Loading summary
Transcript40 lines
- [00:01]
Michael Popak
Introducing Meta Ray Ban Display, the world's most advanced AI glasses with a full color display built into the lens of the glasses. It's there when you need it and gone when you don't. Send and receive messages, translate or caption live conversations, collaborate with Meta AI and more. Be one of the first to try Meta Ray ban display. Visit meta.com metaraybanddisplay to book a demo and find your pair. Good morning everyone. I'm Michael Popak, Legal AF Podcast and we've got the distinct honor and pleasure together to welcome California's Attorney General, Rob Bonta. And what a moment in time for us to have this conversation together. It's being live streamed on the Midas Touch Network and on the YouTube channel for Legal AF. As we speak, I'll be taking some questions and comments along with AG Banta from our audience and think about this moment in time. No Kings Day protest 10 million people across America are protesting against the Trump administration, exercising their First Amendment right, their freedom of expression and speech, their right to peaceably assemble, their right to seek redress of their grievances against the government. Mr. Banta, AG Banta, along with 22 other Democratic attorneys general are in the courtrooms every day in more than 50 lawsuits against the administration, its violations of civil liberties and civil rights, violations of the Constitution. We're going to talk first about no Kings Day and the missiles and ordinance that are being fired at California over the i5 as we speak. This was happened to be the day of counter programming for the Trump administration to do a Marine review of the troops led by Pete Hegseth and our Vice President. I don't think it's a coincidence. I don't think anybody in this room or on the livestream believes it's a coincidence that this is the day military muscle is being flexed against a political critic of Donald Trump in the Governor of this state, Gavin Newsom. We're going to talk about no Kings Day. We're going to catch everybody up on what's going on in the National Guard cases going on around the country that AG Banta is helping to lead, whether it's in California, in Oregon, at the 9th Circuit, at the 7th Circuit, in Illinois, and now with an emergency application to the United States Supreme Court just yesterday by the Trump administration. And then who better to talk about the indictment of Letitia James, an Attorney General of New York who works closely with AG Banta on all of her cases, than Rob Bonta? Ladies and gentlemen, the Attorney General for the State of California, Rob Bonta. So AG Bonta last week. I've had you on before. It's always been a pleasure. We were talking about, I wonder what we'll talk about next week during San Diego. We thought about the National Guard and then all of a sudden we've got Donald Trump's decision to do a military flex during no Kings Day. Talk about what's happening at your local Marine base and the administration's position, your administration's position concerning it.
- [03:29]
Rob Bonta
Well, first, let me say thank you, Michael, for having me. I'm honored to be here with you again. And I also want to say I'm grateful to all the patriots who are coming out en masse across the country. Millions of people standing up for what our country stands stands for. There are many articles, sections and clauses in the US Constitution, but at its core, the US Constitution stands for the proposition that we shall have no kings, we shall have no tyrants or monarchs and people exercising their First Amendment right, showing that people power is the most potent power that there is and doing it peacefully is powerful. And it's necessary right now to stand up for those core principles of the U.S. constitution and our country. The Trump administration's decision to fire live military equipment over i5, shutting it down, it is seems to be nothing more than a vanity parade by weak men with big fragile egos who need to show, I think a show of force is something powerful. As our governor has said multiple times, it's weakness masquerading as strength.
- [04:39]
Michael Popak
You have, you have the vice president of The United States, J.D. vance, caught going up the stairs to Air Force One saying a version of it's just routine training. Let me put this in perspective. Anything but for our audience, this video of the and we're all about celebrating the military and veterans. My dad was army. My late father was Army. This is not about that. The 250th anniversary of anything. This video that they're producing is not even going to be used until the 9th of November. Why did they choose no King's Day for a routine training exercise the likes of which we've never seen before in a state where his leading political critic is the governor? I mean, come on, it's obvious. Yeah, yeah.
- [05:21]
Rob Bonta
It's counter programming. And they're trying to do what they do, chill, intimidate, bully. And it would be, you know, humiliating for the president and shameful and embarrassing if he had shame. But it's dangerous and it's wrong. And to all the things you said, they're trying to counter the people's voice here.
