Loading summary

Transcript8 lines

[00:00]
A
I want to do a follow up about Capital One's disclosure in its recent filing that they had in their anti money laundering department as part of their compliance department a fear or a suspicion that Donald Trump and his family were committing money laundering. That is a disclosure, a revelation that was forced into the public by Donald Trump himself because he sued Capital One down in Florida. I'll talk about the Southern District of Florida case and the judge, Judge Altman, the same judge presiding over the BBC defamation case that Donald Trump is also subjected to financial disclosures related to, but in the case brought against Capital One because they fired the client, which they're allowed to do under their client opening documents, their agreements, for all reasons, no reasons or any reason. Donald Trump said, oh, the reason he was, he and his family were fired and they were given several months, up to six months to transfer their more than 300 accounts for their 400 entities that make up all of their assets to another bank is because there was suspicious activity within the accounts leading to the compliance department, which is, and the anti money laundering department of Capital One to flag them. They never got sufficient answers and so they fired the client. There's many reasons that Capital One could have fired Donald Trump, the Trump family and the Trump Organization. I mean, in and around the same time, the Trump Organization was sued by the Attorney General of New York for what's called persistent fraud in the operation of their business. And they were adjudged to be persistent fraudsters and their company was put into a monitorship, which still exists over the Trump Organization. That, that, that's one, two. Donald Trump was adjudged to be a sex abuser and that he was diverting money. And in the Stormy Daniels hush money cover up case where he was convicted of 34 felony counts of tax evasion, books and records fudging, those are also things that give banks concern. You also have in the fraud case a fact that got missed, which is the auditors for Donald Trump fired him as well. The auditors who had been auditors for more than 10 years said everything that we have said in our audited financial cannot be relied upon and cannot be trusted. We're resigning our engagement. We're not going to be as auditors any longer. We can't trust the financial information coming out of the Trump Organization. These are all things that make compliance departments of financial services companies. And I worked closely with one in my prior life. It gets them upset at the very least. I haven't even talked about the other fact that three entities that are owned by Trump were successfully convicted of tax evasion and books and records fraud on 19 felony counts, all within the last three years. So whether it's sex abuser, hush money, cover up case, persistent fraudster, 19 felony convictions, 34 felony convictions for hush money and books and records cover up related to Stormy Daniels, where the two indictments for election interference in and obstruction of justice. These are all good reasons a bank like Capital One would use, but they didn't even use any of those. Let me dive into this putting on my financial services hat. I'm Michael Popak. You're on the Midas Touch Network and on Legal af. I didn't want the Capital One disclosure in a federal filing. I'll read to you from in a moment to kind of just go underwater under the bridge as we cover other stories. It's that important. And from my experience as deputy general counsel of a Wall street firm, work closely with the compliance department, we're closely with anti money laundering, the enforcement of Patriot act rules and regulations, the enforcement of what we call suspicious activity reports or sars. I wanted to give you the benefit of my knowledge. Okay, let's start. Capital One moved to dismiss for the third time. The complaint of Donald Trump filed in federal court before Judge Altman. They had. Judge Altman had already ruled that Capital One under its own account opening documents could fire a customer for any reason. Banks also have a requirement. It's called the know your customer or know your account holder responsibility. It's part of regulations, banking regulations. You could, you could lose your bank license if you don't comply with it. Money, anti money laundering, Patriot act compliance, bank secrecy act compliance, know your customer. These are all things that are important and keep compliance officers and heads of banks up at night. It did me okay. And I got involved when there was suspicious activity in an account. If there is suspicious activity in an account, somebody who is observing it, either auditing the account, using artificial intelligence to flag transactions in an account has to fill out a suspicious activity report, an SAR, we call it a SAR. There must have been multiple SARs that were triggered by Donald Trump and his Trump Organization's operation of more than 300 bank accounts. What you look at in a SARS or what the compliance team in their audit or in their sampling or in their use of AI is looking for, is suspicious. Funny business going on, deposits coming in, wires going out, checks being written, checks being written on funds that have not yet cleared where the money is coming in from, the source of the money in. Because you not only have to know if you're if you have to know your customer, you not only have to know the business of the account holder well, to think whether this transaction in or out, debit or credit is legitimate or not. Right. But you have to know where that money is coming from, the source of the funds in particular. Because if the source of the funds, let's say, is Russian or Chinese or mob or organized crime related, that's a problem. And the timing of transactions, when money comes in and out, how quickly it comes in and out, the velocity of the transactions also matters. So who is the company doing business with? Whose checks and money are they depositing? How are they being deposited? How money's being shifted around from other bank accounts, whether the Internal Revenue Service should be alerted, the size of the transactions. Because for every suspicious, you know, sized account over a certain amount, which is usually $10,000, you have to fill out a suspicious activity report and then you look at the body in a report. A compliance officer who works closely with a general counsel type like me will then review the files and flag the account. 