Loading summary
Sponsor Voice
This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. Between two factor authentication, strong passwords and a VPN, you try to be in control of how your info is protected. But many other places also have it and they might not be as careful. That's why Lifelock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com podcast for 40% off terms.
T-Mobile Representative
Apply everyone's loving family freedom from T Mobile we'll pay off four phones up to $3200 and give you four free phones all on America's largest 5G network. Visit your local T Mobile location or learn more@t mobile.com FamilyFreedom up to $800 per line via virtual prepaid card typically takes 15 days. Free phones via 24 monthly bill credits with finance agreement eg Apple iPhone 16128 gigabyte 82999 Eligible trade in eg iPhone 11 Pro for well qualified credits end and balance due. If you pay off earlier, cancel contact.
Michael Popak
T Mobile welcome back to the Midas Touch Network. Our continuing coverage of the Epstein Ghislaine Maxwell scandal swirling around and threatening to down Donald Trump. We got a new development. We got the final brief being filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers in the United States Supreme Court arguing not that she's not guilty, not that she didn't commit the crimes, not that she's not a convicted child sex trafficker, but rather that she should get the benefit of a non prosecution agreement Epstein entered into in Florida that prevented him from being prosecuted in Florida in the Southern District of Florida. But that's not where she was prosecuted and convicted. She was prosecuted and convicted in New York by the Southern District of New York. She wasn't a signatory to that agreement. She wasn't named in that agreement. But she's claiming that if you stretch the language of the non prosecution agreement beyond the District of Florida, it reaches all the way into the District of New York and lets her off the hook for her crimes. That's their entire argument. This is a performative puppet theater that we're watching starring Donald Trump, Ghislaine Maxwell and her lawyer Oscar Marcus, along with a supporting role by Todd Blanche, Donald Trump's number two in the Department of Justice and former criminal defense lawyer. That's all we're watching. This is just cover. So when then Donald Trump gets around to granting her immunity and now and then granting which he's Done. And then granting her a pardon, we'll sort of understand why that it was a complicated legal issue before the United States Supreme Court. It's not that complicated. Okay. John Sauer, the lawyer for the government, Donald Trump's former appellate lawyer, just filed a brief 10 days ago that I did a report on in which he laid out meticulously all the crimes and criminal conduct that the jury convicted Ghislaine Maxwell of, which boils down to child sex trafficking. 9, 0 Beyond a reasonable doubt in front of a jury after weeks of testimony, after they had to capture her, after she was on the run and she was convicted, Period. And there's. And I'll go over it with you in a moment. There's a. As Donald Trump is sending in Todd Blanch to go do unquote neutral interview. He is his own Department of Justice thinks she's guilty, thinks that she should not see the light of day or breathe free air ever again. Now, David Oscar Marcus is connected to the Department of Justice because one of his friends is Todd Blanche, who's Donald Trump's friend. You see where this is going? I'm going to wrap it all together with the new filing before the United States Supreme Court and tell you why she's going to lose or she should lose before that Supreme Court. I'm Michael Popak. You're on the Midas Touch Network and on Legal af. Okay, so what is the brief? Who filed the brief? David Oscar Marcus. Who's that? That's a lawyer in Miami who's well connected to Ghislaine Maxwell through Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard law professor by day and often implicated in the Epstein scandal by night, not only as his lawyer, if you know what I mean. So Alan Dershowitz, who's running around on Fox News saying Ghislaine Maxwell, Ghislaine Maxwell should be let out of prison. Ghislaine Maxwell is the Rosetta Stone. She needs to be given immunity. She's pumping and he's pumping, pumping, pumping. Ghislaine Maxwell because his buddy David Oscar Marcus from their days back at Harvard is her lawyer. In fact, I'm sure David Oscar Marcus got picked by Dershowitz to represent Maxwell. Here's a clip of just in the last couple of days of Dershowitz promoting Ghislaine Maxwell. Right. Beaten the drum right on cue from Donald Trump's talking points to muster some, I don't know, some sympathy for her. Let's roll that clip.
Alan Dershowitz
But in the meantime, you suggest she should be potentially offered congressional immunity to Go and testify. Do you think that would happen? And what kind of information would she have that we haven't seen?
