Loading summary
Transcript4 lines
- [00:00]
A
Everyone deserves to be connected. That's why T Mobile and US Cellular are joining forces. Switch to T Mobile and save up to 20% versus Verizon by getting built in benefits they leave out. Check the math@t mobile.com switch and now T mobile is in US cellular stores. Savings versus Comparable Verizon plans plus the cost of optional benefits plan features and taxes and fees vary. Savings with three plus lines include third line free via monthly bill credits. Credit stop if you cancel any lines. Qualifying credit required A Trump appointed judge seems very prepared to refer the Trump top federal prosecutor. I should call her a pretender Prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan for disciplinary proceedings. In other words, you may be kissing your bar license but bye soon. Lindsey Halligan this is this Trump appointed judge from 2019 by the name of David J. Novak sua spontane meaning on his own initiative just issued a scathing order in a case that he is presiding over where there was an indictment against a criminal defendant where Lindsey Halligan represented just this past week that she is a federal prosecutor and and indeed the lead federal prosecutor, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. The thing is, another federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Curry in the Comey case previously ruled that Lindsey Halligan is not a competent, qualified, authorized United States Attorney, that she was not properly appointed and therefore because she was and appointed through the appointments clause of the under the Constitution, she cannot serve as a United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. She was disqualified, remember, in the Comey case that was one of the grounds why the Comey case and the New York Attorney General Letitia James case was dismissed. But the thing is Lindsey Halligan, despite a court order saying you're disqualified, you're fired, get the hell out of here. Lindsey Halligan, you're not the top federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of Virginia. You're not the United States Attorney. You're a squatter. Get out. Get out of the Eastern District of Virginia Federal office. She's like a squatter. She's refused to leave. And finally a federal judge and yes, a Trump appointed judge. David J. Novak. Here's his photo from the Eastern District of Virginia who used to be a magistrate judge. He climbed through the ranks. He was appointed by Trump in 2019. He in this order he said enough is enough. And here's the thing that this federal judge and all these federal judges realize that by Lindsey Halligan pretending to be a United States Attorney by playing Halloween dress up if you will, it is tainting the Cases brought against people who are potentially actual criminals. I'm not talking about these weaponized BS fraudulent cases that Donald Trump wants to bring against his political opponents that are getting thrown out. And then when he tried to re bring it against New York Attorney General Letitia James, the multiple grand juries refused to even indict him. I'm talking about those. But what about the run of the mill criminal cases that federal prosecutorial offices handle every day? When she's signing her name to these pleadings, she's giving the criminal defendant to the extent they have actually committed the crime. And their criminal defense lawyers have great arguments to try to get those cases dismissed. There's an illegal United States attorney on my case and it's tainting the proceedings. Now, Federal Judge Novak was not messing around in this court order. He said, basically what you're doing, Halligan, is you are misrepresenting your status to the public and the court, which is a violation of law. It's a violation of the rules of response, rules of professional responsibility. It's a violation of these rules of court. And he said, you need to respond. Halligan, why are you pretending to be a United States attorney? Why are you pretending to be the top federal prosecutor? I want you to respond right now. And he gave her a deadline. And you'll see, based on how he sculpted this order, he's getting ready, in my opinion, to throw out her legal license if her answers are not sufficient. And I don't see how her answers are going to be sufficient. Let's pull up Judge Novak's order again. Trump appointed judge order. This matter comes before the court on its own initiative. Sua spontane, as it's called. The court's bringing this up on its own. This court has reviewed the indictment in this matter. Just a it's an indictment of a case that's unrelated to Comey or Letitia James. Again, just a run of the mill criminal case that the federal prosecutor prosecutors deal with every single day. Which was returned by grand jury on December 2, 2025, and observes that Ms. Halligan identified herself therein as the United States Attorney for this district. Ms. Halligan did so despite a binding order entered by Senior United States District Judge Curry on November 24, 2025, in which Judge Curry found that the appointment of Ms. Halligan as an interim United States Attorney violated 28 U.S.C. section 5, 46 and the Appointment Clause of the United States Constitution. While the United States of America has appealed, Judge Curry's opinion in order to no stay has been issued in conjunction with that appeal. Consequently, it remains binding precedent in this district and is not subject to being ignored. Again, this Trump appointed judge is saying, Judge Curry in the Comey case ruled that you are disqualified, that you were appointed unlawfully in violation of the appointment clause of the Constitution and in violation of section 28 USC section 5. 46, which basically says that there can be one interim United States Attorney for a finite period of time whose term can be expended, extended by the federal prosecutors of a specific district. But if not extended, then there has to be a formal appointment by the United States Senate or else that person needs to say bye bye. Now, Donald Trump fired the previous United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia because that interim who Trump appointed, who, by the way, was approved by the federal judges, did not want to prosecute, or I should say persecute Donald Trump's political enemies. So Trump pushed that guy out and fired the person he appointed. You only get one interim appointment. So when Trump picked his second interim appointment, Lindsey Halligan, you can't do two. You only had one. So the only way Lindsey Halligan can be appointed is she can't be an interim. She would have to be a United States Attorney who is appointed by Trump and confirmed by the Senate. And there was no confirmation by the Senate. And the judge is saying here, you can't ignore the law. Halligan. For these reasons, the Court hereby directs Ms. Halligan to file within seven days of the issuance of this order a pleading explaining the basis for Ms. Halligan's identification of herself as a United States Attorney. And notwithstanding Judge Curry's contrary ruling, she shall also set forth why this court should not strike Ms. Halligan's identification of herself as the United States Attorney from the indictment. In this matter, Ms. Halligan shall further explain why her identification does not constitute a false or misleading statement. Now, this is the key line right here as well. Because a false or misleading statement to a court is a. Or in general, but especially to a court, is a violation of rules of professional responsibility, Virginia law court rules, which subjects the violator to losing their bar license, losing their legal license. And how do you know this? Take a look at what is being cited by the judge. This is why I'm saying the judge is telling her, I'm going to take away your law license. I'm going to refer you to get disbarred if you don't answer this satisfactorily. How's she going to answer it satisfactorily? She thinks that she's above the law. This Trump appointed judge is saying no way.
