Trump’s OWN Judges SHUT HIM DOWN + MORE

Legal battles continue to surround former President Donald Trump on multiple fronts. In the E. Jean Carroll case, Alina Haba's COVID-related delay tactics may have backfired, as Trump could now testify in the trial starting tomorrow. Trump's attempt to appeal the DC Court of Appeals decision regarding the gag order in the DC election interference case was denied, leaving him with the decision to either take it to the Supreme Court or move on. The Supreme Court made a surprising ruling regarding the supremacy clause and immigration, with some justices questioning the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction. Additionally, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York ruled against pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli, setting a precedent for potential consequences for Trump in the New York attorney general case, where the power to ban him from the real estate industry is being considered.

The Ejean Carroll defamation trial against former President Donald Trump is currently on hold due to COVID-19 related issues within the jury. One juror, Alina Haba, claimed to be sick with COVID and was later seen in New Hampshire without a mask, raising questions about her true condition. The judge has kept the jury anonymous and is bringing them back and forth to court to keep them anonymous and ensure their safety. Despite having alternates available, the judge has granted multiple continuances at the request of Haba's lawyers, delaying the trial. This delay has raised questions about Haba's intentions and the tactics being used to delay Trump's testimony, which was originally scheduled before the New Hampshire primary.

The ongoing trial of former President Donald Trump and E. Jean Carroll's defamation case has seen some unexpected twists, with two jurors, including Alina Haba, raising health concerns, leading the judge to pause the proceedings. Haba, a legal adviser, claimed to have a fever and potential COVID-19 exposure, but her attendance at a New Hampshire event with Trump raised eyebrows. The judge is now considering the implications of this development, and the potential impact on Trump's planned testimony. The trial, which has already seen numerous legal briefs exchanged between the parties, is nearing its conclusion, with only a few witnesses and closing arguments remaining. However, the unexpected health concerns could potentially prolong the trial. The back-and-forth between the parties on various issues, including a potential duty to mitigate, adds complexity to the case. Ultimately, the judge's handling of these issues will be crucial in determining the outcome of the trial.

The upcoming defamation trial between E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump will focus on determining the damages, as the prior jury has already determined that Trump acted with malice and defamed Carroll. The trial may be influenced by Trump's past behavior in court, including his repeated lies and attempts to turn the trial into a campaign event. Judge Lewis Kaplan, known for his ability to control the courtroom, is expected to limit Trump's testimony and prevent any disruptions. Trump could face sanctions or a mistrial if he violates the rules set by the judge. The trial's outcome will likely depend on how effectively Judge Kaplan manages Trump's behavior and keeps the focus on the damages.

The upcoming trial against Donald Trump could result in significant financial consequences for him, as the judge may take away his right to have a jury decide the issue and make the decision himself. Trump's behavior during the trial is uncertain, and there's a strong possibility that he will lose. If he takes the stand, he may violate the court order, leading to a default judgment or sanctions. However, if Trump is precluded from testifying or if there's a default judgment against him, he will likely play the victim card. Robbie Kaplan, Trump's opponent in the case, is seeking to have Trump swear that he understands the limits of the trial to prevent it from becoming a circus and to set him up for contempt if necessary. Overall, the trial promises to be a spectacle, and the outcome could have significant implications for Trump.

The Supreme Court's recent decision temporarily protects migrants and the federal government's ability to regulate immigration at the border, despite opposition from states like Texas. Meanwhile, the Second Circuit's decision regarding PharmaBro could impact the power of New York's attorney general in cases against high-profile individuals like Donald Trump. On a different note, AG One, a daily health supplement, offers a simple yet effective solution for essential vitamins, minerals, pre and probiotics, and more, making it a powerful addition to maintaining brain, gut, and immune health. Copilot, a personalized fitness solution, provides customized workouts tailored to individual needs and goals, making fitness a seamless part of one's lifestyle. Both AG One and Copilot aim to simplify aspects of personal wellness, allowing individuals to focus on their peak performance. In essence, the Supreme Court decision marks a significant step in immigration policy, while AG One and Copilot offer simple yet powerful solutions for health and fitness.

The legal proceedings involving Donald Trump's cases in New York and DC are ongoing, with various gag orders and stays in place. The DC Court of Appeals is currently considering whether Trump has presidential immunity from criminal conduct while in office. The ruling is taking longer than expected, leading to delays in trials. Despite the stays, gag orders remain in effect, and Trump has not yet violated them. The legal process is complex and ongoing, with various judges and cases intertwined. The sponsors, including AG1 and Armira, continue to provide valuable products that support the hosts' everyday lives.

The recent decision by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals not to rehear the case concerning the gag order against Donald Trump marks a significant loss for his legal team. The court's denial of the petition for rehearing en banc indicates that none of the judges were willing to reconsider the initial decision, leaving Trump unable to get the necessary votes for the en banc hearing. This follows a pattern of losses for Trump in legal challenges, and raises questions about the effectiveness of his legal strategy and the caliber of his legal team. The lack of support from the appellate judges, many of whom are regarded as potential Supreme Court nominees, further diminishes Trump's chances of success if he decides to appeal the case to the highest court in the land.

Former President Donald Trump's legal team seems to be stalling tactics in various ongoing cases, with the strategy being to delay as much as possible. This delaying tactic is being employed in hopes that Trump can be elected president again and thereby dismiss all the cases without facing any justice. The speaker expresses frustration over the lengthy decision-making process in the DC Circuit regarding presidential immunity, which is delaying the trial. Additionally, a misconception was clarified regarding Jordy not having had a baby yet. The speaker also shares their belief that Judge Chutkin, who is presiding over Trump's case, does not expect Trump's team to be preparing for the March trial, and she has already scheduled another case for April. The speaker speculates that Judge Pan, who is writing the decision, might be having difficulty with a Bush appointee judge or that the decision is taking longer to write.