Legal Expert
She knows everything. She is the Rosetta Stone. She knows everything. She arranged every single trip with everybody. She knows everything. And if she were just given use immunity, she could be compelled to testify. I'm told that she actually would be willing to testify and there'd be no reason for her to withhold any information. So I don't see any negative in giving her the kind of use immunity that would compel her to testify. So she ought to be summoned in front of a congressional committee.
Alan Dershowitz
Well, we'll continue to track her case. Professor, thank you for weighing in and giving us a little bit of an insider look at what you know. Appreciate your time.
Legal Expert
Thank you.
Michael Popak
Okay. And now we also know that as part of this puppet theater that Donald Trump has authorized his lawyer, instructed his lawyer, Todd Blanche, to go to Tallahassee, Florida, he did it a couple of days ago, and do 12 hours worth of interviews. Now, we don't know the results of those interviews from, from Todd Blanche, but we do know some of it from David Oscar Marcus because he gave a press conference. Here's a clip.
David Oscar Marcus
We're finished after all day yesterday and today. Glenn answered every single question asked of her over the last day and a half. She answered those questions honestly, truthfully, to the best of her ability. She never invoked a privilege. She never refused to answer a question. So we're very proud of her. Remember, people have questioned her honesty, which I think is just wrong. Remember, a juror lied to get onto the jury, admitted to lying to get onto her jury. She did not get a fair trial. No prosecutor even mentioned her until Epstein died. So we feel that the process for Ghislaine has been unfair. She was denied bail. She was treated worse than an animal would be treated in jail when she was first held, woken up every 15 minutes. So we're just trying to get through the process where we are now and get her some relief. We don't know how it's going to play out. We just know that this was the first opportunity she's ever been given to answer questions about what happened. And so the truth will come out about what happened with, with Mr. Epstein. And she's the person who's answering those questions. The government at the time promised her that, promised Jeffrey Epstein that any potential co conspirators would not be prosecuted. And so she deserves that promise. And I'm surprised, I don't think President Trump knows that. The Justice Department took the position that that bargain should not, that promise should not be upheld. President Trump is the ultimate dealmaker. He knows that a promise made on behalf of the government should bind the government. And so we're hoping the Supreme Court agrees with us that when the U.S. attorney's office in the Southern District of Florida promised that no potential co conspirators would be prosecuted, that that bound the Southern District of New York as well.
Michael Popak
Are you hoping for a deal as a result of this meeting?
David Oscar Marcus
We're not going to comment on what we're hoping for. We just today and yesterday answered questions.
Michael Popak
Which brings us to the briefing at the United States Supreme Court. First, let me read you what Donald Trump's own lawyer, the Solicitor General, the number four in the Department of Justice, Donald Trump's favorite criminal appellate lawyer because it was his own. This is what he wrote about this argument. Not that she's not guilty, but that she should get the benefit of a non prosecution agreement because it said that that Epstein would be let off the hook if he pled guilty to a state charge of soliciting prostitution from a minor. That's the least of his worries. He, he committed pedophile and raped women, girls, a thousand of them. We know that now. They have been shut down then by Alex Acosta through the United States. The U.S. attorney for Southern District of Florida. We may not have the Epstein scandal that we have today. What happened to Alex Acosta? He got promoted. He became the US Labor Secretary under Donald Trump. After this, a reward. I'll let you be the judge. Okay, so here's what John Sauer writes last week in his brief to the United States Supreme Court. From 1994 to 2004, Maxwell coordinated, facilitated and contributed to the multi millionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein sexual abuse of numerous young women and underage girls. That means he raped girls. The abuse followed a pattern. Maxwell and Epstein would identify vulnerable girls living under difficult circumstances, isolate them from their friends and families, gaining their trust by giving them gifts and pretending to be their friends, normalizing the discussion of sexual topics and sexual touching with with the girls, and then transitioned to sexual abuse, often through the pretext of her girl giving Epstein a massage. And they carried on these activities in Palm beach and in New York until it all got investigated at some point. Physio, chiropractic and massage therapy are all great resources for when you need them. But going to these appointments every few months does not give me the ultimate results I'm looking for when it comes to my well being. It's taking daily, even hourly opportunities to move my body that makes the biggest difference. This has only been made possible for me with this episode's sponsor, Uplift Desk. Uplift Desk is at the forefront of ergonomic solutions promoting better posture and health through