- [05:39]
Michael Popak
And speaking of counter programming. You see Caroline Levitt, the press secretary, all the way to the Treasury Secretary, Scott Besant, all the way to the speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, all reading off the same palm card that the Democratic Party is comprised of Hamas terrorists, Marxists and illegal immigrants. That is how they wanted to define this. And anti patriotic display of First Amendment expression. Peaceful demonstrations organized today by the American Civil Liberties Union, by the teachers union and other groups. What's your response to how they're trying to characterize the Democratic brand?
- [06:17]
Rob Bonta
I mean, they are the gaslighters in chief. That's what they do. And they're all reading from the same script. Up is down, black is white. They're saying the opposite. They're saying the base of the Democratic Democratic Party is Hamas terrorists and criminals and illegal immigrants. And they're trying to undermine what is really happening and undermine the credibility of this incredible movement. And raising, of course, of voices from across the country who are saying, we don't accept what is happening at the federal level. We demand something different, better. We demand a return to our core principles of separation of powers and the rule of law and a democracy of, for and by the people. So it is the propaganda that they push out all the time. It's, you know, truly disgusting and difficult to hear that coming from, you know, the President's press secretary from the White House. It's all propaganda all the time, you know, full of lies and.
- [07:15]
Michael Popak
Full of.
- [07:15]
Rob Bonta
Attacks on, you know, clearly on blue cities, blue states, the Democratic Party, the radical leftists, whatever they say. So this is more of the same, but I think the people see right through it.
- [07:24]
Michael Popak
Talk to our audience who may not know how hard and doing really, I call it the battalion against Donald Trump. The 23 Democratic attorneys general of which you are one of which, Letitia James is one, talk about what you're doing in the courts and the success that you've had in the more than 50 cases that have been filed just in the last 10 months against the Trump administration.
- [07:48]
Rob Bonta
Yeah, well, I'm so proud of our 23 Democratic attorneys general who have been working together since before the election, you know, post election and pre inauguration and since the inauguration, who have collectively taken the position that if Trump breaks the laws, if he hurts one of our states, we'll sue him, we'll take him to court, we'll meet him in court. And for California, that's meant 44 lawsuits in 38 weeks, more than one a week. Not all of the 23 Democratic AGs participate in all of the same lawsuits. So Collectively, it's upward of 50 lawsuits. But we've been having enormous success in the cases California has been involved in. When an order has been issued, a permanent order, including a permanent injunction or a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order, we have won over 80% of the time A judge has said that over 80% of the time Trump is breaking the law, violating the constitution. We've protected $168 billion plus of funding that Trump tried to improperly withhold, funding that was already congressionally appropriated for California. So we're working very well together. We like each other. We team up for the maximum collective good and we're being very successful in the court so far. And courts are holding. I know there's a lot of views that Trump just ignores all of the laws in all of our, all the court orders in all of our cases. Trump is following the court orders.
- [09:05]
Michael Popak
That's interesting. Let's talk about him following the court orders or as you and I talked about on a recent interview, giving you a gift in your California cases about the way he's handling the National Guard in places like Oregon and Illinois. Just to frame it for a minute, we've got a federal judge in California, Judge Breyer, who issued an initial first set of orders about what they've now referred to as the mobilization of and deployment of the National Guard in California and whether he violated Trump, violated the Posse Comitatus Act. That went up to the Ninth Circuit. Then you had a judge in Oregon, Judge Immergut, who recently issued a series of orders in which she stopped the deployment of the National Guard in Oregon, in Portland in particular, because she said effectively the factual record did not support the commandeering of the National Guard by Donald Trump at all and she kept them in their barracks. That went up to the Ninth Circuit with a three judge panel. We'll talk about what you think is going to happen with that three judge panel in Oregon. I'm not sure that's going to go well for Oregon. In the meantime, a series of judges in Illinois have issued their orders to also while allowing what's called the mobilization or the commandeering of the National Guard, not the deployment that's been supported by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. That is what got appealed last night by the Trump administration in the emergency application. You're involved with all of this use of the National Guard, this federalized military troops for law enforcement purposes on domestic soil against other Americans. Give our audience an update about what's happening in the cases that you're involved with.