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 arm rock Colostrum. I've noticed less bloating, steadier energy and overall I just feel more like myself. Armruck Colostrum is nature's original blueprint for health. Colostrum is packed with over 400 bioactive nutrients that fortify gut 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 from my audience. Receive 30% off your first subscription order. Go to armrud.com legal af or enter legal af to get 30% off your first subscription order. That's a r m r a.com legal a f this is what the good people at Capital One, surprisingly, out of all the banks in America, Donald Trump was doing. I mean, I do banking at Capital One, but I was just surprising that that was the bank that he was actually doing business with. But in any event, let me get up for you the filing and we'll look at it together and we'll post it. So this is what they said in their motion. This is a motion to dismiss the complaint, which was brought for a violation of good faith and fair dealing or some sort of fraudulent concealment. And what they say is here's where they fully confess as to why and how the decision was made. The Second Amendment complaint, that's Trump's complaint, concedes that Capital One's decision to terminate the accounts was expressly permitted by the governing agreement and instead rest on vague allegations of political discrimination that are not supported by any of the documents attached to. To the contrary, those documents make clear that Capital One closed plaintiffs accounts for anti money laundering reasons. The closures were the result of months of analysis and careful review by Capital One's AML team that reports to the compliance department in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance. Capital One never publicized the termination decision nor its confidential internal process giving rise to the closure. And it permitted plaintiff several months, with extensions to find new banking services, which they did. Other words, we didn't want to out them, we didn't want to defame them or embarrass them. We didn't want to put them in a false light. You made us. You made us. Um, and then when they go into greater detail, which they're forced to do on this motion to dismiss, this is what they say about that. So if I go to footnote four on page nine, it says the plaintiffs, which is always the Trump Trust, make the conclusory claim that they could have explained the transactions underlying Capital One's assessment. But plaintiffs do not allege facts plausibly suggesting that any such explanation would have altered Capital One's determination or prevented the account closure. Indeed, the transaction patterns identified by Capital One are, are among the types of activity flagged by federal banking guidance. See Federal Financial Institutions Examination, Council on Bank Secrecy Act, BSA and AML Examination Manual. Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing red flags. So here we go. Trump, the President of the United States had bank accounts closed because of application of guidelines about money laundering and terrorist financing. They forced Capital One to put this in there in their brief. They could have just taken the loss, gone on to their new banking relationship with Charles Schwab and whoever else, which is what they're doing. But no, they, they forced Capital One, after they poked them with a stick, to come out and say, well, we think you were a money launderer or you were financing terrorism, and we don't care what you would have told us because it wouldn't have resolved the issues that we observed with months of our professionals, including former members of the banking community and the Department of Justice and law enforcement on the case. Is that what they wanted? That's better. This is what happens when you bring these defamation cases or these ridiculous Cases that try to gain an advantage. They obviously thought the bank was going to fold and stroke a huge check for Donald Trump for his library or whatever else.
[12:51]
B
And.
[12:52]
A
And they're not doing it. Those days are over. That was ABC and CBS because they were bootlicking to try to get some approval from Trump's government, and they were willing to pay, you know, pocket change, $20 million apiece or so just to get them off their back. But the British Broadcasting Corporation doesn't care about that. Capital One doesn't care about that. So, you know, the Wall Street Journal doesn't care about that. New York Times doesn't. This is just yet another example. And the suspicious activity report in the world of financial services is a big deal. It keeps people like me in my former life up at night. You know, I would be called in by the owner of the financial services company to give my report about why we'd be closing an account like this. Ironically and ironically, people in Donald Trump's own government, including Howard Lutnick, who ran or runs Cantor Fitzgerald, who I worked for at one time, knows AML policy, knows Bank Secrecy act, knows the Patriot act, knows anti money laundering, and knows. Know your client or know your customer requirements. Who's giving Trump guidance in any of these lawsuits? This is ridiculous. And kudos to Capital One for standing talk and debava Voice Plimpton for being their lawyers in this matter. Now, let me end it this way. This is not going to help Donald Trump with his other case against the British Broadcasting Corporation because in that case, he's suing for $10 billion in damage. And soon he wants to appeal to Judge Altman, the same federal judge in this case with Capital One who's presiding over the BBC case. He's going to try to, oh, I need to redo my complaint because I don't want to open up all my books and records because. Because the magistrate judge has ordered that Donald Trump turn over all of his tax returns. This is the trust and 400 entities, all the bank records, all the trust account records, all the financial records to prove up his damages. Now he's claiming. Well, the damages aren't that much. I'll fix my complaint. You think Judge Altman isn't going to remember what's going on here with Capital One? He is. And I know the Southern District of Florida really well. I live in Miami and I practice there, so. So until my next report here on the Midas Touch Network and Legal af.
[15:10]
B
Take a minute.
[15:11]
A
Hit the free subscribe button. Help us to continue to grow our Pro Democracy channel.
[15:16]
B
Can't get your fill of Legal af?
[15:18]
A
Me neither.
[15:18]
B
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 AOF are there as well. We got some new reporting, got interviews, we got AD free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on substack. Come over now to free subscribe.

