← Legal AF by MeidasTouch
Loading summary
Transcript13 lines
- [00:01]
LifeLock Ad
This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. Between two factor authentication, strong passwords and a VPN, you try to be in control of how your info is protected. But many other places also have it and they might not be as careful. That's why Lifelock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com podcast for 40% off terms apply.
- [00:30]
T-Mobile Ad
Summer fun goes great with family freedom from T Mobile. We'll pay off four phones up to $3200 and give you four free phones all on America's largest 5G network. Visit your local T Mobile location or learn more@t mobile.com familyfreedom up to $800 per line via virtual prepaid card typically takes 15 days. Free phones via 24 monthly bill credits with finance agreement eg Apple iPhone 16128 gigabyte 8 2,999 eligible trade in eg iPhone 11 Pro for well qualified credits end and balance due if you pay off early or cancel contact T Mobile.
- [00:59]
Michael Popak
Donald Trump probably thought he was through with and never want to see the likes of Federal Judge Tanya Chut ever again. Well, that's not how the universe works. And now the very first case against the Trump administration that's been filed about the Epstein files by our friends at Democracy Forward Foundation, Sky Perryman and her group has been assigned to Judge Tanya Chutkin. Of course you always get the thing that you don't want. The person that you don't want assigned is gonna be the one you previously bashed when she headed your criminal trial in the DC election interference case that you called a Marxist elect, a leftist that you sick the MAGA dogs on so that she would have to have protection 247 because she got violent threats against her. That's the person now that's been assigned to you the first case filed to obtain the Epstein files. I'm Michael Popak, you're on the Midas Touch Network. I'll talk about Tanya Chutkin, I'll tell you why it matters and then we'll talk about kind of a quick update about Epstein. It's hard to believe with all of the political demands and all the attempts by the Trump administration to get the American people to stop focusing on Donald Trump and the COVID up and the pedophilia, pedophile and sex abuse case of Epstein where it's in this matter, it's not just the crimes, it's the COVID up by the Trump administration. We know so much and Donald Trump wants us to forget all about it. We know that his name is all over the files. We know that his name is all over truckloads of documents reviewed morning, noon and night by the FBI at the direction of Pam Bondi and Cash Patel in March. We know that Pam Bondi advised Donald Trump that his name was on the files. We know that the people reviewing the files had a black marker and we're redacting the name of Donald Trump over and over again. We know all of that. We know he's been briefed about it. We know since he's been briefed, they've been trying to figure out how they can divert attention. We know that his administration gave immunity Queen for the day immunity to Ghislaine Max, who was convicted as a co conspirator as a participant in the raping of girls in the child sex trafficking. She's serving 20 years in jail for it. But now we know in reward for her trying to help Donald Trump save his political hide, she's been transferred to a, from a minimum security prison to a low security prison, a Beverly Hills style prison camp in Texas as a reward for having met with Donald Trump's former criminal defense lawyer. And now number two in the Department of Justice named Todd Blanche. And now Todd Blanche and the White House and the FBI and the Department of Justice. These are things that we know immutable facts are now figuring out how they can best use Ghislaine Maxwell's 12 hours of testimony. Do we have Todd Blanche hold the press conference and show clips? No, that probably won't work. People want to see the whole video, but the whole video is not great for Donald Trump. I. Well, we have a problem. Should we have Todd Blanche hold a press conference and show the whole video? Should we have Todd Blanche do a press conference and have Ghislaine Maxwell sit next to him? Should we have Todd Blanche go on the Joe Rogan show? I'm not making this up. This is stuff they're considering. And then rather than release the files, which everyone left, right and center is demanding, instead what is being leaked out of the White House is they're trying to come up with a communication strategy led by J.D. vance. Is that what they think they have? This is their problem. They think this is a communications problem. This is, this is like the old, this is like the old Steve McQueen movie. What we have here is a failure to communicate. That's not the failure. The, the failure is on the underlying criminality and cover up about the files and sending J.D. vance to go on Fox News and tell the world and admit that there's a meeting at the White House on Wednesday after he denied there was a meeting on Wednesday. I'm going to show you back to back lips on that one is not helping. In fact it only led to the further demand. The more joy the more J.D. vance told, you know his chief propagandist Maria Bartiromo on on Fox the more he told her there's nothing to see here Biden, Biden should have released the files. Trust me if Joe Biden's administration thought there was any way they would help Kamala Harris and Joe Biden win because of all the times by Donald Trump's name was listed in there they would have released it. And all it's led to is everybody demanding with pitchforks and torches the release of the files. See, the Democrats don't care where the chips fall the demo. I mean I'm sure there's certain people that care that are in the files and if they're in the files and they participated in raping girls they should be put in prison. And that's the point of our party. We don't care what's in the files because we'll take it wherever it leads. But you got J.D. vance out there. I'm gonna show you back to back clips first denying the meeting and then and then admitting there's a meeting but it wasn't at that time. Here's the two clips back to back.
