LIVE: Trump RUSHES to VOID EPSTEIN LAW + MASSIVE ICE RULING | Legal AF

What this episode is about

This week covers significant legal developments involving the Department of Justice's resistance to an independent monitor in the Epstein case, while also addressing Donald Trump's controversial pardons and military actions in Minneapolis. The discussion further highlights a ruling by Judge Bill Young that critiques Trump's constitutional violations regarding Palestinian activists, showcasing a broader pattern of judicial pushback against the former president's actions.

Key takeaways

• In a shocking twist, DOJ claims it alone dictates Epstein file releases—an unsettling glimpse into legal opacity.
• Trump's 'fraud stars' are trying to pull a fast one, but history shows crime, much like gravity, isn't escapable.
• Judges like Bill Young aren't just relics; they wield power against Trump, proving age can indeed equal wisdom.
• Trump-appointed judges favor him 92% of the time, but district court losses show reality bites even for kings.
• The civil rights unit under Trump is behaving like a bad sitcom—where every episode features a tape of historical absurdity.

Who speaks in this episode?

• Ben Micellis (Host) · 44 min speaking
• Michael Popoc (Host) · 29 min speaking

What is discussed, and when

1. 0:00 – 10:00: Donald Trump, Department of Justice, David O. Carter, Civil Rights Division
2. 10:00 – 20:00: Department of Justice, Amicus Brief, Chislaine Maxwell, Pardons
3. 20:00 – 30:00: Puerto Rico, Pardons
4. 30:00 – 40:00: Venezuela, Donald Trump, Department of Justice, Pardons
5. 40:00 – 50:00: Civil Rights Division, Becca Good
6. 50:00 – 1:00:00: Department of Justice, Donald Trump, Becca Good, Hannah Nathanson
7. 1:00:00 – 1:10:00: Department of Justice, Donald Trump, David O. Carter, ICE

Notable quotes from "LIVE: Trump RUSHES to VOID EPSTEIN LAW + MASSIVE ICE RULING | Legal AF"

• Decides it wants to do. We'll break down that horrific filing. We should talk about the various pardons that Donald Trump tried to quietly get away with this week. Some of the…

  about Donald Trump · at 0:50

• Involving Palestinian activists and students where he says that Trump and his cabinet are just clearly violating the Constitution in the most horrific way. The name Bill Young…

  about Constitutional Violations · at 1:38

• A crime during the Jan 6 proceedings. He just issued a bombshell new ruling dismissing one of the many attempts by the civil rights division to get your and my no particularly…

  about Civil Rights Division · at 3:20

• No one who files an amicus brief has article 3 standing to be in the case.

  about Amicus Brief · at 16:42

• Maxwell. Dear Judge Angle Meyer, then it says, This is a criminal case with two parties, the government and defendant Gileain Maxwell, that is long since over. Okay. Well, then…

  about Chislaine Maxwell · at 19:19

• So, the entire DOJ in this coverup is being run not by your rank and file a USA's. It's being done by Bondi, Blanch and Clayton. I want to talk a little bit more about this when we come back from.

  about Department of Justice · at 21:38

• Hearing, say out in a written order, say out loud what Judge Young just said, which is there is a conspiracy to violate the Constitution at the highest levels of an…

  about William G. Young · at 59:31

• Just think about that. a judge has to even say these things. In the United States of America, agents are hereby barred from retaliating against persons who are engaging in…

  about ICE · at 1:06:26

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

• Donald Trump — Person · Primary subject of criticism · 16 mentions · first at 0:57
  Discussed as directing a corrupt DOJ, covering up Epstein-related records, issuing controversial pardons, and enabling aggressive ICE tactics and constitutional violations.
• Chislaine Maxwell — Person · Central case figure · 2 mentions · first at 7:28
  Her criminal case is the procedural vehicle for disputes over Epstein-related disclosures; DOJ filings are framed as aligning with her interests rather than victims.
• William G. Young — Person · Referenced federal judge · 1 mention · first at 2:00
  Highlighted for issuing a scathing ruling finding Trump administration actions violate the Constitution, including strong historical analogies and condemnation of DOJ arguments.
• David O. Carter — Person · Referenced federal judge · 5 mentions · first at 3:11
  Discussed for prior Jan 6 crime-fraud findings and a new ruling dismissing a Civil Rights Division attempt to obtain voter data in California.
  Senior judges and older judges that matter here like Judge Young, 85year-old appointee of Ronald Reagan, Judge David O. Carter, somebody in your backyard who famously found…
• Harmeet Dhillon — Person · Referenced DOJ official · 2 mentions · first at 2:49
  Named as leading the Civil Rights Division and accused of disgracing it; tied to resignations and alleged anti-civil-rights posture.
  Weekend. I'm away with my family now to just to see what the civil rights division under Harit Dylan is doing to disgrace the name of the civil rights division as you and I…
• Becca Good — Person · Referenced subject of investigation · 3 mentions · first at 49:29
  Discussed as the widow of Renee Nicole Good and alleged target of federal investigation, used as an example of victim-targeting by DOJ.
  Leaving her six-year-old son, you know,, a, motherless,, at least,, you, know, Rene's motherhood. when they're going after Renee Good and Becca Good, her wife, about whether…
• Hannah Nathanson — Person · Referenced journalist · 2 mentions · first at 50:04
  Mentioned as the Washington Post reporter whose home was searched and devices seized, raising press freedom and whistleblower protection concerns.
  The new year all of these sources that she had developed and she was raided by the FBI her personal laptop personal phones were all taken and confiscated where she was…

Companies & orgs

• Department of Justice — Company · Core institution discussed · 14 mentions · first at 0:08
  Central to the episode as the agency filing against an independent monitor in the Maxwell/Epstein matter, conducting raids/investigations, and allegedly acting as a politicized tool of Trump.
• ICE — Company · Core institution discussed · 2 mentions · first at 1:19
  Discussed as conducting aggressive street tactics in Minneapolis/St. Paul; federal court order restricts ICE actions against peaceful protesters.
• Civil Rights Division — Company · Core institution discussed · 5 mentions · first at 2:49
  Portrayed as politicized and disgracing its mission under current leadership; linked to staff resignations and litigation seeking voter data.

Concepts & topics

• Pardons — Concept · Core topic · 5 mentions · first at 0:56
  Discussed as Trump’s alleged pattern of quietly pardoning fraudsters and politically connected individuals, wiping restitution and undermining deterrence.
  Decides it wants to do. We'll break down that horrific filing. We should talk about the various pardons that Donald Trump tried to quietly get away with this week. Some of the…
• Amicus Brief — Concept · Core legal mechanism discussed · 3 mentions · first at 7:10
  Central procedural dispute: Khanna and Massie seek to file as amici to request a special master; DOJ argues they lack standing and raise new issues.
• Constitutional Violations — Concept · Core allegation · 2 mentions · first at 59:38
  Describes alleged unlawful actions by Trump administration/DOJ/ICE; judges’ orders are framed as responses to constitutional breaches.
• Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) — Concept · Referenced legal tool · 1 mention · first at 10:58
  Referenced in connection with efforts to obtain Epstein files via FOIA litigation (including a case associated with the National Enquirer).
  Things. Boy, were they on the story back in 2017, 2018 when they drive through a foyer, Freedom of Information Act request to get Epstein files. and that case is up at the SECOND CIRCUIT.

Places & events

• Venezuela — Place · Referenced geopolitical example · 5 mentions · first at 35:08
  Used to argue Trump administration corruption and transactional foreign policy tied to oil; discussed alongside authoritarian repression and alleged off-treasury funds.
  List and everything this was a presidency for sale to the highest bidder whether it's big oil who bought our Venezuelan policy for us right this wasn't a war this isn't a…
• Second Circuit Court of Appeals — Place · Referenced appellate venue · 1 mention · first at 10:47
  Mentioned as the forum for FOIA litigation involving Epstein files where DOJ allegedly seeks to avoid public proceedings (oral argument).
  Watching day in and day out with the Trump administration and not just here they run to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals about a case filed by the National Enquirer of All…
• Puerto Rico — Place · Referenced location in pardon discussion · 2 mentions · first at 29:16
  Mentioned in connection with alleged bribery-related prosecutions and pardons involving Puerto Rico political figures.
  Gets, another, pardon., Then, you, go, to Puerto Rico. Wanda Vasquez Mark, who was the former go Republican governor of Puerto Rico, Mark Rousini.

