LIVE: Trump in LEGAL HELL as DOJ COVER UP FAILS!!! | Legal AF

What this episode is about

The discussion focuses on the ongoing legal challenges facing Donald Trump, particularly in light of the recent partial release of Epstein files and ramifications related to Ghislaine Maxwell's upcoming testimony. Key points include potential strategies for Maxwell's deposition, the Department of Justice's questionable practices regarding document disclosures, and the significant turnover within DOJ, which raises concerns about its operational capacity.

Key takeaways

• Ghislaine Maxwell’s 'Fifth' may turn into a legal game of hide-and-seek—good luck getting answers!
• DOJ's document deletion? More like 'creative accounting'—imagine losing the receipts for your biggest scandal!
• 7,000 DOJ lawyers have quit? Sounds like a scene from a legal thriller gone terribly wrong.
• Wave elections seem immune to Trump’s gerrymandering—guess the tides turned, and they're washing away his plans.
• Lawyers as lost souls in the DOJ? Time to call for a legal lifeguard before the whole beach drowns.

Who speaks in this episode?

• Ben Micellis (Host) · 1 h 13 min speaking
• Michael Popach (Host) · 31 min speaking

What is discussed, and when

1. 0:00 – 10:00: Donald Trump, Supreme Court, Jeffrey Epstein, Michael Popach
2. 10:00 – 20:00: Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, Department of Justice, Ghislain Maxwell
3. 20:00 – 30:00: Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, Department of Justice, Supreme Court
4. 30:00 – 40:00: Bill and Hillary Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump
5. 40:00 – 50:00: Jeffrey Epstein, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Department of Justice, Donald Trump
6. 50:00 – 1:00:00: Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, Department of Justice, House Oversight Committee
7. 1:00:00 – 1:10:00: Elon Musk
8. 1:10:00 – 1:20:00: Department of Justice, Donald Trump
9. 1:20:00 – 1:30:00: Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Department of Justice, Attorney General Pam Bondi
10. 1:30:00 – 1:40:00: Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein
11. 1:40:00 – 1:44:41: Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, Supreme Court

Notable quotes from "LIVE: Trump in LEGAL HELL as DOJ COVER UP FAILS!!! | Legal AF"

• It'll end very quickly. But I'll explain what I think the strategy should be and we'll hear from Michael Popach what he thinks the strategy should be. A federal judge wants…

  about Michael Popach · at 0:21

• Also, the Department of Justice is still deleting files that they posted publicly before when they dropped the Epstein file docs. An 86page prosecution memo listing possible.

  about Department of Justice · at 1:08

• Prisons who were supposed to be released based on prior petitions. So we'll cover that. You have Elon Musk having his deposition ordered by a federal judge in Doge related…

  about Elon Musk · at 2:56

• And I just did a deep dive hot take on this. Donald Trump's efforts to run up the score before the election is even run at midterms and try to get anywhere between 15 and 20 congressional seats in his column for.

  about Donald Trump · at 4:11

• Now when Congress is going to call her, she's not going to she's not going to testify. And by the way, what do you mean, Pam Bondi, when you said the files were on your desk in February?

  about Attorney General Pam Bondi · at 12:28

• The cover up remains and is an election issue is an unfit for office issue is a MAGA issue because you the MAGA are as culpable as Donald Trump is because you are his enablers.…

  about MAGA · at 15:17

• You've got Bill Clinton posting the following. I've called for the full release of the Epstein files. I've provided a sworn statement of what I know, and this week I've agreed to appear in person before the committee,.

  about Bill and Hillary Clinton · at 33:02

• Have you ever had a personal relationship with Donald Trump?

  about Jeffrey Epstein · at 52:19

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

• Jeffrey Epstein — Person · Core subject of legal/political scandal discussed · 43 mentions · first at 0:06
  The episode centers on the partial release of “Epstein files,” alleged withholding of millions of documents, and the implications for public accountability and potential co-conspirators.
• Donald Trump — Person · Primary referenced political figure · 39 mentions · first at 4:14
  Central figure in the episode’s discussion of the Epstein document releases, alleged cover-ups, DOJ conduct, and political fallout; repeatedly framed as the person whose administration/DOJ is withholding or manipulating disclosures.
• Michael Popach — Person · Co-host / named commentator (Legal AF) · 3 mentions · first at 0:25
  Identified as a principal voice on the show, providing legal analysis and strategy discussion; also referenced in sponsor-style callouts for his law firm and the Legal AF channel.
• Ghislain Maxwell — Person · Key referenced witness/defendant figure · 2 mentions · first at 0:18
  Discussed as a convicted sex trafficker expected to testify (or invoke the Fifth) before the House Oversight Committee; her prior interview/deposition with Todd Blanche is framed as politically motivated and potentially untruthful.
  Maxwell's deposition before the House Oversight Committee on Monday. What we can expect. I'll just be blunt. I'll probably invoke the fifth right away and it'll end very…
• Attorney General Pam Bondi — Person · Referenced government official under scrutiny · 11 mentions · first at 0:26
  A federal judge seeks clarification of her statement that Epstein files were “on my desk”; she is also described as scheduled to appear before the House Judiciary Committee amid FOIA litigation and document deletion allegations.
• Elon Musk — Person · Referenced litigant/deponent in related litigation · 10 mentions · first at 3:01
  Mentioned as having a deposition ordered by a federal judge in “Doge related litigation,” used as an example of compelled transparency and accountability through civil process.
• Bill and Hillary Clinton — Person · Referenced political figure (comparative/deflection target) · 10 mentions · first at 25:31
  Raised as a subject of Republican committee focus; the episode notes he requested to testify publicly and is used to contrast with the focus on Trump in the Epstein materials.
• Hillary Clinton — Person · Referenced political figure (comparative/deflection target) · 3 mentions · first at 32:42
  Discussed as part of the alleged partisan deflection; the episode states she engaged with the committee under oath and calls for public hearings, while also noting she is framed as less present in the files than Trump.
  Partisan interest. That's not factf finding. It's pure politics. And then Hillary Clinton says, For six months, we engaged Republicans on the oversight committee in good faith.…

Companies & orgs

• Department of Justice — Company · Key institution · 16 mentions · first at 0:52
  Central to discussions about legal processes, document releases, and internal issues within the Trump administration
• Goldman Sachs — Company · Financial institution · 1 mention · first at 20:47
  Mentioned in connection with Jeffrey Epstein, highlighting ties between Epstein and powerful financial figures
  Goldman Sachs, one of the preeminent financial services companies in the world. As the as Goldman Sachs goes, so does the financial markets. Okay. Its general counsel is in Epstein's will as.

Concepts & topics

• MAGA — Concept · Political movement · 1 mention · first at 15:23
  Represents the political base and ideology supporting Donald Trump, discussed in the context of electoral strategies and legal challenges
• Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) — Concept · Legal mechanism · 3 mentions · first at 12:42
  Discussed as a tool for obtaining documents from the government, particularly in relation to the Epstein files
  What is that even referring to? By the way, and there are these Freedom of Information Act lawsuits that have been filed against the Trump DOJ in addition to the Epstein Transparency Act. These Foyer lawsuits are saying.

Places & events

• Supreme Court — Event · Judicial body · 8 mentions · first at 4:06
  Mentioned in the context of legal decisions affecting electoral maps and the Voting Rights Act
  Do and something that's very hopeful which is coming off the Supreme Court decision earlier in the week that blessed the California maps.
• House Oversight Committee — Event · Congressional committee · 4 mentions · first at 0:12
  Mentioned in the context of hearings and investigations, particularly regarding the Epstein files
  Deposition ordered by a federal judge in Doge related litigation. and you have Pam Bondi scheduled to go before the House Judiciary Committee middle of this week which is going…

Full transcript with timestamps

0:00 I told you we would be busy on legal af. The fallout from the release of the partial release of the Epstein files. Uh the repercussions are still being felt there. We should talk about Gileain Maxwell's deposition before uh the House Oversight Committee on Monday. What we can expect. I'll just be blunt. I'll probably invoke the fifth right away and it'll end very quickly. But I'll explain what I think the strategy should be and we'll hear from Michael Popach what he thinks the strategy should be. A federal judge wants answers from Pam Bondi about what she meant back in February when she had said that the Epstein files are on her desk. Remember, there's still a bunch of public records request lawsuits, foyer lawsuits that have been filed against the DOJ, which I think are going to become increasingly important with respect to the remaining 3 million documents or so, which could be 25, 50

0:50 million pages that are being withheld by the Department of Justice. um because I believe they're withholding some of the most damaging and incriminating documents on bogus privilege claims like deliberative process, attorney client privilege, and federal rule of criminal procedure 6E. We will talk about that. Um also, the Department of Justice is still deleting files that they posted publicly before when they dropped the Epstein file uh docs. An 86page prosecution memo listing possible co-conspirators in the Epstein case has been deleted. So, we'll cover that.

1:24 Also, you have Department of Justice lawyers continuing to quit. I think the latest count is somewhere close to 7,000 DOJ lawyers have quit. Um, look at offices like in Minneapolis, like completely gutted this point. Like, no lawyers. Like, when I say no lawyers, like I'm not being hyperbolic. There's like maybe one or two Trump lackey who are in the federal prosecutor's office and nobody else. You say, "Well, how are these offices functioning?" Well, they're trying to bring in lawyers now from like other agencies and other departments. They're bringing lawyers from like immigration lawyers in the government to now become assistant United States attorneys. And they're also calling in JAG lawyers as well.

2:05 These judge advocate general corp, these military lawyers who are not federal prosecutors. They're making them federal prosecutors now. Uh and it's a total mess. And there was this one incident, one incident with this lawyer who was kind of moved over uh Julie Lee who had this breakdown in Minneapolis and was like, "Judge, I can you just arrest me and hold me in contempt. Like I really need to sleep at this point." But more damaging than the salacious headline of the Trump DOJ lawyer saying like, "Arest me, throw me in contempt. I I need to rest. This this office is so unorganized." was the discussion that she had with the federal judge about how nobody in the office knows what they're doing and that there are so many people right now incarcerated who federal judges have ordered to be released but because the administrative paperwork is not being done. People are rotting in prisons who were supposed to be released

2:59 based on prior petitions. So we'll cover that. You have Elon Musk having his deposition ordered by a federal judge in Doge related litigation. and you have Pam Bondi scheduled to go before the House Judiciary Committee uh middle of this week which is going to be I think a very big hearing and we'll see if Pam Bondi will be able to survive that. This is Legal AF and we're very busy here and Michael Pop's very busy on the channel that he runs the Legal AF channel which by the way make sure you all subscribe to at the outset. Let's get that channel two million subscribers. Michael Popach.

