Speaker 1: Thank you for being with me at the Intersection tonight.
Speaker 1: I bumped into a friend of mine today about an
Speaker 1: hour ago as I was finishing dinner with my family
Speaker 1: who is very, very concerned about her right to vote
Speaker 1: and the Democrats and midterms. And it's a person that
Speaker 1: I use as a bellweather because she has very good
Speaker 1: instincts and if she's worried, I know that the messaging
Speaker 1: around voter protection, election elections and databases is not where
Speaker 1: it should be, that Democrats not leading the charge strongly enough.
Speaker 1: And that's why I think it's so perfectly exquisitely timed
Speaker 1: to have Mark Elias join me in about a half
Speaker 1: an hour to give some more confidence to our audience
Speaker 1: that if working together, or we knit ourselves together, we
Speaker 1: protest together, we campaign together, we register to vote together,
Speaker 1: and we vote together, we will overcome all of the
Speaker 1: attempts to steal an election when all those things fall
Speaker 1: into place. So thank you to Sharon. I'm glad I
Speaker 1: bumped into you for many reasons, but what it did
Speaker 1: motivate me for tonight. I have so many things I
Speaker 1: want to talk about that I've curated for you here
Speaker 1: at the Intersection. Thanks for being such fervent supporters. The
Speaker 1: generosity of your time, your spirit, and sometimes your money
Speaker 1: is greatly appreciated. For independent journalists can only exist. You
Speaker 1: are the oxygen that we breathe. We can't exist without you.
Speaker 1: Let me kick it off with something. It's all linked
Speaker 1: to voting and Donald Trump's assault unvoting, and of course
Speaker 1: the Iranian War, where Donald Trump blithefully tells the America people, Oh,
Speaker 1: don't worry, the midterms won't impact my Iranian strategy that
Speaker 1: presupposes there is an Iranian strategy. Trump got very angry
Speaker 1: today at a reporter, obviously a female reporter, when she
Speaker 1: said to him, mister president, what's the plan. Is there
Speaker 1: a plan? And that he had to put upon is
Speaker 1: there something you don't know, something I don't know? Is
Speaker 1: there a plan? I mean, she asked a very good question.
Speaker 1: I'm one degree separated from somebody that knows somebody this
Speaker 1: close to President Trump and is part of his inner circle.
Speaker 1: And that person said, to that inner circled person, so
Speaker 1: what's the plan. And the person who's this close to
Speaker 1: Donald Trump said there is no plan. There's no plan.
Speaker 1: It's Tuesday, that's the plan. And that was somebody I
Speaker 1: can't reveal who it is right now. But when when
Speaker 1: I finally am able to completely consistent with this reporter.
Speaker 1: I don't think we have that clip, but completely consistent
Speaker 1: with that reporter's quitequestioning and Donald Trump acting so put
Speaker 1: upon about being asked a fundamental question about his stewardship
Speaker 1: of this folly of a war that's already taken the
Speaker 1: live of almost twenty service people, probably more more than
Speaker 1: four hundred and fifty wounded, probably more and more to come.
Speaker 1: And we're running out of missiles. That's not the reporting
Speaker 1: over the weekend. We're literally running out of munitions because
Speaker 1: we weren't prepared to go to war with Iran, especially
Speaker 1: the way that Donald Trump is navigating it. In fact,
Speaker 1: I think we have a clip of Trump today in
Speaker 1: the Oval Office talking about the war.
Speaker 2: There are no signs that Iran is ready to stop fighting.
Speaker 1: So what is the plan?
Speaker 2: Is the plan to just keep bombing until that you're out?
Speaker 2: You know something that I don't know. You don't know
Speaker 2: what the dialogue is behind the scenes, that they want
Speaker 2: to meet the control and ended because they're getting decimated.
Speaker 1: You don't get that when you listen to your state station,
Speaker 1: but you don't know.
Speaker 2: You don't know anything.
Speaker 3: You know something that I don't know.
Speaker 2: You know something I don't know. I will tell you
Speaker 2: that they want to get forty and until they're ready
Speaker 2: to meet in a meaningful way, we have no interest
Speaker 2: when even.
Speaker 1: All right, So there's that clip, right, So you know
Speaker 1: she has a very good follow up question. So tell
Speaker 1: us this is what you know, reporters. Scrums are supposed
Speaker 1: to be about to educate the American people. Remember when
Speaker 1: in Wars passed and I asked that you. Ben and
Speaker 1: I were preparing for the show last Saturday and we
Speaker 1: were talking about the war, and I said, well, where
Speaker 1: is Donald Trump's Norman schwartzkof Where is his Colin Powell?
Speaker 1: Where is his general strategist briefing the American people on
Speaker 1: a daily basis about the war that's being conducted. There
Speaker 1: is one, because there is no plan. There is no
Speaker 1: genius military strategist that's in charge. This is it, folks,
Speaker 1: this is you know, I'm showing you the magic trick.
Speaker 1: This is it. It's Pete hagg Seth, a lieutenant general
Speaker 1: who was elevated to general kin And that's about it.
Speaker 1: And a whole bunch of other leaders who got tossed
Speaker 1: on their ass by Pete Hegseth because he was challenged. See,
Speaker 1: in my career, I've always wanted smart and smarter people
Speaker 1: than me around me. At continues, Oh no, not Pete Hegseth, No, no, no,
Speaker 1: you're your criteria for being to having a career under
Speaker 1: Pete Hegseth is that you are dumber than him. And
Speaker 1: we're watching the war play out, And does anybody really
Speaker 1: believe Donald Trump that Iran is calling him back channel
Speaker 1: and begging for the war to stop. That is that even?
Speaker 1: Is that even a thing? I don't think so. And
Speaker 1: then we have the confirmation nine to eight see elections
Speaker 1: matter of the new Director of National Intelligence, Jake Clayton. Everybody,
Speaker 1: come on down, Jay, tell us a little bit about yourself. Well,
Speaker 1: I like to play golf with the President. I did
Speaker 1: that very well. Okay. I was the Securities and Securities
Speaker 1: in Exchange Commission chief for the first term. That was
Speaker 1: my dream job. Okay. And what is your background. Oh,
Speaker 1: I'm a corporate transactional lawyer. That's what I did my
Speaker 1: whole lot. I did deals. Great. Are you leaving out
Speaker 1: anything about your national intelligence experience as spymaster, perhaps worked
Speaker 1: in the FBI, the CIA, the Director of National Intelligence before. Nope,
Speaker 1: don't have any of that. I am a tremendous loyalist
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump, and I have on occasion, including during
Speaker 1: my confirmation hearing denied the election results. This is the
Speaker 1: new Director of National Intelligence, to which seventeen different intelligence agency, civilian,
Speaker 1: and military now report. And if you think he's an
Speaker 1: upgrade from Tulci Gabbert, only it's only because Tulci gab
Speaker 1: Gabbart for years was rumored to be a Russian asset
Speaker 1: who was a puppet of Putin and read his talking
Speaker 1: points like like she was a talking head on one
Speaker 1: of those news shows on Russian television. So I guess
Speaker 1: he's better than that. But if you thought, well, it'll
Speaker 1: be a breath of fresh air to have somebody else
Speaker 1: to which the CIA reports and advising Donald Trump, well
Speaker 1: think again, because he got tripped up by one question
Speaker 1: that he should have saw coming a mile away, which is,
Speaker 1: are you an election denier or not? That's what we
Speaker 1: need to know before we make you the Director of
Speaker 1: National Intelligence, especially after Tulci Gabbert was caught wearing her
Speaker 1: baseball cap lurking around places like Fulton County, Georgia and
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico, trying to take and grab voting machines, saying
Speaker 1: it was her job as the Director of National Intelligency.