Full transcript with timestamps

0:00 A very busy legal week, which means a very comprehensive legal AF coming your way. We've got a lot to discuss. You have the Department of Justice, making a late night filing on Friday in one of the federal cases involving Epstein, the US Lane Maxwell case. That's where Ro Kana and Thomas Massie, the Congress members behind the discharge petition requested a federal judge appoint an independent monitor or special master to ensure the Epstein files are released. The Department of Justice filed its response, saying that there are no grounds to appoint an independent monitor monitor that Massie and Kana do not have standing and that no court in this country, this court or any court can actually enforce the Epstein Transparency Act. No one can do anything about it other than whatever the DOJ decides it wants to do. We'll break down that horrific horrific filing. We should talk about the various pardons that

0:57 Donald Trump tried to quietly get away with this week. Some of the biggest fraud stars. Uh some of the fraudsters not fraud stars, I guess.

1:07 No,, fraud, stars, also. Fraud, stars., I, guess, I, guess, that's, a new genre, right? Right there. Um you know, and also recidivist fraud stars. I guess we'll that's what we'll we'll call him right now. Then let's go to Minneapolis in St. Paul where the Trump regime is invading. We'll talk about uh a order an injunction order based on some of the military tactics of this invasion that are being blocked. And let's talk about the Reagan appointed judge in Massachusetts, Judge Bill Young. His ruling there involving a case involving Palestinian activists and students where he says that uh Trump and his cabinet are just clearly violating the Constitution in the most horrific way. The the name Bill Young may sound familiar to you. that judge has written other scathing orders when Popach and I have talked about Reagan appointed judges who have been uh you know making these very uh powerful rulings against

2:00 Trump. Young's been really at the forefront of that. And then we'll talk about uh the Trump DOJ. Um few things lots of staff quitting again. We talked about that before, but more people are quitting from the DOJ in Minneapolis and the civil rights unit. And also you have these tactics like the FBI executing a search warrant on a Washington Post reporter's home who's the main reporter dealing with all the uh whistleblowers within the government uh agencies um who have been describing all the crimes being committed by the Trump regime. Her personal phones and personal computers were all seized by the DOJ. I mean right out of Russia. Let's bring in Michael Pop. Great to great to see you pop.

2:41 We've got a lot to discuss on this episode indeed. Absolutely., on, Martin, Luther, King, Jr. weekend. I'm away with my family now to just to see what the civil rights division under Harit Dylan is doing to disgrace the name of the civil rights division as you and I continue to hold it up. Federal judges invoking things like the memory of Martin Luther King Jr. and opposing the civil rights division when you and I talk about senior judges and older judges that matter here like Judge Young, 85year-old appointee of Ronald Reagan, Judge David O. Carter, somebody in your backyard who who famously found that Donald Trump had had more more likely than not committed a crime during the Jan 6 proceedings. He just issued a bombshell new ruling dismissing one of the many attempts by the civil rights division to get your and my no particularly your Ben's voter data in California. Um and that case just got dismissed with some choice

3:39 words by David O' Carter. One interesting thing that we're not going to cover today, but I just did a hot take on it that'll go up tomorrow on Legal AF YouTube is putting together a couple of pieces of reporting. New York Times took a look at one full year of rulings by appellet court judges, over 900 of them, to try to categorize, are we watching a Trump effect? In other words, if it's a Trump appointed judge mainly appellet judge from the first term, are we seeing statistical anomalies like they're ruling in large numbers that can't be explained otherwise other than partisan ideology like for Donald Trump? And wait till you hear the numbers. I do, like I said, a deeper dive tomorrow. Ben, listen to this one. of Trumpapp appointed federal appellet judges at the at the top level before the Supreme Court, 92% have ruled in favor of Donald Trump in the last year in 2025.

4:33 68% of non-Trump Republican judges have ruled for him. So still higher than 50/50, but 68% and 27% of Democratapp appointed judges Democratic appointed judges voted for Donald Trump at the appellet level. When you break it down in its entirety, look at the battle between the courts here. At the district court level, Donald Trump is winning only 25% of his cases. That that bakes in all the judges regardless where they came from. At the appellet court level, it moves up to 51% mainly because of the Trumpapp appointed judges voting overwhelmingly for him.

5:13 Just to put this in perspective that this was not a small sample. Out of 150 145 cases involving Trump appointed appellet judges, 133 were in favor of Donald Trump, just 12 against him. And at the Supreme Court level, the numbers jump from 51% at the appellet court level in favor of Donald Trump to 88% at the Supreme Court level, mainly with uh with through the shadow docket. Just a stark battle going on. And we're gonna we see it as an as a thread an undercurrent in many of the cases that you and I discuss this battle between district court judges and their appellet court uh brethren and and the Supreme Court which often spills out into the open but just fascinating uh fascinating numbers as just I'll end it on this a Republican older judges and you and I talk a lot about older judges whether senior status or otherwise David O' Carter, William Young, Charles uh Brier and all the hard work they're doing to protect democracy

6:16 and the rule of law right now. They are also hanging on by their fingernails. And there is this tremendous slowdown in the retirement of Republicanappointed judges who when Biden was appointed they relaxed and retired in large numbers, giving Joe Biden a lot of judicial appointments. They are not retiring at anywhere near that same rate because they they're just looking at their clock like is this Trump thing over yet? and then they're going to retire, which means Donald Trump's efforts to reshape the appellet judiciary the way he did it in the first term is not looking very good for him and it's looking great for the rule of law.

6:52 Let's, start, off, talking, about, this filing. Midas touch broke the story regarding the response by Trump's DOJ to Epstein's to the Epstein case where Roana and Thomas Massie filed uh this request to be what's referred to as Amichi, an amicus brief. Um where it's basically just a friends of the court brief, right? It's where people are not formally intervening in the case as a party because they can intervene as a party, right? Like in this case, there are parties to the case already. It is the DOJ and it is Gileain Maxwell. She was convicted of child sex trafficking.

7:34 She was supposed to rot in a prison in Tallahassee. She got moved to Camp Brian in Texas after speaking with Todd Blanch, uh the number two at the Department of Justice, the deputy, uh AG. Um, and the DOJ is supposed to be representing the interests of the victims and the survivors. They're not supposed to be on the side of Guilain and it's supposed to be an adversarial process. Well, what happens when they're kind of on the same team though now and the DOJ is covering up a child sex trafficking ring and perpetrating criminal violations of the Epstein Transparency Act where everything was due back on December 19th and a report about the redactions was due 15 days thereafter. And so you all will recall that Massie and Kana filed a letter brief, asking, to, just, be, am, A amichi, and they wanted as friends of the court make this request. Hey judge, you know the DOJ has been using you court as their

8:35 excuse about why they can't produce the Epstein files. Then they demanded that you release grand jury transcripts when under rule 6E you're not allowed to. and they tried to blame you there. Then when the Epstein Transparency Act passed they renewed their request saying "We're we we're trying to turn over the records, but judge, you're preventing us." And the judge says, "I wasn't prot pre preventing, anybody.", The, grand, jury transcript is frankly irrelevant in the Epstein files. It's not a major part of it. And remember, this specific judge in this Elaine case, Judge Angel Meer specifically asked the DOJ, "Okay, what documents are you turning over on December 19th?" And the DOJ listed in one of those docket numbers, one of those documents, all of the documents that they were going to um that they were going to turn over. Then they didn't turn it over. So all Kana and Massie, then I'll turn it over to you

9:29 Popach, in terms of what happens next. All Massie and Kana were doing was saying, "Hey, judge, this isn't a mere deadline miss that took place." Okay? Like they're violating crimes. They're using this court as a situs of the crime to take place. Um, they're using you and the survivors are being retraumatized. Why don't we just appoint an independent monitor or a special master, somebody who can just ensure that these documents get turned over? That shouldn't be uh controversial, right? We all we all want it turned over. Let's pick a retired federal judge because we can trust the DOJ to do this job. How can we trust them? And so then Judge Angle Meyer ordered the DOJ to respond. The DOJ responds and Popach, I'll turn it over to you. Y

10:20 tell, us, what, the, do, the, audacity, of, what the DOJ says here. Yeah,, it, it, is, it, is, the, audacity, of nope. um with the Trump administration or as one of the um commentators posted I think Midas reposted, "Have you ever seen in the history of an a presidential administration one that's more hellbent on covering up an international child sex trafficking ring than what we're watching day in and day out with the Trump administration and not just here you know, they they run to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals about a case filed by the National Enquirer of All Things. Boy, were they on the story back in 2017, 2018 when they drive through a foyer, Freedom of Information Act request to get Epstein files. Um, and that case is up at the SECOND CIRCUIT.

