Loading summary
Transcript61 lines
- [00:01]
Host
Seriously, why aren't Democrats in Washington doing more to stop Trump?
- [00:04]
Co-host
I know.
- [00:05]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Have you heard about Phil Weisner in Colorado though?
- [00:07]
Host
No. Is he different?
- [00:09]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Yeah. A.G. weiser sued the Trump administration 65 times. He's beating Trump in court again and again. Things like protecting Obamacare against Trump's illegal tariffs and he even won against Ticketmaster.
- [00:21]
Host
So he actually gets results.
- [00:23]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Exactly as Governor Phil will fight for Colorado.
- [00:27]
Host
Paid for by Phil Weiser for Colorado Registered Agent Nana Nasgese when it's time to scale your business, it's time for Shopify. Get everything you need to grow the way you want.
- [00:37]
Alison Gill Mueller
Like all the way.
- [00:41]
Host
Stack more sales with the best converting checkout on the planet. Track your cha chings from every channel right in one spot and turn real time reporting into big time opportunities. Take your business to a whole new level. Switch to Shopify. Start your free trial today.
- [00:59]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Monday, AI agents took over my work
- [01:02]
Katie Fang
and I absolutely love it.
- [01:03]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Chasing deadlines, writing status reports, updating stakeholders. Agents handle the daily grind. Now they live inside Monday.com so they see the full picture. My work, my team, the whole company. And I don't have to worry about the data. It's safe, which means I'm free to focus on the big stuff. Knowing everything runs smoothly in the background. It's completely shifted the way we work. Create your own AI agent in minutes
- [01:27]
Sponsor Voice
on Monday.com this podcast is supported by MIDI Health. Are you in midlife? Feeling dismissed, unheard or just plain tired of the old health care system? You're not alone. For too long, women's serious midlife health issues have been trivialized, ignored and met with a just deal with it attitude. Many of us have been made to feel ashamed or forgotten. In fact, even today 75% of women seeking care for menopause and perimenopause issues are left left entirely untreated. But here's the powerful truth. It's time for a change. It's time for miti. MITI is not just a healthcare provider. It's a women's telehealth clinic founded and supported by world class leaders in women's health. What sets MITI apart? We are the only women's telehealth brand covered by major insurance companies. Making high quality expert care accessible and affordable. Our clinicians provide one on one face to face consultations where they truly listen to your unique needs. We offer a full range of holistic, data driven solutions from hormonal therapies and weight loss protocols to lifestyle coaching and preventative health guidance. This isn't one size fits all care. This is care uniquely tailored for you. At miti, you will join our patients who feel seen, heard and prioritized. You will find that our mission is clear to help all women thrive in midlife, giving them access to the health care they deserve. Because we believe midlife isn't the middle at all. It is the beginning of your second act. Ready to feel your best and write your second act script? Visit joinmitty.com today to book your personalized insurance covered virtual Visit. That's join MIDI.com MIDI the Care Women Deserve
- [03:27]
Host
Seriously, why aren't Democrats in Washington doing more to stop Trump?
- [03:31]
Co-host
I know.
- [03:32]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Have you heard about Phil Weiser in Colorado, though?
- [03:34]
Host
No. Is he different?
- [03:36]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Yeah. A.G. weiser sued the Trump administration 65 times. He's beating Trump in court again and again. Things like protecting Obamacare against Trump's illegal tariffs and he even won against Ticketmaster.
- [03:48]
Host
So he actually gets results exactly as
- [03:51]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Governor Phil will fight for Colorado.
