Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump REEKS of DESPERATION and Jack Smith LOVES IT

Starting point is 00:00:00 Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg filed a federal lawsuit in New York against Magga Republican Jim Jordan and the GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee. We'll discuss that case. Donald Trump was deposed for a full day by New York Attorney General Leticia James and her team in connection with the New York AG's civil fraud lawsuit against Donald Trump, the Trump organization, and Trump's adult children seeking at least $250 million in damages and trial is set for October 2nd of 2023.

Starting point is 00:00:47 Trial in Dominions, $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox began in Delaware Superior Court with jury selection and also some fireworks in court the day before as audio recordings that Fox tried to conceal were uncovered and they are very damaging to Fox and Fox has already been sanctioned by the judge before trial even started with Rupert Murdock expected to testify very soon. The federal judge in E. Jean Carroll's civil rape and defamation trial denied Donald Trump's request to delay trial, which is set to start on April 25th. Then special counsel Jack Smith is following the money with Trump's various political action groups that raised hundreds of millions of dollars peddling knowingly false claims of election fraud and funneling that money to further obstruct justice and undermine democracy are falling right under Jack's microscope.

Starting point is 00:02:00 We'll discuss this and more on this episode of Legal AF. I'm Ben Myselfis joined by Michael Popok, Popok Action, PACT, week of legal cases and developments. It's time for the Popok Porter board. We've got Trump Arraignment on April the 4th. We've got Trump, New York Attorney General Deposition on the 14th of April, the Dominion Fox trial on the 17th of April. And then we've got the Trump civil rape trial on the 25th of April and Fawni Willis and Jack Smith moving towards May with I am assuming will be their indictment and charging decisions. So let's just get right into it because there's so much to discuss

Starting point is 00:02:42 today. Let's start with the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's federal lawsuit against Maga Republican Jim Jordan and the GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee. This case was brought in the Southern District of New York in federal court. The relief it's seeking is injunctive relief to stop Jim Jordan and the Maga Republicans from further unlawfully interfering with them and had in district attorneys criminal case. And Jim Jordan and the GOP controlled House Judiciary Committee have continued to interfere. They've done everything from trying to Sapina, Mark Pomeran's, who was a former assistant at the District Attorney's Office

Starting point is 00:03:32 under Sive Vance, who resigned during the Alvin Bragg term. They've Sapina, Michael Kalangelo, one of the new hires by the District Attorney's Office. They continue to do these stunts like they're holding this, they call it a field trip or a field visit that they're going to be doing at the Javit Center on Monday. Where they're going to hold the hearing, where they want to talk about how horrible Manhattan District Attorney is and all about the violent crime in New York, even though crime is down in New York and even though in these Maggar Republicans in their own jurisdiction, crime is significantly higher there, whereas crime is down in New York.

Starting point is 00:04:17 So, Pope, tell us if you can about this federal lawsuit that was filed, the relief it's seeking. federal lawsuit that was filed, the relief it's seeking. Also, Mark Pomerance is named as like a punitive defendant as well in this case. So maybe you can just describe the procedural posture and the implications. Yeah, and something you and I talked about before we even got started. Just and this is for both our viewers here and listeners here in the states and around the world. We have a lot of viewers who like what we talk about about the US jurisprudence system and justice system. The things that were on my board to start, this is state versus federal.

Starting point is 00:04:55 This is prosecutors in different states and federal prosecutors in different jurisdictions and divisions. And the way the United States works, they are not coordinated. The Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, sitting in Manhattan, has state sovereignty over criminal justice in his jurisdiction for local crime that's independent from what federal prosecutors look at,

Starting point is 00:05:19 even across the very street. They're in a whole different system, a whole different, a whole different thing. And they're not usually coordinated in any way, shape or form. So Fawri Willis' decision in Georgia, Alvin Bragg in New York, federal with Jack Smith, they are all doing their own thing. There's no mass conference call or Zoom call with all the prosecutors across state and federal lines to talk about who's going to go first. The prosecution goes first that's ready to go first and that was Alvin Bragg on the Stormy Daniels prosecution. Fawty Willis may be next out of the shoot, although Jack Smith may jump in front of her for one or more of the three grand juries that you and I are going to talk

Starting point is 00:06:01 about later in the segment. So that is all about about Stormy Daniels, and now Alvin Bragg firing back at Jim Jordan, state versus federal and sovereignty related to that, and federalism related to that. That's just a matter of who was ready to prosecute, not any type of coordination. If you and I were picking, which one would go first? It may not have been Stormy Daniels, but it doesn't matter.

Starting point is 00:06:23 Prosecutions are ready when they're ready, and they jump out of the box and get out of the shoot when they're ready. Here we've got, as everyone now knows, it's, you'd have to be living under a rock and be ripped then. Winkle, not to know that Trump got indicted for 34 felony counts by a state prosecutor in Alvin Bragg, Manhattan, DA. Jim Jordan doing the bidding along with the MAGA right wing Republicans in

Starting point is 00:06:45 Congress. Now, our federal side has decided to become some sort of super grand jury and look at, you know, crime, local crime at the state level, I guess across the country, but we'll start with Donald Trump's prosecution in state court by a state prosecutor, there is no doubt in anyone's mind constitutionally, there is no power of oversight in this capacity by Congress over a local prosecutor about what effectively is local crime. Say what you want about Donald Trump, but that's just a crime. He committed in false book entries and trying to interfere with election or or gin up results in an election as a result. Jim Jordan has decided because you have to have a jurisdictional hook if you're Congress

Starting point is 00:07:39 before you can do quote unquote oversight. You've got to have some sort of mandate that's provided to you. His mandate, he claims that Alvin Bragg's office used $5,000 out of a multi-million dollar budget stretching into the hundreds of millions of dollars, $5,000 from a federal, a four-fitcher, processor program that gets spread among local prosecutors all around the country.

Starting point is 00:08:09 They either use it or they don't use it for, you know, they buy, maybe it supports an intern being hired. Maybe it's used to pay for pencils and paper, but you know, this is a very small amount of money. But apparently somehow within one of the investigations, not even the Stormy Daniels one, back when Sy Vance had the case, when he was the prosecutor, they used $5,000. I mean, it's, you know, it's all publicly reported. So that's, aha, they use federal funds. I now get to interfere with the deepest, darkest investigations of a local prosecutor. And this, just to be clear, yes, there is an indictment, but we're not done in New York

Starting point is 00:08:49 with Alvin Bragg, his investigators and prosecutors work. This is a live ongoing investigation. Alvin Bragg, as we'll talk about later, and as you and Karen just did on an amazing hot take about the interplay and the coordination, if you want to talk about coordination between the New York Attorney General's office and Alvin Bragg's prosecutor's office to bring down Donald Trump. We'll talk about that later. But that is ongoing.

Starting point is 00:09:17 He could still, Alvin Bragg, bring what we call a superseding or amended indictment to bring all new charges, including for the very things that on the civil side, he's being, Trump's being sued for by, by, by, let's just change. So that's the backdrop. So now you've got super Congress, who's decided to do the political bidding of Donald Trump. Let's drag a, let's drag an existing prosecutor

Starting point is 00:09:41 to existing prosecutors. One being Alvin Bragg, they wanted to come talk about the case and Kalangelo, who used to be Department of Justice and is now with Alvin Bragg's office. And they think the weakest link is Mark Pomerance. Mark Pomerance, as you said in the opener, had been a special prosecutor. He had been brought in from the private sector. He was a private lawyer, not a career prosecutor, by Syvan's Alvin Bragg's predecessor

Starting point is 00:10:09 to focus on Donald Trump for a couple of years. It overlapped with Alvin Bragg. Alvin, you know, a Syvan's did not make the charging decision before he left office. He let it go to the new prosecutor, and the new prosecutor, and Alvin inherited a couple of special prosecutors, uh, carried done in Mark Pomerantz. Mark Pomerantz and carried done having spent two years doing their life's work going after Trump didn't like

Starting point is 00:10:34 that after 90 days in office 90. Alvin Bragg wasn't ready to make the prosecution decision. The buck stops with him and the people of the city of New York of Manhattan voted for Alvin Bragg. They didn't vote for Mark Pomerantz. And so they walked. And then, and then Pomerantz ran across the street to a publisher and he wrote a book called The People versus Donald Trump, in which he laid out the case against Donald Trump from his time as a prosecutor, crapping on the case, including crapping on the story of me Daniel's case in parts of the memoir. And, you know, taking a pot shot at Alvin Bragg. Well, of course, that got the Maga right wing all excited, because they're going to now try to use and set up some sort of pomerance versus Bragg battle over whether this is politically motivated or not, the prosecution of Donald Trump.

