Loading summary
Transcript15 lines
- [00:01]
A
Fox News is streaming live on Fox One when it matters most. You want the truth from the voices you trust. Fox News goes beyond the headlines, bringing you the stories you won't hear anywhere else. Live coverage, sharp analysis, real perspective at home or on the go. Stay connected when it counts. Stream Fox News on Fox One. Download today.
- [00:24]
B
Can I start by saying I am so tired of mainstream media not getting legal proceedings, right? Like even who the judge is that issues orders. I read a whole bunch of things that sort of proclaim that Donald Trump has won some battle in the BBC defamation case because the district court judge in Miami, Judge Altman, has blocked for now temporarily, the ability to go after Donald Trump's financials and tax returns. I'm like, that's not what happened. It's not what happened at all. The way to properly interpret is Donald Trump told the American people in the world that he had a $10 billion defamation case against the BBC because they ran on some backwater channel and documentary that nobody watch, frankly, that they ran some editing of his ellipse speech. I mean, you know, his speeches, they go on forever. They couldn't show that. Who would watch that except for maga, True believers. So they ran like a three or four minute clip of it. Oh, no, that's defamation. That makes me look like the insurrectionist that I am. And so he sues for 10 billion. But the headline shouldn't be Federal Judge Grant's emergency motion by Donald Trump as trust not to provide all these tax and financial documents. It's that Donald Trump has basically dropped the case. He's dropped the 10 billion claim. And the thing that he says is remaining in order to avoid turning over his tax returns. Sound familiar? In his finances, the stuff that he says, oh, it's my rep. Personal reputational harm. That would mean that Donald Trump would have to show that he personally did not earn 10 more billion dollars, let's say, last year, than the 2 billion he already earned. And that loss is because of the BBC in a documentary that nobody watched. It's impossible. So the takeaway should be. The take. You can hear my family in the background. The takeaway should be Donald Trump basically is thrown in the towel in his $10 billion case against the BBC. I'm gonna cover it right here on the Midas Touch Network and Legal af. Let's get to it. All right, let's turn to Judge Altman. He is the federal judge in the district of Miami, the Southern district of Florida, where I practice. He's actually sitting astride two cases involving Donald Trump One, involving Capital One, where Donald Trump sued because he didn't like the fact that Capital One fired his family and all 300 of their bank accounts from the bank because he said, oh, they did it because I'm woke. They're woke. And diversity, equity and inclusion and whatever else he could throw against the wall. That's not the reason. As Capital One disclosed to the world and to Judge Altman, the reason is that Donald Trump's transactions and the accounts and the flow of business in and out of the accounts triggered the anti money laundering protocol in the bank and suggested that there was money laundering and or terrorist financing going on with those accounts and that's why they were debanked. That's with Judge Altman. I know Judge Altman well from my practice down there. Judge Altman also sits on top of this BBC case in which Donald Trump, back in December of 2025, sued the BBC for what he said originally was $5 billion, then it became $10 billion because he said his personal assets, his business assets, his trust assets, his real estate, his brand have all suffered. And so the BBC said, great, give us all your documents over the last two years to show how you've lost $10 billion. We don't think you can do it. I mean, we're eight months into this case and they still haven't on the Trump side provided any documents to support any of their damage model. I mean, you don't have to do it when you first file your case, but eight months in, I mean, come on. Well, they answered some interrogatories. They said $10 million worth of reputational damage. That's what we're relying on, really? $10 billion worth of reputational damage for a president who made the most money in his entire life while he was president last year and brought home $2 billion primarily in cryptocurrency. So he's gonna show that he would have made $12 billion. $12 billion. Sorry. Except for the fact that this documentary that nobody watched about the Ellipse speech, which everybody knows about, happened.
- [04:25]
C
Come on.
