Loading summary
Transcript54 lines
- [00:01]
Ben Mycelis
This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Upgrade your business with Shopify, home of.
- [00:05]
Michael Popak
The number one checkout on the planet.
- [00:07]
Ben Mycelis
Shop pay boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning fewer carts going abandoned and more sales going cha ching. So if you're into growing your business, get a commerce platform that's ready to sell wherever your customers are. Visit shopify.com to upgrade your selling today.
- [00:22]
William Goudge
I'm William Goudge, a Vuory collaborator and professional ultrarunner from the uk. I love to tackle endurance runs around the world, including a 55 day 3064 mile run across the US. So I know a thing or two about performance wear. When it comes to relaxing, I look for something ultra versatile and comfy. The Ponto Performance Jogger from Vuri is perfect for all of those things. It's the comfiest jogger I've ever worn and the Dream Knit fabric is why I'll always reach for them over other joggers. Check them out in the Dream Knit collection by going to vuory.com William that's V U O-R-I.com William where new customers can receive 20% off their first order plus enjoy free shipping in the US on orders over $75 and free returns. Exclusions apply. Visit the website for full terms and conditions.
- [01:15]
Ben Mycelis
What makes a great pair of glasses at Warby Parker? It's all the invisible extras without the extra cost. Their designer quality frames start at $95 and including prescription lenses plus scratch resistant, smudge resistant and anti reflective coatings and UV protection and free adjustments for life. To find your next pair of glasses, sunglasses or contact lenses or to find the Warby Parker store nearest you, head over to warbyparker.com that's warbyparker.com this episode.
- [01:47]
Michael Popak
Is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses. Monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.
- [02:13]
Ben Mycelis
Hey prime members, are you tired of.
- [02:16]
Elise Stefanik
Ads interfering with your favorite podcasts? Good news with Amazon Music you have access to the largest catalog of ad free top podcasts included with your prime membership.
- [02:26]
Michael Popak
To start listening, download the Amazon Music.
- [02:28]
Elise Stefanik
App for free or go to Amazon.com ad free podcasts. That's Amazon.com ad free podcast to catch up on the latest episodes without the ads.
- [02:41]
Michael Popak
A Busy Legal week. Michael Popak and Legal Afers the United States Supreme Court made its first major ruling in a ruling against Donald Trump in the USAID appeal that went all the way to the highest court of our land. We'll break down the order, what it required the Trump administration to do and the breakdown of the 5 to 4 ruling where a Trump appointed judge, Amy Coney Barrett, as well as a George W. Bush appointed judge, the Chief Justice, John Roberts, joined with the three liberals in a 5 to 4 decision. As our legal AF watchers and listeners know, we told you to watch for that five to four dynamic develop and we see that developing right there and playing out in that ruling. Let's also talk about Trump's joint session address, not because I really want to talk about it anymore, but because he made a significant admission in it about Elon Musk's position in Doge that numerous litigants are rushing to the court to show that the government lawyers have been lying to these federal judges about who, what, where, when, why. Regarding Elon Musk and Doge. We'll break that all down as well. The Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee have reported the interim United States attorney in Washington, D.C. ed Martin, who we've been talking about here to the bar, to the Washington, D.C. bar for unethical, alleged unethical conduct. We've been covering all of the things that Ed Martin, who's never had federal prosecutorial experience before, has been doing. He's been tweeting all of these things like Elon Musk, I got your back. We're going to go after these people. We're going to go after these people. He's been like attacking members of Congress. He's been behaving with buffoonery that would be completely unfathomable if this wasn't. The Trump administration will break that down. What the f happened, by the way, in the New York federal criminal proceedings where I think Michael Popak predicted what was going to happen when the federal judge brought in an amicus curi, Paul Clement, who was the solicitor general in the George W. Bush administration, to provide kind of an advisory opinion about what should happen with Mayor Adams and how the Trump administration wants to dismiss the Eric Adams charges without prejudice. Paul Clementi came in and did something surprising. Not great, but we will break down what that is. Then there's been a lot of other updates as well with these various federal court rulings, including in D.C. federal Judge Beryl Howell in a very powerful ruling against the Trump administration, saying that Donald Trump is trying to behave like a king. And she really just gave this scorching opinion where she explained the way our Constitution works how in Article 2, the President is really just a custodian to faithfully execute the laws, not to rule as a dictator and not to rule as a king. We'll break that down and more here on Legal af. Michael Popak, how are you doing, sir?
- [06:00]
Ben Mycelis
I'm doing great, thanks, Ben. I was keeping my own scorecard. So things that are at the the cusp of that intersection of law and politics. You got Mexico and Canada winning the tariff war already, right. With Claudia Scheinbaum being the new leader of of our region because the Donald Trump has abdicated that responsibility. North Korea pulled off the biggest crypto heist in history, taking $1.5 billion out of a crypto market exchange. Poof. Went into the ether as Trump's who is the self proclaimed crypto shaman, watches crypto fall off the cliff along with the rest of the economy. China will soon have more diplomatic missions around the world than the United States as Trump pulls in the American oars. The Federal Reserve reports and confirms the economy is heading for a recession under Trump based on less than 50 days of his administration. We're watching the Supreme Court and appellate federal court struggle as to whether on the fundamental existential question is the presidency and powerful limitless unitary president or is that a myth as cabinet members break out into the open and almost come to blows with Elon Musk. That's this week. I called the day. I want to count off the days of this administration, but it's like a hostage crisis. It's like day 49 of the American values being taken hostage by, by the Trump administration.
- [07:31]
Michael Popak
Yeah, Michael Pop, that list that you gave is not a list of shiny achievements. Those are a list of any one of those things would be, you know, deeply, deeply problematic. The conflagration of them all is, you know, something we need to cover, expose, talk about every single day. Let's talk about though, the joint session address. Talk about what Donald Trump said about Elon Musk and Doge to remind everybody in all of the various federal court cases where Trump and Doge and the various departments have been sued, the Trump administration's position is, is that Elon Musk is not the leader of Doge and Doge is not a new department, that Doge is simply a division that already existed before on digital services which would help with like the websites kind of did some IT work, not actually destroy the government. And they were saying that Elon Musk is not its leader. Who's the leader? They like made up someone named Amy Gleason. They're like, it's Amy. And Amy was like in Mexico. And she was like, okay, I guess it's me. And one of the like, well, why are they doing that? Why are they playing games? Because they want to call Elon Musk, a special advisor to Donald Trump, say he works exclusively in the executive branch so that they don't have to have any accountability. And they could assert executive privilege, Presidential Records act immunity and reject all FOIA requests, Freedom of Information act requests. And to also object to the extent Congress ever tries to subpoena Elon Musk, make it an executive power executive branch versus Congress dispute and say we're not going to make him available. So it's all about the lack of transparency. But with that as background, here's what Donald Trump said at the joint session. Let's play. And I have created the brand new Department of Government Efficiency.
- [09:28]
Ben Mycelis
Go. Perhaps you've heard of it, perhaps.
- [09:39]
Michael Popak
Which is headed by Elon Musk, who is in the gallery tonight. I mean, also so utterly tone deaf. Right? I mean, I mean, again, that that scene out of the joint session really looked like what you would have seen. And you know, with Saddam Hussein's Iraq, what you see now in kind of North Korea, where they all clap for Kim Jong Un, really, you know, like that it's a very, you know, you know, Donald Trump would also say things there like, and we're going to get rid of the CHIPS Act. You mean like the act that the bipartisan investment fund that like, invested billions of dollars in red states and you're going to like, crush jobs in red states. Yes, yes, dear leader. Yes, dear leader. But let's not, you know, this is, this isn't the political show. It's the intersection of law and politics. Popak talk to us, though, about the significance of that admission right there and how it's been used in court.