- [09:23]
B
You know that moment when you notice your first gray hair and it kind of stops you in your tracks. I remember seeing mine and thinking, all right, I guess this is happening. But here's the interesting part. What if you could actually slow grays down and keep your natural color longer while also getting thicker, flat, fuller, shinier hair? That's where Array comes in. Array has completely changed the way we think about gray hair. Their products are clinically proven to slow gray growth, support repigmentation, and improve thickness and fullness in as little as three to six months with consistent use. I've been using the system myself and I've genuinely noticed fewer new grays coming in and healthier feeling hair overall. And here's how it works. Array targets grays from the inside and the outside. Inside is their daily supplement Not Today Gray, which helps fill nutrient gaps that can speed up graying and supports melanin production. The pigment behind your natural color outside is their lightweight oil free serum to the root, powered by Array's patented melanin complex, which helps slow new grays while supporting thicker, fuller hair. I've been using the Shower Duo from Oire. Also, I've got the shampoo and conditioner right here and timing really matters here. Even if you haven't spotted a gray yet, prevention works best when you start early. In Array's clinical study, 88% of users had less gray growth and many also saw more fullness, shine and softer texture. Most of us already invest in slow signs of aging on our face. Array is simply that same idea for your hair and more than 300,000 people are already using it. Most people cover grays, but you can actually slow their progression for a limited time. Our listeners get 15% off at array by using code midasray.com just head to a R E Y dot com and use code midas me I dash and you're all set. After you purchase, they will ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you.
- [11:12]
A
Look what the judge cites. Virginia Rule of Professional Conduct 3.3 a. A lawyer shall not knowingly make false statements of facts or law to a tribunal. Rule 7.1 A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the Lawyer Services. Rule 8.4 it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to subsection C engage in conduct involving dishonesty or or misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer's fitness to practice law. 3.4 A lawyer shall not knowingly disobey a standing rule or a ruling of a tribunal in the course of a proceeding, then the judge goes on to cite the Eastern District of Virginia Local Criminal Rules 83.1 sub M, which says all counsel admitted to practice before this court pursuant to subsection C and D governing federal government attorneys appearing pursuant to the authority of the United States Office of the Eastern District of Virginia and who do not otherwise require admission to practice to this court, subsection ERF shall be subject to the rules, conditions and provisions set forth in full as Appendix B of these local Rules or Federal Rule of disciplinary enforcement. Subsection 4B set forth in appendix A. Acts or omissions by an attorney admitted to practice before this court individually or in concert with any other person or persons which violate the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct adopted by this court shall constitute misconduct and shall be grounds for discipline. And then the court goes on to cite a case called in Ray Joseph Morrissey, esquire. Federal courts have inherent power to control the admission of attorneys to their bars and to discipline attorneys who appear before them. And what is made very clear by Judge Novak in this order is the government's pleading shall be signed by Ms. Halligan. Let the clerk file a copy of this order electronically and notify all counsel of record. It is so ordered. This is what we needed, folks, a powerful order telling Halligan, putting her on notice, you are about to lose your legal license. You think you're above the law. You're not. Now for those who have been watching the videos I've been doing with Harry Litman that I've been doing on Legal af, we've been focused on this issue. You may recall the case of Daniel Richmond versus The United States of America. Richmond was James Comey's good friend and former attorney whose attorney client privilege communications with Comey were stolen by the Trump regime and laundered by Lindsey Halligan through an FBI agent who was not supposed to see the attorney client communications because there was never a warrant to receive them. This FBI agent testified in the grand jury that resulted in the indictment of Comey about attorney client information that that FBI agent was not allowed to have. After the Comey indictment was dismissed because Halligan was not a lice, she was not a appropriately appointed United States Attorney. She was disqualified. But after that case was dismissed, Richmond Comey's lawyer filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for stealing his attorney client communications. A federal judge in that case ruled that indeed there was a theft of the lawyer's documents and unlawful search and seizure that took place and ordered that the government immediately return the files to Richmond. In response, the DOJ, which was led by Halligan, filed a brief on December 24, 2025, where they begged the judge for more time to return the files back to Richmond, and they said they needed more time to delete the files. They claim they