Trump gets BRUTAL REALITY CHECK in Court over FELONIES

What this episode is about

A federal judge has firmly rejected Donald Trump's attempt to move his state court conviction for 34 felony counts of business record fraud to federal court, emphasizing the implausibility of his argument for presidential immunity regarding actions taken before his presidency, including the Stormy Daniels hush money payments. This decision reinforces the legal accountability Trump faces for actions related to election interference, despite his claims of immunity derived from a Supreme Court ruling.

Key takeaways

• Trump's immunity claims may be stronger in theory than in the courtrooms where judges know better.
• Timing is everything: Waiting four months to act on legal claims is like bringing a knife to a gunfight.
• Judge Hellerstein reminds us that presidential duties don’t include hush money to adult film stars—who knew?
• In legal battles, taking two bites of the apple can lead to getting none—especially with sharp judges around.
• Trump's attempt to pivot from state to federal court reflects desperation, not an airtight legal strategy.

Who speaks in this episode?

• Michael Popac (Host) · 11 min speaking
• Alvin Hellerstein (Guest) · 1 min speaking
• Michael Cohen (Host) · 1 min speaking
• Hope Hicks (Guest) · 1 min speaking

What is discussed, and when

1. 0:00 – 3:00: Donald Trump, Stormmy Daniels, Alvin K. Hellerstein, United States Supreme Court
2. 3:00 – 6:00: Donald Trump, Alvin K. Hellerstein, Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Stormmy Daniels
3. 6:00 – 9:00: Donald Trump, Manhattan District Attorney, United States Supreme Court, Michael Cohen
4. 9:00 – 12:00: Donald Trump, Alvin K. Hellerstein, United States Supreme Court, Legal AF

Notable quotes from "Trump gets BRUTAL REALITY CHECK in Court over FELONIES"

• Sketch. The chances of that happening, zero. based on a hearing that Judge Helerstein held earlier this week. I'm going to cover it here on the Midas Touch Network at On Legal…

  about Legal AF · at 0:26

• Clinton. Okay. He then after the conviction, but before the sentencing, boom, the United States Supreme Court July 3 years ago, came out with the quote unquote immunity…

  about United States Supreme Court · at 1:13

• Immunity? But it confused a lot of people. And so after that came out, the argument for the Trump administration was, Aha, the state court judge should do something about it. He should throw out the conviction.

  about Alvin K. Hellerstein · at 2:04

• The argument for Donald Trump's lawyers is that and the second circuit court of appeals wants to hear Judge Hellerstein's view on this is that what do you do with the immunity decision? It.

  about Donald Trump · at 4:07

• Very little from the Manhattan District Attorney, by the way, because he didn't want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. That's when you sit down. And I've been an advocate before, you know,.

  about Manhattan District Attorney · at 7:14

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

• Donald Trump — Person · Primary referenced defendant / political figure · 15 mentions · first at 0:05
  Central figure in the discussion: the episode analyzes his New York state conviction, his attempt to remove the case to federal court, and arguments invoking presidential immunity.
• Alvin K. Hellerstein — Person · Referenced judge / decision-maker in removal dispute · 6 mentions · first at 0:02
  The episode centers on his federal-court hearing and expected ruling denying Trump’s attempt to remove the New York criminal case to federal court and leverage the immunity decision.
• Stormmy Daniels — Person · Referenced witness/subject of underlying scandal · 4 mentions · first at 0:16
  Her alleged affair with Trump and the hush-money payment are framed as the factual core of the state prosecution and the reason the conduct is characterized as personal, not official.
  His core constitutional functions, and isn't a part of his just private conduct or behavior. Well, Stormmy Daniels, the $130,000 payment, the arrangement of the conspiracy, the…
• Michael Cohen — Person · Referenced witness / former attorney · 3 mentions · first at 0:44
  Presented as a key trial witness and participant in the hush-money reimbursement narrative; used to discuss what conduct occurred before vs. during Trump’s presidency.
  Stormy Daniels Hush Money cover up election interference trial. That's a mouthful. Remember the one that Michael Cohen testified at? Yeah, that one. Donald Trump convicted 34…
• Hope Hicks — Person · Referenced White House communications aide · 2 mentions · first at 3:29
  Used as an example in the immunity/removal argument: Trump’s lawyers cite communications with her to claim presidential/official conduct; the judge rejects that framing as personal cover-up activity.
  Make to continue the conspiracy happened while he was president. But just because he talked to Hope Hicks, the press secretary, doesn't mean that converted his conversation…