Speaker 1: Trump is using the national intelligence community that he now controls,
Speaker 1: the and the FBI and the Department of Justice now
Speaker 1: led by him, and a whole band of mary election
Speaker 1: deniers that all reside inside and outside the White House. Right,
Speaker 1: Cleta Mitchell write the name. Now we'll talk about it more.
Speaker 1: When Mark Elias joins us, a lawyer, election lawyer at
Speaker 1: some point created something called the Election Integrity Network the
Speaker 1: ei N, putting chapters in every state. And wouldn't you
Speaker 1: know it, there is an election integrity department inside the
Speaker 1: White House led by an election denier, Kurt Olsen. So
Speaker 1: many of the things that we're watching is this two
Speaker 1: step play between Kurt Olsen and then the Director of
Speaker 1: National Intelligence, Tulci Gabbert. And that led to the seizure
Speaker 1: of equipment in Puerto Rico and in Georgia. And now
Speaker 1: you've got Jake Clayton. Jake Clayton at one time, you know,
Speaker 1: he'd been like a prosecutor back in the day you
Speaker 1: know he had some some ethics. Go oh god, watch
Speaker 1: a senator as off of Georgia. Just ask a simple
Speaker 1: question and see the response for our what could likely
Speaker 1: be on the nine to eight vote voting amount of
Speaker 1: committee today our next director of National Intelligence? Play the clip?
Speaker 4: Yes, who won the twenty twenty election?
Speaker 1: You know what, I'm not going to do this with you.
Speaker 4: This is a job interview. We've established that you have
Speaker 4: an obligation to pretty honest and forthright with the committee. Yes,
Speaker 4: you do have an obligation to be honest and forthright
Speaker 4: with the committee. Yes, who won the twenty twenty election?
Speaker 5: Like I said, I'm not going to get into that.
Speaker 4: With you, but you do have an obligation to be
Speaker 4: honest and forthright with the committee. Is anything that I
Speaker 4: just said non honest or forthright? Yes, you're not being
Speaker 4: honest or forthright. Who won the ask the question? We
Speaker 4: can keep doing this, Well, we're going to keep doing
Speaker 4: it because you're not being honest and forth right.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to engage in the theater.
Speaker 4: It's a simple question, mister Clayton, And I've asked who
Speaker 4: won the twenty twenty presidential election? I've answered it you're
Speaker 4: here asking for the support of senators to lead America's
Speaker 4: intelligence community. We've established that you have an obligation to
Speaker 4: be honest and forthright with this committee and with the
Speaker 4: American public. But you refuse to answer a simple matter
Speaker 4: of fact about the twenty twenty election.
Speaker 1: Is that right?
Speaker 3: No, that's not right.
Speaker 4: Then answer the question who won twenty twenty election? Answer it?
Speaker 4: What is your answer?
Speaker 1: I've given you my answer.
Speaker 4: What is your answer? You refuse to answer a basic
Speaker 4: question about who won a presidential election, but you asked
Speaker 4: to lead America's intelligence community. Isn't it humiliating to be
Speaker 4: un able to answer this question? To have to indulge
Speaker 4: the president's delusions? We know you know everybody in this
Speaker 4: room knows the truthful answer to that question. Why can
Speaker 4: you not give it?
Speaker 1: I think I gave you the answer. Are you aware
Speaker 1: that Director gap right, I gave you the answer. I'm
Speaker 1: not answering the question. I'll kill my job, opportunity, my
Speaker 1: job I'm trying out for with my main client, Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: I'm not giving you the answer. I love Senator Osa
Speaker 1: for so many reasons. By the way, he's up for
Speaker 1: election at the midterms, and a little bit of a
Speaker 1: programming note. His colleague, Reverend Senator Warnock, is going to
Speaker 1: be joining me tomorrow on Legal af for an exclusive
Speaker 1: interview to talk about voting, voter protection, the United States
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, and his ideas of what the Democrats should
Speaker 1: do if they get all three branches of government. It's
Speaker 1: a must see YouTube interview, podcast interview. And he's also
Speaker 1: going to be working hard to get his friend and
Speaker 1: colleague center asoff Re elected. And I think we just
Speaker 1: saw the reason why we need him in the Senate.
Speaker 1: But it was a close vote, but it was nine
Speaker 1: Republicans and eight Democrats. Are those that caucus with us
Speaker 1: that confirmed that guy to be the Director of National Intelligence?
Speaker 1: Now a puppet, a tool of Donald Trump to be
Speaker 1: used in his attack on voting, No doubt about it.
Speaker 1: He's already used him as an attack on free press.
Speaker 1: You know what his parting gift was. You can, by
Speaker 1: the way, we're live live when Mark Elias joins too.
Speaker 1: Put your questions in comments tonight and our staff will
Speaker 1: flag it for me and put it up on a
Speaker 1: screen for me, and I'll try to answer as many
Speaker 1: as I can. You know what Jay Clayton is parting
Speaker 1: gift to Donald Trump was when he was the acting
Speaker 1: Southern well the Southern District of New York Manhattan federal prosecutor,
Speaker 1: the subpoenas against the New York Times reporters and their
Speaker 1: mother's phone records and testimony before a grand jury as
Speaker 1: they try to get to the bottom of the leak
Speaker 1: of the anonymous sources. The New York Times relied on
Speaker 1: to report that the Katari Air Force one is unsafe
Speaker 1: at any speed, is unsafe to fly, and doesn't have
Speaker 1: the missile protection components and apparatus that all the other
Speaker 1: Air Force ones have had. All they gotta get to
Speaker 1: the bottom of who who leaked that? Who leaked that?
Speaker 1: You just look at the plane. There's there's a there's
Speaker 1: a periodical that I look at for plane issues called
Speaker 1: Aviation Weekly.
Speaker 3: Go check it out.
Speaker 1: They have photos it's not classified, of the tail and
Speaker 1: the back end of the current the real air Force one,
Speaker 1: the baby blue one with all of the anti missile
Speaker 1: systems in place. And I'll look at the tale of
Speaker 1: the Katari plane, the reality of by the way, oh
Speaker 1: was I'm on the Quitari plane that was a flying
Speaker 1: albatross that for decades a decade. The Kataris tried to sell,
Speaker 1: they couldn't find a taker until they gave it to
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. That plane was on the market for almost
Speaker 1: ten years. It's a fourteen year old plane. Trump announced
Speaker 1: it as a four hundred million dollar gift, according to
Speaker 1: sources in the aviation world. At best it was one
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty million, maybe two hundred million tops, because
Speaker 1: it was a depreciating asset. And then it needed to
Speaker 1: be retrofitted with a billion dollars in two years worth
Speaker 1: of retrofitting. But of course Donald Trump likes to cut
Speaker 1: corners on every building project he does. See reflecting pool,
Speaker 1: see ballroom, see arc the Triumph, see Kennedy Center. And
Speaker 1: so suddenly he cut a year off of the retrofitting,
Speaker 1: and still the billion dollars. And then you know, there's
Speaker 1: two new Air Force ones being delivered by Boeing right
Speaker 1: at the end of his term for the next president.
