Loading summary
Transcript43 lines
- [00:01]
Ben Meiselas
This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. It's tax season and we're all a bit tired of numbers, but here's one you need to $16.5 billion. That's how much the IRS flagged for possible identity fraud last year. Now here's a good number. 100 million. That's how many data points Lifelock monitors every second. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed. Save up to 40% your first year@lifelock.com podcast terms apply.
- [00:31]
Michael Popak
This episode is brought to you by Enterprise Mobility. From fleet management to flexible truck rentals to technology solutions, Enterprise Mobility helps businesses.
- [00:41]
Jordy Meiselas
Find the right mobility solutions so they.
- [00:43]
Michael Popak
Can find new opportunities. Because if your business is on the road, they want to make sure it's on the road to success. Enterprise Mobility moving you moves the world. Find your road@enterprisemobility.com.
- [00:59]
Ben Meiselas
Hey, prime members, are you tired of 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. To start listening, download the Amazon Music app for free or go to Amazon.com adfreepodcasts that's Amazon.com ad free podcasts to catch up on the latest episodes without the ads.
- [01:25]
Jordy Meiselas
Federal Judge Issued Multiple Rulings Against Donald Trump when it comes to Donald Trump kidnapping migrants and sending them to concentration camps, is a contempt order forthcoming? We will be covering that. And also a federal judge ordered Donald Trump immediately return at least one of the migrants who was kidnapped and sent to a concentration camp in El Salvador. The Trump regime responded, go tell the dictator of El Salvador you are a Marxist. Judge, we are not listening. That was actually the response from the White House. We'll break it down. I want to give you an update on a major Supreme Court ruling that deals with Donald Trump withholding grants to educational institutions on the basis of Trump's view that educational institutions are too focused on diversity, equity and inclusion. Want to talk about an update with Jorge Santos? Yep, you heard that name right. Even the Trump DOJ is recommending at least 80, you know, significant prison sentences. We'll go and talk about what the specific sentence they're requesting is in their brief. They say he is a pathological liar who needs to be incarcerated for basically his own good and for the public safety because the guy is just going to keep on doing it over and over again. I want to cover the North Carolina Supreme Court race. A ruling from from the North Carolina Court of Appeals. I had the honor of having Justice Allison Riggs, the Democratic Supreme Court justice on the North Carolina Supreme Court. On the Midas Touch Network on Friday, we did a 25 minute or so interview right after the ruling from the Court of Appeals. I'll talk briefly about that. And Donald Trump is getting sued by multiple groups now over the tariffs against the world. Trump called it Liberation Day. We call it annihilation recession or probably Great Depression day. Donald Trump is currently golfing today while there are hands off protests around the country. I mean we're seeing literally millions of people protest Donald Trump. We've been covering that all day on The Midas Touch YouTube network is all I know corporate news is not giving that enough tension, attention. Now that we have the platform here, we're giving it attention. And so yes, we'll cover that on other videos today, but we'll cover on Legal af, the conservative group and other groups suing Donald Trump over his tariffs, basically saying it's unlawful. You, you, you can't declare war powers to tariff the world which is actually a tax and tariff on American businesses. And you're not just tanking the markets, you're taking the overall economy and businesses that rely on free trade are going to go bankrupt. And you know, last week we heard about the crash. This upcoming week I think we're going to hear about more businesses going bankruptcy. This is going to have a horrific domino effect on our country. But people are rising up. Michael Popak and it's important that shows like Legal AF and others exist during this moment of turmoil, of chaos. I wish we were talking about things that we were talking about, you know, a year ago, expanding prescription drugs, making it cheaper, growing the economy and things like that. But we're in a world of an authoritarian regime, the Trump regime, the that wants to destroy the legal system, intimidating law firms, so on, so forth. Let's break it all down today.
- [04:45]
Michael Popak
Popar. Great, thanks, Ben. Yeah, I mean I'm nostalgic for the Biden administration. 75 days ago, this, you know, we've said before and I will repeat it again here, elections have consequences. And I've had a lot of conversations in the last 48 hours with self proclaimed Republicans, even people that voted happily for Trump, not didn't hold their nose. And now I just spoke to somebody recently in the business world. They said what is going on? They're all insane over there. The tariffs was the final straw for most of these people. And what we're seeing now is a few things. Republicans, hard to believe Republicans in the Senate stepping forward to reclaim the power that was granted to them by The Constitution, the sole power that was granted to them by, by Article 1 related to tariffs. They loaned the presidency a certain amount of power in a couple of emergency type acts, but they're not being properly used by Donald Trump. He's doing the. There's an exact mirror image what he's doing with deportations without due process, kidnappings to foreign countries to be tortured or killed, is under a phony declaration of war and is saying that we're at war with Venezuela and that the drug gang is Venezuela and therefore he can do all of these crazy unconstitutional things. Same exact thing on the economic side. He's claiming that there is a structural imbalance emergency. Oh, crap. A structural imbalance emergency. What's the cure for that? Oh, I get it. 100 different tariffs averaging 24%, killing $7 trillion of our stock value and sending the entire economy into the crapper in two days. You called it annihilation day. I joke that it's what are we being liberated from our financial security, our Social Security, our wallets? Is that what we're. This is up there with mission accomplished with George Bush in terms of, you know, misnomers. And now we've got Senate Republicans stepping forward. We'll talk more about it today. Trump passing bills to take back the tariff power because the underlying emergency laws that Trump is relying on are fugazi. They're fraudulent. They're being fraudulently used as on the other side, as you and I predicted last week about tariffs, somebody was going to get around to filing a lawsuit that Donald Trump exceeded his powers granted to him by Congress in the area of tariffs, which is limited to begin with. And that has already begun as other federal judges, Judge Zinnis and Judge Boasberg, who we'll talk about next, both within hours of each other, looked the Department of Justice and the Trump administration in the eye and said, you have acted in bad faith and you've committed an illegal act. Judge Zinnis in Maryland ordering the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia on Monday and get him out of jail in El Salvador and in my courtroom, apparently, or purported, you know, effectively. And Judge Boasberg in his contempt hearing, not even his hearing about preliminary injunctions, saying to the lawyer for the Department of Justice, that's sketchy. That looks like people that are acting in bad faith to get around the lawsuit in my power, not somebody who thinks that their conduct is ultimately going to be affirmed by a court. Wouldn't you agree? As he went into a prosecutor mode for a full hour of live, it was like A vivise. It was like an autopsy of a living. I never saw a living person get an autopsy, but that's what happened to Drew Ensign for the Department of Justice. So we're seeing Republicans having to step up and try to get back power in the area of tariffs, including the bill that was passed by Republicans as well, to revoke the Canadian ones, as, of course, they're popping champagne courts and smoking big fat cigars over the tax cuts they're about to hand. Is this the week for tax cuts to be handed out to the wealthy while our economy heads for the shitter and is in. Is in the. Is in the grinder? I wouldn't think so, but to the Senate, you know, they're in a delusional world. And then we've got the lawsuits that have been filed to try to restrain Donald Trump with some updates there as well.
