Legal AF by MeidasTouch

Episode: Trump DOJ Humiliated in Minnesota as GOP Judge Shuts Down Scheme
Date: January 28, 2026
Host: Michael Popok (MeidasTouch Network)

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the recent legal blow dealt to the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding its attempt to pursue charges against journalist Don Lemon in Minnesota. Michael Popok details how Chief Judge Schultz—a conservative, Federalist Society Republican—thwarted DOJ efforts, rebuking both their procedures and their factual basis, and in the process, effectively exonerated Don Lemon. The discussion dives into judicial independence, press freedom, and political overreach, offering inside analysis on how this case exemplifies broader abuses and backfires within Trump-allied DOJ efforts.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Background: DOJ’s Attempts to Indict Don Lemon

• Incident Origin:

  • Stems from Jan. 18 protest at a St. Paul, Minnesota church, involving five protestors and covered live by Don Lemon and his producer.
  • Lemon’s role was purely journalistic—present to record, not participate.

• DOJ's Legal Tactic:

  • DOJ, led by Pam Bondi, sought probable cause criminal complaints and arrest warrants for eight individuals from a magistrate judge (Judge Miko); Lemon and his producer were included.
  • Magistrate approved for three, but rejected probable cause for Lemon and his producer, explicitly recognizing their journalistic status.

2. Chief Judge Schultz’s Extraordinary Intervention

• Unprecedented Letters and Emails:

  • Schultz, a conservative judge, directly communicated with the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, openly criticizing DOJ’s unusual attempt to overrule a magistrate’s denial of arrests.
    • Quote:

      "I've never had a situation where a senior, a district chief judge... has written letters and emails to an appellate court... not just to present why a certain action shouldn't be taken against them..."
      — Michael Popok [01:46]

  • Schultz decried the government’s improper process—in particular, their failure to notify him and their lack of precedent for their actions.

• Judicial Exoneration of Don Lemon:

  • Explicitly states there is “no evidence that those two [Lemon and his producer] engaged in any criminal behavior or conspired to do so.”
    • Quote from Schultz (via Popok):

      “Two of the five protesters were not protesters at all. Instead, they were a journalist and his producer. That's Don Lemon. There is no evidence that those two engaged in any criminal behavior or conspired to do so.”
      — Michael Popok paraphrasing Judge Schultz [12:30]

  • Effectively “puts his arms around Lemon” and shields him from further DOJ action.

3. The Broader Political and Legal Context

• Pattern of Overreach:

  • Trump administration’s hostility toward journalists and free speech highlighted; similar tactics deployed against Washington Post reporters and others.

• Repeated DOJ Failures and Humiliations:

  • Pam Bondi’s efforts repeatedly rebuffed—by both federal judges and grand juries.
  • Recent embarrassment for other Trump cabinet officials (Kristi Noem sidelined; Border Patrol leadership in upheaval).

• Grand Juries Decline to Indict:

  • Multiple grand jury sessions in Minnesota conclude with no indictment for Don Lemon.
  • Quote:

    “There’s been several grand juries, including one on Tuesday. And yet, no, no indication there’s been a presentation, certainly no return of an indictment... He’s effectively exonerated Don Lemon.”
    — Michael Popok [13:30]

4. Judicial Pushback and Signs of Hope

• Schultz’s Actions Against ICE:

  • Judge Schultz also threatened ICE leadership with contempt for illegally holding detainees, further illustrating judicial independence even among conservative judges.
    • Quote:

      “He said either release this one detainee who’s been illegally over and, and in contempt, been held without a bail hearing... or show up on Friday to tell me why you’re not in contempt. And then the Trump administration released him.”
      — Michael Popok [15:12]

• Commentary on the System’s Guardrails:

  • Popok underscores the importance of persistent legal pressure and the role played by principled judges—even conservatives—in upholding rights and legal norms.
    • Quote:

      “If you bring the heat, you’re going to melt ICE. And that’s what we’re working on right now, folks.”
      — Michael Popok [15:52]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Judicial Unprecedented Action:

  “I’ve never seen a chief judge step out and effectively put his arms around somebody and exonerate them... This is chief judges who don’t even want to be here. You think this Chief Judge Schultz... wants to be doing this? No, but he will.”
  — Michael Popok [13:54]

• On DOJ Process Abuse:

  “He says it is unheard of in his district or any other district... for the Department of Justice to try to override a magistrate judge and obtain an arrest warrant.”
  — Michael Popok paraphrasing Judge Schultz [11:44]

• Re. Lemon’s Role as Journalist:

  “These were journalists covering the story, not violently making the story.”
  — Michael Popok [07:48]

Important Segment Timestamps

• Judge Schultz’s Letter Rebuking DOJ: [10:41–13:15]
• Breakdown of Protest Incident and Lemon’s Role: [04:40–07:20]
• Review of Grant/Denial of Warrants by Magistrate: [06:58–07:48]
• Discussion of Failed Grand Juries and Exoneration: [12:35–13:30]
• DOJ/ICE Held in Contempt by Judge Schultz: [15:07–15:52]

Episode Tone and Language

Michael Popok maintains a sharp, incisive, and at times sardonic tone, blending deep legal expertise with punchy, accessible commentary. References to inside knowledge and colorful phrases (“If you bring the heat, you’re going to melt ICE”) pepper the narrative, keeping both legal experts and lay listeners engaged.

Summary

This Legal AF episode offers a comprehensive, behind-the-scenes look at how even a Trump-appointed, conservative chief judge in Minnesota humiliated the DOJ’s overreach, effectively exonerated Don Lemon, and provided a powerful example of the legal guardrails still functioning against political abuse. The takeaways underscore the essential role of the judiciary—even those ideologically distant from the targets of prosecution—in defending constitutional principles and the freedom of the press, while chronicling a stinging series of defeats for Trump-aligned legal actors in Minnesota and beyond.