11:04 NO, NO, WE shouldn't have an oral argument, not because we're going to release all the files, just because we don't want to have things done in public about the Epstein files. here where they could step every moment where they could step forward and prove to the American people that they're not about obfiscation. They're not about hiding. They're not about opakeness. They're about the dignity of survivors and victims. They're about justice and all that. They they do exactly the hump thing that we thought they were going to do, which is to vote for and and make a proposal for the continued hiding of files. Now they the reason we are in federal court talking about Epstein files is not because of Congress and not because of the victims and not because of Galain Maxwell or the dead Jeffrey Epstein. We're in federal court because the Trump administration and its Department of Justice ran to federal

12:01 court even before the Epstein Act was passed in order to try to con confuse the American people. and use the federal courts as a pawn or as a shield to argue to the American people. Oh, the Epstein files. Oh, they're Oh, the the thing you want us, they're not with us. They're with federal judges. We would love to release them. Remember when Cash Patel testified to the to the to the congressional and Senate oversight committees? I I would love to produce the Epstein files, but uh federal orders won't allow us. So they ran to court to try to confuse the American public public about what is the definition of the Epstein files as you and I have been talking about forever. Um and and probably the only news media organization that has been so consistent and so relentless in its coverage of this of this important issue. We've been saying from the beginning the files have always resided not in not with Congress

12:56 not with judges in the executive branch. They they never needed congressional approval to do it. We didn't need an act to be passed. We never needed we don't we didn't needed judges to make orders. All we had to do was release the files that were within the administration's power. And that's been the dirty little secret that nobody wants to acknowledge. The act is great. I'm glad that every member of the House and the Senate but one voted for the Epstein Act. But the the only reason we're in Congress is because Trump ran the Congress the way he ran to the courts. But my position is once you run into those to those tribunals to those those arenas, you are now stuck. So Angelmeer, in my view just as Judge Burman and the others, has the power, has the authority, has the jurisdiction because the Trump administration has effectively waved any argument that he can't fashion a remedy for violations of the law, criminal or

13:55 civil or abuse of of process that have happened in in his in his courtroom. and and and he's already made comments in his orders about the victims being maligned and being misled, the American people being maligned and being misled by the Department of Justice and pass orders. I didn't hear the Department of Justice say, "Judge, you can't write that in your order. You should strike your order. You don't have the power to make comments about our production." Yes, he does. Because you ran there and once you're in, you're in for a penny.

14:30 you're in for a pound as far as I'm concerned with federal jurisdiction and you've waved any argument that well oh wait he's going to say something we don't like oh no no there's no authority for the judge to do that we don't want you to do that so they have filed as you said Ben actually two things back to back one a day earlier they filed an update to ex try to explain why there's three million missing documents and what they said in their filing and this is a letter that they sent in under Jay Clayton the Trump uh the Trump uh friendly prosecutor US attorney in Manhattan in New York. He said in a footnote, "Well the number is really just an estimate and there's been a lot of duplicates. So when we said there were, you know, just an estimate, the numbers coming out of the Department of Justice were 1 million, 5.2 million. 5.2 is a very specific number. doesn't it could be an estimate and then two million and they

15:27 never an explanation as to why these numbers are shapeshifting before our very eyes here they're like judge it's always just been an estimate uh are we okay now we're not okay and you're you're over a month late and you keep you're using the victims again as you said Ben to retraumatize them to use them as the excuse oh we'd love to produce everything but we got to oh you know gosh darn it we got to like redact everybody's names so that takes time so that was filed two days ago. Then they filed late last night hoping nobody would see it on a slow news day. They file their paper to tell the judge "Judge, with all due respect, whenever they start, respectfully, judge," I'm like, "Oh, here we go. You don't have the authority to supervise anything related to the Epstein Transparency Act.

16:10 You don't have the jurisdiction. Um, you know, you only are you're supervising over a criminal case. There's very little to do in that criminal case because she's already been convicted and the Supreme Court has confirmed her appeal. Leaving out the footnote, Trump is still considering, I'm sure pardoning her along with the other pardons we'll talk about today. And um and and certainly representatives Massie and Kana, they're members of Congress. They don't have any article three standing here. So, they're using an amicus, brief., All right,, let's, stop right there and do a teachable moment.

16:42 No one who files an amicus brief has article 3 standing to be in the case. They're all strangers to the case in that way. They might have different levels of personal knowledge, injury or interest, but they're all strangers to the case. That is by definition why it's called a friend of the court brief because these are people that are saying we have something to add of value to the judge to your deliberation and decision-making. And a lot of times amicus briefs, you know, there'll be dozens of them filed in like a Supreme Court case or another case at a district court level. And sometimes actually the amicus brief, depending upon who wrote it, can win the day and be the obvious basis for the juristprudence of the opinion. I've seen the Supreme Court you know, especially in MAGA, you know go with a hard right law professor's analysis of some constitutional issue.

17:38 You're like, "Oh [ __ ] that came out of the amicus." So amic amichi are important, but to but to argue judge uh, they're just stating the obvious. They're not they don't they can't be parties to this case. So So So therefore, what? They can't be amicus. Who can speak better to the Epstein transparency than the sponsors of the Epstein Transparency Act? It's like getting a founding father to come talk to you about the Constitution, right? Okay. So let them speak. Now, this is only about whether he's going to allow the brief in or not. It doesn't they just don't want the issue of this independent monitor or special master to to be they don't want that remedy to be considered by the judge at all arguing that he's only here on the on things related to Gain Maxwell. But Ben, haven't they expanded and waved that argument by running to Engel Meyer and the rest of the judges to try to use them as pawns to convince

18:34 the American people that the Epstein files are sitting in the courts and not with the executive branch? Look, I think a huge hattip though to Kana and Massie because what this achieved is it saved six to n months of what the DOJ's plan was. they were going to wait for someone to try to enforce this a year from now and they were going to make this argument that no court can decide anything. And so to me bringing this issue to the for I just want to show people the language just so you all know like what are you talking about? Just show me the words because how could this possibly be? So just pull up the front page of the letter so you all see. Now this is United States versus Gileain Maxwell. Dear Judge Angle Meyer, then it says, "This is a criminal case with two parties, the government and defendant Gileain Maxwell, that is long since over." Okay. Well, then why are you going to the judge and requesting that

19:31 the judge do things? Right. Right there. So then it goes on to talk about on page two that the am the Amichi cannot raise new issues and seek new relief, which they're not, right? They're just saying "Judge, you have authority to do certain things cuz Trump went in front of you." Then you go to page three and it says "Representatives Kana and Massie improperly seek judicial enforcement of the act." Now, here on page four is where I think the key language is. Respectfully, the government submits that the court lacks the authority to enter the requested relief. When the Constitution or laws of the United States do not support a cause of action a federal court cannot reach out to award remedies. The act, meaning the Epstein Transparency Act, does not provide a cause of action because the statute does not avince Congress's intent to create the private cause of action asserted. This court may not

20:32 create the action through judicial mandate. And then it goes on to say, "If the statute does not itself so provide a cause of action will not be created through judicial mandate." In other words, they're saying the court or no court has any authority regarding the Epstein Transparency Act. One last thing I'll point out. When you go to page six of six, the last page, it's signed by three people and three people alone. Pam Bondi, the attorney general. Todd Blanch, the deputy attorney general. Jay Clayton, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The top three people. This is unheard of.