3:34 H Wow is right. And and you we people have heard me tell this this joke or story that you and I said we we founded Legal AF six years ago. You think we'll have enough to talk about on any given Saturday? Um let's find out. And uh and here we are for ringside seats at this fascist administration. I do want to start off with a little bit of good news though before we jump into all of the updates and stories that we're going to do and something that's very very hopeful which is coming off the the um Supreme Court decision earlier in the week that blessed the California maps.

4:11 Um and I just did a a deep dive hot take on this. Donald Trump's uh efforts to run up the score before the election is even run at midterms and try to get anywhere between 15 and 20 congressional seats in his column for the MAGA before the midterms has utterly failed. Um, I was worried as were you when four or five months ago we listened to the Supreme Court hear a case called Calala about voter maps in Louisiana, but but about broader issues involving the Voting Rights Act. He said, "Oh boy, the Voting Rights Act is going to be if it was on life support under the Roberts court before, it's it's going to be beyond that next and we're waiting around for the decision." as were a number of states like Indiana and Missouri, North Carolina and Florida uh to or not North Carolina um uh Florida and uh Indiana and um and other red states to try to figure out if they could help Donald Trump out. He was

5:10 berating them. And we said at the time if this Cala decision comes out badly in time for the midterms could give Donald Trump up to 15 or 20. But what we didn't count on is the um that a wave election was in the making for the midterms. And what I mean by that, what the phrase means is the title wave of enthusiasm for the Democrats uh would overcome any attempt at partisan gerrymandering. You know, in terms of rock, paper, scissor, wave elections, beat partisan gerrymandering every time. and and it and it's backfiring because not only is Donald Trump not getting anywhere near the extra seats he thought he was going to get, there's some reporting that it may actually be net zero of extra seats because it's the strategyy's backfiring.

6:04 It's not just like it's not five more seats in Texas because a couple of those seats are now competitive Democrat because of the public eyeire and outrage about how the how Texas try to redo the maps, arrest the Texas Democratic legislators who wouldn't agree and the Hispanic vote has come out strong, which is why you you reported and we did it too a week or so ago. There was this special election, yet another loss for the MAGA where a Democrat in Ruby Red district near Fort Worth won the seat by 14 points. A seat that Donald Trump had beaten Kla Harris by 17 points. A 31 point swing and it's freaking out the Republicans. What it means is that it's not just the five more seats in California that have been approved by the Supreme Court for the Democrats.

6:56 It's more than that because of the enthusiasm of people voting. It could be eight more seats in in in your state of California because there are now Republican seats that are imperiled by Donald Trump's actions. There's less state legislators who have thrown up their hands and said, "We're not redoing the maps. We were waiting on the Supreme Court for that case from four months ago. It's not coming out. We're going forward with our original maps." The result is what I was really worried about is we'd be down 15 points before the game even started. It looks like we may be up a couple of points in terms of seats for the midterms before we even get there. And then the enthusiasm gap with Democrat, Democrat, Democrat, then up and down the ballot. As long as our audience, our the party, the independents, the Hispanics, women go to the polls, good things are coming at the midterms,

7:46 right? and a lot of this precedent which I actually believe is bad bad bad precedent being set by Donald Trump and MAGA. But if these are the new rules of the game and the American people have deemed the outcome of those new rules that MAGA has been able to uh steamroll through and hurt the American people and American people are rejecting that. if when Democrats say, "Okay, want to play by those rules?" So, you're saying that we get to fire everybody if a Democratic president comes into power and we don't have to worry about the independence of agencies or any of that anymore? Okay.

8:31 So, you're saying that it makes sense for the president to be able to speak to the attorney general and and that you don't see any issues with that and make that a major part. Okay. So, are you saying that uh you know it makes sense that that uh if you're going to gerrymander five seats in Texas, we can do a 10:1 map in Virginia and get that through and eliminate four seats right there. Eliminate, you know, five seats in California. Let's look at Maryland. Let's look at other states. That is that is that what you're saying? Okay. So at the end of the day, I think you know the the the lack of foresight into what the outcomes of these things actually can be. To your point, Popac is backfiring.

9:17 I mean, look at the president again on the gerrymandering issue. You know, Donald Trump and MAGA pushed Texas, Texas, Texas. So when California did it, tied it to the Texas as a response, made it clear it was a political gerrymander, not any racial gerrymander at all. and then put it to the people at the ballot box and then Trump regime has the audacity to file a lawsuit against California's Prop 50 outcome which was done by a public referendum unlike what Trump's done in his MAGA states where the legislatures have just forced it through the Supreme Court with no dissents just says these are the new rules California California can do it also and that's why I like to see Virginia you know fight back and to your point now that We're in this wave election and people are rejecting this MAGA stuff and people want to go back to normaly. It's like the perfect time for this to backfire as well. So anyway,

10:14 we'll say that at the outset because a lot of the things Michael Popock and legal afers that I think the American people are seeing is that these issues that are out there right now that are quote unquote the MAGA issues versus the quote unquote democratic issues are really not political. I mean, you've got Trump who's mentioned 38,000 times references to him in these Epstein files. More references to Trump than the word Harry in all seven Harry Potter books. More references to Trump in the Epstein files than Jesus in the Bible.

10:46 Okay. When the mag is like, "Oh, this vindicated him. He looks amazing." You see, we told you there was nothing wrong that he did. You see, and and none of the people around Donald Trump did anything wrong, right? The American people are not stupid. What are you talking about? The the allegations against him are vile and grotesque. And granted, they are allegations, but if you're going to say he's not even in these things and not even acknowledge these allegations, it just makes you seem even wor like like worse. Like what are you doing? And then wait a minute.

11:19 So y'all met with Guileain Maxwell had Donald Trump's former criminal defense attorney over the summer a little bit before then Todd Blanch meet with Gileain Maxwell, convicted child sex trafficker in the Tallahassee uh prison area, then moved her to a minimum security facility where the convicted child sex trafficker now gets VIP treatment at a minimum security facility where she's banned. So now she's going to testify on Monday before Congress and she's going to invoke the fifth now the fifth amendment against self-inccrimination when she's been incriminated. She's been found guilty of child sex trafficking.

12:02 The Supreme Court rejected her appeal. She's now filed some frivolous habious petition that's going nowhere. But what does she feel that she needs to invoke her fifth amendment right against self-inccrimination so as to not speak? So she was willing to speak freely with Donald Trump's criminal defense attorney to lie through her teeth and say all these things about Donald that are completely contradicted now by what's in the files that have been released. But now when Congress is going to call her, she's not going to she's not going to testify. And by the way, what do you mean, Pam Bondi, when you said the files were on your desk in February?

12:40 What what is that even referring to? By the way, and there are these Freedom of Information Act lawsuits that have been filed against uh the Trump DOJ in addition to the Epstein Transparency Act. These Foyer lawsuits are saying produce these records. Turn them over the the remainder of them as well. First, it was turn over the records, but now it's geared at turn over the rest of the records that have not been produced. I'm going to talk a little bit about the records that have not been produced and what's going to be going on in the House of Representatives I think and what I think the Democrats need to do. But Popac, let me let me pass it to you because you know the other developments too is like the more you read these files and it's three million. So you go through them a first time, you go through them a second time. As trial lawyers, this is why we go through these documents a lot. I did an initial report

13:31 as did you. Another one. Then you start to see other things too and other people start catching things like even uh Howard Lutnik. Not only did it seem that he took this trip to the island with his children nonetheless back in 2012, but 4 days later he enters into a business deal where he's an investor alongside Epstein 4 days after apparently going to the island for some startup company as well. They're in business together. And this is the guy who said, "I've never talked to Epstein since 2005." And he disgusted me. Y'all were like talking all the time and we're in business together. So Popac, as I said, this isn't political. This is this is this is our bread and butter, Popac. This is legal. This is facts. This is objectivity. All right. Let's start with what we're seeing in the Epstein files because more Donald Trump protests and and tries to say, "Who are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?" The more

14:28 the American people reject it. if he thought the takeover of the Venezuelan oil fields or things that were happening in Minnesota, uh, the depravity of his abuse and the shootings and the murders and the executions of Americans were going to distract attention from the from the core corruption which is represented by his treatment of the child sex trafficking ring and the Epstein files. He's mistaken. American people are not going to get off. This is not a news cycle. Let me let me tell Donald Trump something. Don't worry, people. He doesn't listen. This is not a news cycle. It's not going to go away.

15:03 It's not something you can social media your way out of. Doesn't matter how many depraved other things that you do, people. the stench of the the indelible stench of the Epstein scandal and your role in its cover up and the cover up of the cover up remains and is an election issue is an unfit for office issue is a MAGA issue because you the MAGA are as culpable as Donald Trump is because you are his enablers. Now that we've gotten our hands on I don't know if it's half or a tenth of the total number of Epstein files. Remember, this is only what is in the Department of Justice's and the FBI's hands that they've allowed us to see, having been responsible, right, the wolf responsible for the chicken coupe about which chickens they're going to pre present to us.

15:51 That's a strange metaphor, but I'm going to go with it. So, they're responsible for determining which document they are going to disclose and which they're going to leave on the cutting room floor. We can only imagine which ones with Donald Trump's name have not been. If these are the ones they're disclosing, we can imagine the ones that are still being hidden. Okay? Because the ones that are being disclosed don't do anything to help Donald Trump at all. Okay? There may not be the smoking gun document that you and I are looking for directly of, you know, like him having a sex act with a child yet. However, there are things like uh reinforcement of the fact that he's a tax evader. There's tax evasion references uh with Epstein and Trump putting those things together. And there's that whole series of things that you and I have reported on and have been reported on by other outlets that are

16:42 independent uh about the the connection between Epstein and Putin, Putin and money, the child sex trafficking ring and blackmail and extortion. Donald Trump and his family and Russia and money and Epstein and Trump and money. And now you've got this other layer people that work for Donald Trump and senior members of the administration who are lying. We have to assume you and I when we do our legal practice and have done our legal practice, you have to make certain assumptions about human behavior. Judges make that same assumption and so do juries, which is if you're lying about something, okay, you're doing it because you're trying to cover it up. It is an indicia of your criminality, your your impure heart or mind or menrea we call it criminal conduct because why else would you be covering it up and and otherwise you just come clean. So if you're Howard Lutnik who who full disclosure I used to

17:37 work for uh not during the relevant time periods that we're talking about here uh as his global head of litigation you would say look I bought a house from the guy because this is how it would go if you wanted to be clean with the American people. I bought a house from the guy. I live next to him. It was owned by him and another guy named Wexner. Used to work for the used to run uh used to run Victoria Secrets. It was just a real estate play for me. I didn't know the guy. I bought the house. My wife and I and family moved into the house. I went next door. I was sort of creeped out by the guy, but that didn't stop me from being in uh business with him, doing some investments with him, joining forces with him to stop a real estate construction of a museum down the street from my from our collective homes from uh vacationing with him or going and visiting him with my children all under the age of 15 to Pedo Island on a yacht.