Speaker 1: And that's when he gets to say, and I'll be
Speaker 1: flying away and the one we don't need, No, we
Speaker 1: don't need this Kuitari one with the billion dollars of
Speaker 1: taxpayer dollars, I'm gonna fly it away to Miami, you know,
Speaker 1: like the helicopters leaving Hanoi in Vietnam, or Nixon flying
Speaker 1: off after his disgraceful resignation to fly away, and he's
Speaker 1: gonna try to anyway in that Kutari plane. And so
Speaker 1: that was Jay Clayton's parting gift. Right now, there's a
Speaker 1: motion to quash pending by the New York Dimes. Shout
Speaker 1: out to the New York Dimes doing some tremendous reporting
Speaker 1: lately under fierce. They're taking heavy artillery from the Presidency
Speaker 1: and from the Department of Justice. Heavy Maggie Abram and
Speaker 1: Jonathan Swan in the situation room, you know, with recordings
Speaker 1: or transcripts about Epstein files and everything else. And now
Speaker 1: this but a judge, judge, a supermanian Biden appointee in
Speaker 1: the Southern District of New York, has blocked for now
Speaker 1: those and quashed for now those subpoenas until he can
Speaker 1: get his mind around with further briefing. And then I
Speaker 1: want to turn to the Block Blanche movement, which is
Speaker 1: gaining a tremendous head of steam. You see what can
Speaker 1: happen though with a close vote nine to eight for
Speaker 1: j Clayton, but the Block Blanche movement is really important.
Speaker 1: And who's leading the charge, who's out in front with
Speaker 1: the pitchforks and the torches. The Epstein survivors. Of course
Speaker 1: they are. Who has the moral authority encourage more than
Speaker 1: the Epstein authorities to call for the block of the
Speaker 1: of voting for Todd Blanche who no one. They're the
Speaker 1: living embody of the scandal of the of the of
Speaker 1: the child sex trafficking cover up and the cover up
Speaker 1: of the cover up by Todd Blanche and his Department
Speaker 1: of Justice and Donald Trump to protect his client because
Speaker 1: of his relationships with the leaders of that child who
Speaker 1: were friends of his, of that child sex trafficking ring
Speaker 1: and more. Of course it's not gonna be the you know,
Speaker 1: the other major scandal is JAN six, the JA six
Speaker 1: fund and the release given to the Trump family. Who's
Speaker 1: the living embodiment of that the JAN sixers. No, So
Speaker 1: you've got to have and their willingness. This twenty five
Speaker 1: or so Epstein survivors out of fourteen hundred, like people
Speaker 1: like Danny Benski, who I'm gonna have the honor of interviewing.
Speaker 1: I think this week, I think this week is my
Speaker 1: Danny Benski interview. I think it might be on Thursday
Speaker 1: on Legal af YouTube channel. I've had Danny on before.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 1: I was not surprised that they picked Danny Benski to
Speaker 1: testify against Todd Blanche and then Todd Blanche because he
Speaker 1: was forced into it or it was choreographed with Tom
Speaker 1: Tillis was forced to meet with the Epstein survivors and
Speaker 1: like a schoolboy dragged to the principal's office where a
Speaker 1: person walking around with a stone in his shoe. He
Speaker 1: let it be known immediately he didn't want to be there.
Speaker 1: It was it was degrading and insulting and pecked and patronizing,
Speaker 1: patronizing to the Epstein survivors. That didn't help. In fact,
Speaker 1: if you wonder what I'm talking about, rather than me
Speaker 1: comment on it, let's play a clip of the Epstein
Speaker 1: survivors talking about their meeting with Todd Blinch.
Speaker 6: It wasn't substantive, It was not productive. It very much
Speaker 6: felt like we were just taking the box off of
Speaker 6: the meeting. I didn't expect to walk out of the
Speaker 6: meeting feeling the way that we feel right now.
Speaker 1: It was.
Speaker 6: Demoralizing, to say the very least.
Speaker 7: His attempt at empathy and compassion. Really came off as
Speaker 7: patronizing and condescending. It was very clear he was taking
Speaker 7: the meeting because he wants this premiere.
Speaker 1: Well, I couldn't put it any better than that. And
Speaker 1: when I have Danny Benski on for our audience, we'll
Speaker 1: talk to her about that. Todd Blanche filed answers to
Speaker 1: four hundred and forty one pages of questions by the
Speaker 1: members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I got my hands
Speaker 1: on them. I'm making my way through them now. Two
Speaker 1: things that popped out already. One, at least he answered
Speaker 1: the question of who won the twenty twenty election. Of course,
Speaker 1: he answered it with the patty answer that the MAGA give,
Speaker 1: which is Joe Biden was certified by Congress and the
Speaker 1: Electoral College as the person who won. I'm like, oh
Speaker 1: my god, can't you just say that the winner was
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. Spare us, Spare us the robotic programming. You
Speaker 1: know that you've been given. You know, it's like the
Speaker 1: Manchurian candidate, So makeup. That was one. And secondly, he
Speaker 1: admits he admits, in a response to a question from
Speaker 1: Cornan that he is not independent. He will not be
Speaker 1: an independent from the president attorney general. He thinks that's
Speaker 1: a bad thing. He thinks he's just a regular cabinet
Speaker 1: member that's not independent, and that Donald Trump controls well,
Speaker 1: I'm lead, he said it out loud. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: other things in there that I think are really really interesting,
Speaker 1: including his responses to Tom tell Us. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: he's not all the votes wrapped up. The vote is
Speaker 1: going to be the end of this month, in about
Speaker 1: eight or nine days. They'll first fill the seat vacated
Speaker 1: by Lindsay Graham's death on the Judiciary Committee, and then
Speaker 1: they're going to vote with that committee twelve twelve to ten.
Speaker 1: It'll be twelve Republicans, ten Democrats. But Cornyn has said today,
Speaker 1: as we just put up the headline, I'm not satisfied
Speaker 1: with the answers. And the answers he's talking about is
Speaker 1: not just the ones in those little ten minute clips
Speaker 1: that we've been playing. It's the four hundred and forty
Speaker 1: one pages. So if I can show you what that
Speaker 1: looks like. This is part of the four hundred and
Speaker 1: forty one pages I have organized, and these are all
Speaker 1: single space questions that he needed to answer. Of course,
Speaker 1: so there's a lot of I reject the premise of
Speaker 1: your question. He's able to answer it. He's about as
Speaker 1: straight as a quarkscrew. Todd Blanche, he answers a few
Speaker 1: of them straight. For the rest of them, it's a
Speaker 1: lot of sea above. It's an active investigation. There's a
Speaker 1: grand jury process. I follow the law. The Department of
Speaker 1: Justice always follows the law. I'm like, really, because that's
Speaker 1: not what we've been watching for the last five hundred
Speaker 1: and forty days plus. So Cornyon still on the fence.
Speaker 1: Tom Tillis, I don't think that's what he had in
Speaker 1: mind when he said you better meet with the Epstein
Speaker 1: survivors or I'm not going to vote for you. Pissing
Speaker 1: them off and crapping on them and victimizing the victims
Speaker 1: was not quite I think what Tom Tillis had in mind.
Speaker 1: And even if they voted for for a Blanche and
Speaker 1: voted him out of committee, it doesn't mean they couldn't
Speaker 1: take back their vote under public pressure. That's where we
Speaker 1: come in, uh and vote against him on the Senate floor.