- [03:54]
Host
Paid for by Phil Weiser for Colorado
- [03:55]
Michael Popak
Registered agent Nana Nasgese Sometimes journalists have to cross the line and fill the void and file cases against the Trump administration when no one else will. And I had the honor of interviewing Alison Gill Mueller. She wrote in Daily Beans and my friend Katie Fang of Midas Touch of the Katie Fang News Channel about their decisions, their courageous decisions to not only take on the Trump administration from a commentary and legal analysis standpoint, but to
- [04:30]
Katie Fang
go where no one else has gone
- [04:33]
Michael Popak
before and file lawsuits while being commentators and political analysts at the same time. Now, full disclosure, I've represented like the Midas Touch network in some matters involving famous politicians and the need to get access to information in a public lawsuit. That's different than me being the plaintiff in a lawsuit. I'm not saying I haven't considered it, but they took the actual steps and I think you're going to find that their discussion with me fascinating. In particular, I asked them if the decision has led to trolling or repercussions. And I think you're going to be fascinated by what they told me. They said that at least when it comes to Katie Fang suit to try to obtain the balance of the Epstein files in unredacted form, including those against Donald Trump, including those in foreign languages for an international child sex trafficking ring. And Alison Gill's suit in the Southern District of California about the slush fund that Donald Trump has tried to make and her argument that, like, hey, is the government giving out funds about people who have been victimized by the weaponization of of a president? Well, I was victimized by Donald trump. Right. Her 11 or 12 year career of the Veterans Administration was dashed because of Trump. They had a very interesting response. Let me play the clips. Play it.
- [06:12]
Katie Fang
Let me, let me ask both of you, and we'll go kind of back and forth here to end the segment. Do you have real fear having brought it, that there's going to be, that you'll be that. Well, you know, real, real Trump retaliation will be visited upon you. And how did that go into your decision as to whether to bring it at all? Because you could, you know, Katie, you could never have brought it at msnbc. Right? That would have been your last day on the up. But, but, but, you know, this gives you the freedom. That's the one good thing about what we do on YouTube and independent journalism through Midas and otherwise is we get to do this. But do you, do you worry about it when you bring the case? Because I'll be frank. I, I would, I'd like to be involved, but I would also think long and hard about the right case at the right moment to do it.
- [06:58]
Alison Gill Mueller
Yeah, I'll let Alison have the last word on that. But you're right, there's, it's, it is kind of interesting that nobody in mainstream media with regards to the Epstein Files act, brought a lawsuit. You would think they'd have the financial wherewithal and the, the bigger corporate ability to be able to withstand the heat. Of course I thought about it because I have a family. I have, you know, I, I, I, I like doing what I am doing. Some factors, for example, have been so far, what has been the reaction from doj? Have they been particularly virulent in the way they've responded? Who is the prosecutor that's on my case? Who's responding? I mean, these are things that you would always think about as a trial lawyer. But I think have a little bit more moment now because of what's happening. But I will say something that's been very interesting. Unlike the other stuff that I do on Katie Fang News or, you know, whatever on social media, etc. This particular lawsuit and my role as a plaintiff hasn't generated the type of vitriol that I normally get. Like, I, I get the death threats, I get the horrible racist, gender sexist stuff all the time. It's very boring because it's all the same shit. None of it's original anymore. But the thing is, I have not heard from a single MAGA Republican who's been like, you dumb biatch, what are you doing with your loss? Like, it has been like crickets. Which in my mind, I think sends a very clear message to me, which is people want to know, regardless of your party affiliation, they have a very, very invested interest in finding out what is behind those black redactions on those papers. And so I have been pleasantly surprised to see that that has been the, at least the public response.
- [09:01]
Yeah. Well, let me piggyback off of what Katie said. Same Katie, like you're, you're not seeing the vitriol because we're kind of all on the same side when it comes to the Epstein files. Nobody likes this slush fund either.
- [09:13]
Michael Popak
And I think that's fascinating that what their argue, what their argument is is that maga, there's just some things you can't get MAGA to do. They won't ultimately support a child sex trafficker, and they want the Epistine files released. And so they're not trolling Katie Fang, the way you would have thought. And the same thing for Alison Gill when it comes to the slush fund, which is universally hated. In fact, I asked Katie in particular, and then Allison, why did you bring the case and are you worried about its implications on your career? And she had a great answer. Play the clip, Katie.
- [09:59]
Katie Fang
You kind of broke the glass ceiling here on this type of lawsuit. You've been a chronicler and a follower of all things Epstein from almost from the very, very beginning. If it's not you, it's Ben Meisellis or both of you together, along with survivors and victims. But you can't do your job if what's being withheld from you are the core key documents, including about Donald Trump. So when you looked at the landscape of lawsuits that had been considered and Democrat, you know, trying to bring things in federal court to get federal judges to get involved and that sort of going nowhere and no one really stepping in. Why did you decide I gotta file this lawsuit?
