Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump Panics as Meidas Sues Him… Over Epstein

Episode Date: April 27, 2026

The media is usually on the other side of the “v,” being sued by Trump, or criminally investigated by or indicted by Trump’s DOJ. But now, for the first time in a groundbreaking suit, journalis...t and legal commentator and Meidas contributor Katie Phang has sued the Trump DOJ in federal court for its continued cover-up of the Epstein child sex scandal. Popok briefs the audience on the new suit and on Trump’s being exposed on a related subject by 60 Minutes, of all platforms, during an interview in the aftermath of the WHCD tragedy. Qualia: Magnesium, multiplied. 10 forms for total support. Go to https://qualialife.com/LEGALAF to get 50% off and save an extra 15% with the code LEGALAF. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript
Discussion (0)
Starting point is 00:00:00 Amazon presents Laura versus Fruitflies. Swarming your fruit and terrorizing your kitchen, these little freaks multiply at a rate that would make a rabbit say, yo. Chill. But Laura shopped on Amazon and saved on cleaning spray, countertop wipes, and fly traps. Hey, fruit flies, your baby boom ends here. Save the Everyday with Amazon. Most of my reports about the media and Donald Trump are about the media being on the receiving end of a lawsuit, a defamation suit brought by Donald Trump, or being criminally targeted by his Department of Justice or his FBI.
Starting point is 00:00:44 They're often the defendant in the story that I report on. Now they're the plaintiff as media and leaders in media are striking back against Donald Trump and his administration for their lack of trade. transparency for their violation of law in the Epstein files and otherwise. Two great examples all happened with the last 24 hours. One, as Donald Trump went on his manufactured victory tour in the wake of what transpired at the White House Correspondence Dinner, he met his match in Nora O'Donnell on CBS's 60 minutes of all things, where she read aloud from the manifesto of the alleged gunman and Donald Trump immediately took it as an attack on him for being a rapist and a
Starting point is 00:01:37 pedophile. But now we've got a lawsuit in addition to that, speaking of Epstein, we've got a lawsuit that's been filed by my friend, colleague here on the Midas Touch Network, Katie Fang, a journalist suing Todd Blanche as the acting attorney general for his failures and violations of law about the Epstein files. Sometimes we report on the intersection of law and politics, and sometimes we're at the intersection of law and politics. I'm Michael Popok. You're on the Midas Touch Network. Take a minute. Hit the subscribe button here and on Legal AF YouTube channel as well. In the immediate aftermath of Donald Trump trying to exploit and take advantage of yet another averted tragedy related to him with an attempted assassination, just a floor above him at the White House course.
Starting point is 00:02:29 respondents dinner. Donald Trump, of course, didn't waste any time trying to exploit it for his own political benefits demanding a ballroom be built to, which would have solved the assassination attempt, apparently, go after the left wing and call them anti-Christian. And then he hit a roadblock. He went on, he decided to go on 60 minutes owned by CBS, owned by Donald Trump's friends, the Ellison family, which owns and controls. Oracle, Skydance Paramount, and bought 60 Minutes. 60 Minutes run by Barry Weiss, a right-wing influencer who took over the hollowed grounds of 60 minutes and turned it into sort of a defanged journalistic institution.
Starting point is 00:03:19 But Noro Donald didn't get that memo. And she decided not just to question Donald Trump about the manifesto, But read aloud about it, particularly a section in which the would-be or alleged assassin talked about not wanting to follow as a president or not wanting to follow somebody who was a rapist and a pedophile. Watch Donald Trump's reaction. I mean, I know there's reporting about this already. But for me, the takeaway is watch how flummoxed he is, especially when Nora O'Donnell,
Starting point is 00:03:56 with a little bit of a Cheshire cat smile. She said, oh, I'm sorry, did you think he was referring to you as a rapist and a pedophile? But what would be the basis for that, sir? That would have been the natural follow-up. Play the clip and then we'll get to Katie Fang's new lawsuit. The so-called manifesto is a stunning thing to read, Mr. President. He appears to reference a motive in it. He writes this, quote, administration officials, they are targets.