Speaker 1: That could happen. It's happened in the past, you know,
Speaker 1: and everybody that I've spoken to and all of the
Speaker 1: groups that collaborate with with Legal a f NAACP, A
Speaker 1: c l U and the Democracy Forward, Senators, Attorneys General,
Speaker 1: they all say the same thing. Pick up the phone
Speaker 1: and make a pest of yourself, you know, go to
Speaker 1: your go to your your Congress offices. There could be
Speaker 1: home for the summer. Be a pest in the Senate
Speaker 1: office in your area. Okay, go to the town halls
Speaker 1: email phone the senators tell them to block the We're
Speaker 1: going to be doing a little bit of a programming
Speaker 1: note again along with Not Above the Law, We're going
Speaker 1: to be hosting the live stream of a major block
Speaker 1: blanch event Thursday night at eight pm Eastern time. I'll
Speaker 1: be sort of doing the intro for it. It's going
Speaker 1: to have Dick Durbin, Senator, Dick Durbin, Representative ro Kanna, Representative,
Speaker 1: Lamonica mcguver represent we have Norm Eisen is there, Lisa
Speaker 1: Graves from Court Accountability Action and Legal AF, We've got
Speaker 1: one of one of the Capitol Police are going to
Speaker 1: be there. You're not going to want to miss this
Speaker 1: live stream. We're going to put in the notes a
Speaker 1: link to it, so you guys and actually if my
Speaker 1: staff could do it, put a link in the chat
Speaker 1: to the live stream, and if we can get an
Speaker 1: asset up before I'm done talking, would be good too
Speaker 1: to show people when I'm talking about. So that's going
Speaker 1: to be on Thursday. It's under the live tab right
Speaker 1: now for legal a f set your reminders. You're not
Speaker 1: gonna want to miss it. And at the end it's
Speaker 1: a major motivator and call to action for people to
Speaker 1: do something to block Todd Blanch from being confirmed. The
Speaker 1: other person is working hard to get Todd Blanche exposed
Speaker 1: and blocked is our friend and colleague, Katie Fang. Katie
Speaker 1: Fang's lawsuit is far from over. In fact, some of
Speaker 1: the best parts of it may have just begun because
Speaker 1: yesterday in a what's the legal ternam, I'm looking for
Speaker 1: piece of shit two page filing by Stan Woodward. Remember him.
Speaker 1: He's now the number two in the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: under Todd Blanch. But he used to be Walton Aude's
Speaker 1: defense lawyer in the mar al Lago case. That was
Speaker 1: the Butler body man that got also charged with conspiracy,
Speaker 1: obstruction at espionage. He also are that are a lot
Speaker 1: of jan sixers. Yeah, he's number two in the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice now and they parachute him in all the
Speaker 1: time in order to in order to handle some of
Speaker 1: these cases where they're losing. So in Katie Fang's lawsuit,
Speaker 1: they had to file because the judge gave him one
Speaker 1: more chance to avoid contempt, one more chance to avoid
Speaker 1: a fine, having already granted her preliminary injunction. Five major
Speaker 1: categories of documents related to the Epstein files not produced
Speaker 1: by the government and not adequately explained in their filings.
Speaker 1: Judge ordered them to translate the foreign language documents in
Speaker 1: an international child sex trafficking ring. Didn't do it, didn't
Speaker 1: even mention it in their two pages. That took them
Speaker 1: seven days to write with typos. Again, I'm not making
Speaker 1: this up. It's up on legal app substack. So you've
Speaker 1: got foreign language documents, the handwritten FBI notes for four
Speaker 1: different interviews a woman who claims that when she was
Speaker 1: thirteen she was sexually abused by Donald Trump. Yeah, we'd
Speaker 1: like to see those. That's part of the Epstein files.
Speaker 1: The redaction log. How about that? Howbout two hundred thousand
Speaker 1: pages catalog about why you block them out and so
Speaker 1: we understand it, and so we can challenge it on
Speaker 1: a log. Nope, don't even mention the failure to do
Speaker 1: the log. And so all they said of the judge is, oh,
Speaker 1: Katie Fang's hyperbolic, and we're not. I'm not making this up.
Speaker 1: This is the extent of it. When they're not attacking
Speaker 1: the judge outside the courtroom, they do that all the time.
Speaker 1: Noise Headline Chasing Judge Emmitt Sullivan headline. Has anybody ever
Speaker 1: heard of Emmitt Sullivan before we started covering him on
Speaker 1: Legal Headline Chasing. I don't think so. And I had
Speaker 1: the great pleasure of interviewing Katie Fang, who's away from
Speaker 1: the country but working her butt off on a bustman's holiday, working, working,
Speaker 1: work and working, and I interviewed her. It's going to
Speaker 1: be going up tomorrow at nine p thirty Eastern Time
Speaker 1: on Legal aff YouTube channel. Here's a clip.
Speaker 6: Judge Sullivan ordered him to do so in the preliminary injunction.
Speaker 6: And I think that is really important to show that
Speaker 6: Todd Blanche knows he's up shit creek. He just wants
Speaker 6: to try to gaslight the court and the world into
Speaker 6: thinking that they're actually wearing a real white hat of
Speaker 6: Justice when in reality, what are they hiding?
Speaker 8: Right?
Speaker 1: What are they hiding? That is a very good question.
Speaker 1: You know, you don't work over time the way that
Speaker 1: Todd Blanche is working in the Department of Justice. If
Speaker 1: you don't have something to hide, if you're completely blameless
Speaker 1: and there's nothing in those files that are of any
Speaker 1: great concern that we haven't already known, you'd release them.
Speaker 1: That is how Donald Trump could have gotten the Monkey
Speaker 1: office back, right, this is the pink elephant in the
Speaker 1: corner or whatever. But he never could do it because
Speaker 1: he knows there's things in there, as he's confided according
Speaker 1: to reporting in other people. He knows there are things
Speaker 1: in there that are bad for him and bad for others.
Speaker 1: And that's why they keep playing this ridiculous game of
Speaker 1: hide and seek. But thankfully Katie Fang and her lawyer
Speaker 1: Brendan Blue's been on with me as well. This is
Speaker 1: the last piece of paper, This two pager that they
Speaker 1: filed took him seven days. I can't wait till Mark Elias,
Speaker 1: who's about to join us after the break. I can't
Speaker 1: wait to talk to Mark about this two page filing
Speaker 1: by page and a half filing by Stan Woodward it's
Speaker 1: gonna piss off EMMITTT. Sullivan. Judge Sullivan, I'm gonna I
Speaker 1: could just see him about to bellow, how dare you
Speaker 1: come into my court room with this this thing that
Speaker 1: Katie and I joked that if this was handed into
Speaker 1: us by a junior associate or a mid level associate
Speaker 1: in our law firms, we might have fired them like this.
Speaker 1: This is a reply brief to Katie Fang's paper. And
Speaker 1: any day now tomorrow, early next week, Sullivan, I think
Speaker 1: is going to lower the boom on Todd. Blanche of
Speaker 1: course would be around to report on it. And then
Speaker 1: as we were coming on the air, Alan Dershowitz always
Speaker 1: finds a way to make himself both the center of
Speaker 1: the story and take the hump position. He famously was
Speaker 1: Epstein's lawyer when he wasn't a Harvard law whatever. Epstein's lawyer.
Speaker 1: According to reporting, like Julie K. Brown, he was busy
Speaker 1: abusing survivors and victims and trying to and trying to
Speaker 1: attack them and claim that they were sexual harlots. I
Speaker 1: just saw him recently say exactly this, So I don't
Speaker 1: know why people think he's gonna come after me, like
Speaker 1: CNN He literally said that these were women, girls who
Speaker 1: knew what they were doing, and I don't know got
Speaker 1: what they deserved. I mean he almost said it. I
Speaker 1: mean it's ridiculous. So when Dershowitz and now is not
Speaker 1: a tremendous maga trumper, he was. You know, he was
Speaker 1: supposed to appear before the Oversight Committee hearing with James Comer,
Speaker 1: and he didn't, and it pissed off Comber. In fact,
Speaker 1: Comber has said he's got a subpoena Dershowitz. Dershowitz came
Speaker 1: up with some fake, fake story about his lawyers told
Speaker 1: him he shouldn't appear. Well, now you're going to get
Speaker 1: a subpoena because now that the Epstein survivors have been
Speaker 1: all over the Senate and all over the House, you're
Speaker 1: not going to be able to get away with Oh.