- [10:37]
Alison Gill Mueller
I thought the attempts to get the special master by Congressmen Ro Khanna and Tom Massie was a spectacular move. I thought it was a wonderful example of bipartisan strategy and it was going to endure to the benefit of the victims and survivors who were continuously cheated to have justice and transparency which they are owed and which they deserve. And I understood the judge's ruling in that instance in the Southern District of New York that jurisdictionally there was no standing for Congressman Massie and Khanna and more specifically the law itself, the Epstein Files Transparency act, explicitly did not provide for an enforcement mechanism. Now, we've talked about the fact, Mike, that Congressman Khanna has said that part of the reason why you don't see a private right to a cause of action in the Epstein Files Transparency act is it never would have gotten across the finish line with bipartisan support. There was an articulated concern by Republicans, of course, that if you had given that particular enforcement mechanism in the law, that a slew of lawsuits would have ensued. But appropriately so, let's be honest, right? I mean, any victim or survivor who had their name illegally outed and had their confidential information illegally outed should have recourse against this Department of Justice and this government. So when the special master effort failed, and again, not for any lack of effort, but simply because there was no jurisdiction by this judge that had been presiding over Ghislaine Maxwell's criminal case, I thought to myself, you know, there's gotta be another way to be able to get there. And then I am being represented by the Public Integrity Law Project, which is Brendan Ballew and Sam Ward Packer. And, you know, it's been great to be able to work with fellow trial lawyers to say, look, there's we know where we want to go. How do we get there?
- [12:43]
Michael Popak
And the same thing for Alison Gill, you know, why did I do it? It's almost as if to say there was a void that needed to be filled and against what else could he do to me? But this case needed to be filed. Here's Alison of Mueller. She wrote on that same point.
- [13:05]
Katie Fang
Let's talk about what it's like, why you made the decision. And it is one of courage. We just had the Profile of Courage awards handed out in the last 24 hours. It is courageous to go from commentator and say there is a hole in the swing here. There is a case that's missing. There is a voice that needs to be heard, and it's mine. So let me start off with Alison about the 1776 Anti Weaponization Fund. What made you decide I got to bring this particular case?
- [13:41]
Alison Gill Mueller
Well, first of all, thanks for, for having me on Legal af. I'm a huge fan of everything that you do and I think that your work is so very important in this political climate. So thank you for all of that. You know, it was kind of, it started out as sort of a tongue in cheek, me filing a claim against the slush fund because I had been weaponized against in the first Trump administration when the government decided to investigate my Mueller She Wrote podcast. And eventually that led to me being removed from my public service job at the Department of Veterans affairs after over a decade. And when I put that out because I was specifically asking for $8.647 million in that particular claim. It went viral and I was contacted by the Public Citizen Litigation Group saying, because you're an interested party and we're interested in perhaps providing comment or requiring notice and being able to provide comment as an interested party, would you be interested in a procedural type of a lawsuit as a plaintiff? And I said, absolutely. I already have open litigation against the government for my removal from my position. And I said, well, if I'm an interested party and there's something I can do to help stop this, this slush fund, or at least question how it was being established, I would absolutely want to be part of that.
- [15:17]
Michael Popak
Oh, have you ever actually looked at
- [15:19]
Katie Fang
the ingredient list on your dog's food after that first ingredient? Well, good luck. You see, kibble is made using extreme high heat to keep it shelf stable and inexpensive. So brands have to add back synthetic vitamins and minerals in the form of strange chemicals whose names you don't understand and definitely cannot pronounce. Is that really what you want? Your dog Eating Sundays for dogs is different. They start with more than 80% all natural meats and then finish with superfoods like kale, ginger and blueberries and gently air dries them instead of using high heat. Sundays doesn't look or smell like dog food. It looks like high quality human grade jerky. No fillers, no nutritional blends, no chemicals, just simple complete nutrition. Founded by Dr. Tori Waxman, Sundays was created to meet her high standards as a veterinarian and as a dog parent. And the best part, Sundays requires no fridge, no freezer, no prep, no mess. You get the quality of a home cooked meal with a scoop and serve. Ease of kibble. It's what dog food should have been all along. Over 100,000 dogs are eating sundaes and the reviews speak for themselves, especially from owners of picky eaters who who had never seen their dog get this excited about mealtime before. Like my Lily, make the switch to Sundays. Go right now to Sundays for dogs.com legal af50 and get 50% off your first order. Or you can use code legal af50 at checkout. That's 50% off your first order at Sundays for dogs.com legal af51more time sundaysfordogs.com legal af50 or use code legal af50 at checklist.