Companies & orgs

• United States Supreme Court — Company · Key legal institution · 4 mentions · first at 1:19
  Central to the discussion about the immunity decision affecting Donald Trump's case
• Second Circuit Court of Appeals — Company · Appellate court · 2 mentions · first at 4:10
  Involved in the legal process regarding Donald Trump's attempt to move his case to federal court
  The argument for Donald Trump's lawyers is that and the second circuit court of appeals wants to hear Judge Hellerstein's view on this is that what do you do with the immunity decision? It came out between the conviction and the.
• Manhattan District Attorney — Company · Prosecuting office · 2 mentions · first at 7:11
  Involved in the prosecution of Donald Trump's case in state court
• Legal AF — Company · Podcast · 3 mentions · first at 0:34
  The platform where the discussion is hosted, providing legal analysis and commentary
• Midas Touch Network — Company · Media network · 2 mentions · first at 0:33
  The network hosting the Legal AF podcast
  Sketch. The chances of that happening, zero. based on a hearing that Judge Helerstein held earlier this week. I'm going to cover it here on the Midas Touch Network at On Legal…

Places & events

• Venezuela — Place · Country · 1 mention · first at 4:00
  Mentioned in the context of a legal case involving Maduro and oil fields
  Any time. Fresh off of an earlier hearing the same day involving the arraignment of Maduro. Remember the guy that was captured along with the oil fields of Venezuela by your…

Full transcript with timestamps

0:00 Are there odds less than zero? Because that's the odds that federal judge Alvin Hellerstein is going to allow Donald Trump to take his state court conviction on 34 felony counts of business record fraud, election interference, you know, the Stormy Daniels thing, take it over to federal court, and then have a federal judge toss the conviction in a trash can along with the sentencing as if the judge was some sort of giant etch sketch. The chances of that happening, zero. based on a hearing that Judge Helerstein held earlier this week. I'm going to cover it here on the Midas Touch Network at On Legal AF. What's this all about, Popac? This is about the Stormy Daniels Hush Money cover up election interference trial. That's a mouthful. Remember the one that Michael Cohen testified at? Yeah, that one. Uh Donald Trump convicted 34 felony counts by a 120 jury of his peers in New York beyond a reasonable doubt. And then

0:59 after conviction, of which 99.9% of the facts that were put on in front of the jury involved Donald Trump's actions before he was even president in order to interfere with the election against and the campaign against Hillary Clinton. Okay. He then after the conviction, but before the sentencing, boom, the United States Supreme Court July 3 years ago, came out with the quote unquote immunity decision, which gave Donald Trump and I guess future presidents, but really Donald Trump immunity that he can't be prosecuted and no evidence used about what he does as president as long as it's part of his official duties, his core constitutional functions, and isn't a part of his just private conduct or behavior. Well, Stormmy Daniels, the $130,000 payment, the arrangement of the conspiracy, the payoff so she wouldn't go to the press about her having sex outside Donald Trump's marriage, all of that happened before Donald Trump was

2:00 president. So, how could it be presidential conduct subject to the immunity? But it confused a lot of people. And so after that came out, the uh the argument for the Trump administration was, "Aha, the state court judge should do something about it. He should throw out the conviction. He shouldn't do any sentencing." But there's a big problem. They didn't run to federal court immediately and argue to a federal judge like Judge Hellerstein, hey, we get to take the case to federal court because there's a statute that that uh that uh provides that a federal officer who under the color of their federal office does something and has a federal defense, they can take it to state court, they can take it to federal court. But Donald Trump waited four months after the July uh decision to go back to federal court and say, "Hey, federal officer, federal defense, I want to go to federal court."