- [10:46]
Ben Mycelis
Bad news for the Department of Justice under Donald Trump because now they're no longer going to be able to look judges in the eye and say they don't know who runs Doge. Here's the organogram that's been you and I and our audience knows what it is. But they've been playing fast and loose in a shell game with judges. And judges, as we've reported, are now fed up. And right after that statement was made by, that confession was made by Donald Trump, they took a clip of it. And at least one of the 12 or so cases that have that are where the Trump administration has been sued about things. Elon Musk and Doge has Done. They sent in the clip as under, under a title of a document called New Evidence to help solve this mystery. It's really no mystery to anybody except for the official filings and statements made by these, these Department of Justice lawyers for Donald Trump. Doge sits unconstitutionally outside government through a special advisor named Elon Musk that they're trying to hide behind executive privilege. At the same time, they set up a shadow entity in the executive branch, taking over the original Office of Digital Services which was like the webmaster for the government before. And they made it the, the, the depart the Doge Services. So they just sort of added the name. They put this phony figurehead person that you mentioned, this healthcare executive from Tennessee who's, who's a boss, works for Doge and Elon Musk. That's how she got there. She had been in the digital services before working on the COVID the COVID marketing response for Donald Trump. How did that go? So that's that and then that. Through that they control two things. The Office of Personnel Management where Elon Musk has already co opted for himself a email address sending out emails through hrpm.com Judges have already said the Office of Personnel Management doesn't have the ability to hire and fire the federal workforce. That's at the cabinet level. And then you have Elon Musk's Doge Bros, his teenage 20 year olds running around from his former tech companies now with up to their elbows in our payment systems on the various servers and computer networks for all the major agencies that pay money to American citizens like Treasury, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, State Department. And they're pushing the reject button. Even when cabinet level secretaries like Marco Rubio for State say this $50 million payment needs to be made through the Secretary of State, through the State Department. They're going in and unchecking. I'm not making this up. Unchecking the boxes and making sure the payments don't go out. Which puts the Department of Justice in a weird place in front of judges because judges like why didn't the payments go out? I don't know who's in charge. And they make the, they make these lawyers and lawyers are willing to do it. I'm not letting them off the hook. They're willing. It's no longer plausible deniability, but they're willing to have less than perfect information about what's going on because they don't want to have to answer those hard questions. Sort of like our press secretary in her control. So in about 12 different cases. They've taken various positions that Elon Musk has no power, no role. He's an advisor. It's just that he's influential. And now we know that's, that's, we've always known it's a lie that Elon Musk is the one, even though he's recently, apparently, he's recently gone to federal, to Republican legislators who are getting a lot of grief back home and are canceling town hall meetings and said, I'm not, I'm not the one that's actually doing the firing and the defunding. I don't know why I'm getting all the blame for that. While Trump is apparently, according to reporting, trying to rein in Elon Musk and re. Empower the Cabinet secretaries who were, who were properly vet, I mean, not about vetted, properly confirmed, at least by the Senate and telling them, you, you decide who gets fired from your federal workforce, not Elon Musk. Which led to the fight in the White House. I'm not making this up. It led to a fight in the White House, broke out onto the front pages of the New York Times between Marco Rubio and Elon Musk about Elon Musk interfering with Marco Rubio's ability to be an independent Secretary of state. And then, and then it broke out. It spilled over to Sean Duffy, the head of the Transportation Department, about, why is your doge guys cutting my, my, my, my, what do you call it? My. Not my flight attendant. Sorry, my, my controllers. My. You know, the people that handle the planes and the traffic. Why are you cutting them while planes are falling out of the sky? So this is not, again, we keep saying this phrase. I don't want people to get fatigued by it. This is not normal in the first 50 days. Courts are now going to be handling this in these 12 or 14 different cases that are, at bottom about Elon Musk? It's all going to come to a head soon because somebody is going to get the bright idea, a judge or a lawyer, that they're going to want to get Elon Musk under a deposition, under sworn testimony, and we're going to watch the, the, the Trump administration block it and say, he's an executive privilege, executive privilege. He doesn't get to get that testimony. And then we're going to have yet another constitutional crisis that's going to wend its way up to the Supreme Court.
- [16:17]
Michael Popak
That's where we're heading in the next nine months. I wish it was sooner.
- [16:21]
Ben Mycelis
Yeah.
- [16:21]
Michael Popak
But I think we're going to be looking in June. I target June, July, I bet you we have that Supreme Court case trying to compel Elon Musk to testify. The Trump administration saying that he's executive office, the people seeking the deposition showing all of these things to show that that's pretextual. And then the question is where all of the data and evidence shows that this person is, is actually not a special advisor and the leader, can the executive branch make that type of claim? It's why when we talk in this episode about that five to four dynamic, I think it does seem that, you know, on a lot of the horrific stuff the right wing Supreme Court 6 to 3 is going to hold on some of the stuff that looks more like the dictator king stuff, I think you'll see slight, not the type of pushback that we need. But enough on some of these cases, the most egregious ones, Trump will lose because it seems that Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Roberts, Justice Barrett and Justice Roberts will be joining the liberals against Trump just on those specific types of cases. You know, it's important that we track these types of admissions here on legal AF early on to give you kind of the heads up of future developments before they actually take place. I'll give you another example that not a lot of people are talking about, especially in this context. And I'll give a heads up or a hat tip to Kyle Cheney for flagging this one. Let me give it a deeper context. So there was a hearing before a new D.C. judge named Judge Sparkle Sukanen, who's and she said that she was surprised at the breadth of the DOJ's argument and troubled by their inability to identify any agency that Donald Trump would not have total removal authority over and said can you give some Supreme Court precedent suggesting there are, you know, that, that that exists or aren't there some modest limits? So then the DOJ lawyer, so the Trump administration's lawyer then says that the Federal Reserve is one such agency that Donald Trump would not be able to touch. And then the judge pressed this lawyer to articulate why under the administration's theory, Trump wouldn't be able to take over the Federal Reserve as well. To which this DOJ lawyer said, that question is above my pay grade. To answer Michael Popak, how long do you think that DOJ lawyer is going to have a job making arguments in front of a federal judge like that? Because we all know that one of the places Trump definitely wants to go is the Federal Reserve and to take over the Federal Reserve as Trump tanks the economy more and more and more. And as we enter into a period called stagflation, like it's the worst thing imaginable, GDP contraction and high inflation at the same exact time, what Trump's going to do, because he's the worst at everything, is make matters worse by he's going to want to seize control of the Fed and he's going to want to artificially reduce the interest rates, which will just further tank things and make things worse if it's not handled. So now, though, you have, and this is why I want to flag it now. It was a minor thing that was brought up, or it seemed minor, but that's going to be a major admission, I think, a year down the road when I think Trump tries to take over the Federal Reserve and this will be cited. So I want to flag it for all of the legal community and for all of our legal A efforts. Remember this moment, this week, minor moment, huge implications.