Summary5 min read

Legal AF by MeidasTouch

Episode: Compliance Expert Exposes Trump's Money Laundering Scam
Date: August 3, 2026
Hosts: Ben Meiselas, Michael Popok, Karen Friedman Agnifilo
Summary by: [Expert Podcast Summarizer]

Episode Overview

This episode, led primarily by Michael Popok with input from other MeidasTouch Network hosts, dissects the recent revelation that Capital One’s compliance department flagged Donald Trump, his family, and his organizations for suspicious activity leading to the closure of over 300 bank accounts. The discussion centers on anti-money laundering (AML) procedures, the significance of the Capital One disclosure (forced into the public due to litigation initiated by Trump), and the legal and reputational fallout for Trump across court cases.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Capital One’s Disclosure on Money Laundering Suspicions

Background: Capital One’s anti-money laundering (AML) and compliance departments harbored suspicions that Trump, his family, and his business entities were engaging in money laundering (00:00).
Litigation Trigger: This sensitive information came into the public sphere because Trump sued Capital One after they ended their business relationship, which required him to find new bank partners for over 300 accounts tied to more than 400 Trump entities.

"That is a disclosure, a revelation that was forced into the public by Donald Trump himself because he sued Capital One down in Florida."
— Michael Popok [00:10]
Bank’s Right to Dismiss: Banks like Capital One retain the right, under standard account agreements, to terminate customer relationships at their discretion, a point upheld by Judge Altman.

2. Why Capital One Flagged and Closed Trump's Accounts

Multiple Red Flags:
- At the same time as these closures, Trump and his entities faced:
  - Civil suits and judgments for persistent fraud (New York AG).
  - Adjudications for sexual abuse and money diversion.
  - Criminal convictions: 34 felonies (Stormy Daniels hush money case), 19 felonies (Trump entities for tax/banking fraud).
  - External auditor resignation, citing unreliability of Trump’s financial reporting (00:52).
"The auditors who had been auditors for more than 10 years said everything that we have said in our audited financial cannot be relied upon and cannot be trusted."
— Michael Popok [01:04]
Banking Regulations: Failure to comply with AML, Patriot Act, and Bank Secrecy Act can jeopardize a bank’s license. Banks must know their customer and the sources of all deposits.

“For every suspicious, you know, sized account over a certain amount…you have to fill out a suspicious activity report.”
— Michael Popok [05:58]

3. How Banks Identify Suspicious Activity (The SAR Process)

Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs): Generated when compliance/audit teams spot unusual transactions:
- Unexplained source of funds, rapid money movement, involvement with overseas entities (e.g., Russia, China, organized crime).
- Behavioral questions: How are checks being deposited? How is money shifting between accounts?
- Transactions exceeding $10,000 require extra scrutiny (06:18–07:13).
Inference: Trump Organization likely triggered multiple SARs given the scale and nature of account activity.

