Karen Friedman Agniphilo (6:22)

Gotta unmute myself there, Pope. I'm good. How are you?

Michael Popach (6:25)

I wasn't beauty. You.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (6:26)

No, no.

Michael Popach (6:27)

I know some people accused me of that, but I wasn't.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (6:31)

Every once in a while I have the mute button on. Gotta, gotta find it. But I'm doing great.

Michael Popach (6:35)

I do that when we record because I don't want feedback. I mean, literally.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (6:39)

Background. Yeah.

Michael Popach (6:40)

Background noise coming in. You're in your library. That's not a phony thing, as people once asked. I know that's your real. Those are your real books. You've actually read them or your husband?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (6:50)

Well, I. I don't want to say I've actually read all of them.

Michael Popach (6:53)

What is that? Just randomly selected?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (6:55)

Look, I just randomly selected a book about one of my favorite people on the planet, Paul McCarthy.

Michael Popach (7:00)

Paul McCartney. Have you ever met him or seen him in New York?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (7:03)

I've seen him in concert numerous times. And I am. I don't know if people know this about me, but I am a huge, huge Beatles fan like nothing else. And to me, they're head and shoulders different, better. And I love Paul McCartney so much. And in fact, I'm just going to say this to everybody, my whole family knows that one day, when in my final resting place on my gravestone, I wanted to say, and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. Or it might be the other way around. No. Yeah. No, it's. The love you take is equal to the love you make. Because I think that is just exactly right. And that, to me, is the most powerful. To me. That's the whole philosophy in life. You're a good person and, you know, you. You give love out into the world, you will receive love back to you. And that's what it's all about.

Michael Popach (7:54)

So I've known you for over five years. I would have swore your tombstone was going to say Linda Hamilton said I had great arms.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (8:05)

That's true, too. That is a true story. You did a long time. Did I tell that story on t. On on the Internet, you could tell it again.

Michael Popach (8:14)

I like that.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (8:15)

Again. Oh, my God. It's one of the greatest stories of all time. So in addition to being a huge Paul McCartney fan in the Beatles, I also happen to love. I can't believe I'm admitting all this. Like, Confession Day. Yeah, I love the Terminator movies. I think they're incredible. Terminator 1 and Terminator. I just think they're amazing movies. And I'm a huge Linda Hamilton fan. Especially from Terminator 2 to me, like, all buffed up with the, you know, exactly like that. To me, with the. With the. You know, the full metal, yet totally ripped. But that whole look, you know, with, like, the fatigues and the, you know, whatever. Like, to me, that's. That's like. If I. If I could do look anyway or be anything, it would. It would be like that. So I. I love that. And I'm just a huge fan. I'm also a fan because it turns out she is an identical twin, and I have identical twin girls, so it's just a fun fact. Right? So this is my.

Michael Popach (9:10)

You know, my mother's an identical twin. Right.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (9:12)

I'm not sure I knew that. Interesting.

Michael Popach (9:13)

Yeah, my mother's an identical twin, so.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (9:15)

So that's very interesting. So. And so my identical twins are now 28. But when they were one. So this was like, 27 years ago. I was in Los Angeles visiting family with the girls, and we were at the 3rd Street Promenade, and the girls were running around, whatever, and all of a sudden a woman comes over who I knew was either Linda Hamilton or Linda Hamilton's identical twin sister. Right? Like, I don't know which one it is, but she's there, and she just comes and stands and starts just looking at them and just saying, oh, my God, they're so cute. And look at them. And then she goes, you know, I'm an identical tw. And I'm, like, speechless. Like, one of the only times in my life I'm completely speechless. And she says, do you want to take a picture? And I said, I'd love to take picture. And so she grabs one of them. She says, here, come to Auntie Linda. And I was like, oh, my God, it is Linda Hamilton. I was dying. So I'm standing there holding one, she's holding the other. And afterwards I said, thank you so much. It's such an honor. She hands me back the other one. So I'm holding both, which I often did when you have twins. And she looks at me and says, no wonder you have such Great arms. Now, if that's not the greatest compliment of all time from Linda Hamilton, that's.

Michael Popach (10:32)

Like Schwarzenegger during his pumping iron stage, saying to somebody else, you got great guns there, Popuk.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (10:38)

You know, my husband looked at her, watched this whole thing and knows this whole story and knows how I feel and looked at her and said, you just gave my wife the greatest compliment of all time, like, just coming from her at that moment. So that is a great story. Thank you for allowing me to now memorialize that story for all time on Legal. I'm going to find that picture. I think I know where it is, and I'm going to bring it next Wednesday.

Michael Popach (11:05)

Yes, we're going to show it. People are now, people are people. You can see people are demanding that photo. That's, that's, that's what we've created.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (11:11)

No, no, I have it. I know where it is. It was in my office when I was at the DA's office. And then when I moved, all my stuff's in a box, so I got to find it in that box.

Michael Popach (11:19)

Everybody's got the, you know, else has great guns. Here comes the transition of a century. Jeb Boseberg, Chief Judge of the District of Columbia, who. He's not taking it anymore. Now, I had thought you and I talked about this a couple of weeks ago. I said, oh, with that Supreme Court decision that said on the Alien Enemies act that Boseberg had gone a bit too far, that there was due process that people had that were sent to El Salvador to be, to be in that, that horrendous, inhumane supermax prison in El Salvador. There was due process, but it took the form of a habeas corpus petition that had to be brought by individual prisoners in the United States if they happen to be in the United States. Unfortunately, 250 people not named Abrego Garcia are also in that jail and they're kind of like shit out of luck. But all future people now have this declared right by the Supreme Court reinforced. And I thought, oh, well, his whole did you send the plains or didn't you send the plains? Thing from the Boasberg era. I'm thinking, well, maybe that's dead on jurisdictional grounds or on the fact that the order underlying it was found to be invalid. But I had forgotten and Boseberg did a good job at a 46 page decision today to remind me that no judges have inherent authority. And if they issue an order and you violate that order in real time, the fact that later on the order is vacated or somehow trimmed back by a higher court doesn't mean you have the right to violate the order, because no person can be the judge of themselves. You can't say, well, I think you're going to get overturned by an appellate court, so I'm just going to flout your order. That is exactly what you cannot do. So I was wondering what was going on in his courtroom. We hadn't heard about that contempt in a while. And this wasn't just. Karen, I want you to take it from there. This wasn't just civil contempt. This was criminal contempt with a referral under certain circumstances to prosecution, and then we'll pick it up from there. What did you tell everybody what happened? And then what do you think is going to happen based on the referral on prosecution?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (13:25)

I mean, this is kind of a huge deal, right? And we've talked about this before. Contempt is not something that certainly happens to most people. It's never happened to me. And most people don't even get close to the line of criminal contempt. And a lot usually happens before the word contempt even comes out of a judge's mouth. And so for this judge to go from zero to 60 the way he has in such a short time is just absolutely fascinating. And frankly, it's so clear what Trump is doing, and whether it's in this case or it's the Abrego Garcia case, they're just basically, they're not even pretending. They're just blatantly violating court orders and doing what they want and sending people to El Salvador. And in this particular case, what Judge Boseberg said is, look, there were a couple of planes that were sent despite my oral and written order, at least two airplanes in direct violation of my order. And even though ultimately that the Supreme Court found that the order was that you have to do it in a different location, the habeas petition has to happen in the location where the body is, and said that ultimately the case has to be brought in a different jurisdiction. What he basically said, it doesn't really matter. The order is what the order is. And he went from zero to 60. And he basically said, I'm not satisfied with the answers here, so I want answers. And he gave a very short time period where he used some pretty, I think, some pretty strong language about what he expects. And if the, the, if the Justice Department doesn't comply, he's going to hold them in contempt and ultimately send it for criminal referral.