21:11 Okay. Normally, a filing would be handled by an A USA, an assistant United States attorney, or a midlevel or lower level deputy assistant United States attorney. You're not getting filings by the actual AG, deputy AG and the United States attorney with no other deputies signing it. I just think that's an important point. It's subtle, but no one else wants to attach their name to this. So, the entire DOJ in this coverup is being run not by your rank and file a USA's. It's being done by Bondi, Blanch and Clayton. I want to talk a little bit more about this when we come back from our first break. Then we'll talk about um some of the pardons because I think it's all related with this rogue DOJ. A lot of the pardons and clemency grants actually followed the DOJ basically charging people with misdemeanors anyway that should have been charged with felonies in major cases with this DOJ doing that. A reminder, make sure you

22:13 subscribe to Michael Popox YouTube channel, Legal AF, Michael Popox Substack, the Legal AF Substack, as well as um all Michael Pop things. Subscribe to us on audio here, the Legal AF audio. And a reminder, if you or someone you know has been injured in an auto accident, a trucking accident, um caused by the negligence of other sexual assault, sexual harassment, give a call to 877 pop af or visit the popfirm.com. 877 pop afoc.com available 247. And POP has lawyers across the country that are here to help you out. So um give a call or go to the website. We'll be right back after our first quick break of the show. I want to eat better, but I realized pretty quickly that after long days of recording, cooking healthy meals just wasn't going to happen for me. Factor doesn't ask you to meal prep or follow recipes. It just removes the entire problem. 2 minutes, real food, done.

23:11 You're not failing at healthy eating. You're failing at having a three extra hours every night in your day. Factor is already made by chefs, designed by dieticians, and delivered to your door. You heat it for 2 minutes and eat lean proteins, colorful vegetables, whole food ingredients, healthy fats, no refined sugars, no artificial sweeteners, no refined seed oils. My favorite has been grilled filet minan and creamy parmesan shrimp because it worked even when I was completely slammed. Factor fits your life, not someone else's plan. With around 100 rotating meals every week, including high protein, calorie smart Mediterranean GLP1 support, ready to eat salads, and the new Muscle Pro collection. Always fresh, never frozen no prep, no cleanup, no mental load.

23:58 It's not motivation to eat better. It's elimination of the reason you don't. I use this and you should, too. Head to factormeals.com/legal aaf5050 off and use code legal af50 off to get 50% off your first factor box plus free breakfast for a year. Offer valid for new factor customers with code and qualifying autorenewing subscription purchase. Make healthier eating easy with factor. Feeling sluggish? Bloated? Not like yourself. Life bombards us with silent threats. Processed foods artificial light, and modern stressors disrupt your gut and drain your energy and weaken your immune health. Your body isn't broken. It just needs the right inputs. That's why I've been using Armra Colostrum. I've noticed less bloating steadier energy, and overall, I just feel more like myself. Armra Colostrum is nature's original blueprint for health. Colostrum is packed with over 400 bioactive nutrients that fortify gut

25:00 health, fuel fitness recovery, and strengthen immune health, supporting your best performance every day. Take back control of your health. We've worked out a special offer for my audience. Receive 30% off your first subscription order. Go to armrod.com/legalaf or enter legal AF to get 30% off your first subscription order. That's a r a.com/legala. Welcome back to legal af. Lot to discuss. We'll touch upon it when I throw it back to you, Popach, if there's anything else you wanted to round out that segment on regarding uh the Epstein files, but it's just obvious they're going to continue covering this up.

25:43 That's been their plan. They viewed the Epstein Transparency Act as having this massive loophole. It doesn't have a private cause of action, so we don't have to follow it. And there's a broader point here. Um, the Constitution has gigantic loopholes. I was talking about this at breakfast earlier with my wife and and our niece. Um, and I was just saying, you know, a lot of people credit the founders for being brilliant and you know, and and you know, oh my god you know, m maybe during that time period, but in terms of 2026, you know there are major problems. When I teach law, as I do this semester over at USC you know, it's just I always find it interesting when I teach a class like sports law, when we talk about collective bargaining agreements that govern how a league manages itself. Um you know, basketball, NFL, whatever they are thousands of pages and meticulous and anticipate every scenario. And then when I go and show

26:38 the class, well, this is the Constitution, it's not all that long. The key amendments are a few sentences. And I think the extraordinary part that a lot of countries were unclear how we could accomplish this as a nation is that the constitution was built on good faith and norms and traditions and courses of dealing, not just the words themselves. Because the words often are broad pronouncements and they often don't specify specifically what the drafters of the specific amendment truly wanted. and yet it it held together for so long. Then you have someone like Trump who's ripped apart and shredded contracts his whole life, even when they're crystal clear what the obligations are. He looks at the Constitution as weak. And you see here a law like the Epstein Transparency Act okay, it doesn't have a private cause of action, but who would interpret that law as saying "Gotcha. we don't have to uh actually

27:42 produce anything because you Congress mandated we do something. We signed it into law, but no private cause of action. Gotcha. You know, and and the question whether you're Democrat Republican, independent is seriously what society do you want to live in? Are are we a gotcha on everything like that? And is that the way we handle things? By the way, I think they're wrong. There are some things called implied private causes of action. And when you go before a federal judge and you put out fact sheets about the Epstein transparency law, here's what we're going to do and then you don't do it. There are other equitable and other principles that come into play, but it's just that's their position is so is so low. It's so it's so gutter. It's such it's such trash human behavior. And again, I don't care whether you're Democrat, Republican, you should not want to teach people in your life to behave in that way. It's so it's

28:40 just, not, what, we, expect, of, of of, leaders that their position is. Gotcha.

28:47 Let's, talk, about, that., But, I, but, let, me just you tie it all together. But like you know, Ken Vogle from the New York Times did this great piece um uh where they talked about all of these people who were quietly pardoned, you know this week, you know, with someone named A Adriana Cambrero. She did like um uh fake 5hour energy drinks back in like 2021, you know, and she was pardoned back in 2021. Then she was then she committed fraud again. She did it again.

29:16 Gets, another, pardon., Then, you, go, to Puerto Rico. Wanda Vasquez Mark, who was the former go Republican governor of Puerto Rico, Mark Rousini. Um, and then there was uh another, this was all about bribes. There was a guy Julio Herrera, and Herrera's daughter gave Trump's pack $2.5 million, and then another million, so $3.5 million to Trump. And then Herrera got hit with a misdemeanor for engaging in a massive bribery scheme with the Republican governor, a former Republican governor of Puerto Rico, and then got a misdemeanor for it, which is total BS and then got pardoned. A guy who dumps sludge into cities in Southern California, got five months only, and then got pardoned as well. Um, you go through this list of other people.

30:00 Terren Piser, ex CEO, convicted of insider trading. And we've been covering this the through line throughout here of all these other fraudster sex trafficking networks. Juan Orlando Hernandez the biggest drug trafficker. Um Pop, what do you what do you make of of all of this? You could start with the gotcha, you know, just we start with and then tie it into the part.

30:23 Yeah., And, on, the, gotcha, part, and, you're so right. I mean the the constitution was not built as a statute which you know the code of federal regulation or the United States code annotated which is our code book which is supposed to be consistent with the aspirations of the constitution or the teachings of the constitution as interpreted by human beings. I mean, it was in, you know, the since 1807 with the Marbury versus Madison case, Chief Justice John Marshall, who when you go to the United States Supreme Court, you will know who is the greatest Supreme Court justice of all time. It's not John Roberts. giant statues of two of them and busts of John Marshall because he's the one that gave us our checks and balance system through a a a Supreme Court that's diff that has not always been nine over time. It's been different numbers of justices and hopefully it will be a different number

31:18 in the future, but their interpretation of it and and and frankly the the founders and the framers never thought that we would not have amended this the constitution to fit morals and values over, time., It, is, a, I I, it, is, a, little bit of a misnomer. I mean, I've always seen it as a living, breathing document but um it it is not to MAGA and to the right wing or as Antineine Scalia famously put it, the Constitution is not a living breathing document. It is dead dead and and they interpret it that way through the prism of their own ideology.

