Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump Plans BACKFIRE and Jack Smith is READY

Starting point is 00:00:00 Donald Trump defames E. Jean Carroll after being found liable in federal court. So what happens next? Donald Trump's attempt to delay the Manhattan District Attorney's criminal case has backfired and let's also give an update on what's going on with that Jim Jordan and Maga Republican led judiciary committee, subpoena and deposition of Mark Pomeran's, the deposition actually just took place, well sort of. George Santos, Maga Republican who lies about everything

Starting point is 00:00:40 and is also a criminal both in the United States of America and an international criminal was criminally indicted by the Feds last week. Let's talk about those charges and what to expect. Donald Trump's CNN debacle has given special counsel, Jack Smith, a treasure trove of evidence, especially evidence going to Donald Trump's knowledge and criminal intent and just because Fox settled with Dominion doesn't mean that they're out of hot water yet. The smartmatic lawsuit taking place in a New York court house is still in full effect against Fox and smartmatic has just subpoenaed the Trump campaign to get information about the relationships there with Fox.

Starting point is 00:01:31 We'll talk about all of this. And maybe some more on this episode of Legal AF, Michael Popok back from his Popokian vacation. Everybody's thrilled that your back will see more hot takes from you and wanna give a special shout out to my mom and to all of the Midas mighty moms out there. It is my mom's birthday. So happy birthday mom. I love you and a big shout out to all the mothers watching this as we approach mother's day as well. Happy Mother's Day. We know that the Midas mighty mamas are the best in the world. Pope Pocka, where are you? You, I'm doing great. Do you remember once early on in our tenure as podcasters? I did a remote

Starting point is 00:02:18 podcast with you from my mother's where my mother lives in Georgia and her back in her backyard patio with really bad internet. Do you remember that? I remember the technological specs would be totally unacceptable for a modern day legal AF, but I do remember that. I remember you were outside in that courtyard area. The wind was blowing. You had the little mic.

Starting point is 00:02:42 I remember exactly where you were. My mom is so proud. I mean, proud, mama's. My mom is so proud of what you and I care and do because she's been there obviously from the very beginning. You know, the ones where we were getting 200 views total and we were high-fiving each other. She's just been and I showed her those episodes and my mom lives in a home unfortunately. she's in a wheelchair for a long, long time. But I show her the videos when I go visit her and it's her favorite viewing. And it's really nice that we have loved ones in our family that are so supportive because we couldn't do what we're doing if we didn't have people in our lives that support us and

Starting point is 00:03:20 let us go off into dark rooms and podcasts and record things, taking away quality time from them. So you and I are both very, very lucky as is Karen. And very lucky for all the Midas, mighty moms out there, all of you watching on YouTube or listening on audio. Let's just be real. It's because of women who have saved America from Donald Trump. And really, none of this is possible without you. You've you've saved our democracy and continued to save our democracy. Let's get right into the show. So, you know, earlier in the week, Popak, you had called when you thought this jury verdict was going to be handed down, right? The closing arguments took place on Monday, and then we had very, very, very quickly on Tuesday,

Starting point is 00:04:11 quicker than I thought. I'd love to get your take. I thought we'd get it maybe late Tuesday, but like they basically went to jury deliberations, maybe had a little bit of lunch, and like within an hour, they had reached the decision that Trump was liable of sexual abuse and defamation and came up with the money award of $5 million and to me that was quicker than I anticipated so first let's just talk about that and your overall Reflections final reflections on that trial and then let's talk about what happens moving forward. But Popeyes, let me tell us to do you. Yeah, the jury did a masterful job in weighing the evidence.

Starting point is 00:04:52 We've always talked about the civil standard preponderance of the evidence, the balanced scales at the beginning of the trial, the feather in favor of one or the other party. And when you have, as you said, Ben in the past, I like we make self-referential statements on our podcast. Remember when we said earlier, well, Ben, you know, you said earlier, it's not just the preponderance of the evidence,

Starting point is 00:05:13 it's all the evidence is on the side of E. Jean Carroll because of the 11 witnesses, it was 11 witnesses for E. Jean Carroll and non-Fortontal Trump. He had painted himself into the corner because he's been lying from the beginning that he didn't know her. It was a hoax. He wasn't there. So he has no alibi. He couldn't play because he said he wasn't even there and he doesn't know her. So once he did that, kind of all of the rest sort of fell into place. They had obviously made an early decision

Starting point is 00:05:39 knowing that their client was never going to testify, that they were going to have to do this through cross examination, the defense. Some of the newspapers put up headlines. Trump puts up no defense. It's not exactly, he put up a defense, but he did it through cross examination of E. Jane Carroll's witnesses. There's very few documentary or video or audio pieces of evidence that came down to the credibility of the witnesses.

Starting point is 00:06:02 And since E. Jane Carroll not only did an amazing, courageous, masterful job in fighting off a caveman cross examination by Joe Takapina that pissed off, obviously, I can say it now, pissed off the jury. The jury was, the jury was for E. Jean Carol and against Donald Trump, probably from the opening statements that were made by the, you know, this competing stark contrast between those two lawyers and all of that. Now, my favorite kind of tidbits leaving the trial, now that the jury has returned that verdict and you and I joked, I thought,

Starting point is 00:06:39 and it went exactly the way I thought, I thought they would pick their jury for a person, order lunch, which I thought was the most complicated decision of the day, who got the tuna wrap, who got the hamburger, and then they were going to vote really quickly on a straightforward jury verdict forum and reach their decision. And they did it in under three hours, which is a record time. Now, the reason that Donald Trump were going to pick it up in the later segment is so concerned about taking his criminal case away from a jury, is because of what just happened with this Manhattan jury, meaning all the jurors were chosen from Manhattan, from that liberal

Starting point is 00:07:18 Biden Democratic Bastion. And he doesn't want that. He wants a federal jury. We'll talk about the differences when we get there. And he had his lawyers, at least Susan Neckless, the criminal lawyer we know, sat in for jury selection of the E. Jean-Karrel civil case just for that reason.

Starting point is 00:07:33 Now, once the jury returned the verdict, we have, and awarded her the $5 million in all of that. We had the inevitable appeal. He's got no real grounds for the appeal. He doesn't like certain of the evidentiary decisions that the judge made. Judges are given tremendous latitude in making decisions about what evidence comes in,

Starting point is 00:07:54 what witnesses testify, what topics are covered. They're given a broad, broad, you know, broad, broad birth to do what they want to do in that area. And again, just to remind everybody, no one is entitled under the law, under the Constitution, to a perfect trial. You just have to be a fair and just trial. And so there can be errors that are made along the way, even by this judge. You know, a comment here, a comment there, an instruction given or not given to a jury.

Starting point is 00:08:24 But it has to be reversible error. It has to be something that's so impacted. The jury's verdict that without that, it would, it tipped the scales improperly in favor of one party or the other. And we watch this trial closely and no one who's a, who's a seasoned court watcher or trial lawyer, like you and me, Ben or Karen, thought there's any reversible error that's been committed. So he'll file his notice of appeal. He'll have to put up that bond that you and I talked about in order to stop the enforcement of the $5 million judgment, which is a judgment right now. And I haven't seen whether he's posted the bond jet and maybe you know that part.

Starting point is 00:08:57 And then of course we got to get to Trump can't help himself and he's decided to defame E. Jean Carroll again at the CNN town hall, which I was very, very worried about because of the format of it being a town hall in New Hampshire filled with maga. I thought not a great moderator, um, and she bore out my, my fear. I didn't think she lost, I think she lost control of the moderation part. It's very hard to moderate a town hall to begin with. And then 70 minutes of just pure, unvarnished Donald Trump, but that has the impacts on the other segment we're gonna talk about,

Starting point is 00:09:33 which is has he implicated himself and at least two of Jack Smith's criminal investigations by the comments that he made at CNN. And now Eugene Carroll, does she have the right to bring and will she bring is you and I predicted on the last show with Karen will Robbie Kaplan her lawyer go after Donald Trump for him attacking her once again at the CNN town hall. Yeah, you know, and just think about Donald Trump, you know, he filed this notice of appeal and just to give you a sense of how

Starting point is 00:10:06 frivolous it's You know going to be and why both Michael Pope and I think it's going to just be you know clearly rejected by the court of appeals is He didn't show up to the trial He wind about the fact that he got an unfair trial because he wasn't allowed to testify, even though he was allowed to testify, and the judge gave him more latitude and leeway to testify than I've ever seen given before, because the judge knew exactly the type of person Donald Trump was, and exactly what Donald Trump was trying to do on appeal, claiming that this whole process was unfair.

Starting point is 00:10:48 And so the judge actually went out of his way to make it not only fair, which he should, but Trump got extra benefits that other litigants would never have gotten. When your lawyer and officer of the court represents to the court that my client has waved his right to testify the way Takapena said and the judge goes, I hear you saying that. However, I'm still going to give him three more days to decide if he actually wants to testify. That never happens. I've never seen that happen before other than in this situation and the judge was anticipating just this. The only person who would possibly have the right to an appeal would have been E. Jean

Starting point is 00:11:30 Carroll if the verdict somehow came out the other way because Donald Trump was making extra judicial statements that were in clear violations of the court orders. So while Trump was too big of a coward to show up in court, he was posting on his social media platform precisely the things that Donald Trump either did not actually introduce into evidence as he had the right to do. So Trump wanted to introduce his DNA into evidence and make an argument about the DNA. He had three years to do that. And he didn't do it. And then he started posting about the dress, the dress, the dress, and the DNA. The same way he had the opportunity to testify.