Michael Popach (15:25)

Now, I think, just to clarify, he's found them in contempt already. It's a, it's Probable cause that you have committed contempt, you have a way to purge your contempt, and that if you don't purge it, I want to know who the people are so I can refer prosecution. I know there's been headline banners that have said, he may. We're on the way to contempt. We're beyond on the way. It's probable cause that they have been found in criminal contempt.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (15:49)

Right? Well, there's probable. That's true. There's probable cause for contempt. But then there has to be an ultimate finding, Right. To hold them in contempt. So I think you're right. But criminal. To be held in criminal contempt, you know, you have to be more than just the initial probable cause. And the thing that's really. The thing that's kind of tricky here is what happens when. If they don't comply and if these things aren't. If the things aren't met that, the requirements, and essentially bring them back, you know, and show me what happened. And he refers it to criminal contempt. And the thing is, a criminal referral is to the Department of Justice. Well, we know that's going to be fruitless. So then he can appoint a private prosecutor. Now, it's interesting because there's at least two justices on the Supreme Court who think that a private prosecutor in this type of scenario is actually illegal, and you can't do that. So that'll be interesting to see if that's upheld by the Supreme Court. But, you know, in a strange way, all of this is kind of pointless or fruitless because all Donald Trump has to do is pardon the people who have done this, and it kind of dissolves the contempt and the criminal contempt. So at the end of the day, this is really testing this unitary executive that the Supreme Court has created, allowing Trump to do whatever he wants and basically give the middle finger to the judiciary. Like I said, they're not even pretending. They're not even making excuses for these things. They are literally just saying, no, I can do whatever I want, and there's nothing you can do about it. And frankly, it's unclear if there's anything they can do about it. Like I said. Cause he can pardon them. And the Supreme Court enabled this. They've created it. Indeed, I think they want it. It really sets the stage not just for this presidency, but for future presidencies. And we are in a pivotal, pivotal time period that we keep edging up towards the line. Right, well, what would happen here? And what's he gonna do about it? No, what's he gonna do about it? I mean, And Trump really, I think, ratcheted it up when he had Bukele come to the White House and they both were basically again, giving the middle finger to the courts and to the American people in front of everybody. They're not even pretending and they just kind of say, no, we're not doing it and you can't make me. So it's going to come to a head. I think the judge here is going to use and exercise everything, every tool in his toolbox. And I think at the end of the day, we're really going to see what everybody's limits are, but that's where we are.

Michael Popach (18:31)

Yeah. Well, a couple things I want to unpack there and I want to read from aspects of Boasberg's decision since it is so powerful. He's already at purge. So for me, I think the contempt finding has already been made. I mean, you call it probable cause or you make another. There's no other finding that needs to be made. When you read his order, he has found that they've willfully disobeyed his order and he's moved into. He's used the phrase probable cause. But there's no other step in federal court. They either purge next Wednesday, which is a term of art in contempt world, which means you cure or fix the thing that you're being found in contempt for because there's nothing to purge if there's no finding of contempt or, or if you're not going to do that, then I'm taking names and I'm kicking ass. You tell me who the people are. Those people that are in contempt are known as contemners. You tell me who the contemners are. Those are the live human beings in the Trump administration, knowing of my order that violated it Any then the order particularly was about two planes. The violation was about two planes that went anyway, even though the judge had ordered them to return. He's already established that in the record. That is it. And there's no amount of, as he said in his order, no amount of mea culpa at all, as you said, Karen, from this administration who is brazenly violating all of our rights. It's not just Abrego Garcia or here, the two plain load full of people that had constitutional rights that were violated, they're violating our rights and how they're interpreting what the American flag means. And that's why, as you said, this is pivotal. It's not as we had Jamie Raskin on and I did an interview with him with the Court Accountability Action People Last week. It's not a constitutional crisis. That's such a hackneyed phrase, it almost has no meaning. Donald Trump is at war with the Constitution. And when you said it was fruitless because he'll just pardon. See, I think there is fruit. And the fruit is he'll have to expend in public, transparently scarce political capital. And his political capital is getting scarcer and scarcer with how he's running the economy into the ground. And he's doing things that people didn't vote for him to do. I mean, how many people have we seen now who are now public on social media saying, I voted for this effing moron three times. I didn't vote for this fight on Abrego Garcia. I didn't fight. I didn't vote for tariffs to destroy my business. I mean, it's just legion and, you know, podcasters, right wing podcasters. He's starting to lose the Joe Rogan set. You know, he's starting to lose the New York Post. I just read in the Post because I like the sports section, the New York Post editorial board, which is led by, you know, ultimately by Rupert Murdoch, the editorial board came out yesterday with an editorial that said, will you take the win on tariffs already? Sign a deal, announce something. Because the longer that you don't and you play this ridiculous cat and mouse game with the American economy, you're just playing into the hands of China. That's the New York bus when you start losing all of those things. So the scarce political capital comes into. Sure, he can pardon and will likely pardon, but Boseberg and the federal courts are making him do that so that that is part of his body of work that we can then judge at the midterms. Just like the Jan.6 pardons, everyone's like, he's just going to pardon all these people. Sure. But now we can stand. Remember, at the mid. I say remember. I just, that's just a rhetorical phrase. I don't really mean. You have to remember this at the midterms. There's no Biden, there's no Kamala. It's all Trump v. Trump. It's just Trump. It's thumbs up or thumbs down on Trump. It is a complete referendum on him. And all of these things for me and the work that we do on Midas Touch and on Legal AF is part of that. I want to be the echo chamber for that. I want to be with you and Ben and the rest. I want to continue to aim heavy artillery, to continue the guns, phrases, metaphors. We're using on Donald Trump so that when he stands up or the people with Rs next to their names stand up at the midterms, it's a very easy decision in the ballot box. Let me read to the audience, just for a moment before we take our break, a couple of powerful lines from the judge's order just today. This is on page one of the order. Rather than comply with the court's order that was to ground the planes, the government continued the hurried removal operation early on Sunday morning. This is a month ago Sunday. Hours after the order issued, hours after the order issued it, the government transferred two plane loads of passengers protected by the temporary restraining order into a Salvadoran megaprison. The court ultimately determines that's a determination finding that the government's actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its order sufficient for the court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the government in criminal contempt. Because it's criminal, it now goes to a prosecutor to investigate and prosecute the case and meet its burden. But the finding has already been made by this civil judge, if you will, under the federal Rules of criminal procedure and the other rules that govern contempt.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (23:52)

I have a question.

Michael Popach (23:53)

Sure, go ahead.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (23:54)

Why do you think he did criminal contempt and not civil contempt? And just to remind people civil contempt is to, to basically require someone to comply and to do something. Knowing the futility of criminal contempt in this case, if the whole point is to return the planes and return the people, why didn't you know what he could do? Because here the reason, I guess I'm unclear about whether or not there has to be more for the contempt is there's no people. Like, who is he holding in contempt? I mean, he's going to see who the people are. And so I just think that he's taking testimony and depositions and he's going to figure out who did what when. And then I would.

Michael Popach (24:39)

Who's in contempt is next Wednesday.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (24:42)

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I mean, I just, I've never seen it done backwards like that. I've always thought, yeah, whatever.