adjustable standing desks designed to help you live a healthier lifestyle. Plus, they have all kinds of accessories to keep you moving throughout the day even if you work for only a few hours at your desk. For me, I love I love the Bamboo Motion Export. It makes me feel like snowboarding without waiting for the lift. Standing while I work gives me the room to move and helps me get the creative juices flowing. Moving throughout the day helps me focus and stay productive and I'm way more alert when I'm using my standing desk and I have more energy. A desk should fit the user, which is why Uplift Desk has a lot of customization options so you can build your perfect workspace with more than 200,000 configurations. Uplift Desk allows you to tailor your workspace to perfectly suit your style and needs, empowering you to create an environment that inspires productivity and creativity. For me, I built the custom standing desk of my dreams from Uplift for my Pope POC Media offices where I make a lot of my hot takes and content for Legal AF and so I went all out with a heritage oak top and their advanced angled keypad for the lift part. Make this year yours by going to upliftdesk.com legalaf and use our code legal af to get four free accessories, free same day shipping, free returns and an industry leading 15 year warranty that covers your entire desk and an extra discount off your entire order. That's U P l I f t--E-S-K.com legalaf for a special offer and it's only available at our link start 2025 right stand move thrive with uplift desk and the US Attorney's office. Maybe from pressure from other people that are powerful in Palm Beach. I can think. I can think of one. Gave Epstein a sweetheart deal which avoided the thousands of women that he had abused. Now in there it listed four co conspirators not named Ghislaine Maxwell and other co conspirators. Now the big argument here is that the non prosecution agreement was clear that it was only between the Southern District of Florida U.S. attorney's office and Epstein. That other U.S. attorney's office were not bound by it, nor was the Department of Justice in Washington. But David Ostreomarcus wants to twist those words and say, well you see where it says that Epstein will only be not investigated or prosecuted outside of the Only, only the Southern District of Florida are making these promises to Epstein. So he, he'll, he'll not be prosecuted in Florida, but other jurisdictions are up for grabs. His argument is that in negotiating the deal, Epstein obtained a broader release, a broader non prosecution agreement for unnamed coconspirators like Ghislaine Maxwell. Then he obtained for himself. Let me put that back together again. The lawyers representing Epstein represented Epstein. They negotiated the best deal you can presume they could obtain in that deal. They got the Southern District of Florida U.S. attorney's Office to agree not to prosecute Epstein in return for an exchange. They also added language about the coconspirators because they were worried that he gets sucked back in through a co conspirator investigation. And so their argument, David Oscar Marcus's Ghislaine Maxwell argument is. Well, they didn't also put that phrase in Southern District of Florida. So Epstein negotiated a better deal for your unnamed client who didn't sign the non prosecution agreement that he negotiated for himself. That's beyond belief. Let me read you from the brief so you know I'm not making this up. And we'll post this on the legal AF substack. David Oscar Marcus, same lawyer interviewing just a couple of days ago. I mean you can't avoid him on television. He's pumping pump and pump and trying to get that pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell. Here's what he says on page three. The very purpose of the petitioner's argument is that the parties to the NPA that would be Epstein and everybody not named Ghislaine Maxwell. That's an agreement. Did seek to control the scope of the relevant clauses by narrowing the scope of immunity for Epstein or through the use of narrow language specifying enforceability only in the Southern District of Florida and then expanding the scope of it as his to his co conspirators by using the term United States. While doing so, Epstein's lawyers were no doubt informed of how that language was interpreted in the jurisdiction in which they were practiced. He goes on to say on page five, that was on page three. I mean he admits on page four that the list is in exchange for Epstein's guilty pleas. The United States also agrees that it will not include institute any criminal charges against any potential co conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to four names not named Epstein. Okay, and then he goes off on the rest of the brief. That's basically the argument. But I want to make it clear to you so that there's no confusion. Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal to the United States Supreme Court is not that there were errors in the trial. There were errors in evidence being admitted against her. People lied about her. There was perjury, the judge was biased. The judge made mistakes about the admission of evidence. Something went wrong with a juror, something went wrong with the jury. Four person, somebody tampered with a witness. None of that. The only thing she's arguing is, yeah, I did all those bad things. However, Epstein, although he didn't mention my name, entered into a typed up agreement with the Northern, with the Southern District of Florida and I'm a coconspirator and they mentioned the United States. So you can't, you can't bring it against me anywhere. I mean, if the United States Supreme Court is paying attention, at least the MAGA majority, the questions that are going to be asked are why would Epstein and his lawyers negotiate a better deal for an unnamed coconspirator than they did for themselves? Since they won't be able to answer that question, the lawyers for Maxwell in any coherent fashion, she should lose at the United States Supreme Court. This is the last set of briefs. Okay. There is generally oral argument. If there is, we'll put it up on legal AF so you can watch it live with commentary. And then the United States Supreme Court, it won't be this summer. And then the United States Supreme Court sometime in the fall or next spring, we'll get around on this issue. The reason I think you're going to see a delay with the United States Supreme Court is that they're going to intentionally give breathing room to Donald Trump to try to work something out with Maxwell to try to mitigate this scandal that's engulfed his administration. And they're going to do him a solid by not taking this case up fast. So then Donald Trump in some press release or spokesperson can say, well, Donald Trump's pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell. There's complicated legal issues about the, about the enforceability of an agreement down in Florida and therefore the rest. I mean, even David Oscar Marcus, that's exactly what he's saying out loud. Well, government, you know, should be abiding by their contracts. Donald Trump knows about deals and contracts. Yeah, but this wasn't the dealer contract with your client. But you can see where the Supreme Court, by delaying and foot dragging and making a decision here, rolling in to 2026, Donald Trump will say, well, I check. I've taken a look at the evidence myself and my experts have and relying on Todd Blanche. Here's the puppet theater I'm going to pardon. Maxwell. She was some sort of scapegoat. Well, go tell that to the more than 1,000 victims. Many of them were underage, meaning they were girls when they were raped through a combination of Epstein and Glide. Maxwell, go tell it to them. I mean, we shouldn't be shocked. We've got a felon in chief. We've got a sex abuser in chief in the White House with a long history of misogyny and sexual abuse of women. So is anybody shocked that it's even he's even in the transom of his mind considering a pardon of a convicted convicted child sex abuser convicted of that in a conspiracy and has already approved immunity being given to her as a convict. I'm not. We're going to continue to follow it. I'll let you know what happens with the United States Supreme Court. You're here on the Midas Touch Network. Come on over to Legal Aft, The Substack, Legal AAF, the YouTube channel and help us grow there as well. Till my next report, I'm Michael Popach. 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 layout for 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.
Sponsor Voice
Trip Planner by Expedia. You were made to outdo your holiday, your hammocking and your pooling. We were made to help organize the competition. Expedia Made to travel.
Michael Popak
You say you'll never join the Navy, never climb Mount Fuji on a port visit or break the sound barrier. Joining the Navy sounds crazy. Saying never actually is. Learn why@navy.com, america's Navy forged by the sea.
Alan Dershowitz
Shopify helps you sell at every stage of your business. Like that. Let's put it online and see what happens.
Michael Popak
Stage and the site is live that.
Alan Dershowitz
We opened a store and need a fast checkout. Stage thanks. You're all set that count it up and ship it around the globe stage.
Michael Popak
This one's going to Thailand and that.
Alan Dershowitz
Wait, did we just hit a million orders? Stage Whatever your stage businesses that grow grow with Shopify. Sign up for your $1 a month trial@shopify.com listen.
Podcast Information:
In this episode, Michael Popak provides an in-depth analysis of the latest developments in the Ghislaine Maxwell legal saga. The focus is on Maxwell's recent legal maneuvers to seek an urgent hearing at the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS), aiming to secure immunity based on a non-prosecution agreement previously established for Jeffrey Epstein.
Michael Popak begins by outlining the essence of the legal brief filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys to SCOTUS. Contrary to contesting her guilt, Maxwell's legal team, led by David Oscar Marcus, argues for the extension of Epstein's non-prosecution agreement to her case.
Michael Popak [00:58]: "She's claiming that if you stretch the language of the non-prosecution agreement beyond the District of Florida, it reaches all the way into the District of New York and lets her off the hook for her crimes."
Popak criticizes this move as a theatrical display involving key figures like Donald Trump, Maxwell, her lawyer Oscar Marcus, and Todd Blanche from the Department of Justice, suggesting it's more a performance than a substantial legal challenge.
Maxwell's legal team contends that the non-prosecution agreement Epstein secured in Florida should extend to her, despite her not being a signatory to the original pact in the Southern District of Florida. This agreement previously shielded Epstein from federal prosecution in Florida, and the contention is that its scope should be broadened to include Maxwell in New York.