Starting point is 00:04:22 And he also wrote this. I'm no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes. What's your reaction? Well, I was waiting for you to read that because I knew you would because you're you're horrible people, horrible people. Yeah, he did write that. I'm not a rapist. I didn't rape anybody. Oh, you think he was referring to you? Excuse me. I'm not a pedophile. You read that crap from some sick person. I got associated with all stuff that has nothing to do with me. I was totally exonerated. your friends on the other side of the plate are the ones that were involved with, let's say, Epstein
Starting point is 00:05:06 or other things. But I said to myself, you know, I'll do this interview and they'll probably, I read the manifesto, you know, he's a sick person, but you should be ashamed of yourself reading that because I'm not any of those things. And I was never, excuse me, excuse me, you shouldn't be reading that on 60 minutes.
Starting point is 00:05:26 You're a disgrace, but go ahead, let's finish the interview. See the face? Right. And that brings us now, as long as we're talking about rapists and pedophiles, that brings us to the Epstein Transparency Act and the failure of this government to this moment to abide by and comply with it. Of course, the doormat of the Maga Congress isn't doing a thing about it. So now you're looking to see, well, who could bring a suit like this? Now, we had hoped, but it's hard that one of the victims or survivors would be a plaintiff and come forward and sue over the violations of the Epstein Transparency Act. But let's be frank, they've been through enough.
Starting point is 00:06:09 They've already showed a tremendous amount of dignity in the face of tremendous humiliation being led by the Trump administration, its attorneys general, FBI, and the like. What should be happening now is that a not-conumption, Inflicted Department of Justice and FBI should be going through the 3 million pages of files and opening up criminal investigations to go after the 1,200 or more predators, whatever the number is, of these women and girls, plain and simple. That's what Europe is doing. That's what other countries are doing around the world that aren't led by Donald Trump. And so they already, that's That's what the Department of Justice and FBI should be doing under the auspices of an independent special counsel that's not conflicted, doesn't have an ethical conflict, appointed by the Attorney General.
Starting point is 00:07:06 That's what should be happening. We should be talking about a special counsel, a team of people going through the files, not a phony audit by the inspector general without interviews. not a attorney general in Todd Blanche saying, well, there's nothing to see here. We've produced everything. Not a complete silence and hearing crickets about any criminal investigations. Even Melania Trump's dramatic call for congressional hearings and testimony by the witnesses and victims got it wrong, putting the onus on the victims to be victimized again and have to testify. in open about what happened to them?
Starting point is 00:07:52 They're not having any of the men who are being brought before the oversight committee being testified in the open. Howard Lutnik, Commerce Secretary behind closed doors. You've got the former Attorney General, Pam Bondi. She's not even testifying at all. Oh, sure. Make the women have to come forward and do their own investigation of their own crimes that happened to them. That's required. If there was a murder, a murder, you'd have the murder
Starting point is 00:08:23 victim or his family come forward and have to testify in Congress. No, you'd have the Department of Justice and FBI do their job. Look, the magnesium, it's something most of us lack. And if you're taking that drugstore variant, you're still not getting the full picture. Industrial farming, chronic stress, and everyday aging all make it worse. Most supplements only use one form of magnesium, but magnesium comes in many forms that support your body in different ways. That's why you need to try qualia magnesium plus. It combines 10 bioavailable forms of magnesium with more than 70 trace minerals for comprehensive full spectrum support. Sleep deeper. Think sharper, recover faster. Support muscle strength, a steadier mood and balanced energy metabolism. It's not just a
Starting point is 00:09:15 sleep supplement. Oh no. It's a full-body magnesium system built for modern living so you can feel your best every day. Since adding qualia magnesium plus to my routine, I'm feeling easier recovery from workouts and a calm, more centered wind down at night. It's been a supportive addition to my daily wellness routine. Experience the most trusted magnesium for purity, potency, and performance, Plus, it's non-GMO, vegan, and gluten-free, making it a choice you can feel good about. Go to qualiaLife.com slash legal AF for 50% off. And here's a bonus. Use the code legal AF for an additional 15% off your order.