Starting point is 00:11:20 So Alvin had no choice, but to run now from, he's a state prosecutor, run into federal court, because they're the ones that have jurisdiction over the Congress in Jim Jordan to sue for an injunction, to stop mock pomeranides from testifying pursuant to a subpoena, so quash the subpoena, and to preserve the sanctity and the secrecy around the grand jury process, which would also be invaded by Jim Jordan, putting aside the unprecedented act of a sitting congressman interfering with local prosecution decisions. Now the judge happens to be, and there's a couple of them on the Southern district, happens to be a Trump-appointed judge

Starting point is 00:12:05 in Mary K. Viscousel. So Viscousel used to be a bankruptcy judge. She was a bankruptcy lawyer, and she kind of did that for about 10 years. And then when Trump was looking around for somebody Republican to elevate in the Southern District in New York, he elevated her. Now, there's been some press about, well, she's already against the case because she denied Alvin's motion for temporary restraining order. At the time, he filed the case right along with it was another piece of paper called an X Part Day motion for

Starting point is 00:12:38 temporary restraining order, which means judge, don't even let the other side have a chance to speak. Just enter an injunction right now because the clock is ticking because Jim Jordan wants an April 19th subpoenaed appearance by Mark Palmerance. We got to hurry. Do a temporary restraining order. Now, and the judge said, now I'm going to deny that. Not the merits of the case. I'm going to deny that. We have plenty of time. Give notice to the other side Jim Jordan Get him served with this suit and let's all brief it and appear in court on the 18th of April We're all make a ruling and the 19th of April would obviously be the date for the for the testimony I think even this judge better want to get your opinion

Starting point is 00:13:21 Quashes this subpoena and finds this is an unprecedented incursion into state sovereignty and federalism versus states rights at the prosecutor level. I think you give the Trump a point to judge too much credit there to do the right thing. I don't think that's what's going to happen. I think the judge is going to allow Mark Pomerance to testify. However, Mark Pomerance is going to be able to preserve, I think, existing objections that the district attorney's office can assert. So essentially, Pomerance really can show up, will be able to assert the various privileges, so will not be able to really testify to anything meaningful,

Starting point is 00:14:08 things about the grand jury secrecy, things about the deliberative process, that privilege is held similar to the way an attorney client privilege is held, with the client, that privilege of the deliberative process, that privilege belongs with the District Attorney's Office, and pomerance isn't allowed to waive it. That's why pomerance is a putative defendant in this case

Starting point is 00:14:36 because while I ultimately believe the injunction against the, you know, mega-republic Republicans likely won't succeed. The injunctive relief as it relates to pomerance, I actually think will succeed. And pomerance, I think, though, will be restrained from what he is actually able to testify based upon rules of grand jury secrecy.

Starting point is 00:15:00 You know, there's one other issue that has been percolating in the federal courts regarding these types of lawsuits against House of Representative committees. And we saw this in a ruling by a Trump-appointed judge in the federal courts in Washington, DC, where the judge basically found under the speech and debate clause, you can't sue them in federal court for certain actions that a committee takes.

Starting point is 00:15:34 So I actually think both on the fact that there may be a speech and debate clause issue at play. Number one and number two, I think as species as the hook is here about this federal funding, I think the hook gives the judge enough to basically say, we the federal courts are not going to be interfering with congressional hearings, but I think there will be narrowly circumscribed limitations as it relates to pomerance. Now, as it relates to Kalangelo, as it relates to Bragg, as it relates to all this other stuff, I think that it will be far more difficult to, you know, Sapina there, but pomerance,

Starting point is 00:16:19 I think, because of his conduct as well, you know, and I think it's unfortunate conduct. And as we talk about what's happened with the New York Attorney General's deposition of Donald Trump, where Trump actually sat for the deposition, and now the Manhattan District Attorney's office has a complete deposition transcript of Donald Trump talking about potential financial crimes. Not only do I think what

Starting point is 00:16:45 Pomerance did was inappropriate, but I think history has now demonstrated it was very short-sighted because Pomerance's strategy would have precluded the Manhattan District Attorney's Office from getting that deposition that Donald Trump just sat for. So I take a slightly different view than you given that it's a Trump appointed judge. But I think ultimately there's not going to be meaningful testimony derived. Let me put make one more final point about the final point I want to make about pomeranxes. While pomeran's thought the falsification of business records case against you know against Trump for the hush money payments

Starting point is 00:17:26 to stormy Daniels was a weaker case than the financial fraud case. Pomerance's ultimate proposition is that Donald Trump is a criminal who deserves to go to jail for the rest of his life. So even if you play this out and Pomerance testifies fully, this is why the Maga Republicans, we call them on the Midas Touch Network, our professional rake steppers, because you're now going to put in someone as a witness who frankly believes the problem with the stormy Daniels related case is that it's not strong enough against Donald Trump, whereas the real crimes that he wants to see prosecuted are the

Starting point is 00:18:05 crimes still being investigated. So it's, it would be an entire hearing on how big of a criminal. Donald Trump is ultimately, but I'll give you the final word on this topic. Yeah, I don't want to nerd out on it because maybe the first time in 200 episodes, you and I are on opposite sides of this. This is why I don't think I'm wrong, but we'll find out in a week. First of all, there's going to be an appeal regardless. It's going to go up to the second circuit court of appeals, which is primarily hedging your bets, hedging your bets.

Starting point is 00:18:31 No, no, I'm giving the full rundown. I don't think there's going to be. Also, I think we're missing the point here. This is different than speech and debate, which is federal federal. This is federal versus state. And this is the power of Congress and the precedent that would be set to allow a member of Congress to interfere at the local level crossing over sovereignty under a body of law that was developed by Karen's office called the Mazers Decision, having to do with Donald Trump's accountant

Starting point is 00:18:58 and when it's appropriate to obtain information across federal versus state lines and when it is not under a constitutional. Now, Vox, the focus he'll may not get it, right? She's not as big a Trump or as people, oh, she was appointed by Trump. He was looking around for somebody that was Republican, you know, he found it, which is a hard to find in Manhattan,

Starting point is 00:19:17 but he did find one. I don't think she was ever, I don't know if she's a federalist who have to look it up, but in any event, whether she makes the right or wrong decision, it's going to go up on appeal to the second circuit. He is not going to be testifying on the 19th of April. And then it's going to have to go back to the Supreme, much like the Mazers case, to see. He had, Alvin had to do this because if you don't draw the line in the sand right now,

Starting point is 00:19:39 and you emboldened the Maga right wing, the the comers, the Jim Jordan's to say, Oh, I can do this. Let me go after every to use their vocabulary, every woke, sore us backed Marxist prosecutor, the way Donald Trump has just put up in his in his social media truths where he says, if he gets reelected, right? I'll fire every US attorney. I'll hire a 100 new ones. I'll revamp the FBI.

Starting point is 00:20:08 I'll stop them from going after conservatives and Christians using the police powers. This is what, I mean, this is his platform for getting back into office. If people weren't scared enough of the image of Donald Trump winning an election, listening to him list his grievances that he's going to execute on if he ever gets elected. And this is why you got

Starting point is 00:20:32 a this is why prosecutors like Alvin Bragg have to run to federal court and ultimately to the hopefully to the US Supreme Court if it doesn't go his way to stop this in its tracks because you see what'll happen if we don't. Yeah, and look, of course, Donald Trump uses all of those, you know, the load in language as a way to try to prop up his fascist attentions. Let's make no, let's have no doubt about it. What it is that the Maggi Republicans and Donald Trump are trying to create here. They're trying to completely remove law and order and our justice system. And that's why it's just so important that we talk about it here on legal a app, speaking about talking about it. Apparently, Donald Trump talked about it.

Starting point is 00:21:13 He talked and talked and talked for a full day deposition by a New York attorney general, the Tisha James. You will recall that before the Leticia James filed the lawsuit seeking at least $250 million in damages against Donald Trump, the Trump Organization, and Donald Trump's adult children, there was what was called a special proceeding. And in the special proceeding, Donald Trump was deposed and he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination over 400 times there in a civil case, unlike a criminal case invoking your Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, constitutes, and adverse

Starting point is 00:21:58 inference. So in a criminal case where somebody invokes their Fifth Amendment rights and decides not to testify, a prosecutor can say, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, do you see that individuals invoking their fifth? They must be guilty. In fact, the prosecutor can't even tell the jury that the defendant isn't invoking their fifth amendment right or make any inference or imply anything about it. In a civil case, it's different. In the New York Attorney General's case is a civil fraud case. And the case is about Donald Trump making fraudulent valuations, high and low valuations on his statement

Starting point is 00:22:36 to financial conditions to get favorable loan terms, to get favorable issues with his taxes, to not pay taxes, to get favorable deals with insurance companies. And so Donald Trump would just say, hey, I want favorable terms on a loan, my property value is higher. I want to pay less taxes, my property value is lower. That's the basic nature of it.

Starting point is 00:22:59 And in this civil case where New York Attorney General Leticia James alleges that there was a decade-long plus scheme, that's as far back as the AG statute allows her to go for this particular case, she alleges that Donald Trump should basically discord or return the money that he made by lying on his statement to financial conditions. In that case, a civil case, where in addition to monetary damages, she's also seeking injunctive relief to effectively stop Trump and his children and the Trump organization from doing business in New York.