Michael Popach (24:48)

But to answer your question, your question was why? I said the same thing on my Hot Take analysis. I said, normally I've been involved with a handful of contempt proceedings. It starts at civil sort of progressive discipline. I'm going to find you in civil contempt. Here's how you get out of it. You do the following. You turn over the money, you turn over the property. You stop doing this. You have to have the keys to your purge in your pocket. As we say in law School parlance. And if you don't, then it's hard to find somebody in contempt. Like if they don't have the money, pay a million dollars by tomorrow. If they had no ability to do that, that's actually an illegal contempt finding. And then you ratchet it up. If they don't do that, you go to criminal contempt. It just shows you that from the record and given the constitutional stakes, the judge doesn't have to under the federal rules of criminal procedure and prevailing statute in this area. He does not have to start at civil. He can go right to criminal. And I know he wanted to end his order. Let me read to the end of the order, then we'll talk about more when we come back. At the end of his order after he goes through all of the findings. Let me go to page 14 for a minute. He said, he said on page 14, defendants provide no convincing reason to avoid the conclusion that appears obvious from the factual recitation. They deliberately flouted this court's written order and separately its oral command that explicitly delineated what compliance entailed. They don't dispute it. They don't offer a mea culpa. They don't want to rectify it. They are in violation. And then at the end, because I think the answer to your question is right here at the end of the order, because he wanted to be able to write the following Sentence on page 46, for the foregoing reasons, the court will find probable cause the defendant's actions constitute contempt. In other words, he's effectively indicted them for contempt. Now it's up to a prosecutor to take it from there. It will provide them an opportunity to purge such contempt if they, the administration, opt not to do so. The court will proceed to identify the contemners, the live people, and refer and refer the matter for prosecution. A separate order. We haven't seen the separate order yet, but that's coming. Right, but he wanted to write that.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (27:09)

Right. But criminal prosecution is potentially futile because he can get. They can pardon anybody. That's why I'm saying why not put them in jail for criminal contempt? I guess they could.

Michael Popach (27:21)

I guess Trump can't put him in jail for civil. Wait, I. Wait, let me unpack this, because you might be onto something because I thought this too. Why isn't he using his powers to put somebody into jail directly? And why is he referring it over for criminal prosecution?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (27:34)

Exactly.

Michael Popach (27:35)

That's a good question. That's a good question.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (27:38)

Yeah. That's what I didn't understand. Start putting them in jail. Until they comply.

Michael Popach (27:42)

State court judges certainly could do it. You know that. Well, I don't know if I have to look closer. I haven't been involved with a federal criminal contempt order, thank God. Neither on defending somebody or otherwise. So I don't know. But we will by the time we.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (27:58)

Maybe you're telling me he can't put them in jail under a civil contempt to require compliance?

Michael Popach (28:05)

I don't think so. I don't think he can get to jail. I think he can get to a.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (28:08)

Court if they refuse to testify, if somebody refused, at least in state court. And I'd love to. This is something I'd love us to research and come back to. Because. Because if you. In order to compel, for example, testimony or to turn over documents or to compel, which is what civil contempt typically is, jail is a tool that can be used.

Michael Popach (28:27)

Yeah, agreed. You and I agree on that. That's usually how we understood it. But we won't have time to do it tonight. But we promise everybody, because that's our commitment to you, that we will get to the bottom of this little arcane area of the law when it comes to federal criminal contempt. I have to assume Chief Judge Boasberg knows how to do it. So he's probably following it by the book, but we will continue to follow that. Speaking by the book. No segue. We've got some amazing sponsors. I don't think there's a book sponsor in there who are pro democracy, who are supportive of legal. I have a couple of things I want to announce. First of all, because we don't do enough to. Midas does a lot of tooting of its own horn, understandably, as being the number one YouTube network, number one podcast, and some amazing things in the future I can't even talk about. We don't do enough. We don't do enough. And you and I are competitive, too. And on the same chart where the Midas Touch podcast is number one, we're number 10 in the world of all podcasts. It's crazy, but I'm competitive and I want to pass a lot of MAGA Republican ones along the way. I like to get into the top five. I want to get closer to the brothers. And we can only do that with your help. That means subscribe to the audio version of the Legal AF podcast, if that you know, or. And. Or no, and watch the YouTube versions and leave comments and ratings and reviews all along the way. And if you're a YouTuber, go over to the audio and download and listen to that because that helps, and vice versa. There's some people that don't even know we're on YouTube. There's some people that don't even realize there's an audio podcast. And if we put all that together, we will rock it up that rating and we will get with it. I don't need to pass the brothers. I just want to be in the same screenshot as the brothers. Karen, what do you think about that?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (30:14)

I think it's amazing. And yes, I'm very competitive too, but I'm just in awe that we're in the top 10. I mean, it's incredible. We need to pass the brothers. I mean, you know, I want to pass them. Like this is going to end up.

Michael Popach (30:28)

Asin's going to do a clip of you and me. We got to catch the brothers. All right, so put them in number two. So that's the way our audience can help you.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (30:36)

By the way, Ben is also a Legal AF host. So, you know, either way, he wins.

Michael Popach (30:41)

