Loading summary
Transcript54 lines
- [00:02]
A
The world moves fast, your workday even faster. Pitching products, drafting reports, analyzing data Microsoft.
- [00:09]
B
365 Copilot is your AI assistant for.
- [00:12]
A
Work built into Word, Excel, PowerPoint and other Microsoft 365 apps you use, helping you quickly write, analyze, create and summarize so you can cut through clutter and clear a path to your best work. Learn more@Microsoft.com M365 copilot Kay Jeweler's black.
- [00:33]
B
Friday Sale is on. Now's the time to get up to 50% off Black Friday deals. With savings this big, you can get gifts for everyone on your list. Plus, if Black Friday lines aren't your thing, skip em at Kay. You can buy online and pick up in store or get free shipping right to your home. This holiday season, unwrap love and savings with Kay. Exclusions apply. See kay.com exclusions for details.
- [01:01]
A
Introducing Meta Ray Ban Display the world's most advanced AI glasses with a full color display built into the lens of the glasses. It's there when you need it and gone when you don't. Send and receive messages, translate or caption live conversations, collaborate with Meta, AI and more. Be one of the first to try Meta Ray ban display. Visit meta.com metaraybanddisplay to book a demo and find your pair. Today we'll attempt a feat once thought impossible. Overcoming high interest credit card debt. It requires merely one thing, a SoFi personal loan. With it you could save big on interest charges by consolidating into one low fixed rate monthly payment. Defy high interest debt with a Sofi personal loan. Visit sofi.com stunt to learn more.
- [01:55]
B
Loans originated by Sofi Bank NA member.
- [01:57]
A
FDIC terms and conditions apply. NMLS 696891 for everyone who solves crime from their couch, knows more about forensics than their own job, and has trust issues with small town sheriffs. Amazon Music's millions of podcast episodes are calling. Just download the Amazon Music app and start listening to your favorite true crime podcasts ad free included with Prime. It's not just midweek on Legal af. It's the start of the holiday season. Thanksgiving is here and we celebrate our audience the fervent support that we've gotten throughout the year here on Legal af. As we came on the air, of course we got a already a bit of a national crisis. We've got a somebody that looks like they were targeting National Guard in the District of Columbia. Several people sent to the hospital from it looks like the West Virginia National Guard. We'll get more information about that. But we have to focus on, as we always do, at the intersection of law and politics, we try to curate for you the things in the courtrooms, around the courtrooms that matter. And if ever, Karen, I. People would ask me, what will it look like when the Trump administration finally and MAGA finally implode and we see for ourselves the grip of power being lost by Donald Trump? What does that look like? This is the beginning of. I mean, this is it. I mean, people were wondering when we would finally see it. When would the cracks and the fissures start to swallow up this administration? We're starting to see it. I mean, it began in the courts with the losses, the frequent losses. Then it's the scandals. Pam Bondi at the center of many of them, if not her Cash Patel, if not him, others. And then you just see it all. Like, it's all reading on to Donald Trump. I mean, he looks flagged and tired and gassed and just out of it. You know, instead of doing the people's business, he's trying to figure out whether the New York Football Giants should go for a touchdown or not. And writing about or whether there should be a sequel to one of his favorite movies or not. I mean, seriously, this is. This is 25th amendment stuff. You know, on one hand, he's trying to figure out how the Giants win a game, and the other hand, he's blowing people out of the water without due process, you know, in violation of international law. And then you've got the series of legal cases and decisions that have come out that just declare that this administration and its Department of Justice are lawless and corrupt. Donald Trump says, I'm the chief legal officer of America. Forget Pam Bondi next to me. Okay, well, the chief legal officer, you're doing terribly in the courts around America with federal judges, with grand juries and the rest. So why don't we kick it off, Karen, with first. Happy Thanksgiving Early. I know you like to cook up a storm. How's it going with that?
- [04:53]
B
Yeah, Happy Thanksgiving, Kopak. Yeah. This time of year, a lot of cooking, a lot of reflecting and things about what you're thankful for. And I think about my family and how grateful I am to have such a big, beautiful family. And I think about what I was most thinking and what made me feel very warm inside was that I get to do this podcast tonight with you thinking about the community that has been created around Legal AF and the Midas Touch Network. And I look forward every Wednesday to being here so that we can all come together and really just know that you're around people who see the world the way you see the world as opposed to sometimes when you feel alone, when you look and say how is it possible that these things are happening? But it's not. No one's alone. We're all in this together and we're going to fight this together because we need the world to come back to something at least I recognize. So. Yeah. And then after this, I'll be cooking and prepping all night.
- [05:54]
A
That's good. Thanks. Thanks for being here with our audience, too. There's three cases at the midweek which I think sum up the depravity and the scandal ridden Trump administration. James Comey and Tish James's prosecution and what's happened to it. The restart of a long forgotten criminal contempt proceeding presided over by Judge Boasberg. Chief Judge Boasberg in D.C. against the Trump administration, which started back in March and April, went off into a hiatus because of appellate decision making. But it is back. And wait till our audience hears the potential witnesses that'll be brought before Judge Boasberg for a grilling. And again, another F up by Pam Bondi. I mean, if we made Pam Bondi the center of scandals and f ups a drinking game, let's just say our audience would be inebriated very, very quickly tonight and every other night. And then people like Eric Swalwell, Representative Swalwell is like, you know what? It's not okay that Bill Pulte, who's Donald Trump's attack dog, a Nepo baby who bought his way in to be the head of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It's not okay that he gets to rummage around private mortgage information and then slap dash, cut and paste and leak half truths about people's mortgages and then throw shade on them and a cloud on them and make them clear their name. He said, screw that. Taking a page out of like what Michael Wolf, the journalist just did, ensuing Melania Trump first for defamation. Eric Swalwell brought a case against Bill Pulte to stop the criminal. It's funny, I had said, I wonder if any of these people will try. I don't know if you remember this, Karen, about, you know, when the talk about Letitia James and Adam Schiff and Jim James Covey before they started indicting, I was like, some of these people should consider preemptively filing a suit to try to cut it off at the pass. And that's what Swalwell's done. And guess who his judges well, I'm going to leave it at that. A little bit of a cliffhanger, but I think our audience is going to be happy to hear who his judges and then we'll update our audience about developments in another oft forgotten quarter of the universe, Georgia. There was a criminal case there against Donald Trump and others. We'll talk about what's happened there just to update our audience as well. So why don't we kick it off with a very brave decision by Judge Curry in sitting by designation in Eastern District of Georgia, Virginia, sorry, but regularly sitting in South Carolina. And right before Thanksgiving, as she promised, she made a ruling about whether Lindsay Halligan was invalidly illegally appointed or not. And then if she was, what she was going to do about the indictments. That's separate and apart from judges like Makbenoff and Walker who are the actual trial judges for the, the two prosecutions, about what they're going to do about the indictment and closing the criminal case if they find selective prosecution, vindictive prosecution, abuse of the grand jury process, constitutional violations of rights and that type of thing. So why don't you bring our audience up to speed about Judge Curry and then what happens next with the Eastern District of Virginia prosecutor position?