18:30 I would just explain all of this. You know, it's New York. He's he was he seemed to be a legitimate businessman. I'm a legitimate businessman. I made a mistake in retrospect. I'm sorry. Let's move on. But when you go on a powderpuff podcast run by Rupert Murdoch called AirPod 1, which is where you go where all the Trump administration goes when they don't want to get hard-hitting questions, they wanted hard-hitting questions. They go to Midas Touch in Legal AF and they he SAT OH I 2005 I HAVEN'T TALKED TO THAT GUY. Turns out 2012 2013 2015 and beyond he's having lots of relationships with him. And for a guy you're creeped out by because he's got a massage table in his dining room.

19:14 You wouldn't think you'd bring your your prepubescent and underage children to his island for lunch. Um but the fact that there's the cover up we often say it's not off it's not always the crime. It's the crime and the cover up because what are you covering up? If you didn't think you did anything wrong, you wouldn't cover it up. You would just level with the American people. This lack of leveling with the American people is sort of the major problem. It's a tick. It's a tell for Donald Trump and everybody around him. And it's bringing down a lot of other people and it should and it will ultimately electorally bring down Donald Trump.

19:49 Howard Lutnik can do what he wants and others in his administration can do what he wants. But in their obituary is now going to be a line about their involvement with Jeffrey Epstein. Donald Trump as well. He'll never historically from an obituary standpoint, which is one of my factors. He will never get out from under this. Look what's happening to people who were just one level down from being in the White House. You got you got the head of Paul Weiss, a major law firm in New York, the first firm to settle with Donald Trump for $40 million in proono work, just tossed Brad Karp, their chairperson, out on the street, the guy that cut the deal with the Trump administration because of his close personal and legal relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Okay, maybe that now explains and maybe he should have told his law partners that one of the reasons he was so giddy to settle with the Trump administration is because he was hoping

20:40 to God that the Epstein files would never be released and his relationship would never be disclosed. That's one. Two, it even goes onto Wall Street. Goldman Sachs, one of the preeminent financial services companies in the world. As the as as Goldman Sachs goes, so does the financial markets. Okay. Its general counsel is in Epstein's will as the executive, right? You've you've got Katherine Rumbler who's still at Goldman Sachs as the general counsel. I mean, for one guy that had one giant fund of money, one giant honeypot, the amount of powerful people that were attracted to him in more ways than one and and whatever else was going on is is just it's mindboggling to me. You know, to be frank, other than the reporting from the Miami Herald when I lived in Florida, I never heard of Jeffrey Epstein and I worked in financial services in New York until the child sex trafficking part came out. So, the reason that we and our

21:39 audience constantly brings up the Epstein files is because it is symptomatic of a depravity about the Trump administration that he has a complete blind spot about and so therefore does all of his administration from Department of Justice, FBI and otherwise. And that is a gift. his immorality and his thinking it's a news cycle that will somehow eventually peter out and go away is the gift that keeps on giving because this is not the end of the story. For instance, where are the FBI interview notes on reports called 302?

22:20 Where are the 302s? Uh I I I mean I looked I did my searching through it. I know people in the FBI, former FBI that did their searching through it. They're missing. You would think those things would be important. And there's one last thing then before I turn it back. We're not done with the quote unquote definition of the Epstein files. Okay? Because what's missing are the other agencies and branches uh uh uh agencies and departments of the executive branch. the Treasury Department, for instance. Where's the IRS folders and files about Jeffrey Epstein? Where's the bank records from the banking regulators?

23:00 There's lots of things that were not part of the Epstein Transparency Act. In a retrospect, probably should have been. I would have liked to have seen it be broader. It should have been at the time. All documents within the executive branch. We're going to have to now go back and do an amendment to that act and and uh and get and get these other documents. Let me just touch on Gaina Maxwell for two seconds. Gain Maxwell committed perjury and lied under oath when she gave the interview to Todd Blanch. Okay. A phony interview that was done for political purposes for Donald Trump to get a child sex trafficker, convicted child sex trafficker to vouch for his reputation. How low do you need to sink in order to have a convicted child sex trafficker? You need her endorsement. Okay. And she went through with a lawyer that she had at the time, David Oscar Marcus. She went through a series of of answers that she wanted to

23:59 that she knew was going to please Donald Trump, but were in fact lies. How do we know that? because of counter evidence in emails that have been released by the Epstein by the Epstein uh estate and other sources that put a lie to most of what she said other than my name is Galain Maxwell and I'm currently in a in a Florida wherever she was penitentiary. Other than that, everything else really didn't hang together. And how do I know that? Because I look at another another piece of data, the departure of her lawyer. If you if you'll remember, or if not, you'll hear it here straight for the first time. She doesn't have a lawyer any longer. David Oscar Marcus quickly departed after that deposition.

24:42 No more him campaigning for a pardon. No more him saying she'll be vindicated in court. He lost at the United States Supreme Court. They didn't take her appeal. And now she's a jailhouse lawyer writing effectively petitions on toilet paper and sending them into courts where the courts are like this is yeah you're not getting out of jail based on this jailhouse lawyer petition for habius corpus that you just wrote. Uh and but but that is I you know that's something that gets missed. Her lawyer with a law license said yeah I'm out. and now by herself, I don't know who's even preparing her for this highwire act of going in there and I I agree with you, taking the fifth amendment, but this is what the Mike Johnson and MAGA don't give a crap about the American people.

25:30 Instead, they're running these phony hearings about Clinton in a hot tub or what did what did Hillary know and oh, let's get Gain Maxwell out here instead of doing what they're supposed to be doing, which is release all of the Epstein files and force force the FBI and the Department of Justice to prosecute people in the Epstein files and follow up with them. Don't just say Trump's absolved every time they do a data dump. go follow the leads and figure out who has escaped prosecution and bring those heads to the American people. That's not happening at all.

26:09 Democrats, when they take over the House of Representatives, they'll issue a subpoena for Melania. Now, Melania is in the files multiple times that she has a nickname for Gileain Maxwell G. And she said, "Gee, J," referring to Jeffrey Epstein, "Look great in that New York magazine article. You know, the one where Donald Trump said that Epstein likes girls on the younger side. You look beautiful as well, G in that photo of you." Melania said, "Love to hang out or see you soon in Palm Beach." Then Gileain Maxwell was like, "Sweet pee."

26:43 It's her nickname for Melania. Sweet pee. No, I'm super busy, so I'm not going to be able to hang out with you, but hopefully we can do something soon together. Right. Then earlier this week, Melania was asked about Gileain when Melania was holding a press conference using AmericanIsraeli hostages in order to promote her movie Melania. And then Melania was asked a question, well, what do you think about Gileain being moved to the minimum security facility? I am not here to talk about any of this. I am here to talk about these hostages. It's like it's fair game, Melania, right now.

27:18 How about the Wait, how about the reporter who yelled out, "Do you think it's appropriate as first lady during an official event to shill your documentary?"

27:25 And she said, "I'm not doing that. I'm just here with these hostages who were freed." And you can also see Melania in theaters, you know. And so that's that's literally what she did. And so the American people are watching this. The rest of the world is just done. The American people though are watching this and as I said before this isn't a political thing like these are horrible people. These are doing horrible things and there should be a legal process to deal with the criminal things and a moral and ethical process to deal with those things also. And these are just it's just bad. It's just bad being bad humans who are hurting and harming and lying. And that's what this is about.

28:12 take our first quick break of the show. When we come back though, I want to show our audience and our listeners how to look at these documents, what some of these things mean on top of it when it says something like deliberative process privilege because I want to explain to you the anatomy of the cover up that's taking place here. I want to touch upon Gilain Maxwell's fifth amendment claim and why I think it's bogus. And then we have a lot more to discuss on other topics as well. A reminder, if you or somebody you know has been injured in an auto accident, a trucking accident, if you're the victim of sexual assault or abuse, if you know someone who's been injured by the negligence of others, or if you know someone who died in a tragic accident and their family members looking for a lawyer, reach out to the POPAC Law Firm. Call 877 POPAC AF.

29:04 That's 877 POPAC AF. or go to thepopfirm.com. thepopfirm.com. Also, make sure you subscribe to the Legal AF YouTube channel. It's on its way to 2 million subscribers. And make sure you subscribe as well to the Legal AF uh Substack, wherever you get your Substack. Legal AF Substack, Legal AF YouTube. We'll be right back after our first break of the show. We're a year into the new administration and it's getting harder to read the news and see continued attacks on our First Amendment freedoms daily. Now is the time to look for the helpers. Those who are strategically fighting day in and out to preserve our constitutional freedoms.

29:48 One of the organizations fighting the good fight is Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Their mission is to protect everyone's right to live as they are and believe as they choose so long as they don't harm others. AU is fighting back against the wave of Christian nationalist threats happening across the country. They filed 11 lawsuits last year alone, multiple against the Trump administration to protect your individual freedom of and from religion. Whether you support public education, are passionate about LGBTQ plus and reproductive rights, or some combination of all, AU relies on the help of its supporters to do this important work. If you're looking for an organization to support and learn from, head to au.org/legalaf to see how you can get involved in their work and support the fight against Christian nationalism. That's au.org/legalaf.

30:44 When America's divided, we are Americans united. Learn more at au.org/legala. Fresh start, same system. Banks win, you pay. Fees and calls piling up monthly. Unless you fight back, PDS debt has already helped hundreds of thousands cut their debt and put money back in their pockets, not the banks. Whether you're struggling with credit cards, personal loans, collections, or medical bills, PDS Debt has customized options for anyone in that situation, PDS Debt understands your specific scenario and will help you provide alternative solutions to becoming debt-free with a personalized plan designed just for you.

31:25 There's no minimum credit score required. They're here to help you save more, pay off your debt faster, and start putting money back where it belongs, in your pocket. PDS debt is A+ rated by the Better Business Bureau, has thousands of five-star reviews on Google, and a five-star rating on Trust Pilot. Every month you wait cost you more in interest and fees. The best time to start was yesterday. The second best is right now. Don't wait another month. Take back control in 30 seconds. Get your free personalized assessment. And the best option for you at pdsd.com/legalaf.

32:03 That's pdsd.com/legalaf. pdsdebt.comlegalaf. You're 30 seconds away from being debtfree. Get your free assessment and find the best option for you right now at pdsd.com/legal af. Welcome back to Legal AF. Thank you to all of our sponsors. This show is made possible thanks to them. Keep the lights on. And uh Jordy does some good discount codes with those sponsors. The discount codes are in the description below. It's worth pointing out though as the MAGA Republicans have wanted to, you know, try to distract and deflect and make this about Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. Both Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have requested that they be permitted to testify publicly in the House and the Senate. Do both. Do it by camera. They don't care. They just want it in public in front of the entire country to say you wanted to subpoena us. Okay, let's do a public hearing.