That's very true. Very. He sometimes forgets that. That's very true. Now that's one way to support us. We have a. We have Legal AF, the YouTube channel, which is at five. It's going to hit 550,000 this weekend. Shout out to Salty, who's also sort of our channel manager over there. Got a great group behind the scenes. Sydney, Nico, Brian, led by Salty. I do what I can. And we're doing. We got over almost a dozen contributors that are now there. I got two more that I'm going to be onboarding soon that people are going to be blown away by hopefully next month. But come on over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel in collaboration with the Midas Touch Network. Hit that subscribe button there as well. Okay, we got all that. And of course, we got our first break for our sponsors. Millions of Americans grind or clench their teeth at night, and most don't even know they're doing it. If you have jaw pain or headaches after a night's sleep, there's a high chance you grind or clench your teeth. Teeth grinding, also known as bruxism or tmj, is generally caused by stress and it can cause serious damage such as eroding away your your enamel and broken teeth, which leads to expensive dental bills. The solution to protecting your teeth is a mouth guard. But mouth guards from the dentist, they can cost you around 500 to $800. The good news is that there's Remy. Remy makes dental grade professional quality mouth guards without the painful price tag. They're up to 80% cheaper than what you'd pay at the dentist and don't require you to visit a dental office. Remy's process is simple. They send you an at home impression kit to create molds of your teeth. You send those back to Remy and Remy's dental team will make your custom fit cards and send them right back to you. Remy's guards are so comfortable to wear that most customers forget they're even wearing them. Plus, with a 45 night satisfaction guarantee, you can try it risk free, sleep better and decide if it's the perfect fit. If not, Remy's got you covered. Look, stress can be my middle name sometimes, especially in the fast paced world of podcasting and content creation. I'm on a news cycle timer and at night sometimes I have trouble turning off the old brain engine and I have a lot of dental work that my dentist would love if I did a better job protecting including my smile. And then I found the Remy mouthguard kit and now my dentist is jealous. The in home process was so convenient, easy and affordable. Using their custom impression kit. It took me less than 10 minutes and Remy ships it to you for no additional cost and they keep your impression on file for future use. Remy is for anyone dealing with nighttime grinding, clenching or jaw pain who wants an affordable solution to protect their smile and say goodnight to jaw pain and headaches. Head to shopremy.com legalaf and use code legalif to save up to 50%. That's 50% off that. S-H-O-P-R-E-M-I.com legalif with code legal af give your teeth a break without breaking the bank with Remy. Thank you Remy for sponsoring this episode. Why are elite athletes, business moguls and high performers using Armor Colostrum? Armor Colostrum is nature's first whole food with over 400 bioactive nutrients working at the cellular level to build lean muscle, accelerate recovery and fuel performance all without artificial stimulants or synthetic junk. Whether you're running a business, training hard or just want an edge, ARMRA optimizes your body for peak output. Optimize your whole body microbiome and strengthen your immune barriers along the mouth, sinuses, lungs, gut, urinary and reproductive tract to guard against unwelcome particles for your strongest immune health look. I love using Armor Colostrum to combat bloating and to feel lighter. Probiotics are touted as a gut health solution, but they only address one part of the four part gut wall and most products on the market are dead before they even reach your gut armor. Colostrum naturally fortifies your entire gut wall system, optimizing your microbiome and strengthening the gut wall architecture, which guards against irritants that can trigger symptoms like bloating and constipation. Oh, and get this Colostrum bioactives have also been shown to reactivate hair follicle stem cells, optimize the hair microbiome, feed regenerative nutrients to the scalp, and work to combat hair loss by guarding against chemical induced damage to the follicle. Fueled performance and recovery is possible by harnessing the closely guarded secret of elite athletes. Long prized for its unrivaled ability to take performance to its apex, Colostrum has been shown in research to help enhance nutrient absorption, promote lean muscle building and improve endurance while fueling cellular repair regeneration for faster recovery. Specifically, Colostrum has been shown to improve fitness endurance by 20%, decrease recovery time by over 50% after intense exercise, improve stamina and specifically build lean muscle mass. We've worked out a special offer from my audience. Receive 15% off your first order. Go to tryarmrun.com legal af or enter legal af to get 15% off your first order. That's t r y a r m r a dot com legal a welcome back to legal af the midweek edition. Care Freeman Nickniffalo and Michael Popak. All right, so we've, we've done our thing on Bozberg, but that's not the only contempt that's in the hopper in the pipeline potentially against Donald Trump and the Trump administration. I thought we were going to spend the entire time talking about the Abrego Garcia case and Judge Zinnis. Right. So Supreme Court and I'm going to turn the whole thing over to you on this one, Karen. Supreme Court completely supports that as every way, shape and form that matters in a 90 decision. I mean, it was a crappy three quarter, you know, three quarters of a page and there was one line in there about foreign affairs. But it's really a complete rebuke of the Trump administration and a reaffirmation of what Judge Zinnis, Paula Zinnis, did in Maryland. So basically 13 judges Zinnis, three judges on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, nine judges on the United States Supreme Court have all supported Judge Zinnis ultimately and found that the Trump administration illegally, over an order of another judge, deported and removed Abrego Garcia to El Salvador. And all the courts want the Trump administration to do and they're doubling and tripling down on not doing this because they're children is facilitate the release from the El Salvadoran jail of this guy and get him back. Don't release him. Keep him where you want him, but give him due process and he should never have been sent to El Salvador in the first place. Instead they're doing, you know, they bring Bukele in with the black T shirt and the suit jacket, you know, like some exactly what he is, a petty dictator of El Salvador coming in there. And they called it a bilateral summit. It looked like a ridiculous press conference pitch and catch call and response in order to set up some filing in the Zinnis case. That's what it, that's what it ended up being with Pam Bondi and Stephen Miller, who's the great brain behind the use of the Alien Enemies act to begin with, all chirping away and they're attacking cnn. I mean, it was ridiculous. And, and of course Judge Zinnis was all eyes. And now you got Drew Ensign coming into court on Tuesday with, with the transcript of the, of the, of the press conference under his arm and things went downhill from there. Karen, what'd you take it.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (38:42)

This is again the middle finger, you know, giving, basically giving the courts the middle finger there. He's just, they are just. That was a complete show to just have Bukele and Trump pretending that we're idiots is really what it is. It's like, we're not stupid. We know what's happening. We know what you're doing. Oh, well, I don't have the power. Oh, I don't have the power. I mean, this is a guy who has all the power. He's claimed all the power. He thinks he has the power to steal Greenland and to annex Canada and to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. I mean, he's out of control power and the Supreme Court is doing nothing about it. But he doesn't have the power to return someone who they have said was a mistake. And again, he's just absolutely, you know, doing that in public. Right? He's doing that in front of everybody. They're not even pretending, they're not even hiding it. And Bukele's doing the same thing. It was theater for everybody and it was really a way of just showing everybody that we're in complete power and we're in complete control. And Judge Zinnis is going to be in a crash collision course with all of this as well. And it's going to do the same thing that we just talked about with Judge Boasberg. It's going to push everything to the limit. And, you know, it's interesting because Trump entered into a contract with El Salvador. Don't forget to pay them $6 million to house people, to basically serve as a prison for us. But it's really a complicated matter. They're saying, oh, it's foreign affairs. It's diplomacy. No, it's actually a contract matter. And it would be great if we KN what that contract said and what the agreement was. And is this going to be something that now he's going to try to use for American citizens, which will. Will absolutely be a whole other fight. Right. One of the reasons he's getting away with this is because Abrego Garcia falls into a gray area. He's not an American citizen, but he's also not here illegally. He's been found by multiple courts or multiple times by courts to be here legally. And he has not been found to be a member of Ms. 13. He's not been found to part of any terrorist organization, and he has a green card. He's married to a United States citizen. And so. And so they're sort of using this as a. As a way of being too cute by half, frankly. And here, you know, this is a judge again, developing a record to hold, I think, to hold ensign in contempt. You know, basically said, there's going to be two weeks of intensive discovery. Cancel your vacations. We're gonna have expedited discovery, et cetera, et cetera. And I want to know exactly what has been done and what has been said and what have you done to, quote, facilitate his return? Because that's what the Supreme Court held unanimously Trump had to do. Right. He has to facilitate his return to the United States. And of course, the Trump administration is saying, okay, if he shows up at one of the ports of entry, we'll let him in. But guess what? We'll let him in just to deport him again, because we're revoking his status as. As a.

Michael Popach (42:00)

He conducts his own prison break, and he just wanders back to the United States.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (42:05)

Exactly.

Michael Popach (42:06)

To facilitate his entry. Thanks, guys.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (42:09)

Yeah, so it's just. And, you know, look, they're doubling down on this, and their talking points are, you know, the lefty liberals, all they care about is somebody like him. He's a terrorist. He's an Ms. 13 they don't care about. And then they parade out the mother of a woman who, frankly, tragically lost her daughter to somebody who is here illegally. Has nothing to do with Mr. Abrego Garcia, who has never been accused of a crime, let alone convicted of a crime. And there's absolutely no information that he's a criminal or involved in a dangerous game. So it's again going to be pushed to the limit. I think she's setting up the administration for contempt through this process. And so we'll see what ends up happening. But this is, is, this is theater again being played out for all of us to see. And this is Trump showing everybody that he can literally do whatever he wants. And I'm, I'm scared of, of when he starts doing it to United States citizens. That's where this is going to be. Very.

Michael Popach (43:12)

How does he do that? I mean, well, let's jump here.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (43:15)

How he does.

Michael Popach (43:16)

How do you take. Unless you make like, like Guantanamo Bay.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (43:21)

That'S exactly what you do. You set up a Guantanamo. Yes.

Michael Popach (43:25)

You and I are talking shorthand. But let me explain. You cannot, under the Constitution deprive somebody of their citizenship because even if they're Jeffrey Dahmer, even if they've committed heinous school shootings, that's not enough to revoke your citizenship. People don't like that. They can go amend the Constitution, but that's the way that works. So you couldn't. See, everybody agrees then, or you do, Karen, that he couldn't send them to El Salvador for committing crimes in America. He couldn't deport them, however. Right. So what do they do next? They make another. They make American soil out of a phony US Base in El Salvador or somewhere and they send them there.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (44:03)

Exactly.

Michael Popach (44:04)

Then we have an 8th amendment problem. Are. We, are, is this a country where we're. Look, let me just tell everyone what.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (44:10)

The Eighth Amendment is. Popoc.

Michael Popach (44:12)

You're speaking Eighth Amendment against cruel and unusual punishment.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (44:15)

Exactly.