- [17:02]
Michael Popak
Now what I find fascinating is that the attacks have not been coming fast and furious against Allison and against Katie. In fact, you don't even hear a comment. I mean I know that the press secretary is out of maternity leave, but you don't hear a comment at all going after the integrity of Katie, the character of Allison, because you really can't. And I think there's maybe even a begrudging respect by even the White House and the lawyers for the Department of Justice about these two journalists in a way you're not seeing, for instance, in the Don Lemon case. I mean, I'm friendly with Don. A Don programming note is going to be on with me this Friday for an interview. I was on his show, and Don was doing his job in St. Paul in that church, covering it during the attack on the community by ICE and the National Guard at mainly ice, at Donald Trump's behalf. And he's indicted. He's moving to dismiss for a vindictive prosecution, I'm sure, in the future. But you could see how they trolled Don Lemonade about the indictment over and over and over again. Here's a clip of the government going after Don Levin.
- [18:31]
Don Lemon Critic
So this is what the people are trying to protect, because all ICE wants to do is get them out of our country, bring them to prisons and jails and mental institutions from where they came. That's all they want to do. They're patriots, and they have to be abused by guys like Don Lemon, who's a, you know, loser, lightweight. I saw him, the way he walked in that church. It was terrible. I have such respect for that pastor. He was so calm. He was so nice. He was just accosted. What they did in that church was
- [19:00]
Michael Popak
horrible yesterday, and yet you don't see them doing that against Katie or Alison, because I think there's universal acceptance by the public that the Epstein files need to be released. Now, I had Brendan Blue on, who's a lawyer for Katie. Talk about her case for a moment. Her case is heating up. We got a hearing on 30 June with Judge Sullivan. She filed her brief in which she pointed out that Todd Blanche effectively conceded that he violated the Epstein Transparency act. Didn't produce documents, never addressed it, never addressed key evidence in the case either. In fact, here's my interview with Brendan Ballew. Play the clip.
- [19:47]
Katie Fang
What I loved about your filing was you say right up front in your introduction, I don't know. We got 22 pages from Todd Blanche in opposition to our temporary restraining order, where you're trying to get the entirety of the Epstein files that were mandated to be produced to the American people through the Epstein Transparency act, including the Trump files, the Trump purported victim files. If you will. Or ones that claim to be victims. The foreign language files, the redaction log and everything else that's missing. And you say it's 22 pages in. Not one word, not one page of one word of that filing. Does he deny that he violated the Epstein Act?
- [20:29]
Co-host
Yeah, it's just incredible. And again, credit goes to my colleagues Sam and Emily, who are the primary drafters on that brief. But as you said, you know, we have moved for a preliminary injunction seeking pretty straightforward relief with where there are these various categories of information, where it is just obvious that the government is breaking the law here. And the administration, in its response, didn't even try to justify it. They didn't say that they were complying with the law. They just said that Katie is not the kind of person who can sue here. And just as a matter of black letter law, they are wrong on that. So it's very clear that when the government breaks the law and fails to disclose information that it's supposed to, the people who benefit from that information have the right to sue. And so you have case after case where journalists or public interest groups are saying, look, the government said that they were going to disclose something. They never disclosed it. You know, we have the right to sue.