- [10:44]
Rob Bonta
Absolutely. California, Los Angeles in particular specifically was the first city where national guard were deployed. 4,000 National Guard back in June, 700 Marines after that. So the largest deployment of any state as well. And we moved quickly, the governor and I, to take the federal administration to court, arguing that there was no basis for the federalization of California's National Guard, no basis for the deployment and the mobilization. There needs to be an emergency set of facts on the ground to justify the federalization. There needs to be an invasion or a rebellion or the inability to enforce the laws with the regular forces. It's all set forth in Title 10 USC 124 06. And we argued, and the judge agreed, that none of those necessary factual predicates existed. Those facts on the ground did not justify the mobilization. And the same was something that we argued as an amicus in Oregon, as an amicus in Illinois and the district courts who are closest to the facts, who get the, in our case, who get the declarations and the factual presentations, are all finding that there's no justification. Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit, through an administrative stay in our case and then a stay pending appeal, has seen it differently and provided, in my view, undue deference to the federal administration with respect to what the facts are and what justifies the deployment. But we are seeing in the 7th Circuit and in Oregon so far with the 9th Circuit, a decision by the appellate court that the federalization for now is okay, but the actual deployment of the troops onto the streets of Portland or onto the streets of Chicago is being prohibited. That part of the injunction is being upheld. And that really is the most important thing. I just want to emphasize that we don't want troops unlawfully on the streets of American cities in violation of the Posse Comitatus act or without any justification under 10 USC 1204. And so far, that is being maintained in Portland and in Chicago. We'll see what the US Supreme Court says when they get this. We'll see what the 9th Circuit says with respect to Oregon's National Guard when they issue an order. But the hearing did suggest that there could be an order that is not supportive of Oregon's position and our position.
- [13:17]
Michael Popak
And how is California using Donald Trump's conduct, his administration's conduct, as part of the record to make your argument? In other words, Trump and his DOJ spent a considerable amount of time trying to convince federal judges in California that the in real life on the ground was so terrible that they needed nationalized militia to help them guard federal buildings. They then took 200 of those people and sent them to Oregon and other places, which seems to undercut their argument that they're needed in California 100%.
- [13:52]
Rob Bonta
A really important admission by action in my view. The Trump administration had argued in California's case with regard to the ongoing deployment of 300 National Guard in California, that the federal government would suffer irreparable harm, that it was absolutely necessary that they have these troops on the ground in California to protect federal interests, to protect federal buildings and property. And they were so important that when there was an opportunity to send them to another state and away from California and Los Angeles, they sent the vast majority of them. They sent 200 to Oregon and they sent some to Illinois as well. And we called out that hypocritical action to the court with an additional filing and presentation to the court saying, if these National Guard are so necessary, if the federal government will suffer irreparable harm, then why are they being sent out of state and no longer here in California? And I think it speaks for itself. It's a very compelling argument and it was a gift in the courts. And we have shined a light on it to the judges to make sure that they consider this action when they make their decision.