3:01 Why? Because he wants a federal judge to toss the conviction and the sentencing based on the immunity decision. Again, the immunity decision is about things that happened while you're in office. The only thing that happened while Donald Trump was office, the the conspiracy was completed. It was just the payment, the re the payment back to Michael Cohen and certain public statements that Donald Trump wanted to make to continue the conspiracy happened while he was president. But just because he talked to Hope Hicks, the press secretary, doesn't mean that converted his conversation into presidential communication or that she was being the presidential press secretary when he's trying to cover up for the scandal.

3:43 That's their argument. So, he had a big hearing in front of Judge Hellerstein, 92 years old, sharp as attack, by the way. I'd vote for him for president at any time. Fresh off of an earlier hearing the same day involving the arraignment of Maduro. Remember the guy that was captured along with the oil fields of Venezuela by your and my taxpayer dollars and US military? Same judge. So, he sets a briefing schedule. The argument for Donald Trump's lawyers is that uh and the second circuit court of appeals wants to hear Judge Hellerstein's view on this is that what do you do with the immunity decision? It came out between the conviction and the sentencing. Does it have any impact on the decision of Judge Hellerstein to deny because he already denied two years ago the attempt by Donald Trump to take the case the state case to federal court.

4:36 The judge reasoned then, "Wait a minute. I I'll put it simply. A private affair literally is not presidential conduct." So, no, you don't get over the first hurdle because in order to bring a case into federal court under federal removal, you've got to show federal officer conduct, colorable conduct, part of your job description, and then you have a federal defense. He says you don't this is not federal federal officer conduct what having sex with Stormmy Daniels you know an exotic dancer the maybe for Donald Trump it's official conduct and then on the defense you don't have a defense that's federal election law that's not a defense to the criminal case that just got that you just got convicted of and the judge tossed it. Then we go into the world of the sentencing immunity decision comes out and the judge says in the hearing in an open court, you're too late. And the lawyers for Donald Trump says, what do you mean?

5:34 Says, you're too late. You waited. First of all, the conviction already happened. The sentencing already happened. You didn't run into court and and try to get back to me with a new notice of removal. It's called a notice of removal. They said, "Well, judge, we're we're prudent litigants." The lawyer for Donald Trump said, "We we we wanted to wait and work it through in the state court proceeding before we came to federal court." He said, "No, now you're trying to get two bites of the apple. You're waiting to see what Judge Mawn in the state court's going to do." And when you didn't like that ruling, right? Then you came to me.

6:08 Too late. You waited four months after the immunity decision. If you thought you had a legitimate good faith argument to take this case post conviction, post sentencing to federal court for a second shot with me, you would have done it immediately after the immunity. It's a one-page, one paragraph document. Why didn't you file it? Well, judge, we made the strategic decision. She says, "Right, you made the strategic decision to stay in state court and make your arguments to the state court judge and you're late." Meaning, you're out of time either through latches or foot dragging. You you you waited too long to bring your removal to bring this case to federal court. I said, "Well, judge, you have to analyze the immunity decision and its impact or implications and how it maps on to these issues." the second circuit. Your boss has told you that. He goes, "Yeah, I will. First of all, you're late on that alone. No more.

7:03 There's no removal here." And and then he went on to This is a very hot back and forth, you know, between uh the judge and the lawyers for Donald Trump. Very little from the Manhattan District Attorney, by the way, because he didn't want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. That's when you sit down. And I've been an advocate before, you know, like I'm about to get up and I realize the judge is on my side and like I sit back down. It's hard, you know, cuz you're paid to talk and you've been doing that your whole life as an advocate, but you sit down. Discretion is the better part of valor. So Manhattan DA did a lot of sitting down.