- [09:23]
B
Yeah, so the, the issue that was before Judge Curry was a very discreet issue and that's whether Lindsey Halligan was validly appointed as United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. And just to remind everybody, the United States attorneys across the country, although they are inferior, they're considered inferior officers still require this. Congress passed a statute that says it requires them to be appointed by the president with advice and consent of the Senate because that can sometimes take time. They passed another statute that says that the president can appoint someone interim for 120 days because obviously, like I said, that process can take time or looking for someone or there could be a vacancy. So you can appoint someone temporarily for 120 days. But, but the statute specifically says when that time expired or expires, what happens next is district judges are the ones who choose the United States Attorney. Now, Trump basically thought that because that statute has two sections, one saying that you can appoint someone in interim, that you can just keep doing it and every time you do it, the clock restarts another 120 days. But what happened here was Trump nominated Eric Siebert, who was going to be the United States Attorney under Trump. He was Trump's nominee, but his 120 day period expired. So when that happened, the district judges in Virginia voted and made him the United States attorney exactly how the statute is supposed to work. And unfortunately, when he and all the career prosecutors in that office looked at both the Comey case and the James case, Letitia James case, said, you know what? There's no case here. There's nothing to bring. Can't prove any case beyond a reasonable doubt. No crime occurred. Everybody agreed and refused to prosecute the case because they had prosecutorial ethics and integrity. And when that happened, Trump either fired Siebert or he resigned, depending on whose side you believe, and put install Lindsey Halligan into the office, somebody with no prosecutorial experience whatsoever. And she was an insurance lawyer. She represented Trump personally. And the people are saying that the defense attorneys for Jim Comey and Letitia James brought these. Brought these actions, saying, that's illegal. She was unlawfully appointed. And. And so, as you said, this went to Judge Curry, who is not an Eastern District of Virginia judge, but since all of the district judges in Virginia had voted to install Eric Siebert, they were conflicted out of making this determination. And so they had to do it out of district. And Judge Curry was appointed to the judge. And Judge Curry did a very tight analysis of the statute and interpreted case law and basically said, sorry, if you look at statutory interpretation and all the case law, it's very clear how this works. The statute is, first you do this, then you do that. So first you appoint it when the term expires, then the judges get to do it. And that she was unlawfully appointed, Therefore, she was not the United States Attorney at the time that she voted this indictment. P.S. she was the only one in the grand jury. She was the person who signed the indictment. So this. But for her, this would not have happened. And if she's unlawfully in there and doesn't have the authority, it would be like me or you going into the grand jury. We're just normal citizens. We. We have no power. We have no authority. And he basically said, since she was invalidly appointed, the indictment is dismissed. She dismissed it without prejudice. So there's. With prejudice. Without prejudice. With prejudice. It means that you can. You can never bring the case again. The case is over forever. Without prejudice means you can bring the case again, but the statute of limitations has run, and there's a footnote in her decision that basically says, look, if the invalid. If you're invalidly. If you're invalidly appointed, like I said, you are, that doesn't stop the clock. So it looks like the statute is run and that the case against Comey is gone forever. We'll see I'm sure all of this is going to be litigated and appealed, but Judge Curry found that the statute is unambiguous, and once the term expires, the district court fills the vacancy, and that's that. And so it's a great decision. It's very clear. And it is, I think, going to be really hard to interpret this any differently, even on appeal. But the question remains, what happens to all the other motions that were in front of the trial judge? Right. Whether it's Nachmanoff or Walker, as you said, what happens to the dispute over the grand jury materials, the vindictive prosecution, all of the various motions that. That were pending before those judges. And I, you know, I wonder if you have a different view of this, but I don't see how those things can necessarily be ruled on because there's no case in front of those judges. There's nothing on the docket. There's no way to rule on them, although a complete record has been made. Right. They've briefed these issues. They've had hearings on these issues. So in that regard, I think they're covered. But what. What is your thought on what they.
- [15:24]
A
I think they can still go forward. I don't think the cl. I don't think the criminal case has been closed. Clerk hasn't closed the case. There's a ruling that Lindsay Haligan is invalid as a prosecutor, and like fruit of the poisonous tree, everything that she did or touched is void. Citing to Judge Cannon, which I thought was interesting, in the order. Citing to Justice Alito and back when he was a young lawyer in the White House counsel's office for the proposition on remedy that, which is what we always thought she was focused on with looking at the grand jury transcripts about what do I do once I find that she's invalidly appointed? What do I. I. Okay, I toss the indictments in this case without prejudice, although for Comey, as you said, has different impact because they're out of time. And the invalidity of the indictment, I think, is. Is. Is a terminal is to the case being brought again, I don't think it can happen again the way that she's analyzed it. But in terms of if I'm Nachman off and. Or I'm. Or I'm Walker, I'm like, all right, well, she's gone. But let's look at the grand jury process and let's. And let's look at whether vindictive prosecution was present sufficient that. Not only that, but I'm going to dismiss it with Prejudice. In other words, don't even bother bringing in another Lindsey Halligan, God forbid, or even the one appointed by the, the judges of the, of the district court. Because I am finding that in, in the one chance that she had it demonstrated vindictive prosecution and she was illegally appointed as part of that. But I'm going to close the case and I'm going to do it with prejudice. I think that's similar to what you actually thought was going to happen when you said she's not going to dismiss the indictment. She's going to leave it to Nachman off and Walker to do something with on the merits, on the substance, so to speak. That's sort of what she did.
- [17:22]
B
Yeah, I mean, yes, but she dismissed the indictment. That's the problem is if the indictment is, it'll just be interesting to see how they, how they.
- [17:34]
A
Prejudice. I would agree with you. Case closed clerk. Close the cases without prejudice. That puts the ball back in the government's court to try to figure out a way to get a prosecutor not appointed by them under 546 to go and make a decision to go do this. And that's not always easy. I don't think any self respecting prosecutor like you used to be is going to prosecute this case and then they're going to be left arguing naked argument to some higher authority that their interpretation of 546, although rejected in Nevada, rejected in New Jersey and soon to be rejected in the third Circuit Court of Appeals is the right interpretation of plain statute that says it's a single use ticket. You get one appointment for 120 days. After that it gets turned over to the federal judges of the district and it's a little bit of a power split there. Now some people have asked me isn't that a violation of the separation of powers? Like how does the district court get to pick a executive branch officer in the form of a prosecutor? You know, listen, our nation has been doing it apparently since the Civil War. There's been some version of this sort of power sharing when it comes. I guess the way the balance is is Trump gets to, he always gets his pick to be confirmed by the Senate and he also gets this extra pick for 120 days. But he doesn't get unlimited 120 day picks to avoid the, the appointment clause and therefore somebody's got to fill the job. So we'll let district court judges who sometimes pick special prosecutors will let them do it. I think we're out from under a separation of powers issue. But you know that's what they're going to argue. Just like they argued that, you know, oh, the statute's been around for 90 years for the Federal Trade Commission or the National Labor Relations Board, but it really has always been a violation of separation of powers. We'll see. But for right now, I haven't gotten word yet that the judges have, have the judges met to pick the replacement yet? They should.