- [20:21]
Ben Mycelis
If, if Trump finally takes over the Federal Reserve, which, which he threatened to do in his first term and get rid of, and get rid of Jay Powell, it will reflect we're getting close to 25th Amendment time. Because the reporting right now is that his inner, inner circle and those with Wall street experience have convinced him that it would be suicide, political and economic suicide, for him to rattle the markets more by trying to co op the Federal Reserve. That's why we've seen in his last set of executive orders, he's carved out the Federal Reserve by name as an agency that's not under his thumb. That's because lots of people around him with Wall street experience have convinced him that that would, if it hasn't already tanked the economy, what he's done, that it would further tank the economy. That's why we're seeing sort of the rollback on tariff war. Then he has a phone call with Claudia Sheinbaum and she wins the war and he decides that she's a lovely person and he's not going to do the tariff war anymore, in effect, with, with Mexico, while he continues to troll Canada. Right. If, if he were, if you're right, and I'm, I'm a little bit agnostic right now about it, I think there's, there's people holding him back from doing that, and they've been successful to date. But if that happens, then he's lost the Cabinet because those that are in the Cabinet, some of which I know, have been imploring him not to do that and that that will not help the Trump economy right now. He's I don't even recognize for many reasons this person they call the president because you know, he used to tout the stock market and now he says don't look at the stock market. The stock market's not going to reflect how I'm improving people's lives. And, and which is as you said, a 10 year or tone deaf set of observations that are just going to get him and the Republicans to to get whipped at the midterms because they are not recognizing the suffering that is going on in the first 50 days of their administration with you know, the stock market's just one indicia of it. You know, just if we go into that stagflation and now the Fed and Jay Powell gave their speech where they said yeah, it is a, it's a tumultuous Trump administration that is trying, he's basically saying in a nice diplomatic way trying too many things at the exact same time. Immigration, tariff, war, federal cuts to funding federal taking the US out of the US Economy and the rest that has a destabilizing impact on the U.S. economy. You know, when you, when you, I'll give you an example of taking the US out of the US Economy. There's reports that the commerce Secretary is considering breaking out of spending reports the amount that the US Government spends. So they can obviously blame the, the consumer for the problem with the economy. So they want to take the contraction number of them cutting the fuel supply of federal funding, which is one of the components that helps our economy hum by taking it out of the equation. It's not just a thought experiment. It's people's lives. It's the economy. And so they're going to try to cook the books on the commerce numbers that come out monthly in order so the Trump administration and its cutting of funding doesn't get blamed. And so this is we're moving quickly into this Orwellian world. We haven't even we won't touch on it here. All the executive orders this week attacking universities, attacking students, attacking law firms, attacking law firms by name, you know, on his retribution campaign. How does any of that make anyone one ounce better than they were before the election? I defy anyone to tell me that in their comments.
- [24:16]
Michael Popak
Michael Popak, you're giving a lot of love to the Mexico president, Claudia Sheinbaum, and it's well deserved. You also got to give some love, I think, or I will give it to Prime Minister Trudeau and to mostly all of the premieres of the various provinces of Canada standing up to Donald Trump as well, they got him to back down. Donald Trump actually removed all of those tariffs through at least April 2nd. He said, Even though it's a terrible deal, this USMCA, United States, Mexico, Canada agreement that Donald Trump negotiated, he said the new deadline is April 2nd. Canada gave nothing. They ceded nothing. They went elbows up over the boards, and they stuck it to Donald Trump, too. And they showed you ain't going to bully us. They took American booze off their shelves. They've been boycotting tourism. They've been boycotting all things American. And Howard Lutnick, Donald Trump's commerce Secretary, who seems just like a just overt snake oil salesman at this point. Hey, you want some gold cards? What if we got rid of the IRS and replaced it with the External Revenue Service? Imagine how rich we're all going to be. This is also greater. Donald Trump's Treasury Secretary. We're just going through a detox period. We're detoxing right now. The pain and suffering is detoxing. America. We want to detox. Canada stood up. They didn't back down. And Lutnick and Besant were saying, can you please make Trump look good? And Trudeau's like, nah, I'm not doing shit. Go away. And Trump removed the tariffs till April 2nd. And Canada's like, do you do what you want to do? But we know how this game works at this point. Anyway, I just wanted to give a shout. I know we got a big Canadian audience as well. Let's take our first quick break of the show. When we go back, let's talk about justice. Amy Coney Barrett, you see this video of here, Right here, Popak, as she was looking at Donald Trump. And, you know, you can see the face that she has of, like, utter, absolute disgust that she's looking at the guy. It looks like a version of the Melania face and some of the other faces that, like, just. She's gonna puke when she sees this guy. Um, let's take our first quick break of the show. We'll be right back.
- [26:35]
Ben Mycelis
Four companies control over 80% of the US meat industry. And China now controls the largest portion of US pork. And wait till you hear this. Over 80% of the antibiotics in the US are fed to animals. So what can we do about this? Let me tell you about a company that's coming up swinging on behalf of American family farms and your family's food security. Moink. The business is simple. Moink's meat comes from animals raised outdoors, where a pig is free to be a pig. Their farmers are given an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, and they deliver meat straight to your doorstep at prices you can actually afford. Support American Family Farms and join the Moink movement today@moinkbox.com legalaf right now and get free Wings for Life. They're the best wings you'll ever taste for free, but for a limited time. Spelled M O I n k box.com legalif that's moinkbox.com legal af did you know? Fast Growing Trees is the biggest online nursery in the US with thousands of different plants and over 2 million happy customers. They have all the plants your yard needs like fruit trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs and so much more. Fast Growing Trees makes it easy to get your dream yard order online and get your plants delivered directly to your door in just a few days without ever leaving home. Their alive and thrive guarantee ensures your plants arrive happy and healthy. Plus get support from trained plant experts on call to help you plan your landscape, choose the right plants and learn how to care for them. We recently moved into a new house and it came with two big bald spots where grass used to be but the prior owner's dog wore out. So we turned to Fast Growing Trees and their plant experts advice turned an eyesore into one of our favorite features of the yard with a few key lime trees suited for our climate and location. Saved us all the aggravation of dealing with unknown landscapers and nurseries too. Big yard, small yard, no yard. Fast Growing trees has over 6,000 plants to fit any space from indoor plants to fruit trees to full size privacy trees and more and their 14 point quality checklist is ensures you're getting the best quality plant possible. Each plant is cared for individually based on their needs from watering routines to the amount of sunlight, giving your plants the care they deserve from the time they start growing to when they ship to your home. Whether you're looking to add privacy, shade or natural beauty to your yard, Fast Growing Trees has in house experts ready to help you make the right selection. With plant experts on call to offer growing and care advice, you can talk to a plant expert about your soil type, landscape design, how to take care of your plants and everything else you need. No green thumb required. Every plant comes with instructions and tips to take care of your new plants so they can grow to their fullest potential this spring. They have the best deals for your yard, up to half off on select plants and other deals and listeners to our show get 15% off their first purchase when using the code. Legal AF at checkout. That's an additional 15% off at fast growing trees.com using the code legal AF at checkout fast growing trees.com code legal AF. Now's the perfect time to plant. Use legal AF to save today. Offer is valid for a limited time. Terms and conditions may apply.
- [30:09]
Michael Popak
Welcome back to Legal af. I'm Ben Mysellis, joined by Michael Popak. Popak. Over the right before the break, we talked about Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Barrett, Justice John Roberts, who joined Justice Katanji Brown, Jackson and Jackson and Justice Kagan. And she joined Justice Sotomayor. And there was a group of five justices in this 5 to 4 USAID decision that worked its way up from the Washington, D.C. federal court where Judge Ali, the federal judge ordered the Trump administration 36 hours. You have to fund the things that Congress already passed, laws that were signed into law that were supposed to be funded. There's about 2 billion, 3 billion or so dollars with contracts that were already done. We're not talking about future contracts. We understand that you're in charge now, unfortunately. But there are past contracts and there's food that's rotting. And that food and these services and these products. By the way, these deals are with American contractors. You know, Donald Trump loves to screw the contractors. Donald, pay your contractors the $2 billion. Let them ship red states, blue states, purple states. Let them ship the stuff to where it needs to go right now in 36 hours. And the Trump administration's like, nah, we'd rather let them die abroad and not pay our contractors. Popo, surprise, surprise. The guy that you're fired guy, what does he do? Fires everybody, fires the veterans, fires these people. The guy who's fired people for a living with the catch line, is this a shock that he's firing everybody who he can actually fire? And the guy who screwed contractors his whole life and has bragged about screwing contractors. Screwing the contractors. The screw contractors USAID case goes up to the Supreme Court and the five to four decision says, no, you gotta, you gotta pay him. Now you're having all these MAGA people saying, oh, Coney Barrett, she's a traitor. She's dei. She's dei. That's what you're hearing from maga. What do you make of all this?