4. The Disclosure’s Wording and Tone

Capital One’s Position (from the Filing): The closures were carefully considered and rooted in compliance with federal AML regulations. The decision and process were never publicized—Trump’s lawsuit forced their hand.

“To the contrary, those documents make clear that Capital One closed plaintiffs' accounts for anti money laundering reasons. The closures were the result of months of analysis and careful review by Capital One’s AML team that reports to the compliance department in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance.”
— (Reading from filing, Michael Popok) [09:01]
Insensitive to Explanation: Even had Trump offered explanations, Capital One asserts this wouldn’t have changed their conclusions, citing alignment with federal red flags for money laundering and terrorist financing.

“They forced Capital One, after they poked them with a stick, to come out and say, well, we think you were a money launderer or you were financing terrorism, and we don't care what you would have told us because it wouldn't have resolved the issues...”
— Michael Popok [11:31]

5. Broader Implications and Legal Ramifications

Other Banks & Auditors: Capital One is not alone; even Trump’s long-standing auditors found his records unreliable.
Ongoing & Related Lawsuits: Judge Altman (also presiding over Trump’s $10 billion defamation suit against the BBC) will remember this Capital One episode. Trump’s lawsuits risk greater exposure of his finances and records (13:10).
Strategic Misstep: Trump’s penchant for litigation backfired—publicizing embarrassing revelations that could otherwise have stayed confidential.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On Trump’s litigation strategy:

“Is that what they wanted? This is what happens when you bring these defamation cases or these ridiculous cases that try to gain an advantage.”
— Michael Popok [12:19]
On the rarity of banks taking a stand:

“Kudos to Capital One for standing... This is just yet another example. And the suspicious activity report in the world of financial services is a big deal. It keeps people like me in my former life up at night.”
— Michael Popok [12:51]
Prediction for further legal exposure:

“You think Judge Altman isn’t going to remember what’s going on here with Capital One? He is.”
— Michael Popok [14:25]

Important Timestamps

00:00 – Introduction; Capital One's forced disclosure of AML concerns.
01:00 – Review of reasons for bank firing: criminal and civil cases, auditor resignation.
05:30 – In-depth explanation of how compliance/AML works at banks (SARs, KYC).
09:01 – Reading from Capital One's court filing, detailing process and justification.
11:31 – Capital One’s refusal to accept explanations for suspicious activity.
12:19 – Reflection on the consequences of Trump’s decision to sue.
13:10 – The ramifications for Trump’s BBC defamation suit and further financial disclosures.

Final Thoughts

The episode delivers a detailed, expert-level breakdown of anti-money laundering protocols and how Trump’s banking activity with Capital One became a matter of public record—ultimately revealing patterns consistent with money laundering concerns. The hosts, with a mix of bewilderment and legal precision, highlight how Trump’s own legal aggressiveness led to greater transparency about his financial conduct, and how this may come back to haunt him in ongoing and future litigation.