- [15:03]
Michael Popak
I'd like to welcome the Legal AF live stream audience. We've got thousands of people along with the people here in San Diego at Law de Gras watching this interview and they always welcome Attorney General Rob Bonta being here for briefing. What I want to touch on lastly with the time that we have left, AG Banta, is what's happening with one of your own who's been indicted by this administration, a major critic of the Trump administration and somebody who has gone after him successfully. Letitia James in New York. For those that are not from New York, the New York attorney general has mainly civil, a little bit of criminal power in terms of prosecution, but it's mainly civil. But she is the one that obtained the judgment that now still stands that the, that the Trump and Trump family were fraudsters, persistent fraudsters in the state of New York and the operation of the Trump Organization. There is still a court ordered monitor over all of the Trump Organization activities at this moment in order to prevent future, future fraud and victims. That's all because of Letitia James. There's a debate now on the appellate level about how much money she's going to be able to obtain related to the fraud. But the fraud, the fraud, not conviction, but a judgment that was obtained through Judge Engoron still stands. In addition, she worked closely with the Manhattan District Attorney's office that Obtained not the only the 34 count felony conviction against Donald Trump, but also a 19 count felony conviction and against two of his companies. They work closely, hand in glove. Now suddenly, Letitia James, because she bought a second home for 100 grand in Virginia for some of her family members, is being accused of a 30 year prison sentence mortgage fraud because somebody checked the box that she wasn't going to rent it out. Apparently, according to the fact she's not renting out the house. Family members are living in Virginia. So where is the fraud? What are we watching with, with your peers, your colleagues being now prosecuted by this, by this Department of Justice and president?
- [17:09]
Rob Bonta
Well, that's the whole issue. There isn't any fraud as far as we can tell. It appeals to appears to be a witch hunt. It's an abuse of power. It's a targeting of a political enemy. Trump has targeted Tish James, by the way, an incredible colleague, an incredible person, someone I'm proud to serve with, who has served her constituents in New York as well as the people of the United States of America very, very well. And this is a chilling moment where political enemies are being persecuted. Trump literally has an enemies list. He put it on social media and he name checked James Comey, Tish James Schiffy Schiff, he calls him Senator Adam Schiff, the great senator from this state. And this is really an erosion of the integrity of the United States Department of Justice. It's, it is a very frightening escalation of the political weaponization of the criminal process to go after enemies. Trump literally has an enemies list. Comey was the first stop and AG James is the next stop, although there's also John Bolton on his vengeance tour. This is about a president with a personal grudge using the Department of Justice to personally weaponize, to go after his political enemies. And one of the, and just, it's important to know what's happening in the Eastern District of Virginia. There was an attorney general there appointed by Donald Trump, Eric Seibert, who looked at this case involving AG James and decided that there was not probable cause to seek an indictment. He was pushed out or fired and he was replaced by Lindsey Halligan, Trump's private attorney. No criminal experience, never prosecuted a case before. She's an insurance attorney and she promptly sought an indictment against AG James and she was the only person who signed the indictment, who signed the document. No one else, apparently the career prosecutors who were overruled and ignored were willing to do so. So that's what's happening here. Trump had a enemies list. He Posted on social media PAM, referring to U.S. attorney General Pam Bondi. What are we doing? Are we going to prosecute these people? We need to prosecute these people. And then when the actual, and by.
- [19:23]
Michael Popak
The way, naming Lindsey Halligan in the social media post as the person to.
- [19:27]
Rob Bonta
Go after them as his attack dog, his loyalist, the person who would do his bidding. And so he replaced a career prosecutor who would upheld, who would uphold the ethics and the professional duties and obligations of the job, look at the law with blind justice, without fear or favor, and replaced it with a loyalist attack dog who will do his bidding. And so that's where we are as far as any fraud. There's a requirement that there be, as I understand it in the law, that there be some sort of timeshare or other ownership arrangement or a tenant leasing agreement, none of which are present. That is a required element, as I understand it, not even pled in the indictment. So I think, you know, I'm going to go out on a limb and I think this case is going to be dismissed. There will be no conviction here. But I don't necessarily think Trump wants that. He wants to be able to say that she was indicted. He wants to try to perp walk his political opponents. He wants to embarrass them. He wants them to have the personal cause.
- [20:24]
Michael Popak
I think he cares less about whether she actually gets convicted. He's already gotten the headline. James Comey indicted. Senator Adam Schiff probed for mortgage fraud. Letitia James indicted for mortgage fraud. John Bolton. And it's a lot of what about, like, it's a lot about, well, at Mar a Lago, I took all the documents and committed espionage and obstruction of justice. But what about John Bolton? Oh, I was, I was adjudged a fraudster about mortgages and mortgage fraud in New York. But what about Letitia James and her $18,000 over 30 years? Like she threw away her entire career to save, you know, 50 bucks a month, apparently. No, seriously.