Speaker 1: I couldn't make it, especially where when he's he's everywhere else,
Speaker 1: He's everywhere else. There's some talk show nobody's watching in
Speaker 1: New York on radio. He appeared there. But he can't
Speaker 1: appear to the House Oversight Committee to do justice for
Speaker 1: the Epstein survivors. Of course he can't. He's already attacked
Speaker 1: them as being the as asking for it. Effectively, he's disgusting.
Speaker 1: Comber's got to get Dershowitz under oath and subpoena as
Speaker 1: soon as possible. The next segment after, you know, after
Speaker 1: our quick break, is going to be all about voting,
Speaker 1: which is where I started tonight's podcast. Voter cases that
Speaker 1: are out there, the election integrity database error riddled as
Speaker 1: it is, this olive garden scenario that they're running in
Speaker 1: red states, like olive garden polices. It's all you can
Speaker 1: eat past the bar more than Democratic states, Blue states
Speaker 1: police voting. I'm like, I don't know what the heck
Speaker 1: if you're talking about, but we'll talk about that. And
Speaker 1: the revelation today in New Jersey came out with it
Speaker 1: to their credit that there were a number of people
Speaker 1: who were registered to vote that shouldn't have been and
Speaker 1: I was like three thousand or four thousand people out
Speaker 1: of millions and four hundred or so that voted. But
Speaker 1: it's been caught, they're going to be prosecuted, they're gonna there.
Speaker 1: It wasn't outcome determinative, it's it's within you know, point
Speaker 1: one percent or whatever. But of course now Trump's like, oh,
Speaker 1: this is why I need the databases. So I want
Speaker 1: to talk to Mark Elias about all of that as well.
Speaker 1: And then at the end of the show, I want
Speaker 1: to talk about Peter Navarro getting suffering a step back today.
Speaker 1: Couldn't happen to a nicer Maga Jhan sixer than Peter
Speaker 1: Navarro at the Pellic Court. And I'll give you an
Speaker 1: update about the Biden tapes and all of that. But
Speaker 1: so many different ways to support what we do on
Speaker 1: the Intersection. You're doing it already. You're here, you're here,
Speaker 1: you're listening, you're watching. Come over if you're a watcher,
Speaker 1: if you're a legal if you're an intersection YouTuber, come
Speaker 1: over to the audio podcast. That's wherever you get your
Speaker 1: audio podcast from. Plug in the Intersection, hit download or subscribe.
Speaker 1: That's it, and we need more there it is. We
Speaker 1: need more downloads, Eat more Chicken. We need more downloads
Speaker 1: for this podcast. The views are outstanding, it's often three
Speaker 1: to five hundred thousand a week, but audio downloads still
Speaker 1: drives a lot of traffic, if you will, and it's
Speaker 1: very very helpful. So that's one Legal af the YouTube
Speaker 1: channel that I curate. Early voting has started there we're
Speaker 1: trying to get to two million subscribers by the midterms.
Speaker 1: We'll do it. We'll do it with your help. Check
Speaker 1: right now, whether you are a subscriber or not, hit
Speaker 1: the free subscribe button and that'll help us. Substack Legal
Speaker 1: af Substack, I do a live report every day. We've
Speaker 1: got all the filings under filings af I had left
Speaker 1: Parnisan Today. I have an amazing cast of characters that
Speaker 1: come up with me and talk at live when I'm
Speaker 1: not doing my own commentary. But you're gonna like everything
Speaker 1: about substack and legal a f substack, so come over
Speaker 1: there and support us as well. And then we've got
Speaker 1: our pro Intersection pro democracy sponsor's handpicked by Jordy Micellis
Speaker 1: and me, and well let's take a break for them now.
Speaker 1: A lot of people hear about GLP one medications and
Speaker 1: assume they're out of reach because of the costs, so
Speaker 1: they never even look into treatment or may be more
Speaker 1: affordable options than people realize. ROW helps eligible patients find
Speaker 1: the lowest cost path to FDA approve GLP one treatment,
Speaker 1: whether that's through insurance coverage or lower cost cash pay options.
Speaker 1: Rowse free insurance checker lets you see which GLP one
Speaker 1: medications are covered by your insurance and whether a prior
Speaker 1: authorization may be required. You don't have to be a
Speaker 1: ROW member to receive your coverage support, and if insurance
Speaker 1: doesn't cover treatment or you don't have insurance to check.
Speaker 1: ROW also offers lower cost FDA approved cash pay options,
Speaker 1: including GLP one pills. Before being prescribed medication, patients must
Speaker 1: complete an online Medical Visit lab test if needed, and
Speaker 1: qualify for medication based on their BMI lab results, medical history,
Speaker 1: and the discretion of a ROW affiliated healthcare provider. One
Speaker 1: thing I really appreciate is that ROW makes it simple
Speaker 1: to see what's covered. Pe for making a decision, go
Speaker 1: to ro dot co slash intersection to see if you qualify.
Speaker 1: That's ro dot co slash intersection. To get started on ROW,
Speaker 1: go to Row dot co slash Safety. That's ro dot
Speaker 1: co slash safety for boxed warnings and full safety information
Speaker 1: about GLP one medications. One of the very best investments
Speaker 1: I've ever made for my health has been getting better sleep,
Speaker 1: and my Lisa Mattress has made a real difference. At
Speaker 1: the end of a long day, It's the place where
Speaker 1: I can actually unwind it's supportive without feeling stiff, comfortable
Speaker 1: without sinking, and I wake up feeling more rusted and
Speaker 1: ready to tackle the day. Lisa has a lineup a
Speaker 1: beautifully crafted mattresses tailor to how you sleep, So whether
Speaker 1: you're a side sleeper, backsleeper, or somewhere in between, there's
Speaker 1: an option for you. They're meticulously designed and assembled right
Speaker 1: here in the U S and they back everything with
Speaker 1: free shipping, easy returns at one hundred and twenty night
Speaker 1: sleep trial. Go to Lisa dot com for twenty five
Speaker 1: percent off select mattresses plus get an extra fifty dollars
Speaker 1: off with promo code truth Exclusive for my listener. So
Speaker 1: that's l E E SA dot com promo code tr
Speaker 1: u th for twenty five percent off select mattresses plus
Speaker 1: an extra fifty dollars off. And when you use our code,
Speaker 1: you're supporting our show. And we are back. And I
Speaker 1: checked on legal af YouTube channel. We're already up to
Speaker 1: one million, one and seventy thousand, adding a number of
Speaker 1: new people during this particular show, and I thank you
Speaker 1: for that. Speaking of being thankful, I'm thankful for people
Speaker 1: like Mark Elias being on Planet Earth talking about his
Speaker 1: work with his law firm side in fending our right
Speaker 1: to vote every hour, every day in lawsuits primarily Appellate
Speaker 1: Court up to the Supreme Court and the rest, and
Speaker 1: also just an expert commentator and clearing house about what
Speaker 1: the Republican omega are up to. You know, the announcement
Speaker 1: about Chinese interference in twenty twenty, which was all a ruse,
Speaker 1: then led we saw to simultaneous announcements of election integrity
Speaker 1: employees or volunteers being hired and Mark Waynemullen holding back
Speaker 1: money unless there's the Save Act has passed and all
Speaker 1: this other bullshit. And so what we're watching is a
Speaker 1: sustained artillery heavy fire by Donald Trump, his Department of
Speaker 1: Justice's Homeland Security is Director of National Intelligence to try
Speaker 1: to undermine faith in the elections and try to scare
Speaker 1: the crap out of us and make us try to
Speaker 1: stay home and not vote. We're not going to let
Speaker 1: that happen. And people like Mark Elias are leading the charge.
Speaker 1: Let's bring in Mark. Hello, Hello, Look what I got.
Speaker 1: I've got my Duke Law alumni bottle.
Speaker 3: There it is, there, it is.