Starting point is 00:12:10 He didn't. And then wind. They didn't let me testify. They silenced me. So that appeals absolutely going nowhere. But Takapina did file the notice of appeal, which will start about a one year or so process, where it could be a little longer

Starting point is 00:12:26 where an opening brief is going to be filed. That's not what was filed yet. Just the mere notice that this is the process that's going to take place. An opening brief, an opposition to that, and then a reply brief, and then there'll be oral arguments probably sometime about a year from now around this time. But Trump's gonna have to post a bond in the meantime of at least $5 million or close to that to pursue this appeal and we'll let you know if and when that's been posted But yes, then Donald Trump does that so-called town hall I it was more of like a Maggarelli with CNN and Chris Lick cheerleading, this kind of temporary burst of ratings, but it was like ratings of watching a fascist train wreck to ultimately destroy the credibility of CNN.

Starting point is 00:13:15 I'll say this, the Biden town hall though, in 2020, got significantly better ratings than this. I think that needs to be pointed out as well. But he just tried to answer before you move on. Can I just comment about one thing on that? CNN sent out Anderson Cooper to give his explanation as to why they it was appropriate. I'll tell you what was inappropriate better. Although we like it, it may have been a treasure trove you and I are going to talk about for the prosecutors because rather than saying, I can't comment on that because it's the subject of appending criminal investigation, which I'm sure his handlers told him to say he can't help himself. So he commented on everything that is the subject of appending criminal investigation. But the way that CNN could have done this is not a town hall, put him in another format

Starting point is 00:14:02 where you have more control of over him, not where he talks for 60 minutes uninterrupted, apparently, trampling over the moderator and becomes like you said, a rally-like experience. It was the format that didn't help matters, but it may have helped matters coincidentally on the prosecution side, so maybe it is the gift that keeps on giving. Well, you know, so helpful for E. Jean Carroll in a future defamation case, but when we say helpful for a case, coming at great personal trauma to E. Jean Carroll after winning this trial after having her name cleared

Starting point is 00:14:38 by a nine to nothing unanimous jury for Donald Trump to immediately go in his social media platform and then go on the platform that CNN afforded him to defame her and then the audience laugh at her and mock her as he mocked her and lied about her and then said the same exact things if not worse things than he was just found liable for in the defamation case that was brought against him. So what do you think about? Do you think they're going to file another defamation case, Michael Popak? And if they do, because the jury has already reached a verdict and has made a finding that

Starting point is 00:15:18 Donald Trump sexually abused her, that he already defamed her, is it an easier, more expedited procedure now? Yeah, and it's time for a World Breakout, a legal AF law school class on collateral, a stop-all new concept. I don't think we actually talked about collateral stop-all before. So let me just keep the see, keep the momentum going in our, where we are in the case. The case that was tried that you and I've spent a lot of time talking about, rightly so, was what we referred to as E. Jean Carroll II, Roman numeral II, because the act of sexual abuse that happened as the jury found in the dressing room of Berkdorf Goodman, which Donald Trump needs to remind everybody as I've always have, it sits between two properties that he owned.

Starting point is 00:16:07 Plaza Hotel directly next door, he owned it at that time, and Trump tower directly across the street. I mean, it's a prime location. This is a half block that Donald Trump frequently walked and all of that. I don't know why. He just says ego can't help him from commenting about all the big building right next store. Yeah, you own the big building right across the street. That's why it happened there, Donald.

Starting point is 00:16:28 But the Carol one, which got stayed by the judge just a month or so before the trial, which was misreported by a lot of media as, you know, there's a stay of the defamation and civil rape case. There wasn't. It was a stay of the case related to any rape case. There wasn't. There was a stay of the case related to any defamatory statements they were made by Donald Trump when he was president. And that issue, which has these legal constitutional issues

Starting point is 00:16:53 about immunity and executive privilege and something called the West Fall Act, a statute that governs and protects federal employees and whoever's sitting in the White House at a given moment is considered employee number one, the United States, and they get the protection of that. If they are acting within the course and scope of their duties, when they make a statement or do some sort of conduct, his argument, Trump's argument was, you can't sue me for the things I said when I was a president, when I was defending myself even though I defamed her because I have a privilege around that.

Starting point is 00:17:25 That bounced up and down between federal appellate courts and territorial or district of Columbia, appellate courts, but finally right before the trial came back. So she can now go after him on this issue of defamation before another jury about the statements that were made after while he was president, which is another set of damages.

Starting point is 00:17:49 She could get another expert to talk about new damages that were made when that happened above the five million. She can't double recover, but above and different than the five million. So that case could be thought out like now by the judge and by Robbie Kaplan, her lawyer, and set that case for trial.

Starting point is 00:18:08 Discovery is done in that case. And now let's talk about what do we do with the jury's ruling? Can a party retry issues that have already been decided against them? In this case, the sexual abuse that happened in the dressing room as a jury of 9 and Manhattan found 9-0. So the doctrine of collateral, a stop-all, has four elements. You have to have a valid and binding final judgment. We do. You have to have the same issue in case number one in later cases. In this case, not the defamation, because that's already been decided. You can't try that again. The defamation, the particular defamation in that case, not the defamation, because that's already been decided. You can't try that again.

Starting point is 00:18:45 The defamation, the particular defamation in that case, not new defamation or old defamation, but that defamation. But sexual abuse is now an issue that Donald Trump is precluded from litigating again. It is now forever more stamped for this in every other future trial that what E. Jean Carroll said happened in that dressing room happened in that dressing room.

Starting point is 00:19:07 And he can't say it didn't. He can't in a court of law as opposed to social media and a town hall. He can no longer say to another jury that that didn't happen because that's over. We skipped that completely. The jury is instructed that a prior jury and a judgment found that that happened. And then the last couple of elements of collateralistopel are, is the issue, that issue of what happened in the dress room, is that essential to the jury verdict, the judgment? Yes, of course, it was essential to that.

Starting point is 00:19:39 And is that issue being actually litigated in the new, in the second or third or tenth case? And the answer to that would be yes, on future cases. So he is lost forevermore, cannot litigate, can't put up a defense to the issue of what happened in that dressing room. Now the issue for the jury, the new jury in the future will be, was there defamation by denying it? And does that rise the level of defamation? If it happened while the guy was president, they're gonna have to get into immunity

Starting point is 00:20:06 or the judge is gonna have to get into immunity issues. If not, if not, there's no immunity issues, he'll lose again because this is the family story. And I don't know why he continues to do it. I mean, I guess he thinks, well, I only got hit for five million. I'll just keep doing it. How many times can they bring a suit? But you and I said on the Wednesday podcast, don't try full and mess with Robbie Kaplan and E. Jean

Starting point is 00:20:28 Carroll. And if he thinks he's going to keep screwing with them and they're going to walk away, Robbie Kaplan's quoted in the Times two days ago, we are considering our options. We know she got defamed again and we'll let you know in a couple days what we're going to do, including about the Carol, the Carol one case. And then I'll leave it on this bed for my part. I don't know if you saw, I would probably put it up on the screen. Takapena, for all of his terrible, bad form in the courtroom, 1980s, 1990s conduct towards Eugene Carol,

Starting point is 00:21:02 he did go over to the table, to the council table and shake her hand. And I guess she grabbed a Kaplan's hand. And appropriately, E. Jean Carroll got the last word. And she reports that she said to Joe Takapina, he did it, meaning Donald Trump. And you know it. And then he walked off and didn't say anything in the back. So I love the courage and the bravery of E. Jean Carol right to the bitter end, even when shaking hands with her opponent and saying, you know he did it, you know he did it.

Starting point is 00:21:35 You know, when you look at videos of Joe Takapina from even 18 months ago, when he would make these media appearances, he kind of even looks like a different person. He talked like a different person. He acted like a different person. And when people are brought into Donald Trump's orbit, the toxicity is actually contagious. Trump rubs off on the people around him and they then take on that same kind of really

Starting point is 00:22:06 despicable persona. And when Takapina would make these media appearances, the way he would act in court was not as a lawyer representing Donald Trump, but it was as a lawyer pretending to be Donald Trump with the same exact kind of mannerisms and lies and kind of just despicable way of treating people. And that's why I think a lot of the public, including us here, were very critical of him as the lawyer. Look, Donald Trump was entitled to have a lawyer.

Starting point is 00:22:38 Donald Trump's entitled to have a lawyer. And I don't fault lawyers for representing clients, you know, and representing clients accused of very, very horrible and bad things. That's part of the system. And there is not necessarily in the civil side, but in the criminal side, a constitutional right to that. And that is an important right that people have. And so I don't think we should just attack lawyers because they represent bad people or people accused of doing bad things. However, when the lawyer then acts like the client and the lawyer engages in the behavior, that's when it's utterly problematic. The next point I want to make is that and you may have touched on this too, is that judge Lewis Kaplan will also likely be the judge.

Starting point is 00:23:24 Not just he will definitely be the judge of the other defamation case that's still pending, but in a new defamation case, it would likely be a related case. Judge Lewis Kaplan would be the judge essentially of all these federal defamation case that E. Jean Carroll would bring. So the fact that Donald Trump keeps on attacking the judge and saying, cl Clint in appointee and the worst judge ever, a horrible human being, that's not going to make judge Lewis Kaplan go, you know what, I can't be the judge anymore. It's not going that way at all.