- [19:38]
B
Yeah, I mean, I, they, they really should. Exactly.
- [19:42]
A
Quickly.
- [19:42]
B
Exactly. So, you know. Yes, but the. I hear what you're saying. I just don't know the mechanism, how they are going to be able to rule on this when there's no indictment before him. But it'll be interesting, right? It'll be interesting to see. Do they have to wait to re IND they can make these arguments or can their can knock Nakmanoff or Nakmanoff still rule on these issues?
- [20:10]
A
I think he doesn't. But we'll have the debate.
- [20:11]
B
We'll see. Yeah, no, no, it'll be interesting to see.
- [20:14]
A
There's no indictment in front of him. The criminal case is still in front of him because it was done without prejudice. So as long as he still has jurisdiction, then my argument, my argument would be if I were now Comey, I would bring a motion to dismiss with prejudice the indictment for the running of the statute of limitations. He has to be able to rule out. Let's use that as an example. Nachmanov has to be able to rule on that. Who would rule on it? So in other words, they want to prevent, preclude the government from, even under any prosecutor from running back in because of the running of the statute of limitations. That's clearly an issue of law. That can be decided by Naquanoff. Right now.
- [20:53]
B
Yeah, I think he has to wait for another indictment. Right now there's no case. She dismissed the case. She dismissed the indictment.
- [20:59]
A
No, there's no indictment.
- [21:00]
B
There's nothing. There's no char. But there's no charging instrument.
- [21:04]
A
Yeah, right. But it's without prejudice. So the case is still alive until they re re prosecute. And if, if, if they're all there together, I mean, we could debate this all night long, but I've had plenty of cases where the Amen. The complaint gets dismissed without prejudice, doesn't close the case. And she didn't order the case be closed.
- [21:21]
B
Yeah.
- [21:21]
A
So the case is still open on the docket. And if I'm, if I'm comey, the next piece of paper I write is to stop the next indictment, not wait for it and say, you Cannot under all the other things we talked about. But a new thing, Judge. The statute of limitations has run. The indictment has been declared to be invalid. Therefore, it didn't stop the clock on the sol. The statute of limitations. And you. And you need to bar them from bringing me back through the mud with another indictment. If they get another kooky prosecutor. That's what I would do. We'll find out.
- [21:51]
B
Yeah. I mean, Comey could have asked for the indictment to be stricken, and then I would agree with you. But he asked for the indictment to be dismissed, and that's what she did. You're right. It's without prejudice. Means they can bring it again, except for the statute of limitations. But I'm. We'll be. We'll see. We'll see what happens. But I'm not as I think this case might be dead, dead, dead without us being able to review, without those rulings to happen. That being said, I think that they might appeal this. Right. And so if this gets appealed and the indictment goes back and that. That's what I think was smart about Nachmanoff. Right. Is that if this gets appealed and the Supreme Court rules that Lindsey Halligan was validly appointed and these things are wrong. All of these issues have been briefed already. And Nachmanov then I think could. Because then the case will go back down to him. Can then rule in these other areas. But we'll see. We'll see how it goes. But it's very interesting.
- [22:48]
A
Yeah. And the debate continues, but not without a word from our sponsors. Thank you for being here on Thanksgiving. So many different ways to support what we do here on legal af. The 12 different commentators and contributors that I have on the legal a YouTube channel. The work that's done on the legal AF sub stack. The work that's done here every week on Legal AF, the YouTube channel, and on the podcast. Support the podcast. Keep us, keep us afloat, you know, with audio listens over on Apple and Spotify with reviews there as well. That keeps us floating around about 50 to 60 in all news podcasts. We ended up being in the top 20 recently on YouTube for. For all podcasts. So that's the way to do it. Come over to Legal. I have the YouTube channel. We're so close. So crashing through the 1 million barrier. We're going to be at 970,000 by Turkey Day. And at the rate we add on subscribers, about two weeks later, hopefully right around Christmas, Hanukkah, whatever your choice of holiday is, we're going to be at the 1 million. And that's all testament to you. It gives me goosebumps to think about it. Now we got Legal AF sub stack where you can really dive in and nerd out on some of these procedural issues. You can read the orders like Judge Curry's order for yourself, live reporting on things that happen at the minute that we've got to get to you immediately in a way that even YouTube can't do. And, and all of that. And then we've got our, we got our sponsors. Some of them have been with us from the very beginning, some of them are, are new, but they have something in common. They know our point of view, they know that of our audience. They support our First Amendment rights and, and, and by extension support yours to get briefed by us, you know, every day, every hour, one way or the other, different ways of distribution for the Legal AF brand. So we appreciate our sponsors and here's a word from them now. This holiday season, if you're looking for a gift that's both genuinely useful and unexpectedly luxurious, Tushy offers a simple way to elevate someone's daily routine. A Tushy bidet is a practical upgrade that brings comfort, cleanliness and a modern touch to any bathroom. I received a Tushy bidet and I was surprised by how quick the installation was and how clean and modern it looked once it was in. It fit right into the bathroom setup and the fresh water clean is noticeably more effective and comfortable than traditional toilet paper. It's a small change that makes a very real difference. Tushy focuses on everyday luxury with real benefits, helping reduce irritation, cutting down on toilet paper use, and offering a cleaner, healthier experience. It's a practical gift that still feels premium and it's something absolutely anyone can appreciate. Remember, a hole is only a naughty word if you wipe for a limited time. Our listeners get 10% off their first bidet order when you use code legalafeckout. That's 10% off your first bidet order at hello, tushy.com with promo code legal AF. Remember, a hole is only a naughty word if you wipe for a limited time. Our listeners get 10% off their first bidet order when you use code LEGAL AF at checkout. Once again, 10% off your first bidet order at hello, TUSHY.com with promo code LEGAL AF. Your feed is filled with nonstop commentary and the group chat isn't far behind. Into Cloud delivers the piece your feed won't. Into Cloud is an online cannabis dispensary offering gummies, flour, pre rolls and more. All federally legal THC DEA certified lab tested and shipped discreetly. When the news cycle refuses to slow down into Cloud provides a reliable way to create a little distance from the noise. What stands out about Indecloud is their attention to quality and their thoughtful product selection. Whether it's better sleep when the world feels overwhelming, a calmer and more balanced buzz during tense political moments, or potent pre rol for when your mind simply won't switch off, they offer solutions designed to help you reset without stepping away from what matters. This is how you unplug without falling behind. So if you're 21 or older, check out into Cloud Co and use code LEGAL AF for 40% off your first order plus