Michael Popach (44:16)

We. You may not like our. You may not. How do I put this to people? We. None of us, none of us support murder. None of us support criminality. Certainly not the prosecutor. Even a defense lawyer. I don't, I don't support that either.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (44:32)

However, I'm a defense lawyer now.

Michael Popach (44:34)

That's right. Well, I mean, former prosecutor. That's true. Very, very good point. Now, once the person is convicted, after appeals have been exhausted, we still live in an America where our Americans, whether private jails, companies or public funding, we mete out our justice and our prison experience. We don't offload that to a black ops center like they're going to get water bordered, you know, water, water aborted. You know, like we're doing some sort of, you know, in search of Osama bin Laden, you know, we're not doing. That's not America. Now, let me just talk about El Salvador for a minute, okay? Because we've seemed to have. Donald Trump has seemed to have delegated to the El Salvadoran president his right to run our democracy. Okay? El Salvador is a country of 6.3 million people, God love them, but there's more people in the, in New York than there are in El Salvador. Okay? Of that. Listen to this stat. Karen, you tell me this isn't a country that's out of control and run by a dictatorship. One out of 60 Salvadorians are in prison. One out of 60, it's like five times the United States population. They have, listen to this math. They have a jail that can hold this Maximum security prison, can hold 40,000. Trump, during that presser in the Oval Office, said, you got to double it. He's willing to double it to 80,000. We're paying $6 million to house. 250 total. That's 24,000 an inmate. If he, if he doubled that to 80,000 and then we somehow made a deal to make that an army base or a base or US soil, and we sent 80,000. At that same rate, we would be paying El Salvador $200 billion to store our human beings who are supposed to be in our criminal justice system. How do you do that? With a federal judge. We're going to put a federal judge in El Salvador to keep an eye on prison abuse.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (46:48)

It can't. That absolutely cannot happen. That's outrageous and unconstitutional. So all of this has to stop. But I think with what he's doing, I think the whole thing with Abrego Garcia is a setup to show that he can do it with people who are here legally and he's going to try to do it with American citizens. That's what I think, because he's setting this up to push this.

Michael Popach (47:13)

I mean, I agree. We just got a note when we were on the air about one of the senators going to El Salvador to try to visit Abrego Garcia, the one from Maryland, and him being stopped. And instead they got him. I don't know, something with the vice president of El Salvador, whoever that is. And I only half joked in our own text chain, I said, yeah, we're going to see a new press conference that says, well, you know, you know, a US Senator is now in the custody of the El Salvadorians. It's, it's sovereign affairs. We're not going to get involved. Sorry you went down there, but it's an Administrative snafu error. Whoops. I mean, is that. Is that the. This is what I want, people, not our audience particularly, but other people that listen to us occasionally. Is this the America that you woke up in? Is this what our American flag stands for? This is what we want. You can accidentally. And Donald Trump will do it. He'll send, as a tester, he'll send one US Citizen prisoner to El Salvador and then see. He'll sit back and see what the. What the Supreme Court does about it. And the Supreme Court, as you said earlier, created this monster and now has to figure out how to put Pandora back in the box. Is that the right phrase? Put the genie back in the box or whatever. And, you know, we have no one to blame other than Chief Justice Roberts, who led that majority to give Donald Trump immunity and that superpower, and he interprets it his own way. And now they stand in front of federal judges like Judge Zinnis, and they tell the judge they contort Supreme Court rulings out of all shape or recognition. We don't see it that way, Judge. Well, which part of this. I mean, it's not a spelling. It's not a spelling bee. Facilitate, Judge. Can you use it in a sentence? Yes. You need to facilitate the release from an El Salvadoran prison of Abrego Garcia, because the Supreme Court commanded it. You know, as I said in her hearing, she was like a drill sergeant. It was like, drop down and give me constitutional compliance. Nobody's going anywhere. Cancel your vacations. We're working 24 7. And so am I. And this is gonna be. And I have a phrase for it. My team that works with me know what the phrase is. Proctologist style discovery, put on your glove. Because she just allowed the plaintiff to do four depositions serve today. A series of questions under oath that have to be answered. And she warned the Trump administration, if you play games with discovery, which is only being done, people might be thinking, why is she doing discovery? She's doing it the right way. She's developing a record to allow the plaintiff to support its motion for contempt. This is heading for contempt. There's no. It's not. Well, she may trust me. Based on what's happening already, she's ready to rule on contempt. She just needs the record to be developed over the next two weeks. But she's told the plaintiffs, if they start screwing around with you, meaning the Trump administration on discovery, come back to me earlier on an emergency application for bad faith. And you know they're going to. Pam Bondi. Oh, it's a leftist radicalist judge and activist. We're not going to abide by anything she says. And here we go. Not constitutional crisis, war with the Constitution. We got two judges who are pretty tough. Abrego, the Abrego Garcia judge, Judge Boasberg, chief judge, well respected by even people on the United States Supreme Court. He was Kavanaugh's roommate in law school, for God's sakes. And Chief Justice Roberts likes him a lot as well. And you got Zinnis. Yeah, she was appointed by Obama but is considered to be an amaz judge. Very strong judge, should be shortlisted for the Supreme Court when the Democrats take back the presidency in a few more years. At least that's my view. We're going to talk about the attack. While Donald Trump is not helping anyone at the gas pump, well, maybe a little bit the gas pump at the food store, at paying rent, at paying bills and making your life better, not destroying your mom and pop businesses, he's spending an inordinate amount of time trying to crush dissent, trying to crush the media and the First Amendment expression of law firms, of media organizations and outlets who have been associated with moderate views or liberal views or whatever views, just First Amendment expression. And we'll come back and talk about his attacks on pbs, on npr, on cbs, on Associated Press, in that case, the Associated Press. The Gulf of America is up on appeal, ladies and gentlemen. And it's gonna be let me just give little watching guide. It's going to be tomorrow, Thursday at 2:00. And we're going to do our first live stream of the audio of the oral argument in that case when we come back from our break, then I'll tell you who the three judges are with Karen, and we'll talk about the problem. But that audio is going to be up there and you should hit a reminder and come on Legal af. And then we'll have some post game about how I think and others think that that that oral argument went. Yeah, Karen, before we go to a.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (52:13)

Break, I just want to read it just feels like it's time to reread to everybody what Justice Sotomayor wrote in United States v. Trump in her dissent. And everyone thought she was exaggerating and being histrionic and that's never going to happen. But it not only has happened, it's worse than what she said. So she said the president of the United States is the most powerful person in the country and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way under the majority's reasoning, he'll now be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy Seals Team 6 to assassinate a political rival. Immune. Organizes a military dissenting coup to hold on to power. Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon. Immune. Immune. Immune. Immune. Let the President violate the law. Let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain. Let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today. And here we are.