Starting point is 00:23:55 So this is the judge Trump's going to have on all of these eGene Carol defamation cases, I believe there. And then just kind of turning to your point about the town hall and Donald Trump statements there. And kind of like what's he doing? The Maga Republican movement, they don't stand for law and order, right? And so what that means and what Trump's approach approaches is basically screw the courts, right? Like like screw what the actual law is. I'm a dictator and and and I'm an authoritarian.

Starting point is 00:24:32 I'm going to make the law. So you know, even in this area, it's like, I don't care. I'm going to defame her. Who cares? If I'm elected, I'm going to destroy the freaking courts. Like that's that's where he's betting. I'm going to take over this country and I didn't complete what I wanted to complete in those four years, which is just making this an entirely authoritarian state. That's why, to me, it wasn't even an accident.

Starting point is 00:24:58 It wasn't like Caitlin Collins asked him these hard-hitting questions about his theft of classified records and about how he acted towards Mike Pence. Trump's just like, I don't care what the law is. I'm not trying to defend myself through what a legal defenses. I'm trying to defend myself the way Mussolini and the way Hitler took over a country. Like, I'm going to take over this country and then I'm going to destroy the Department of Justice. That's where I'm going with this and that's the messaging that I'm putting out there. And that's what he did throughout that entire CNN debacle.

Starting point is 00:25:33 Let's talk about all of that and more. Let's also talk about what's going on in the Manhattan DA's criminal case. But first, let's take this quick break. Let's take a quick break to talk about our next partner, Zbiotics. Now, if you're like me, you've probably skipped a workout because of drinks the night before, like it happens. But if you commit it to your healthy routine, you need Zbiotics. Zbiotics, pre-alcohol probiotic is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it works. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut.

Starting point is 00:26:10 It's this byproduct, not the hydration, that's the blame for your rough next day. Z-biotics produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down. It's designed to work like your liver, but in your gut where you need it most. Just remember to drink Z-biotics before drinking alcohol, drink responsibly and get a good night's sleep to feel your best tomorrow. Now I can't lie, after we hit one million subscribers I may have partied a little bit too much that night. But luckily I knew I had Z-biotics.

Starting point is 00:26:38 Now as instructed I drank a bottle of Z-biotics before any alcohol and I was amazed at just how good I felt the next day. Give Zbiotics a try for yourself. Go to zbiotics.com slash legalaif to get 15% off your first order when you use legalaif at checkout. Zbiotics is backed with a 100% money back guarantee. So if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money. No questions asked. So remember, head to zbiotics.com slash legal a f and use the code legal a f at checkout for 15

Starting point is 00:27:12 percent off. Thank you, Zbiotics for sponsoring this episode. Welcome back to legal a f. Ben myself is joined by Michael Popec a busy week also in developments in the Manhattan district attorney's criminal case for those 34 felony counts of falsifying business records against Donald Trump. There was a hearing that was held last week where the judge stated he was going to issue a protective order and has issued the protective order and is ordering Donald Trump, I think on May 23rd, to have to show up via Zoom and listen to the judge as Judge Juan Mershan, the judge presiding over the case in State Court reads the protective order to Donald Trump. Donald Trump is going to have to actually be there on Zoom. The judge is going to lecture him on what the protective

Starting point is 00:28:02 order is and the fact that he could be held in contempt of court if he violates that. So that'll be interesting when that takes place on May 23rd. But some other big developments as well too, Popeye, right? Donald Trump trying to delay this case by filing a removal, but then this week the judge who eventually the case got assigned to Judge Hellerstein had a response to that, which I don't think Donald Trump's gonna be able to delay this thing. And then some developments with Mark Pomerance

Starting point is 00:28:32 and the lawsuit that was filed by the Manhattan District Attorney against Jim Jordan, and a deal was cut where Pomerance would testify, but Pomerance would be able to potentially invoke various privileges. So what's going on here, Popeye? Yeah, I want to first comment on Donald Trump's continued cowardice, which you've so properly outlined before we got to the segment.

Starting point is 00:28:58 Donald Trump outside the courtroom and his lawyers outside the courtroom and Donald Trump's lawyers inside the courtroom are usually two completely different things. That's what's going to get Donald Trump ultimately more in trouble because he's manufacturing evidence in a good way for the prosecutors almost every day because he leads this outside life outside the courtroom without regard to what happens inside the courtroom or what his lawyers tell him or wish he would stop doing. And the lawyers do the same thing.

Starting point is 00:29:30 You know, you've done some good hot takes on Alina Habba, you know, who we'd never heard. Anything she was as quiet as a church mouse during the actual trial itself, but she's a big loud mouth when she's on newsmax and seeing that, I mean, on the right-wing media. Same thing, Donald Trump, same thing, Tekka Pina, same thing, all of his lawyers.

Starting point is 00:29:51 His real lawyers, like Jim Trusty and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, stay on message, stay on script, but they got a client who's completely out of control. So when Judge Mershon gets him on that video on the 23rd of May, because the judge said, I don't care where he's at, we'll get a video link. I want Donald Trump in front of me. I'm going to read him the protective order and basically the gag order. So he knows the dos and don'ts, the rules of the road to avoid me fighting him in contempt. You know what Donald Trump doesn't do during that other than saying yes sir and no sir. He doesn't do the things to the judge there in a courtroom that he does outside. He doesn't attack the judge.

Starting point is 00:30:32 He doesn't call him a hack. He doesn't go after his daughter. He doesn't go after the prosecutors. He doesn't say this is all a sham. Like you and I have seen defendants and we've seen it in the Jan 6th defendants lose their minds in court and start yelling at screaming at everybody. Donald Trump doesn't do that because he's a coward. He knows he can't get away with it there. He'll be found in contempt. It's just interesting. We have to constantly talk about as you and I do with Karen and the three of us do about

Starting point is 00:30:56 the outside, you know, red meat throwing, maga, dollar, grifting, Trump and lawyers, and what happens in these courtrooms. Now, I have a slightly different take on why he filed the notice of removal, and it's not related to delay, because frankly, notices of removal, where we've all been involved with those on the civil side, don't delay, because they're decided, usually it's decided without an evidentiary hearing on the papers relatively quickly after their filed. It's either removed because it belongs in federal court or there's grounds

Starting point is 00:31:37 to suck it out of state court or there aren't. And that's normally not a delaying tactic. I have a different theory. My theory is that the reason that they're trying to get it away from Mershon is they're trying to get it away from a Manhattan jury that they just had a two terrible experiences so far in the last year in front of a Manhattan jury. The two main subsidiaries of the Trump organization, 17 count felony conviction, Manhattan district attorney with a Manhattan jury in state court with Susan Necklace on the receiving end of that as the as the lawyer. And E. Jean Carroll, we have another federal, I'm sorry, well, in that case, a federal grand jury, which could have been

Starting point is 00:32:24 made up of people other than Manhattan people, but I think he's haunted a bit by what happened to the 17-count felony conviction in state court. The difference between state court and federal court is not just judges and a system and rules and law. It's also a jury pool. In New York, the federal court, civil or criminal, is the Southern District of New York. That's where Judge Kaplan sits on the civil side for E. Jean Carroll. The random wheel that is created, the master jury wheel is what it's called in all federal courts and for the Southern District. For, for New York, Southern District of New York, where his case could be tried if he's successful

Starting point is 00:33:11 in the removal, which he will not be, but if he were, would pick up seven counties for potential jurors, where there has to be a unanimous jury. Most of those counties, New York, Bronx, Westchester, Putnam, Duchess, Sullivan, Orange, and Rockland are Democrat. But if you see a map, we might put it up here today of what New York look like for the election, even though we keep talking about New York being a blue state, it's a blue state because the urban centers overvote for Democrats, but the rest of the state is red. It's red and then blue heading down to Manhattan. And that's what wins the presidencies and the governorships usually in New York. But for those, there's at least three counties that he's searching for a jury, a juror

Starting point is 00:34:01 to find that have reasonable doubt and not convict him. In that case, Putnam County, for instance, he won Trump won by 9% over Biden, even when Biden won the state. Sullivan County, he won by 10 points, even though Biden won the state. Orange County, he won by a couple of points. So there's, he's hoping for an orange county, Sullivan County, or Putnam County person to be pulled into the jury pool and hope that he can get a hung jury or somebody, or somebody that's going to find reasonable doubt in June. I think the 20, what is it, June, what, Ben? June 15th, or no, 15th for the DA to respond,

Starting point is 00:34:50 the 27th for the evidentiary hearing. He's gonna hold an evidentiary hearing. I doubt he takes this into federal court. He's told Mershawn in his order, Judge Hellerstein, you do you, you do you, you continue to do you in state court. I'm not gonnaershon in his order, Judge Hellerstein, you continue, you do you. You continue to do you in state court.