- [20:59]
Rob Bonta
I know, I know, it's, it's a little.
- [21:00]
Michael Popak
Well, one of the things I know you wanted to end with here with our audience is about the destruction of the Department of Justice right now. Donald Trump's taken a wrecking ball to his own Department of Justice. He lines up the people that are supposed to be the leaders, right? Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche. He puts them in the Oval Office this past week. He embarrasses them, although they, in order to be embarrassed, you have to have shame and humility. So they're just standing there staring at their Feet. But he says things like, let's go after Jack Smith. Why isn't Jack Smith being prosecuted? This is a career prosecutor who was an independent special counsel who led two investigations of Donald Trump that resulted in grand juries indicting him twice. So what is the crime that Jack Smith committed other than being, in Donald Trump's mind, a political enemy of Donald Trump. And Jack Smith is now, as we've seen, knowing that he's going behind closed doors because they're not going to let the public hear from Jack Smith with the, with Congress. He's coming out now and giving his first round of interviews about the destruction of the Department of Justice, about apolitical career prosecutors that are being fired or leaving or being forced to resign. We just had the Major Crimes Unit prosecutor for the Eastern District of Virginia, Beth Youse, who let it be known that she was not going to recommend the the indictment of Letitia James that leaked out 72 hours later. Lindsey Halligan had her indicted, got her indicted. And I said, Beth's not going to be around much longer. And she got fired last night along with one of her deputies. What does this say when 5,000 members of the Department of Justice have been fired or forced to resign in the last nine months by this administration? And lastly, just to make the question even harder, we have a civil rights division that does not protect people's civil rights and is being used as a weapon the first time in history. We have the Department of Justice, during the Supreme Court oral argument this week, take the position that the Voting Rights act effectively is unconstitutional.
- [23:06]
Rob Bonta
It's all scary stuff. And we're in uncharted waters. And it's, you know, with respect to the US doj, an unprecedented weaponization of the US Department of Justice to seek personal vendettas and to support personal vendettas of the president. With respect to Jack Smith, your question, what's the crime? It appears that there is not one. It's just that he's a political enemy. That is it. And these aren't criminal prosecutions. They are political persecutions. And so we have to be very clear eyed about that. And they're not going to stop. They seem to be. The president seems to be emboldened about it. He has the people in place that he wants to execute his weaponization of the US doj. And, you know, the morale in the US DOJ has to be in the basement. You know, folks are quitting, they're leaving. They signed up to do a job. They were public servants. It is so insulting to them, to treat them like this as career prosecutors with ethics, with professional duties, with legal and moral obligations, and to ask them to do these things. And when they refuse, you know, they're pushed out or they quit because they won't do it. With respect to the civil rights, I mean, you know, the federal government's duty and obligation to enforce civil rights law is, you know, they have thrown that out the window. So it's incumbent upon states to step in, fill those gaps, fill that vacuum, fill that space and do more. But what's happening with the Voting Rights act and what seems to be in the cards for what the US Supreme Court might rule there and with respect to people's rights, freedoms, their ability to not be discriminated, discriminated based on race, ethnicity, the people that they love, how they pray. We're going backwards. And Trump is leading that regressionary charge, unfortunately.
- [24:50]
Michael Popak
Let's leave on a hopeful note. Put the grim reaper away for a moment. We've got 10 million people taking to the streets on no Kings Day today, including in D.C. they skipped D.C. the last time because there was a military, a military parade at D.C. at the time. We always like to leave our audience here and on the live stream today with a hopeful message, a call to action. What would you say to the audience about between now and the midterms, the midterms and the 2028 election, about our constitutional republic and what we can do as we the people to help hold Donald Trump accountable and his lawlessness accountable?