- [32:23]
Ben Mycelis
Well, well, yeah. Let me, let me break it down for you. The Amy Coni Barrett attack by MAGA is a symptom of a big problem for Donald Trump and the Republicans. It means that she has moved to the center, right? And it scares the crap out of maga. They're calling her Amy Kami Barrett. And they figured out that she has Haitian adopted children. And they just this is maga, okay. This is the depraved aspect of that party that, you know, got them elected DEI judge. Why? Because she's a woman. I mean, they loved her when she was slammed in with 38 days to go in the Trump administration to block Biden from having a pick and to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg of all people. They loved her then. But now that she's as we had hoped that she would become, lifetime appointment as a special superpower for some judges, not all. Some get worse. Gorsuch has moved completely off the grid to the alt right. Kavanaugh quickly rapidly moving there as well into the orbit of Thomas and Alito and to be their replacements. But Amy Coni Barrett, as we've remarked here on Legal, a legal a YouTube channel and on a show I do with Dina Dog called Unprecedented, we've been, we've been mapping and watching the growth of Amy Coney Barrett. New York Times got around to doing an article on it this week, but we've been talking about it for a long time. She is now it's becoming the Amy Coney Barrett court, not the John Roberts court. When she joins in the majority when she, when you look at her, the votes, she's in the majority on opinions that matter more than the other justices. And it's only going to get better or worse. It helps us because even though she's right, right of center, she's at least got one foot in the center lane. Just as Sandra Day O'Connor was in the middle Kennedy for years, it was the Kennedy court because Kennedy was that swing vote. She's right of those people. And on issues that matter to you and me and our audience, like religious freedom, separation of church and state, things related to reproductive rights, she's sort of on the wrong side of that because of her other theology and her other thinking. But on things that come to presidential power, gun rights, even though she was in a concurrence, she gave Trump the win on immunity. You can see now she's, she's turned and fired on Alito and Thomas and a number of dissents last term coming into this term and now not the first time that she's joined with Roberts to form the five person block to rein in and hem in Donald Trump in particular. This is why she's getting attacked by maga. That and her face, although I didn't think, to be frank, I didn't think her face was any different than Kavanaugh sitting next to her. They all, they all look like they just ate a bad oyster at some point. We didn't mention here. I know you mentioned on the brothers podcast. The most troubling one was the Roberts face when Trump tried to fist bump and pat him on the stomach and say, never forget you. And he looked very, very uncomfortable, probably because he knew the order was coming out any minute now that was going to be against Donald Trump. Now. So here's the way the ruling works. Judge Ali ruled that on the 2 billion out of the 50 billion that of U.S. aid, and I mean that as an acronym. The department that what the bureau that was underneath the State Department until Elon Musk shuttered it. That was one of the fights that was the instigating fight between Marco Rubio and Elon Musk was that he, he, he, he shuttered and closed USA before Marco Rubio knew what, knew what hit him. And he didn't like that. That was that fight. But in, in the, of the 2 billion of the 50 or more billion of, of aid related to, as you said, services rendered, goods already provided, not in the future. So how could they be fraudulent? I mean, they're already done. There was, there was an inspector general that was responsible for things. So they had been ordered to be paid. The, the you and I reported on Judge Ali being emphatic after seeing weeks go by with the Trump administration ignoring effectively his temporary restraining order ordering that the 2 billion be paid. He finally gave them a week or so ago, a midnight deadline to get it done. Trump administration ran to the U.S. supreme Court after a pit stop with D.C. court of Appeals and got Judge Robert Justice Roberts as the emergency judge on a shadow docket to, to grant an administrative stay, which is the lowest form of stay or injunction that's out there. It's temporary, could last hours, days, just until something happens, a briefing schedule or a new brief comes in. And the judge said on, on about, on a Tuesday, Judge Justice Roberts I'm going to give US Aid. Sorry, the aid Coalition, AID Vaccine Coalition and others who oppose this. I'm going to give them till Friday to write a brief and then we'll, we'll, we'll look at it again. Well, Friday the brief came in. I did a report on it. And after Friday, Cody Barrett and Roberts with really joining the other three liberals or moderates issue, you know, said to, said to Judge Ali the following. All right, you're, I'm gonna, I'm gonna paraphrase this. Okay. You're gonna be able to order the, the, the payment. However, you need to hold a hearing. You need to get through your preliminary injunction process. The date and time has already passed for your deadline. So I want set a, set another deadline. Give the government a reasonable amount of time. And if you, and, and what they signaled was if you do that, you'll have your five votes in the future. If you don't do that, you see the wolves over here in the, in the dissent. It was a scathing dissent by Alito. He literally started with, I am stunned. I'm stunned by the majority having decided that a judge without jurisdiction, without jurisdiction had the power to waste taxpayer dollars and order funding. I'm like, okay, well you already set up a straw man because he has jurisdiction. I mean, so you start from the proposition that's wrong and then of course you're off on the wrong foot. You never catch up. By the end, he said, I respectfully dissent and went through this. But, but what it shows and when you and I get to the Judge Beryl Howell segment about what she wrote is what we're watching, we're watching and we will watch iterations of this for the, for the next foreseeable future. The next four years is a struggle for the soul of the, of the Supreme Court and therefore the soul of our, of our constitutional republic over one issue, existential issue. It's about the presidency. Is, is, are we going to adopt and apply the unitary president model? I'll talk about that in a minute. With its limitless, powerful, all powerful president at the heart of it. Or is, or is that as legal scholars like Cass Sunstein have said, is that a myth that never really existed in history? Andrew Jackson tried it, but it got rebuffed by the Supreme Court. And, and, or, or, and so that's the battle. And on the Supreme Court you've got Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito and Thomas who believe in the unitary president theory and that all power, and it's almost limitless is reposited in this thing called the President of the United States for the executive branch. Whereas the others, and I think that's where Amy Coney Barrett comes in and probably other Roberts also. Roberts don't believe in all the aspects of the unitary president theory. Neither does Barrel, Howell and the other judges and believe that there needs to be in the co. Equal branches of government in the checks and balance system. What Louis Brandeis famously said in 1925 or 1927 that the friction between these moving plates of the three branches is the checks and balance we don't want frictionless raw power exercised by the presidency. We, the friction is our democracy and our constitutional republic. And that there was a quote like that that was also in Barrel Howell's opinion. So this is what we're watching. That's why the first three pages of Beryl Howell's order about the NLRB had nothing to do with the NLRB and didn't even mention the actual dispute. It just went into. This is the world. We're either into the absolutism of unitary president theory or we're not. And if you, if you're over here, you're going to side with Trump every time, and if you're not, you're going to side with our constitutional republic and the structure of checks and balance. And here's where I am. And then she went on, and that is the fight. And this is why you and I will find it easy sometimes to interpret how the Supreme Court is going to rule. And sometimes we're going to smack our foreheads and say, that's a warped decision. I don't know where that came from, because we're watching this fight. And one of the leaders of the fight, I believe, is Amy Coney Barrett.
- [41:46]
Michael Popak
You know, Michael Popak, the unitary Executive theory may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. It's the stupidest theory I've ever heard of because. And I'm not trying to, you know, just, you know, just use abrasive language or what. I mean, it's just dumb. I mean, our government was created as a reaction to and as a rejection of the monarchy, Right? I mean, the French philosophers who in enlightened ways talked about these ideas that made its way into our Declaration of Independence and then our constitution, you know, they were a reaction to people like, you know, Louis the 14th, right, who would say, one king, one law, one faith. So, you know, and monarchs, you know, who were running, you know, who, who used to rule America like dictators, you know, kings. We, we were a rejection to kings. So this idea of a unitary president is a king repackaged in the word president. And it's just, it's ridiculous. So I say if by conservative, the mask off moment is that they really meant conserving a monarchy. I just wish these kind of pathetic people, these gaslighters, would just go on and say that's what they really mean, that they look at Kim Jong Un and they look at Xi Jinping and they look at Vladimir Putin and that their views actually are that in a complicated society is as we head into 2026 and beyond 2025 as we're here now. You know, it was just too complicated to have democracy. It's too messy. Co equal branches of government, judicial review, Congress being a check on executive power and being co equal. This whole thing is just a mess. We need dictators, right, Popak? I mean, that's fundamentally what they're saying. But the same way they got us here by using bullshit frameworks of oh, I'm an originalist, I'm a strict textualist, and oh, I believe in, I believe that each word has its important point. Okay, well what about the second. What about the second Amendment that talks about regulation?