Starting point is 00:35:09 You set a trial, which is now set for either February or March, which is also known as primary season of a criminal trial. You set your trial. I'll get back to you on whether the federal court's going to take jurisdiction over this. The argument that they've raised, you and I talked about this a bit on a prior podcast, the argument that the lawyers for Donald Trump is raising, to argue that they have the right

Starting point is 00:35:32 under the removal statute, to take the case into federal court, and to be clear, the court would change if he's successful, not the prosecutor. The prosecutor is still Manhattan, DA, Alvin Bragg. The laws are still state law violations. The only question is what jury, I mean the judge up until the jury, but what jury would ultimately try the case. That's what's up for grabs. Sure, he was hoping for a Trump appointee to be making these decisions and of course he didn't get it. He got Judge Hellerstein instead who's the opposite of a Trump appointee, but under there is, he's a Clinton appointee, senior status judge that's almost 90 and has ruled against Donald Trump

Starting point is 00:36:10 ultimately and in favor of Michael Cohen on retaliation by Donald Trump against Michael when Michael was making comments and social media and publishing books while he was still within the Bureau of Prisons controlled by the Department of Justice. So he's got the wrong judge. They're gonna hold this here. There he's got my prediction, and I wanna hear yours. I've heard Karen's, Karen thinks it's possible that the federal court could take jurisdiction.

Starting point is 00:36:34 Their argument is that Donald Trump repaid Michael Cohen for the hush money while he was president and that election law law federal election law crimes are being implicated by the way that it's charged in state court. And that is only something that should be ruled upon in federal court with federal preemption and all of that. I think this is a loser. I think he's trying to get a better jury pool.

Starting point is 00:37:01 I think he's going right back to Judge Mershon and the Manhattan jury pool that he deserves. Yeah. So these are New York state law criminal statutes. That's simple. It's not a complex issue. By the way, Donald Trump, a professional rake stepper in his notice of removal, if he's claiming that they're federal crimes as well, perhaps the Department of Justice and the Feds should charge him with the federal versions of the crimes. Heck, they did it to Michael Cohen. And one of the things Michael Cohen's been rightfully upset about is, and that's an understatement

Starting point is 00:37:39 is they should charge Trump with the same federal versions of these crimes. So that's essentially what Trump's argument is that this implicates federal law. Yeah, federal crimes, but you're not being charged with federal crimes. You're being charged with state law crimes here in Popeye. I'll give you, so it's not the Judge Hellerstein who ultimately got to sign this case, who you just mentioned. Judge Hellerstein is, I think, going to remand, meaning send the case back, which he's already basically said,

Starting point is 00:38:12 it could, the proceedings can still be taking place in the state court, but he will remand, send the case back to state court where the proceedings will already be taking place. I don't do not believe this case is going to stay in federal court at all. I do have a friendly disagreement with you though about Trump's ultimate reason for the removal because, you know, I think you kind of hit on it when you were talking about the two cases because the first case you mentioned in Manhattan court itself, the Manhattan jury pool and the Trump organization case where within

Starting point is 00:38:45 nine hours, the Trump organization was convicted on 17 felony counts and the Manhattan district attorney's criminal case. But the E. Jean Carroll case was in federal court, was in the Southern District of New York. Yes, there's a unanimous jury in federal court for civil unlike state court, but there is a unanimous jury required in state court anyway. So it's not like you're getting a bigger benefit in federal court there. Trump in three hours was found liable by this federal jury.

Starting point is 00:39:18 I do get your point though that the jury pool is broader. So for a criminal case, maybe you do pull a juror from another county that could be more Trump friendly than just say him and hat in jury pool. But ultimately, I think what this was about, and this is the next point we're gonna talk about on this topic is Trump wanted this case before a specific judge.

Starting point is 00:39:39 Trump goes judge shopping. Trump's mind, very simple, you know, and he just hits on certain points. And Trump is the one who drives these things. So Trump remembers the experience with Judge Eileen Cannon who took jurisdiction when she shouldn't have taken jurisdiction. Now any other judge Trump probably would have drawn in the Southern District of Florida would not have ruled away Judge Eileen Cannon did. It randomly got assigned to Judge Eileen Cannon in the case involving the search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago. And she took jurisdiction in a case she should

Starting point is 00:40:15 never have taken jurisdiction and it delayed things by about four or five months sort of but not really. But it did delay things and create confusion until the court of appeals and the Supreme Court, and the court of appeals again, was basically like, okay, you do not have jurisdiction. What the heck are you doing? Trump saw Judge Mary Kay Viscousill. A judge he appointed rule in favor of Jim Jordan when Jim Jordan's basis for jurisdiction was that the Maga Republicans wanted to pass a law that would immunize former presidents from having any criminal liability and exposure at all.

Starting point is 00:40:56 Trump believed, what do I have to risk here? If I could get in front of Viscousel, maybe she'll grant a motion to dismiss. Look what she just ruled for Jim Jordan. Maybe she'll just throw this whole case out. So I've got a 10% shot or 20% shot, 10% shot of drawing randomly Judge Viscousel. Let me take my, I'll file a frivolous motion to remove. Maybe I'll get this Trump appoint to judge.

Starting point is 00:41:21 Who knows, if it gets in front of her, this case could just simply be dismissed and she'll accept jurisdiction or it'll be delayed, delayed, delayed, delayed and that brings me though. And that's why I think he ultimately filed it. At first, he got judge Abrams and Obama appointee. Her husband was on the Mueller investigation. She recused herself and then went to judge Hellerstein and judge Hellerstein's been like, do not delay this judge Juan Mershon

Starting point is 00:41:45 and state court keep going and doing what you are doing. We'll set an expedited briefing schedule. I'll make a ruling on this in June and then we'll see what happens there. But he's not going to accept the case and it's going to go back to state court. Frankly, still is. But now, Pomeranso, I want to talk about Pomeran's though because it relates to Judge Mary K. Viscousel because when the Manhattan District Attorney filed the lawsuit against, when Alvin Bragg filed the lawsuit against Jim Jordan and the Maga Run Judiciary Committee, that case got assigned to this Trump appointee, Mary K. Viscousel. Lots of people, most legal scholars and observers said, what's the jurisdiction that, and that was your point too, Pope.

Starting point is 00:42:28 I guess no jurisdiction that the Judiciary Committee has to try to interfere with what Alvin Bragg's doing on the criminal case. And then I told you, I said, yeah, you're right. If you went by law and logic, I said, this is a Trump appointee. She's gonna to force, she's going to force Mark Pomeran's to testify. And she did, but even in her own ruling,

Starting point is 00:42:54 she was like, but he doesn't have to testify on certain things if there are privileges. And so what happened there, Popeye? Yeah. Yeah. You were right on that one, but I didn't think the $5,000 that the feds had given to the Manhattan DA's office and federal forfeiture funds, which is what it sounds like. Usually civil forfeiture when people do bad things and they also own property, a lot of that property gets forfeited to the government. Boats, planes, money, jewelry, something, usually gets sold if it's not used by the feds

Starting point is 00:43:24 for their other undercover and other operations. And that money is then a fund in different different state and federal organizations, usually state organizations around the country can ask for money from it to fund things if they need a new SWAT van for the police department or something related to COVID or this or that. And apparently, that DA's office took $5,000, not even Alvin Bragg, predecessor, and used it for something, not even the actual storemeat Daniel's investigation, which is what this was all about, but prior to that. And that was the hook for the judge.

Starting point is 00:44:01 But now, it's fast forward, because some people have written in social media. What happened to that pomerance thing? Pomerance went in with a lawyer. They had already negotiated. This was sort of baked before. When Alvin saw the writing on the wall with Judge Viscousel, but he got to stay from the second circuit of pellet court in his favor, if you will, that gave some breathing room for some negotiations between Jim Jordan and the lawyers, the general counsel inside the Manhattan DA's office, the general counsel for the prosecutor to negotiate the terms of condition, the rules of the road for that actual statement being given by pomerans. And the rules were, yes, it would be under oath. There'd be certain topics that would be off limits.

Starting point is 00:44:48 The general counsel for the Manhattan DA would be able to sit there and object and keep a watchful eye over it to make sure that they didn't get into areas that were inappropriate, including their continued position that everything, despite the fact that pomeranians wrote a book called the People versus Donald Trump,

Starting point is 00:45:05 his fantasy of what his prosecution would look like, if he were the Manhattan district attorney, which he was not. He was a special prosecutor that was brought in by the predecessor and then left in a very noisy exit we've talked at length about because he didn't like the fact that Alvin Bragg on his 90th day in office wasn't moving on the recommended prosecutions that he and another special prosecutor had made, which wasn't his call, by the way, the people of the city, the people of Manhattan, which I was one voted and they voted for Alvin Bragg not for Mark Pomeran. So in any event, Mark Pomeran, despite the fact that he wrote a book, the position of the Manhattan DA's office is things that he learned while he was a special prosecutor in the office are highly confidential. It should not be shared with the outside world, especially during the dependency

Starting point is 00:45:55 of an ongoing criminal investigation. That was their position. Pomerant's the writing on the wall again for him with his own lawyer now represented by his own council issued a statement Just before he gave his testimony in which he he told the world I have the right to protect the criminal investigation I am going to I'm going to protect the criminal investigation. I've been instructed not to respond to the intricacies of what I learned When I was a special prosecutor and if push comes to shove I'm going to take the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination and I'm not gonna answer questions that I can't answer or I'm instructed not to answer by the General Counsel for the Manhattan D.A.'s office and after five or six hours It sounds like a very frustrated

Starting point is 00:46:41 panel led by Jim Jordan didn't get much out of Mark, Mark pomerance. But I have one open question for you. It really has to do with my understanding of the Fifth Amendment and having, having counsel clients in civil matters primarily about the application of it. Generally, because we all talk about assert the Fifth, he asserts the Fifth, maybe he'll assert the Fifth, but generally in order to assert a proper assertion of the fifth amendment is when you is when you reasonably believe that you could be indicted on a criminal matter because there's either an active criminal investigation