Starting point is 00:23:36 One of the things that she's allowed to say, unlike in a criminal case, is ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Donald Trump invoked his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. You can now make what's called an adverse inference. You can infer, based on the invocation of the fifth amendment right, that Donald Trump, for all of the questions he didn't want to answer, you can infer that the reason he didn't want to answer them is that if he did answer him, he would be admitting to the underlying liability that is ultimately at issue in each of the questions being asked. In other words, Donald Trump would lose the case if he invoked his fifth amendment right

Starting point is 00:24:16 against self-incrimination. And what's the most important thing to Donald Trump, the most important thing in his life is his money. So he said, you know what, I'm going to have to testify at this deposition, because if I don't, I'm going to automatically lose the case. And so he did not invoke his Fifth Amendment rights at this deposition. And he posted on his social media about what he says took place at the deposition. And perhaps he should have invoked his Fifth Amendment right against

Starting point is 00:24:45 self-incrimination because his post was not just further establishing liability, but like further establishing criminal liability as well. So Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg was certainly very, very, very interested in this post. I want to dissect this post with you in what took place at this deposition, Michael Popok, right after this quick break. This is Michael Popok from Legal AF. If you like me, you understand the pains of choosing what to wear. Let's face it, most clothes are uncomfortable or too tight or are never actually the size you really are.

Starting point is 00:25:21 Not to mention the annoyance of trying to put a good outfit together. And when you do have a good fit, you can only wear it for a few hours before you have an important meeting or dinner. And then you got to change all over again. Everyone wants to dress the best and look good at all times because frankly it's a confidence booster. So here's the deal. Men's closets were due for a radical reinvention, and 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.

Starting point is 00:25:51 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 what to wear when you have the Rhone Commuter Collection. Rhone's comfortable for-a-way stretch fabric provides breathability and flexibility that leaves you free to enjoy whatever light throws your way, from your commute to work to your 18 holes of 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.

Starting point is 00:26:30 And on top of that, Ron is 100% machine washable, so you can ditch the dry cleaner altogether. I absolutely love Ron. As you can see, this has truly become my go-to commuter fit and on the legal AF podcast recordings. We're on the move a lot, whether it's jumping for meeting to meeting or catching a flight or an important dinner, the 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 into whatever comes next head to roon.com slash legal a f and use promo code legal a f to save 20%

Starting point is 00:27:11 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. Welcome back to legal AF right before we took a break. I showed this post that Donald Trump made about his deposition. Here's what he says in the post. He goes an interesting day spent with the attorney general and her representatives. I strongly made my quote points. They are irrefutable and it is a case that should not go forward. My company and overall value is actually far stronger and higher than shown in the so-called

Starting point is 00:27:49 financial statement. The honorable thing to do would be drop it and spend all of this time, money, and energy on fighting violent crime in New York. It would make a big difference and show real strength encouraged by the AG. So in addition to just the delusional aspect of this, the malignant narcissism that he thinks he can basically just post and say, hey, New York Attorney General District James, can you please drop it? Your statement of financial conditions are supposed to be accurate. They're not so called financial statements. They are your statement of financial

Starting point is 00:28:23 conditions that you submitted to third parties like taxing authorities and lenders and insurers to get terms and here he is Pope in this very statement admitting that he did not provide accurate financial statements by his own terms He's saying that he thinks that the statements should have been even higher than they were. And he doesn't understand the central issue of the case is that he's providing false, I mean, maybe he doesn't, his ego can't help it. And he has to say it's actually bigger and better, but that's the crime that he's basically admitting to here.

Starting point is 00:28:57 So what happened at this deposition? And do you agree with me that this post is further digs the whole deeper for him. He also start with the post. He also doesn't understand the fundamental difference between a Manhattan district attorney and prosecutor and a New York attorney general. New York attorney generals don't fight crime. They have a very small remit when it comes to certain types of crime, not an issue here.

Starting point is 00:29:21 The crime fighters are the Manhattan DA that's already prosecuted on 34 counts and got a conviction against his other companies on 17 counts of criminal tax fraud. So that's the crime. So he doesn't understand how like government works, which we've heard before. We've always heard he'd never understood how the three branches of government works. Like they had to give insiders would say when he was president, they'd have to give him like a schoolhouse rock tutorials on how like a bill gets made into a law or how government works. We still don't get how government works. As to his admission, his Freudian slip, yes, he has always been quite clear, including

Starting point is 00:30:00 under oath in other cases, that the value of his brand, the value of his balance sheet, is whatever he thinks it is when he wakes up in the morning. He's literally set that in prior cases. He said, well, what do you think the company's worth? That's well. Whatever I think it is on that day. If I'm having a good day, sun shining, and I like my cup of coffee, then it's a billion too. If I'm having a rough day, it's less because he thinks brand means hard physical assets on his balance sheet, which are supposed to be capable of calculation and appraised value and not conjured up out of the transom of your mind whenever you're going for a loan, you inflate them and deflate them as you said, if you're trying to write

Starting point is 00:30:43 off or pay less on your taxes. And the case, just to remind everybody, because sometimes we talk in short-hand on this show, because we've been doing this so long, and we're very mindful that there's also new people here that are joining us for the first time. The case is about hyper, it's about loan valuation and deflation on 23 properties that Donald Trump owns or owned, including Mar-a-Lago that you've heard so much about, Trump tower where he lives on Fifth Avenue, and a property that he's now sold that used to be the Trump hotel, the old post office building in Washington, D.C. That 23 and the total amount that the attorney general in her investigation that preceded the filing of the civil suit claims that was improperly attributed to Donald Trump and for which he got value in his pocket that should

Starting point is 00:31:32 be discouraged or taken from him or clawed back in her lawsuit is $500 million in value of which he's seeking $250 million at least in discouragement. He's not the only defendant, Trump organization is a defendant in the case, Ivanka, Don Jr. Eric, and it's interesting because they didn't all coordinate how they were going to give deposition testimony, sworn testimony to the NY AG at all. Donald Trump, as you said,

Starting point is 00:31:58 been gave 500 or so fifth amendment assertions. The first time he gave his deposition. Eric, well, he gave 400, Eric gave 500. He didn't answer a darn thing, but Don Jr. and Ivanka apparently did testify and did not assert the fifth amendment privilege. He got sort of a weird thing going on there. Donald Trump, as you noted so eloquently with Karen in your hot take, he is damned if he does or damned if he does it now.

Starting point is 00:32:29 Because of the way the civil case with New York Attorney General, Latisha James and Alvin Bragg's office, who this one I can say with certainty is coordinated because they have had attorneys in each office be deputized by the other and staff has worked with each other from the very beginning for the civil case and the criminal case to work hand in glove and share information, which they have been doing from the start. It's been publicly reported. Everybody knows this.

Starting point is 00:33:01 That Alvin Bragg let, if you will, in the coordination, leticia take the lead because she's got more powers of economic sanctions, of death penalty for the corporation and for its corporate officers from a corporate standpoint, not allowing them to be officers anymore of New York corporations. To put the corporation out of business and stop its ability to get lending and money, that is in the hands of the New York Attorney General in her powers under what we call the executive law 63-12 Very strong robust powers that the criminal side doesn't have criminal side puts people in jail Maybe there's a little bit of a fine, but it's putting people in jail taking away their liberty That is the focus of criminal justice. Civil and a New York attorney general is so much scarier to Donald Trump

Starting point is 00:33:51 because it could tear apart his house of cards finances and not put him in jail, but might as well, you know, let him go into old age, broken and busted. So that's the coordination between the two and where the Fifth Amendment money comes in is at that very intersection because he, because he was so worried in August when he gave the original deposition or whenever it was six, seven months ago that he said, oh, I got this other thing. I got the shark in the water with Alvin Bragg and all the other cases. I got to put up my fifth, even if it means losing the case now. And they've been trying to find out. We talked about this on prior podcast, Alina Habba, subpoenaing banks,

Starting point is 00:34:28 and other parties trying to figure out what other criminal investigation is out there. Those were all quashed by judges. So they were worried. And now Alvin, having come out of the box with the tax prosecutions, now the Stormy Daniels with more to come, right? That's a comma. That's not a period at the end of stormy Daniels prosecution. He can still go back now and pick up criminally

Starting point is 00:34:53 the same exact subject matter that the civil case is being done. There's no double jeopardy when you're talking civil versus criminal. And he's now worried about that. But he wants to win the case that's going to trial in October. So he's going to, it's basically shooting himself in the head. So he went in and testified for eight hours, bragging apparently all along the way. The Latisha James didn't take the deposition, although she appeared at it and read a statement on the record. We don't know what the statement was yet. We will when we start seeing the transcript of that gets filed. But one of her line attorney, attorney deputy attorney generals or assistant attorney generals took the deposition.

Starting point is 00:35:30 Chris Kice, who we haven't heard a lot about lately, he was the guy that took the $3 million retainer from Donald Trump and Alina Haba were apparently in the room. And you know, where he just bragged about how much money he's had and how he's got a credible billion-dollar business. But he had to answer some hard questions. Why did you say that your apartment in Trump Tower was five times the size that it really

Starting point is 00:35:53 was? Why didn't you use an independent appraisal? Why did Alan Weisselberg say this to this insurance company, Zürich, and why did you deflate the value of something in these 23 properties? There's no way they covered everything in seven hours. The press is making a big deal out of, oh my God, it was there for almost seven and a half hours. Yeah, but 23 properties and hundreds of examples of fraud can't be covered in seven hours.