- [08:55]
Jordy Meiselas
You talk about the grinder. Donald Trump sending these DOJ lawyers work for him into the meat grinder. You know, it's an interesting dichotomy since the Trump regime exists extrajudicially outside of the judicial system, acting as authoritarians, but we still have a judicial branch which is still a co. Equal branch. So Donald Trump, you know, struts out these lawyers who go in front of these experienced judges who were trained in the top law schools, you know, who are like, you know, to be a federal judge at the level of these judges, it's like, you know, being in the Navy SEALs of the military. Right. So they're sending out these individuals with very little experience to do hand to hand intellectual legal combat with judges who are the most experienced people in these areas. And they're in this courtroom and they're still existing, at least when they open up the courtroom door and they're in front of the judge in chambers. Right. They're existing still within the confines of a judicial system. And they don't know what to say, these lawyers. It's what you and I flagged what we thought was going to happen, I mean, both in terms of the cuts to the doj, that they literally don't even have the resources to, you know, know, do the research and to kind of do the bare minimum actual work. I mean, it's a lot of work, a lot of documents, but then they don't have the answers. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. And then they're getting just absolutely destroyed and slammed by these judges. So I think as we see protests escalate as well and grow, we're also seeing an escalation in the judicial system where now we're moving to the area of contempt. I think once the floodgates open there, we're going to see contempt orders over and over again. I think Judge Boseberg's the first that's going to actually issue contempt order. It's certainly seen based on the hearing that that's going to go that way. But Popac, let's break down these two really big. There's a lot of big immigration cases. So I don't want to play short shrift to other ones that I think are like, there was another case which basically where the Trump regime was going to kidnap a Venezuelan and send him to El Salvador and they made a mistake and they, they recognize the error, they send them to another state about to send them to El Salvador. Thankfully, that was flagged before a judge said, bring him back to New York at your own expense right now. Like there are dozens of these cases right now that are happening regarding Trump kidnapping human beings, sending him to concentration camps who are not actually gang members, who received no due process at all, who are now rotting in an El Salvador concentration camp. You know, the big case, Judge Boasberg, of course, because he issued an injunction back in mid March saying, don't do this, stop. We'll figure this out. Let's just go through a process. The Trump regime heard the order, but then they first like, oh, it's an oral order. We don't have to listen to oral orders. Oopsies. The plane is now in international waters. So because the planes over international waters, you don't have jurisdiction, which is again, totally false. And then they finally went to basically the ad hominen attacks. You're a Marxist Obama judge, even though he was appointed by George W. Bush to be a D.C. superior Court judge. We're not going to listen to Marxist judges. So that's how they escalate. Bozberg has escalated in kind. So there's that big case before Boasberg. Then you have Zenis Paulet, Judge Paula Zinnis in Maryland and she ordered the return of Abrego Garcia, an individual who a Trump immigration judge in 2019 said, don't you ever send this guy to El Salvador. He will get killed in El Salvador. There were allegations that Abrego Garcia was a gang member back in 2019 that was based on seems like an unreliable informant. There was really no evidence ever suggesting that he was. This was an individual who was working in Maryland with his family. He was checking into ICE at the direction of a 2019 Trump immigration judge ruling. And then he was kidnapped, sent to El Salvador exactly where the judge said he can't be sent. So if you want to argue, hey, this guy should have been deported, certainly shouldn't have been to El Salvador. The Trump DOJ admitted it, Popak in their filing saying this was an error. Oopsies. So then the judge, Judge Zinnis, Paul Zinnis, says, okay, we'll return them. And then the Trump regime led by Stephen Miller and others said, you're a Marxist judge. No, you're a Marxist judge. Go tell dictator Javier Bukele. Go tell him rather. Go tell Bukele rather what you're going to do and let and see if Bukele wants to return him. You don't have jurisdiction, Judge. That's where they're going with it. Popak, what do you make of these cases?
- [13:28]
Michael Popak
Well, I'll synthesize it the way that you did. Within 24 hours, two federal judges declared that the Trump administration and the Department of Justice are acting in bad faith and they are an illegal act. I mean, if you read the reporting from in the room, we'll be getting the transcript soon. We'll do more reporting about what happened with Boasberg, who was there on a. This one is so many spinning plates about the Alien Enemies act in the Boasberg case, which was the first one three Saturdays ago. Just three weeks ago at 6:30 at night, he issued an injunction, a temporary restraining order type injunction, until he could hear the full preliminary injunction, which is now set to be finally heard after briefing on the 8th of April. So we're really only talking about a four week period maybe for temporary restraining order, but he ordered the return of those planes and for those people to be brought back if they had already left Texas. And then he got down as he said he would. Judge Boasberg, I'm going to get to the bottom of this. And the bottom is a pretty deep bottom. It is apparent from the facts developed by Judge Boasberg in his courtroom that knowing that the judge was going to, knowing that the lawsuit had been filed the early morning of three Saturdays ago, knowing that there was going to be a hearing at 5pm that Saturday three weeks ago, the Trump administration worked under cover of darkness. Trump signed the proclamation declaring phony war against Venezuela because there's a drug gang in America that came from Venezuela and then use that to declare phony powers under the Alien Enemies act to deport without, to kidnap and deport without due process to the killer jails, literally the Killer jails of El Salvador now. So to the judge signing their declaration on Friday, but not publishing it until Saturday, loading the planes and getting all the logistics done in advance so that the birds were in the air by the time the hearing started is the very definition of acting in bad faith. And so the judge went through that timeline with Drew Ensign. This, I would say I have pity on him, but I don't because, you know, he decided to keep this job or take this job. So he's, he gets to stand there and he doesn't have much to say. As you said, he's being led to the slaughter by the Trump administration. But again, he's not blameless. So I'm not, I'm not apologizing for him, but the judge said, let me walk through. At his contempt hearing. This is the hearing about whether between 6:35 and 7:30 and beyond, the Trump administration violated a federal judge's temporary restraining order. You can call him a lunatic Marxist, you can call him a criminal corrupt, but he is a federal judge until he's not a federal judge. And he has powers to enforce. Because you can imagine the anarchy that would happen that Trump would promote if federal judges just said, oh, you didn't abide by my rule. All right, what else do we have on the docket today? That's not how federal court works, and that's not how enforcement of federal orders work or the inherent authority of federal judges power. So this hearing, not to be confusing to people because there's so much going on, is about contempt and about whether based on the briefing and oral argument. And the judge then spent an hour dusting off his prosecutor cross examination skills, which he was to just live roast. This guy Drew Ensen in the courtroom, you know, in every way possible, Socratic method. Is it your position that you abide the government abided by my order? Yes. Okay, now let's walk through the timeline. How can you possibly say that you abided by my order? Let me tell you what it looks like. It looks like the order was signed, but then deep six. Until the next day the planes were loaded. And with people knowing that the lawsuit had been filed. Do you see where I'm getting that implication from? Right, sir. And then knowing that there was going to be an order, you already lifted the birds off the plane. You know, lifted the birds off to get them to El Salvador to avoid my jurisdiction. You see, that doesn't look very good for the administration. Right, sir. And then he said, who did you tell about my injunction? Now, the right answer in that hearing should have been, I told the Homeland Security Secretary, Christine Om or her affiliate. I told the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, I told the Department of Justice, Pam Bondi, and I told the office of the President. That was not his answer. And that pissed off the judge because that should have been, that's the only answer because he was ordered to inform the administration and everybody appropriate about it. And apparently that didn't really happen. That's on the Department of Justice. So he's annoyed about that. And he's, when he walked through the final nail in the coffin for this guy, if he even needed a final nail, is when the judge said to him, now let me talk about this state secrets privilege that you're, you're, the administration is refusing to turn over to me, the federal judge, the information that I have required to get to the bottom of the flight details, the who, what, where, why and how of the flights. And you're withholding that based on the state secrets privilege, is that right, sir? Yes. Okay. Would you, would you agree with me that the information about the flights themselves is not confidential, as we use that term, and could have been shared with me in my chambers? And he said, yes, he says, okay, now give me an example where a state secret privilege was used about non confidential information. Go ahead. And of course, he looked out of his shoes and he top danced and he said, right, right. It's pretty sketchy, isn't it? So we're going to get a contempt order. The question is what is the remedy that the judge. Not if it's when. We're going to get it Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. What is going to be the remedy? Is it going to be fines per day against the federal government, meaning our taxpayer dollars? That doesn't sound like something I want. Is it going to be a default judgment against the federal government? He's going to strike their defenses and he's going to enter the, he's definitely going to enter the preliminary injunction. That's happening on the 8th with a hearing and the 9th with a preliminary injunction being entered, which keeps the injunction about using the Alien Enemies act in place all the way through the end of trial. And so I'm going to kick it back to you in a minute, Ben. I'm going to ask you what you think the remedies are going to be because they're going to be something Supreme Court is hovering in the background because they asked for full briefing, which they've received about whether this gap between the temporary restraining order and the preliminary injunction, whether they're going to block Boasberg's injunction order. And we're still, you know, Saturday night on air. We don't have the Supreme Court ruling on this. And I think by the time they rule, they're either going to get over the period, but they're going to rule by not ruling because he's going to hold that hearing on the 8th. And the question for the Supreme Court, which we're going to hit later today, is whether they're going to side with the Trump administration about the illegal use of phony war powers to imprison people without due process in a foreign country where they will be tortured and killed under all of the U.N. all the U.N. conventions against torture. Or what world do we live in now? I thought I knew what world we lived in. But later on, you and I are going to talk about a Supreme Court case that gives me quite amount of pause about where the strike zone is with this particular Supreme Court.