33:02 You've got Bill Clinton posting the following. I've called for the full release of the Epstein files. I've provided a sworn statement of what I know, and this week I've agreed to appear in person before the committee, but it's still not enough for Republicans in the House Oversight Committee.

33:16 By the way, before you once that's down, Todd Blanch, the number two in the Department of Justice, effectively cleared Bill Clinton because he came out with a defense last week and said it's not a crime to party with with Epstein. Um, and so at worst, what is it that Bill Clinton's in a hot tub? Bill Clinton got a Bill Clinton got a gift,

33:33 right? I mean, said, but look, the the reality is, uh, Bill Clinton, I believe, has a lot of questions that need to be answered.

33:40 All right, I think that's I think that's fair, and I don't care what Blanch says, but Bill Clinton is saying,

33:46 I want to answer them. So, I'm saying great. Like, what what's the issue then? Right. What's the argument? Bill Clinton says, "Well, now Chairman Comr says he wants cameras, but only behind closed doors." So, who benefits from this arrangement? It's not Epstein's victims who deserve justice, not the public who deserve the truth. It serves only partisan interest. That's not factf finding. It's pure politics. And then Hillary Clinton says, "For six months, we engaged Republicans on the oversight committee in good faith. We told them what we know under oath. They ignored all of it. They moved the goalpost and turned accountability into an exercise in distractions. Let's stop the gains.

34:25 If you want this fight, COMR, that's the MAGA Republican who leads the House Oversight Committee. Let's have it in public. You love to talk about transparency. There's nothing more transparent than a public hearing.

34:35 Where are the Republicans? Where get Donald Trump for for a question and answer period.

34:41 But just Yeah, of course. That's where I'm going. Of course. But the the point is who objects to what Clinton and Clinton what Bill and Hillary are saying.

34:54 The only people who object to such a thing is people to your point from the first segment pop who have an agenda of covering things up for Donald Trump. Because once they testify publicly, the next question is, okay, so Donald Trump and Melania, you testify publicly. Hillary's not even in the files. Donald Trump are in the files 38 times more or 50 times more than Clinton is or by far. So, by this logic, you guys go next. Oh, and now this is what the magnets are saying. Oh crap. Now we're going to have to do a whole six-hour hearing in front of the public on Epstein. We don't want to do that because then the public's going to focus on it. I'll toss it over to you when I But that to me is the issue on all of these issues. It's the meta issue, the macro issue, the the the game, okay, is that there is a side, and I don't want to even view it politically, who wants to bring accountability and openness and

35:54 transparency because the system is rigged against most Americans. And not only is it rigged, there are people who are being outright abused physically, psychologically, mentally, and sexually by the people who are rigging the game. And there are people out there saying, "Let it all out in public. Let's be transparent." And then the people rigging the game are saying, "Let's keep it quiet." The people rigging the game were the people for all of these years accusing the people who wanted it transparently of rigging the game. And they convinced a good portion of the country that the people rigging the game were the people who wanted openness. And because the people who wanted transparency were not out there bragging about that, but were actually talking about, I don't know, the helping people and delivering health care and doing things for people. You know, that was not as salacious as the people who threw

36:48 out these allegations. But it turns out that the people who have been making the accusations all along are the very people who have been doing those same things they've been accusing the others. It's the oldest tale of humankind, Michael Popac, and it transcends all of this stuff. So, they want to go on these magas and make this a political game, right? You know, and ooh, you know, you you should call it, you should say it this way, you should say it that way, and people just like, no, just enough of this crap. That's one of the big things here Pope.

37:20 Yeah. Look, it reminds us of the old biblical biblical adage. The devil's greatest trick was convincing the world that he doesn't exist. And that's what we're watching over and over again. And then we're going to watch the umbrage that'll be taken by members of the Trump administration when we do provide oversight and Howard Lutnik has to sit in an oversight committee hearing or Pam Bondi next week has to sit in an oversight committee hearing or Cash Bedell has to and they're going to have oh and the Epstein questions come up inevitably. Oh, you have nothing better to talk to me about than the Epstein files and my No, let's talk about the lying you did around your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. That's fair game for the American people to know about your fitness for office or whether you should be impeached or not. And you see, you know where this is going to go. I just had Sydney Bloom I just had uh

38:09 Senator Blumenthal, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut on and I said, "Are you ready?" I asked him point blank. I said, "Are you ready for Pam Bondi next week?" And her snarking and sneering and sarcastically presenting her way through this hearing to try to to try to save herself. You're like, you know, oh, what about you, Senator? And what about you in this picture, Senator? And what about something you did in college, Senator? Instead of answering the question, are you ready this time? you know, because I felt like you did, you guys all did a great job, but you were caught a little bit flatfooted by the fact that she would be so imperious and so um uh disrespectful to the process, to the office, to the Senate. So, no, we're ready, Michael. He said the interview, we are ready for that this time. And if they have to sideline her and say, "All right, you're not giving us you, you know, I see your your pie hole opening,

38:59 but nothing's coming out of interest. We'll take over from here." They'll just do leading questions as the prosecutors, many of them were formally, and just and just lead her and they don't care what her response is to demonstrate how pathetic she is to the American people and so on and so on and so on. The one thing we I want to touch on related to Epstein is this hearing and and and this is this is going to be the Freedom of Information Act FOYA has become a tremendous and powerful tool used by public interest groups used by the ACLU and democracy forward and independent journalists to go after the Trump administration. It sounds innocent, right? that the government has to provide all the documents pursuant to a legitimate foyer request and if they don't a judge can order them to and and force them to pay attorneys fees for for for delaying. So an independent journalist there's three different foyer

39:53 cases out there at various levels of of court and appeal involving the Trump administration, Trump and Epstein that live on independently from the data dump we call the Epstein files. So, there's one in front of Judge Chuckkin that was brought by Democracy Forward uh to to get, get this, a narrow subset of all communication between Epstein and Donald Trump. That's pretty good. And that's still being litigated by Democracy Forward and Judge Chutkin. And and even though the the DOJ, as we right on right on Q said, but we just put up all the docks, that doesn't answer the FO that doesn't properly respond to FOYA. a second case brought by the National Inquirer of all things, that supermarket tabloid at the end of the of the supermarket aisle from like 2017, like before you and I even got together and did legal af uh has been kicking around made its way to the second circuit court of appeals about Epstein files and the

40:56 and again they sent in the belleaguer department of justice appellet lawyer to the second circuit judge we're about to produce pursuant to the Epstein transparency act. Isn't that going to do it? And the second circuit said, "No, that's not going to do it." And so they're going to have to produce additional documents or go hunting through the pile they've already produced. Which brings us to a judge, Randy Moss, for football fans. not that one who is a who is a federal judge in DC who has a case in front of him brought by an independent journalist who listened like you and I did very closely to Pam Bondi say out loud on a Fox interview in February of last year are we ever going to get the Epstein files and the client list and she said no one put words in her mouth I didn't see a I didn't see a puppet master behind her she said I have the files and the client list right here on my desk.

41:51 Okay, there it is. So, so the uh the independent journalist filed a case a couple of months later and said, "I want," quoting from the clip, "I want everything that Pam Bondi had on her desk related to Epstein at the moment she made that comment." And that was filed in August. The judge, Judge Moss, ordered that the Department of Justice respond by Jan 6th, ironically, uh, this year, uh, with a, uh, oh, sorry, Feb 6 with a response about whether uh, if Pam Bondi was going to produce these documents and and and what had been done to comply with FOYA. So they got some guy or I don't I can't tell for the name what it is exactly the person is exactly but they filed an affidavit that said I'm responsible for responding to Freedom of Information Act requests. I went to the office of of attorney general. I did the search and there is no quote unquote client list anywhere in the and there's nothing quote unquote on

42:56 her desk that hasn't been produced sealink to our major Epstein library recently updated. And the judge says, "Listen, I'm not playing." Gotcha. But that pointing to the Epstein file disclosures is not going to do it. She either had documents on her on her table on her desk or she didn't. And if she did, she needs to produce those. And I want to hear, he now said, I want to hear from Pam Bondi about what she was referring to that was on her desk. Now Pam Bonnie's known she was in trouble in a trap of her own making almost from the moment she said it because in subsequent uh clips subsequent interviews she said now I want to address this thing that the media has taken out of context like what context what how do you take out of context it's sitting if I told you Ben that thing you're looking for from me it's sitting right here on my desk I'll send it to you you can't later on say well you misunderstood what I said desk

43:57 I meant when I meant papers. What I really meant. So, she's been trying to backtrack her way. It ain't working. And Judge Moss is not buying it. So, here's what's going to happen. Pam Bonnie's going to file another if she's still the attorney general. We'll talk about that next. She's going to file another go pound sand federal judge. I'm not going to tell you. It was a rhetorical flourish. It was a metaphor. It was something else. But I didn't have anything on my desk. And that's going to be a problem for her al among a a m a mounting pile of other problems for for Pam Bondi. And this is going to come up, by the way. I if she's even there, and you and I will speculate in a minute about whether she's going to be at the hearing or not, but if she's at that hearing coming up this week, this is going to be fair game for any senator or member of the House like Jamie Raskin to say, "You got a federal

44:48 court order coming down the pike that's going to require you to turn over the Epstein list, the client list, uh, and respond to it. Where are those documents, ma'am?" And, and we can just anticipate what her response is going to be.

45:01 Absolutely. All right. I want to show people the documents, what they look like, how to read an Epstein filed document and what documents are being withheld and why I'm confident the most damning documents are the ones being withheld. to your point, the FBI interviews, but all of the internal memos, all of the internal research, the deliberative process by the United States attorneys, their strategy. We talk about deliberative process, their strategy memos to each other, right? If you think about it, it's like uh Super Bowl Sunday's coming up, right? You know, the the plays that the that the coaches call, right? They have all the codes that the quarterbacks wear on their on their arm and then they have the playbook, right? That's deliberative process. You can see the game being played on the field, but the coaches don't want to ever turn over the playbook because they view those documents as confidential. And the DOJ,

46:00 we would call that that's their deliberative process, their playbook, what their strategy is behind the scenes. But obviously as that relates to prosecuting a child sex trafficking ring, that's of course going to be where all the secrets are, right? The same way in football, the playbook would be having what all the plays are and when you call the plays and things like that. Now, normally in a criminal case, the defendant would not be able to get those documents, right? Because even though they're entitled to discovery, should they be entitled to get the playbook that the prosecutors are using to prosecute you? No, you don't get that.