- [06:36]
Donald Trump
Both very good, Mr. President. The two Kevins. Very good Mr. President.
- [06:39]
Michael Popak
Is Vice President Vance hosting a gathering this evening to talk about how to respond to the Epstein situation?
- [06:45]
Donald Trump
Is he working on what?
- [06:46]
Michael Popak
Is he posting some kind of gathering of top advisors this evening to talk about how to respond to the Epstein situation?
- [06:52]
Donald Trump
I don't know. I could ask you that question. I don't know of it but I think here's the man right here I.
- [06:59]
J.D. Vance
Saw today and it's completely fake news. We're not meaning to talk about the Epstein situation and I think the reporter reported that he got his horses.
- [07:10]
Donald Trump
Look, the whole thing is a hoax. It's put out by the Democrats because we've had the most successful six months in the history of our country and that's just a way of trying to divert attention to something that's total bullshit. Okay.
- [07:25]
Michael Popak
Yeah, please at the White House about.
- [07:29]
J.D. Vance
The Epstein files and how you're communic the Epstein story. So I've seen so many different fake reports about this. So let me set the record state straight. There was no meeting at my house last night. There just wasn't. Was there a meeting at the White House? We did meet at the White House yesterday, but not at the time that they said that they. That we were going to meet and not about the subject that they said that we were going to meet about. We have a great FBI director and a great Department of Justice lead, Attorney General Pam Bondi. And we met to talk about how to ensure we have justice for the American people. We actually didn't talk about the Epstein issue at all. That was never meant to be the subject of the meeting. And, and it's one of those things where I guess somebody leaked a calendar entry maybe, and then people assumed that it must have been about Epstein, even though it had nothing to do with Epstein. On the Epstein issue, what the President has said very clearly, because we've had other meetings about that, is that he wants us to be fully transparent and he wants the credible information out there. So we're working to compile the thousands and thousands of documents that are out there for full transparency. But I have to say, Maria, I laugh at the Democrats who are now all of a sudden so interested in the Epstein files. For four years, Joe Biden and the Democrats did absolutely nothing about this story. We know that Jeffrey Epstein had a lot of connections.
- [08:40]
Michael Popak
You know what they say, first impressions matter. Whether I'm in court, on camera, or just heading out to meet friends. Looking sharp isn't optional, it's essential. And staying well groomed, that takes tools you can trust. For me, that's Harry's. I've been using Harry's for a while now, whether to clean up around my beard or when I'm clean shaven and I'm hooked. The trial set I got came with a sleek weighted handle that feels like it belongs in a high end barbershop. A five blade razor, their signature foaming shave gel, and a travel cover, all delivered straight to my door. The packaging is clean and modern and yeah, it looks pretty good sitting on my bathroom counter. I keep a short beard and I like a clean shave on the neck and cheeks. Harry's gives me a close smooth result around my beard or when I shave it all off every time without the irritation. And the shave gel, rich lather, fresh scent. Honestly, it's a game changer. Here's the best part. You get top quality German engineered blades, customizable refills for as low as 2 bucks, and that $10 trial set. Right now it's just 6 bucks. Show everyone you mean business. Get Harry's. Normally their trial set is $10, but right now you can get it for just $6@harrys.com legalaf that's our exclusive link. Harry's.com legal af for a $6 trial set. So that's what you've been hearing about the politics. Now I want to talk about the law with the lawsuit. Democracy Forward files a lawsuit. In fact, Sky Perryman, who heads Democracy Forward, is going to be coming on Legal AF with me this week. I think today. We'll have the interview for tomorrow about the filing. It's the first lawsuit ever filed about the Epstein files. It demands it under the Freedom of Information act statute and it demands it on an expedited emergency basis because of the great public concern and interest in the matter. And they, they made a written request to the Department of Justice and the FBI, the two defendants in the case, demanding everything, everything that has Ghislaine Maxwell's name on it, Donald Trump and Epstein's name on, including their little love notes and communications. Everything about the client list and the client list about the flight logs and the flight logs and the Epstein files, however they're defined. Every document that the FBI reviewed, every document that Pam Bondi reviewed, every document that was reviewed to prepare Donald Trump, what was told to Donald Trump about his name in it. Everything. Of course, the FBI and the Department