- [44:10]
Ben Mycelis
Wait, what about the. Wait, wait, I agree with you. The textualism even doesn't work because the role of the Supreme Court in the three co equal branches of government to declare what the law is and to rein in the executive branch or the congressional branch is nowhere in the Constitution. It's from a case. It's from Marbury vs Madison and Judge and Justice Marshall, if he hadn't interpreted not the language because it's absent the role of the Supreme Court, other than the fact that there is a Supreme Court. There was no owner's manual in the Constitution. There isn't. I defy anybody to go look at it to tell you what it is supposed to do in the co equal branches of government. It was up to an 1807 case before that. They were kind of scrambling like I don't know what we do. And now people are like, oh, the Supreme Court said something, oh, that's interesting. But we're not going to abide by was that case. So I never understand originalism, I never understand textualism because the very existence of the Supreme Court can't be. Isn't based on text in the supreme. In the Constitution.
- [45:14]
Michael Popak
You know, these are frameworks. Heads I win, tails you lose. You know, types of frameworks. Right. I mean, it is, it is a framework created where ultimately you have the outcome already decided, but then you give it a filter so that you don't act like you pre decided what you want your answer to be. And then ultimately if one interpretation doesn't work, you just move on to your other framework and your lens and then you justify it through that. And now they brought us to this point where now they're unitary executive, which they've always been talking about and flirting with and you know, and it was discussed in law schools. Oh, the unitary executive this, the unitary executive that. Well, now you have somebody who looks up to Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, you have someone who hates our democracy, hates the American history, loves Kim Jong Un, thinks Xi Jinping's the greatest thing, loves Vladimir Putin and wants to rule as a dictator that America was a reaction against. That's what we have right now. And by the way, a bumbling, fumbling idiot, too. You know, a dumb, a dumbo as well in the White House who's, who's an idiot who doesn't read his own deals. You know, he's chick, he's, he gets scared and he goes, oh, the markets are crashing. I guess I'm going to pull the tariffs. I guess I'm going to put the tariffs. I guess I'm going to pull the tariffs. Oh, what a stupid deal. It's your deal. The usmca. I mean, so now we have idiocracy, kleptocracy, dictatorship, authoritarianism. And they're like, well, to be or not to be. The unitary executive theory, just say what it is, let's be honest about it, and then we can have a debate and a discussion about it. And I reject authoritarianism. I reject the oligarchs. I don't want to see that here in the United States of America. That's not what our Constitution is. It isn't even a close freaking call anyway. We'll talk about that and more. We'll read Judge Beryl Howell's opinion. Let's take our last quick break of the show. But before doing that, I want to remind everybody that Michael Popak has started his new law firm. And I'm so proud of Popak for doing it. So Michael Popak's firm handles catastrophic injury cases. So bad car accidents and trucking accidents. And Michael Popak's firm is representing the tragic plane crash that was over Washington, D.C. victims in that, in that horrible plane crash, the families, if you have a case like that, sexual assault cases, sexual harassment cases at the workplace or otherwise. So if you have a case like that or you know someone who has a case like that, that's the types of cases that Popak is handling. Popak, where can people reach out to you if they have a case like that?
- [48:06]
Ben Mycelis
Thanks, Ben. It's easy. An easy website address and an EAS the phone number. It's Pope. The Popoc firm, just like my last name.comthepopocfirm.com is the website. It's got all sorts of easy ways to start your free case analysis. And then an 800 number, 1877 Popoc AF. What else?
- [48:30]
Michael Popak
There you have it, everybody. We will be right back after our last quick break of the show.
- [48:34]
Ben Mycelis
Even if you think it's a bit overhyped. AI is suddenly everywhere from self driving cars to molecular medicine to business efficiency. If it's not in your industry yet, it's coming fast. But AI needs a lot of speed and computing power, so how do you compete without cost spiraling out of control? Time to upgrade to the next generation of the cloud Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, or oci. OCI is a blazing fast and secure platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, plus all your AI and machine learning workloads. OCI costs 50% less for compute and 80% less for networking, so you're saving a pile of money. Thousands of businesses have already upgraded to oci, including Vodafone, Thomson Reuters and Sunoai. Right now, Oracle is offering to cut your current cloud bill in half if you move to oci for new US customers with a minimum financial commitment. Offer ends March 31st. See if your company qualifies for this special offer@oracle.com legalaf that's oracle.com legalaf your nighttime bedroom temperature has a huge impact on your sleep quality. If you wake up too hot or too cold, I highly recommend you check out Miracle Maids bed sheets. Miracle Maid sheets are inspired by NASA and use silver infused fabrics that are temperature regulating so you can sleep at the perfect temperature all night long no matter the weather so you get better sleep every night. These sheets are infused with silver that Prevent up to 99.7% of bacterial growth leaving them to stay cleaner and fresh three times longer than other sheets. No more gross odors. Pericle sheets are luxuriously comfortable without the high price tag of other luxury brands and feel as nice if not nicer than sheets used by some five star hotels. Sleeping on bacteria can clog your pores causing breakouts and acne. Sleep clean with Miracle. Upgrade your sleep this year. Go to try Miracle.com LegalAF to try Miracle Mate sheets today and whether you're buying them for yourself or as a gift for a loved one, if you order today you can save over 40% and if you use our promo code LEGAL AF at checkout, you'll get a free 3 piece towel set and save an extra 20%. Miracle is so confident in their product it's backed with a 30 day money back guarantee so if you aren't 100% satisfied, you'll get a full refund. Upgrade your sleep with Miracle made. Go to try Miracle.com legal AF and use the code legal AF to claim your free three piece towel set and save over 40% off again. That's try Miracle.com legal AF to treat yourself. Thank you Miracle made for sponsoring this episode.
- [51:30]
Michael Popak
Thank you to our pro democracy sponsors. Show ain't possible without them. And I can actually see in real time popoc. When people are visiting your firm's website, it actually shows up on the back end database. So a lot of people are checking it out. Remind people also if they've been in a catastrophic injury or know someone who's been victim of some sort of catastrophic injury, whether it's a car accident, trucking accident, an employment, wrongful termination, wrongful death, med mal, medical malpractice. Where do they reach out to again?
- [52:07]
Ben Mycelis
1-877-Popak AF we have people there to start that process. And then the website, there's a version of it www the pope pock firm.com.