free shipping. This is IndeCloud's biggest sale of the year and it lasts all month long because peace of mind shouldn't expire in half a day. That's I n D A C L O U D Code Legal A F for 40% off free shipping and acquired or break reserved for our listeners. As always, please enjoy responsibly and thank you to Indecloud for sponsoring today's episode. Welcome back to the midweek edition of Legal AF Case number two. We're kind of pulling together like five years of, of teaching and being together and communing over the law and politics in these cases. Chief Judge Boasberg in D.C. back in March. That's how old this matter is right at the beginning of the Trump administration when they try to use the Alien Enemies act to start deporting human beings without due process in the middle of the night. Sometimes children sent 200 Venezuelans to El Salvador to be tortured at the Seacot prison in return for El Salvador getting $6 million to the United States. Boasberg didn't like it, especially when the ACLU ran into court early and said they're fueling the jets and they're sending them El Salvador away from your federal jurisdiction. After the suit was filed. Judge and he said, no, they're not. I'm going to hold a hearing. And he held a hearing and he ordered the that all planes that hadn't left yet be grounded. He ordered the ones that were in the air be returned. And they didn't do any of that. Then they sent in a a purposeful, willfully blind lawyer named Drew Ensign who said to the judge, I don't know. I told him about your order judgment. I don't know what they're doing, you know, and, and that was all a lie. And how do we know that because there's a whistleblower named Erez Riveni, who I just learned today has joined Democracy Forward, working with Sky Perryman as a new lawyer. Boy, is he going to be a secret weapon for sky in her hundred cases that she's especially in ones involving immigration. So hats off and congratulations to Sky Perryman, Democracy Forward and Eris Roveni. And eris had a 35 page or so whistleblower complaint right at the time that Emil Bovey, Donald Trump's former criminal defense lawyer and number three, the Department of Justice, was nominated and up for confirmation hearing to be on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. There he is, sitting in Philadelphia, of all places. And Amel Bovey said, I was promoted on March, I think the March 13th or 14th, right around the time of the hearings with Judge Boasberg. And right after I was promoted, I was ushered into a room and I was there with all the other immigration litigation people for the Department of Justice. And there was Emil Bovey, who told us in no uncertain terms that we are to hide the fact that we're using the Alien Enemies act to whisk people out of the country and that we're to tell judges who ask about it to go f off, literally go f off. And he was very, very concerned about that. And he refused to do it. He then phoned in for a hearing with Judge Boasberg, the one I'm talking about now, in which he says Drew Ensign, who was his boss, effectively lied to Judge Bozberg about the planes and where they were located. I still think they're lying because I read the new filing they made last night, Karen, and they still are fudging the timeline of when planes were, were not in the air. So he, Judge Boasberg started a contempt proceeding. He asked the ACLU if they wanted contempt. They said yes, he started a contempt proceeding. Now, subsequent to that, he started in April. The United States Supreme Court vacated, blocked his earlier temporary restraining order and found that he didn't have the power to do that. But this is a different issue. This isn't about whether his order later was overturned by the Supreme Court. The question is, at the time, it was a valid and binding federal court order from one branch to another, whether you're allowed to just stub your nose at it and flout and say, well, I think you're going to be reversed one day. So I'm just going to keep flying my planes away from federal jurisdiction and oversight. And I think the answer to that question is no. There's just Case law that's longer than my arm that's out there about you have to comply with the federal court order unless and until you're told otherwise by an appellate court and you can't just on your own, you self help and violate it. So he, after a bunch of appeals, he restarted this hearing. And the first thing he said at the hearing a couple of days ago, Karen, was I want to hear from Erez Riveni, which is exactly what you and I had said when Ariz Roveni's 35 pages came out. Whistleblower. I said, there's two people that are going to want to hear from Erez Raveni, Judge Zinnis about the Abrego Garcia case and Judge Bosper, because now we have the answer. Why weren't they listening to Boasberg and her and Zenith in their orders? Because. Because Amel Bovey told the lawyers not to listen to the judges and, and told the, and effectively told the Homeland Security director, Kristi Noem to keep flying the planes. And we'll deal with it later. So now we got this amazing potential hearing with some very interesting guest appearances under oath to talk to Judge Boasberg. What do you think, Karen?
- [32:52]
B
Look, this is really, this one's going to be interesting because Kristi Noem says that she sought legal advice, right, about whether or not they had to listen to Boasberg's order. So they're admitting that he gave an order, but it was an oral order at the time. Right. He said it on the record, orally. And so she claimed she saw it. And I'm putting air quotes for people who are listening and not watching legal advice from Todd Blanche, Emile Vove and others and asking them, do I have to listen or not? And she's claiming that they gave her legal advice, that she didn't have to listen and she sent the planes off. Now, the reason I bring that up is because there's a defense, right? There's this advice of counsel defense. She can kind of rely on that in this criminal contempt proceeding that's happening in front of Judge Boasberg when he's looking at whether to bring criminal contempt. She's going to lean on the. Well, I was relying on advice of counsel, which is, I think this one's going to be hard because this is not really within the law. Within the bounds of the law. Of course, an oral order of a judge is enforceable. I mean, I was thinking when I read that that that's their position, that. Well, it wasn't in writing. Well, first of all it was on the record, meaning it was transcribed by a court reporter. Therefore, it is in writing. And I'm thinking about all the times there are never writings like in an emergency search warrant that you have to do orally or an emergency eavesdropping warrant that you have to do orally. Those have complete full effect in cases. Right. Judges orally do things. Or if a judge tells you to do something or orders you to do something on the record and you don't, then they can hold you in contempt. Not everything comes out in a written order. I mean, so to me, it's just such a preposterous position. Position to take that they are taking that this was advice of counsel. So this is going to be, I think, a major hearing where they're going to try to call Emile Beauvais, who was at the time the number two at the Department of Justice, but is now an appellate judge, a federal appeals court judge. So I don't know how you call a federal appeals court judge to testify. That'll be interesting. And Todd Blanche, who's currently. Right. The number two at the doj, who's going to have to also talk about this, that they gave this advice. But I mean, what, what a, what a pickle this this has they've created by making these claims.
- [35:20]
A
Bovey was three and Blanche was two.