31:58 But whereas state constitutions, every state has its own constitution, which is why you and I certain sometimes talk about, you know, abortion was upheld today in Wyoming under the state constitution. Those constitutions have been amended thousands of times over the last 50 years, thousands. Um, every state, but the constitution is never gets amended. And the last time we tried, you know, the Equal Rights Amendment, you know, it either did or didn't pass depending depending on how you interpret how long it took for the states to ratify it. But I think the thing if you ask me what would be the most, surprising, and, sh, I, think there's, a couple things the framers and founders would be shocked by. One is this kind of originalism and textualism commitment that the right-wing uses to try to block out civil rights. I think that would be surprising to them about well we have to it's whatever you know on gun rights

32:56 it's whatever in the old tiny times whatever was on the books for gun regulation in the 1780s or 1820s that's what's going to govern today I think they'd be shocked by that I also think they'd be shocked by how few times we've actually amended the constitution to fit and update it for the times so with that let me let me switch gears to the pardons the pardons are not surprising to anybody. And the part that gets missed, although Vogle did a good job there, is how much money is getting wiped out going to the taxpayers for restitution that go along with these things. You know, like the Chrysley family, there was like a hundred million dollar bank fraud and they were obligated to pay back tens of millions of dollars based on it. Every one of these people that had a conviction also had a restitution amount because they were all major league fraudsters or what you called earlier today fraud stars.

33:49 These fraud stars owed so much money to the American people for restitution purposes and that gets wiped out along with the when when the pardon happens. They haven't paid it back. They've been in jail. And what is the message that Donald Trump is sending to the American people to the recidivist, the ones that committed fraud more? How about the one that got first time in history got a pardon twice? You know, like I mean, how many times does Donald Trump have to say, "I don't really know you that well but you were weapon, you know weaponized Department of Justice. Have a good life." You This is how he writes his social media tweets around these pardons. How many times you have to pardon the same person twice? What is the messaging that it's sending to the rest of America, to your daughter and my daughter and other people and around the world about values, like you said, about about um uh morals uh about what it

34:39 means to be an American and what it means to have a criminal justice system to be respected and a rule of law to be respected. Now, every potential fraudster says, "Well, [ __ ] it. I'll make as much money as I possibly can because hopefully a mag will get back into office and I'll get a free pass especially if I donate to the cause. You know how this is we said originally at the top of the at the top of the pardon list and everything this was a presidency for sale to the highest bidder whether it's big oil who bought our Venezuelan policy for us right this wasn't a war this isn't a freedom on the march this isn't installing democracy this is this is how do we capture the Venezuelan oil from for now and into the future we'll get around to democracy and election Maybe one day. Look at me smiling with my Nobel Prize. This this terrible terrible scene. I felt bad for Machado too. You know, switching gears to

35:38 Venezuela for a minute. You know, the the leader of the ex the party in exile who's probably going to be the president of that country and most people want her to be. She had to go in there and like kiss his ring, give her give him her Nobel Prize in order to try to get back into power and and all with no cameras present. I mean, this is a guy that doesn't wipe his ass without a press photographer next to him or a social media post or two. No pictures of her no official statements, no social media. It was as if it didn't happen except for the Nobel Prize being given to him which led the Nobel Prize committee to say that's not how Nobel prizes work. You you can't just hand it to somebody. And if you want to go back in history, you know, um Hitler's uh uh public uh communications director goals, he he was given a Nobel Prize by somebody too who also wanted something from the Hitler regime. So you know this whole [ __ ]

36:35 there. This is the immorality and the illegality of the Trump administration and Donald Trump. And this is why, you know, we haven't talked about it lately. The poll numbers are so terrible for Donald Trump almost in anability to recover from them at the, you know, as he's maybe going past the 30% approval mark, which means a fair amount of MAGA have written him off for the midterms and beyond, you know for his party and beyond. But what what we're worried about over here on the Midasan legal AF side is we know what happens when a a desperate Donald Trump tries to cling to power Jan 6 ins you know insurrection act in gets invoked now and all that we saw what happened on Jan 6 and Donald Trump's conspiracy there even though you know he got an immunity passed from the from the Supreme Court but wait till midterms in 2028 when he's got nothing to lose and his flirtation with the insurrection act

37:37 becomes let's seize voting machines let's postpone voting day let's continue our assault on voting rights because he can't possibly win any other way that's something long that's the long view you and I are going to have to keep a very very very close but this pardon thing is just symptomatic of a diseased corrupt Trump administration and department of justice

38:01 two, points, one, on, the, textualist interpretation aspect of things, but the other on the oil and this goes into criminality. What a rogue regime this is. The oil money from Venezuela right now is going to a bank account in Qatar. It's not going to the Treasury Department. It's not going to American taxpayers. It's being held in a Qatari bank account without checks and balances or controls. And I say this again Democrat Republican independent you're okay with the money going first off, you're okay with the authoritarian regime of Maduro still being in power while they brutally repress the opposition in Venezuela right now. like that's what America represents that we just steal oil if we can just have our authoritarian and and say that. And by the way, I don't know if you've seen this, but um Senator Rick Scott of Florida, he's even been posting without any shred of irony based on his cult-like admiration for Donald Trump.

39:08 He's like Diodados Cabo is still holding hostage uh Edmundo uh Gonzalez's the the other opposition leaders uh children and he's brutally Yeah. because they're a brutal regime. And the CIA was there in Venezuela with Deli with the Adados with the whole authoritarian crew. You had talk about CIA covert covert intelligence agency. You know it's supposed to be confidential classified. We've got our CIA director chilling with Deli Rodriguez, Maduro's VP turned the head of the country. And just so people know, that would be like Trump leaving office and getting Steven Miller. Like, you know, that's pretty much what it's like. She was the worst than Maduro and Diodadoo Cabo is like bringing in Hegsith.

40:06 That's who's running it. Miller and Hegith are now running it versus Maduro. That's basically the equivalent. Next point, the issues of textualist originalists, all this stuff. It's all [ __ ] you know, and it's sometimes tough for me as a law professor to have to explain that to the class because when I was in law

40:25 is, that, how, you, start, your, con, law class? It's all [ __ ] My, con, law, class,, I, just, want, to, let, you know that basically everything here is ultimately BS. And it's really just going to be who's appointed to the Supreme Court's going to rule or not rule in your favor. Because here's the thing. When we went to law school, you learn about these frameworks for analysis. Um, are you a textualist? Like every word matters. Are you an originalist? You go back to the origin and the meaning. Are you a states rights person and make sure that states rights are always protected? If you read the first amendment, where do you stand on the free speech versus free exercise balance? because the first amendment read it. It's pretty it's pretty short you know, when you So, there are all of these frameworks of of analysis, but ultimately they're the frameworks of sociopaths because at the end of the

41:18 day, the answer is determined by the framework from the outset. You want a certain outcome, you say you're an originalist. You want an outcome here say you're a textualist. I'm a textualist until the Second Amendment starts to talk about um regulation well-regulated militia. And you're like well, how does the words well reggulated militia deal with the right to bear arms? You see, that's where we're an originalist. Okay. The founders never made any comments about semi-automatic weapons and these machine guns. And so they like guns. Yeah. But they had different types of weapons back. Well they never said it. Well, but what about the language that says well-regulated militia? Wouldn't the word regulation and amendment imply regulation? No, no no, no, no. Why? There's a comma. What do you mean there's a comma? Yeah, you do. You don't read before the comma.

42:15 Everything after the comma is right, but before the comma, we don't care about those words. Why? Because we're originalists. Oh, we're states rights. Okay, well, you're states rights, but now we've got the federal government invading the states. Well, you've got a unitary executive. What does that mean? He could do whatever he wants. Anything. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We're originalists. Okay. But isn't originally the Constitution intended to stop the monarchy? Isn't the whole originalist of our existence against absolute immunity?