Loading summary

Transcript8 lines

[00:00]
A
I want to do a follow up about Capital One's disclosure in its recent filing that they had in their anti money laundering department as part of their compliance department a fear or a suspicion that Donald Trump and his family were committing money laundering. That is a disclosure, a revelation that was forced into the public by Donald Trump himself because he sued Capital One down in Florida. I'll talk about the Southern District of Florida case and the judge, Judge Altman, the same judge presiding over the BBC defamation case that Donald Trump is also subjected to financial disclosures related to, but in the case brought against Capital One because they fired the client, which they're allowed to do under their client opening documents, their agreements, for all reasons, no reasons or any reason. Donald Trump said, oh, the reason he was, he and his family were fired and they were given several months, up to six months to transfer their more than 300 accounts for their 400 entities that make up all of their assets to another bank is because there was suspicious activity within the accounts leading to the compliance department, which is, and the anti money laundering department of Capital One to flag them. They never got sufficient answers and so they fired the client. There's many reasons that Capital One could have fired Donald Trump, the Trump family and the Trump Organization. I mean, in and around the same time, the Trump Organization was sued by the Attorney General of New York for what's called persistent fraud in the operation of their business. And they were adjudged to be persistent fraudsters and their company was put into a monitorship, which still exists over the Trump Organization. That, that, that's one, two. Donald Trump was adjudged to be a sex abuser and that he was diverting money. And in the Stormy Daniels hush money cover up case where he was convicted of 34 felony counts of tax evasion, books and records fudging, those are also things that give banks concern. You also have in the fraud case a fact that got missed, which is the auditors for Donald Trump fired him as well. The auditors who had been auditors for more than 10 years said everything that we have said in our audited financial cannot be relied upon and cannot be trusted. We're resigning our engagement. We're not going to be as auditors any longer. We can't trust the financial information coming out of the Trump Organization. These are all things that make compliance departments of financial services companies. And I worked closely with one in my prior life. It gets them upset at the very least. I haven't even talked about the other fact that three entities that are owned by Trump were successfully convicted of tax evasion and books and records fraud on 19 felony counts, all within the last three years. So whether it's sex abuser, hush money, cover up case, persistent fraudster, 19 felony convictions, 34 felony convictions for hush money and books and records cover up related to Stormy Daniels, where the two indictments for election interference in and obstruction of justice. These are all good reasons a bank like Capital One would use, but they didn't even use any of those. Let me dive into this putting on my financial services hat. I'm Michael Popak. You're on the Midas Touch Network and on Legal af. I didn't want the Capital One disclosure in a federal filing. I'll read to you from in a moment to kind of just go underwater under the bridge as we cover other stories. It's that important. And from my experience as deputy general counsel of a Wall street firm, work closely with the compliance department, we're closely with anti money laundering, the enforcement of Patriot act rules and regulations, the enforcement of what we call suspicious activity reports or sars. I wanted to give you the benefit of my knowledge. Okay, let's start. Capital One moved to dismiss for the third time. The complaint of Donald Trump filed in federal court before Judge Altman. They had. Judge Altman had already ruled that Capital One under its own account opening documents could fire a customer for any reason. Banks also have a requirement. It's called the know your customer or know your account holder responsibility. It's part of regulations, banking regulations. You could, you could lose your bank license if you don't comply with it. Money, anti money laundering, Patriot act compliance, bank secrecy act compliance, know your customer. These are all things that are important and keep compliance officers and heads of banks up at night. It did me okay. And I got involved when there was suspicious activity in an account. If there is suspicious activity in an account, somebody who is observing it, either auditing the account, using artificial intelligence to flag transactions in an account has to fill out a suspicious activity report, an SAR, we call it a SAR. There must have been multiple SARs that were triggered by Donald Trump and his Trump Organization's operation of more than 300 bank accounts. What you look at in a SARS or what the compliance team in their audit or in their sampling or in their use of AI is looking for, is suspicious. Funny business going on, deposits coming in, wires going out, checks being written, checks being written on funds that have not yet cleared where the money is coming in from, the source of the money in. Because you not only have to know if you're if you have to know your customer, you not only have to know the business of the account holder well, to think whether this transaction in or out, debit or credit is legitimate or not. Right. But you have to know where that money is coming from, the source of the funds in particular. Because if the source of the funds, let's say, is Russian or Chinese or mob or organized crime related, that's a problem. And the timing of transactions, when money comes in and out, how quickly it comes in and out, the velocity of the transactions also matters. So who is the company doing business with? Whose checks and money are they depositing? How are they being deposited? How money's being shifted around from other bank accounts, whether the Internal Revenue Service should be alerted, the size of the transactions. Because for every suspicious, you know, sized account over a certain amount, which is usually $10,000, you have to fill out a suspicious activity report and then you look at the body in a report. A compliance officer who works closely with a general counsel type like me will then review the files and flag the account. 