- [20:43]
Jordy Meiselas
Look, I think the remedy is going to have to be to target, you know, the. Any lawyer who's making unethical and false representations should be subject to the sanctions. If a lawyer with a bar card is going before a judge and lying, they should like any other lawyer, it would be no different. They would have to face consequences. Now, that can mean sanctions against their license being recommended to the various bar authorities where they're members of a judge frankly, issuing an order, you know, censuring a specific lawyer so that in a post Trump error, the lawyer's conduct can be evaluated, I think, in the proper context. To your point, Pope, what do you do with the administration in terms of the financial. Well, you know, but, but to me, that's the way that you deal. I mean, you know, imposing a financial sanction. I mean, I would like to see eventually if you're held in contempt, the agency official who's responsible for this be incarcerated. I mean, I think that's where it should be escalated to. And if you're violating federal orders, you go to jail. The question becomes, well, then Trump just pardons them, right? Or the question is, is that the DOJ doesn't enforce it? Or then do you have literally a court, you know, ordering their bailiff to arrest someone in the court jail while the doj, you know, so the Metro police deputized, you know, so, so that becomes the question. That's what I think should happen. Not because even I despise the Trump regime, which I do. Any lawyer who defied orders, that would be the consequences. But I'm thinking in terms of how do you craft a remedy in this moment of time, I think it has to fall on the weight of the lying lawyers who are suborning perjury before the judge. Popak, I want to talk about what Judge Zenis ruled as well. I want to talk about the George Santos update as well. And I want to talk about people want to know the updates on the North Carolina Supreme Court race there. And I had that great interview with the Democrat line justice. So we're going to cover all of that. I want to take a quick break right now. I want to remind everybody to subscribe to Michael Popak's YouTube channel. Also, Michael Popach started his own law firm that's doing great as well. So if you have a catastrophic injury, whether it's a car accident, trucking accident, employment case, medical malpractice, negligence, or if you or someone you know has a case, Popoc, where do they go?
- [23:28]
Michael Popak
Yeah, it's come over to my website. It's www.the popoc firm.com pop okay. And a 1-800-number to make it easy, 1-877-POPAK AF. And we've got those lawyers and other people standing by to kind of evaluate the case as it makes its way to me. And again, as you said, we're focusing on these catastrophic injury cases, auto truck rollover, anything that happened, unfortunately to you or somebody in your life, we're there for you.
- [23:58]
Jordy Meiselas
There you have it. Let's take our first quick break of the show. We got a lot more show. Let's go to our Pro Democracy sponsors.
- [24:04]
Michael Popak
Right now, DeleteMe makes it easy, quick and safe to remove your personal data online. At a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable, data brokers make a profit off of your data. Your data is a commodity. Anyone on the web can buy your private details. This can lead to identity theft, phishing attempts and harassment. But now you can protect your privacy with Delete Me. What do data brokers do? Your name, contact info, Social Security number, home address, even information about your family members could all be compiled by data brokers and sold online. As someone with an active media and social media presence, privacy is really important to me and making sure my family and I are protected 24, seven from bad guys trying to hack us, steal our identities and credit and docs us take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Deleteme now at a special discount for our listeners. Get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to JoinDeleteMe.com LegalAF and use promo code LEGALAF at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to JoinDeleteMe.com legalif and enter code legalif at checkout. That's JoinDeleteMe.com legal af code legal af hey, look at me. Michael Popak here. And yes, I'm actually using iRestore's amazing Elite hair growth device. And now you know one of my many personal grooming secrets to having great looking hair. At 59, it's time to shake off the winter blues and get ready for a fresh start this season. Tackle thinning hair and hair loss with the Irestore Elite. It's a clinically proven solution designed to help you regrow hair with 282 lasers and LEDs delivering light therapy directly to your scalp. Think of it as a rejuvenating treatment for your hair follicles, giving you a new look for the spring season. Now that we're experiencing those in between days, you know when it's still chilly but you're ready for a change. Whether it's a rainy afternoon or a quiet evening indoors, the Irestore Elite is the perfect way to take care of your hair. Lightweight, hands free and painless, it works while you relax and prepare for the warmer days ahead. No hassle, just real results. For a limited time only, our listeners get $625 off their Irestore Elite when you use code legal AF@irestorelaser.com that's 625 off your Irestore Elite@irestorelaser.com with promo code legal AF to get the hair regrowth device you've been wishing for and start feeling like yourself again. Listen, the Irestore Elite device is the best at home laser device in the world. It has more lasers, LEDs and power output than the competition, ensuring you'll see results wearing it. And maybe the best part about Irestore, they offer a 12 month money back guarantee so you can try it risk free. If your hair doesn't make a glorious return, you'll get a full refund. No awkward questions, just fabulous hair or your money back. Give yourself the gift of hair confidence this spring. For a limited time only, Our listeners get $625 off their IRESTORE Elite when you use code LEGAL AF@irestorelaser.com that's 625 off your IRESTORE Elite@irestorelaser.com with promo code LEGAL AF. Please support our show and tell them that we sent you Hair loss is frustrating. You don't have to fight it alone. Thanks to Irestore.
- [27:40]
Jordy Meiselas
Welcome back to Legal af. Thank you to our pro democracy sponsors right there. The discount codes for them are in the description below. My brother Jordy spends a long time vetting those sponsors and negotiating the discount codes. So take a look at those are in the description below. Okay. Michael Popak, let's talk. We talked about Judge Boasberg's ruling. Tell us about what Judge Zenis, a Maryland federal judge, did. What was her ruling? How significant is it?
- [28:10]
Michael Popak
Yeah.
