dollars in profit, where the expense is being, being born by the American people, but the profit is being shared among Donald Trump and his cronies. That's the same as a little kid with the Easter bunny rolling an Easter egg. Or Joe Biden having a ice skating rink built for the kids, for Christmas, for the holidays. Or Obama having a concert to celebrate Black Heritage Month and having Beyonce at the concert. You know what the difference is?

They were all free. They were all run by the government. They weren't pimped out for profit the way the Trump has. You know, Obama didn't get a kickback from Beyonce for her performance. Joe Biden wasn't selling pretzels and hot cocoa in a little hut next to the skating rink. See the difference? They don't in their filing. I never thought a pillowcase could make much of a difference until I tried Blissie.

Blissy pillowcases? They're made from 22-momi. 6A grade 100% pure mulberry silk. And I noticed the difference right away. The silk feels naturally cooling, breathable and gentler on my skin and hair than satin. I've had less frizz and smoother hair when I wake up and fewer sleep creases. I also love that Blissy is dermatologist tested and recommended,

fully machine washable and comes in over 100 colors and designs, including Wicked and Harry Potter collections. Plus, there's a reason Blissy has sold. over 3 million pillowcases that has been featured in Vogue, Oprah Daily, and Good Morning America. Personally, it's become one of those simple upgrades I didn't expect to love as much as I do. Sleep more comfortably, wake up with better-looking hair, and it feels like a small luxury that's actually practical. Because you're a listener, Blisssey is offering 60 nights risk-free, plus an additional 30% off when you shop at blissy.com slash legal AF. That's BLY.LI.

sysy.com slash legal a F and use code legal a F to get an additional 30% off your skin and hair. Well, thank you. And they're listening, but let me go to page four where my eyes popped out. There's references to the $60 million that you and I, taxpayer dollars, have already spent. We're at the front of the line on the expense and the back of the line on any profit. That's for sure. But then it says the White House South Law on page four has a long history. history of hosting public events.

Public events. Stop right there. Is a for-profit where tickets are going for like being raffled off for a million dollars for two? Is that a public event? So I think they end it right there. Perhaps the most famous is the Easter Egg Roll. Is the Easter buddy shaking down the kids and their parents for cash the way Trump is?

But here's the security issue. State dinners that exceed the east room seating capacity are held on a large tent on the south lawn. Okay. The annual congressional picnic is there. King Charles III had a reception there, swearing in ceremonies of Supreme Court justices. And you can do all that without a ballroom? You can do all that without having the president sequestered. First of all, he doesn't want to be sequestered in a ballroom.

I had this exact line of questioning for Brendan Ballou, lawyer for Public Integrity Project who's fighting this UFC fight, who's going to have to respond to this ridiculousness and silliness later tonight or later today. And here's a clip of my interview. I think you'll find fascinating by Brendan Ballou. We'll put the clip of the entire interview in the notes below. Side note, he's also the lawyer that represents Katie Fang against Todd Blanche for the Epstein files. And he's representing his company, two, his entity, two Jan 6th officers. in their attempt to shut down the Donald Trump slush fund. Fascinating interview, and it's in the link below.

But here's a clip of my discussion about how this undermines the ballroom argument raised by the same lawyers. Play the clip. Maybe because I just come out of the oral argument about the ballroom that we streamed live on Legal AF. And you hear the lawyers, some of them in the same office working for Brett Shumate, making the argument like Yakoff Roth, that this is a, you know, a,

Well, A, I could do anything I want and I can get away with it and nobody can stop me. But all this national security, national security, the White House is insecure from kamikaze drones. And I mean, it sounds like if you're an idiot, if you ever attended another event at the White House. And yet, Donald Trump is bringing the hordes and masses of people, and they're not gonna be in a ballroom.

They're gonna be outside at a claw. Has that kind of inconsistent argument, inconsistent position taking by the government? I know it wasn't in your briefing, but is that that? part of this too? Well, that's a great point. I mean, and certainly I think our case can probably be helpful to the ballroom case for exactly that reason. It undermines any claim that Donald Trump needs to be cloistered indoors at a secure compartmentalized facility in the White House at all times.

He clearly doesn't. He clearly doesn't want to be. Right. I thought it was all about the ballroom. The ballroom is a shed that covers complex. It's knitted together holistically. It can't be separated. It's a security apparatus for the president to make him and his guest secure. You know, from Kamikaze drone strikes and missiles. I don't see any part of that listed on page 40. They don't even have the excuse of saying, but different lawyers, different kind of case. Now, same lawyers, same case, same Yakoff Roth,

that argued about the ballroom just a few days ago. And you'd think you'd at least drop, if you're a careful lawyer, you drop a footnote that said, This does not undermine our argument about security at the White House. There's going to be amped up security for this event. I don't know what security is for this event at all. Donald Trump, who is notorious for not wanting metal detectors or magnetometers at his events,

probably is going to drop them for this. Just going to be a horde, a Jan 6-like horde descending on the White House lawn. Lord knows what's in their pockets and backpacks. But the president's okay with it. He'll come out, wave around, freak the Secret Service out, you know, the most shot at president in our history, doesn't seem to really care about security. Then why should we? And why should we allow for the destruction of the White House, desecration of its hollow grounds as the People's House to support a ballroom for his ego? That'll be a question for Mr. Roth.

Now, it may not be in a filing, although the ballroom lawyers should consider filing. But certainly it's going to seep into the water supply, as Judge Millett, I think is probably writing the majority opinion here, makes her decision. She's going to be like, yeah, they really need that ballroom. They really need to have the president, like in a bunker. He's holding UFC fights on the White House lawn. But I love when the Department of Justice can't keep their story straight in their filings. And federal judges are onto it, and they know it. And so are opposing counsel.

So, listen, until my next report, come on over to legal. AF YouTube channel, hit the free subscribe button and do the exact same thing at legal AF substack. Until my next report, this is Michael. Can't get your fill of legal AF. Me neither. That's why we form the legal AF substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or an oral argument, come over to the substack.

You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do call, wait for it, morning A.F. What else? All the other contributors from legal AF are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad-free versions of the podcast and hot takes. Where legal A-F on Substack.

Come over now to free subscribe.