Starting point is 00:36:19 I assume this is it. Do you know why Ben, the judge allowed another deposition? Is this because Trump said, I'll wave my fifth and start answering questions? Like, what was the genesis for this deposition? It hasn't been reported, but what, reading between the lines, what seems to have occurred is that Trump's team conveyed to New York Attorney

Starting point is 00:36:40 General, the Tisha James team, that he was actually willing to sit for a deposition because he did not want the special proceeding deposition where he invoked the fifth to be his last word because he didn't want the adverse inference. So I'm sure Christopher Keiss or Habba, but it was probably Keiss reached out to New York Attorney General, Attisha James, said he'll sit for a deposition. And New York Attorney General, Attisha James was like, yep, absolutely. We will take that, we will take that deposition. We will call your bluff. He wants to sit, we'll take it. And Trump has had on his end, he's had seven or eight months to digest the hundreds of

Starting point is 00:37:20 thousands of pages of data and documents as you, as you like to say on the podcast, most of which are his own that they obtain from tax, tax preparers and accountants and banks and from the Trump organization themselves to get ready for this. But I don't think you get Donald Trump ready for a deposition. You know, I've prepared people at this level. I'm sure you have two. And with binders of material to get them ready for the deposition, I, does anybody really think with all the other things on my whiteboard today that Donald Trump sat and allowed Alina Habba and Chris Keist to properly prepare him for a seven and a half hour deposition

Starting point is 00:37:55 with the Attorney General showing him key documents and get and shaping responses? Does anybody believe that? If he, if he didn't wing this by the seat of his pants, I'd be shocked. Because all he did, according to the truth, socials, is just do the same talking points he always does about, you know, the value is whatever I think it is and the so-called financial statements.

Starting point is 00:38:16 And like, no, do you understand that there is actual documentation that shows that you committed fraud in the state of New York by your companies? And so while they came out whistling in the graveyard about, oh, we did great. It's just, you know, Alina Habo. It just showed that he's the successful billionaire owner that he usually is. You know, seven and a half hours, whatever they decided to cover them, I'm sure they had prioritized in their outline for the New York Attorney General, what they were going to cover, knowing that eventually that seven and a half hours was going to go

Starting point is 00:38:49 buy like that. But we'll know because now it's interesting. He wasn't able, I don't think, to totally redo the 400 questions that he was asked. I don't think they went through the 400 questions from before. It's that you want to change your answer now. So I think this is going to be like a hybrid, a mixed thing where there's still going to be areas where he took the fifth, and there's going to be areas where he has recanted and come up with a new statement. And we're going to have to see how that plays out in front of a trial, in front of a jury. Yeah, and we'll have access to that deposition the same way that we got access to the prior deposition.

Starting point is 00:39:26 I mean, it is a public proceeding. At some point, it will be released. And of course, we'll have it here on the Midas Touch Network. One final point, everybody can go and watch the hot take I did with our other co-host, Karen Friedman Agnifalo, about the way that Alvin Bragg really did this like a chess master and how Mark Pomerance was short-sighted. But if you think about what Pomerance was advocating for, where he wanted within the first 90 days for Alvin Bragg to bring the indictment before a grand jury and have the grand jury vote

Starting point is 00:40:01 on the indictment many, many, many, many months ago, there would never have been this deposition of Donald Trump and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office would never have had access to this treasure trove of evidence right now. Not only that, but if a criminal case was filed essentially on the same topics that are where, if the criminal case was filed essentially on the same topics that are where, if the criminal case was filed on the same topics of where New York Attorney General, Alicia James,

Starting point is 00:40:31 civil cases, and they were both focused on financial, on the financial fraud, what Trump's lawyers in the New York Attorney General, Alicia James case would have done is filed a motion to stay that case or stop that case until the criminal case was completed. And even though Justice Arthur and Goran has said, come hell or high water, this case is going to trial. I could pretty much guarantee you that in that case and Goran would have his hands tied and would have to stay this civil case.

Starting point is 00:40:59 So not only would Pomeran's case have led to Donald Trump not giving that deposition in the first place and the Manhattan District Attorney not getting this treasure trove of evidence from the deposition, it actually would have derailed and significantly delayed for many years New York Attorney General the Tisha James case and so at the end of the day I think Alvin Bragg strategy of being very surgical in which cases he's bringing and has brought has proven to be the right strategy here.

Starting point is 00:41:33 Speaking about the right strategy or the wrong strategy, it's never the right strategy in the days leading to trial when it is uncovered that you have been suppressing critical evidence in the case and it's never the right strategy to be lying to your trial judge who's about to preside over your trial. That's precisely what Fox has done in Dominion's $1.6 billion defamation case. That jury selection is now underway. And this case is in Delaware Superior Court. The judge presiding it over that case is Judge Eric Davis.

Starting point is 00:42:12 We can talk a little bit about the jury selection process, but I think what's even more interesting is the fireworks that took place the day before jury selection last week, where Abby Grossberg, a former executive at Fox, she was in a role, she was like one of the executive producers who was in charge of booking first for Maria Barteroma, and then on the Tucker show, she's filed a sexual harassment and retaliation case against Fox. But one of the allegations that she's made in this lawsuit is that in connection with her deposition, when she was deposed, when she was still working at Fox, she says that the Fox lawyers threatened and harassed her and intimidated her and basically told her to lie and say you don't recall things that she can recall.

Starting point is 00:43:09 Doesn't that sound familiar? Kind of sounds like what Trump's lawyers were telling January 6th committee witnesses. And by the way, when we talk about Jack Smith a little bit later in the episode, Jack Smith's focused on that exact same type of conduct of how Donald Trump's lawyers may be saying that to critical witnesses there anyway, back to Dominion's defamation case. One of the other things that Abby Grossberg says is, you know what? Fox wants to go there. Fox is trying to throw me under the bus.

Starting point is 00:43:35 Guess what? When I was subpoenaed for my deposition when I was still working at Fox, they asked me to produce evidence that was in my custody and control. And guess what I had? I had all of these audio recordings of pre-interviews before Trump administration officials would show up on these interviews with Maria Barteroma and other shows. And in these pre-interviews that were all recorded, the Trump administration people, whether it was Giuliani or other top campaign people,

Starting point is 00:44:07 would say, hey, can we go off the record? Yeah, yeah. We don't really have any evidence about this whatsoever. We don't know any of this. But hey, can you just promote January 6th? Can you like promote that day? There's not enough attention being there. Like, we don't really have any of this information.

Starting point is 00:44:23 And rather than Maria Barteroma and Fox saying, you know what? Let's not put that on the air because we know they're lying. What would they do? They then put the guests on and the guests would literally lie about the exact thing in the pre-interview that they were telling the Fox host like Maria Barteroma, they had no evidence. So clearly, Popok, in this defamation case where Dominion is alleging that Fox had knowingly and maliciously and or recklessly, that's the standard that you have to show because Dominion's a public figure that they acted with, that Fox acted with actual malice. Dominion's alleging that they knew when they platformed it anyway. These audio recordings that Fox did not turn over in discovery seemed to show that.

Starting point is 00:45:11 So Fox was sanctioned. That happens the day before jury selection. And now we're in the thick of it in this case. Tell us about that Pope Bach. And what else we should expect from this trial. Yeah. So the trial is in full full March now, 12 jurors are being picked in Delaware Superior Court, 12 alternates. They didn't finish. They started on Thursday. They're going to finish on Monday. And I think opening statements for both sides are going to be Monday afternoon to answer a few nagging questions. No, it's not going to be televised. But the judge, Judge Eric Davis, has given a tremendous amount of media access. There's 200 seats in the courtroom in Wilmington,

Starting point is 00:45:51 Delaware. Some of them are going to be occupied by the media. There's an overflow courtroom next to the main courtroom where the proceeding is happening. That's filled with media. The media is allowed to have their laptops. They are not allowed to record, actually record either the actual proceedings with a camera nor the audio. Although there is an audio link that people like the Midas Touch and Legal A-Fers in our show will be able to phone into every day if you want to sit for seven and a half hours and listen to the trial each day. Assuming we don't overload and blow out the connection, there is gonna be audio, but the media has been told by the judge

Starting point is 00:46:30 because he denied their request. They are not allowed to record the audio, so this is a little bit of a gift for Fox, because can you imagine, with the parade of witnesses, I'm gonna talk about next, being put on the stand on a televised trial. And I'll tell you one media outlet

Starting point is 00:46:48 that's not really covering this well. And I looked them up today, as Fox is not covering their own $1.6 billion defamation case. The cast of witnesses that we can expect to be brought in are Legion. I mean, wait till you hear this list. Rupert Murdoch is gonna testify,

Starting point is 00:47:05 Locklin Murdoch, this is Kendall versus Logan, succession style, writ large in the courtroom. The new CEO, Suzanne Scott Tucker, Hannity, Ingramham, Barnaromo, and Dobbs are all gonna be testifying over the course of a six week or so trial. When they testify right next to their heads on a giant screen for the jury to see is the cross-examination materials that are going to be used, what we call demonstrative evidence, which is going to be things like text messages, internal emails, internal audio, like you've been mentioned before, and then play it, and then