- [35:23]
B
Sorry I promoted him. I apologize.
- [35:27]
A
And now Stan Woodward is number three, who just showed up on the 46 people who donated to Donald Trump and his transition campaign. Five of them are now in the administration, including Howard Lutnick, Linda McMahon, Stan Woodward and a couple of other people. Talk about pay to play. All right, so we're going to see what's going to happen with Judge Postberg. There's going to be appeals again. And, and already the administration, I, I said in an earlier hot take today that, that the Boseberg's not going to be pleased with the filing by the Department of Justice, which effectively told him to go pound sand, that he was wrong, that the appellate process said he was wrong, that they were, they were not in contempt. And then they fudged the, which I think is another perjury problem, except it wasn't done under oath. But it's a problem for the lawyers who signed that pleading. I think they got the time of the planes wrong because I've seen earlier versions that the judge was focused on which said some of those planes were not out of U.S. airspace. And I think now they've wallpapered over that with, they just alighted over it with a, with a little flick of the pen or the computer screen. And I think they're going to be in big trouble. But you know, Bozberg, they're trying to undermine Bozberg left and right. You know, you got Pam Bondi saying he's a terrorist enabler. I mean, just crazy to say out loud by the chief legal officer of the Attorney General of the United States against a federal judge. I mean, I can't wait. I wish I could just time travel to the end of this administration and get a Democrat back in office and get the Department of Justice right again. And like I would if I never hear, it's like, it's like, it's like a silent movie star. Like I never want to hear for the, from the Attorney General unless I really have to. Instead of these crazy, insufferable press conferences, you know, with her, with her, her, her resting, resting Attorney General face that she said she's developed, you know, like I do, I need to see this. I mean this isn't, this isn't wallpapering over your defects, your lack of ethics, your lack of leadership and independence as an Attorney general. And it's not working with the American people, you know, so I don't know why they continue to play this card, except they're pandering to the only person that matters to them, which is Donald Trump. But woe be them if we're right that the slip on power has happened. And Donald Trump, who's already like close putting the lid on his day at 3:30, 4:00 clock in the afternoon and you know, and all of that there, they don't have presidential immunity. And, and some of the things that they're, they're within a five year statute of limitations for some of the crimes that they have committed. You know, they act so imperiously so like they're never going to be caught for what they're doing. They are. And I think they're starting to realize it as we're watching the implosion of the MAGA movement. It's all you can call it, you know, the ma, Mike Johnson's not going to be there through the midterms. It's not just Marjorie Taylor Greene. It's going to be the permission that Marjorie Taylor Greene has given to others in her party to throw up the middle finger to the White House and say I'm tired of being abused by effing Stephen Miller, who elected him, who elected Pam Bondi, who elected any of these people other than Trump. And if there's 34 or 5 people that go, I'm out. Even before the midterms. Forget about playing with the maps, the congressional maps. They'll lose their hold on power in Congress now. And it's just. I don't know what they thought. It's just the abuse of power. They just got power mad drunk on power.
- [39:29]
B
I agree with you that for the first time, we're really seeing fissures in the MAGA movement. You're really seeing that there is infighting, there are problems. There are people like Marjorie Taylor Greene and others who are fed up with the fact that the Trump administration is not doing what they said they were going to do. And it's not just Epstein transparency that they promised and assured everyone that they were going to be, but it's also putting America first. Right? Prices aren't going down. Trump is flying all around the Middle east and buying up companies for his own edification and making him and his family members more wealthy and not spending time at home. I read something recently talking about how he seems really tired and he's falling asleep and he doesn't come down from his part of the White House until noon, and then he stops all his meetings at 5. I mean, I think you're really starting to see, see that he is ailing, he's aging, and he's really losing his. His support from a lot of his base. And I think he feels it because you can see by. By what he's panicking about, but with his screeds. So it's interesting, and I think you're 100% right. We're seeing it, and we're seeing it play out in real time, and nothing could make me happier.
- [40:54]
A
Look at the six paragraphs that he wrote against the New York Times reporter who wrote an obvious a story about what we're watching with our own eyes. His. His flagging energy, his. His putting a lid on the day early. And then he called her. I mean, he can't help himself. He called her ugly inside and out. The failing New York Times. Here we go. I stopped eight wars. I don't. What wars? You.
- [41:20]
B
I know. Name one. Forget eight.
- [41:24]
A
So, I mean, even Ukraine, Russia, they bombed Ukraine yesterday. Nine more people died. What war is ended? You know, so it's just that implosion we were hoping for. I didn't think it was going to happen in month 10 or in, you know, so soon, but it's here and we need to capitalize on it. I want to talk about Eric Swalwell. So Donald Trump figured out, and I called It a mass conspiracy that if he had Bill Pulte, the Nepo baby from the Pulte Construction fortune, who he took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and have him go after Democrats for quote, unquote, mortgage fraud, he get a lot of mileage out of it, political mileage out of it. So all of a sudden, you know, three months ago, here's the conspiracy. Bill Pulte, at the, at the demand of Donald Trump, goes and writes a phony memoir. And then he sends that memo and on his social media post to Pam Bondi and he says, oh, look at these signatures on these two documents. Not looking at the rest of the file for a mortgage or anything else. Oh, this is, this is mortgage fraud. There are two primary homes, or this is a secondary home, but you can't rent it out. And what's the niece doing there? I mean, just crazy about how people run their lives. And of course, ignoring the fact that his own parents, the Pulte's, committed this quote, unquote, mortgage fraud in Michigan and Florida in claiming two primary residences where that Scott Bessant, the Treasury Secretary, did the exact same thing, or 20% of the cabinet did, including the Transportation Secretary and the labor secretary. Because it's not fraud. It's not fraud if the bank isn't defrauded. If the bank knows they're lending you both loans, they know you can't have two primary homes. If they gave you a lower rate, it's because you're a good customer or it's because you're the Attorney General, because you're a senator. They're not worrying about you going bankrupt like Donald Trump or foreclosing on your house. So he slaps this together, it puts up this. Look at these signatures. Oh, this is interesting. And then shade is cast on these people. And then because Pam, Bonnie. Oh, I'm going to open up an investigation. Who can I use? Oh, Ed Martin. Oh, John Cerconi. Oh, Lindsey Halligan. Oh, oh, oh. And now you've got the front page headline that Donald Trump wants. It's all he wants. That's his pound of flesh Federal probe. Federal criminal probes open about mortgage fraud. Adam Schiff, Shifty Schiff, Leticia James, Jigaboo James or whatever he used to call her. Peekaboo James. And who's the last one? Oh, Lisa Cook on the Federal Reserve. And then we had a report last week that maybe, although I'm not sure it's true, maybe in a grand jury, some DOJ people were actually looking at Pulte and Ed Martin to see if they committed any crimes. But now we've got Eric Swalwell. Well, I think right on time. Like, exquisite timing because there was a referral from this Pulte guy about Swalwell's mortgages. He said, screw that. I don't need a criminal referral hanging over my head. I'm going to sue Pulte. So take it from there and tell our audience what judge just got assigned to it.