Starting point is 00:47:16 or something akin to it, which allows you to then assert the fifth amendment. You know, you can't just assert it because, oh, maybe one day sort of kind of, I could be criminally prosecutor. I'm not even sure what you'd be criminally prosecuted for if he revealed these, the secret sauce over while he was there. It's a breach of confidence. It's probably a rule, a professional responsibility and conduct and other things related to prosecutors. I'm not sure it's a crime to do that. He wrote a book mainly on many of these same topics. But here's a question, Ben. If they don't like it and they find him in contempt, the Jim Jordan MAGA, you know, this

Starting point is 00:47:54 committee, and it's referred to the Department of Justice, which is a Biden led, Marigarlan led Department of Justice, don't they have to find that that was a proper assertion of the Fifth Amendment as a as a foundation? Delph, it was a proper assertion. If you go into the statement that he read, he says the following. Finally, the rule of law permits me to refuse to answer questions that are not pertinent to a legitimate legislative function, or that seek information that is protected by the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. I cannot be punished for answering such question. There may be other privileges as well under the Fifth

Starting point is 00:48:42 Amendment to the Constitution, nobody may be compelled to be a witness against themselves or herself in a possible criminal case. Shortly before the publication of my book, the District Attorney's Office warned me that I could face criminal liability if among other things I disclose grand jury material or violated a provision of the New York City Charter dealing with the misuse of confidential information. When we were before the United States District Court in April 19th, a lawyer from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office said that my book, quote, exposed me to criminal liability. While I'm certain I broke no laws, I'm not required to answer questions.

Starting point is 00:49:19 If my answers might be used against me in a criminal process,, if I had read that statement on my holiday, I probably would have been able to answer my own question. So, yes, it's ladies and gentlemen of our audience, you have to have a fear that there is an outstanding criminal potential prosecution against you. But Mark did, because I had forgotten that the Manhattan DA had so warned him, I was surprised at the beginning that the Manhattan DA didn't do more than write him that letter and didn't go into court to try to stop the book. I know it's a prior restraint and there's whole

Starting point is 00:49:50 constitutional issues about First Amendment on that, but I thought the letter was a little bit weak, but look, it's enough to scare the crap out of them and enough to invoke the Fifth Amendment, and I'm sure that's what their General Counsel, Lisa, I forget her last name, I'll get it, before this is over, made sure that that was asserted counsel, Lisa, I forget her last name, I'll get it before this is over. I made sure that that was asserted. All those Republicans came out so frustrated that Mark Pomeran didn't give them their testimony. Let me give you the big difference here, though. Pomeran showed up the information here that the Maggi Republicans are seeking is patently unlawful.

Starting point is 00:50:26 Pomerancin publishing that book made a mistake. I believe he made a mistake in publishing that book, the way he did and the timing that he did, especially now that Donald Trump had given a deposition to New York Attorney General, Now that Donald Trump had given a deposition to New York attorney general, Letitia James, and that treasure trove of information obtained in that deposition is now in possession of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. And I believe they will be bringing the criminal case against Donald Trump for the things that Pomeran's wanted them to bring it earlier. I just think the Manhattan DA's office had a different strategic plan.

Starting point is 00:51:10 But the main difference here is that Steve Bannon, Mark Meadows, all of those people didn't even show up. They did not respond. They ignored the subpoena, or their lawyers said, we're above the law. We don't have to show up. They did not respond. They ignored the subpoena or their lawyers said, we're above the law. We don't have to show up. They didn't show up and then invoke any privileges at all. And here, Pomeran showed up and vote the privileges. And, you know, they could, they could try to hold him in contempt, but he has a constitutional right to do what he did. And as we learn more

Starting point is 00:51:44 about what took place there We will of course update all the legal a efforts out there. Let's talk briefly about George Santos Because I want to talk spend a little more time on the other topics and George Santos is such a loser that He's not even worthy of that much time on legal a F But look we've been talking about it here for a very long time that we thought that not only is George Santos a everybody knows that he's a liar about everything and should be, you know, summarily removed from his position in Congress, although Kevin McCarthy relies on George Santos' votes and the modern day Maga Republican Party has

Starting point is 00:52:23 no spine and they are the party of people like George Santos. I mean, they not just quickly recount light about everything where he went to college, working at Wall Street. That is, parents survived 9.11, that his grandparents were Holocaust survivors, that he was a volleyball star, that he played volleyball, that he ran a charity, he didn't run a charity. This is somebody who created a fake charity that wasn't a real charity and that prayed

Starting point is 00:52:52 on homeless military veterans by finding their sick pets and promising that he would do a go-fund me account to raise money for their sick pets and Ray would raise $3,000 saying that they were going to provide, he would provide life saving care. It wasn't a real charity. Santos would steal the money and then he would let the homeless military vets die. I mean, and that is someone who was welcomed in to the modern day Republican Party. But as we said, focus on the crimes here, focus on the crimes. And all that stuff is disqualifying, but let's focus on the crimes.

Starting point is 00:53:39 And the crimes are, we have the fact that he lied on his disclosure forms in the House of Representatives. And he would say that he had money that he didn't have and he would list income that was false and he would list loans that he would give his campaign that were not actually loans from everything he stated in his financial disclosures, essentially everything was false. And the criminal, the 13th Count Criminal Indicament out of the Eastern District of New York focused on just a few of those misrepresentations, specifically relating to him lying about his income,

Starting point is 00:54:16 both understating it in 2020, and then claiming he was making $750,000 to a million dollars plus in dividends, which he was not making just totally lied about that. And he put that in disclosures. That's a crime. But they also focused on wire fraud. He created this LLC and then would tell people

Starting point is 00:54:36 that the LLC was actually supporting his campaign. And then he would take the $25,000 or $50,000 donations he'd received and buy himself luxury goods with those items. And so that's wire fraud right there. And then he engaged in crimes relating to unemployment monies that were supposed to be made available to individuals unemployed as a result of COVID,

Starting point is 00:55:01 as part of the CARES Act. And he stole about $24,000 from that fund. He was not unemployed. He claimed he was unemployed, and he stole $24,000. Those were the main charges there. I think we'll see a superseding indictment too with more charges, but the Department of Justice

Starting point is 00:55:20 built their case, both the public integrity section for main justice. But this was really handled out of the Eastern District of New York, Department of Justice Division. And I do think we'll see a superseding indictment, though, with more charges. But I think they just wanted to make sure they filed these charges because every time this guy walks around and, you know, and continues to engage in this conduct is just, it's a, it's a national shame and embarrassment. And it's very analogous to the fact that Donald Trump is a national shame and embarrassment. One other thing to

Starting point is 00:55:55 mention about Santos Popeyes, and if you want to hit anything there before we had the next topics is that he also had to admit unrelated to the Brazilian authorities that he committed those crimes as well. And he avoided prosecution by admitting to fraud there. So he is a convicted criminal internationally in Brazil. He's admitted to that fraud. Yet he still is Kevin McCarthy's position, we're not going to ask him to resign. And he cast the key votes, by the way, on that could cause our country to default

Starting point is 00:56:32 on its debt and other horrific votes. He walks around with an AR-15 pin. I mean, really, really disgusting. Yeah. Yeah. So I was talking with a couple of criminal defense lawyer types in New York that no Breon piece, well, who's the US attorney for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn. And they were struck by how strong in his press statement and press release, he was against George Santos. He said it was, it was a very aggressive set of statements about that this was a fraudulent scheme and brazen misrepresentation. He didn't hold back against them.

Starting point is 00:57:11 They know they've got the evidence that the George's Santos is ultimately dead to rights. And as you said, there's three separate frauds that they brought relatively straightforward, not a lot of moving parts. There's a number of things that are identified in the indictment that not by name, by company one, by investment firm one, by person one, but the New York Times has done a good job at identifying who that is. Company one that's listed in the indictment

Starting point is 00:57:35 is likely redstone strategies, a Florida limited liability company set up by George Santos as a phony 501 C4 social welfare charity not related not supposed to be related to politics in that way, which one of his campaign operatives who's also identified as person number one, a friend and consultant for George Santos who led the fake fundraising effort at Santos's direction. According to the indictment, directed people to donate money there, especially donors who had already maxed out

Starting point is 00:58:10 on the federal limit of contributions. But there's no technical limit on 501C4, which has all sorts of tax deduction and IRS treatment implications, which is why they get the benefit of that. If it's legit, this one was not legit. So one donor in particular donated $25,000 already being over the limit to give George Santos any more money, sent it over to this redstone strategies owned by Santos, thinking

Starting point is 00:58:37 that it was going to be used for campaign ads and other things related to the campaign. And then because you always follow the money when you're a federal prosecutor or a prosecutor, they had already gone and gotten the credit card statements of George Santos, the bank statements of George Santos, and found and figured out that right after he got that money, he went and used it for personal rent, luxury items, luxury clothes, luxury goods, just like in Brazil.