- [28:10]
Jordy Meiselas
And the response from the Trump regime.
- [28:13]
Michael Popak
And she's from your old sort of hometown. She's from Mineola, Long Island, Nassau County.
- [28:17]
Jordy Meiselas
Person, Mineola train station. Minneola.
- [28:20]
Michael Popak
Right. Next up, Minneola, change trains in Jamaica, whatever it's supposed to be. She went to Yale Law School. She clerked for some amazing judges. She was a, by the way, not only was she selected by Obama, but she was confirmed by the Senate at some very high numbers. It was 53 to 34, which is, you know, today you would never see that. So to call her a Marxist, I mean, first of all, they don't know. It's like that old, it's like the old movie Princess Bride. I don't think they know what that word means, Marxism. They. It's just she was just picked by a different president. That's all. That's how our federal court system works. Sometimes you and I identify when it is important to the story in the analysis. What president picked that judge to explain some sort of warped ruling? Usually we'll say a Trumper. But, you know, I would, I did a whole hot take on Judge Zinnis. I didn't mention that she was picked by Obama. It wasn't relevant to the particular story. Boasberg's bipartisan selection process is not important to the story. We only do it when it's important to the story or it's something we think is the sort of the missing piece to explain a result. But she, you know, within 24 hours is very hot, bothered herself in her own hot bench. She had another set of lawyers in front of her. And this one, you know, there's just uniform, universal public outrage about what happened to Mr. Abrego Garcia. I mean, he is a person who was under a amnesty order, temporary or otherwise, since 2019, by a federal immigration judge. In their own filing, as you mentioned on page three of their own filing, they don't say that Immigration Customs Enforcement, ice, should have been aware. They said they were aware of the judge's order of amnesty that he cannot be returned to El Salvador because he will be killed. And yet they put him on the plane anyway. I mean, they had to concede that they thought maybe if we just say it in a couple of words, nobody will notice. But we all noticed that. It is a concession. And the judge said, let me get this straight. You don't have due process. You. Oh, we do. What is the due process? Whatever the president said the due process is. Okay, what was the due process? You didn't give them notice, so they had no time for lawyers. You shackled them together. You gave them no due process. I don't care what you say the president gave them. There's no due. We know there's no due process. They were put on planes, kidnapped and put on planes and sent to El Salvador. Right. To try to avoid, apparently, jurisdiction, which is not going to work because I have inherent authority. We'll talk about that in a minute. And you screwed up on at least one person who's brought this suit here, who's brought this case here, because he should not have been deported. And you admitted that he should not have been deported. You, The Trump administration committed an illegal act, and it went downhill from there. In the hearing, and she's ruled. I'm just waiting to get my hands on the written order, but she ruled from the bench late on Friday that he is to be returned from the deep, darkest depths of the cells of El Salvador's supermax prison, and he is to be returned to the United States ASAP on Monday. And for those that say, oh, I shouldn't have the power to do that, yes, she does. First of all, as has been outlined in every brief that's been filed in this area, anything that the President does, including a phony war power declaration or a constitutional core power, is ultimately reviewable by a federal judge, a single judge in a single district. As our press secretary likes to say over and over again, that's how it works. That is our checks and balance system. Because I would just ask, if I was doing the Socratic method and I had a Trump DOJ lawyer in front of me, I would say, okay, what is the check and balance on the President's exercise of this power? If you don't think it's my federal jurisdiction and my ability to review, just tell me what it is. I got time. Go ahead. And they have no answer. They never talk about it in their briefing. They ignore. They want to always ignore. As Amy Berman Jackson put it, they always want to ignore Article 1 and Article 3, all they talk about like a broken record is the Article 2 Powers of the presidency. And, oh, by the way, did I mention that I got a mandate and I won seven battleground states? That's all they want to talk about. And that doesn't fly in federal court. So the judge said, I have inherent authority under the Administrative Procedures act that's been violated under the Constitution and under everything else to bring back this person. Now, their argument is you can only do it by writ of habeas corpus, which supposes, which presupposes that the person is in the United States and is trying to get out of detention to be brought before a federal judge because they've been illegally detained. That's not what's going on here. We're not talking about them fighting detention for now. They're fighting removal. They're fighting deportation to a place that's not American soil when they should not have. Especially in this particular gentleman's case where he's married to a US Citizen, has a baby living in Maryland, whether he is or is not a member of that gang in El Salvador that's already been put through the grinder of the administrative immigration procedure. And an immigration judge has ordered him stay in. And Donald Trump decided, oh, where is that? Where's that order? I don't see it anywhere. That's not going to fly. So now we're going to see, because if you're right, and I know you are, about them saying, we're going to thumb the nose at this Marxist judge and they're not going to do it on Monday, we're going to have a constitutional collision of epic proportion starting on Monday when the judge doesn't see or doesn't get a report that she likes about Mr. Abrego Garcia's return. Now, for them to say they can't get him back also is talking out of both sides of their mouth, because what they told the judge, Judge Boasberg, is that the relationship between America and El Salvador on this issue is a function of the foreign relation, power and the ability of the president to negotiate foreign, foreign treaties and delicately balanced agreements. Okay, so you have these foreign agreements and you're paying them $6 million to house these people. And, and you're, you have no ability to pick up. You're telling me Trump can't pick up the phone at Cola Kelly and tell him, hey, you know, hold on. What is it? Inmate 16493 yeah, you got to, you got to pop them out. We're going to be picking them up. You're telling me you can't do that? Well, then you have a whole nother world of hurt about violation of the UN Conventions on torture, which you're not allowed to do, and other things. So they're taking. The Trump administration is taking such inconsistent positions in the court. And of course, federal judges are smarter than they are and are and are up on it. We're going to see. It's going to be a big matter on Monday, what happens. Ben, you know, if you look at.
- [35:24]
Jordy Meiselas
All of Donald Trump's conduct, it points to the authoritarian playbook, kind of step by step. Authoritarians don't care if people suffer. That's kind of a standard when it comes to authoritarians. So if you're wondering, does Donald Trump care that he's destroyed the markets?
- [35:40]
Michael Popak
No.
- [35:41]
Jordy Meiselas
Donald Trump actually hates bankers. He hates stock market. He never did well in it. He bankrupted his businesses. He always thought that Wall street looked down on him. So it's part of his retribution. But he's happy, actually, that people's 401ks and pensions are suffering. And if you want an explanation of, you know, the tariffs and you're trying to find, well, why. Why is he doing this? This isn't going to help him. Well, in his view now, as he destroy the authoritarian mindset of, like, a Putin, you think Putin cares if his people are suffering? Do you think Saddam Hussein cared if his people were suffering? Do you think Kim Jong Un cares if his people are suffering? No, but then you have to go and beg for exemptions. You have to beg for favors. You have to beg for, you know, other countries have to beg. Please, can you help me here? You're going to screw this, you're going to screw that. And that's the authoritarian mindset, frankly, it explains everything about what he's doing. He's not smart enough to actually engage in a thoughtful process, you know, at any level, whether it's economic, judicial, otherwise. So he just wants to break it down, destroy it. That starts with destroying the economy, breaking it, and then have people suffer and then try to beg. Like that's actually what he wants.
- [36:53]
Michael Popak
With one. One element missing. He's. He purposely did this to pressure Jay Powell, the Federal Reserve chairman, who he hates and wanted to replace, to cut interest rates in June. He'll have no choice but to do it. But. But look what he had to do. Kill all of our financial security and our economy. The dumbest recession ever, in order to force Jay Powell to cut interest rates. Yeah.