- [44:38]
B
Yeah, so Judge Boasberg, our favorite judge. So basically, what Pulte's saying is that. I'm sorry, what Swalwell's saying is that Pulte abused his position by going through and scouring the databases of mortgage records and selectively looking for records to create these allegations, these fake allegations of mortgage fraud, and asked the judge to declare Pulte's actions illegal and direct him to withdraw his criminal referral. And so it's almost like a vindictive prosecution claim in advance, because they're. A criminal referral is slightly different than a prosecution. It basically, what criminal referrals are is government agencies who don't have the ability to prosecute, but they uncover illegal activity within their agencies. They can refer the matters to the Department of Justice. And so Pulte's agency has made this criminal referral. And what Pulte is essentially doing is saying this is vindictive, even though he's not really exactly using those words, because vindictive prosecution is a term of art after a prosecution has been brought. But that's essentially what he's doing. This is like that. It's like he's saying it's vindictive in advance. And because, look, there's all sorts of federal privacy laws that prohibit officials from going into the private information of citizens and use that information to go after your political opponents. And so he also raised First Amendment claims, basically saying that the effort to get the DOJ to investigate him was retaliatory and to punish him for his political speech. And he writes in his filing, the First Amendment is first for a reason. Freedom of speech comes before all others. And I'm allowed to say what I want to say. But you're not allowed to then vindictively go and search through confidential information looking for something against me. So it was. This is. I think he's got a great lawsuit, and I'm glad he brought it. And, you know, let's see where it goes. You know, Pulte is also the guy who sent a referral, by the way, who that led to the Indictment against Letitia James, the New York Attorney General that was dismissed, you know, by Judge Curry as well on Monday, I think it was. So I, I think, I think it'll be interesting to see where this goes.
- [47:10]
A
In the meantime, you know, he's the head of something, which means there's an oversight capacity to Senate and the House. And with the slip on power by Donald Trump and MAGA heading for the exits. Certainly not wanting to run in his shadow. No. Who's going to want to now with Donald Trump's independent, independent voter approval rating at 26%. Who's, who's going to want to run? Clinging to Donald Trump, you know, his superpowers are effectively done. The rapidity or velocity at which Donald Trump has lost his powers to help candidates is stunning, really stunning. I think it started with well before election night three weeks ago, but certainly proved itself election night three weeks ago. And perfect timing, exquisite timing by Eric Swalwell to take on the administration, take on Bill Pulte head to head. And he's got the right judge and Judge Boasberg, we'll see what happens next and we will report on it. And Pulte will one day be in front of a committee having to answer questions about that, which he's done. And if I'm in the oversight Committee or the committee responsible for financial services or the mortgage industry, I bring in Pulte right away and talk about his side gig at being Donald Trump's attack dog and rummaging around the private records of Americans and putting them out for public display in a half assed manner in order to throw shade on them. It's not right, it's not fair, it's not democratic, it's not American and it needs to stop along with this administration. Right?
- [48:45]
B
You know, yeah, absolutely. You know, it's funny, this reminds me that growing up I my parents generation was very much about privacy and not letting the government get your information and not letting the government have personal stuff about you. And I always thought they're so paranoid, you know, because it was all like the age of the Internet and being, being suspect of all of computers and databases and that sort of stuff. And again, I always thought it was kind of paranoid. But you look at what they're doing, you look at what this government is doing with people's personal information and going into databases, whether it's doge with going into everyone's Social Security information, you look at what they have access to and not only do they have access to it, but that they are going through our personal information in order to go after their political enemies. It is frightening and we are living in a time that is frankly really frightening. And thank God for the judges.
- [49:51]
A
Who.
- [49:51]
B
Are the last check but is stopping. So far a lot of the stuff that's going on and the abuses that are going on. And I want to give a shout out to all the judges who are holding down the fort. The founders who had three branches of government and checks and balances, et cetera, were so just genius impression. And because Congress seems to be not showing up and not doing their job and really just feckless, it's just amazing that the judiciary has held up and is holding the line. Even Trump appointed judges and are ruling against him. So that's a good thing. And I think there's reason for us all to continue to have a lot of hope because we do have this great system of checks and balances. And so let's just keep fighting and keep bringing these cases and, and keep pushing back against this authoritarian regime.
- [50:49]
A
Can you imagine if Congress was strong and the President was strong and the judges were weak? Imagine we just had a. First of all, I don't know what our show would be about. We lost again today in federal court. Federal judges not doing their job. I guess that would be the show. But, but I'm glad you're right that the last firewall to protect democracy and our rule of law is holding, is holding strong even if we have to hold our breath every time a case gets to the United States Supreme Court. When we come back, while we'll take another break, wish everybody an amazing Thanksgiving. Now's the time to pull your family even closer and friends even closer. Thanksgiving has always been my favorite holiday, not only because it just what it sort of represents about family and I love all the foods. It's also very close to my birthday. So I've always loved Thanksgiving. In fact, there's a great photo of my late mom and me. God, I think I was about five or six and I was obviously at a Thanksgiving table with, at my grandparents house in Long island of all places. And I can see the birthday cake for me on the table because they would use that to kind of kick off my birthday. So I always have fond memories about that. And so for those that want to help us in going into 2026, what important year for us to continue what we've built together brick by brick here on legal AF 2026. Wow. I mean if it wasn't, if it wasn't obvious before that this, that's the year where real change happens. It is now, but we, but we're doing the right thing. Being together. Being together. Being together now. Legal AF been there from the start. Five years. As you know a five year old podcast. Help us on the audio side of this podcast, come over to Apple and Spotify, leave reviews, 5 star reviews and comments. The audio does really well, but we could always do better on YouTube and you can send it off to people in your life and ask them to join us. And that helps us stay at the top of the YouTube rankings along with some other work that I do along the week. And then we've got the Legal AF YouTube channel. That's where we really drill down. That's where the TED talk meets the law school class. 12 different contributors. I do the first four videos a day. But then I've got Adam Classfeld, All Rise News and Sydney Blumenthal and Sean Wilentz of a court of history. We've got the ACLU over there, we've got Democracy Forward over there with us. We've got Court Accountability Action. One of our, one of our first contributors that joined right right away, Dina Dahl joins me once a week to talk about the Supreme Court on a show called Unprecedented all on Legal AF YouTube channel. With your help, we'll cross the 1 million subscriber threshold, that important ceiling to give us street credibility to bring on the guests that you want to hear from the elected officials, the judges, the former judges, the, the law, law professors. Help us cross that million subscriber barrier. And then of course we got Legal AF the substack, which is where you can read the orders that we talk about on the show. We've got live reporting there that we can only do there, not on YouTube because the nature of the platform and the rest. So come over to Legal AF substack as well. And now a word from our sponsors.