Speaker 1: I don't I don't think I have any I went
Speaker 1: to this year's reunion.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, I got I got nothing for you.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you know you got a lot for me.
Speaker 1: Trust me. Our audience has been waiting with baited breath
Speaker 1: for your arrival. So we were together a couple of
Speaker 1: weeks ago. Some new new developments I wanted to talk
Speaker 1: about every.
Speaker 5: Day, every every day, every hour, every day's new new development.
Speaker 1: My my, my people were talking to your people, like
Speaker 1: what do you think Mark, Mark and Michael are going
Speaker 1: to talk about? Like, I don't know what time is it.
Speaker 1: You know, anything is new. The two things that I
Speaker 1: want to start with are the Election Integrity database and
Speaker 1: this whole Election Integrity Network thing that was the fevered
Speaker 1: imagination of people like Cleta Mitchell and other election deniers.
Speaker 1: Kurt Olsen now embedded deeply within the White House leading
Speaker 1: it there, Cleita and her people outside along with others.
Speaker 1: And this is a broad, broad cabal that's out there.
Speaker 1: And then I read this thing about we'll get to
Speaker 1: New Jersey in a minute. But I read this thing
Speaker 1: about the Olive Garden that they're making proguess primarily to
Speaker 1: Red states. I don't know Blue states go to Olive
Speaker 1: Garden too. About voter protection. Why don't you pick up
Speaker 1: with that, and then we'll talk about how you're anticipating
Speaker 1: they're going to use the New Jersey revelation about some
Speaker 1: people ended up who are not citizens on the voter
Speaker 1: rolls and maybe even voted. How they're going to use
Speaker 1: that against you in your cases.
Speaker 5: Yeah, So this Olive Garden thing, you know, I have
Speaker 5: to say I didn't see coming. Yeah, I've been to
Speaker 5: Olive Garden. I've never had to show ID to eat
Speaker 5: it Olive Garden. But the right wing has sort of
Speaker 5: seized on the idea that I guess Olive Garden is
Speaker 5: selling some kind of you know, all you can Eat pass,
Speaker 5: and you know, when you buy the All you Can
Speaker 5: Need pass, they want to make sure that you are
Speaker 5: the one eating off of the All you Can Need pass.
Speaker 5: I guess so maybe they ask righty. It's very unclear
Speaker 5: what exactly the origin of this is, but you know
Speaker 5: what this fundamentally speaks to is Donald Trump and the
Speaker 5: Republican Party's strategy for twenty twenty six, which is they're
Speaker 5: not going to inspire voters, they're not going to persuade voters,
Speaker 5: and they're not really going to turn out their voters.
Speaker 5: So you know, politics is, as I recently wrote for
Speaker 5: Democracy Docket, like elections are a game of inches, and
Speaker 5: their way of gaining inches is not to increase, like
Speaker 5: I said, Donald Truk's popularity, but rather to decrease the
Speaker 5: number of Democrats who are able to vote. And so
Speaker 5: they found a number of clever ways to try to
Speaker 5: target Democratic voters disproportionately to Republicans. So it targets all voters,
Speaker 5: but it harms Democratic voters more than Republican voters to
Speaker 5: disenfrance them. One of them is this this combination of
Speaker 5: proof of citizenship, which you know, you're Donald Trump talk
Speaker 5: all the time about with a very strict, unforgiving type
Speaker 5: of voter ID. And you know, again I wrote about
Speaker 5: this for Democracy Docket. I did actually a video, a
Speaker 5: YouTube video about this you can check out. And the
Speaker 5: point I try to unpack is that when Republicans say, look,
Speaker 5: photo ID is common, photo ID is is popular, they
Speaker 5: don't really connect it up with what it is they
Speaker 5: are proposing. So, you know, Clidamtchal you mentioned, she and
Speaker 5: her organization put out a model set of laws, and
Speaker 5: you know, to their credit, they are actually pretty straightforward.
Speaker 5: They want to prove citizenship every time you vote via
Speaker 5: photo ID, Well, here is my message to you. Unless
Speaker 5: you live in one of five states that bord Canada,
Speaker 5: your state doesn't issue a driver's license that can prove citizenship.
Speaker 5: Real ID does not prove citizenship. In fact, there's a
Speaker 5: clip on the Internet of Mark Wayne Mullen saying real
Speaker 5: ID does not prove citizenship. And that's because real ID
Speaker 5: just means you're essentially able to travel on airplanes and
Speaker 5: have been sufficiently vetted. But non citizens can get real
Speaker 5: ID driver's licenses. So when you hear Republicans say that
Speaker 5: they want photo ID, what they are saying is they
Speaker 5: want to make it nearly impossible for people to vote
Speaker 5: using even a driver's license. And certainly when you then
Speaker 5: get to married women who changed their last name, though
Speaker 5: they are armed more, when you talk about who has passports,
Speaker 5: it disproportionately negatively impacts black voters versus white voters. And
Speaker 5: all of this that I'm describing is just an effort
Speaker 5: by Republicans to chop off the margin of Democrats relative
Speaker 5: to Republicans.
Speaker 3: It has nothing to do with ID, it.
Speaker 5: Has nothing to do with eating unlimited Italian food olive garden.
Speaker 3: It's just straight out voter expression.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, and they I mean, I'm sure they would
Speaker 1: have loved to use cracker barrel if they could have
Speaker 1: figured out something that cracker barrel was doing with IDs.
Speaker 1: But but no, that we have a thing. I mean,
Speaker 1: I talk about this that I know you do in
Speaker 1: different ways to our audiences. We have voter protection, so
Speaker 1: to speak, I mean voter ID protection. It's called under
Speaker 1: penalty of perjury and prosecutions. And those that want to
Speaker 1: commit that crime are allowed to commit the crime, and
Speaker 1: then prosecutors if they're not caught before by many layers
Speaker 1: of you know, including showing up, you know, and actually voting,
Speaker 1: and if they still are able to vote, there's plenty
Speaker 1: of prosecutions that happen after an election. The big thing
Speaker 1: is that none of this fraud, whether it's four hundred
Speaker 1: four thousand, even four hundred thousand, is outcome determinative fraud.
Speaker 1: We're talking about a point oh one or point oh one,
Speaker 1: depending upon what we're talking about level of fraud. So
Speaker 1: we already have a sufficient a panacea or or cure
Speaker 1: for this particular illness. What you what you don't do
Speaker 1: is you don't build a nuclear bomb because you have
Speaker 1: a fly in your house. Yeah, and destroy the house.
Speaker 3: Yeah. A couple of things.
Speaker 5: First of all, more often than not, when we talk about,
Speaker 5: you know, voter ballots being rejected or people being turned
Speaker 5: away from the polls, we are almost never talking about fraud.
Speaker 5: Like we are by and large talking about people who
Speaker 5: are eligible voters, they are entitled to vote, who for
Speaker 5: one reason or another, are not able to jump through
Speaker 5: a sufficient number of hoops in order to vote. So,
Speaker 5: you know, when we talk about someone who, for example,
Speaker 5: casts a mail in ballot and that ballot is rejected
Speaker 5: ninety nine point nine nine percent of the time, that
Speaker 5: is a lawful voter. That is just someone who forgot
Speaker 5: to sign there atter envelope or mailed it too late
Speaker 5: for it.
Speaker 3: To be received on time.
Speaker 1: So we need we need to.
Speaker 5: Like disaggregate fraud from the myriad ways that the system
Speaker 5: can frankly fail voters and Republicans find new ways for
Speaker 5: the system to fail voters and therefore increase those numbers.