Starting point is 00:47:48 or have the witness testify and then play it as to why they were lying either in the courtroom under oath, or they were lying in the text or the email, where were you telling the truth, Tucker? You know, which one was it? You're either lying in one or lying in the other and lying or all three about their understanding that there was no truth to anything that was being said about dominion. Now, let's back up for a minute. That's sort of how the trial plays out over the next six weeks in front of these 12 jurors. They are not anonymous jurors. We will get some information from them, jurors, they are not anonymous jurors. We will get some information from them, maybe not names, but at least their backgrounds and how many women and how many men, that kind of thing. We'll know that probably from reporting in the courtroom on Monday. Now, just to remind everybody who's new to the show, there are three main elements for defamation by

Starting point is 00:48:40 Dominion voting machines who says they relied about on the air with knowledge that it was untrue and they suffered damage as a result. That is defamation. The three elements are falsity. Things were false that were said about them publication, which is that those statements were made to a third party either in writing or orally and third that they've been damaged as a result. So out of those three elements, two out of the three have already been established in favor of dominion by the judge before they even stepped into the courtroom. So if you're in the batter's box as Fox, you've already got two strikes against you. The jury will be instructed by the judge

Starting point is 00:49:20 at the appropriate time. Maybe even in the very, I think in the very beginning, I go be a written state, there'll be a written statement about what this case is about, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, from the judge in the black robe. And he will say, this is a case of defamation, involving dominion voting systems, a Denver based company against Fox News and Fox Corporation. And, and these other individuals, some of which, you know, part of Rome and dobs. And before you even came into this courtroom, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I made some rulings, and here are my rulings.

Starting point is 00:49:51 You are to assume that everything that was set about dominion by Fox News and it's on air personnel was false. Judge said in an order, it was crystal clear that it was false. He'll say to the jury, it was false. So that element of the three elements you have to decide is off the board, you are to assume it's true.

Starting point is 00:50:08 I'm sorry, you do assume it's false. The second element is publication. And I've already found ladies and gentlemen with the jury, there's been publication. So you don't have to worry about that element. You got one element left to decide. That element and then a one defense to decide. The one element left is damage.

Starting point is 00:50:25 How have they been damaged? Obviously they've been damaged. And what is the amount of that damage? That's where you have a battle of experts about, is it a $1.6 billion defamation case? Is it a smaller amount of money or does the jury just pick its own number, which is usually what happens? And then lastly, the judge will say, you have one other issue to decide. That's a defense. The defense is whether this news organization, this media company gets the benefit of a protection under the first

Starting point is 00:50:53 amendment because there's a showing or no showing of actual malice, meaning they either, they knew it was false, what they were saying, or they did it with reckless disregard if whether it was true or false. If you find, for instance, that they didn't know, or they they exercise proper care to determine whether it was true or false, then you're to find four fox. If you find that they knew or should have known, you're to find for dominion, and you'll hear evidence. And that's what he's going to instruct them at the very beginning. So already, before we get to the sanctions that the judge already laid out on Fox, this is what stepping into the box Fox has to deal with in terms of it's not that the liability has already been established to get them, but it's pretty darn close. And the jury gets to go to damage.

Starting point is 00:51:40 Now on the remaining issue that's really interesting, you know, for me about all of this is the sanction. So what happened is, Fox has been late producing documents and data and recordings all along the way, including two or three days ago, some of which is coming from disclosures in the lawsuit that you just described from the former producer who was fired, who's going to be a witness has already been declared to be a witness in the case we're discussing right now. She will be brought in for this particular case by Dominion. One of it was this recording that you're talking about, including a recording in which the Sydney Powell, who's the, who's the grandmaster skimmer about this conspiracy that Dominion has claimed

Starting point is 00:52:27 to have been involved with the Venezuelan government in Yugoslav and Foni Software and bribes to Georgia officials and the like, all false. That part of her foundation for making that statement, Powell, to Fox News, was a woman who claimed to have time traveling superpowers. I'm not making this up. And using her time traveling abilities, she found out this information. And Bartiroma was on the phone during this. Now any legitimate news organization would say, I'm sorry, did you just say that the basis

Starting point is 00:52:59 for your statement about this is a time traveling superpower person? And that is, and it's very essence, actual malice, if that is all true. So that evidence came in really, really late. The second piece of evidence that came in really late to pissed off the judge is the relationship between Rupert Murdock and not the parent company, FoxCorp, but Fox News, because they always took the position at Fox

Starting point is 00:53:24 that Rupert's just like the titular head. parent company, FoxCorp, but Fox News, because they always took the position at Fox that Rupert's just like the titular head. He's really not involved with day to day news operations. His emails are interesting, but they don't really influence policy over at Fox News until they discovered that there is a corporate filing that says that Rupert is the operational chairman of Fox News. So the Dominion people jumped up and down in front of the judge two days ago and said, this change is the whole complexion of the case. We did all our discovery based on a representation

Starting point is 00:53:54 by them in this courtroom that that Rupert Murdock had no role over at Fox News. So we've been trying the Fox Corporation case separate from the Fox News case, but look at the interaction between the two and his control over it. And the judge says, yeah, I'm really annoyed about this. I, Judge said, I was, I was misrepresented to, he didn't say lie. I was misrepresented to by lawyers for Fox in this courtroom. And now I got to do something about it. So he did two things.

Starting point is 00:54:20 He said, I'm going to sanction Fox's follows. There is going to be a new depa, a new series of depositions that Dominion thinks are necessary to get to the bottom of the Rupert Murdoch involvement on the news side. And Fox is going to pay for all of that in the attorney time and everything related to that. That's one. Two, I'm thinking about appointing a special master, usually a retired judge or magistrate, to go look at all of the emails and correspondence

Starting point is 00:54:46 among the lawyers and the client, Fox, about the discovery process, the collection of documents and data. And then I want a full report back to me. So everybody hold on to your papers and don't destroy anything because I want to look at it. And then I'll come up with an appropriate section. Some people might be thinking, well, the trial started already, or it's going to start on Monday, who cares about sections? Well, first of all, you take time out from trials

Starting point is 00:55:09 to go do depositions that happens all the time. The judge says, hey, everybody, ladies and gentlemen, the jury, we're not going to meet on Wednesday. The lawyer is in the judges have something we got to do. And so they go do a deposition. But the real sanction here, Ben, is if he finds out that he was lied to as a judge, one penalty that he could assert is effectively a death penalty.

Starting point is 00:55:32 He could sanction Fox by striking their pleading, striking their defenses, and finding liability, basically, a default judgment against Fox. And that could happen during the course of the trial. So they're not out of the woods because while the trial is going on in the courtroom, we're all following. We also got to keep an eye on what's going on before court starts and after court starts and during lunch breaks when there are hearings on these issues with the jury not present where the judge will have to make a decision about what is the appropriate sanction against Fox. If he goes all the way to death penalty, the jury will come back one day and be told, thank

Starting point is 00:56:09 you for your service. We don't need you any longer. I've made a decision on liability. Let's get to damages only. That could happen. Well, we will be following that very closely here with hot takes probably every day as we learn what's going on in those proceedings. We still have a lot to discuss on this episode

Starting point is 00:56:29 of legal AF, E gene carols, civil rape and defamation trial, set to start April 25, Donald Trump tried to delay it. Donald Trump was not successful in trying to delay it, special counsel, Jack Smith is focusing on following the money and where Donald Trump is putting all of that money he raised grifting and lying to followers that it was going to an election defense fund and there was no election defense fund that even existed and we should also touch upon the fact that Donald Trump did in fact file a frivolous $500 million

Starting point is 00:57:10 dollar lawsuit against Michael Cohen in the Southern District of Florida. And there was an entire section Pope called podcasts that referenced the Midas Touch podcast network. We'll talk about that and more. Let's just take a quick break. podcasts that referenced the Midas Touch Podcast Network. And we'll talk about that and more. Let's just take a quick break. And now let's take a quick break to talk about our next partner, Lomi. Now I've never been able to compost before.

Starting point is 00:57:33 It was always too complicated, too much work. And frankly, I don't think I even knew exactly if I was doing it right. Then I got a Lomi. Lomi allows me to turn my food scraps into dirt with just the push of a button. Lomi is a to turn my food scraps into dirt with just the push of a button. Lomi is a countertop electro-composter that turns scraps to dirt in under 4 hours. There's no smell when it runs, and it's really quiet.

Starting point is 00:57:53 Thanks to Lomi, I have way less garbage each week. My family worked down from 3 bags per week to just 1. And here's something pretty cool, my wife recently started gardening, and we've been able to use the dirt that Lomi produces to help fill the garden. And since I got my Lomi, I threw out way less garbage. That means it's not going to landfills and producing methane. Instead I turn my waste into nutrient rich dirt that I can feed to my plants. I feel so great knowing that I'm composting and creating soil instead of waste.