- [54:10]
B
If you're anything like me, the very first thing you do when you get home is rip off your bra and get comfortable. But that is until I got this amazing new bra from honeylove. Their bras are so comfortable you actually forget you're wearing them. And frankly, that's not going to be the first thing you feel like doing when you get home from work. So I don't know about you, but I am absolutely in love with honeylove. It's just a fantastic undergarment product that is our sponsor. They have wireless bras that feel like second skin. They're lightweight, they're breathable, they're perfect for the summer heat, which is where I am in New York, it's quite hot. And so whether you're wearing a T shirt, a tank top, a sundress, their bras give you just the right amount of lift without that terrible squeeze, thanks to years of research. So they have ton of wonderful, beautiful bras that you should look at. And they aren't the stiff wires or the bulky padding. It's the shape you want without the stuff you don't. Once you try it, you'll love it. You'll forget you're even wearing one. So go ahead, ditch the discomfort, say goodbye to those terrible underwires and treat yourself to the summer support you deserve with Honey Love. And for a limited time, you can get Honey Love on sale. Treat yourself to 20% off your entire order to heading by heading to honeylove.com legalaf support the show and check them out because you deserve this Glow up.
- [55:37]
A
You know I've been trying to clean up my morning routine lately. I was tired of that mid morning crash after my second cup of coffee so I switched things up up. And that's when I found Mud Water. It's a coffee alternative made with cacao chai, turmeric and adaptogenic mushrooms. So you get focus and energy without the jitters or the crash. I just mix it with hot water, froth it up and it's become my morning ritual. It's warm, smooth and it actually helps me start the day clear headed. And now they've got Nourish, the world's first mental wellness shake. It's like a protein shake but it's for your brain and your body. With 25 grams of clean plant based protein plus nootropics and adaptogenic and probiotics. It supports focus, recovery and digestion and it actually tastes good. Ready to make the switch to cleaner Energy? Head to mudwater.com and grab your starter kit today. Right now our listeners get an exclusive deal up to 43% off your entire order plus free shipping and a free rechargeable frother when you use code legal AF. That's right, up to 43% off with code Legalif at M U D W T R. After your purchase they'll ask you how you found them. Please show your support and let them know we sent you. Welcome welcome back to the Thanksgiving Family edition of Legal af. Yes, this is Francesca, my daughter. For those that are wondering, future podcaster President of the United States and or and or Chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, you be the judge. But I wanted to bring I saw Ben Brought in his daughter. I was like, wait, I want to bring in my daughter to work.
- [57:16]
B
So gorgeous. She's so gorgeous. Hi, Francesca. Look at that little face.
- [57:22]
A
That's Aunt Kfa.
- [57:24]
B
That's the face of a future Supreme Court justice. That's what I said.
- [57:27]
A
Hi, Legal A effers. All right, we're going to take. We're going to take. Let's pick it up with Georgia and I'll turn it over to you, Karen, while I take care of my daughter for a second. Georgia, there was a prosecution, and it was brought by somebody named Fani Willis. Remember that? It was so long ago. Fani Willis decides she's got a RICO case, racketeering, and that it was all over, baby. And that she's going to bring it against Donald Trump and a whole bunch of other people, including Rudy Giuliani and all of his lawyers. And it looks so great. And at one point, it was leading. And then your old office, Alvin Bragg, he got ahead with his prosecution. And then what happened?
- [58:03]
B
Yeah. So. Yeah, well, Fani Willis had an unfortunate relationship with her lead prosecutor that then called everything into question, and the case spiraled out of control and she was ultimately taken off the case. And they were looking for another prosecutor to prosecute the case. And what just came out is the. In Georgia, there's a, I guess a head prosecutor or, or a consortium of prosecutors that they all belong to. And the president of that basically said, I couldn't find another prosecutor who would take this case. Nobody wanted to touch it. Besides, you couldn't prosecute a sitting president until after the president is no longer president. So we'd have to wait for three years for that. And besides, presidential immunity has come down, and so we'd have to sort through all the immunity questions. And. And Sitchley just said, we're dismissing this case. This prosecutor also said, which I thought was ridiculous. I mean, all of those things are disappointing, but I understand them. What I thought was ridiculous was he said that, that call to Brad Raffensperger, the Secretary of State of Georgia, saying, find me the 11,800 and whatever number of votes, that that could be interpreted in two different ways. And when there's ambiguity and things can be interpreted in two different ways, the tie goes to the defendant, which is a concept in criminal law. But there is no way, in my opinion, you can say with a straight face, that that was what Trump was doing. He was absolutely trying to have there be basically. Basically trying to get fraud, find fraudulent votes is, I think, pretty clear. Anyway, that's A question for the jury to decide. And he was indicted by the grand jury. And that's not the only charge. It was a sweeping RICO case that you can't just look at that one phone call out of context. You have to look at it in the context of everything else that he was charged of doing, like getting fake electors to come in and all the other schemes that were going on. I mean, 18 people were indicted. And it was a huge, sweeping, very long indictment that had charge after charge and RICO predicate, after RICO predicate and overt act, overt act in the conspiracy. I mean, it listed out such a web of lies and fraud and deceit. And when you look at that phone call in the context of the entire case, there is no way, in my opinion, that you can say, oh, well, he could have just been saying, oh, look, I'm questioning the election and there could be irregularities, so let's look for the irregularities. I mean, I think that just is bananas. So I think I'm really disappointed that he said that. But the bottom line is no one in Georgia, no prosecutor is willing to touch it with, you know, 20 foot pole that they think it's a political hot potato and no one wants to get under Trump's ire. He also said, by the way, this is more appropriately brought by Special counsel Jack Smith, but that case was, was dismissed because he has immunity. How is it more appropriate for Jack Smith if the president, if Trump has immunity? That makes no sense either. So it's just clear that they didn't want to touch it. Georgia is basically a red state and they don't want to go after Trump because it has, you do that and it has consequences for people who are elected. I still support Fani Willis. I don't think her relationship, her personal relationship is anyone's business and certainly is not a disqualification for this case. I think that was a little bit of a, of a, just, I don't know, hatchet job on a black woman in the South. And I think she brought a incredible case. She put a lot of work into it. It was a righteous prosecution. And I'm thankful that she at least brought to light all of the abuses of all of the individuals that participated in that scheme. And that, that will be a record in history going forward. And even if nothing happened with it, it's not going to get completely swept out of the record books of history. So, you know, but that case is over for now or forever, I guess.