Starting point is 00:59:00 Same guy, just bigger fraud, bigger scam, bigger Ponzi. And so they were able to square all of that. So that's, that's one. The other entity that is listed as investment firm number one, which goes to the unemployment fraud, where he claimed in COVID that he was unemployed for a period of time, went at the exact same period of time, he was drawing a hundred and twenty thousand dollar a year salary from a Ponzi scheme SEC shutdown entity in in Florida called Harbor City Capital, which was already shut down by the SEC for for doing bad things. And that one, he was drawing a salary at the same time. They have the deposits into his bank account. At the same time, he was telling the his bank account at the same time he was telling

Starting point is 00:59:45 the New York State Unemployment Commission and Department that he was unemployed drawing a salary, I mean drawing unemployment insurance benefits from that period of time. So that's of course a fraud. And then he had to figure out Santos had to hide all of these frauds. It wallpaper all over all of them. So he misled, he falsely stated on his, as you said, bad as House of Representatives disclosure form, both the ones that he did when he ran unsuccessfully two years earlier and the ones when he ran successfully about where his money was coming from, because he needed to hide all of that. The other person that's obviously a cooperating witness, especially according to the New York Times investigative reporting.

Starting point is 01:00:24 That's not mentioned by name, but as a name as the term of art is used in grand jury indictments, a person known to the grand jury is likely Ray Tantillo. Ray Tantillo, a Long Island auto dealer, right before the election, Santos brokered between donors that were that liked him for whatever reason because he's a liar and they liked him Brokered the sale of a 19 million dollar yacht a boat And I happen to know the family that he bought the boat from in Miami because I litigated against the husband Who's a lawyer in Miami that also has a business that's very successful? So it's it's already publicly disclosed that myra Ruiz

Starting point is 01:01:08 very successful. So it's already publicly disclosed that Myra Ruiz is the seller of the boat, the wife of John Ruiz, bought by Tantio for 19 million and that of commission went to George Santos, which got pumped into his election. That's where some of that money that we couldn't figure out. How did this guy work in four years ago for direct TV, trying to make sales, making no money in hour. How does he have money to pump into his, because he broke her donors to try to grift off of them at the same time? So that Ray Tantillo is cooperating with the feds, according to reporting by the New York Times, against Santos, whether whether the person who is his political operative, his henchman, for collecting up all this money is cooperating.

Starting point is 01:01:48 If that person isn't, they better be because he's going down and he's going to take all these people with him at the exact same time. So I assume, at least two cooperating witnesses, they've got all the bank records and statements. And I love when he says in his press conference conference Santos, I'm gonna vindicate myself. I'm gonna clear my name and Matt Gates, this is what happens when, you know, the prosecutors don't go after people. Matt Gates told me that I should vindicate my name

Starting point is 01:02:17 and this is America and I have, I don't know how you vindicate bank records. I don't know how you vindicate a credit card statements. I don't know how you vindicate a card statements. I don't know how you've vindicate a timeline that clearly establishes that you've stole money from donors under one pretext and spent it on luxury

Starting point is 01:02:32 items. I don't know how you clear your name. That is called wire fraud. That is called male fraud. And you'll go to jail. Let me just end my my piece on this. For those that say, get him out of the Congress. He's not going anywhere. As you said, Ben, even though he's given up or had taken away from him, all of his committee

Starting point is 01:02:49 assignments, he's still a vote that McCarthy needs on a very slim majority in that house. I did a long time ago on a hot take. There is an ethics commission, but it's been defunded and defanged by the Republicans. And it can't do anything. There's an ethics commission, but it's been defunded and defanged by the Republicans. And it can't do anything. There's an ethics committee, which is separate from the independent ethics commission that is also now controlled by the Republicans. And unless he's convicted, which it would take about a year, even going at warp speed to get to trial

Starting point is 01:03:25 and all these other things. And the only way to take them out is gonna be, he loses the November 2024 election and isn't seated in January of 2025 because it'll be a close call with how fast Breon piece can get this case to trial. You know, can he do it in six months? I mean, maybe.

Starting point is 01:03:44 They did some of the Jan 6 stuff really quickly, but I think it'll be a year out and the fastest thing that we can do is the voters of the third district that he represents take them out. But in the meantime, we're going to have to suffer having a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, uh, uh, crim, you know, potential criminals subject to his day in court, sitting and serving in the US House of Representatives. Yeah. And it's not a both sides issue. If this was a democratic member, I guarantee you the modern day democratic party in the

Starting point is 01:04:18 house of representatives would say, see you later. This is humiliating and embarrassing. This person's got to go or at the very least Hakeem Jeffries would call out the person and say the person absolutely needs to go But that's not who Kevin McCarthy is. I'm with you. I don't think this case goes to trial before 2024 and I think Ultimately, he's going to lose significantly and then be, um,

Starting point is 01:04:48 criminally, ultimately the charges are going to pile up. I think he's going to serve very serious jail time, you know, because he thinks that he's, you know, they all put themselves in the image of Donald Trump. Donald Trump's going to be held accountable. I know that people are very frustrated as am I about the pace that it's taking. But Donald Trump, because he was elected to the position that he was in 2016, he has a lot more immunities and claims that he could at least assert than somebody like a George Santos. And Santos is going to go to jail for a very, very long time. I think Trump is as well. Let's talk about Donald Trump and the treasure trove and smoking gun evidence that Special Council Jack Smith has just been handed after this debacle of a town hall or whatever you

Starting point is 01:05:35 want to call it. And then let's briefly talk about smartmatic and there's a pin of the Trump campaign. And I think there's some relationship between those two things there as well. We'll talk about that, but first let's take 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've got to change all over again.

Starting point is 01:06:12 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 Ron stepped up to the challenge. Ron's commuter collection is the most comfortable, breathable, and flexible set of products known to man. And here's why. Ron 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

Starting point is 01:06:41 what to wear when you have the Ron commuter collection Rhone's comfortable for-a-way 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

Starting point is 01:07:13 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 Rone 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

Starting point is 01:07:43 into whatever comes next. Head to roan.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. This is sponsored by Lomi. I have a big family and that means there's usually

Starting point is 01:08:06 a lot of trash left over by the time the week comes to an end and frankly I used to feel a bit guilty about this but then I got a Lomi. Now that I have a Lomi it's changed the way I think about my food waste. It transforms my garbage into gold at the push of a button. It's a counter top electric composer that turns food scraps into dirt in under four hours. Now I love composting and plus it makes cooking at home more fun and there's no food rotting in my garbage smelling up the kitchen and I don't feel guilty about throwing food waste into landfills. Thanks to Lomi, I only have to take out the trash once a week and it's hassle free, messfree experience with no more gross leaking bags.

Starting point is 01:08:47 Here's something cool too. I turn my waste into a nutrient-rich dirt that I can feed to my plants, lawn or garden, and that means it's not going into these landfills, producing methane gas. So I get to help the environment and make my life easier. And all my food scraps, plants, clippings, and even those leftovers, I forgot in the back of the fridge,

Starting point is 01:09:03 go into my garden helping me grow more nutritious food right in my backyard. I learned through Lomi that food waste makes up a huge portion of our personal carbon footprint, and by reducing the amount of food I sent to the landfill, I'm helping do my part for the planet while also feeding my garden. And I'm also my neighbor next door brings over her food waste and puts it in my lomi because I've convinced her that we should do this as well together. Whether you want to start making a positive environmental impact or just grow a beautiful garden, Lomi's perfect for you.

Starting point is 01:09:36 Head to lomi.com slash legal AF and use the promo code legal AF to get $50 off your lomi. That's $50 off when you head to l-o-m-i.com slash legal AF and use promo code legal AF at checkout. Welcome back to legal AF. I've been my cellist joined by Michael Popak back from his Papaki invocation. So earlier in the episode we talked about this debacle. I don't even want to call it a town hall because a town hall implies some objectivity and a cross section of a population that is diverse and may be asking kind of tough questions. And that's just not what this was. They brought in 400 Maga Republicans who laughed and mocked sexual abuse victims, laughed and mocked as Donald Trump made a mockery of our law.

Starting point is 01:10:25 It was really disgraceful, Caitlin Collins. She did do some minor pushback. She was not up for the task. It's a very hard task, but CNN did her no favors by making it that format. You also had that situation there where Donald Trump would kind of lurk over her. A lot of the Hillary Clinton debates.

Starting point is 01:10:46 The whole thing was, you know, truly traumatic for the nation to see that. And that's one of the reasons CNN engaged in such journalistic malpractice is their search for ratings, which will backfire, ultimately the trauma that that causes the nation as well to see him make a mockery of sexual abuse after being found liable nine to zero in our court of law, making a mockery of our laws and our democracy, making a mockery of us defending our allies, you know, basically, you know, again, showing that he's Putin's puppet. I mean, horrific things to that transpired. But look, there are some moments there that I think will be actually very helpful for

Starting point is 01:11:33 special counsel, Jack Smith's investigation for Fulton County District Attorney, Fony Willis's investigation. I want to hear your take, Pope, but, you know, he basically admits to stealing the records, which we know he does. And he goes, basically, I could do anything I want to do when it comes to classified records. And he goes with the, it's automatically declassified. I took him. I took him.