Starting point is 00:58:22 And I have basically a limitless supply of dirt from my garden. The other week I had my in-laws over for dinner and the food cleanup process was such a breeze. Plus they all think I'm super eco-conscious now. If you want to start making a positive environmental impact or just make cleanup after dinner that much easier, loamy is perfect for you. Head to loamy.com slash legal a f and use the promo code legal a f to get $50 off your lomi. That's $50 off when you head to l o m i dot com slash legal a f and use promo code legal a f at checkout. Food waste is gross. Let lomi save you a call trip out to the garbage can. This is Michael Pope, a legal AF. Call Turkey may be great on sandwiches,

Starting point is 00:59:06 but there's a better way to break your bad habits. We're not talking about some weird mind voodoo from your wacky neighbor or some sketchy message board. We're talking about our sponsor, Fume. And they look at the problem in a different way. Not everything in a bad habit is wrong. So instead of a drastic, uncomfortable change,

Starting point is 00:59:23 why not just remove the bad from your habit? Fium is an innovative, award-nominated device that does just that. Instead of electronics, fium is completely natural. Instead of vapor, fium uses flavored air. And instead of harmful chemicals, fium uses all natural, delicious flavors. You get it. Instead of bad fium is good. It's a habit you're free to enjoy and makes replacing your bad habit easy. Your fume comes with an adjustable air flow dial and is designed with movable parts and magnets for fidgeting, giving your fingers a lot to do, which helps with de-stressing and managing anxiety while breaking your habit. The first time I used fume, I was shocked

Starting point is 01:00:01 at how flavorful and fresh it tasted. It's easy to hold and perfectly balanced, quite honestly, extremely fun to fidget with. The real wood material and sleek design definitely classes it up, and I feel pretty darn cool holding it. Stopping is something we all put off, because it's hard, but switching to Fume is easy, enjoyable, and even fun. Fume has served over 100,000 customers and as thousands of success stories, and there's no reason that can't be you. Join Fumin accelerating humanities break up from destructive habits by picking up the journey pack today. Head to trifumed.com and use code legalaf to save 10% off when you get the journey pack today. That's tryfum.com. Use code legal AF to save 10% off the journey pack today. Welcome back to legal AF. I just want to touch shortly, just for a brief moment on the

Starting point is 01:00:53 Michael Cohen lawsuit, only because Trump references us there. I mean, it's a completely frivolous lawsuit, I think, against Michael Cohen there. He's basically suing Cohen for breach of confidentiality, breach of fiduciary duties. He's saying that Cohen, who by the way, Trump has accused of lying. I guess in this lawsuit, he's now accusing Cohen not of lying, of revealing the confidences as part of the attorney-client relationship.

Starting point is 01:01:24 While at the same time, Donald Trump talks one about all of them publicly, which would be a waiver of attorney-client privilege to begin with the fact that you can't claim confidentiality over crimes. Right? You can't be in a criminal conspiracy with your lawyer, and then when the lawyer speaks to legal authorities, go, you violated my confidentiality for speaking with the criminal authorities. You can't do, you know, so Donald Trump's lawsuit is completely, completely frivolous. And then there's this whole section there about podcasts and talks about how Michael Cohen's podcast on the Midas Touch Network made Donald Trump very sad and very upset.

Starting point is 01:02:02 So I know we're having a big influence there. What one point I'll make quickly, but I don't want to be labor the Michael Cohen lawsuit because frankly, I think it's a completely frivolous lawsuit. I want to talk about the judge though. I'll let you talk about the judge because I want to move on to the EG. I'll let you hit it.

Starting point is 01:02:18 Popuck. Yeah, I practice in Miami. I know Judge Gales. Judge Gales is an amazing judge. He started on the circuit court, state court, where this is a constant theme on the show today, state versus federal and the different systems in the United States.

Starting point is 01:02:34 God elevated by Obama to the federal bench in Miami. He's been on there for about 10 years. The first openly gay black man at the time of confirmation to be on the federal bench. And it is exactly the opposite prototype of a judge that Trump in his forum and judge shopping was trying to do by filing in Miami. We talked a lot in prior podcasts about his being deathly, Trump being deathly afraid of Don Middlebrook's the judge up in West Palm Beach that sanctioned him and Alina Haba over a million dollars and has found basically all of his filings to be without merit and fraudulent.

Starting point is 01:03:14 And so here we have another false bad faith filing by Donald Trump in yet another federal court. And rather than filing it across the street in Palm Beach County where he lives at Mar-a-Lago, he had some, he electronically filed, and I used to say he drove down there, because that's how he used to file, but he electronically filed it in Miami. Why? Because there is a fair number of conservative federalists

Starting point is 01:03:35 to society, federal judges in Miami. If you're gonna pick one courthouse in the Southern District to file, and if you're looking for that, then you would try it and spend the wheel and see what happens. What came up instead is Judge Darren Gales. If anybody doesn't understand this is a proxy for the Trump versus Obama fight, that's been going on since he ran for office originally. If he keeps the case going,

Starting point is 01:04:00 well, it's without merit. He may dismiss the case having now seen who the judge is going to be because Another million dollar another another million dollar fine could be in the offing based on what's been alleged here against Michael So we wish Michael well at the end of the day It's the wrong courthouse. It's the wrong court and it's a lot of claims that look very stale and potentially barred by the statute of limitations and Everything Donald Trump says is a confession right. He always accuses everybody of, you're judge shopping, you're doing this when it's not judge shopping. It's like just a random assignment of a judge in the correct jurisdiction. Meanwhile, Donald Trump actually does the judge shopping.

Starting point is 01:04:38 So it's just yet another example of projection. And yet another example of Donald Trump's tactics delayed, delayed, delay in e.g. Carol's civil rape and defamation case against Donald Trump said to go to trial on April 25th, Donald Trump's lawyers filed a motion asking for a cooling off period. They said this was a carnival-like atmosphere that's been created since Donald Trump was criminally arraigned and and so please can we have a four-week delay? That's all we need. The judge really wasn't having any of it. Popo, what's going on here? This case is going to trial. Oh yeah, this is the second time in a week that judges denied the 30-day extension. It's obvious.

Starting point is 01:05:21 This is the tell if you play poker. They keep asking for 30 days because Donald Trump's not ready. Why is Donald Trump not ready? Because he's been doing a lot lately. He's just got a rain. He just gave a deposition. New York attorney general. He's got three at least grand jury. He's dealing with and up heels and down and down and DC. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no,

Starting point is 01:05:44 no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no to interrupt you ever friend, you know, who's just like, um, hey, I'll be there in five more minutes, right? Then after five, right, and after five minutes, I need five more minutes, right? And then after that, please give me five, that's basically the strategy here. Yeah. Yeah. And so now there's one piece of reporting that came out that everybody's jumped on in mainstream. But let me just set it straight as a trial lawyer like Ben who's been in courtrooms like the one that is the EG in Carroll case, it's being tried. And the civil rape case and the defamation related to statements made by Donald Trump after he was president, which we refer to in the business as the Carroll Roman numeral two case, distinguished it

Starting point is 01:06:21 from Carroll one in a minute, is going to trial on April 25th. I don't care what Alina Habba and Joe Takapina and how much high-chair, you know, baby formula throwing they're doing, they're going to trial. So they got one little thing that they're decided on the Trump side to, they think is a gift and it's a big nothing and it's going to be a big nothing in front of the jury. But let me explain it. Let me tie it to a Jack Smith investigation that we're going to do a little bit later on that I think go hand in hand. Not even a little bit later on.

Starting point is 01:06:52 We're almost there. We're almost there. Yeah, yeah. No, we got three more hours of the show. What do you mean? No. No, no, no. What I mean is that there's a connection between who's paying for the lawyers.

Starting point is 01:07:03 Hold on to that topic for a minute. Because at the time, I was like, who gives a between who's paying for the lawyers. Hold on to that topic for a minute. Because at the time, I was like, who gives a crap who's paying for the lawyers. But now I see the connection that Trump's tried to make to run interference for what's happening in grand juries. In the EGN Carol case, it came out when they were prepping EGN Carol, the lawyers for EGN Carol, Robbie Kaplan and her law firm. I'll talk about the law firm in a minute. What you do when you're getting ready for an April the trial where your lead witness is your plaintiff, you prepare her.

Starting point is 01:07:30 You prepare all the witnesses you're supposed to. So in preparation and going over her deposition transcript, they came across a line in there where Alina Haba had asked her in deposition, E. Jean Carroll, who's paying your bills for the litigation? And she said it's on contingency, which is true. Meaning Robbie Kaplan's firm is going to get a percentage of any recovery, but until then, unless there's a recovery, she doesn't get paid. They said, what about other things, or other fees or costs? And there, not every client knows what's going on about funding and this kind of thing.