- [25:33]
Rob Bonta
I'd say this. I'd say don't feel hopeless because we're not helpless. We have power. We have agency. We have the ability to make sure that tomorrow is more fair, more just, better than today. That there's a lot of chapters to be written in the story of this great state of California, more chapters to be written in the story of the United States of America and you and me and us. And we are going to write it. The people, a government of, for and by the people. And so today is a day when people are reminding themselves they need to stay engaged, stay enraged about this president's abuse of power, that they need to use the most potent power that there is, people power, and express it through peaceful means, as the millions of people in this country are doing today. And there's more to be done between now and the elections. And so we have to fight. If we fight, I know we will win. But we have to stay engaged and active. Democracies die in the dark, with neglect and with apathy. They thrive with engagement and participation and advocacy. So we have to stay focused and just remember three things are really important. Courts Crowds encourage. Courts are where ags and others are going to achieve justice and hold an unlawful president accountable and make sure we block unlawful actions. Crowds is what is happening today when people power is on full display. We're demanding of our leaders because we are their bosses, what they must do and rejecting what we will not accept. And then courage is important. It sounds obvious, but with all of the intimidation and the bullying and the targeting, literally the political persecutions and political prosecutions, some people want to keep their head down and don't want to speak up and don't want to speak out and don't want to rise up. But it's important that we do that. We have the courage to fight for the founding principles of this nation. Our democracy, our rule of law, rights and freedom, separation of powers, checks and balances, and no kings, no tyrants, no monarchs. So keep fighting. I am confident and I'm optimistic and I'm very hopeful that if we fight, we will win. But we must fight.
- [27:37]
Michael Popak
California Attorney General Rob Bonta. Such an honor and a privilege to have you join the first inaugural live feed for Legal AF podcast that we've ever done.
- [27:52]
Rob Bonta
I'm honored.
- [27:53]
Michael Popak
I can't think of a better guest for it. You regularly brief our audience. I'm so glad you're here and not only now, but I know in the future we're going to be. We're going to be following Attorney General Rob Bonta's career and his civil service towards America. Thank you so much.
- [28:06]
Rob Bonta
Wonderful to be with you. Thank you.
- [28:14]
Michael Popak
Can't get your fill of Legal af. Me neither. That's why we formed the Legal AF substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing in the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called Wait for it Morning af. What else? All the other contributors from Legal ao for there as well. We got some new reporting, we got interviews, we got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where high interest debt is one of the toughest opponents you'll face unless you power up with a Sofi personal loan. A Sofi personal loan could repackage your bad debt into one low fixed rate monthly payment. It's even got super speed since you could get the funds as soon as the same day you sign. Visit sofi.compower to learn more. That's s o f I.com p o w e r loans originated by Sofi Bank NA member FDIC terms and conditions apply NMLs 696891 Morning Zoe. Got donuts.
- [29:16]
Rob Bonta
Jeff Bridges, why are you still living above our garage?
- [29:19]
Michael Popak
Well, I dig the mattress and I want to be in a T Mobile commercial like you teach me.
- [29:24]
Rob Bonta
So Dana oh no, I'm not really prepared. I couldn't possibly at t mobile get the new iPhone 17 Pro on them. It's designed to be the most powerful iPhone yet and has the ultimate pro camera system.
- [29:37]
Michael Popak
Wow, impressive. Let me try. T Mobile is the best place to get iPhone 17 Pro because they've got the best network. Nice.
- [29:45]
Rob Bonta
Jeffrey, you heard them.
- [29:47]
Michael Popak
T Mobile is the best place to get the new iPhone 17 Pro on us with eligible traded in any condition. So what are we having for Lodge?
- [29:55]
Rob Bonta
Dude, my work here is done. 24 monthly build credits on experience beyond.
- [29:59]
Michael Popak
For well qualified customers.
- [30:00]
Rob Bonta
First tax and $35 device connection charge.
- [30:01]
Michael Popak
Credits ended balance due if you pay.
- [30:02]
Rob Bonta
Off earlier Cancel Finance Agreement. IPhone 17 Pro 256 gigs $1099.99 and new line minimum $100 plus a month plan with auto pay plus taxes and fees required. Best mobile network in the US based on analysis by Ooklab Speed Test Intelligence data 1x2025 visit t mobile.com.