- [52:19]
Michael Popak
Let'S take a look at Judge Beryl Howell's ruling. And you may remember the name Judge Beryl Howell of all of our legal efforts. She was once the presiding judge in Washington, D.C. so in all of those Trump cases, when there would be grand jury fights, it would go to Judge Beryl Howell, who would make a lot of these big impactful rulings under seal. After her term was done, it was another federal judge that becomes the presiding judge for limited terms. But she's still obviously on the bench. Here's a ruling that she made this past week where she ordered the reinstatement of National Labor Relations Board member Gwen Wilcox. Gwen Wilcox, the first African American female board member of the National Labor Relations Board. When Donald Trump singled her out to be fired, what he did was he created a situation on the NLRB where they couldn't have a quorum. And if they can't have a quorum, they're not able to make decisions. If they can't make decisions, unions can't be formed, labor grievances can't be decided. And so it really guts all labor enforcement. It guts the abilities of unions to form. So it's a major thing that union busting entities really wanted. And so for anybody who said, oh, well, Trump's gonna be good for labor, if you still think he is, he gutted the NLRB board. There had to be litigation to get Glenn Wilcox to be ordered back. This, of course, is now gonna go up, though, to the appeals and to the Supreme Court. We're gonna be seeing so many Supreme Court cases in the late spring, early summer, we may have to have extra episodes of Legal af. But in ordering that the termination unilateral of Gwen Wil without cause, just Firing her by the Trump administration was unlawful. Judge Beryl Howell says that Donald Trump fundamentally misapprehends the role of Article 2. She goes on to say, a president who touts an image of himself as a king or a dictator, perhaps as his vision of effective leadership, fundamentally misapprehends the role under Article 2 of the U.S. constitution and our constitutional order. The president is tasked to be a conscientious custodian of the law, albeit an energetic one, to take care of effectuating the enumerated duties, including the laws enacted by the Congress and as interpreted by the judiciary. And then she goes on to cite the Constitution, Article 2, Section 3, that he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. At issue in this case is the president's insistence that he has authority to fire whomever he wants within the executive, executive branch, overriding any congressional mandated law in his way. And then it goes on to say he can't do that. And so Congress passes laws, they're signed into law by the president, and the president has to take care that those laws go into effect. Now, if there's ambiguity in the laws, that's what executive orders are about, which set forth interpretation where there's ambiguity. But Michael Bocach, where there's not ambiguity, a president can't rule by executive orders because in our country, we have a system where Congress, that's Congress's job. And then the president signs that law and effectuates it, signs the bill, makes it into a law, and that's what happens. And but what Trump is trying to do is just make executive orders the law. And that's what dictators do. That's, that's just not our system. And then as you said before the break, you then have these right wing people who go, well, that's the unitary executive, that's the unitary president. And I'm just saying, no, that's, that, that's fundamentally another system called the dictatorship. And here you have Judge Beryl Howell, I think, very neatly teeing up what the issue is going to be in the Supreme Court. She's framing this issue, I think, along the terms that I am and that you are. She's not using the language that I'm using. She's saying it more eloquently, of course, but I think she's saying, okay, Supreme Court, when this is handed to you, I'm putting you on the spot. You give your stamp of approval to King, if that's what you're going to do, or you reject King. That's why I think this order, in addition to saying that Gwen Wilcox goes back on the nlrb, which will be appealed by the Trump administration, why this order is actually so important that it sets forth that framework. Pop.
- [57:04]
Ben Mycelis
Yeah, I think this is. There's nobody better than Senior Judge Beryl Howell to take on Donald Trump and to frame the issues going forward. People will probably recall, as you said, she not only presided over many aspects of the criminal prosecutions of Donald Trump, she's the one that ruled that lawyers for Donald Trump should be stripped along with Donald Trump of the attorney client privilege because it was more likely than not they were participating in a crime or fraud. She's the one that started off the Mar A Lago investigation with a subpoena, eventually became a search warrant. We know what happens there. She presided over the Rudy Giuliani defamation case, resulting in $158 million judgment against him. She presided over many Jan.6 trials and sentencings. And she's been very outspoken about Trump as king and reining him in. In fact, about six months ago or so, she gave a speech, I think, to an American Bar association meeting and said almost what we see here. So, you know, she's consistent with her thinking about the absolutist king and the slippery slope that we're seeing with Donald Trump. It was so jarring to MAGA that Elise Stefanik, who's now the ambassador to the UN For Trump, but was then a congressperson from New York, we're going to talk a little bit later about bar complaints, made a bar complaint about her judiciary complaint about her, that she had, you know, prejudged her cases and she was political and all of that. But what she did in the first four pages of this decision is really masterful. When you and I saw it, we both sort of wrote at the same time powerful. She doesn't even talk about the case. Like, if you just got the first four pages of her decision, you'd be like, what is this case about? After the first four pages, when she's done with the historical precedent, the analysis, the role of the various entities, the Article 3 judges, the Article 2 president, the Article 1 Congress, and she stitches it all together and just totally craps all over the unitary president theory, but does remind everybody in a footnote that Donald Trump has called himself a king. You know, we have the fake time cover that he used for that and has said that he'll be a dictator on day one. She quotes all of that to remind. To remind everybody what we're working on. She then sets up this academic Debate that is the soul of what we're going to be fighting over for the next four years, which is on one side, the legal academics like Steve Calabresi, who has said in just the titles of his articles is it's been imperial from day one, which is completely antithetical to everything you and I ever learned about the foundation and formation of our, of our, of our government. It's always been imperial. No, no it hasn't. That's why we left King George. I mean, I really don't understand that theory. And then you have people like Sun Casting who says no, that's been a myth that's been used by out of control rogue presidents. And why MAGA and the GOP want this theory? Because they're, what do they think they're going to be holding the presidency for the next 100 years? More likely than not, they're going to lose the presidency in the next go around based on the first 50 days of this administration. Why would they want to empower President Gavin Newsom, President Gretchen Whitmer, President Pete Buttigieg with these powers? I mean, I don't really understand. This is the reason why history and tradition has.
- [60:27]
Michael Popak
I'll tell you why. Because they know they're not going to abuse it. Popak. The reason is Democrats.
- [60:32]
Ben Mycelis
What?
- [60:34]
Michael Popak
Correct. That's why the corporations feel fine, to be like, oh, you know, we know that if Kamala wins, then she's going to treat us fairly.
- [60:45]
Ben Mycelis
I think that's a dangerous proposition to hope that the Democrats are rattling.
- [60:49]
Michael Popak
That certainly is the world.
- [60:50]
Ben Mycelis
All right.
- [60:51]
Michael Popak
They don't for a second believe that the party for democracy, the Democrats will do these things and they know that the Republicans will, so they treat him differently. That's part of the problem.