Speaker 5: The most common voter fraud, and this is going to
Speaker 5: come as you know, maybe news to everyone, the most
Speaker 5: common quote unquote fraud are committed by husbands and wives
Speaker 5: and parents and children, right, which is your absentee ballot
Speaker 5: comes in, your wife knows who you're going to vote for,
Speaker 5: and you have been lazy to return it, and so
Speaker 5: your wife marks the ballot and puts it in an
Speaker 5: envelope and mails it.
Speaker 3: Okay, that that's.
Speaker 5: Like literally what I have just described as the single
Speaker 5: most common form of voter fraud. And I don't think
Speaker 5: this is not to excuse it. It shouldn't happen, but like,
Speaker 5: it's not exactly a nefarious plan. Or a parent who
Speaker 5: applies for an absenty ballot for their spouse or for
Speaker 5: their child, knowing that they want an absentee ballot, they
Speaker 5: send it an application even though they are not the
Speaker 5: person who sought the application. Again, I'm not here to
Speaker 5: say that that is like best practice, but that is
Speaker 5: the vast majority of what we're talking about. The thing
Speaker 5: you mentioned in New Jersey was not voter fraud. It
Speaker 5: was the state screwed up. I mean, as far as
Speaker 5: we can tell.
Speaker 1: The motor v of the DMV screwed up.
Speaker 5: Yeah, essentially, as far as we can tell, and you
Speaker 5: know it's still early, but as far as we can tell,
Speaker 5: a bunch of non citizens showed up for driver's licenses.
Speaker 5: Totally legal, right, They filled out the box that said
Speaker 5: I am not a US citizen, totally appropriate, and then
Speaker 5: the DMV vendor flipped that box without them knowing, without
Speaker 5: those people knowing, flip them to citizens rather than non citizens.
Speaker 5: That's not the fault of the person who registered or
Speaker 5: in this case, the you know, the person's all the
Speaker 5: driver's license.
Speaker 1: It's not it's not a fraud scheme.
Speaker 5: It is an error by the Department Motor Vehicle's vendor
Speaker 5: in in that happen.
Speaker 1: By the way, when you need a fiand to support
Speaker 1: you on that matter. Having lived in New Jersey from
Speaker 1: most of my life and having sat in the Department
Speaker 1: of Motor Vehicle, Eatontown, New Jersey, shout out, I'm happy
Speaker 1: to tell you that about how that could have happened.
Speaker 5: Now I'll tell you something about that eating eaton town,
Speaker 5: eating town, that Eatontown, New Jersey DMV. It is one
Speaker 5: of the few ways to turn to get to the
Speaker 5: other side of the road.
Speaker 1: Mark Elias, how do you know that, right?
Speaker 5: Because because what you need to know about New Jersey
Speaker 5: if you're not from there, is they have designed all
Speaker 5: of their roads to make it impossible to cross over
Speaker 5: jug handles. Go ahead, explain, Chuck.
Speaker 1: No, No, it's no explanation. I just have the name
Speaker 1: for it. It's called the jug handle.
Speaker 5: Right, which is that you have to go what you
Speaker 5: go through the intersection and then double back.
Speaker 1: You've been on Highway thirty six in Eatontown.
Speaker 5: I have been almost everywhere in the Garden State. I
Speaker 5: you know, I grew up in Suffern, New York, which
Speaker 5: is right on the New York border between New York
Speaker 5: and New Jersey. In fact, if anyone's familiar with the
Speaker 5: song Johnny ninety nine, which was written by Bruce Springsteen,
Speaker 5: he talks about the mala Ford plant being closed, and.
Speaker 3: That was right on the border of Malwa, New Jersey.
Speaker 1: And another good reason we get along, by the way,
Speaker 1: that's where I got my driver's license at seventeen in Eatontown. Eatontown.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so I have, I have. I've said this. You know,
Speaker 5: all of my jobs growing up were in New Jersey.
Speaker 5: And as a lawyer, I know this is going to
Speaker 5: surprise you, but it's actually not a bad place. Like
Speaker 5: there's not a there's not a shortage of need for lawyers.
Speaker 1: True, true, I need to see I learned a whole
Speaker 1: new things about you. Yeah, talk about this. Talk well,
Speaker 1: catch us up on the voter cases. I think you
Speaker 1: wont another one since we were last together. And then
Speaker 1: do we touch on the election integrity database and why
Speaker 1: it's all riddled with theirs?
Speaker 5: Okay, So the first thing in terms of vot voting cases,
Speaker 5: so we've had a couple of different categories of victories.
Speaker 5: The first is the Department of Justice is now in
Speaker 5: sixteen in their efforts to get their hands on state
Speaker 5: voter files, they filed thirty lawsuits. They are now over sixteen.
Speaker 5: So you know, Hope Springs eturnal over there at DJ.
Speaker 5: But my law firm, we are undefeated obviously in representing
Speaker 5: voters and groups of voters and protecting their information from
Speaker 5: being turned over to to the.
Speaker 3: Department of Justice.
Speaker 5: States run elections on the federal government. There is no
Speaker 5: role for the federal government here. This is a state
Speaker 5: function and that's what the Constitution says, and it is
Speaker 5: how we operate as a country. The second category of cases,
Speaker 5: so I do want to sort of highlight, which is,
Speaker 5: you know, I've litigated countless numbers of vote by mail
Speaker 5: cases with Republicans against Republicans. I have fought with them
Speaker 5: over signature matching. I have fought with them over dated, misdated,
Speaker 5: undated ballots. I've fought with them over ballot ballot, ballot
Speaker 5: drop boxes, deadlines for app develis. I mean, if there's
Speaker 5: something involving Avenue Devellis, I have litigated against Republicans over it.
Speaker 5: And the Republican Party decided that they were going to
Speaker 5: try to target laws in nineteen states that allow ballots
Speaker 5: that are postmarked by election date account even if they
Speaker 5: come in days afterwards. And they brought a case in Mississippi,
Speaker 5: not because they cared about Missis. I think they thought
Speaker 5: that they'd get an easier run in Missippi in Mississippi
Speaker 5: than in swing states, and that perhaps I wouldn't be
Speaker 5: paying attention. We did pay it. I did pay attention.
Speaker 5: We intervened in that case. That case went to the
Speaker 5: Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: We won.
Speaker 5: That's the Watson case. But what's happened since then, and
Speaker 5: this is the update that I want to give you,
Speaker 5: is you know, Republicans had prepositioned two cases that they
Speaker 5: were that had already been filed and were ready to
Speaker 5: go when Watson came down. One targeted California, one targeted Illinois.
Speaker 5: Both of them were aimed at shutting off ballot ballots
Speaker 5: postmark by election from counting in those two states, and
Speaker 5: as a result of the victory in Watson, both of
Speaker 5: those cases in the last week have now been dismissed.
Speaker 5: So Donald Trump may have his gripe about California, he
Speaker 5: may spread lives about California vote counting, but he has
Speaker 5: no legal claim to challenge it, and in fact, the
Speaker 5: effort that they had in place has now been dismissed.
Speaker 5: The other one I want to mention real quickly is
Speaker 5: we actually proactively sued Kansas because Kansas had a three
Speaker 5: day grace period and did away with it and said
Speaker 5: no ballots postmark by election day will not count, even
Speaker 5: if they come in a day or two afterwards. And
Speaker 5: we sued in Kansas, and we won in Kansas. Kansas
Speaker 5: state judge has now reinstated that three day grace period,
Speaker 5: and so that's like a real big win, you know.
Speaker 1: And on that one mark, what was the what was
Speaker 1: the legal basis for your successful argument?
Speaker 3: So state constitutional claims.
Speaker 5: You know, when people don't realize this is virtually every
Speaker 5: state in the country has a right to vote clause.