Starting point is 01:11:55 I could take him. They automatically get declassified. He continued to say how he's not sorry at all or apologetic about pens that pens did the wrong thing. And Trump spread the disinformation and the criminal conspiracy, the overall scheme that he was engaged in the green bay sweep of trying to have state legislatures overthrow the free and fair election. He talked about the call with Brad Raffensberger, which he said was a perfect call again, and then Liden said that he never said, find the votes, but that he thought that that was perfectly

Starting point is 01:12:32 acceptable. You put this all together, and I think it demonstrates Donald Trump's intent. It goes to his men's rey. He's aware of the common plan and scheme, right? His lawyer in that letter they sent a few weeks back to the House of Representatives to the Maga Republican Controlled Intelligence Committee because they were trying to get them to intervene. They basically wanted act like the defense, the lawyers, I think, were previewing is that Trump didn't know any of this. Trump, you

Starting point is 01:13:02 know, Trump, you know, if anything, it was just sloppy record keeping and there was just mistakes that were made, but Trump's not even aware of all of this and Trump demonstrates here that he's not only aware of it, but he's directing all of it and he thinks he can do it. You can do whatever you wanna do, which he's wrong about.

Starting point is 01:13:18 What was your takeaway here, Popeye? Yeah, he's in big trouble. He cannot take instruction. If anybody's, if anybody's giving him advice and counsel, they're either giving him terrible advice and counsel, or he is just blowing through it as only Donald Trump, the narcissist, eco, maniacal person can do. Because anyone who's a lawyer worth his salt and Jim trustee say what we want about him and he has an unpopular client and one that doesn't listen to him but trustee's reputation before he took this case and Representing him was pretty solid pretty stellar. He actually worked with Jackson Smith

Starting point is 01:13:56 And they were friends even though they had a different divisions under the Department of Justice prior to all of this and Tim Parlatore will put him in a slightly different category, but, you know, they're either not telling him, look, don't comment. You're going to get questions. You just got convicted. You just got a judgment against you by a jury. I'm a sick convicted about sexual abuse. Yesterday, you're going to get asked questions about it. Let's prepare on what you should say about that on the civil side so you avoid future liability. If anybody had that conversation with him, he allows anybody to have that conversation with him

Starting point is 01:14:32 because you got to be able to speak truth to power. It was ignored. On all the pending criminal investigations by Jack Smith and Fannie Willis and the Manhattan D.A.'s office, I know the council was when you go on there and you're asked questions about it, A, don't say anything. Just say, I would love to say it,

Starting point is 01:14:52 you know I'd love to say it, you know me, I'm a truth teller, but I've been told by my lawyers, I can't say anything. If you can't say that, then at least follow the script of being consistent with things that we have said in the courtroom or to the outside world. And he couldn't even follow that.

Starting point is 01:15:10 I mean, he gives a lot of grief as to his Yahoo's that follow him and all these people of the town hall meeting. It looked like Jerry Springer died last week. It looked like an episode of Jerry Springer with the whooping and the hollering and the machine engine being embarrassed about who they led into that town hall and how it ended up being a laugh track, a laugh soundtrack like it was a like a 1980s sitcom of every punchline of Donald Trump like he was at some sort of rally. But having said that, at least beyond message, he says that Biden is daughtering, and can't complete a sentence,

Starting point is 01:15:47 or can't deliver a video without a script, which is a lie, Donald Trump we know, because we have the outtakes, did have a script, and was working off of it when he made his Jan 6th video. But stay on message. Tim Parletor, just a week or so ago, along with Jim trustee, we have a copy of the letter, set the 10 page letter to the House Intelligence Committee, trying to beg the Republican House Intelligence Committee to take control, whatever that means, of the

Starting point is 01:16:16 Mar-a-Lago investigation. And they took the position that it was a hectic departure from the White House. I don't know why, he knew, maybe because he refused to admit he lost, so he didn't do any planning about the departure. And there were boxes everywhere, and it was rushed to get out, and things got thrown in there, and he didn't know about them, and it was inadvertent at best. That's not what Donald Trump said at the town hall.

Starting point is 01:16:40 At the town hall, he said, I took him. I didn't take him by accident. I had every right to take them. I, and I may have showed classified documents to people. Like he admitted that he, he says, I don't know if I did, but I could have. I was allowed to, that's false under the law. The, I took them and there was my right to take them.

Starting point is 01:17:01 That's false and an admission that he retained documents, classified documents that violate at least two statutes that I can think of, including obstruction and the SB Nage Act, showing documents that are classified, another criminal violation. He said, I never made a secret out of taking the boxes. That's a lie. And why would then which you have somebody like Walt Maddow, your valet, your body man, move boxes away from the area of storage when you were negotiating or whatever your lawyers were doing with the Department of Justice about the turnover. He kept saying Ben, and hope why would you have your lawyers submit declarations under penalty of surgery, stating that you don't have the documents. Right. Right.

Starting point is 01:17:46 Right. This is not consistent with somebody that thinks he's done nothing wrong. This is consistent with a guilty heart and a guilty mind. He also had this weird verbal tick bed. I don't know if you picked it up. I was traveling. I didn't watch the video, but I've now read the transcript. There's a written transcript that CNN has put out. He kept saying, well, we were negotiating with NARA, the National Archive. We were negotiating. We were well, we were negotiating with NARA, the National Archive. We were negotiating. We were negotiating. We were negotiating. Negotiating what? You stole the documents that were top secret and classified at least a hundred. It's not your right to negotiate for their return, like they're a hostage, and you've got to show proof of life

Starting point is 01:18:21 and change for a ransom. And we already know there's testimony that he wanted something in exchange. He wanted the Hillary Clinton server files or the Hillary Clinton, whatever files in return for, because again, as you've always said, transactional and exchange, right? A quid pro quo, Zelensky. I won't give you the $450 million weapons deal unless you open up an investigation against Hunter Biden and Joe Biden. Oh, wait, this is Donald Trump. He's always cutting a deal.

Starting point is 01:18:53 He's a really, a middling, real semi-failed, I'll say it out loud, real estate developer, a casino operator. Okay, think about those industries that the majority of the electorate voted him into office when the rest of New York who knew him well and grew up with him. I grew up in the New York New Jersey area, watch them since I was a child. Let's be fair, wasn't the majority of the electorate? It was the electorate. It was the electoral college. Well, that's why that, that's why that the electorate be the electoral college. But in any event, this, this is the guy that gets it.

Starting point is 01:19:28 He kept saying this, negotiating, negotiating, negotiating, it was negotiating. You shouldn't be negotiating. The fact that you're admitting that, that you've retained things that you thought you're entitled to, which is inconsistent completely with the 10 page letter that his lawyers just try to set up for him a defense of innocence of no culpability blown out of the water by Donald Trump. Look, Jack Smith gets a lot of flak, including sometimes on this show because they, the people think he's moving too slow or the wheels of justice are not grinding fast enough or hard enough or

Starting point is 01:20:01 on the timetable that we would all like. But every day, I've said this before and so of you, every day that Donald Trump remains a free man, but subject to criminal investigations is another day that Donald Trump says something or does something that helps the prosecution. Now eventually, you got as Karen is likes to say, you can't have analysis paralysis. You got to like prosecute when you think you got your case, your eyes, your teeth crossed, your witnesses lined up, your evidence lined up on your cases. And whether you're doing one at a time, Mar-a-Lago and the other, Jan 6, the other two issues, are you doing them all together as a package deal

Starting point is 01:20:39 to present to, to present to America, and which Jack Smith has to do. Let's all remember, we keep calling it the Jack Smith prosecutions, but he has to make a recommendation to America, and who has to either accept or reject it case by case. And then if he rejects the prosecution, he has the answer to it to the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee,

Starting point is 01:21:02 but that's for another day. But that was on Mar-a-Lago. We talked about Eugene Carroll and all the bad things he said about her, which will likely lead to another defamation case. And then on Jan 6th, he did it again. He refuses to acknowledge that he did anything wrong. Everything is perfect.

Starting point is 01:21:19 Every email and tweet is perfect. He never accounts for the missing three hours where he sat in the dining room watching gleefully as his people attacked the Capitol, attacked Mike Pence and went after elected officials. In fact, he continued to lie about things that we know from the Gen 6 committee about what he did and the statements that he made and the timing of those statements. You know, even down to the National Guard blaming Nancy Pelosi for the National Guard when his own acting Secretary of Defense has already, Chris Miller has already testified that Donald Trump never

Starting point is 01:21:56 gave the order to release the National Guard. And that's where it has to come from. It has to be the commander in chief. But we had no commander in chief on Jad 6th. That everybody knows it. So just as you and I and the Midas mighty are going through carefully the video and transcript for the town hall, so is Jack Smith and the investigators to add that to the indictment.

Starting point is 01:22:23 Just as we've seen when he was on Twitter, Donald Trump's tweets being used against him, his social media truths being used against him, statements that he's made at rallies, at speeches, at press conferences, at interviews, all being cut and pasted, literally into the body of the indictment or the pleading, we are going to see this again.

Starting point is 01:22:43 Mark our words here, whatever today's data is, I've lost track after the vacation. Mark our words, things that happen in the CNN town hall are going to make their way into Faudiwellis and or Jack Smith's written indictment. And then finally, let's just turn to this smartmatic lawsuit against Fox, right? This defamation case is still going on. Fox is not out of significant exposure after settling with Dominion for $787.5 million. Smart Maddags demanded over $2 billion in states. They're not going to settle for anything less than and states they're not going to settle for anything less than dominion. And that's the floor they call it in their ongoing lawsuit. But a lot of developments in this marty case as well. You know, there was a judicial hearing officer who I guess deals with

Starting point is 01:23:38 discovery disputes before the actual judge rules and some of these New York state cases. I don't practice day to day in New York state, but in reading the orders, it seems that this judicial hearing officer and the smartmatic case limited the discovery that they were able to get and the judge judge Cohen, who's the you'll start hearing more about, who's presiding over the smartmatic defamation case, was going along with what the judicial hearing officer was recommending until the dominion settlement and then the judge there's like uh uh like we saw what happened in dominion smartmatic should be getting

Starting point is 01:24:16 basically the same discovery that dominion got in Delaware we should not be limiting that here at all and it's having a ripple effect, what went down in Delaware's superior corn and the settlement that Dominion got. And it's allowing Smartmatic now to conduct a lot more discovery. And to follow the trail, that Dominion left everybody when ultimately Dominion settled that case before trial.

