Legal AF by MeidasTouch

Episode: Trump DOJ Torpedoes their Own Case with Desperate Filing

Date: November 22, 2025

Host/Commentator: Michael Popok (MeidasTouch Network)

Episode Overview

This episode provides a detailed legal analysis of the Department of Justice’s recent missteps in the prosecution involving former FBI Director James Comey. Michael Popok dissects a controversial and, by his account, self-sabotaging filing by interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, who submitted a brief, seven-minute segment of a grand jury transcript—but only after having previously testified that no such transcript existed. This move, according to Popok, casts doubt on the entire case, raises issues of prosecutorial misconduct, and could ultimately favor the defense dramatically.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. DOJ’s Bumbling Filing and Its Fallout

• Main Issue: Lindsey Halligan, acting as interim U.S. attorney, filed a seven-minute portion of a grand jury transcript in Judge Nachmanoff’s court after previously telling Judge Curry that such a transcript didn’t exist (02:29).

• Core Incompetence: Halligan’s misstatements and apparent confusion over basic procedures—including how the indictment was handled with the grand jury—exposed significant procedural weaknesses in the government’s case.

  “She has suddenly filed seven minutes of a grand jury transcript that she told another federal judge, Judge Curry didn’t exist… She can’t even get the basics straight.”
  —Michael Popok (02:29)

• Sword and Shield Problem: By disclosing part of the grand jury record, DOJ may no longer argue to withhold the entirety from the defense—potentially opening up the full transcript to scrutiny.

2. Timeline and the Transcript Gap

• Transcript Discrepancy: The submitted transcript covers a narrow timeframe (6:47pm to 6:54pm), leaving an unexplained two-hour gap between the end of the presentation to the grand jury and their deliberation (04:55).

• Halligan’s (Changing) Story: Halligan declared under oath that there was no additional interaction with the grand jury during the gap—a statement directly contradicted by the newly produced transcript.

  “At the November 13 hearing, Judge Cameron Curry expressed concern regarding an alleged gap in the grand jury record… Halligan has the balls to tell the judge there is no transcript. When she filed on the 14th, she said...there was no additional presentation, interaction or discussion…”
  —Michael Popok (06:10)

• Implication: Filing the missing transcript segment appears remedial—and could be seen as a tacit admission of earlier misstatements or even misconduct.

3. The Indictment Confusion

• Two Indictments, One Mess: There are two indictments in the record, both signed by Halligan and the foreperson: one with two counts (presumably the “true bill”) and one with three counts (never properly approved by the grand jury).

• Sloppy or Deceptive? Halligan’s explanations about the origins and authenticity of the indictments are contradictory and unconvincing.

  “She had a three count indictment. She doesn’t know where that came from. That’s what she presented to the grand jury. They rejected the three count indictment. They then cut and pasted and created a two count Indictment outside the presence of the full grand jury and had the four person sign it. That’s the problem.”
  —Michael Popok (10:45)

4. Judicial Reactions and Potential Consequences

• Judges’ Concerns: Judges Curry and Nachmanoff have both raised concerns about these procedural deficiencies—specifically, about the inconsistent filings and missing transcripts.

• Potential Sanctions: Halligan faces possible removal as U.S. attorney, and her office’s errors may lead to dismissal of the Comey indictment.

• Constitutional Concerns: A magistrate judge had already found two major constitutional errors in Halligan’s presentation to the grand jury:

  • Violation of Comey’s Fifth Amendment rights (implying he needed to testify)
  • Improperly shifting the burden of proof to the defense (15:05)

  “She violated the Fifth Amendment right of James Comey, suggesting to the grand jury that he needed to testify…and…said that the burden was on the defense, not on the prosecution…”
  —Michael Popok (15:15)

• What’s Next: Judge Nachmanoff may order the full grand jury transcript released to Comey's defense; dismissal of the indictment for vindictive prosecution or unconstitutional handling is possible.

5. Broader Implications for DOJ Credibility

• Incompetence and Oversight: Popok questions whether anyone at DOJ is reviewing Halligan’s work, hinting at broader institutional problems.
• Transparency: The episode underscores the importance of procedural clarity and the perils of trying to cover up or rush legal processes when constitutional rights are at stake.

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On DOJ Using the Grand Jury Transcript as a "Sword and Shield":

  “You can’t use them as a sword and a shield, as we like to say in the law.”
  —Michael Popok (03:40)

• On the Gravity of Halligan’s Mistakes:

  “She is woefully incompetent and it shows in every one of her filings… is no one who is competent in the Department of Justice… reviewing anything that she’s doing, any procedure that she’s employing? I don’t think so.”
  —Michael Popok (03:00)

• On the Two Indictments:

  “They’re both signed by Lindsey Halligan. They’re both signed by the foreperson. They both can’t be the indictment, which is it? So you already have a problem.”
  —Michael Popok (11:50)

• On the Possible Outcome:

  “Look, I don’t see how Judge Nakhmonoff doesn’t turn over the grand jury transcript as recommended by the magistrate judge immediately to the defense. He’s considering whether to dismiss the indictment for vindictive prosecution for sure.”
  —Michael Popok (15:25)

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Timestamp | Segment | |---------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 02:29 | Summary of Lindsey Halligan’s grand jury transcript error | | 04:55 | Discussion of the two-hour gap in grand jury proceedings | | 06:10 | Halligan’s sworn statements about the missing transcript | | 10:45 | Discrepancy between two indictments; procedural failures dissected | | 11:50 | Quote on both indictments being signed by Halligan and the foreperson | | 13:40 | Court’s instructions and Halligan’s confused responses | | 15:05 | Constitutional errors: Fifth Amendment, burden of proof, and impact on the prosecution’s case | | 15:25 | Analysis of possible judicial remedies: transcript release, indictment dismissal |

Conclusion: What Lies Ahead

Popok paints a picture of an unraveling federal case, driven by incompetence, misstatement, and panic filings from the DOJ’s own team. The implication is that the defense (James Comey) is now in a strong position to argue for access to the entire grand jury transcript—and possibly to have the indictment dismissed outright for procedural and constitutional violations. The episode ends with a call for listeners to keep abreast of this rapidly evolving case via Legal AF’s platforms, promising timely updates and document access.

Episode Tone & Style

Throughout, Popok is direct, critical, and somewhat incredulous at the DOJ’s handling—using accessible language, legal analogies, and a conversational style that mixes legal jargon with plain talk and occasional humor.