of Justice ignored the Freedom of Information act demand or request. And what happens when you're the party making that demand? You get under the statute to take your case to court and they filed it on 8 August, two days after the now infamous White House meeting that never happened, but happened just 48 hours later. Case filed and later. The case has now been assigned. Now it's a simple case. I just laid it out for you. They made demands for records. These are the records they made demand for. The government refused to acknowledge or to process. We get our expedited processing of our demand. One count under foia. Judge assigned. Now random wheel. Spin it. What I feel like I'm doing prices right. What does it say? It's Tanya Chutkin. Now let's update everybody on her fine, amazing jurist. She was a trial lawyer for 17 years, worked in the Department of Justice, was worked at some major law firms. She was appointed properly by Obama. She's been on for a long time, handled lots of cases. She handled dozens of Jan6 cases successfully. Bench trial convictions, jury trials, convictions, how to handle the aftermath of the pardons. She handled many, many cases and was probably on a short list to be on the United States Supreme Court if and when a Democrat ever gets back into power. Now that's Tanya Chutkin. She then gets assigned to the D.C. election interference case when Jack Smith and his team prosecute Donald Trump. She handles the case masterfully, makes some amazing rulings. She's covered by another judge for most of that time, Judge Beryl Howell, who is the Chief Judge of D.C. responsible for grand juries. Tanya Chuck is not responsible for grand juries. As the federal District court judge, she gets everything else in terms of evidence. Makes some great rulings, made a ruling against Donald Trump refusing to dismiss his indictment under the immunity. But she does stay the case, recognizing immunity as an ultimate defense, and allows Donald Trump to take the appeal. The appeal goes to the D.C. court of Appeals three judge panel or D.C. circuit Court of Appeals, and it ends up being 30 in favor of Tanya Chukan against Donald Trump. Finding no immunity, written by Judge Pollard, goes up to the United States Supreme Court. And we know what happened after that. Two summers ago, the United States Supreme Court reverses. Tanya Chutkin finds that there suddenly is criminal immunity for Donald Trump to do anything he wants as long as it's part of his presidential powers. And since it's arguable whether elections are part of his presidential powers, in fact, finding we're going to give the guy criminal immunity. Very interesting. And we know what's happened since then. Jeannie's out of the bottle. Jeannie gets reelected and we've got a criminal president who's now acting even worse than he did the first time around. But Tanya Chutkin is. If you were in a lab making a jurist who you wanted to be fair minded, even tempered, respectful of the law, respectful of the people arguing in front of her, ethical, it would be Tanya Chutkin. I don't know what her father did in Jamaica or one of the Caribbean islands where they're from. I don't really care if he was a Marxist or a Communist for that matter. All I, you know, a person's body of work defines them, not the color of their skin, but the content of their character. That's what matters to me. That's what matters to our people here on Midas Touch. So I'm going to get Sky Perryman, Democracy Forward back with me later today on Legal af. I'll post that interview, we'll talk more about this case, talk more about Tanya Chuck to the extent I can get her to comment on it. But now, you know, my commentary it's good judge. It's a fine judge. She's going to make the best level decision that she's going to make. My gut is she's going to rule for democracy forward in order that these documents be released. Some of it is covered by attorney client privilege. I will admit that, you know, some of the common communications and conversations between Pam, Bonnie and Donald Trump, you know, I think they're going to be covered. But the files themselves, which the administration is on record of saying we're going to release them or should release them, they've been released. There are no it went from we're going to release everything, including the client list, to I have the client list on my desk, this is Pam Bondi to there's no more client list to JD Vance saying release the client list. I mean, you cannot trust this administration. You know that, right? You know, you know how you can tell if they're lying to you because their lips are moving when they speak. That's it. So I'm going to continue to follow this story closely here on the Midas Touch Network and of course over on Legal af. Come over there and help us there. Hit the free subscribe button as we continue to grow that channel. So until my next report, I'm Michael Popak. Can't get your fill of Legal af. Me neither. That's why we form 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 A for 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.