- [61:04]
Ben Mycelis
But I, but I wouldn't, I wouldn't bank on that. And there's a reason why. And for instance, in this case, in 95 years since the founding of the National Labor Relations Board, no president has ever removed a member of it. They serve five year terms. Gwen was on her, she's a great labor lawyer and member of that. She was the chairperson. The president is allowed to remove the chair. And he did that. He's just not allowed to remove the person, the federal officer confirmed by the Senate without cause and without due process. You can't just send her a thank you for your service email, which is what he's been doing to get rid of these people and the unifying common denominator of the three cases. And I'll go back to a quote from Beryl Howell in a minute. The three cases that all came at the same time all are the assault, the full frontal assault on federal workers by Donald Trump. One case removing the head of the Merit Protection Service Board, one removing the head of this Office of Special Counsel and the other one, the National labor relations board. The two were, were created in 1978 to protect the civil servants from partisan attacks and retaliation and whistleblowing retaliation. And the other one was formed in 1935 because of the violence in the streets against workers. And unions needed a independent, quasi independent judicial body that was created by Congress in 1935. The interesting thing about so all those three cases, they all fundamentally turn on a one particular case really from 19 also from 1935 called Humphreys executor, which stood for the proposition that a president in this case Hoover couldn't fire a person like Gwen Wilcox who was then on the board of the Federal Trade commit, couldn't, couldn't fire a Federal Trade Commissioner. And there was rationales related to that. The independence, the bipartisan, the very small amount of executive power is being exercised and the will of Congress and precedent. And that's the case that off that, that gets cited over and over and over again. It's been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court four different times, including a version of it in 20. In 2020. That's the case. Right. And so we've got this week alone in the last seven days, three different judges, this being the last one taking on that issue, Amy Berman Jackson, Rudy Contreras and now Barrel Howell all uniformly saying Humphrey's executor stops Donald Trump from firing that person this way. The, the most compelling case is the one that Barrel Howell is talking about because the, the NLRB which, which Gwyn Wilcox the plaintiff here is a part of was formed two months after the Humphreys Executor case was was issued by the Supreme Court. So of course the Congress knew about the Humphreys Executor case and created a board in its, in its shadow. So that I think this is an easy one. The weird thing that's happened though, and I want to do one quote from Beryl next. The weirdest thing that's happened is that a three judge panel that we, you and I touched on, I did a hot take on of Obama. A Biden and a Trumper got together on the D.C. court of Appeals and they actually overturned Amy Berman Jackson and they found that, that Hampton Dellinger needed to fight back for his job. They took him out of his chair as the head of the special counsel's office, which protects federal workers, and said, no, no, you do your appeal, we'll do it over the summer, but you're out of a job until then. And he threw in the towel and said, you know what? Four months or more of me being out of a job is not. Is with Trump. A Trump person in there destroying everything is not. I'm not going to do this appeal. For what reason? Understanding There were other two cases, but we have a bad decision by the D.C. court of Appeals on one. The other two cases, including barrel Hows, will go up to their own three judge panels and then over to the US Supreme Court. She's speaking to the US Supreme Court here beyond the DC Court of Appeals. And when she saw I just want to read this one part about the king versus the dictator. You did that part, but here's the part that I liked among many. When she quotes Louis Brandeis, she says as Justice Louis Brandeis, the first Jewish justice who eloquently opined checks and balances were established in order that this should be a government of laws and not of men. Observing further that the separation of powers was not adopted to promote efficiency, but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The purpose was not to avoid friction, but by means of the inevitable friction incident to the distribution of the governmental powers among three departments to save the people from autocracy, she goes on to say on page five. Luckily, the framers anticipating such a power grab, the one that she's observing with Donald Trump vested in Article 3, not Article 2, the judges the power to interpret the law, including resolving conflicts about congressional checks on presidential authority. The President Trump's interpretation of the scope of his constitutional power, or more aptly, his aspirations, is flat wrong. And she has now set this up. And who's in this tug of war on the Supreme Court between the Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas, who are firmly in the unitary presidential model camp, what is Roberts going this is the time now for Chief Justice Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett to step up at a moment of history. They've certainly, certainly Roberts has shrunk under the weight of history as he's going down the history as one of the worst Chief justice we've ever had. But what's he going to do now? He created this Leviathan, this out of control Frankenstein in his immunity decision from last summer and now he's got an opportunity on the civil side. And they know. They know. And if they want to poke the bear, I said with Dina Dahl, the Other day they poked the bear twice. They literally poked John Roberts at the joint session, which I think annoyed him. And they poked him in their filing, which Beryl Howell pointed out because they said the basis for their unlimited, limitless, absolute presidential power grab is the immunity decision giving him criminal insulation, but doesn't talk about civil or civil civil limitations on congressional checks. So but you see, that's what when we see John Sauer one day, the former criminal appellate lawyer for Donald Trump, now our solicitor general, arguing this, you know, they're going there on immunity and that's going to trigger hopefully John Roberts to do the right thing.
- [67:33]
Michael Popak
You mean Chief Justice John Roberts didn't like at the joint session where Donald Trump, like a mobster, said I won't forget what you did for me when everybody knew that it was about giving him absolute immunity. And Chief Justice John Roberts looked there like, you know, an idiot. And Amy Coney Barrett looked literally repulsed. Popak, we are in the lightning round right now. I'm going to give you two topics and we're going to try to nail it in about six minutes total. This is the legal AF lightning round. The first one I want to talk about is what happened in New York with Eric Adams. You predicted it.
- [68:09]
Ben Mycelis
Popo Go, go easy. It all it all ended the day that the judge decided to bring in a former right wing Republican solicitor, former solicitor general and Paul Clement to help him out to decide whether the there was a corrupt bargain between the Trump Department of Justice and Eric Adams, who had been indicted for fraud and campaign violations involving the Turkish government, whether there was a corrupt bargain or not, that they would only dismiss the indictment without prejudice in return for him playing ball on public policy. And we had six different prosecutors resign over it, including a very noisy resignation by by Danielle Sassoon, who was the U.S. attorney who said it's unethical, it's wrong, he should be indicted, he should never be dismissed. And Paul Clement wrote his brief is a bit this is again back to your point of Democrats having to bend over backwards to seem impartial. There's plenty of Democrat solicitor generals. There's plenty of people like Michael Ludig that could have served in this role. Why Paul Clement, who was who was in charge of, of defending waterboarding and against reproductive rights for women and other gay marriage, why he was chosen by this democratically appointed judge, Judge, how? I have no idea. But I said it was going to happen. So the so he I read the 30 pages or whatever of the brief. The Clement recommends that the indictment not continue but it be dismissed with prejudice, completely ignoring and just gliding over all of the prosecutors who have yelled out corrupt, no, unethical. They said, you shouldn't get involved yourself. You should use jurisprudential parsimony, and you shouldn't even listen. There's debate. There's good people on both sides. Are there, are there good people on both sides about the corrupt deal. So now you have this, this friend of the court that the judge has appointed telling him, go one better dismiss the indictment with, with prejudice and get rid of it. But that's not good enough for the Trump administration because Todd Blanch, the lawyer number one for Donald Trump, criminal defense lawyer number one, and now the number two in the Department of Justice, often referred to as the bad cop in the Department of Justice, has now stepped forward. He confirmed. And he's, he's wrote, he's written to the judge and said, no, without prejudice. We have the right. We're the prosecutors. Because they want to keep what Paul Clement called the Sword of Damocles over Eric Adams's head for as long as they can. By the way, side note, Eric Adams is never going to win the primary based, based on current polling. So this might be all for not as we watch whether the governor is going to take him out of that role.
- [70:54]
Michael Popak
I think the governor realizes that I could be wrong to your point. He's going to lose in the primaries the people of New him, and it's just a matter of time. Why create, you know, a, a martyr type of issue when, you know, you know, a maga martyr and, you know, to the extent you want to find any silver lining in what Paul Clement did, I, I think it's hard to find one. But you recognize that the Trump administration was trying to do this kind of quid pro quo, hang it over, you know, at, you know, allow this to basically be used against Mayor Eric Adams, you know, in the future, and say, if you don't do what I want, and this would actually just say, all right, you want to dismiss this case Trump administration, then it's gone. I mean, you know, you're, you're the executive branch. You can, you want to dismiss cases against criminals, but you can't now use it to enter into the deal. And then maybe Eric Adams feels, well, now I'm not beholden on the criminal side of things. And so if you want to find any silver lining, that's probably what Paul Clement would say to you in private, that it actually is a little bit of an F you to the Trump administration by saying you shouldn't do this without cause. Let me call you. I mean, you shouldn't do this without prejudice. It should be with prejudice. And I called their bluff. And look, Todd, Blanche. And the DOJ immediately was like, no, no, no, we want to still keep it. Which kind of shows the corrupt quid pro quo deal. That's how Clement will say it behind the scenes. But I think it goes to prove my other point, though. Michael Popak is like, okay, you've got this judge who's appointed by the Democrats, and who does he pick? The George W. Bush Solicitor General to do the job. And, you know, as I've always said before, it's like, Democrats be Democrats. Like, like, you know, you think maga's going to appoint, you know, you know, aoc, you know, to do things. You think MAG is going to appoint Adam Schiff? Schiff used to be a great federal prosecutor. Of course not. You know, but I think ho was.
- [72:55]
Ben Mycelis
Worried about getting impeached, to be honest with you.
- [72:57]
Michael Popak
Well, you know, but, you know, everyone's worried. It's. Everyone's worried. I'm worried, I'm worried, I'm worried. And the bottom line is, you know, who behind the scenes panics more than anybody when you call the guys bluff? The idiot in the White House, as we see with other countries, Canada, Mexico, stand up to him. The guy backs down. I just. It is a baffling concept that someone could blow me and like, it is shocks me that that works. I just. I don't understand it.
- [73:32]
Ben Mycelis
You're dead. He just posted Hamas. You're dead if you don't Release the last 35.