- [37:15]
Jordy Meiselas
As Carl Quintanilla says, it's trying to cook a steak by burning down the house. Okay, great. At the end of the day, you have. You have a burnt steak and now you have the entire house absolutely destroyed. So good luck trying to eat it with no forks. But Donald Trump knives. Donald Trump. He doesn't care about the suffering of these people. Like, Donald Trump did not greet the four Lithuanian. So the four, four Americans who died in Lithuania. And he didn't make any statement of, you know, mourning, of sympathy, any expression of that. When four American troops died in Lithuania, the Lithuanian leaders did. They gave a incredible, thoughtful, sad, you know, respectful though, you know, process, as they were. As the bodies were sent back to the U.S. the U.S. did nothing. Donald Trump doesn't care. Donald Trump hates America. You just have to be very clear. Trump and his regime hate America. They hate it. They hate our systems. They hate law and order. And we just have to be clear and not like, overcomplicated with, with big words. I do want to say this, though. The Justice Department still, even with the Trump regime, is seeking 87 months when it comes to George Santos in a sentence. This is from the legal filing. Thank you, Kyle Cheney, for his great reporting. As always. Santos is a pathological liar and fraudster. For years, Santos manufactured and promoted a fictionalized biography, one that depicted himself as a highly educated, independent, wealthy, successful businessman, all premised on a heap of lies. And then it goes and says that Santos's history and characteristics are extremely troubling and call for a significant prison sentence. So even the Trump DOJ saying when it comes to Santos, which is ironic given all of Santos or Santos support for Trump, they are seeking that popac. Let's talk now, though, about these lawsuits. You know, we talked about the economic policy, so it's worth mentioning now, these lawsuits against the Trump tariffs, this one group called New Civil Liberties alliance, they filed a lawsuit on behalf of a small business owner in Florida who would do a lot of imports from China as part of her business. This is what the New Civil Liberties alliance posted. We just filed the first lawsuit challenging Trump's China tariff. They write ieepa, that's the law lets presidents freeze assets, not tax American businesses. No one's ever used it this way in 50 years. Our client is a small business in Florida hurt by this unlawful move. And Popak, you know, you got to just say, there they are. Right about that. You know, this law, ieepa, and there's other laws, allow, you know, sanctions to be imposed in wartime by a sitting president without Congress. But, you know, the imposition of these types of tariffs, I mean, we still have co equal branches of government and, and you know, drastically changing, you know, economic policy like this without going to Congress is, is unlawful. But just like with the immigration issue, when it comes to the tariff issue, what's Trump doing? He's doing it under war powers. He's saying we're in a war. That's why he uses the term invasion. We're being invaded. When he talks about Canada and he defames Canada, by the way, elbows up Canada. We've got an elbows up emoji. What does he say? He says Canada. You know, it's like his version of Putin's denazification of Ukraine. Since Trump wants to take over and conquer Canada, not just a trade war. Trump wants a real war. He wants to invade Canada. That's how the Canadians perceive it. That's why Canada's standing strong against Donald Trump and showing the world the way to do it. But Trump says, oh, they're drug dealers. They're killing Americans with fentanyl on purpose. And that's why we need to do it. War powers. War, war, war. International affairs. And that's how he tries to say I don't have to follow the law because we're in a war right now. That's what dictators do. Popak break down what this and other lawsuits challenging his tariff power are before we go to our next break.
- [41:16]
Michael Popak
Love the lawsuit. Don't like the venue since we're being honest here. Having practice all over the country, including in Florida, Pensacola, Florida federal court. Not my number one choice. It won't be the only lawsuit challenging Donald Trump's ability as a president to impose tariffs. See that got lost not on legal AF or on the Midas touch network that got lost by mainstream media about. They just took it as an article of faith that the president can impose tariffs. He can't. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the sole power to tariff do impositions and excise taxes on Congress. The only reason a president even has any of the five or six congressionally made laws empowering under limited circumstances a president to impose a tariff is because the 1930s in the Depression when Congress got together with the support of Hoover, this Trump is modern day Herbert Hoover. Unfortunately they they in the Smoot Hawley Smoot Hawley act which was the then the highest global set of tariffs in American history. America first all over again. Protectionism all over again. It didn't do well as it never does. It led to a 67 or 80 or sorry, 70% decline in global trade at the time, and it worsened and hastened the depression. So Congress was like, maybe we should give some power to the president over tariffs, but only in an emergency. So they came up with the National Emergency act and the ieepa, which gave him under limited, again, you have to declare a phony war or a phony emergency, a conjured up emergency to give you these powers. In 50 or 60 years, no one has ever used the IEEPA to ever impose a tariff. They've used it for other things. And now Congress has woken up at least some of the elder states people in there and have said, oh, we might have gone, this guy's out of control, we got to start reeling him back in. So Chuck Grassley, who's a huge Trumper, 80 year old, he's number three in line for the presidency, he came up with a bill with Mary Cantwell, Democratic senator, which is going to pass, which is going to try to impose some discipline on Trump, that good luck. They're going to require that he give Congress a 60 days notice about any new tariff that's not really retrospective and give Congress six, six months. Oh, no, he has to give him, he has to give him a short amount of time of notice and then give Congress 60 days to evaluate it and then decide whether they're going to go along with the tariff or not. Question is, what do you do with the ones that have already been imposed in the Senate? And as well, four Republicans, you know, the moderate ones, joined with the Democrats to strike the tariffs against Canada, but now they're have to do it against the other 70 countries. As you and I have reported on all the channels that we, that we run, the formula used by Trump is. And world economists have slapped their forehead over it. Like that's how you came up. Is that why there's an 80% tariff in Vietnam or in Ivory Coast? Because you just divided the amount of the trade deficit by the, by the total amount of the trade deficit by what's the denominator there? I forget. But anyway, it's a very simplistic formula that's not really a reciprocal tariff. And as a result, the world kind of collectively slapped their forehead. Now, the big silver lining is that Donald Trump announced, I've got a deal with Vietnam, everybody. Great. So my Nikes and Lululemons are not going to be taxed at the highest rate. So, and as I've said on a hot take, great. When you're homeless, you can wear all the Nikes and Lululemon that you want. So Congress is trying to reel in Donald Trump and he's of course fighting it, kicking and screaming. Courts are going to have to get involved about whether Donald Trump exceeded his authority, grant it to him, this limited authority. Think of it as a bundle of sticks. Congress had all the bundle of sticks pursuant to the Constitution about tariffs. They loaned one stick from the bundle to the presidency. Now they want it back because he's choking us with it. So we're gonna watch that. But at the same time, while I was heartened a bit by some Republicans, a gang of four, gang of five, gang of six getting together to try to rein in Donald Trump collectively. At the same time, Senator Thune is popping champagne corks because they're about to pass a huge tax grift for the wealthy and cut federal funding more. Is this the moment where we need more federal funding, cut more workers thrown on the unemployment line and, and less tax revenue coming into the United States. Is this the time for that? No. And I would suggest that this is ill timed and, and tone deaf by the Republicans and what we have to do. I'll leave it on this. Whether it's today, with hands off, mass mobilization Saturday, which is sort of the first opportunity for people to kind of like, besides voting, express their dissatisfaction with the Trump administration. We need to, no amnesia. We need to remember what the, what the Republicans once again have done to wreck an economy. Okay. Just like Obama had a cleanup after Bush and Biden had to clean him up after Trump won, look what's happening now. We need to hold the Trump administration and everybody with an R next to their name accountable and responsible for the things that we're watching that's happening on their watch. And that's where the midterms come in. In the meantime, there's special elections you and I'll talk about that are really, really important. We talked about them last week. But this is our ability. You say elbows up. Whatever the American equivalent of that is, we got to start doing it and doing it now. First, talk truth to each other, which is what we do every week. Every, every hot take on legal aid, on Midas, Dutch. And then we got to do this mobilization part.