Starting point is 01:24:43 And one of the most recent things that Smartmatic did in addition to prevailing on a motion to expand the scope of discovery, they sent a subpoena to the Trump campaign. And look, we've now, and one of the reasons they did that, right, is we've seen through the dominion lawsuit and the Abby Grossberg lawsuit. She was the executive producer who worked at the Tucker show and before that, the Maria Barteroma show, who sued Fox for sexual harassment, retaliation, discrimination, intimidation. She's been providing these pre interviews where you see like Trump administration officials with Maria Barteroma and others before these shows, basically like, we don't really have any information or evidence about this, but just push January 6th.

Starting point is 01:25:29 Just talk about the January 6th. We need more attention on January 6th. So no doubt that's one of the things that SmartMatics looking for there. But I ultimately think SmartMatic may also want to try to request the deposition of Donald Trump. And it'll be interesting to see, I think this is the first step to that. And I think ultimately they may get a deposition of Donald Trump, but that's to be continued.

Starting point is 01:25:54 Anything else you want to add on smartmatic Popeye? No, I practice in New York. So the judges either use what's called a judicial secretary, law secretary, which oftentimes are people that want to be judges in the future. And they run a lot of the courtroom before you get into the courtroom. But in this particular part of New York, they use, especially cases that will have complex discovery issues, a discovery referee or hearing officer. As you just know, it was appointed early on in the case to help judge Cohen sort out what he knew was going to be because he's got eyes and he's watching what happened in Delaware on these things.

Starting point is 01:26:31 Sometimes it's called a match of straight, a federal courts often use a match of straight judge for discovery issues. And this is that sort of equivalent of referee or a hearing officer related to it. And that's how we learned, as you said, about this April, Sopena, and we're just hearing about it now. And then once that subpoena is served on the Trump campaign related to everything Fox, everything fraud allegations in the election and everything smartmatic, the subpoena has been issued and served. And the third party, in this case, the Trump organization, the Trump campaign, can move the court to either what's called

Starting point is 01:27:09 quash the subpoena, meaning have it be rejected and not be enforceable or narrow it or limit it in some way as the time or subject matter and that's everything. And that's going to be that battle that's going to go on next. They've also, we've talked about it on prior podcasts and hot takes. They've also smartmatic subpoena bill bar. So they're going after the hot button people in and around Donald Trump and Donald Trump ultimately. And if they can make out a case that citizen Trump, he likes to call himself the president

Starting point is 01:27:42 of the United States and and the CNN moderator gave him that courtesy, which I think he's already forfeited the right to continue to be called the president of the United States when he's addressed. But citizen Trump doesn't have any privilege or protections or anything like that. He might have a couple of things he'll try to assert, but he can just be subpoenaed for deposition. Like anybody else, he can argue that he doesn't have any relevant knowledge. And it's a burden on him and it's a rassing. But you know, I'm not sure he wins that in Judge Cohen believes that there's merit to

Starting point is 01:28:13 the case. It believes that it's it survived already a motion to dismiss. And for those that are wondering, why is this on a so much slower track talking about wheels of justice than the Delaware case with Dominion, which led to the settlement, but a $1.6 billion, very similar, very, very similar cases. They, I was going to say they copy each other, but if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Dominion should be flattered because a lot of what they did is in the smortmatic pleadings. But that's in New York State Court.

Starting point is 01:28:46 And as we've said before, Delaware moves very, very quickly because it's a place where business law is developed and businesses look to have certainty. And the only way to get that is to do things quickly. So things go in rapid pace down there. It's a rocket docket when it comes to companies and corporations that are Delaware corporations like Fox. This one's in New York and New York it's like on a normal track and on a normal track means we're going to do a year of discovery maybe a year and a half. This case is going to be like a 2025-2026 event.

Starting point is 01:29:19 But I thought a very I'll leave you in my comment on this Ben. I thought it was very interesting'll leave you in my comment on this, Ben. I thought it was very interesting watching the progression of Fox corporation, Lockland Murdoch and others and their press statements when they're reached for comment because now they spend about three-quarters of their statement talking about the damages, not the liability, talking about that damage number, oh, $2.7 billion, so big, so improbable. You know, chilling effect in our First Amendment rights, they do very little now after dominion in saying that there's no liability,

Starting point is 01:29:57 that they're gonna win on defamation, that they're gonna win, that they were just neutrally reporting about smart-matics involvement with a phony conspiracy that was made up in the favored imagination of people like Sydney Powell and others, and linking them to Dominion and linking them to Venezuela and to China and to Hugo Chavez and to this poor other guy that Fox settled with, they said was the leader, a businessman for Venezuela who was the leader of this fake,

Starting point is 01:30:25 non-existent, magical thinking conspiracy. So they know they're going to lose on liability. The law in New York is almost the same as the law in Delaware. In fact, the law of New York applied in a certain aspect in the case down in Delaware related to defamation because of where it was done. So they know they're going to lose. So the only thing they're left with is the damage. The damage number numbers so large

Starting point is 01:30:49 They'll never get that number, but you know what if they want to avoid amen back We're this back to a theme of this show a men hat and jury Not federal jury picked in Manhattan with dozen skew Fox May and knowing what happened down in dominion with a judge who knows what happened down in Dominion with a summary judgment process just like what will happen? It will happen in New York just like it happened there with all these emails and all these all these Witnesses now fired like Tucker Carlson and others the case for the case for smart medic up better not worse It's stronger than Dominion at this point because what's happened in the wake of dominion and they'll be the beneficiary of it. The number goes up for settlement.

Starting point is 01:31:28 They're going to settle this case, but they're not going to do it this year because they just took a giant hit on their on their financials. They're already in a lost position for the year, you know, based on where they were the year before. So they're not going to do it again in 2023 and totally take their stock while they try to maybe sell the company, which we've talked about and sell the assets. And then maybe they'll make that payment in 2024 when they see how they're,

Starting point is 01:31:51 if their revenue recovers from the departure of Tucker Carlson. And maybe just maybe the Manhattan case will be televised. We'll see, in Delaware, Superior Court, imagine that, right? That Fox would have to cut that check for $787.5 million to Dominion because they wanted to avoid a trial there that was not going to be televised. And then they still have to go through the same trial with Rupert and Locklin and all of those and a fired Tucker Carlson now testifying and all those individuals and it would be all on TV the judge on that last point Ben.

Starting point is 01:32:33 That's why it's almost assured to me that they're going to settle. They're just not going to settle and take another hit in this year's finances. This is where business and law and politics all come together. They're gonna take that, they're gonna take that right down on their finances, but in 2024, they have to settle the case. They know what happened down there. It scared the crap out of them

Starting point is 01:32:55 and what really scared the crap out of them are even the emails that you and I didn't even know about that were redacted, blackened out when they were filed about Tucker Carlson, that so scared filed about Tucker Carlson that so scared them about Tucker Carlson, they fired the guy. You think they'd carry him at least long enough until they got through the smartmatic process, but they couldn't even carry him because they knew those were going to see the light of the day. And smartmatic has those same, those very same text messages and audio clips. But now you got a Tucker Carlson, they can't control because he's not aligned with them

Starting point is 01:33:28 any longer, testifying effectively against them in smartmatic. It's crazy. Well, where law and politics and business and common sense and where it all meets also is right here on legal AF, it's been such a pleasure sharing this this weekend legal AF with you, Popak and all the legal AF was out there. We covered a lot of topics, wheels of justice, keep turning in the right direction.

Starting point is 01:33:54 It's going to be a very, very busy summer for us. So I'm glad to have Michael Popak back from Popyes and vacation time. And we will be here covering the latest updates and making sure that we break down and ways that make sense. A bunch of these legal cases that people tried to make way more confusing and way more complicated and way more inaccessible than they actually should be. So thank you all for watching. This episode

Starting point is 01:34:25 of Legal AF, make sure you hit subscribe on our YouTube channel. We're on our way to 1.5 million subscribers are very close to hitting 1.2 million. That's 200,000 new subscribers since about late was a late March when we hit the 1 million mark. So that's going at a great pace. But let's hit 1.5 million by this summer. We're almost in the summer. So make sure you hit subscribe, share this channel, tell friends, family, colleagues, co-workers, anybody you know about legal AF, subscribe on audio.

Starting point is 01:34:58 If you just watch on YouTube for audio listeners, subscribe on YouTube if you just listen to audio. Go to store.mitustouch.com for the best pro democracy gear, 100% made in the USA, 100% union made. Thank y'all for watching this. We'll see you next time on Legal AF. I'm Ben Myself as joined by Michael Popak, shout out to the Midas Mighty. you

Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump Plans BACKFIRE and Jack Smith is READY

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