- [04:26]
B
I mean, the major argument by the BBC is Donald Trump's reputation is in shatters and shred be defamed anyway, that given the backdrop of the January 6 events, the investigation by the Jan6 select committee, their 600 page report, their eight days of hearings, Jack Smith's investigation, his investigation, prosecution and indictment of Donald Trump related to D.C. election interference. How can you defame him by playing clips of his own Ellipse speech? Now, we have a concept in Florida and most states, which is called defamation by implication, which means you can use somebody's words against them. If you cut and paste them and you jumble them in a certain way and edit them in a certain way, maybe leaving a false impression, okay, that's for another fight. But you still have to show damage if you want the billions of dollars that you've required. Here's what Judge Altman this is where mainstream media pisses me off, to be frank. I read, I won't name it, but I read a major website, you know, a social media site related to the news. And I see Judge Judge Lett has issued an order. Okay, first of all, Judge Lett is the magistrate judge. She sits under Judge Altman. It was her order forcing Donald Trump's trust to turn over everything by subpoena that led to the emergency motion up to the district court judge who is Judge Altman. So it would have been Judge Altman's order, not Judge Letts order. They even attached the order even though it was signed by, signed by Altman. They still said let in the article. Sloppy. But listen, hopefully that's why you come here to Midas Touch and Legal af
- [06:05]
C
Before I found Noble, I never really thought about how easy it could be for someone to get into a regular zippered suitcase. Between airlines, hotels and overhead bins, your bag is out of your sight all the time. That's why I've been loving the Noble all in one carry on. It's completely zipperless with secure latch locks that close like a safe so when it clicks shut, you know it's locked. On top of that, it's packed with smart features, a built in charging port, a front laptop pocket that makes TSA so much easier, a flip out cup holder that I use constantly and smooth 360 degree wheels. They've sold over 500,000 suitcases. They're the highest rated luggage brand in the category on Trustpilot. Over 12,000 franchise flight attendants and pilots swear by them. And even TSA agents say it helps prevent theft and tampering. Every suitcase also comes with a lifetime warranty, 100 day money back guarantee and free 3 day express shipping. Noble gives you real travel, peace of mind, security, design and convenience all in one. Head to nobletravel.com for up to 46% off your entire order. That's n o b l travel.com for up to 46% OFF. After you purchase, they'll ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that our show sent you.
- [07:33]
B
All right, let me read to you from Judge Altman's ruling and then I'll tell you why. This is the death knell for the case. He points to the hearing that Judge Lett, the magistrate judge that reports to him, had to say or the hearing that she conducted. And this is on page three of his order. Counsel for plaintiff who also represents the trust. That means the lawyers for Donald Trump are also representing the trust because they're too cheap to go hire another law firm to be independent. Testified at the July 27, 2026 discovery hearing that the plaintiff no longer intends to pursue a damages theory premised on injury to the plaintiffs brands and businesses. So how are they ever going to come up with a $10 billion if they're not going to rely on brand impact or business impact among his 400 companies? Quote from the transcript, this is what Judge Altman says. Even if there has been harm to the brand, we are not pursuing that as part of our damages. That's Alejandro Brito, the lawyer for Donald Trump, quote, so I don't want to acknowledge that the brand has or has not suffered any injury.
- [08:43]
D
You know, I don't want to acknowledge
- [08:44]
B
that the brand hasn't suffered any injury. He's basically acknowledged the brand has not suffered any injury. But I'm telling the court that I'm not going to leverage any such injury to the extent it exists as part of my damage claim. It's simply the reputational injury to the president, full stop. Notice how they call Donald Trump the president again before he was even president. And then when they, then they argue later on, oh, no, he's suing in his personal capacity. So by conceding that they're not going to be relying on damage to any of the 400 companies or brands, it is virtually impossible for them to make
- [09:18]
C
out $10 billion or $5 billion or
- [09:20]
B
even a dollar worth of damage.
- [09:22]
C
So this case for me is effectively over. I mean, it'll continue for another year
- [09:26]
B
as they try on the Trump side to extract some sort of tithe or tribute some sort of extortion payment from the BBC. But the BBC is not following a of is not falling for it. In fact, on the same day that Judge Altman granted the emergency motion and said to the trust, well, hold off on producing anything until we see the new amended complaint which will define the discovery in this case. Judge Lett, the magistrate judge did issue an order in which she said, look, you, the BBC are going to be able to get additional documents pursuant to your 75 subpoenas about what really went down on January 6th and Donald Trump's mental state as a result, you're getting all that information, not getting everything, but you're getting most of it. She then ordered the parties to get together in good faith and consult and come back to her if there is a problem. That's the right thing for magistrate judges to do, give guidance, let the parties try to work it out and then if they can't, bring it back to her. So again, the headline here as we finish this hot take is not that the judge granted Donald Trump's emergency stay of discovery related to his trust, it's that Donald Trump has effectively shot himself in the foot related to his defamation case. He cannot continue it cuz he has no damages. He can just switch over and claim that he was defamed, what we call per se, and just prove a dollar in damage. That's okay, but he can't sue for the big dollar amount which he only included in the complaint, frankly, because he wanted to extort money out of the BBC. We'll continue to follow it all right here. You know, I'm traveling, you can hear sometimes my family in the background. They're so loving and generous with my time, which I appreciate. But I gotta continue to do what we do here, which is to keep hope alive. To give you the proper analysis without blowing smoke or sunshine on the Midas Touch network and Legal AF. And hey everybody, we're about to cross 1.2 million subscribers on Legal AF this weekend. With your help, we will get there. Slide over. Hit that free subscribe button to Litex Report. I'm Michael Popak.
- [11:31]
D
Can't get your fill of Legal af.
- [11:32]
C
Me neither.
- [11:33]
D
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 and 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 AOFF are there as well. We got some new reporting, we got interviews, we got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on Substack. Come over now to free subscribe.