Starting point is 00:09:57 That's Q-U-A-L-A-L-A-L-A-Lif.com slash legal AF and then use code legal AF. Thanks to Qualia for sponsoring this episode. I'm not surprised that victims didn't want to come forward and sue the government and leave it to Katie Fang to do it for them. Here's the brand new suit hot off the presses. Later, I'm going to be interviewing Katie Fang on the legal AF YouTube channel about this complaint and why she decided to go from media and journalist covering matters to being the plaintiff in a case like this one.
Starting point is 00:10:31 It's over the failure of the Epstein files to be transparent, the Attorney General to produce all the documents, the redactions that are inappropriate. including those about Donald Trump. When it comes to having standing, because in order for a plaintiff to be the appropriate plaintiff to bring a case, in a live case or controversy, they have to have an injury, they have to have standing. So in paragraph eight of the complaint,
Starting point is 00:11:04 and later on, Katie says that the failure to follow the law has harmed the plaintiff, Katie Fang, a journalist, lawyer, and legal analyst who has extensively reported on Jeffrey Epstein and his network. Fang's inability to report with substance on all of the documents she should be able to access has hurt her ability to do her job and made it harder to fulfill her mission as a journalist and legal analyst. When you get to paragraph 28, she focuses on the inappropriate redactions. For instance, she says that the identities in a draft indictment, of people who allegedly conspired with Epstein to persuade, induce, and entice individuals
Starting point is 00:11:46 who had not yet attained the age of 18 to engage in prostitution? Who are those people? And why aren't they being prosecuted? The identity of the person who wrote to Epstein in 2014, thank you for a fun night, your littlest girl was a little naughty. The identity of the person who wrote to Epstein in 2017 that I met, blank today. She is like Lolita from Nabokov femme miniature so now I should send you her type of candidates only about how about an Epstein in 2018 email who's the person that wrote I found at least three very good young poor but we but was so tired meet this one not the beauty queen but we both likes her a lot who's that who wrote that and why were these names redacted
Starting point is 00:12:38 Why were photographs of images on Jeffrey Epstein's desk with Donald Trump redacted? Why were purported notes of interviews in paragraph 39 with victims and witnesses alleged that Trump had forced her to perform oral sex when she was in her early teen? She further alleged that Epstein introduced her to Trump. Who was that? Why was that not properly pursued? I like this approach by Katie Fang. Somebody had to come off the sideline and file in her. her lawyers at Public Integrity Project have sued for a declaratory judgment,
Starting point is 00:13:14 violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, and Ultra Vare's Act. Now, it'll be a tough road to hoe for her to prove standing here, but I think she's on the right side of the Angels with the case, and it was the right thing to do at the right time. Because the Trump administration believed by firing Pam Bondi and turning the page with Todd Blanche that they would not have to, be held accountable for the Epstein Transparency Act. And you've got groups like Democracy Forward with Freedom of Information Act requests that are still pending before federal judges. Katie Fang's now
Starting point is 00:13:49 new lawsuit and the rest. Donald Trump thought by now the media would be exhausted and the news cycle would move on from his cover up of a child sex trafficking ring. But you can see by the Nora O'Donnell interview that that's not happening. Doesn't matter. That's the Oversight Committee, they're trying to get out of the business of issuing subpoenas for anything by creating roundtables instead of investigations to try to cut the legs out from another Democrats issuing subpoenas to try to stop people from being dragged in to have to testify about the Epstein scandal. That's not going to work because the people have already made their decision about whether Donald Trump is covering up the Epstein scandal
Starting point is 00:14:32 and whether his Department of Justice and FBI are complicit in it. But we'll continue to follow this Katie Fang new lawsuit. I'm glad to see the media on the other side of the V on the plaintiff side. I think you'll be fascinated by my interview with her on LegalAF YouTube channel. So until my next report, this is Michael Popak. Can't get your fill of Legal AF. Me neither. That's why we form the Legal AF substack.
Starting point is 00:14:59 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 LegalAF 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.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.