42:47 No. No. No. You see, you're wrong there. We've created a new theory called unitary executive. Who created it? The founders? No. No. No. No. Who? The federalist. The Federalist. the Federalist and the Heritage Foundation. You mean in the 80s? They came up with it in the 80s. Yeah, they came up with So, you're not an original. So, my whole point here, what I just did, that exercise that I just did is the problem frankly, with the law. And when you go back to the loopholes and maybe it's empowering to know the things that I'm that I'm saying but it is it is a imagine playing soccer with people and one team good soccer players not great but they have machine guns. Okay. And then the other team you're playing against great soccer players the best.

43:33 You know pick your favorite football club from you know the Premier League. Don't have machine guns. Okay. you start to play and then the side with the machine guns and this reminds me of the movie the uh the dictator with Sasha Barack Cohen when he's running the race and then he he has the gun and he starts shooting people on the track. the team with the machine gun starts shooting everybody and you're like, "But we were better soccer players. Our answers made more sense and we were we you know, we were we were more talented." But yeah but they're using machine guns. And so at some point the I don't mean to make it a violent reference, but the point is there's been one side that hasn't been going with norms, traditions, rules, but they've been pretending to, as Mamani said during his inauguration speech kind of using the facade of decency and and intellectual language to actually do the repression while other people have

44:27 been playing by norms and standards and rules and have been screwed. Popac. Hold the thought because I want to talk about that and much more because this to me is addressed in the Reagan appointed judge Judge Young, who's saying what I'm pretty much saying in his own way. And it's interesting when it comes from a Reagan appointed judge. So, let's take our last quick break of the show. A reminder, if you or someone you know has been injured in a car accident, auto accident caused by the negligence of others, any type of negligence of others, sexual assault, sexual harassment cases, medical malpractice cases, if you know someone who's died in an accident, um, and you know their family, reach out to Popox Firm there.

45:06 Popox Firm is there to help. He's got lawyers across the country to give a free consultation. So give a phone call to 888 popcaf or go to the popfirm.com. That's that's 877 popacf or go to the popfirm.com. 877POPAF or go to the popfirm.com. Not 88877. Um also check out the legal afstack and check out the legal AF YouTube channel. I know there's going to be a big Substack sale on the legal AF. So, uh make sure you all check that out. Let's take our last quick break of the show.

45:45 Delete, Me, makes, it, easy,, quick,, and, safe to remove your personal data online. At a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable. Look, as someone with an active online presence, privacy is really important to me. I'm constantly thinking about how much of my personal information is just floating around out there. Data brokers make a profit off of your data. your name contact info, home address, even details about your family, and anyone on the web can buy it. That can open the door to things like fishing attempts or harassment. If it hasn't happened to you, it happened to me. You probably know someone it has happened to. That's why I like Delete Me. They work to remove your data from hundreds of data broker websites, helping you take back control of your privacy. They've even been named the New York Times wire cutter top pick for data removal

46:37 services. Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me now. At a special discount for our listeners, you can get 20% off your Delete Me plan when you go to joindeleteme.com/legal AAF and use promo code legal AF at checkout. The only way to get 20% off though is to go to joindeleteme.com/legal AF and enter code legal AAF at checkout. One more time. That's jointdeleteme.com/legal AF and code legal AF. Magic Spoon is basically the grown-up version of your favorite childhood cereal. All the fun nostalgic taste without the sugar bomb.

47:19 It's a wholesome, highquality, high protein, zero sugar cereal that still hits that Saturday morning vibe. Each serving has 13 gram of protein, five gram of net carbs, and zero gram of sugar. So, it's super fueling any time of the day and great for anyone who's carb conscious. They've got classic flavors like fruity, frosted, hot chocolate, and cinnamon toast. They're also launching new flavors in January this month, that lean hard into childhood nostalgia. Classic marshmallow, reminiscent of a certain childhood favorite enjoyed by all, and S'mores, the ultimate campfire inspired cereal. Both include real marshmallows and just two grams of sugar. Plus, Magic Spoon Treats are crispy, airy snack bars with 12 grams of protein and their granola packs. 13 g of protein with zero added sugar. Perfect anytime. Look for Magic Spoon on Amazon or at your nearest grocery store. Or get $5 off your next

48:24 order at magixpoon.com/legalaf. That's magixpoon.com/legal AAF for $5 off. Welcome back to Legal AF. We've got a lot to discuss. You know, it's a serious legal AF when I'm doing it in the courtroom. Legal AF in the courthouse. Michael Popac. Let's talk about a few things. Um I'm sure you could weave it and tie it all together. Um, we learned earlier today, which we knew before, this is why the prosecutors in Minneapolis, who are actually also the prosecutors doing the fraud cases and investigations and successfully under the Biden administration into Trump, prosecuting the fraud that was identified in 2024, which Trump was using as the pretext for this invasion um, and try to attack the entire Somali community to go after Minneapolis. Um we also know that the lawyers quit out of main justice in the civil rights division. Um, but we know now that federal officials are officially investigating Renee Nicole Good's widow

49:19 uh, regarding the uh, killing of Renee Nicole Good by the officer or not the officer, the ICE Gustapo guy, Jonathan Ross. Ross is not under any investigation at all. Uh, the feds are going after the widow. They're also going after Mayor Fry. They're also going after uh, Governor Walls. Criminal investigations into everybody other than the shooter and everybody other than ICE by, this, DOJ., And, that, was, one, of the reasons for mass resignations. You have that one. Two, that same DOJ that's now going after the widow. Uh, imagine criminally investigating a widow. A widow right now and not the shooter.

49:57 A, grieving, widow. Just, lost, just, lost, her, wife, like, a, week ago. That, same, DOJ, through, the, FBI, executes, a search warrant on a Washington Post reporter, Hannah Nathansson. She was the main reporter doing all those really good scoops on the federal workers who had been fired and all of their and the whistleblowers, federal workers who observed the the crimes taking place. I think she developed 1,169 sources. The Washington Post wrote back in December of 2025. Um, and she recounted in that article right before the new year all of these sources uh that she had developed and she was um raided by the FBI her personal laptop personal phones were all taken and confiscated where she was communicating with those uh whistleblowers. And then you have tying it all together pop and I always love to throw three things out have you weave it together. Judge William Glover Young, uh, Judge Bill

50:53 Young as he's known in Massachusetts appointed by Reagan, issues a scathing order against, uh, the Trump regime. So Popac, the floor is yours. Weaving weaving as we speak. Okay. So, again the the thematic here is an easy one. We're watching the most corrupt Department of Justice run by the most uh corrupt attorney general in our history a guy named Donald Trump who runs his own Department of Justice. And when he doesn't like what they're doing with all of their wickedness and corruptness like Pam Bondi, he finds ways to get rid of her and find somebody that will do his bidding. And so we're watching the total immolation of the Department of Justice. It was already stripped of its credibility and stripped of its proud history um in the first six months if not before by Pam Bondi willingly. I mean that was one of her jobs was to chloroform the Department of Justice and joined and and she was joined though

51:52 with complicit syncopants and bootlickers like Harme Dylan to put out of its misery the civil rights division while continuing to fly the flag of being if you go on the civil rights division's website it still talks about we're the division that investigated the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Megar Evers. I'm like are you effing kidding me? you you're still using the history wrapping yourselves in the constitution and the civil rights movement while being led by the most corrupt racist anti- civil rights uh you know uh presidency in history I mean let come on so you got that as the backdrop in Minneapolis what are we watching we're watching federal judges like Judge Mendez issue a decision just yesterday and it was a little bit confusing because she's handling two cas And one day people were like, "Ugh, she didn't enter the temporary restraining order in favor of the state of Minnesota