Michael Popach (53:20)

Yeah. And here we are. It's always Sotomayor. It's always Sotomayor is the conscience. If it's not her, it's Ketanji Brown Jackson. Occasionally, Kagan has the conscience. That's a great way to do that. To support talking truth to each other and sending the message to everybody that matters. To keep us on the air, we got a few ways to support the show. Legal af, the podcast is, comes in two formats, two forms. Audio and go over there. If you're a video person, download the audio. That helps with the ratings, the rankings, reviews, and to keep us on the air, so to speak. And if you're a YouTuber or audio person, come over to YouTube and watch us over there. Especially if you were wondering, I wonder what those two look like. Come over. You'll find out on our YouTube version. So that's one way to support the show. Then there's other ways. In and around the ecosystem of Legal AI, we've got the Legal layoff Patreon and I got some original content going up there, ad free versions of some of these things all up on the Patreon. That's one. Secondly, legal layout, the YouTube channel legal AF MTN that shows our close relationship with the Midas Touch brothers, notwithstanding the fact we want to crush them in the ratings. We have a close collaborative relationship, of course, with the Midas Touch network and couldn't do it without them. And we're over there. Hit the subscribe button over there as well. We're trying to get to 1 million before our one year anniversary. Seven months in, we're at 550. We're doing. We're doing great. That's a testament to you. Sure, I can curate and do all the videos that I want, but if you're not there supporting us, we have such an amazing, lovely audience. Just smart, intelligent people. You were. You're talking about, you've talked a lot on the show about having run into people who recognize you from the show and hugs and kisses and all sorts of things. I had one today, as people may know. I've got a termite problem. I got a giant termite tent going over my house, which explains some of the remote reporting I'm doing. And the termite guy showed up and he came out of the truck and shook his hand and he goes, I know you. And I go, have we met before? Like I'm thinking, have I had a termite guy before? And he said, and he held up his phone and he, and he goes, And I go, he said, Legal AF and Midas touch. I said, you're kidding me. He goes, no. I go, where are you from originally? Because we, you know, I could tell from his accent he wasn't, he wasn't originally from here. He said, Honduras. I said, what do you, what do you like about the show? He says, I love everything about the show. Found my way to Midas, then I made my way to Legal af. And you do that great show with that lady? I said, Karen says, yes, Karen, love her. This, all, this is why we do this. You know, it's not the, you know, the Ivy League colleagues, you and I, that fine. I, they watch. That's great. I want that guy. Right? That's what matters. That's why we do it. And the fact that we've penetrated that and we resonate with all Americans and people that are new to this country at this time is so rewarding, right, Karen?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (56:17)

So much. It's so rewarding. And I, it's, it's exactly what keeps me going and whether it's, you know, I've run into lots of people who, at different points in my life and one time in particular, I was, I was leaving a family member in a hospital and I, somebody, it was at the airport and somebody came up to me and gave me a hug at the exact right time. And I'll never forget that.

Michael Popach (56:39)

So, yeah, I remember you told that story.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (56:40)

Yeah, it just means the world to me. And it's also just a community place to be with like minded people who really need to know that there are people in the world who look outside and see the sky is blue and it's not, you know, it's not green the way we are being told by Donald Trump. And so we're gonna keep just telling the truth, telling people what's actually happening. And so that people can know exactly that there are other people who are still fighting to get the truth out and save our democracy. And I thrilled to be doing our little part here in our little corner on Legal AF with all the Legal af'ers who are just the most amazing people.

Michael Popach (57:24)

Absolutely. And so come on over to Legal AF Mtn. Hit the subscribe button there and and now another word from our Pro democracy sponsors. 4:20 is around the corner and there's no better time to elevate your wellness routine. Whether you want to relax, recharge or refocus, Via has the perfect lineup for you. If you haven't tried them yet, you're seriously missing out. Whether you need to unwind, refocus or boost your mood, Via is here to enhance your every day and night. Trusted by over half a million happy customers, Via is changing the game and natural wellness blending powerful, high quality hemp derived ingredients to deliver real effect driven benefits. Whether you're looking to sleep better, have better libido, improve focus, recover or simply relax, Via has a tailored solution just for you. With products ranging from zero to high cannabinoid levels, Via lets you fully customize your experience to fit your needs. Whether you're looking to support your daily wellness routine, enhance focus and clarity or unwind with deep relaxation, Via has you covered. From their award winning Effect Direct Forward Gummies to calming drops, every Via product is thoughtfully crafted, made with organic lab tested hemp sourced from trusted independent American owned farms. And the best part? Via legally ships across the usa. Discreet direct to your door, no medical card required and backed by a worry free guarantee. Not sure where to start? Take Via's Product Finder quiz to get personalized recommendations tailored to your needs. It can take you less than 60 seconds to complete, so if you're 21 years or older, treat yourself to Via's annual Spring 420 sale Black Friday level savings up to 35% site wide right now up to 50% off packs and bundles and get a free gift plus more savings with your first order using our exclusive code LEGAL AF at the link in our description. Plus enjoy free shipping on orders over $100. Unlock the power of nature with Via's organic and vegan hemp extracts. Perfect for relaxation and rejuvenation, Via is the only lifestyle hemp brand. They use compounds found in hemp along with active plant extracts to create products each with a specific effect in mind. Whether you want to get better sleep, ease anxiety, enhance your mood or just get high, they have something for you. Their products range from 0 milligrams to 100 milligrams of THC, so these guys have you covered. Whether you're looking to microdose or enjoy more potent effects. Via's products are sourced from the finest hemp for your peace of mind. Plus they're lab tested and certified and feature premium products that fit your budget. If you're 21 years or older, check out the link to Via in our description and treat yourself to Via's annual spray spring 420 sale black Friday level savings up to 35% sitewide right now, up to 50% off packs and bundles and get a free gift plus more savings with your first order using our exclusive code legal AF. Plus free shipping on orders over a hundred dollars. That's code legal af@ the link in our description after you purchase the Ask yeah where you heard about them, please support our show and tell them we sent you. Enhance your everyday with Via Physio, Chiropractic and massage therapy are all great resources for when you need them, but going to these appointments every few months does not give me the ultimate results I'm looking for. When it comes to my well being, it's taking daily, even hourly opportunities to move my body that makes the biggest difference. This has only been made possible for me with this episode's sponsor, Uplift Data Desk Uplift Desk is at the forefront of ergonomic solutions promoting better posture and health through adjustable standing desks designed to help you live a healthier lifestyle. Plus they have all kinds of accessories to keep you moving throughout the day even if you work for only a few hours at your desk. For me, I love the Bamboo Motion X board. It makes me feel like snowboarding without waiting for the lift. Standing while I work gives me the room to move and helps me get the creative juices flowing. Moving throughout the day helps me focus and stay productive and I'm way more alert when I'm using my standing desk and I have more energy. A desk should fit the user, which is why Uplift Desk has a lot of customization options so you can build your perfect workspace. With more than 200,000 configurations, Uplift Desk allows you to tailor your workspace to to perfectly suit your style and needs, empowering you to create an environment that inspires productivity and creativity. For me, I built the custom standing desk of my dreams from Uplift for my popoc Media offices where I make a lot of my hot takes and content for Legal af and so I went all out with a heritage oak top and their advanced angled keypad for the lift part. Make this year yours by going to uplift lyftdesk.com legal af and use our code legal af to get 4 free accessories free same day shipping, free returns and an industry leading 15 year warranty that covers your entire desk and an extra discount off your entire order. That's U P l I f T-E-S-K.com legalaf for a special offer and it's only available at our link start 2025 right stand move thrive with uplift desk. Welcome back and thank you for our for supporting our pro democracy sponsors. The Constitution's not the only thing under attack. I mean, I only half joke like why doesn't he just declare martial law, suspend the constitution and then he won't have to be bothered with that sticky little thing called constitutional rights because he's just busy trampling over them and violating them. Who voted for this? Even the Trump supporters are going to be going, who voted for, who voted for this? I want, it's the economy, stupid. I didn't vote for the rest of this BS that, this Project 2025 Heritage foundation stuff, you know, making billionaires more billions. I didn't vote for that. And now he's going after, you know, let's go after law firms. And he got a billion dollars worth of, you know, tribute or payment in the form of free legal services from law firms that didn't do anything wrong other than represent clients to the best of their ability under an oath that we all took to uphold the constitution and to be zealous advocates for our clients. And when he's not busy going after law firms, some of which are having second thoughts about the deal, little buyer's remorse, trying to get out from under some of these deals, he's going after cbs because I love all of his policies are based on him watching cable television all the time. When does he have time to be the president? Between golfing every weekend for 10 weekends straight, costing the American taxpayer $40 million, going to MMA fights and bringing the cabinet along with him, which also cost us a pretty penny, he has to go to these places where he gets instant adulation for his ego at my dollar, at my expense. Between that and watching cable television. Oh, what's Maria Bartiromo saying today? Oh, what's Jesse Watters saying? Oh, you have half of Fox News in your cabinet. Why do you need to watch him on television? And he makes policy decisions based on what he watches. So now he's watching 60 Minutes because they got a story on Greenland and they got a story on Zelensky. Of course it's pro Greenland and pro Zelensky. What else would it be? What did he think it was going to be? And so here we go. Basically gives a command to Brendan Carr, his head of the fcc, to go after cbs, who I thought was settling with Trump, but now they're not. And they've let 60 Minutes do an unflinching examination or expose about the Trump administration. So there's that. And then while we're at it, why don't we pull the funding on NPR Newsflash? They don't get much federal funding. And pbs. Now we're going after Sesame Street. We're back to that again. Bert and Ernie are living together. They must be gay or transgender. Is that where I'm at? So, Karen, why don't you kind of put a neat bow around why you think he's doing it? He obviously thinks he's getting some political wind at his sail or some value out of it. And then what are you seeing in terms of these elements, these important stakeholders in our society and how they are obeying or fighting Donald Trump?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (66:18)