- [47:27]
Jordy Meiselas
American equivalent today is hands off with this hostile takeover. When it comes to Canada, it is elbows up. And I think when it comes to internationally, I've gotten pitched a few things from my friends in Australia, my friends in Europe, I'm workshopping those. But we appreciate all the international support here. As I've always said from day one, pro democracy is an international movement this right wing virus is not unique to the United States. We've seen it internationally, we've seen how it's crushing countries across the world. And it's, you know, root and rooted in this kind of Putin esque view of what the world order was once like. Frankly, before the United States Constitution, before French enlightened thinking, things were not good then. That's not how we should be advancing in ways of humanity and helping each other and be empathetic love with judicial systems that are certainly not perfect. That's an understatement. But that work and that help and that have due process. So it's why I think it's all important that you all subscribe to Michael Popo's YouTube channel, Legal AF. I want to get that channel a million subscribers soon. It's a rocket ship right now. Make sure you all subscribe to the legal a YouTube channel. Also, if you or someone you know has been injured at all, you know, Michael Popo's new law firm handles catastrophic injuries like trucking accidents and bad car accidents, sexual harassment cases, medical malpractice, negligence. So if you have a case like that or you know someone who has a case like that, Michael Popak, where do they go?
- [49:03]
Michael Popak
Yeah, and we're representing the family of a flight attendant on the American Airlines flight that went down over the Potomac. And so, you know, it runs the gamut. But it's in that vein that you just talked about. Www the popoc firm.com real easy. P o p. Okay. And then a 1-800-number that I thought would be catchy and we'd Remember especially our legal AF audience.
- [49:24]
Jordy Meiselas
1-877-Popoc-Af let's take our last quick break of the show. When we get back, I want to talk about the United States Supreme Court's ruling regarding Trump blocking grants on the pretext of schools are teaching diversity, equity and inclusion. What the Supreme Court did, what it means. And then we should talk about the North Carolina Supreme Court race where their MAGA Republicans are trying to steal a Supreme Court seat in a race where a Democrat won not just in one recount, two recounts. And get this, the Republicans in challenging 65,000 votes and trying to get those thrown out, say only in the Supreme Court race we're okay and all the other races that existed. But it's just we just want to challenge the Supreme Court race and we just want to challenge like the Democratic areas. Let's not focus on a broader recount. Let's just target it there. It's the most insane Maga thing, but it shows you how within a framework of democracy laboratories of autocracy Fester Take a quick break.
- [50:27]
Michael Popak
This show is sponsored by Liquid iv. I was born by the beach and I haven't recovered since. Born in December, but a summer baby all the way. And my daughter, she was born on a 95 degree sweltering day last June, so I love summer. Prepping for a big summer means planning to stay hydrated so you can get the most out of your body and live more months. Visit liquidiv.com and maximize your summer plans with Sugar Free Hydration featuring the new Raspberry Lemonade hydration multiplier. Get 20% off your first first order with code legal AF at checkout. I've made Liquid IV part of my daily ritual so that with one simple pack I ensure that I'm getting not only hydration but electrolytes and needed nutrients to keep my personal battery charged. Like just before my wife and I do a quick jog to the gym, we fully hydrate with our favorite Liquid IV flavor. Liquid IV is the perfect way to stay hydrated during long days outside that often become even longer nights. Liquid IV features true to fruit flavors that keep you hydrated. Find all your favorite hydration multiplier flavors on their website from Acai Berry and Lemon Lime to Pina colada or choose from their line of sugar free flavors like Raspberry Lemonade, White Peach and Rainbow Sherbet. Break the mold and own your ritual. Just one stick and six 16 ounces of water hydrates better than water alone. Liquid IV is powered by Live Hydro Science, an optimized ratio of electrolytes, essential vitamins and clinically tested nutrients that turn ordinary water into extraordinary hydration. It has three times the electrolytes of the leading sports drink and eight essential vitamins and nutrients. Always non gmo, vegan, gluten free, dairy free and soy free. Get ready for summer with extraordinary hydration from Liquid IV. Get 20% off your first order of Liquid IV when you go to LiquidIV.com and use code legal AF at checkout. That's 20% off your first order with code legal AF@liquidiv.com when you run a business, you can either use the wonder method like I wonder how that happened or you can plan ahead and make sure your inventory is squared away and backup supply chains in place in advance of your next big season. In my field, when I started my YouTube channel, I just knew that I couldn't manage all the content, editing and coordination among our dozen contributors without an efficient communication platform, so I rolled one out on day one and I never looked back. Creating a Trust and Will is a very slow and time consuming process, leaving you less time for more important tasks. Trust and Will makes creating your will easy and time efficient, meaning you can focus on other important tasks. Get 10% off@trustandwill.com LegalAF Estate Planning and the trust and wills that go along with it can sound like a daunting task, but one that if done right, can set your mind at ease knowing that you're protecting your loved ones and giving you peace of mind. That's where Trust and Will comes in. Their website is super simple to use and just by answering a series of prompted questions you'll have estate planning documents in no time. Keep your family prepared and protected by managing your will or trust online. Each will or trust is state specific, legally valid and customized to your needs such as care, wishes, nomination, guardians, final arrangements and power of attorney. Their simple step by step process guides you from start to finish, one question at a time. Save loved ones time and stress by having all your documents in one place with bank level encryption. Live customer support is available through phone, chat and email. Trust and Will has an overall rating of excellent and thousands of five star reviews on trustpilot. Uncomplicate the process with Trust and Will. Protect what matters most in minutes@trustandwill.com legalif and get 10% off. That's 10% off@trustandwill.com legal A F All.
- [54:44]
Jordy Meiselas
Right, welcome back to Legal AF. Michael Popak, why don't you take the United States Supreme Court, I'll take the North Carolina Supreme Court issue and we will, you know, we will continue then to highlight our coverage of all the protests we've done around the clock protest coverage here on the Midas Touch Network because we've heard everybody loud and clear and look, when we have a network of this size right now, scale, scope, we know corporate news is not wanting to cover it so it makes our job more important than ever and the fact that we built this platform, it's to platform these protests ultimately. Popak, let's talk about what the Supreme Court.