52:48 um to stop these abusive ICE tactics on the streets." That's because she was also handling another case. And she knew she was about to enter a preliminary injunction in favor of six ICE protesters, you know, peaceful protesters on the streets of Minneapolis representing a class of all protesters. So, while she didn't grant the temporary restraining order, which is the kind of one, of the, lowest, levels, of, in, of injunctions during the course of a of a case at its inception for the state at a at a status conference on Wednesday she held a final hearing on Tuesday and said, "I'm going to be issuing an order in the protester case." So, she's got the Minneapolis case and the protester case. She's issued her order, a scathing 83page decision. And I have it up on legal layoff substack for paid subscribers. Um, but I'll boil it down for you in very simply. She found that the American Civil Liberties Union

53:45 representing the protesters had made their case at this juncture subject to final trial or summary judgement that the Fourth Amendment illegal search and seizure rights under the Constitution of the protesters have been violated by the ICE tactics and by the administration. She said, "You didn't quite didn't quite get there for me with the record as it is on first amendment, which means freedom of speech and viewpoint based discrimination, but I'm all with you on the Fourth Amendment." She also excoriated the Trump administration for not bringing evidence into her courtroom., She, said,, "I, don't know., I got the protesters testifying about what happened to them, including a story that like I almost had to stop reading it that's in the order about a pregnant pregnant protester who was stun gunned and thrown to the ground by ICE. Separate from that, you got two people in Santa Clara California, who were blinded blinded by

54:48 ICE by shooting non non-lethal but deadly force. Anything above the neck that you fire at somebody is considered even under ISIS own manual deadly force. So they fired projectiles and and blew out the eyeball of two people. One of them was a protester. He's five foot. It's a ban five foot tall and 102 pounds. I can't really see this guy getting in the way of, you know, of obstructing justice, if you will. And certainly he shouldn't have been blinded on the streets as a penalty. So, you've got all that going on with Judge Menendez supervising over all of this.

55:24 The American Civil Liberties Union who's now with us regularly on Legal AF U with with the reporting and contributions, they just filed another new civil rights case in Minnesota as the the automatic response of this corrupt regime, the Trump administration, is to double down and triple down. Now, while Donald Trump may have backed off his threats of using the Insurrection Act for now because we're drawing attention to it, they are going after the victims. They're victimizing the victims. I mean I mean Renee Good's body is not even cold in the ground leaving her her six-year-old son, you know,, a, motherless,, at least,, you, know, Rene's motherhood. um when they're going after Renee Good and Becca Good, her wife, about whether about whether what to try to prove JD Vance's total incomplete disinformation campaign that he launched the first day after they learned about what happened on the

56:19 street that there's some sort of left-wing activist being funded. They were on the board of education of a charter school in the south side of Minneapolis devoted to social justice who were who had done training about nonviolent opposition, peaceful opposition. She sat in a car perpendicular but left open her back and her front to allow traffic to go around her. She just wanted to slow down a process. She didn't want to lose her life for peaceful protest. So, I mean I mean how many in you can put it in comments tonight. How many domestic terrorists drive a late model car with an old dog in the back uh and dance in their car to try to slow down ICE? How many how many domestic terrorists fit that bill? Not many. So instead of investigating whether Jonathan Ross committed civil rights, criminal civil rights deprivation the way that Derek Schovin did when he crushed the life out of George Floyd. They've turned the

57:25 tables in a Kafka-esque Orwellian way and are going after the victims. Sure let's open an investigation into Becca Good and what she's doing for peaceful protest or Renee Good or the mayor of Minneapolis or the governor of Minnesota, right? Everybody's being investigated except the shooter and the murderer of uh a US citizen on the streets of America during peaceful protest. And and right away they circled the wagons around the guy and they said, "Oh self-defense. Uh you know, absolute immunity. Uh why don't we let the investigation not be tainted by your prejudging? Try that. That would probably give the American people more confidence that you're being honest and true with your development of your facts than if you declare upfront that it was you know, we've seen the video. Yeah we've all seen the video. But now, let's let law enforcement, maybe state law enforcement, since you're so conflicted

58:24 uh, take over and to tell the American people exactly what happened. And then you know, I've had Keith Ellison, the attorney general, on he's not afraid to go after federal officers and prosecute them for crimes, you know, that are committed on his streets. And that, I think, is the next wave, the next turn of affairs that if that'll come here. If the feds aren't going to do it, then um the states and the state attorney generals are going to have to do it. And and against that backdrop, you've got two judges, two 80year-old judges who are doing God's work, staying in their chair and opposing the Trump administration. William Young, Bill Young, okay, he didn't want this. He's a Reagan appointee, 85year-old. He'd like to be sitting on some golden pond somewhere with his grandchildren fishing, I'm sure. But he can't go anywhere because of this outofcontrol administration. He just declared, "I've

59:18 never seen this before in my life. I've read thousands of Supreme Court decisions from law school on." So have you, Ben. I have never seen a federal judge say out loud, because it was a hearing, say out in a in a written order, say out loud what Judge Young just said, which is there is a conspiracy to violate the Constitution at the highest levels of an administration led by its two senior cabinet members, Marco Rubio and Christy Gnome, and then went into the detail including making reference to their that in comparing the tactics of the Trump administration to those who chased after newly freed slaves to return them to their slave owners. You're like, if he's using this imagery to talk about it now as I've said to people, this was this at the bottom, the facts are about All right, we can fill in the blank. This one happens to be about uh pro Palestinian uh uh students and faculty and whether whether they have a first

1:00:25 amendment right on US soil to say things that some of us might find offensive. And I tell people I'm not saying I agree with everything a protest comes out of a protesters's mouth on any side of the of the aisle or any side of the spectrum. But I will defend with my last dying breath the right for that person to say that out loud as long as it doesn't cross past the the protections of the first amendment into being some sort of you know hate speech uh slash um you know a call for violence or fermenting of violence. But short of that the fact that it makes me uncomfortable is the reason it needs that is the speech that needs to be defended. And so they were deporting and and throwing into ICE without due process all of these students, right? Uh and getting them off of campus and then until they had bond hearing months later. And the judge was like, "No, this this hearing was about remedy. He already found the violation

1:01:21 several months ago." And of and of course the the Department of Justice corrupt, led by Donald Trump, looked the judge in the eye and said the same thing they've been saying to every judge. you don't have any jurisdiction here. He's like, what are you talking about? No you can't fashion a remedy because that can only go to immigration court. He says, we're talking about constitutional violations that are that I've developed a record and you're telling me I can't do anything about it. Trust me, he's going to be doing something about it.

1:01:48 Same day, David O. Carter in your background in your backyard who famously back in in off the um off the Jan 6 committee subpoenas to John Eastman Donald Trump's constitutional law halfwit that he relied on for the insurrection who was trying to protect his emails from his law school server and others from being disclosed to the Jan 6 committee because a lot of them were about or to Donald Trump. He made that famous ruling that the first one, he was the first, there was others, but he was the first to say that a President Trump had more likely than not committed crimes and stripped the attorney client privilege away under the crime fraud exception. So D, we've been tracking you knew David Carter from your your days of practicing law in California and I certainly learned a lot about him in that case. In the nuke case, he just shot down the civil rights division uh using civil rights law perversely to try

1:02:48 to get their grubby, greedy little hands on our private voter data where they've gone after 17 states or so so far to try to get our data. Yeah, there's a reason our founding fathers back to the [ __ ] of the constitution. Why our founding fathers separated and uh the uh you know the allocation of responsibility for federal elections. They are in the hands of the states because by and large we don't trust the federal government running elections. That's just the truth. They're too far removed from us. We certainly don't want the executive branch and one guy doing it or one person doing it. So they very smartly under article one gave that power yeah article one to the states uh to run even federal elections time place and manner what not the day but how they're going to be run what's the procedures what's the logistics the counting the method the all of that that's all with the states and the

1:03:47 executive branch in the presidency has no role in it um and so judge Carter said this is you know when you start seeing quotes of like Abraham Lincoln. Abraham Lincoln famously said that the ballot is stronger than the bullet. You ironic considering his end. Um and other statements of founding fathers and framers. And he called out the administration for being unpatriotic for being illegal and unconstitutional and just trying to suppress the vote and scare people into not voting and under the guise that they have some role in that process. he dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning they're going to have to take an appeal now because that case is now gone um in one of two states that have done it. So when you when you put all of these kind of cases together, you know, from Minneapolis to Boston to to in this case California, what is the common theme and denominator? It is a corrupt department of justice who's lost

1:04:42 its way if it ever had a way about ethics and morality, our constitution and what its role is supposed to be. I just as an example of, you know, and I talk a lot about what should be the independence of the Department of Justice completely destroyed by Donald Trump who's captured it completely um under this whole unitary executive uh presidency model. You know, you have J. D. Vance announcing the creation of a Department of Justice office devoted to fraud, which again, you know, here, over here, he's pardoning fraudsters, some of them multiple recidivists. Over here, he wants the American people to think he's tough on fraud, and he's opening up a new prosecutor's office related to it.