46:40 So, in the actual case, a criminal case, the deliberative process privilege makes sense. We're not going to hand over the playbook to the criminal defendant, you know, but we'll turn over all of the stuff that you have to turn over transparently, the evidence, but not the playbook. So, if you look at the memo that the DOJ just ripped off or or uh took down from the website, it's the 86page prosecution memo listing the co-conspirators. And you'll see it says, "This memorandum details the investigation and steps taken since the indictment of Jeffrey Epstein in this district on July 2nd, 2019 and analyzes the extent to which certain Epstein associates and employees may or may not be criminally liable for their conduct during the employment with Epstein." So, you see why this is like the DOJ playbook. The date of this is December 19th, 2019. Um, and so this is after Epstein dies. And by the way, there's a

47:39 lot more questions about Epstein's death right now that we've seen in the Epstein files. Someone in looks like in an orange jumpsuit was allowed in when there was never references to that made before right around that 10:39 time period. But, uh, in any event, um, you have this memo that outlines it. You'll have lots of other memos and reports and internal emails amongst the United States attorneys to each other that outline these co-conspirators, that co-conspirator, who what do we think about this person? What's our strategy here? What what did this witness tell us? What did this victim tell us? What did this survivor tell us? So, if you notice on the top of this memo, it says privileged attorney work product deliberative process confidential subject to federal rule of criminal procedure 6E. So that would have been labeled that during the time period of the Epstein case on December 19th, the

48:34 lawyers would put that on there because they don't want it to be discovered inactive cases in active. This and this was before the Epstein Transparency Act, of course. Now, if you look at the bottom right of the document, you'll see two numbers. One says EFTA 02731082 and another one says EFTA 3022461. Why are there two numbers? Because one of them was given that Bates number likely during an original case and then when it was reproduced again it got another uh what we call Bates numbers. So, one of the things that I've been saying is all of these documents were out there ready to be produced years ago. And how do you know that? Because they already had the Bates numbers ready to go years ago. And all that had to be redacted from something like this is the victim's names. And under the Epstein Transparency Act, that is all that is allowed to be redacted. Victim's names, victim's faces, survivors names,

49:37 survivors faces, any any personal identifying information of survivors and victims. That's it. That's all. You can't withhold on the basis of privilege like you could in an actual criminal case. You could say deliberative for the reasons I said, but not anymore. You can't do that because the Epstein transparency act says the Epstein case is done. The Gilain case is done. Produce the records, all of them, including deliberative process and attorney client privilege. So the here's how I I don't just speculate and say, "Oh, they must be hiding the worst documents because they turned over these documents." I know they are is what I'm telling you because of this concept.

50:18 Deliberative process privilege withholding is what they're saying. So I want to make that point. The other point that I want to make as well is I think it's total BS that Gileain Maxwell is going to invoke the fifth amendment against self-inccrimination because she's already been incriminated. She's been found guilty of the things she's being asked. Okay. And she answered the questions for Todd Blanch. So to the extent that there should be a concept of a waiver, she my view waved it because she spoke to Todd Blanch on these exact topics that she's now going to invoke the fifth for. Also, what the Republicans want to do with her at the deposition is they're going to try to arrange, and I want you to watch for this because no one else is going to talk about this, what's called a blanket fifth amendment assertion. Meaning, at the beginning of her deposition on Monday before the House Oversight

51:12 Committee, she's going to want to read a letter that says, "I'm not going to testify. I have active cases pending. I have a habius petition." So, for each and every question I would be asked, I'm going to invoke the fifth amendment right against self-inccrimination. And then what James Comr is going to want to do is say, "Thank you. We appreciate you saying that. It's unfortunate that you're not willing to testify, but you've invoked your fifth. This hearing is hereby adjourned. We're done." Okay. What I want to see happen is she should still have to sit there and I'll throw it over to you pop for six hours and every Democrat should be able to ask any question to her and let her in let her invoke the fifth every single time to every single question. And I know she doesn't want to do that because she doesn't want a question to be asked like the following. Do we have Kelsey the Jeffrey Epstein deposition before uh he

52:12 was criminally prosecuted the second time? Let me show you what Epstein's deposition looked like. Let's play this clip if we got it.

52:19 Have you ever had a personal relationship with Donald Trump? What do you mean by personal relationships?

52:28 Have you socialized with him? Yes, sir. Yes. Yes, sir. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?

52:46 Though I'd like to answer that question at least today, I'm going to have to assert my fifth, sixth, and 14th amendment rights.

52:53 So my view is she should have to sit there just like that and she should be able to have Democrats ask her questions. Are you have you ever been aware that Donald Trump was engaged in sex with underage girls? Yes or no? Just asking the question. Were you ever aware if Donald Trump was or wasn't engaged in a child sex trafficking ring with Jeffrey Epstein and yourself? Yes or no? Let her sit there. Let her say exact I invoke my fifth amendment right and get that tape and then make that tape public and show this is her talking to Trump's number two at the DOJ and former former criminal defense Todd Blanch. She was willing to answer it then. Then when we asked her the question, she invoked the fifth. That to me is critical and it's a strategic blunder if Democrats don't get that out of this deposition. Pop.

53:45 Yeah. Let's talk about the fifth amendment in that kind of context as I agree with almost your analysis, almost all of your analysis. There is a way for the Trump administration to solve the problem of the fifth amendment and to demonstrate what we've been saying throughout this particular podcast. They have no intention to having Galain Maxwell tell the truth about her close personal relationship with Donald Trump, his close personal relationship with his BFF Jeffrey Epstein, and the ways in which Donald Trump could be connected to the child sex trafficking ring. the the Trump administration, Donald Trump has no intention to waving a magic wand that he possesses to force her to um dispense with the fifth amendment and testify. When you're in court and a witness is being compelled to testify, a federal judge will tell the government, "If you want this witness to testify, you have to give them immunity.

54:50 If you give them immunity, then their assertion of the fifth amendment is um improper. I will strip it from them and force them and compel them to testify. But it's up to you prosecutors to give her that pass. Now, she got prosecuted and convicted of five felony counts of child sex trafficking for which she is serving 20 years apparently in some plush Beverly Hills style penitentiary in Texas at the moment. She was convicted by a jury uh a 120 jury in New York under judge um Nathan and sentenced. If in the civil context you take the fifth amendment, which is I think where you're going, you don't in criminal context it it cannot be used against you.

55:39 You can't be compelled to testify against yourself. And a jury can't make any adverse inferences and conclude your guilt because of it. Not so in civil. And Congress is civil, not criminal. And so if you take the fifth amendment, the jury is instructed, which mean the American people, that every time the person takes the fifth amendment in a in a civil context, you can presume that they are that that whatever they're being asked about, they did. In other words, an adverse inference can be drawn from the question and therefore the answer. So when in the civil fraud case against Donald Trump, Leticia James, the New York attorney general herself deposed Donald Trump and he took the fifth amendment more than 600 times. The jury in a civil case can be told when he's asked, "Did you inflate your assets fraudulently in order to put yourself up at the top of the Forbes 400 list or 20 list of wealthiest people or to secure

56:45 bank loans? I take the fifth amendment." You can presume that he did it. Same thing goes in Congress. Now, she's already got two levels of protection making her assertion uh improper, meaning somebody could jump out to court and force her to testify over the objection. And we can test whether that applies in a congressional hearing setting or not. It's a compelled testimony. She um she already was convicted, as I said. Then when she was when she was deposed for nine hours over two days by Todd Blanch up in uh in uh Tallahassee, Florida, coming out of penitent penitentiary, she was given what we call a queen for the day immunity, meaning anything that she said, as long as she didn't lie, she could not be convicted of or prosecuted for. And with that secured by her then lawyer, buddy of Todd Blanch, guy named David Oscar Marcus, they went into this performative theater of lies. Now, we know she lied. Okay, David Oscar Marcus.

57:53 I don't I I don't know him. I mean, I know of him. He's no longer here. You can make your own presumption about why the lawyer quickly departed her his representation. But if the if Trump and the Department of Justice really wanted the American people to hear from Galain Maxwell, right, again, they would absolve her of any of any uh liability, her exposure, criminal exposure for for her interview with Todd Blanch because that's it. That's all that's left. There's nothing else that she could be prosecuted for. She can't be prosecuted for the child sex trafficking ring. She can't be prosecuted at that point for anything she told top lanch. And the only thing she could be prosecuted for a crime is if she committed a crime of perjury to Congress, right? And was therefore, which we've seen that's a tool of this administration. You bring that charge against Michael Cohen or you bring it against James uh uh James Comey, the FBI

58:53 director, or whomever, but that's the only thing that she's exposed by. So, you could you could work on stripping away and maybe even having a federal judge saying, "No, you can't take the fifth when you go into Congress because you have no legitimate expectation that you will be prosecuted having been convicted and having received immunity." Now, Trump could also pardon her, but he knows that's political suicide, even though he keeps flirting with it. So, it's just another indicia that the Trump administration, you know, with this split screen, you know, we want, you know, only the Democrats to come in here and talk about the Epstein scandal and, you know, and pound the table. And the Democrats like uh or and and independent people like Jack Smith or the Clintons are like, "Okay, just turn on the cameras and make it a public hearing. We're happy to show up and answer all of your questions." Oh

59:45 that didn't go well. Uh and and now they've got this one. Why they keep demanding Galileain Maxwell, I have I have no idea. She's untrustworthy. She's a liar. She is uh she is a um an unguided missile against the Trump administration. Why Comr or or any of these people that are allegedly MAGA and loyal to Trump continue to flirt with disaster to bring her into that chair? I have no idea. But we've just outlined all the ways that if the Trump administration really wanted her to tell the truth, which which he doesn't, they could they could make that happen. But they're not, and that should be held against them.

1:00:27 I I want to take our last quick break of the show. When we come back, I want to talk about what else is going on in the DOJ. So, as they're covering up the child sex trafficking ring, covering up documents there, they are losing lawyers. That's in for prosecutors at such a rapid speed. It's unprecedented. About 7,000 of some of their top senior mid-level people, parallegal, everybody's quitting or being fired. And so they're having to now pull from other departments. Being an assistant United States attorney, it's like a deputy or one of the, you know, uh, kind of line prosecutors was one of the most highly soughtafter jobs from law students. And now they can't. No one wants to work for the DOJ right now. And again, this isn't a partisan thing because it's Trump appointed judges and George W. Bush appointed judges and Reagan and George HW Bush judges as well as Democrat appointed judges who are out there just

1:01:28 saying that this DOJ is incompetent, is foolish, is contemptable, is sanctionable, and people are, you know, uh destroying their careers by working for this DOJ because the the work itself is horrible. The work product is terrible. the you know and they're doing terrible things and and violating laws. Um so I want to talk about that and then let's leave on a high note as well by talking about Elon Musk being forced into a deposition despite the Trump regime claiming that he was a highle cabinet position. Uh and uh the judge wasn't buying that at all. Let's take our last quick break of the show. a reminder if someone you know has been injured in an auto accident, a trucking accident, or the negligence of somebody else, or a sexual assault or sexual harassment case, call or text 877 popc or the popfirm.com. Also, check out on Substack, legal afstack, and check out the legal AF YouTube channel. Both are

1:02:34 doing great. Let's keep those channels growing. And by the way, don't be shy when it comes to calling the POPAC firm. I know you trust POPAC and I'm sure you know people who have been injured in certain types of accidents. Um, and they're looking for lawyers. The consultation is free. Reach out. The worst that could happen is they'll say there's not a case. Uh, but they are representing people more on the wrongful death and the kind of catastrophic injury cases. So, think about that when you call. All right, last quick break of the show. We will be right back after these messages. Well, when it comes to dog food, it feels like you have to choose between fresh and healthy or easy to store and serve, but never both.