did not have the technical qualifications of government personnel in Washington, D.C. for the remainder of the holidays to comply with the court order. Why am I bringing this up to you? Why am I bringing it up? Because Lindsey Halligan signed that pleading. Take a look at what I highlighted here. December 24, she was representing that she was the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. So it's not a fluke that she was representing herself in the Judge Novak case as the United States Attorney. She was separately representing she was the United States Attorney in the Richmond case. But get this, I went through all of the Eastern District of Virginia social media posts. They are all signed by Lindsey Halligan in her capacity as United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia after she was disqualified. There's a case involving a guy named Tyrese McKinnon who is alleged showed a disregard for the law by engaging in chronic offenses, whatever that means, and he was sentenced to three years and one month in prison for stealing vehicles from airport park facilities. Signed Lindsey Halligan, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. She's not that position. This guy, Tyrese McKinnon, has grounds for appeal. Now, she screwed up that one. How about this case, Johnny Duran? She says Johnny Duran's crimes are abhorrent. Thanks to the hard work of our prosecutors, this child predator has been removed from our communities. Signed, Lindsey Halligan, Eastern District of Virginia, United States Attorney. Okay, as you say over here, the Eastern District of Virginia will pursue offenders with the full force of federal law. But Halligan, you may now have given an individual who you refer to as a child predator a grounds for appeal because you're not the lawful United States Attorney and you're writing these messages. That predator who you're talking about, who you're calling a predator, he'll be able to appeal that Scott Allen Bulger case after case. Mark Gaba, I'm just, I'm going through all of the filings in the Eastern District of Virginia that they're promoting, and she's saying that she's the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, which she's not. I think it's also important to point out the following as well. Benjamin Weiss does a good job pointing this out. So as she's falsely representing. She's the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. The White House back in December, quietly filed Lindsey Halligan's formal nomination to become a United States Attorney, asking for Senate confirmation. So after she was disqualified by the judge for being an unlawful United States Attorney, the Trump regime's response is, well, now let's ask the Senate to confirm her. Well, how could the Senate confirm her if she was now basically violating the law? Isn't that per se shown that she should not be appointed? But then, as Benjamin Weiss goes on to point out in her judiciary questionnaire, she lists the DOJ's cases against Comey and Letitia James among her top experience to be the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. So the cases where she was disqualified as the lead prosecutor, she's putting that on her Senate questionnaire as her main qualifications for the job as United States Attorney. They're like, why should we appoint you as U.S. attorney? Name your top cases. She cites the cases where she was unlawfully the United States Attorney. She also says that the case against Comey is pending, which it is not pending. It is dismissed. And she says the case against James remains ongoing, which it is not. Both indictments have been dismissed. Sure, the DOJ may be exploring re indicting both, but they have failed to re indict Letitia James in multiple grand juries already. So she, in her questionnaire, I think, is also committing misconduct by falsely representing cases are ongoing that are not ongoing. They are dismissed. She lied to the Senate as well in this questionnaire. So you take a look here as well at her questionnaire, and I was just curious at our questionnaire. One of the things I found interesting is that there's a statement of assets and net worth. Um, you go to her net worth statement. She says she has a hundred thousand dollars cash on hand and that her Overall assets are $563,000. That basically her total net worth, she says, is around half a million dollars. I just, I find that to be an interesting number based on how she kind of represents herself and what her net worth is that her net worth is half a million dollars. I'll just leave it at that. You go on and look at this questionnaire as well. It says, list all professional, business, scholarly, fraternal, civic, charitable, or other organizations that you are a member of. She says none indicate whether any of these. And none there published writings. None supply copies of reports or policy statements you prepared. None list titles of publishers, books, articles, reports, editorial pieces that you've written about none pro bono work. Her only pro bono work she ever did was volunteering for the Innocence Project in Miami in 2013. Other than that, she hasn't done any pro bono charitable work. Well, there you have it folks. Let me know what you think. Hit subscribe. Let's get to 6 million and thanks so much for watching. Want to stay plugged in?
- [21:30]
B
Become a subscriber to our substack@midasplus.com you'll get daily recaps from Ron Filipkowski ad free episodes of our podcast and more exclusive content only available@midasplus.com.