Michael Popak [08:15]: "The only thing she's arguing is, yeah, I did all those bad things. However, Epstein... entered into an agreement... so you can't bring it against me anywhere."
Popak emphasizes that the non-prosecution agreement was explicitly between Epstein and the Southern District of Florida, with no mention of Maxwell or other co-conspirators.
Popak delves into the specifics of the brief submitted to SCOTUS, highlighting the flawed logic in Maxwell's appeal. He points out that Maxwell is not contesting her convictions or the evidence against her but merely trying to leverage Epstein's agreement to avoid prosecution.
Michael Popak [18:45]: "Maxwell was prosecuted and convicted in New York by the Southern District of New York. She wasn't a signatory to that agreement."
He further dissects the language used in the brief, arguing that Maxwell's interpretation of the non-prosecution agreement stretches beyond its intended jurisdiction and purpose.
Alan Dershowitz, a prominent Harvard law professor and Maxwell's lawyer, is featured in the episode advocating for Maxwell's testimony in Congress. His argument centers on Maxwell being the "Rosetta Stone" of the Epstein case, suggesting she holds crucial information that could illuminate the extent of Epstein's network.
Alan Dershowitz [04:54]: "She knows everything. She is the Rosetta Stone. She knows everything... she could be compelled to testify."
Popak critiques Dershowitz's position, framing it as aligned with Donald Trump's narrative, thereby portraying the legal efforts as politically motivated rather than evidence-based.
David Oscar Marcus holds a press conference to assert Maxwell's innocence and the alleged unfairness of her trial. He claims that Maxwell was denied bail and subjected to inhumane treatment, arguing that the legal process against her was biased.
David Oscar Marcus [06:08]: "She answered those questions honestly, truthfully... We feel that the process for Ghislaine has been unfair."
Popak counters these claims by referencing John Sauer's brief, which meticulously outlines Maxwell's proven involvement in child sex trafficking alongside Epstein, reinforcing her convictions beyond the alleged procedural injustices.
The episode touches upon allegations made by Maxwell's defense regarding misconduct during her trial, including claims of biased judges and perjured jurors. However, Popak refutes these assertions by emphasizing the overwhelming evidence presented against Maxwell and the rigorous legal processes that upheld her convictions.
Michael Popak [12:20]: "There were no errors in evidence being admitted against her... she was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt."
Popak predicts that Maxwell's appeal to the Supreme Court is unlikely to succeed. He suggests that any delays in the court's proceedings may be strategic, allowing political figures like Donald Trump to leverage pardons to mitigate scandal within his administration.
Michael Popak [19:50]: "By delaying and foot dragging... Trump will say, 'I've taken a look at the evidence myself and my experts have...'"
He expresses skepticism about the fairness and outcome of Maxwell's appeal, citing the overwhelming evidence and the specific limitations of the non-prosecution agreement.
Wrapping up the episode, Popak underscores the gravity of Maxwell's crimes and the improbability of her legal team overturning her convictions. He warns of the potential misuse of legal processes for political ends, particularly in the context of the Trump administration.
Michael Popak [20:50]: "We shouldn't be shocked. We've got a felon in chief... Michael Popak concludes that the Supreme Court will likely deny Maxwell's appeal and that any attempts to use political influence to grant her immunity are unethical and legally unfounded."
Popak encourages listeners to stay informed through the Legal AF Substack for ongoing coverage and analysis of the case.
Michael Popak [00:58]: "This is a performative puppet theater... starring Donald Trump, Ghislaine Maxwell and her lawyer Oscar Marcus."
Alan Dershowitz [04:54]: "She is the Rosetta Stone. She knows everything."
David Oscar Marcus [06:08]: "The truth will come out about what happened with Mr. Epstein."
Michael Popak [20:50]: "We've got a felon in chief... We've got a sex abuser in chief in the White House."
This episode of Legal AF provides a comprehensive and critical examination of Ghislaine Maxwell's ongoing legal challenges. Michael Popak effectively dissects the arguments presented by Maxwell's legal team, offering listeners a clear understanding of the complexities and political undertones of the case. The detailed analysis underscores the improbability of Maxwell's appeal succeeding and highlights the broader implications of legal maneuvers influenced by political agendas.
For continued updates and in-depth coverage, listeners are encouraged to subscribe to the Legal AF Substack and follow their YouTube channel.