1:05:29 Jamie Vance announced it from the White House, not Pam Bondi from the Department of Justice. So now they're opening up whole new who knows what just admissions, confessions that they are in control of this puppet department of justice. Everybody there should resign or be impeached. I'm not sure if Pam Bondi, you know, you know, I've done a lot of hot takes on this. I'm not sure Pam Bondi makes it to our February 21st oversight committee hearing back in back in in the in the Senate. I see Todd Blanch taking this whole thing over very very soon. But in any event, that is the common denominator. And we're watching is judges, Menendez, Young, Carter, and others just just trying their hardest with the tools in their tool pack to restrain a lawless presidency.

1:06:16 Take, a, look, at, what, this, federal, judge ruled in Minnesota, restricting ICE tactics against protesters who aren't suspected of committing crimes. I mean just think about that. a judge has to even say these things. In the United States of America, agents are hereby barred from retaliating against persons who are engaging in peaceful and unobstructive protest activity including observing the activities of Operation Metro Surge, arresting or detaining persons who are engaging in peaceful and unobstructed protest activity, including observing the activities of Operation Metro Surge in retaliation for their protected conduct and absent to showing a probable cause or reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime or is obstructing or interfering with the activities of a covered federal officer. Using pepper spray or similar non-lethal munitions and crowd dispersal tools against

1:07:10 persons who are engaging in peaceful and unobstructed protest activity, including observing the activities, stopping or detaining drivers and passengers and vehicles where there is no reasonable articulable suspicion that they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with covered federal agents. The act of safely following covered federal agents at an appropriate distance does not by itself create reasonable suspicion or justify a vehicle stop. The fact that that has to be put into a court order when that's just a statement of the United States Constitution and a statement of the law. the fact that you have these ICE and Border Patrol Gustapo and military fatigues asking people to see their papers and if they don't show the papers and if your skin looks a certain way, you get thrown into a detention center and maybe never heard from again in the United States of America. the fact that you'll see

1:08:05 peaceful protesters on the streets and then you'll see these ICE agents or border patrol take these canisters of gas and sometimes it's unclear. It's not just pepper spray and pepper balls. Some of this noxious gas that's green and makes people choke and and really, you know, hurts people um and causes so much pain. They just throw the they chuck the gas at the peaceful protesters because they want to create the scenes and the imagery of war that they themselves are are creating. And you have Governor Walls and the mayor saying to the people, "Be peaceful. Be peaceful. Don't buy into what they're doing." At the same time, you have the tactics of this invasion inflicting the pain on the people to try to provoke and terrorize and cause these scenes. This is what's happening in the name of the United States of America. So, I'll leave you with this though with some positive news. I mean, today was the swearing in

1:08:59 of Governor Spanberger in Virginia. Um there's now a trifecta in Virginia of the House of Delegates, the Senate which comprises the General Assembly there, and the governorship in a very short period of time. They've put forward referendums in April to protect women's reproductive rights, to protect voting rights, to protect access to health care, and all of these things that Governor Ynan ripped away. So all of these things will be on the ballot including uh gerrymandering mid district or mid decade redistricting there in Virginia.

1:09:30 And there you have the uh the the the president proemp of the United States uh of the Virginia Senate um basically saying to like you know there are all these like senators in the United States and other people who were like you know maybe don't overreach Democrats and you know don't do a 10 to one map that's too much like maybe try to make the map like 8 to three or or or seven to four like let's like let's relax a little bit here and then the president uh promp. She's incredible. Luis Lucas. Um she goes, "I have the utmost respect for Senator Kaine and Senator Warner, but we do not need coaching on redistricting coming from a cut chair in the corner. How about you all stay focused on the fascist in the White House and let us handle redistricting in Virginia 10 to one. I don't know what other choice you have right now with every with everything that we've said. In what world do we go, you know what? Let's be

1:10:29 let's let's let's just kind of come up with what it it'll be okay. You have to fight back. Even selfishly, you have to fight back. Even if your pure grounds is selfish, if you do what Machado does and you're and just thinking about it selfishly, did that benefit Machado? What happens when another administration comes in? Do you think that that Machado handing over her Nobel Peace Prize inspires confidence in her leadership? To me, everything that made her get the Nobel Peace Prize is thrown out the window when she hands over her Nobel Peace Prize to the person who invaded our country and propped up the authoritarian.

1:11:06 Yeah. Her whole legacy was destroyed. I I, I I, mean,, do, you, I, mean,, do, you, think Nelson Mandela when he was in prison for decades, you know, was out there, you know, trying to cut deals with authority, is he trying to cut deals you know, and be like, "Actually, you want all the oil here?" like, well, and you'll let me out early. You know, at some point, you know, and I don't mean to end on on a bit of a morbid note, you know, you you either will stand on principles and be attacked for that, but keep your principles and values, or you'll sacrifice it, and you're going to be attacked anyway.

1:11:43 It's a simple choice, even if you had the most selfish reasons for it. And you shouldn't have the selfish reasons. You should have reasons that were here to help people. That's the whole point of this all to be better people. When we talk about what the government is doing to the people, the pain it's inflicting on people. That's not what government's supposed to be for. Government's supposed to be for helping people access healthcare, access homes, access opportunities, access a better life, not be the terrorists.

1:12:12 There you have it. We'll keep covering this all the time. We've been doing live reporting from inside Minneapolis and St. Paul today. I'm sure you've seen that coverage. We appreciate you all watching. Make sure you subscribe to Michael Popox Substack. Legal AF. Just search it on Substack. Subscribe to Michael Popox's YouTube channel, the Legal AF YouTube channel, and subscribe to all of the Legal AF channels including our YouTube channel here, and Legal AF on audio. Finally, if you or someone you know has been injured in an auto accident, a trucking accident, if you've been injured by the negligence of someone else, if you know someone who's the victim of wrongful death or someone else's ne negligence, uh give a call to 877POPAF or visit the popfirm.com. That's 877 Popac AF or or go to the popfirm.com.

1:13:00 They have people, lawyers, uh administrators 247 uh getting back to you. The consultation is free and there have been so many legal AF listeners and viewers who have called who are actually being represented by the POPACH firm. So make sure you give a call 877 Popac AF or go to the popfirm.com available 247. Don't be shy. Thanks everybody for watching. We appreciate it. We're grateful for you. Stay safe. Keep fighting for democracy. We're in this together. Shout out to the mightest mighty and shout out legal actors.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "LIVE: Trump RUSHES to VOID EPSTEIN LAW + MASSIVE ICE RULING | Legal AF"?

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

What is "LIVE: Trump RUSHES to VOID EPSTEIN LAW + MASSIVE ICE RULING | Legal AF" about?

This week covers significant legal developments involving the Department of Justice's resistance to an independent monitor in the Epstein case, while also addressing Donald Trump's controversial pardons and military actions in Minneapolis. The discussion further highlights a ruling by Judge Bill Young that critiques Trump's constitutional violations regarding Palestinian activists, showcasing a…

What is mentioned in this MeidasTouch episode?

17 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Donald Trump, Department of Justice, ICE, Chislaine Maxwell, Pardons, Civil Rights Division. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "LIVE: Trump RUSHES to VOID EPSTEIN LAW + MASSIVE ICE RULING | Legal AF"?

The episode runs 1 h 14 min; the transcript is about 12,510 words in 90 timestamped sections.

More from MeidasTouch

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