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 arm rock Colostrum. I've noticed less bloating, steadier energy and overall I just feel more like myself. Armruck Colostrum is nature's original blueprint for health. Colostrum is packed with over 400 bioactive nutrients that fortify gut 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 from my audience. Receive 30% off your first subscription order. Go to armrud.com legal af or enter legal af to get 30% off your first subscription order. That's a r m r a.com legal a f this is what the good people at Capital One, surprisingly, out of all the banks in America, Donald Trump was doing. I mean, I do banking at Capital One, but I was just surprising that that was the bank that he was actually doing business with. But in any event, let me get up for you the filing and we'll look at it together and we'll post it. So this is what they said in their motion. This is a motion to dismiss the complaint, which was brought for a violation of good faith and fair dealing or some sort of fraudulent concealment. And what they say is here's where they fully confess as to why and how the decision was made. The Second Amendment complaint, that's Trump's complaint, concedes that Capital One's decision to terminate the accounts was expressly permitted by the governing agreement and instead rest on vague allegations of political discrimination that are not supported by any of the documents attached to. To the contrary, those documents make clear that Capital One closed plaintiffs accounts for anti money laundering reasons. The closures were the result of months of analysis and careful review by Capital One's AML team that reports to the compliance department in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance. Capital One never publicized the termination decision nor its confidential internal process giving rise to the closure. And it permitted plaintiff several months, with extensions to find new banking services, which they did. Other words, we didn't want to out them, we didn't want to defame them or embarrass them. We didn't want to put them in a false light. You made us. You made us. Um, and then when they go into greater detail, which they're forced to do on this motion to dismiss, this is what they say about that. So if I go to footnote four on page nine, it says the plaintiffs, which is always the Trump Trust, make the conclusory claim that they could have explained the transactions underlying Capital One's assessment. But plaintiffs do not allege facts plausibly suggesting that any such explanation would have altered Capital One's determination or prevented the account closure. Indeed, the transaction patterns identified by Capital One are, are among the types of activity flagged by federal banking guidance. See Federal Financial Institutions Examination, Council on Bank Secrecy Act, BSA and AML Examination Manual. Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing red flags. So here we go. Trump, the President of the United States had bank accounts closed because of application of guidelines about money laundering and terrorist financing. They forced Capital One to put this in there in their brief. They could have just taken the loss, gone on to their new banking relationship with Charles Schwab and whoever else, which is what they're doing. But no, they, they forced Capital One, after they poked them with a stick, to come out and say, well, we think you were a money launderer or you were financing terrorism, and we don't care what you would have told us because it wouldn't have resolved the issues that we observed with months of our professionals, including former members of the banking community and the Department of Justice and law enforcement on the case. Is that what they wanted? That's better. This is what happens when you bring these defamation cases or these ridiculous Cases that try to gain an advantage. They obviously thought the bank was going to fold and stroke a huge check for Donald Trump for his library or whatever else.
[12:51]
B
And.
[12:52]
A
And they're not doing it. Those days are over. That was ABC and CBS because they were bootlicking to try to get some approval from Trump's government, and they were willing to pay, you know, pocket change, $20 million apiece or so just to get them off their back. But the British Broadcasting Corporation doesn't care about that. Capital One doesn't care about that. So, you know, the Wall Street Journal doesn't care about that. New York Times doesn't. This is just yet another example. And the suspicious activity report in the world of financial services is a big deal. It keeps people like me in my former life up at night. You know, I would be called in by the owner of the financial services company to give my report about why we'd be closing an account like this. Ironically and ironically, people in Donald Trump's own government, including Howard Lutnick, who ran or runs Cantor Fitzgerald, who I worked for at one time, knows AML policy, knows Bank Secrecy act, knows the Patriot act, knows anti money laundering, and knows. Know your client or know your customer requirements. Who's giving Trump guidance in any of these lawsuits? This is ridiculous. And kudos to Capital One for standing talk and debava Voice Plimpton for being their lawyers in this matter. Now, let me end it this way. This is not going to help Donald Trump with his other case against the British Broadcasting Corporation because in that case, he's suing for $10 billion in damage. And soon he wants to appeal to Judge Altman, the same federal judge in this case with Capital One who's presiding over the BBC case. He's going to try to, oh, I need to redo my complaint because I don't want to open up all my books and records because. Because the magistrate judge has ordered that Donald Trump turn over all of his tax returns. This is the trust and 400 entities, all the bank records, all the trust account records, all the financial records to prove up his damages. Now he's claiming. Well, the damages aren't that much. I'll fix my complaint. You think Judge Altman isn't going to remember what's going on here with Capital One? He is. And I know the Southern District of Florida really well. I live in Miami and I practice there, so. So until my next report here on the Midas Touch Network and Legal af.
[15:10]
B
Take a minute.
[15:11]
A
Hit the free subscribe button. Help us to continue to grow our Pro Democracy channel.
[15:16]
B
Can't get your fill of Legal af?
[15:18]
A
Me neither.
[15:18]
B
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 AOF are there as well. We got some new reporting, got interviews, we got AD free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on substack. Come over now to free subscribe.