7:36 Whereas on their feet, you know, bouncing around lawyers for Donald Trump and they said, "Judge, you got to apply the immunity decision." He said, "I will. You will." And again, nothing about the immunity decision. and and its its um format for dividing the world into personal conduct, official conduct and core presidential conduct. What they said is for core presidential conduct, there is absolute immunity and you can't use evidence related to core constitutional conduct or official conduct stretched to its outer boundaries in a case against a president. Okay. So, what the judge said is there's no core constitutional conduct here. Talking to your press secretary in order to lie to the American people about the cover up of your conspiracy is not core presidential function. Even if I take your um the president's powers, official conduct stretch to its outer boundaries, which is what the court require, Supreme

8:42 Court requires him to do. Still, this falls outside of that and falls into the last bucket, which is personal conduct. And personal private conduct has no immunity. That's how that court, that immunity decision divided the world. And they said, "But judge, he talked to Hope Hicks, the press secretary. He met with Michael Cohen in the White House in order to write the check back to him." and he said that may be but that did not convert the underlying conspiracy for which he was convicted into core presidential function or official conduct of the president. Therefore, there's no federal uh federal conduct, federal officer conduct that's even colorable that gives you a ticket into the federal courthouse. You got to stay in state.

9:31 Now, why do they want to move from state to federal? For those that are are confused, let me try to clear that up. For Donald Trump, it's a two-step process. He tries to get the case over to federal court on removal. He then argues to Judge Hellerstein. He then argues that the the conviction and the sentencing should be vacated based on the immunity decision. Let's just play this out. Helerstein says no. He they take it to the second circuit court of appeals. Second Circuit Court of Appeals says no, not not happening. They then take it up to the United States Supreme Court on an on an emergency application or some sort of application to see if the court is interested in ruling on this. So it shortens the appellet track for Donald Trump. If he stays in state court, which is where he's at, then he's got to go up through the First Department appellet division, which sits over trial courts in Manhattan. I'm a

10:29 member of that court. And then if he they lose there, which is likely, they'll go up to the Court of Appeals, the highest court in New York. And failing that, they then have to try to jump the track and go to the United States Supreme Court. So, this shortens the path. They're trying to get to the Supremes. I just don't I just don't see them getting through Judge Hellerstein. As soon as we get the order, I'll report on it. But based on those that were in the room and and reporting that I know about uh there I would I would fall out of this chair dumbfounded if Judge Helerstein ruled in favor of Donald Trump and allowed this case to come over. He'll still take it up on appeal but he's not going to allow it and he's been upheld he's been upheld on in this case by the court of appeals a number of times. We'll continue to follow it.

11:18 You're on his touch at Legal AF. Take a moment hit the free subscribe button. Come over to Legal AF YouTube, do the exact same thing and help us with our Legal AF Substack running a 35% off sale. Uh, until my next report, I'm Michael Popac. Can't get your fill of legal AF? Me neither. That's why we formed the Legal AF Substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the Substack. You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called, wait for it, Morning AF. What else? All the other contributors from Legal AF are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on Substack. Come over now to free subscribe.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "Trump gets BRUTAL REALITY CHECK in Court over FELONIES"?

Michael Popac (Host), Alvin Hellerstein (Guest), Michael Cohen (Host), Hope Hicks (Guest).

What is "Trump gets BRUTAL REALITY CHECK in Court over FELONIES" about?

A federal judge has firmly rejected Donald Trump's attempt to move his state court conviction for 34 felony counts of business record fraud to federal court, emphasizing the implausibility of his argument for presidential immunity regarding actions taken before his presidency, including the Stormy Daniels hush money payments. This decision reinforces the legal accountability Trump faces for…

What is mentioned in this MeidasTouch episode?

11 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Donald Trump, Alvin K. Hellerstein, United States Supreme Court, Stormmy Daniels, Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Manhattan District Attorney. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "Trump gets BRUTAL REALITY CHECK in Court over FELONIES"?

The episode runs 12 min; the transcript is about 2,095 words in 14 timestamped sections.

More from MeidasTouch

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