- [73:37]
Michael Popak
Shalom. He goes, shalom, Shalom. Because he goes, shalom, Hamas. You know, and he's. But by the way, Popak, I won't divert the episode. We'll finally talk about the state bar, the state D.C. bar stuff. But the Hamas stuff. Look, Donald Trump made that threat January 7th, release the hostages before I take office or I will unleash hell. Nothing happens. He does it on February 10th. Release the hostages or I will unleash hell. Then Saturday comes February 15th, he goes, I'm going to let Netanyahu do what he wants. Then does nothing. Then he does it again. Then he does the same stuff with Greenland. I'm conquering you. Wait, I'm conquering you. Wait, I'm conquering you. Then he does the tariff thing. Governor Trudeau. Governor Trudeau. You're the governor. 51st state. Fentanyl. Fentanyl. Fentanyl. All right, I'm imposing tariffs. Doesn't impose tariffs. I'm doing it again. It's the same stick. It's just the reality. He is a weak, pathetic reality TV person and we are now all non consensual participants in a dystopian reality TV show. And the guy's an idiot. He, he knows how to do the theater. I just want to live my life with my family and not wake up to the markets crashing and then, oh, maybe, maybe we'll be out of it. Oh, what's going to happen on the next season? Just leave me the f alone. POPAC State Bar DC Bar what's going on? I know that the Democrats in the Judiciary reported ed Martin, the D.C. interim U.S. attorney who's pretending he's actual the attorney. They're saying, look, all the stuff you're doing by threatening members of Congress and also by the way, representing your former January 6th client while you're still at the DOJ and then dismissing your own case while you're the lawyer for the person. Yeah. So you were representing the person while you were at the doj, then dismissed your own case to help your own client and didn't recuse yourself. That kind of seems like something to be disbarred for. Those are the allegations. Lightning round pop.
- [75:40]
Ben Mycelis
No, no, I think you, I think you kind of, it's easy. I think you covered it. Ed Martin is, is wholly unqualified. He's, he's, he's unethical and I, I kudos the Senate Democrats to try to hold these out of control US Attorneys that Donald Trump has placed in there to be his, his, his pit bulls accountable. They, you know, and I, when I, you and I did a report three weeks ago about he signed the dismissal for his own client on a Jan.6 matter. He didn't even think that maybe somebody else in the office should do that. It just shows you the cracked lack of character, lack of ethics. And I think the bar should open up an investigation. Will open up an investigation. I mean they all automatically will based on, based on this filing. I mean it's a page out of the Repub. They were constantly filing, as I mentioned before, Elise Stefanik filing one against Barrel Howell. You got Donald Trump going after, you know, right now you got Donald Trump going after all big law firms because they have DEI programs. I just did a hot take on he should go look up Sullivan and Cromwell who represents him in his criminal case because they have a huge DEI commitment on their own website. But you know, he had to do an executive order to get back at Perkins Coy, who he lost a major case against down in Florida, but he doesn't like the fact they were involved with the Steele Doss. And, you know, again, he's like, you know, there used to be these, these cases where, you know, 30 years after the war ended, somebody came out of the woods and thought the Civil War was still going on. Donald Trump's still running these old historical vendetta. Vindictive. And he's wasting our money, our time, our energy. Not one of the things that he signed this week on executive orders. Not one of these things that Ed Martin is talking about. Yeah, I'll help you, Elon Musk. Not one, not one will help anyone in our audience or even outside of our audience with their kitchen table issues, with their economics, with, with, with how they're going to worry about a parent or grandparent, their health care, their children schooling, how to pay bills. Because this, this administration is, is the most removed from the constituency and the people that I've ever seen. It has to do with who's in the Cabinet, the fact they've never struggled. They've, you know, I'm gonna say they've always been billionaires, but they are so apart. And they, and they covered it with a sheen of populism that got them elected. But the reality is they have nothing in common with the average American. And it shows every day. I've never seen maybe the Hoover administration. I've never seen a worse start in the first 50 days of an administration than what we are watching now. He, he loves to attack the now, the now departed Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter inherited stagflation from Ford and the gas lines and all of that. You know, you can, you can debate whether he, he and the Fed at the time could have done more to get the country out of the problem. But this is Donald Trump taking an amazing, robust economy and, and strangulating it and killing it in 50 days for him to implement his vendetta war. That's all we're watching. He doesn't care about us. And that's obvious. And now my only question is how irretrievably broken is the, the economy, our foreign policy at this moment, and what are the American people finally going to do with the midterms? If I've said, I'll say one last time, give me the House and the Senate, I will give you an impeachment and a conviction of Donald Trump.
- [79:14]
Michael Popak
You know, one of the things I've been covering here, and I think I will continue to cover, are these. Senator Bernie Sanders Rallies. He's going into working class cities and towns. He's holding town halls in purple areas. He gave an incredible speech on Friday night in Kenosha in front of 4,000 people and 1,000 people in the overflow crowd. The tour that he's giving, he's calling it fight the oligarchs, Stop the oligarchs. And I think you should see more Democrats follow that. If Republicans are counts are canceling their town halls, just go speak to people. Like, go speak to people, people. Look, the Republicans thrive on manufactured rage and to get people to vote against their interests based on manufactured rage. People are really enraged though about a lot of things right now that prices are surging right now and Trump said he was going to lower them on day one. The economy every single day hits gets wrecked with some more bad news. You know, this idea that we're going to be in a situation of stagflation, low GDP and GDP contracting and high inflation, that's going to be devastating. And Donald Trump going around with Elon Musk and not just destroying the government, but doing it so utterly cruelly is something that, you know, is, is, is so anti American, so un American and something that we need to, you know, stand up to and, and, and, and just go out there, don't try to be something that you're not. Be a fighter. Stand up for people and be loud and proud about, you know, what your values are. You know, Senator Bernie Sanders is being authentically Senator Sanders. He's out there fighting for working class people. That's what's needed now, you know, and, and Democrats just go out and fight. Whether you agree with Bernie on everything or not. People want fighters. Right now you have platforms as politicians. Go out there and talk to people, look people in the face, be there with the people, explain to them what you're going to do, let them know that you're there with them. Just being there too is helpful so that you can have those connections with people. Anyway, we're going to keep doing that here on Legal F on the Midas Touch Network. And, and I said it before, let me say it again. Michael Popak, I'm so proud of you. Starting your own law firm. I can see the data of people checking out the law firm and I can see inquiries coming in right now during the show itself. And so I just, if people, if someone that you know, has had a catastrophic injury, car accident, truck accident, sexual harassment victim, you know, employment related case, wrongful termination, wrongful death, any, you know, go to the Michael Popak law firm Popac. What's the address? How do they get there?
- [82:08]
Ben Mycelis
Yeah. Www the popoc firm.com and a 1-800-number-1-877, Popak AFM Also, we're gonna turn the odometer on. 500, 000 subscribers on Legal AF this weekend. We're at 495, 000 before our six month anniversary. I'm doing, I'm doing a lot of the content, but the audience reception to Legal AF is just off the charts and humbling. Help us roll that odometer over to 500, 000 this weekend.
- [82:40]
Michael Popak
Thanks everybody for watching this episode of Legal af. Michael Popak, thank you for everything that you do and I'm super proud of you about your law firm Legal a first. Thank you so much. We'll be here with you every step of the way. Hit subscribe here as well. Let's get to 5 million subscribers. Thanks for watching everybody.
- [83:07]
Elise Stefanik
Marketing is hard, but I'll tell you a little secret. It doesn't have to be. Let me point something out. You're listening to a podcast right now and it's great. You love the host. You seek it out and download it. You listen to it while driving, working out, cooking, even going to the bathroom. Bathroom podcasts are a pretty close companion. And this is a podcast ad. Did I get your attention? You can reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from Libsyn Ads. Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements or run a pre produced ad like this one across thousands of shows. To reach your target audience in their favorite podcasts with Libsyn ads, go to Libsyn ads.com that's L, I B S Y N ads.com today.