1:03:12 Well, you don't have to choose anymore, thanks to Sundaes. Sundaes was founded by a veterinarian and mom, Dr. Tori Waxman, who got tired of seeing so-called premium dog food full of fillers and synthetics. So she designed sundaes air dried real food made in a human grade kitchen using the same ingredients and care you'd use to cook for yourself and your family. And my Lily a border collie chocolate lab mix loves it and we love it for her. Every bite of Sundays is clean and made from real meat, fruits and veggies with no kibble. That means no weird ingredients you can't pronounce and no fillers compared to kibble or other brands out there. Sundays. Invest 50 times more in its ingredients to ensure premium quality. Because your dog deserves food made with care, not in the interest of cost cutting. Even if you don't have a dog yourself, you still want the dogs you love to get the same quality food

1:04:07 you'd want for your own family. Real ingredients, no fillers, and something that actually supports their health. And the best part, you just scoop and serve. No freezer, no thawing or prep, no mess. Make the switch to Sundays. Go right now to sundaysfordd dogs.com/legalaf and get 50% off your first order. Or you can use code legal af50 at checkout. That's 50% off your first order at sundaysfordd.com/legalaf. Sundays fordogs.com/legal AF50 or use code legal AF50 at checkout. Welcome back to Legal AF. Once again, just want to thank those sponsors who make this show possible. Subscri uh in addition to subscribing to this YouTube channel, go check out the uh description below, the subscription button. Um and then make sure you uh check out those sponsors and take take a look at those discount codes. All right, Pope, I want to talk about all of the these DOJ lawyers who are quitting. If you go back to some of

1:05:10 the early legal AF episodes of this of last year in 2025, February or March, you and I predicted this exactly. We saw where this was heading when we saw some of the initial resignations in New York. And we said, what's going to happen is all these DOJ lawyers are going to quit. And they're like, they're not going to have lawyers who work there. And that's basically where we're at now is that the DOJ, not I'm not being hyperbolic, like they quite literally do not have the lawyers to keep up with the cases anymore. And that's a big problem because they have lots of cases. And it was never even a conceivable concept to me that the DOJ could show up in federal court and tell a judge, "Judge, we don't have the resources to meet these deadlines." It it just was unfathomable.

1:06:05 And if any DOJ lawyer ever said that, they would be fired immediately because it's like, "What are you doing? You have unlimited resources." You'd hear that from the criminal defense lawyers or the adversaries of the DOJ that we're being overpapered or outmatched because we can't possibly compete with all of these resources that the DOJ you know has. But now it's inverted. It's the opposite right now. And you know, and it's having real serious ramifications. Like first and foremost, think about the cases that are not high-profile, that are just not being prosecuted, or where deals are being cut with criminal defendants simply because the DOJ can't keep up with its workflow or cases not being pursued because the DOJ is so overwhelmed that people aren't looking through the paperwork. So think about these sex trafficking cases and fraud cases and crly crime cases that are just not and gang cases and all these things

1:07:02 that are not espionage that are just not being looked into or investigated because there are not lawyers who are able to look into the crimes that are taking that are taking place. Public integrities doesn't even exist anymore at the DOJ. I mean both in terms of the department and whatever. But one of the issues too is that like when Trump has the sends his Gustapo and his, you know, uh, SS, this border patrol and ICE into these areas and they start rounding up people that people hire lawyers and the lawyers file what are called habius corpus petitions to get their clients released from these concentration camps that they're in because they often don't go through hearings and they're being detained without any hearings. ings at all and they get lost in the system. So these habius petitions have to get filed because hearings aren't being taken place where some of these people are kidnapped and the DOJ and the Trump

1:08:00 regime has taken the position like we don't we we don't need to go through hearings like so they're forcing the people they're kidnapping or throwing into these detention centers to affirmatively tell the judge by invoking habius corpus hey we're being unlawfully detained here. Then the judges are very frequently saying to the DOJ on an emergency basis, you have to get you have to release this person. Like you you've literally kidnapped a person and you haven't provided them due process. Release them. And then the people aren't being released because the lawyer there's no lawyers who are reviewing the judge's paperwork. So the lawyers who are representing both migrants and citizens then rush back to court and say judge. And it's hard to get court dates sometimes because courts are crowded themselves. Judge, it's been a week or two weeks or 3 weeks and the DOJ said they were going to release our client.

1:08:52 He's still being kept there. And then the judge is looking at the lawyers and the judge is saying, "What is going on here?" And that was the hearing that just took place in Minneapolis where the lawyer, this Julie Lee, is out there saying, "We don't have lawyers." like like I had to transfer here from the immigration department in some in and I was a lawyer for immigration uh enforcement not a USA and she said things have gotten so bad she's a Vietnamese immigrant and she moved here in 1993 Julie Lee and she said I volunteered to work at the DOJ because there weren't lawyers there who can process the paperwork so people were being unlawfully detained and she thought that she'd be able to get through these petitions cuz she said she wanted to help and release the people who are basically remaining kidnapped and are not being released. And then the judge is saying to her, you have to release them. Like I understand that,

1:09:54 but like saying that you're overworked is not an excuse. And she goes, "Judge, just hold me in contempt. Like I need to sleep. I'm so overworked. I'm so tired. I can't do this anymore. I need to sleep. Hold me in contempt. That was the big salacious headline that a DOJ lawyer, technically someone who is now working as an assistant United States attorney, but who was working in a different department is saying this. But when you actually look through Popach the hearing transcript, it was the federal judge and Julie Lee talking about how there were all these people with habius petitions that have been granted to have people released, but there are could be thousands or more people who are just remaining in prisons who are ordered out because the DOJ is losing them in the system. That's what was overwhelming Julie Lee and why she broke down in court. And so now the DOJ isn't using the these immigration

1:10:52 lawyers anymore. They're now said we're going to start using JAG lawyers, the military lawyers who go by an entire different set of rule military. These judge advocate generals are now posing as a USA and showing up in court because the DOJ doesn't have aus pop. This is some this is unchartered territory within unchartered territory. I I never thought I've been doing this for 35 years. I've been doing white collar criminal defense for just this long and it always sent a chill down my spine when the United States of America would identify themselves as the United States of America. Well, it kept me on my toes anyway, especially as a young lawyer because they had unlimited resources. I used to tell my clients, we're up against a leviathan of un unlimited resources of mindless uh just, you know, if we've got 20 people on the case, they can put thousands of people on the case. We got to do, you know, we have to outwork them

1:11:49 in some way. But there's an asymmetry about this relationship. It's gone. It's gone. I talked to the like you do. I talked to the attorneys general around the country. I talked to Democracy Forward. I've talked to the people that are in the courtrooms against the Department of Justice. And I said to I said to Sky Perryman and to Rob Bont separately, the attorney general for California. I said, I'm looking at, you know, I do an audit. I'm looking at probably in a in a in any given week, I'm reading about, let's say, 30 to 40 court decisions, then decide which ones I'm gonna I'm gonna talk about. And in those cases, I see the same names over and over again for the line prosecutors, the the the people in the courtroom. How many times do I have to see Brett Schumate? How many for the Department of Justice? How many times do I see have to see Drew Enson or Yakoff Roth? I mean, and there and not

1:12:45 just in one area of expertise like this is an immigration case. This is a due process abius corpus case. This is a case about civil liberties and civil rights. I mean they can't where why and they said because when you when you subtract 6,500 people from an organization and you don't replace them and can't replace them and don't want to replace them in certain circumstances. This is what you're left with. You're lefting you're left with just a dozen people running around at that level of leadership and management. You know this level of middle management that's running around like the boy at the dyke trying to stick their finger in to all of these places. And what's suffering?

1:13:22 justice is suffering. The next wave of cases that you and I will follow, first wave was how do we oppose the 250 lawless unconstitutional executive orders and their and the and the and the other orders and policies they spawned. Right. Okay. That's wave one. If we're we're divi like you you gave a good overview of you know sort of a decoder ring of how to analyze documents. Let's do this in phases. Phase one was, "Holy he just signed 250 executive orders. He's basically sidelined Congress, and he's decided to take over budgets, take over things that the Constitution prevents him from taking over, like voting, civil liberties, civil rights, and he's trying to call everything an emergency in a war in order to expand his powers." Okay, what do we do about that? Okay, 700 cases later in federal courts, we're doing pretty well looking back on a year and we know what to do now for year two.

1:14:22 Second, now the third, that's first wave. Second wave is the civil rights and civil liberties cases brought by individuals who have been abused, killed, murdered, tortured, left in dank prisons, detention centers. Uh, and now their cases are flooding into the courtrooms. You know, every time you and I talk about Operation Midway Blitz, Operation Metro Surge, uh, whatever, alligator Alcatraz, whatever these stupid juvenile trolling names are, there's human beings on the other end of these policies and procedures. And they have rights, even if Donald Trump doesn't want to recognize it. and they by way of, you know, the the soldiers of the constitutional foot soldiers of lawyers and public defenders and and law firms that uh aren't are willing to challenge the Trump administration and civil liberties groups. They are running into court.

1:15:18 There are there are hundreds thousands no thousands thousands of habius corpus petitions filed under this what we call the great writ to get people in front of a federal judge and out of their detention centers and this is overwhelming each individual 93 federal district courts the way the only thing I can compare it to is what happened after 1 1500800 people were prosecuted by the department of justice this under Biden for Jan 6th and how it all flooded into primarily one courthouse in the District of Columbia and how the judges there with grace with dignity with decorum were struggling under the weight but got through that forget that number it's triple that number in some courouses they can't even Minnesota doesn't have that many federal judges to handle the byproduct the demon spawn of operation metro surge and so you have this discon connect, which I talked about in the context of Julie Lee, the accidental

1:16:21 whistleblower, who I'm giving her credit, but it was an accidental whistleblower where she revealed as well as other other DOJ lawyers in Minnesota in filings and in courtrooms that ICE is not returning their phone call. Here's a new strategy. Don't even respond to your lawyer. It's the lawyer who's the officer of the court with their law license. That's why they're all heading for the exit and they're being set up by their client because ICE doesn't give a crap because it's a corrupt organization that as Senator Blumenthal said needs to be put into bankruptcy and receiverhip and restructured and taken over because it's lost its way. It never had a way.