I mean, the press is the fourth branch of government, right? I mean, the press has such an important, powerful role in our society that they're essentially a fourth branch of government. Right? They're the ones that shine a bright light on everything that's happening. You know, Washington Post says democracy dies in darkness. It's all about all about transparency. And they do incredible work. And there's journalistic ethics. And they don't just most legitimate news sources do actually have codes of conduct that they follow and rules that they apply and don't just report things without sourcing it with multiple sources and verifying things, et cetera, and do investigatory reporting. And then they identify when it's opinion versus news. But the problem is the news, whether it's Midas Touch or it's CBS or it's anybody else on the planet, cnn, if you're going to tell the truth and you're going to be factual, it's going to be against Trump. There's only one news. Well, I shouldn't say only one. Now there's more. But Fox has historically chosen to only report things that they view are favorable to Trump and to not report report things that are unfavorable and frankly is very much a propaganda machine of Donald Trump and of the right wing. And look, I know that the right wing says that the other mainstream news and us are propaganda machines of the left. And now that I'm a part of it, now that I'm sitting here with you here at Midas Touch and I do my own research, I don't have staff, I don't have anyone who gets me court decisions or anything. I do my own research. I read the decisions myself. I read the transcripts of court proceedings. And when I report to people, it's not. I identify when I'm giving my opinion versus when I'm giving facts. And it's the thing that just, I think, is so appalling about the Trump administration is they don't really care about facts. They lie to people's faces. And people are just like, okay, no problem, go ahead, lie to me. And it's one thing to just disagree, but it's another thing, have facts, right? Stop lying. And so this started with ap, the Associated Press that refused to call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. Trump didn't like that. And he just flexes his muscles and says, I have absolute power, so I'm not going to let you in to my news briefings. And apparently that came to a head and a judge ruled essentially about a week ago that you can't, you don't have to let the press into the Oval Office or the West Wing or on Air Force One or anywhere else. But if you do, you're not allowed to edit. You're not allowed to basically say, people can't come in because of, I don't like what you're reporting. It can't be content based. It has to be neutral. It has to be. You could have a standard like, oh, you have to have 500,000 viewers or you have to have whatever it is, because obviously you can't have every single person who claims they're a reporter. You have to have limits, but it can't be based on anything that's First Amendment protected, like your viewpoint, your opinion, your content that you give. And he didn't like that. And that was clearly based on that. And so a judge ruled that AP would be irreparably harmed if they cannot be let in. And so they were ordered to be allowed back in. Well, what does Trump do? Trump does what he always does. He doubles down. He doesn't just say, okay. Doubles down and says, okay. Now I'm gonna just, now I'm gonna ban all news wires, not just ap. So now it's not just content based. So I'm gonna ban more news wires and I'm gonna let who I want to come in, come in. And so it's bubbling up. It's going to an appellate court. You did a hot take a good, hot take on it and talked about the judges and talked about the three judge panel. You didn't like two of the appointees. And look, the Supreme Court has, has always been a little bit kind of, you know, this issue about the freedom of the press has always been ripe to go up to a conservative Supreme Court because Gorsuch and Thomas never really liked or believed in free press. They don't like the idea of the press. They don't like the idea of the standard that was, that was determined many, many, many, many years ago, decades ago of actual malice that you have to show if you to try to sue the press for defamation, you have to show that they acted with actual malice. It's a heightened standard because they're given a lot of deference, in leeway. It's not enough that they made a mistake or they got something wrong. You have to show that they intended to harm you if you're going to go after them for defamation. And Gorsuch and Thomas never really liked that. So this issue is ripe for the Supreme Court. We'll see what they do. But again, and you know, it's just funny that it's great that Trump doesn't. There's no pretext in anything they do. They don't protect, they don't say, okay, I'm doing this for a different reason. And you have to look behind that and say, no, he's doing it for something else. He's really just doing this because he does not like their viewpoint and he's making space for more conservative news. And so now he's trying to control the news. He doesn't like that there's people out there independently reporting the truth because if the truth doesn't help him, it'll be.

Michael Popach (72:05)