- [21:22]
Michael Popak
So I guess at the end of the day, and the point of order here is that sometimes in this era, especially when it comes to independent journalists, you have to step across the line and courageously file about the stories and subjects that you cover for a living. That's one of the, I guess, the perks of the independent journalist life that you, our audience, have provided us because of your generosity of time and spirit and of commitment, because there's no way that Katie Fang on MSNBC or Ms. Now, whatever it is, would ever be able to go to her bosses or editor, her producer, and say, you know, I'm going to sue Trump. She would have canceled herself at that moment and sent her off packing. But that's also the difference between, you know, our brand of commentary and journalism and like and other places. And I think that's why you come to Midas touch and why you come to Legal AF and maybe why you come to my special brand of observational commentary. Because, you know, it's my commentary. I'm going to give you the facts straight, right? I'll give you a fact straight. No smoke, no sunshine. But it's mixed in with my experience, my commentary through my lens, my, my, you know, my body of work as a, as a human being and as a lawyer for the last X amount of years and decades. And you know that when you listen to me, I think you know, so you're not coming to me for, you know, the time and the weather. You're coming to me and Katie and Allison for a heartfelt, mature set of observations through a lens that you can trust. And I thought it was remarkable there hasn't been enough pat on the back for Allison and Katie about handling the these cases, filing these cases at this moment. I mean, there's thousands of cases filed against the Trump administration, but Katie's was the first one about the Epstein files. She's the first plaintiff, so far, the only plaintiff. And Allison joined a very small group. You can count on one half of one hand the amount of lawsuits filed about the slush fund and the anti weaponization fund. She takes it from the position of if you're going to have a fund, well, don't drain it giving it out to Jan Sixers and insurrectionists. Leave a little behind for those that were, that were attacked and, and were the targets of weaponization by Trump 1 or Trump 2. See, those are very unique vantage points in which to make the argument. You know, I asked the lawyer for Allison Gill, what was it like to represent Allison in that special, unique role of being both a journalist and a plaintiff. And here's what he had to say.
- [24:31]
Katie Fang
When you represent somebody like at the
- [24:34]
Michael Popak
level of Alison in a case like
- [24:36]
Katie Fang
this, I'm sure it presents some interesting additional aspects that are present with a traditional plaintiff without revealing confidences in any way. Without what, what. How did you approach representing her and framing her case, understanding that she's in the business of being a commentator at the same time.
- [24:58]
Alison Gill's Lawyer
Oh, well, thank you for having me on. I think you're absolutely right. There are, unfortunately, today probably a number of commenters who could claim to be victims of weaponization and lawfare, but Alison did step up to be a plaintiff in this case. It is different and somewhat refreshing to have a client who is familiar with explaining what could be a very dry procedural issue in a way that hits home to regular folks about why this is important. I suppose the normal listener here does not, is not steeped in the Administrative Procedure act, but it's the basic check on government.
- [25:45]
Katie Fang
More so than you'd think after 19 months.
- [25:49]
Alison Gill's Lawyer
Yeah, but it is a basic check on governmental power and it is designed to prevent agencies from just exercising raw power by fiat to implement new programs or adopt new rules. And so that Allison is someone who is impacted by the decisions that the Department of Justice will make with respect to this Anti Weaponization Fund, what they what they call the Anti Weaponization fund.
- [26:22]
Michael Popak
So what I thought is I'd put the full interview in the notes below if you're interested in the full, you know, 30 minute interview. But I wanted to kind of wrap this all together for a special Midas Touch presentation of it. I'm glad you're with me. If you like this kind of content, you like what we're doing, keep the gas in our tank. Come over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel. Hit the free subscribe button. Do the same thing on Substack. So until my next report, this is Michael Popak.
- [26:50]
Katie Fang
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 or 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 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.
- [27:27]
Host
Seriously, why aren't Democrats in Washington doing more to stop Trump?
- [27:31]
Co-host
I know.
- [27:31]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Have you heard about Phil Weiser in Colorado though?
- [27:34]
Host
No. Is he different?
- [27:36]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Yeah. A.G. weiser sued the Trump administration 65 times. He's beating Trump in court again and again. Things like protecting Obamacare against Trump's illegal tariffs and he even won against Ticketmaster.
- [27:48]
Host
So he actually gets results.
- [27:50]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Exactly as Governor Phil will fight for Colorado.
- [27:54]
Host
Paid for by Phil Weiser for Colorado registered agent Nana Naschesy.
- [27:57]
Phil Weiser Campaign Representative
Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same Premium Wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities. So do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to do@mintmobile.com
- [28:15]
Alison Gill Mueller
Switch upfront payment of $45 for 3 month plan equivalent to $15 per month required intro rate first, then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full terms@mintmobile.com Most people overpay for
- [28:29]
Sponsor Voice
car insurance not because they're careless, but because switching feels like too much hassle. That's why there's Jerry, your proactive insurance assistant. Jerry compares rates side by side from over 50 top insurers and helps you switch with ease. Jerry even tracks market rates and alerts you when it's best to shop. No spam calls, no hidden fees. Drivers who save with Jerry could save over $1,300 a year. Switch with confidence. Download the Jerry app or visit Jerry AI Libsyn today. That's J E R R Y AI libsync.