Starting point is 01:08:05 She said, I'm not sure I'll have to get back to you on that one. I don't know. Okay. And then they went on. And then when when Alina Haba, this is again, Slope Alina Haba again. We've seen this in the past where she forgets to do something in the case. And the judge has to remind her, well, you had your chance, but you never asked me to do anything about it. She did it again, because they sent out discovery requests to E. Jean Carroll and said, give us information about how your fees are being paid by your, for this case and anybody else that's helping to support you. And they objected and they said objection,

Starting point is 01:08:41 attorney client relevancy. And Alina Hobbit didn't do anything about it. She didn't bring it to the judges attention. She didn't file a motion to try to get that information. She just let the objection lie on the table. Now in preparing, it turns out that read Hoffman, who is a linked in the LinkedIn founder and a billionaire because of Microsoft when they bought LinkedIn and supports democratic and progressive causes, just like Peter Thiel does on the Republican side, like the Koch brothers do and all of that. And everybody else who's a big funder for Donald Trump, he gives two causes, including

Starting point is 01:09:18 to allow people to pay the cost of entering a courtroom to vindicate their rights. That's a public service that he does. It's a public charity. He can spend his money anyway that he wants. Put that next to E. Jean Carroll's lawyer, Robbie Kaplan, when she found that her law firm in 2017, around the same time I founded mine in New York, she dedicated her law firm to public interest law. About half of her practice is taking free causes on contingency, including

Starting point is 01:09:45 going after Donald Trump a few times and winning. And then the other half of her practice is, you know, she's got corporate 500, Fortune 500 clients of pay or, you know, $1,500 an hour. So it, but she does both. And so as part of that, she hooked up, the law firm hooked up with Readhoffman's foundation and got some funding along the way to defray certain costs and fees, not attorneys' costs, not attorneys' fees, costs and fees that go along with a case.

Starting point is 01:10:13 And just as a little tutorial, when you try a case, you got a lot of things you got to lay out of pocket when you're a plaintiff's side contingency lawyer. You've got experts that got to get paid. Experts can't work on contingency. They have to get paid experts can't work on contingency. They have to get paid. So let's say the DNA expert, the expert on her on E. Jean Carroll's economic damages. That could be two or three hundred thousand dollars or more worth of expenses. Court reporter costs for all the deposition. That could run 50 or a hundred thousand dollars and so on and so on. You could easily in a case like this, have $5 million or $10 million worth of invested time

Starting point is 01:10:49 at the attorney rate of $1,500 an hour and have a half a million dollars worth of costs that you're running as a law firm. To defray some of those costs, Robbie Kaplan said, hey, read in the foundation, you gave me money for one of my other cases. I got some leftover. Can I use it towards EG and Carol after the case had already been filed? You gave me money for one of my other cases. I got some leftover.

Starting point is 01:11:05 Can I use it towards EG and Carol after the case had already been filed? It had already been up and running a year. And they said, sure, you can apply it. So they use it to pay. Who knows what? Coppiers, DNA, filing fees, whatever. Not to put money in Robby Capital's pocket. That the client didn't know about the intricacies of this whole relationship is a big nothing.

Starting point is 01:11:23 And the fact that they're using it to say, aha, read is really the, this is really, he's the puppet master. And E. Jean Carroll is being let around by her nose. And this is all about politics and a hoax and a vendetta, just as we always said. And the judge says, okay, that's sort of interesting that she didn't quite know exactly how costs were paid. So do an hour deposition, go off and do it, get one hour on that topic only, and come back, we'll talk about it.

Starting point is 01:11:49 And the question is whether it's going to go in front of the jury, whether she really purge herself as Alina Haba likes to say, but let me just draw a line in the sand here. If Takapina and Haba really thought they had, E. Jean Carol dead to rights on a perjury lying under oath or anything like that. They would have kept that evidence in their pocket. They would have used it at the trial itself to embarrass her. They was, well, do you remember when you were deposed? Yes.

Starting point is 01:12:17 Do you remember what we asked you the question? Were there another funder? You said, well, at best, she said, I can't really remember. I'll have to get back to you. Oh, but isn't it true that Reed Hoffman's LinkedIn foundation is paying for a part of your 30,000? She'll go, okay, maybe that's true. I don't know.

Starting point is 01:12:34 You have to talk to my lawyer. And the jury is going to be like, why are we here on this? This is not a prock. They're never going to believe then that this is a proxy battle between Reed Hoffman and Donald Trump. This is a civil rape between Reed Hoffman and Donald Trump. This is a civil rape case that's being tried in front of a jury where the victim is the plaintiff and that is E. Jean Carroll. That there was some pencils and paper and DNA tester paid for by Reed's foundation to

Starting point is 01:12:59 defray some costs so that the lawyer didn't have to carry it. What does it have to do with the rape charge? Nothing. It's a big nothing burger, it's going nowhere. They used it because they wanted a delay trial. Trump's going to trial April 25th on a civil rape and defamation case where E. Jean Carroll is going to be calling

Starting point is 01:13:19 other individuals who Donald Trump raped, who will be testifying E. Jean Carroll, will be showing the jury, the Donald Trump raped, who will be testifying, E. Jean Carroll will be showing the jury, the Donald Trump access Hollywood tape where Donald Trump brags about sexual assault, that evidence is allowed in. Donald Trump will be testifying as well where Donald Trump has said in his deposition

Starting point is 01:13:39 that E. Jean Carroll's not his type, that's why he would not rape her and then he said that he thought that E. Jean Carroll, he thought E. Jean Carol was his ex-wife in one of the photographs. So all of that will be going before a jury. So a lot of action there. As before you move on. Sorry, good.

Starting point is 01:13:57 I didn't mean to interrupt you. Go ahead. That's all I got. No, I was just saying before you move on. Because I did promise something and I want to wrap it up here. There was an appellate decision that just came out by the DC Court of Appeals, not the Federal Court of Appeals, the one that sits in the District of Columbia for that territory. They are going to, based on the ruling, the Carol I case, which is her original filed case

Starting point is 01:14:21 that she was defamed while Donald Trump was president and the question of whether he had immunity or not as the president Because if he did then that case is over that case was already stayed by the judge judge says Let's just do the case of the civil rape which which will go on and whether after he was president She was defamed that's April 25th the other case. Maybe we get to it. Maybe we don't. Let's let the appellate court do its job. The appellate court came back and said, it's a very a fact intensive issue. And we're not going to be able to get to the bottom of it here. So go develop facts with a jury. So basically the new ruling would allow in theory a second trial of Donald Trump, regardless of what happens here. But I think if she wins here, the case is

Starting point is 01:15:05 about over. And then lastly, and then segue into your Jack Smith, our Jack Smith segment, now I see what they're trying to do. Because one of the investigations that's now become a little bit more public about Jack Smith is into Donald Trump raising money and using it to pay for lawyers and how does he pay for lawyers and what are the representations that he's made and what are those lawyers do in terms of witnesses that are part of the investigation. This is just a talking point about E. Jean Carroll being supported or as even Axio said out loud in their headline that E. Jean Carroll was being bankrolled by Reed Hoffman. That is a lie. That

Starting point is 01:15:42 is not the bank roll comes for what's matter? No, I know, I know you're, you look, Donald Trump is gay. It's a head fake by Donald Trump. And I don't want to be laid through the point, you know, and give it more attention to the deserves because as we go to Jack Smith, Donald Trump has received 16 million, well, he's paid out 16 million dollars in defense costs and legal fees from his political action arm. Okay. So whatever little bit amount that E. Jean Carroll received, it is a complete ridiculous, you know, it is a ridiculous thing that matters. Bop zip because what the real issue is that is going on is that from November of 2020 to January 6th of 2021, Donald Trump from just that time period alone, based on 2022 disclosures.

Starting point is 01:16:38 We don't even have the 2023 disclosures yet, because political action arms don't have to report those for another few months. But Donald Trump raised about $250 million, okay, making false claims about the election. And that is an area that Jackson Smith is very, very focused on because one, Donald Trump, where is he, where is this money going even? Well, they've created a number of shell companies and shell corporations that are controlled by Donald Trump loyalists. So money goes there. Then once it goes there, where does the money go after? That's something that Jack Smith is focused on. And then how is this money also being used to potentially try to control witnesses?

Starting point is 01:17:31 How is this money being used to have lawyers who would be appointed to maybe try to change the testimony? Popok, what do you think about this? I was going to do a little board. Look, there are three investigations that we are keeping our eye on. The most recent one that looks like it's heating up is going to focus on wire fraud, which is, frankly, the easiest and most potent tool in a prosecutor, federal prosecutors arsenal is wire fraud. And the focus on that is every time he grifted

Starting point is 01:18:09 and every time he tried to raise money on the backs of a lie about the election and took money from the babies, took money from his followers, each element of that email blast that went out, every email individually is a wire fraud crime. Because we should put up, I think we can put up with salty, 18 USC, 1343, which is, and people are saying, well, what's the wire?

Starting point is 01:18:34 Well, we've evolved technology. The wire used to be telegrams and telegraphs, but now in radio and phone, that's a wire, but now email is a wire. So it says whoever has devised with the intent a scheme to defraud or obtaining money by false representations by wire, that's email. Every time he grifted by email, that's a wire fraud charge.