1:17:02 And so they're like, "No, I'm not going to call Julie Lee back." And she said to the judge, Judge Blackwell, an African-American judge, she said a couple of things in her accidental whistleblowing. She said, "First of all, I'm Vietnamese American and I'm concerned that my client is committing racial profiling and my own family is at risk." She actually said that out loud in court, you know, now that the transcript is out, that's one, which you don't normally do. You don't normally throw your own client under the bus, but at that point, I think she had nothing to lose. Um she and she's if if you think Julie Lee was not qualified to take on that assignment to handle habius corpus petitions for which she said she foolishly volunteered at least she had worked for ICE in immigration court right and so probably at least had a passing understanding of ritz of habius corpus and then gets handed 8080 ben

1:17:56 files in January. Here you go, Julie. Thanks for coming. Here's 80 files and you're in court in 10 minutes. I know friends that are public federal public defenders and that's very similar to their first day. So, she doesn't know what she's doing. She's passing understanding of that. She's getting no training, which she admitted to Judge Blackwell, and she doesn't have a client that's returning her phone calls. She said to the judge, "It's like pulling teeth to get them to comply or to answer me, let alone comply with your orders. I have to threaten to quit in order for them to to do anything. And all the judge really wanted to hear is like I got five habius corpus petitions in front of me. Why are they all being violated? The orders that I've issued.

1:18:37 Now, we'll put this in the broader context. Last week, you and I reported on Judge Schultz, the chief judge of this same court system, who did a survey of his fellow judges, and concluded and put in an order that at in January alone, up to 100 federal court orders have been violated by ICE alone in January in Minnesota. And he says it stops now. Well, exhibit A is it's not stopping and Judge Schultz is going to have to do something about it. To put that in context, I've been doing this 35 years. I've done zero violations of federal court orders and my clients, too. If I even if I add your 20 years, Ben, it's still zero. Okay. So, to say that an organization committed a hundred violations of federal court orders tells you all you need to know. Now, we know why, right? We're peeling back the onion here with Julie Lee and other filings that have said the same thing, which is we'd love to respond, judge. We can't

1:19:37 get ICE on the phone and uh uh and we're overwhelmed and and and and all of that now to plug these major holes in talent, right? You said they're bringing in military justice trained lawyers, JAG, the Judge Advocates General Office. Okay, that is an entirely different set of civil code that only applies to people in the military. For for people that are thinking back to TV shows like JAG or A Few Good Men, the movie or play, that's JAG. Okay? Has very little resemblance to anything related to civil the our constitution, civil rights or anything. They don't know Ritz of habius corpus because they've never they don't deal with it in that court. Are they upstanding advocates in in in a law process? Yes. But it would be the equivalent if we took a lawyer from France or I'm I'm serious or Canada or Mexico who are also competent and very accomplished in their own legal systems or Louisiana which has a civil code and

1:20:47 shove them into an American federal courthouse under the federal constitution federal rules of civil and criminal procedure and said go for it. I mean this is like my cousin Vinnie these people and I'm not I'm not be in their world I'm sure they're expert but it is professional malpractice for them to take the assignment and it is it is criminal for the department of justice to give them the order to go and do something they're not competent to handle and and that's where your law license comes in and I thought the takeaway frankly from um the Trump one was that if you follow Donald Trump into the abyss, right, into the heart of darkness and you happen to be a lawyer, you're going to get convicted. You're going to get indicted. You're going to lose your law license. Okay? And no amount of Donald and Donald Trump's not coming back from the dead or politically dead to help you. Okay? I thought that

1:21:46 was the lesson that was learned in Apparently not. Apparently, I don't know what it is about the seduction of power. It it is an afro it is an aphrodisiac and people get all drunk with power and the only person that's going to skate scot-free is Donald Trump because of the Supreme Court and the immunity decision. Everybody else directly under him or around him. We're talking to you, Pam Bondi, Todd Blanch, Steven Miller, Carolyn Levit, Tulsi Gabbard, uh, Pete Hegth, Marco Rubio, and the list goes. Uh, John RFK Jr., you're all okay in the in the winter is coming. Department, new Department of Justice is coming, new House and Senate are coming. You're all exposed. And if you're a lawyer below them, you don't Donald Trump's throwing Tulsi Gabbards and the Pam Bondies and under the bus. You don't think he's going to throw some Department of Justice attorney that he doesn't even know their name under the bus? You guys

1:22:51 are toast. Get out now while you can. Don't violate your code of conduct, your ethics rules. Don't violate the oath that this is you and me now doing what Mark Kelly Senator Mark Kelly and five other Congress people did. Don't give up the ship. This is the legal law lawyer version. You you lawyers took an oath to uphold and defend the constitution. You cannot file follow illegal unconstitutional orders that subject your law license to getting yanked and for you to violate the constitution. You did not swear an allegiance to the person occupying the White House or the Department of Justice. You have an independent obligation, independent obligation and judgment to comply as an officer of the court with the rules of conduct and ethics. And every moment that you stay in the Department of Justice and you allow yourself to be used as a prop is is a is one moment you are closer to losing your

1:23:58 bar license. people are dying. I think that aspect needs to be emphasized. You know, it's like when people talk about the image that Donald Trump posted of former President Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama and they say racist image. Just say what it is. Actually describe it every time. That's what I do in all my videos that Donald Trump posted an image of apes with the Obama's face photoshopped on the apes. That's what he did. And I think it's, you know, it's difficult to have to say that and describe that, but I don't want it to be lost in this gobblelygook of double speak. I want to describe exactly what's happening. Right. There's an invasion by ICE and border patrol in states torturing and terrorizing people.

1:24:53 That's what's happening. And the ramifications of everything you just discussed there pop is also that people are dying in their thirst for power also right if you think about the dismantling of US aid by Trump and Doge and this entire regime we don't have the numbers right now but on the low end the dismantling of USID killed tens of thousands of people dead mothers children, babies, dead, all people dead. And the number could be as high as in the millions because we know that when data was being collected by our government, the USAID was the biggest relief organization in the world. And it stopped over the course of several decades millions of people from starving to death and contracting HIV and AIDS and other serious uh diseases. By the way, you don't have to even quote me for that. Uh Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka was a big proponent of USAID during the first administration and she would use

1:26:03 those stats as well and they would always talk about, oh, look how she's helping women in subsaharan Africa or here or there, right? I mean, that was one of the things they pushed back then. But now when they ripped it apart, remember they like incinerated like they destroyed food where they could have just sent the leftover food. They rather the people starve to death and they destroyed the food which by the way also harmed our farmers who didn't get paid for the food that they were making to send to USA ID and Trump didn't pay those farmers.

1:26:39 And so finally, Popach, we're going to get a deposition of Elon Musk. And a federal judge ordered this deposition take place. Elon Musk and the Trump regime argued he was a cabinet official. Their argument was that he's what's called an apex official and that you can't just depose cabinet level officials. You can't just depose the Secretary of Defense because of, you know, things that the military is doing. You can't just depose the Treasury Secretary because of things that you know are going on there. you know, you have to if you have lawsuits that you have to depose the people in the departments and then only if it determines after like a ton of litigation that there's an exceptional need for the apex person to be deposed, then you then you have the ability to make a motion to the court and get that deposition. And if you think about it, you may go, why does that make sense?

1:27:38 Well, let's just assume you had a lawsuit against, I don't know, against uh a pharmaceutical company, right? If everybody sued a pharmaceutical company and then everybody got the deposition of the CEO was the first place you would go, the CEO couldn't be the CEO. So, what the law says is you could do you could take depositions of senior people, but you have to climb the ladder first. Maybe do the regional person and that person may give you what you want. But if it turns out the regional person doesn't know, then go to the regional person's manager and then go up again and then go up again and then maybe you can get the CEO afterwards. But you can't your first depo can't go to the CEO.

1:28:19 Here the ladder was climbed by these groups suing Doge uh for their dismantling of US aid and the people who worked at US aid. And in any event, they argue we don't have to climb the ladder because Elon Musk didn't even work at the government. He was an un who is he? He never was he never had a real role. We don't know what his title is. Get his deposition. And the federal judge on multiple different levels ruled both. Elon Musk seems to be the only person who has this information that the plaintiffs sufficiently asked others and no one else knows the answer. And the court has asked for explanations and no one's providing answers. So it seems the only person who could actually answer this is Elon Musk. And also Elon Musk is not a cabinet level of person. So we're not going to use the apex analysis of cabinet level people. He should be deposed. So they ordered to be deposed.

1:29:18 You know the Trump regime is going to appeal that. But it's just fascinating to me in a lot of levels pop that they're still arguing that Elon was like a cabinet member person. And then it also goes back to a theme we talked about earlier on this episode, which is Elon Musk never testified before Congress, which if you are a cabinet person, you at least usually have to testify. Although you see these magnets don't want their cabinet members to testify in the Republicans. The Democrats had constant oversight hearings when the Democrats controlled the House. frequent oversight hearings of all of the people e even when they would call in Mayorcis, right? The homeland security secretary guy who would get who would come in, Fox would get all the sound bites that they want.

1:30:03 Democrats would call that guy in all the time. They weren't like, "Oh, we don't want to give Fox a sound bite when the Republicans can just ask the guy these questions." No, no, no. They called him in. They called them all in frequently. You'd see the Secretary of Defense on the regularly. Secretary of T. All these people would show up over and over. Not with these MAGAs. Not with these MAGAS. That ain't what they're doing. And And when Bill Clinton says he wants to show up, they're like, "No, no, no. Even though we said we wanted you to do this, but we we actually don't want that." And now Elon Musk ref like they're hiding him. They're hiding his testimony. And I just think it's so BS. You know, it's putting it lightly that you're out there doing all this destruction, saying all of these things on regime media, and then it's like, okay, well, we have your deposition and can you say it under

1:30:52 oath? And then all of them, no, no, no, I can't do that. Remember when Christy Nome testified, what was it a few months back? And then she said she had to go to like a special FEMA meeting and the meeting never even took place. She walked out of a hearing. I I'm sorry. I have to go. after she was being cross-examined. What do you have to go? Like that should annoy and anger and make you livid regardless of your political party, right? I mean, transparency really means transparency. And again, going back to a theme of this episode, all these MAGA Republicans who use transparency, turns out they're the ones who hate transparency the most because they're covering up this all.