- [55:22]
Michael Popak
Yeah, yeah. And on Hands off go over to the Legal AFMTN landing page and go under shorts. You'll see some great shorts from each of our contributors about Hands off and in their involvement with it over on the Legal AF YouTube channel. So look, you and I the reason we're sometimes inaccurate about our predictions or our good faith analysis of what we think will happen at the United States supreme court is because, frankly, we're watching a struggle for the soul of the Supreme Court, by extension, the United States there. And Amy Coney Barrett is. I'll just say it aloud one more time. She is the. She is the swing vote. It is the Amy Coney Barrett court. It's not the Roberts court. And that means that in close call, five to four decisions, where she votes is what the majority decision is going to be. And that has been going on for the last two years and certainly this term in particular. I have to think out loud, I'm going to posit out loud that Amy Coney Barrett, who sided with Roberts and the Democratic wing of the Supreme Court just three weeks ago, two weeks ago, before the joint session speech to five to four decision. Again, she's in the five. It's the Amy Coney Barrett court. We're just living in it. That she got so bashed by voting with John Roberts to force the Trump administration, during the pendency of the appeal to pay out $2 billion of U.S. aid, that humanitarian organization under the State Department, its obligations already incurred, that she was so bashed that not only did Donald Trump feel he had to come out and console her in public, which, of course, I don't think she appreciated, especially since she was also bashed for giving him sort of the stink eye during when he walked by her during the joint session speech. But she was attacked, I'm sure violently attacked. They said she was Amy Kami Barrett. They called out the fact that one of her eight children is somebody she adopted from Haiti. I mean, MAGA got MAGA on Amy, on Amy Coney Barrett's backside. And now we were like, yeah, all right. It looks like this could be the voting block. Roberts and Barrett joining the other two to rein in Donald Trump in cutting off the fuel supply for funding in an arbitrary and capricious fashion, depending regardless of the program. We're like, okay, I'm feeling pretty good about that one. And the reason we can't get the strike zone right, to use my baseball metaphors, is that the strike zone keeps changing. It's like a umpire one inning, you know, it. It's underneath the armpit and down to the knee. That's the strike zone. And the next inning, it's at your chin and he's calling a strike. And we're like, why can't we figure this out? It's because they're not figuring it out. Amy Coney Barrett either got bashed to crap and she didn't want to do it again, or she Found a way in, some intellectually honest or dishonest way to side with the other side. Automatically. The other side is Kavanaugh, Gore, Sigilito and Thomas. That is a solid four. For anything in favor of the executive branch, regardless of what every other judge has said about it, three are by themselves. Right. You've got Katanji, Brown, Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor. And the question is these free radicals in the middle, Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett. Roberts is center right. Right. And Amy Coney Barrett is center right. Right. But she plays the role that Kennedy had played. It was the Kennedy court for years and Sandra Day O'Connor played. Except they're more to the right of either of those people. But now, based on what happened two weeks ago, on approving the $2 billion being paid and affirming the judge's order, I'm like, that's going to be easy. She's not going to like the fact that aid to teachers, grants to teachers to work in inner city schools to help children. Okay, Our public children, our public education system is being cut off without notice in the middle of a school year, harming teachers and children alike under a false flag of dei. I'm thinking, no, she's not going to. The, the, the woman with eight children, I'm sure they're all in private school, but she, she's not going to go for that. Right. Based on that last result. No. Either because this is a make good a makeup, or she found a way to slide over. Everybody wrote a new. Everybody wrote an opinion. That's how at odds with itself the Supreme Court is. Everybody wrote one. But at the end, it doesn't matter how many opinions you write, because it came down to a five to four to allow Donald Trump to cut the spending to teachers and students. You know, he's trying to. He's already chloroformed the Department of Education, let me just say, with a shout out to Kanye West. You'll never hear Michael Popox say that usually Donald Trump hates American schoolchildren. There's no other way to put it. He's killing public education. He's killed it already and its regulations and all the programs that go along with it, including for those that are disadvantaged and disabled. And then at the same time, he's killing off the teachers who, who don't. Some of them don't want to really voluntarily go into inner city schools and urban schools, blue state schools, because, you know, it's treacherous. They need a little battle pay. And that's some of this grants was for that. So he cut the cord on that as well. And my takeaway is this does. I am now, this does not bode well for me about all the other spending cut cases, arbitrary and capricious cases that are in the pipeline on their way up to the Supreme Court. If Amy Coney Barrett is not going to dig in, which she didn't, and she is just going to twist in the wind depending upon whoever talks to her last or who bashes her last. What did you think, Ben?
- [61:09]
Jordy Meiselas
You know, I think that this is where someone like an Amy Coney Barrett over intellectualizes these things and views it as well. Look, procedurally, all we're doing is we're issuing a stay in favor of the Trump administration. We're not necessarily saying that the administration is right in withholding the grants, but we are saying we need to preserve the status quo. And the status quo as frozen right now is that the Trump administration said that the grants don't go. So isn't that freezing the status quo? No, no. The status quo is that they're supposed to get the grants. It's kind of like what we saw with the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals ruling we covered last week, Popak, with the National Labor Relations Board, where they, they viewed the preservation of the status quo for purposes of staying, which is kind of freezing in time that the NLRB member does not go back when it was like, well, you're then buying into the Trump regime spin of it that that's the status quo. The status quo is that the person shouldn't have been unlawfully filed. So to me, and it gets a little more complicated. But if you were to ask Amy Coney Barrett, hey, you just ruled against schoolchildren, what do you think her answer would be? Pop, that's not what I did.
- [62:26]
Michael Popak
Yeah.
- [62:27]
Jordy Meiselas
She goes, all I'm saying is we're preserving the status quo of whatever and the grave them.
- [62:34]
Michael Popak
And I'm like, what are you effing talking about? You just hurt inner city school children. This lack of connectivity to the human dimension. These are people being deported and sent to killer jails, never to be heard from again. Right. These are families that are being broken up. These are. This is your financial security and your ability to care for yourself and for your loved ones and for your aging parents in the future that's at risk. Don't talk to me about procedure.
- [63:01]
Jordy Meiselas
It was, it was one of the things that during COVID the way that it was really exposed there, like as you had these mass casualty events and people were dying, it was Obvious that a lot of these magnas, not a lot, most, like, didn't care about people dying. Like, that's why sometimes you call it a death cult because, like, just the idea of like, well, someone just died, that's not bad to you. Like, what are you, what are you talking. Talking about? Like, there were mobile morgues and they were like Dr. Fauci and like, what, what are you, what are you upset about? What someone's dying, you know, and then the person, like from their family, like a MAGA family, they would like, have people die and they would just be like, what? Whatevs? And it was. The whole thing is so utterly bizarre to me though. But it's why I try to break down my hot takes and talk about just things like empathy and love and just common sense. Because we have to reconnect with like reality. Maybe it's in an advanced digital age. You know, whether it's the social media apps and the. All the info is making mush brains of ourselves and we don't. I don't know. I just know we have to return to empathy, love, understanding, friendships. And that's part of the message that we talk about on the show for that reason. All right, let me talk briefly about what's happening in North Carolina. You all may know the story. Go back and watch the video I did with the Associate Supreme Court Justice Alison Riggs. So she was appointed by a Democratic governor in North Carolina in 20D3. So then that specific seat goes up for reelection in 2024. So a short turnaround just based on the dynamic of that specific seat. So November 2024 elections, you have in North Carolina, the Democratic candidate, Justice Alison Riggs. She was already a Supreme Court justice. Then you had a MAGA Republican candidate who was on the North Carolina Court of Appeals. His name was Jefferson Griffin. Of course, not a great election for Democrats nationally in November 2024. But Justice Allison Riggs won. She won by 734 votes. There was a recount that was held. She won the recount. There was a second recount that was held. She won that recount. In North Carolina, they also have voter id. All the things that Republicans say. You absolutely need all of those things. Those exist in North Carolina. Did Jefferson Griffin, after two recounts, accept the outcome? No, he didn't. He filed litigation and said, actually, you have to throw out the absentee votes. Absentee votes shouldn't count, but only from Democratic areas. So she he targeted. There was 30 of 35,000 absentee votes. Jefferson Griffin targeted 5,000 absentee votes, just in Democratic areas, not the others. And that was part of another 65,000 votes that Jefferson Griffin said needed to be thrown out. And actually within that group, Alison Riggs learns that her parents are in that group. Her parents filled out all the applications the right way. But Jefferson Griffin saying that, oh, there are people who have challenged that these voters are real voters, those voters are all real voters. And but for whatever reason, you know, some right wing person may have challenged it, their signature doesn't match this or this or this. And 65,000 votes then were in dispute even only as it relates to this race they counted for. If Republicans won congressional races, fine. If Trump won, fine. They're not asking for recounts on anything other than this specific Supreme Court race.