Starting point is 01:19:00 This is the biggest target of the back of Donald Trump right now because it is the simplest path to prosecution and to conviction is the wire fraud. So they're focusing on the grift. They want to know the money that was raised and what he did with it. You laid out then $16 million for attorney's fees. They also want to know if he weaponized the use of attorney's fees to put the 20 or so people at Mar-a-Lago and his Inter-Sanctum AIDS to put them under under control to try to influence their testimony by buying their silence or buying their cooperation by giving them

Starting point is 01:19:37 attorneys. Cassidy Hutchinson testified to just that very thing in the Jan 6 committee. The Mueller report revealed that even Michael Cohen and Michael Flynn were both improperly influenced by Donald Trump by including by helping to pay for lawyers or bringing in lawyers to help them. So now that's a focus. All of that. The question is the odds makers, you know, like in Vegas, are looking at what you and I have always said, we're at least three grand juries, and now we know there are. Mar-a-Lago, which has to do with national security implications,

Starting point is 01:20:13 possibly the Espinoge Act and obstruction of justice. And now we have new reporting that he may have taken, Trump may have taken a map with secret, confidential, sensitive intelligence information, and showed it to people in the White House on Air Force 1, two donors and all sorts of other things. They've already gotten testimony from General Miley, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Head on that. So you've got the map issue there, which of course Trump's lawyers have already reached out. Oh, worry about the 21-year-old Massachusetts Airmen that leaked 100 documents. That's on your watch, Biden, with 1.5 million people that have top-secret security clearance, instead of focusing on what Donald Trump did

Starting point is 01:20:54 with his map. But the map has become a big focus of the investigation. And then you've got the Jan 6th fake electors interference pressure on Mike Pence, Georgia issue. We'll talk about that in a minute. And then the third one is this one, which is the pack fundraising fraud scamming the donors, wire fraud, save America, pack using the money to corrupt the process of struck justice and witness testimony. If you're a betting person, testimony. If you're a betting person, Mara Lago, according to insiders, is about done in its investigation. The last all witnesses that relate to Mara Lago, all, and ending with the capstone of Evan Corcoran, are done. So if I were a betting person, Mara Lago is the first out of the shoot by Jack Smith's prosecutors with a recommendation

Starting point is 01:21:47 to our attorney general, Merrick Arlin, and then a prosecution. The second one, I think, is now the pack. I think the pack fundraising fraud has now caught up. It's still a little bit behind Mar-a-Lago because there's still more to do there. Then the third one is the most complicated one. So obviously not surprisingly, in third position, which is the fake electors interference also. And then you've got the issue about the race between Jack Smith, talk about lack of coordination, the race between Jack Smith and Foni Willis on Georgia interference.

Starting point is 01:22:22 Because if that's a part of the federal side because it was a federal election and therefore he has jurisdiction There's gonna have to be either some coordination or for and he's gonna just say I'm going first if she goes first It'll be a slight problem a potentially for Jack Smith's prosecutors and she won't necessarily have to stand down because there is a distinction between state and Federal prosecutors so you've got all that going on, but I don't want to undersell the necessarily have to stand down because there is a distinction between state and federal prosecutors. So you've got all that going on, but I don't want to under sell the how serious the focus that the reporting is now out there, that wire fraud is the one that they're going to try to use against them on the obstruction and the pack.

Starting point is 01:23:00 Because as I was half joking with our producer before the show started, every email, and he does hundreds of thousands of emails, there was fundraising, every email is an individual count of wire fraud. They don't group them together like the Tuesday emails. I mean, the charge is alone and it is the easiest. It's the one every time you get an indictment in white collar, defense the way you and I do it sometimes. Every time there's a male or wire fraud charge in there because it is the easiest one for the prosecution to prove and to certainly to indict. Yeah, look, you look at the email. The email says donate right now to the election defense fund. They raise hundreds of thousands of dollars per email or millions of dollars per

Starting point is 01:23:44 email. You then ask the witness. Okay, so did it go to the election defense fund and then they go there was an election defense fund. So they're like, oh, so you just said an election defense fund. Yeah, it was just a marketing tool that we use. Okay, so you mean you lied to people and said that there was an election defense fund? Okay, well, where did the money actually go? Well, we use some of that money to go to the EG and Carroll defense. Wait a minute. So you use the election defense money to pay for a Joe Takapina and Alina Hobbazfis to defend Donald Trump in connection with EG and Carroll's civil rape and defamation case against Donald Trump? Yeah, but we can do whatever we want.

Starting point is 01:24:27 We have a disclaimer that says we can do whatever we want. Well, let's go back to your email. Your email says it's going to an election defense fund, though. So that's what you've told your people and you knew at the time that's not where it was going, correct, correct? That's how that actually plays out in real time with that one email.

Starting point is 01:24:46 And so Donald Trump's response to Jack Smith's increasingly productive investigation is to call Jack Smith a war tag. So he went from calling Jack Smith a mad dog psycho and now this morning he called him a war tag. from calling Jack Smith a mad dog psycho. And now this morning he called him a warthog. And Donald Trump is having a conversation with himself this morning.

Starting point is 01:25:14 He is responding to a, like this is like a real maniac. Like this is not normal behavior. So he first posts, Biden obstructed with thousands of boxes loaded up with classified documents many stored in Chinatown, whatever the hell that means. He's just slurring Chinese Americans for going exactly. And then he responds to himself and says true. Biden is guilty of obstruction, 1,850 boxes unchecked, many found in Chinatown, heavy unclassified documents. He has been totally uncooperative, won't show docs. I went by the presidential records acts have right to declassify and did nothing wrong, but was purposefully

Starting point is 01:25:57 given by DOJ and Biden, a Trump-hating lunatic prosecutor, Jack Warthog Smith, who is a harasser end-abuser in order to obstruct an interfere with the 2020 presidential election. Public won't stand for unequal treatment. I mean, I could probably spend a very long time explaining why, I mean, it's very easy to do it, but I could go on and on with every single lie here. But everybody recognizes that this is a maniac who is just completely unhinged and each and every day, you know, crashes and crashes even more. This is someone lonely, isolated, actually having conversations with himself.

Starting point is 01:26:44 Yeah, he said every prosecutor. He said, right, Donald Donald Trump from two days ago. That's a very good point I made and then he made his thing, but I but but there's also this just one last thing, but he there's also this This undercurrent of a continued misogyny and racism and everything he posts. If you are a black prosecutor or attorney general, he uses racist tropes, calls, calls, leticia james pica boo, which is a play on a racist name, I'm not gonna say out loud. He calls the,

Starting point is 01:27:19 all the black career professionals, racists, saw us back and all of that. Animals, which dehumanizes them, threatens to brain them with baseball bats. If you are Jack Smith, who's not those things, whose name is Jack Smith, then he's like a warthog, but not a racist.

Starting point is 01:27:40 He's not an animal or a human. He's not the other in that way. And so it's just another continued. I don't even know what warthog means. I mean, it's just another way. Well, the animal, the warthog, because you know, but I mean, I know what warthog is. Thanks. I know what a warthog is. What is the warthog then? No, but why is it applied to Jack? Is it beard? His hair? I mean, I don't really understand. But, um, yeah, I'm racist. Right. Well, one of the world, you know, he does have an anti-Semitic trope that he does with Jack Smith though.

Starting point is 01:28:08 When he goes, Jack Smith isn't his real name. And he's basically saying that Jack Smith secretly adjue, changed his name to Jack Smith. So that's one of the things that Trump does when he goes, Jack, not his real name, Smith in other posts as well. So there's, there's that. But this is an individual who the Republican party's like, you know what? You should have our nuclear codes.

Starting point is 01:28:31 You know what? You should be the one who makes decisions over the life and death of my family and friends and neighbors and community and colleagues. Let's give this person more power right there. And look, I think the contrast could not be starker between that way of thinking and real law and order, pro-democracy.

Starting point is 01:28:54 And that's why we cover these topics here on the Midas Touch Network and right here on Legal AF. We covered a lot today, Pope, a lot of topics, very important topics. You and I and Karen Friedman Agnifalo and the whole team here at the Midas Touch Network is going to be very, very busy. But you know what, busy is good.

Starting point is 01:29:17 And there's no one who I'd rather spend this time with than all the legal AFers out there. And you, Popak, and Karen Friedman Agnifalo. But all of the legal AF and you pop up in Karen but all of the legal a without you. We're so gre we've got some great en to about some new initi legal a f over the coming everybody stay tuned for that. You can check out store. MidasTouch.com for the best pro democracy year,

Starting point is 01:29:48 including official legal AF merch. That store.mightisTouch.com. If you want to support MidasTouch network as well, we're not funded by any outside investors. You can go to patreon.com slash MidasTouch. PATREN.com slash mightestouch. P-A-T-R-E-O-N.com slash mightestouch. That is one of the main ways we fund this network. One of the other ways we fund it is through our sponsors.

Starting point is 01:30:12 So I want to give a special shout out to all of them. We have a link of our sponsors in the description. And they're actually great sponsors, and we do use all of those products. And so, you know, make sure you check that out as well. Hit subscribe on our YouTube channel for all our YouTube watchers. Make sure you subscribe on audio podcast as well to all our audio podcast listeners. Subscribe to the Midas Touch Network on YouTube as well. I'm Ben Micellis joined by Michael Popak.

Starting point is 01:30:41 Thank you for watching this weekend's episode of Legal AF and a shout-out to The Midas Mighty.

Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump REEKS of DESPERATION and Jack Smith LOVES IT

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