1:31:34 They're at the heart of the cabal. They are the cabal. You know, all the pizza references be like, "Pizza gate, pizza. What the hell IS THEY'RE THE ONES TALKING about the pizza in in the in the files? It's all them. Them them them them them them them. All of it." And to me, that's not political. I'm not saying this to you as a Democrat. I'm saying it to you as someone who's read the files, who's read the documents, who's saying, "Why are they hiding from depositions, saying, "I want Bill Clinton to be deposed." He's saying he wants to do it in public in front of everyone. And MAGA saying, "No." What's going You have to force Elon Musk to show up at a deposition after he goes out there and wants to, you know, spend hundreds of millions of dollars to to meddle with our election system. And he won't he won't speak in a deposition.

1:32:22 If you don't want to be in a deposition, don't do the role. Don't don't do those things and you won't be deposed. So, Popach, I'll give you the final word.

1:32:29 The uh Thanks, Tulsi Gabbard or whoever w who' you say walked out of the committee meeting. It was

1:32:36 uh gnome. Oh, gnome. Yeah, that reminded me of the um Godfather 2 when the senator who had been compromised by the family during the during the hearing about Michael Corleone being the head of the the god, you know, the head of the family suddenly stood up in the middle of it and said, "Well, I I'd love to sit here, but I've got another hearing that I have to attend, but the Italian people are some of the hardest working people." I mean, seriously, I didn't realize The Godfather was a documentary. So, look, you've got judges like Judge Chung in Maryland who is saying the obvious out loud that USID was destroyed, not by Marco Rubio. There was a lot of reporting at the time that Marco Rubio did not want to stop the $50 billion of US aid, which is an extension, it's it's supposed to be an extension of American diplomacy run by the State Department in order to convince people to turn towards the west

1:33:36 and away from our enemies in the east. Right? When you have starving people and women who have issues about food security and disease and reproductive rights and children, things like that, and you don't feed them, house them, help them as a extension of the large s of America. You just put them into the hands of the Chinese, the Russians, and the rest, which is what's really happened. reordering of the world by way of Donald Trump, uh, which we probably are not going to be able to completely recover from despite a lot of the healing that we'll be able to do with a proper president, uh, a democratic president in 2028. There's things that we're just not going to in a in one generation fix. you know, the the reordering of the world where the European Union has turned its back understandably on the United States, the booing of of JD Vance and his wife at the Olympics is the least of their problems. But you know, the

1:34:40 European Union joining together and and these new configurations of China at the heart of new relationships, exactly what happens when you pull out of world of world influence, which is what the Trump administration did. It's not just about the money. It's about shuttering State Department offices and consular offices around the world, which means you're taking away the America. Think of it like McDonald's. It's It'd be like McDonald's closing thousands of its franchise units around the world and then wonder why they're not selling any more hamburgers. We're we we sold democracy and the benefits of democracy through the State Department, through the voice of America, the voice of Europe, through radio and other and now internet um uh information and media to promote the flame of democracy.

1:35:32 Donald Trump got out of that business with America first, took the money with him. And so you and as a result you have dying as you said dying and dead people and and there was a big fight between Elon Musk and uh Marco Rubio about US aid when Elon Musk put US aid famously through the wood chipper uh when Marco Rubio did not want that to happen and had some other people appointed. So finally a federal judge is like, "You know what? We got to get to the bottom of what happened with us aid." And I can't think of anybody better than the person that effectively took it over and ran it. And I'm not going to let you hide behind all of these other doctrines because I there are the there are now extraordinary circumstances that require you to sit in a chair and answer questions under oath to the class action lawyers that are suing on behalf of US Aid and its beneficiaries. While he's in the chair, I would love to ask him other

1:36:27 questions like, "Is the Don Lemon prosecution related to the fact that Don Lemon is in a lawsuit with you uh in a contract dispute?" I don't think I don't think those two things are completely unrelated. That's I'm call me crazy, but I think th those are things one day I would hope that Elon Musk is going to have to answer for. Um, and there's other things. If Elon Musk thought he was going to come in like a bull in a china shop and and tear down hundreds of billions, trillions of dollars of of America influence and and the and reshape in a negative way the relationship between the federal government and the states and its people through defunding it and do that with complete exoneration and with and and with and get away scot-free.

1:37:16 Wrong. Wrong. And you can't hide behind what they always wanted to hide behind, which is that he was not a confirmed Senate official, right? That's just a violation of the appointments clause. That's what's at the heart of the case that we're talking about. That doesn't help you. That's act it's not a defense. That's actually the violation that you're being charged with here. Who were you to be addressing cabinet members who had all been confirmed by the Senate? Okay, we we think they're depraved and immoral also, but at least they got confirmed by the Senate. Who are you to stand there with a baseball cap and a black t-shirt and a black ill-fitting coat and start talking about things and and forcing like it was some sort of hostage video by Donald Trump forcing applause about all the great work that you did before you got fired and then had a fight with Donald Trump and got tossed on your ass, threatened to create

1:38:10 a new third party to challenge Donald Trump. Then then Kiston made up with Donald Trump because of the billions of dollars billions of hundreds of billions of dollars of federal government contracts that your company relies on. He's about to do a giant SpaceX merger bailout with your and my money and then like the coward that he is does not want to sit in a chair and answer for all the illegal unconstitutional things that he did and take responsibility for it. when he was building the wall of receipts that never materialized about all the money he was saving. All a lie. In fact, he cost us more money because of all the bailout, all the buyout contracts for federal employees that he furled and all of that. It actually cost us more than he actually saved us. You were all banging away, jumping up and down on a stage like a like a ketamine uh addicted madman. Not my words, the words of Susie

1:39:09 Wilds, the head of uh the Donald Trump's chief of staff. That was all fun and games, right? It's fun to go play It's fun to go play uh a politician, right? It's fun to go play a federal employee, isn't it? Except now we're into that third wave of litigation, right? This is the cleanup section of litigation and we're only like a month into second year of the Trump administration. If he he thought if he thought that things would by now he'd be firing on all cylinders. Think about Trump from Trump's perspective. I'll leave it on this.

1:39:47 Trump destroys the American economy. He destroys or tries to destroy the global economy. He he has his commerce secretary, we now know closely linked to Epstein, tell the American people that the tariffs, which are about to be torn down hopefully by the by the Supreme Court, are going to lead to the American economy firing on all cylinders no less than the four, no later than the fourth quarter of 2025 or the first quarter of 2026. Has anybody looked at the economy recently? Look at your own checking account recently. Okay, none of that is happening. the American the American economy and the hopes and dreams of the American people crushed by Donald Trump in a year's time, digging a hole so deep he'll never dig out of it within a year.

1:40:34 While he attacks the Federal Reserve, also destabilizing the financial markets. He said it was going to be the golden era of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. How's that going? Cryptocurrency and Bitcoin fell off the shelf this last week and last two weeks. Okay. The only thing that's making money right now is gold. Okay. people rushing in to buy gold, including companies affiliated with his commerce secretary. Uh, and and he's wondering why why am I so unpopular? He just gave an interview a couple of days ago when the guy said in an interview, uh, your polling is not doing great with the economy. It should be. Your polling is not doing great with the American people. It should be. Well, it's not. 70% of the American people think this is a failed administration because it is. 70% of the American people want their vote back. 70% of independents or 75% of independents want their vote back. 70% of voters under 30

1:41:27 want their vote back. 70% of women Hispanics want their vote back. And I'll I'll leave it on this Ben. When I interviewed Senator Blumenthal last week, I said to him, you know, share with our audience for a minute without breaching confidences. You know, the collegiality of the Senate, you know, it's a long tradition guys talk. are your Senate Republican friends and colleagues, are they worried about their electoral chances and that of the midterms? He said, you can see it in their eyes. They have a thousand yard stare. They are they are if even if the House won't admit it, the senators are very the Republican senators are very worried electorally, politically about about Donald Trump after year one and beyond. And you know that we we know why. So, we just got to do what we do here. Might as touch legal AF, all the videos, all the lives, all the things that we're reporting on is just get

1:42:25 people the information they need to continue to win the hearts and minds of people to remind them why Donald Trump is so depraved in his administration, too, and then help run them out on a rail come the midterms and beyond.

1:42:41 Covered a lot today. we uh we'll always be doing this level of detail. I think that's what makes this show important that you know sometimes we don't know okay are we going to do two segments on the Epstein files are we going to do and it's just a feeling sometimes of how do we make sure we get you all the information that you need to be fully um you know prepared knowledgeable uh aware of the coverups taking place and that you could help others uh and and explain what's going on to to others. So, um, Super Bowl weekend. So, uh, tomorrow. Enjoy the game if that's what you choose to do and watch that. Um, we are we appreciate you. We're grateful for all of your support. Hang in there. We're in this together. Let's keep fighting. We've got momentum. Uh, and it's always an honor to spend time with you. Uh, over the weekend, Legal AF. And a reminder, make sure you hit subscribe here. help us get

1:43:42 to 6 million subscribers, but more importantly, help the Legal AF YouTube channel get 2 million subscribers. Uh, it's on its way to 2 million. So, subscribe to Legal AF, subscribe to the Legal AF Substack. And also, if you or someone you know has been injured in an auto accident, car accident, trucking accident, sexual assault, uh, medical malpractice, uh, call 877POPAF or visit the popfirm.com. The consultation is 100% free. They're available in every state, available 24/7, 877 POPA AAF or go to the popfirm.com. Seriously, don't be shy.

1:44:18 Pop represents hundreds now of people who listen and watch Legal AF who have cases. So, he's there to uh help you as well. Um, again, appreciate you all. We'll see you next time on Legal AF. Shout out Midas Mighty. Shout out Legal AF.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "LIVE: Trump in LEGAL HELL as DOJ COVER UP FAILS!!! | Legal AF"?

Ben Micellis (Host), Michael Popach (Host).

What is "LIVE: Trump in LEGAL HELL as DOJ COVER UP FAILS!!! | Legal AF" about?

The discussion focuses on the ongoing legal challenges facing Donald Trump, particularly in light of the recent partial release of Epstein files and ramifications related to Ghislaine Maxwell's upcoming testimony. Key points include potential strategies for Maxwell's deposition, the Department of Justice's questionable practices regarding document disclosures, and the significant turnover within…

What is mentioned in this MeidasTouch episode?

14 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, Department of Justice, Michael Popach, Ghislain Maxwell, Attorney General Pam Bondi. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "LIVE: Trump in LEGAL HELL as DOJ COVER UP FAILS!!! | Legal AF"?

The episode runs 1 h 45 min; the transcript is about 17,998 words in 136 timestamped sections.

More from MeidasTouch

• All analyzed episodes
• Books mentioned on MeidasTouch
• People mentioned on MeidasTouch
• Sponsors mentioned on MeidasTouch
• Topics mentioned on MeidasTouch