- [66:18]
Michael Popak
Right?
- [66:19]
Jordy Meiselas
That's utterly ridiculous. And she won twice. So now Jefferson Griffin wants to win it in the court. The North Carolina Supreme Court is a five to two Republican court. Five Republicans, two Democrats. She's one of them, one of the Democrats. She had to recuse herself from the filings because she, it's the case involves her. The Supreme Court stayed any certification of the election results while it was litigated, which was outrageous to begin with. Her own Supreme Court basically screwed her over because now you had a 5 to 1 right wing majority there. And then the case worked its way up through the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which by the way, Jefferson Griffin is a judge on. He wasn't on this three judge panel, but it's a right wing court of Appeal because the Republicans engage in all of this nonsense, right? Like they don't play by the rules. That's one of the big problems here. They gerrymander. They, you know, they, they do these, you know, procedural hacks that to me are, you know, that Democrats didn't do before. Democrats were playing by the rules. Okay, You're Democrats, we're Republicans, we could all be nice. And Republicans were like, nah, screw you. We're gonna, we're gonna try to rig the maps and all of this so that we can win basically no matter what the outcome is. Hell's heads, I win, tails you lose, basically. So the Court of Appeals on Friday in a 2 to 1 ruling ruled against Alison Riggs in favor of their Republican colleague, Jefferson Griffin, and said all those 65,000 votes should be challenged. On what basis? So Alison Riggs parents votes now get thrown out. And now they're, now voters have to go and like find whether or not their, their vote is challenged or not. And because this is just targeting the Democratic areas, people say that this challenge is tantamount to stealing the election away from Alison Riggs. I mean, to me, you know, you know what they would never do? They would never hold another election right now, right, because they know Allison Riggs would win. Instead, they want to go and kind of surgically get rid of Democratic votes and say, oops, that your signature doesn't match that signature. So therefore, like, as though people have, like, the identicals. Look at my signature when I'm busy, look at my signature. You know, when I'm not busy, look at my signature from two years ago. And this is the type of stuff that the Republicans are doing as it relates, though, just to this specific race. So I had Allison Riggs on go back and watch the full interview. The current status of it is, is that these votes now are going to be challenged and voters have to, like, go and find out what's going on. Watch the video. Allison Riggs gave the information about where you can learn more details about her, her race. She's like, she's had to like, spend a million five or something like that in legal fees.
- [69:06]
Michael Popak
We'll put a link to the video down here in our clip. Let me mention one thing about this that we've been following that story for a long, long time. So glad you had the justice, the judge with you. This is all about one thing. The Republicans hate votes and hate voters. Every time you hear about election integrity, just translate that. Use your, you know, Google Translate. Just use your legal AF Midas touch translate. That means voter suppression. When they want to make early voting shorter, when they want to make the lines longer, when they want to make you. Oh, you brought the wrong piece of paper. It's like I'm thinking of a number. Oh, did you bring your passport? Did you bring your proof of citizenship? Where's your birth certificate? Where's your wet ink birth certificate? That is all nothing about fraud. The thing that happened in North Carolina is about a second envelope about certain ballots and whether it was signed or not had nothing to do with what was inside the ballot. It was about a ridiculous, you know, it's like the old manufacturers who give you a coupon, you know, but they don't really want you to cash in the coupon. So it's like cut off the CP code on the side of the box and make sure you in the original receipt and mail it to this and make sure you get the number right because they don't want you to mail it in. This was a double envelope issue about security envelope about the inner ballot. That's what this is all about and this is what it's all about is voter fraud in America is not a problem. As you said, you don't burn down the building to make a stake. You don't make it so hard for people such barriers of entry for voting that it is a tantamount to suppression. Especially when you don't like the way the votes went. And so when you hear Republicans hear they hate you and your right to vote. We should be having it as easy as any other democratic country in the world. Should be like an atm, a week long voting issue issue, secure voting. And like an ATM like machine. I'm done. Dropboxes everywhere. They want drop boxes nowhere. They want absentee ballot revoked. They want veteran military people in the military their ballots revoked if they don't come in on time and they want this challenge only their race in their place and try to toss the votes to win a close race. What does that tell you about the depravity of the party? Tells you everything you need to know, Popak.
- [71:27]
Jordy Meiselas
That's the status there. We covered a lot today. Hopefully everyone has appreciated also our coverage of the protest. It's something that I'm most proud about in building this platform that we're able to showcase things that would not be getting that attention and needed that attention. And to me it's exactly where this network filled a void and a need and we did it for that purpose and we're able to meet the moment there. You're meeting the moment with the Legal AF YouTube channel because it's not just you, by the way. You're of course one of the best legal analysts out there, but you've compiled a whole team of some of the top, best legal analysts as well. They're getting some of the top, top interviews. I mean, you know, we always hear about American Oversight filing these lawsuits. You got the people from American Oversight on the channel. You know, we hear about what's going on in the Senate. You have the top people, Senate Judiciary Committee people and senators who are talking about Sheldon Whitehouse. You got others, you know, who are talking about their legislation. You know, the groups that you have there are first rate and it's a testament to you what you build. Popoc, everybody subscribe right now to the Legal AF YouTube channel. It's going to be and already is an invaluable resource during these difficult times. It's going, things are going to ramp up and you know, we've always said we got to build the infrastructure yesterday for the issues of tomorrow and that's what we've been doing kind of piece by piece, brick by brick, ready and waiting for a moment like this. Also, Michael Popox Law Firm. We'll put a link also in the description below. But please, if you can, if you have a case, you know, a catastrophic injury case, serious injury case, car accidents, trucking accidents, auto accident, negligence, slip and fall, you know, any type of case where someone's been wrongful, death cases, people that you know in your life, sexual harassment cases against someone at work or whatever. Michael Popak handles those cases. Michael where do they go?
- [73:31]
Michael Popak
Yeah, easy www the pop firm.com and an easy to remember 800 number 877 Popak AF everybody.
- [73:42]
Jordy Meiselas
Thank you for watching this episode of Legal AF. We covered a lot. Subscribe to this YouTube channel as well. We're gonna have a lot of updates over the next 2448 hours for sure. Thank you for watching Shout Out Midas Mighty Shout Out Legal A effort.
- [74:05]
Ben Meiselas
Like your favorite travel guide. T Mobile's network knows all the spots because T Mobile helps keep you connected from the heart of Portland to right where you are on America's largest 5G network. Switch now keep your phone and T Mobile will pay it off at the $800 per line via prepaid card. Visit your local T Mobile location or learn more@t mobile.com keepandswitch up to four lines via virtual prepaid card. Laugh 15 days qualifying unlock device credit service port in 90 plus days device knowledgeable carrier and timely redemption required Card is no cash access. It expires in six months.