- [62:38]
A
And then you got the crazy House Oversight and Judiciary Committee going after Jack Smith and Jack Smith's prosecutors, You know, who's going to take, I mean, I give you a lot of credit for being a prosecutor for 30 years. Who, who want to take this job, especially when you're being attacked for just doing your civil service, just doing in a non political way where the facts lead you and wielding your particular prosecutorial power in the right way. I mean, I mean, the fact that Jack Smith even has to answer to these yahoos in the House and it's not helping them if they thought they didn't obviously get the memo of what's happened since the shutdown and since election night in America and since the Epstein scandal has so, so spectacularly blown up in the face of Donald Trump and the fact that after yet another year of high prices and no relief in sight, and a president that seems out of tune, completely out of tune with the sufferings of America and even goes out of his way to make Americans suffer, that they still think that people care about them going after Jack Smith where it doesn't boomerang and hit them back in the head. That's not what it looks like to the American people. It looks like an out of control, deranged MAGA elected officials doing Donald Trump's bidding, what's left of them, to the detriment of the American people. I just saw a number before we came on the air today. Get this number carried. The American people are going to foot the bill for over $300 million for Donald Trump to go golfing while he's in office. $300 million.
- [64:27]
B
That's crazy. That's absolutely crazy. You know, Popak, you, you basically, you just reminded me of something when you said, who in their right mind would, would do this, right? Who in their right mind would be a prosecutor and subject themselves to this? You know, I was a Prosec said for 30 years and the last third of my time, I was the number two at the Manhattan DA's office. And when Cy Vance, the Manhattan DA, told me that he wasn't going to run again, I had to make a choice because whoever the next DA was going to be certainly would want to bring in their own number too. So I had to decide do I want to run for office myself and do I want to be the next Manhattan da, or do I want to leave and go do something else. And I actually went through the process of thinking about running and going through what it would be like to your family, to your life, to be a politician, a prosecutor in this day, right, with what everything is going on. And I ultimately made the choice that I made, which is not to run and, but I think about all the time what you just said, which is what all these people who do make that choice, these amazing public servants who give up so much of their privacy, the people who are getting attacked by the President of the United States and others who he has appointed, who are getting doxed, who are getting these terrible bomb threats, these fake bomb threats at their houses, who have to have security 24 7, who have their personal lives turned upside down and who are completely just attacked for just being normal people. And yet these are people who are public servants. They don't make a lot of money and they are here to serve us and we abuse them. And I don't mean us, but we, our society right now because of who the President is. And so it's really, I have, I just hold people who do make that choice to be prosecutors and, and to devote, you know, to make the sacrifices that they're making, especially now, which is an unprecedented time. Those are people who deserve our praise and who deserve our support. And I, you know, I really, I just want to give a shout out to them and the judges and all the other public servants out there who are upholding the rule of law and who are trying to do the right thing. Because the Department of Justice right now is, is unrecognizable. What is happening in the Department of Justice and the prosecutors who are there, the things they are being asked to do and not do is beyond atrocious. What's happening. So I hope when the Democrats are back in office and we can return our society back to a society of laws and order and justice and not, not political, vengeful retributions and bringing cases that don't exist out of thin air against people like James Comey or Letitia James, all the people that Adam Schiff, these are all public servants. These are people who have sacrificed to serve us. And being a public servant is not easy. So I'm just appalled, I'm absolutely appalled at what's going on and to our.
- [67:57]
A
Audience and back to my point about 2026 being so important. Important. In the last week I've had interactions with like 13 or 11 attorneys general for the Democrats live and in person when I went out to Arizona to interview them and, and the product of that is now up on Legal AF YouTube channel. And I spoke to League Alert, who's the head of the Immigration Litigation division of the American Civil Liberties Union. And they all un. Unsolicited, it said effectively the same thing which is we. And they're talking about the lawyers that are in the courtrooms, on the front line and are the first responders. We need you, Legal af and your audience and the support that you're giving us. That's the heavy artillery that's pinning down the elected officials as we do battle in the courtrooms. And they put it in those terms, almost in those exact terms. And it was interesting, interesting because to hear from the actual newsmakers is the wrong word. The actual litigators and trial lawyers and organizations that are, that are in the courtrooms every day. We learned that the Democratic attorneys general talk every other day, all 23 of them and their staff, about how to defeat the Trump administration and its lawlessness every other day in a way that they never did before. The ACLU's of the world, the democracy forwards of the world. They say they can't do their job without our support, without our audience, without the coverage that we provide for them. It's not ego. It's not like, oh, I got 300,000 views on my video, you know, interviewing Lee about the new K. It's the, it's the attention that is, that is, that is brought to bear on an issue and how it impacts the body politic and those in power. And that made everything that you and I and Ben do on Legal AF World and our contributors there, it made it all worthwhile to hear that from their perspective. They need not just us, Legal af, the channel, the platform, but they need our audience to be focused on these things. And they're so, so, they're so respectful and they're so supportive of everything that we do here. And I wanted to, I wanted to accept that compliment and praise on behalf of our audience, but I wanted to talk about it here on our Thanksgiving edition.
- [70:28]
B
I love that. That's like, I have the chills. That's like the most wonderful thing I've ever heard. That's like. Thank you for saying that because I love, I love our audience, too, so much and just the community that has developed. And I'm so happy that they also, that they also recognize how important they are and what a part of just what's going on and how important it is to stay informed and to know what the issues are and to be a part of, you know, the people who show up at the, at these protests. Right. And the people who the no Kings Day. And it's because people are involved and engaged and I just think it's so wonderful. So thank you for, for sharing that story.
- [71:11]
A
Absolutely. And thank you to our Legal AF audience. We got big things planned here in resistance, if you will, on legal AF and all its different formats in 2026. But we're not done, you know, we're not pulling in our oars on, on the eve of Thanksgiving. And I'll be, Karen will be, too. We don't miss a beat. Full day of programming up on Thanksgiving day on Legal AF, the YouTube channel. Back at it on Friday. I'll be traveling for a bit. I got a birthday coming up soon. But, you know, I have a mic, I have a bag, I've got a understanding family and you'll see me recording while I'm traveling as well. It's just that important. At this moment in time, nobody wants to look back and say I could have done one more thing to help the defense of our rule of law. And I, I never want to look back and say I could have done one more thing without doing it. So thank you to our audience. Enjoy your family and friends on Thanksgiving and because they're so important and, and to honor them and we honor you. Thank you. We'll see you on Saturday with Ben Meisellus and me on Legal AF next week, following with back with Karen Freeman and me here on Legal Afghanistan. In the meantime, shout out to the Midas Mighty and the Legal A effers.
- [72:29]
B
Happy Thanksgiving.