Interesting to see what this three judge panel does. We're going to live stream it on Legal AF, the YouTube channel, tomorrow at 2pm it's audio only. That's the way it works. Actually. One of the few things that people might like that Merrick Garland did is when he was the head of the D.C. court there, he made it all, really all oral arguments before that court are done live stream. So we will have that. I just don't like the lineup. It's Katzis, who's a Trumper and almost never votes against Donald Trump ever. I think he did it once during the January 6th period. It's Rao, who is also a Trumper Federalist Society and she clerked for Thomas. Now you've got Pilar, who I like a lot, who's the intellectual heavyweight there. But she's got to pull rao over to a 2 to 1 in order for that to work. It's pretty cut and dry. It's so cut and dry that Trevor McFadden, the Trump appointed federal judge, ruled, I'm not going to even grant you more of a stay because it's causing the Associated Press, which gives half the world its news irreparable harm. Like they could go bankrupt and go out of business. That's a much harm. They are the newswire service for the world and they're being banned from the Bukele or Oval Office thing or photo op or Air force one. And McFadden already told them, well, McFadden said, this time I'm not going to give you more of a stay. You have your appeal. You can seek an appeal from the appellate court even. They didn't give him a stay. They gave them a fast oral argument but not a stay. And he said, I'm not going to do it because you have no chance of winning. He basically said you have violated the First Amendment right, core constitutional right by viewpoint discrimination. You don't like what they've said. You brazenly said you did it because they won't change their style book to call that body of water the Gulf of America. I mean your words, not mine. That's Carolyn Levitt, that's Donald Trump, that's Susie Wiles. It's obvious you're not going to win. No, I'm not going to stay any longer. That's a Trump judge that ruled that way. So I, so we have that. But he also said in his order, because you and I covered it a couple weeks ago, you could have a press list. This is crazy. You could have a pressless presidency. If you don't want to have a press secretary, if you don't want to have a press conference in a briefing room, if you don't want to have your press at your events, if you don't want to open the Oval Office to the press, that's okay too. But if you're going to do it it, then what you can't do is say, nope, not you, not you in the room. We don't like your tie, the color of your jib, the color of your party, the color of your skin or your viewpoint. That you cannot do. And that's what he said. So you can do a lot of things he said to him. You don't have to call on anybody in particular. You have to give them access to the room where it happens, period. So you got that going on. Then you got the law firms who cut a deal with Donald Trump hoping he would stop beating them including ones I'm like, what are you doing? Are you so ashamed of your pro boto programs that you can't possibly abide by potentially losing a couple of shekels because Donald Trump puts you on a blacklist? They even went after Wilkie Farr and Gallagher, who I used to applaud because they represented valiantly Ruby Freeman and Shay Moss, and got her $158 million judgment against Rudy Giuliani. But they also went after Wilkie Farr because Kamala Harris husband is there. Doug Emhoff is a lawyer there. In fact, he pleaded with the management committee, don't do this. Don't bend the knee. They were like, where do we sign? And now the rate is going up. First one in Paul Weiss, 40 million. The next three, including my old law firm, Skaddenorp's 100 million. Now the going rate is 125 to 150 million dollars of free legal service. But now they're saying there's always this disconnect. The law firms say, we didn't do anything wrong. We're not going to prostitute ourselves and let Donald Trump tell us what to do. Even though we've taken down all of our DEI references, all of our hiring manifestos. How are they going to hire new lawyers in the future? Karen, when they totally bent the knee to Donald Trump, why would any diverse candidate think about going to one of these major law firms at all? And now they're saying, no, no, no, no, no. We're only going to do the things we want to do. We're going to fight anti Semitism. We're going to fight that. No, you're not. You're going to work on trade policy, and you're going to work against transgender people, and you're going to be forced to do all the things because that's Donald Trump's pound of flesh that he's going to extract from you. And they're all going, oh, that's. That's what we need to do. Maybe we don't cut that deal. You can always walk from the deal. There's nothing. Government can't sue you. I mean, they're suing states for having transgender policies that they don't like. Like. Like Maine, but they can. Law firm. If the law firm says, you know what? We've thought better about this, we don't want to do it anymore to force them into servitude, they can't do that. But we're going to see there's going to be some peeling off and peeling away. But the Only firm that's really weird to me because they must have cut a deal in the beginning is Quinn Emanuel. Quinn Emanuel is representing Abrego Garcia. Quinn Emanuel is representing Harvard university and the $9 billion at risk there, which puts us all at risk because Harvard and the research team there is doing things like trying to solve Parkinson's, trying to solve Alzheimer's, trying to solve diabetes, creating AI that will help everybody. No to the Trump administration. They didn't do enough during that, you know, the protest with the Palestinians and, and Elise Stefanik, who went to Harvard as a thing for Harvard. Really, we're going to destroy the, you know, arguably the number one university in America over this. And they're fighting back. And they're represented by Quinn Emanuel. The interesting part there is that Quinn Emanuel's senior partner, who's the co managing partner, director of the firm, is Donald Trump and the Trump Organization's ethics advisor about what the Trump Organization doing business with the government, Bill Burkle. So I don't understand how he. So the only way that the Trump administrator, the only way that Quinn Emanuel could have done that, do both, is that they cut a deal in the beginning, say, we'll do your ethics, but if there's something we want to get involved with against your administration, we're going to do it. And they wanted Quinn Emanuel that badly that they said, okay, so don't forget.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (78:42)

They also represented Mayor Adams right. In that dismissal. So they're very much in lockstep with the Trump administration as well as against them. And I don't know how they did that. The question is, and this is the thing that is head scratching to me is all these other firms that are cutting deals, like Paul Weiss, et cetera, is this a, did they sign something? I mean, this is a law. Like, these are law firms, right? Like, the fact that they would have a handshake deal and not something in writing is. It would be shocking to me.

Michael Popach (79:14)

I think there's a deal. Don't you, don't you think there's a contract or something?

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (79:17)

Yeah, there's a contract. So you can't just consideration. Well, I think the issue is he threatened to take away, right. He threatened to take away their, their access to public buildings and security clearance and whatever are the other threats that he did. And I think some of their clients at least were like, look, we, we can't have this. You know, we're, we're going to go to someone who can work in a federal building, right? Like, I don't want to get involved in politics. So, you know, so. So you got to do something and fix this. But I just would be so surprised that they would. They breach a deal without having something in writing because, you know, they act. I think they're acting a little bit surprised here that they have to do certain things that they don't like. But I think it must just be the associates who misinterpreted what this means. I thought we just had to do.

Michael Popach (80:08)

You know, I'm not sure about that because Paul Weiss posted what it thought was the deal, and then Donald Trump posted what he thought was the deal. And nobody said, but wait a minute, we got a piece of paper. So maybe you're right. There's no contract act. It's just the managing partners go in there and kissing his ass. And then they write down, like, what they think the deal is, but maybe it's not enforceable. And now law firms are thinking twice about it. But shout out to Harvard, whoever's representing them for fighting back the Harvard faculty bringing the lawsuit in Massachusetts, there's going to be a hearing up there about cutting off that 9 million in funding. 9 billion in funding. Sorry, you've got that. There's a lot of things that we'll cover during the week. We got judges in Texas that are ruling against the Trump administration about using the Alien Enemies Act. And now you got Donald Trump complaining about due process. Oh, there's going to be 5, 500,000 separate cases. Well, then you should not have argued against the Abrego, the Alien Enemies act case in front of Judge Boasberg because he had certified a class. You can't have it both ways. You didn't like the class with one judge. And now you've got 500,000 Texas judges. 500,000 cases in front of Texas judges about habeas corpus. What did you think they're. I'm already going to correct myself. There's no thought process with the Trump administration. So cbs, hang tough. Npr, do the same thing. Disney, when they come for you, you and I were on a chain about, oh, he hasn't talked about Jack Smith or Letitia James lately. Boom. Letitia James opening up an investigation about whether she committed mortgage fraud or not. I mean, it's getting ridiculous. Why don't you focus on the things that people sent you back to the White House to do, which apparently was to lower the price of eggs and things like that. You're not doing any of that at all.

Karen Friedman Agniphilo (81:49)

And the economy's in the shitter.

Michael Popach (81:51)

The economy's in the shitter. The only thing that's lower is going to be gas prices because oil production has shrunk, because global trade is on hold, because under Donald Trump. Use this, use this moment to punish anything with an R next to its name at the midterms. That's the only way. Give us back, you know, the Mandalorian, this is the way. This is the way. Give us the House and the Senate. I'll give you an impeachment. He would be impeached already if we had the House. I don't know about the Senate for conviction, but he'd be impeached how many times. You and I would just be doing an all impeachment episode of Legal af, right every week if we had one. Give me the House, give me the Senate to give me one of them. Holy shmigoli. All right, I'm fired up. We've reached the end, it's true, but we've reached the end of another edition of Legal AF at the midweek with Karen Freeman, Nicknipolo and Michael Popach. You know the ways to help us and really, it does help us. Hit the subscribe button here and on the Midas touch network, Legal AF, the YouTube channel, Legal AFMTN, hit the subscribe button there. It's all free, but it sends the right message. Listen to the audio versions. Watch us on YouTube. Tell your friends we grow organically. We're people powered. And that's it. Patreon by Legal af. Another way to support us and of course, our pro democracy sponsors and thank you to the team that helps us keep the wheels on here at Legal af. Shout out to Sydney and Adam and Nico and Brian and Jeremy and the rest of the crew, people that are unsung. We don't do credits at the end. I just did the credits at the end. You know, you talked about a wrap party for your other your other gig. We're never going to have a wrap party because we're never going to end illegal AF. We just can't. There it is. And we hit 500,000 subscribers. I love that bullet over on legal AF. We're never. This is a season that never ends. But we're here for it. We signed up for it and this is why we're here. So appreciate all of you. You see on Saturday with Ben Mycellis and hot takes all along the way. Shout out to Legal a efforts and the Midas might.