The ongoing legal battles against Donald Trump, specifically regarding the January 6th Capitol riots, are experiencing significant delays in the court process. The judges, Childs and Pan, are currently deciding whether to grant Trump's request for presidential immunity. The decision is anticipated soon, but every day that passes brings us closer to the election and makes it increasingly difficult to hold Trump accountable for any potential convictions. The Manhattan DA's office, which has a history of taking on high-profile Trump cases, is preparing for a trial in the Stormy Daniels election interference case. This trial could potentially be the first criminal trial against Trump, providing a significant step towards accountability. The importance of this case lies in the fact that every day of delay allows Trump to continue campaigning and potentially win the election, regardless of the outcome of each individual legal argument.

The Midas Touch network, a YouTube channel, is aiming to reach 2,000,000 subscribers, and they are encouraging their audience to help them achieve this goal. If they manage to reach this milestone during their show, they plan to send a special "legal AF" t-shirt to the 2 millionth subscriber. The network values its audience and emphasizes that they cannot exist without their support. The subscription to the network is free, and viewers can easily subscribe on YouTube by clicking the subscription button. The network also plans to display a counter on the screen during the show to motivate their audience and keep them updated on their progress towards their goal. The significance of reaching this number lies in the instant credibility and demonstration of the power of their audience. The hosts, who are competitive, are eager to put the network over the top and will never forget the achievement.

During the discussion, the hosts expressed admiration for an individual's problem-solving skills and then transitioned to discussing the importance of having adequate life insurance coverage. They highlighted Policygenius as a helpful resource for comparing and purchasing life insurance policies, emphasizing its ease of use, affordability, and customer service. Meanwhile, they criticized the state of Texas for implementing policies that hinder federal agencies from carrying out their duties effectively, using the example of the border situation and the impact it had on migrants' lives. The hosts expressed concern over the political theater and the potential harm caused to those seeking asylum in the US.

The United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, temporarily blocked the implementation of razor wire at the border requested by Texas, allowing it to be cut down by border patrol while the appeal continues through the 5th Circuit. The Supreme Court did not make a substantive ruling on the merits of the case but signaled their likely decision. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, voted in favor of blocking the razor wire. The case highlights the ongoing debate over the supremacy clause of the US Constitution, with some justices believing in the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction in immigration and foreign policy, while others do not. Ultimately, this issue underscores the need for Congress to address the current border crisis and provide a lawful way for people to enter the country while ensuring secure borders.

The ongoing dispute over razor wire at the border is not just about that specific issue, but a reflection of the larger failure of the immigration system in the United States. The recent court ruling was technical in nature and did not address the merits of the issue, but rather whether Texas could use state tort law to restrain federal border patrol agents. The cost of razor wire or border patrol salaries is not considered irreparable injury, making an injunction inappropriate. However, the situation is untenable and requires action from Congress. The Supreme Court has signaled its intention to reinstate the supremacy clause and put the federal government back in charge of immigration regulation. The 5th Circuit's ruling allowing the border patrol to take down razor wire is just a temporary measure, and the final outcome remains uncertain. The impact of this case extends beyond razor wire, as it also affects the New York attorney general's powers to seek disgorgement and impose bans on individuals in her case against Donald Trump.

The ruling in the Shirelli case, which involved a lifetime ban and disgorgement of profits for those found guilty of civil fraud, is being used as a roadmap for potential legal action against Donald Trump, Allen Weisselberg, and others involved in the Trump Organization. The New York Attorney General is seeking similar remedies in the ongoing civil fraud trial. The egregious, deliberate, repetitive, long-running, and dangerous nature of the scheme was a key factor in the Shirelli ruling, providing a blueprint for the judge overseeing the Trump case if he decides to impose the same penalties. The importance of integrity and honesty in the legal profession was emphasized, as well as the sense of community among those involved in the legal industry. The disclosure of connections and potential conflicts of interest was also highlighted as essential for maintaining trust and credibility with the audience.

The Midas Touch network, which includes a website, video and audio podcasts, newsroom, social media, and merchandise store, offers various ways for audiences to engage with their content. The network provides free access to podcasts and news, and viewers can support the show by subscribing, sharing clips, and purchasing merchandise. The network also produces bite-sized versions of their shows, such as Legal AF After Dark, to introduce new audiences to their content. The Midas Touch network has seen significant growth, with over 2,000,000 subscribers and almost 3,000,000,000 views. It all started during the COVID-19 pandemic when the founders were looking for content and the speaker joined them with fresh perspectives. The network's success is a testament to their dedication to providing valuable content and engaging with their audience in various ways.

The beginning of the Legal AF podcast started as a special edition of the Midas Touch Brothers podcast on Wednesday nights, but when they decided to establish their own brand, they named it Legal AF and have been consistently producing content for the past three years. The hosts, Ben and Michael Bobak, value their audience and appreciate the support they have received, both publicly and privately. An interesting anecdote shared during the discussion was how they used to get excited as kids when the numbers on the side of the radio station's building changed, just as they are excited now about the growth and milestones of their podcast. Additionally, they mentioned a lawsuit with Monsanto and discussed some potential fact-checking regarding the anniversary date. Overall, the conversation emphasized the importance of persistence, branding, and the power of a dedicated audience.