Speaker 5: And I expect that there may be some other states
Speaker 5: that will see similar claims to this in the in
Speaker 5: the near future. But it's a but it's a good
Speaker 5: example of like good news that's taking place a little
Speaker 5: bit under the surface. You know that that the legacy
Speaker 5: media doesn't pay as much attention to, but which you know,
Speaker 5: in close elections, and there will be close elections in
Speaker 5: all the states I just mentioned, this can matter.
Speaker 1: I'd ask you if you put an your litigation bag
Speaker 1: handle for all the wins, but you wouldn't have a handle.
Speaker 1: I mean, you're just just racking them up, and they
Speaker 1: they do fly below the radar. Although people that if
Speaker 1: you haven't already subscribed to Democracy Docket with Mark Elias's team,
Speaker 1: you need to. It's it is the fundamental source that
Speaker 1: that commentators like me use to be updated in real
Speaker 1: time about what's happening out there in the election cases
Speaker 1: and even cases that aren't cases yet. Just you know,
Speaker 1: bad conduct and actions are piecing together. You know, Donald
Speaker 1: Trump does things intentionally in different fragmented pieces hoping that
Speaker 1: we don't put the giant puzzle together. And you do
Speaker 1: a great job with your team of putting that giant
Speaker 1: puzzle together.
Speaker 5: So I was going to text you off air about this,
Speaker 5: but I'll just ask you on air because you are
Speaker 5: you are the master guru of all things YouTube and
Speaker 5: social media. I mean, you have the largest legal podcast
Speaker 5: YouTube channeling.
Speaker 1: Oh thanks, Mark, gotta go.
Speaker 5: So we just launched Democracy Dogget. We launched a reddit,
Speaker 5: and I was looking to see do you have a reddit?
Speaker 1: Like.
Speaker 5: We decided to do this because like, there are not
Speaker 5: a lot of good platforms for communities. So Democracy not
Speaker 5: Get launched a Democracy not Get subreddit, and I.
Speaker 3: Was wondering if this is something you have already conquered.
Speaker 1: I think that we talked about it back in the
Speaker 1: day Midas and Legal af about a reddit, and it
Speaker 1: just never sort of became the place for us. I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that it's not I don't know much about
Speaker 1: that particular platform.
Speaker 5: You and I are not of the Reddit era.
Speaker 1: No, and I went on it. You know, we used
Speaker 1: to get critiqued a lot on Reddit, and then we
Speaker 1: used to piss me off. Like Pope Box said this,
Speaker 1: I'd be like, oh shit, what is that community all about?
Speaker 1: But we were you know, we were early adopters of
Speaker 1: like Twitter, and then we hated Twitter for obvious reasons
Speaker 1: after it became x and then we sort of to
Speaker 1: be frank just to lift the curtain here a little bit. YouTube, yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: and then we were We're fortunate that we were early
Speaker 1: adopters of substack minas first, and then legal af and
Speaker 1: we are you on Are you guys on substacks?
Speaker 5: Are not on substack? People are going to find those interesting.
Speaker 5: So the first is like YouTube. Obviously, I always say
Speaker 5: there are only two platforms that you're never going to
Speaker 5: outgrow Facebook and YouTube, right, Like, what is it like
Speaker 5: four billion people are on Facebook every month. I'm not,
Speaker 5: by the way, not one of them. I don't have
Speaker 5: a Facebook account. If you see a Facebook account for me,
Speaker 5: you can ignore it. But YouTube, right, like, you're never
Speaker 5: going to outgrow YouTube.
Speaker 9: But the the the the whole thing with substack is
Speaker 9: we had already built by the time people were really
Speaker 9: focused on subtack, we had already.
Speaker 3: Built our own tech stack.
Speaker 5: And you know, we're really committed to it because not
Speaker 5: that I don't trust the good people at substack, but
Speaker 5: you know, I have been sold the oh, this will
Speaker 5: be a perfect open web platform. Have no fear because
Speaker 5: like you. I was on Twitter and spent a lot
Speaker 5: of time tweeting back in the day. You know when
Speaker 5: before you when you start to put r T when
Speaker 5: you're right remember like you know.
Speaker 3: And so we we.
Speaker 5: Are not on substack because we just want to control
Speaker 5: our own tech stack.
Speaker 1: And yeah, and you and you have an amazing people
Speaker 1: need to go on democracy doc and maybe offline you
Speaker 1: and I can talk about having some sort of substack
Speaker 1: presence as well. I do a substack live once a
Speaker 1: day get a couple of thousand.
Speaker 3: I don't understand why.
Speaker 5: That is because you get so many more views on
Speaker 5: the audience is like Mark, It's like market This is guys.
Speaker 3: You want to know what we talk about off off time?
Speaker 5: Like your YouTube channel is so large, Like what are
Speaker 5: you incrementally really adding with a substack live? What a
Speaker 5: few thousand? It's not that the million rel to the
Speaker 5: millions you have on YouTube.
Speaker 1: There's a there's an immediacy, a real time response that
Speaker 1: I can do on substack that even if I get
Speaker 1: a video up in thirty minutes after an event and
Speaker 1: it's a million other people covering it, so I have
Speaker 1: a connection with an audience. We're building a community like
Speaker 1: an overlapping community, but some of it's unique to substack.
Speaker 1: You know, we got one hundred and fifty thousand subscribers
Speaker 1: on substack. We're not we're like top thirty of US
Speaker 1: news already. We put a lot of the content not
Speaker 1: everybody's on YouTube, so we put a lot of the
Speaker 1: content from YouTube up on substack. But we do we
Speaker 1: do do unique things. For instance, here I can't do
Speaker 1: this on YouTube. Everything you you that I cover that
Speaker 1: you do. All the filings and the orders we post
Speaker 1: on substack for people to read. So it's that. And
Speaker 1: then I do a live as sort of extra content.
Speaker 1: And also I can do like, hey, breaking new literally
Speaker 1: breaking news just happened ten minutes ago, or I need
Speaker 1: to update a video that I just did because it
Speaker 1: got stale because of some other crazy crap that Trump
Speaker 1: or Blanche did. So there is it is another community building.
Speaker 5: Actually, this is why you guys are so much smarter
Speaker 5: than I am, because you know the guy, the person
Speaker 5: who like totally agrees with you is Brian Tyler Cohane,
Speaker 5: who I know is a friend of the mida's network
Speaker 5: as well and someone I do I do a lot
Speaker 5: of content with, and he was like just lecturing me
Speaker 5: about this yesterday.
Speaker 3: He's like Mark.
Speaker 5: Some people want to be on Spotify, so they're on Spotify.
Speaker 5: Some people want to be on YouTube. They're on YouTube.
Speaker 5: Some people want to be on substack Live. They're on
Speaker 5: substack Live. Different viewers, different or you know, consumers. When
Speaker 5: I say people, I don't mean I don't mean the
Speaker 5: creators like you and me. I mean the like some
Speaker 5: people want to consume through one platform or another, and
Speaker 5: you just need to let them consume it where it is,
Speaker 5: rather than lecturing them about which platform.
Speaker 1: Right. It's like it's like candy bars. They come in
Speaker 1: all different sizes, from small to meetiums, the large, and
Speaker 1: just to show you where you're exactly right. Ben and
Speaker 1: I used to tibbots about uh the I just lost
Speaker 1: my train of thought about where where we existed and
Speaker 1: who was watching? Oh when we started the podcast and
Speaker 1: Mia did too as an audio only Oh in fact,
Speaker 1: six years ago, there's there's a joke on really. Oh yeah.
Speaker 1: I used to get dressed up because we used to
Speaker 1: record it on zoom. I used to get dressed up
Speaker 1: and Ben would show up like in a T shirt.
Speaker 1: And after about three or four episodes, I said to
Speaker 1: how can you go get dressed up for this? He goes,
Speaker 1: it's we're not doing video. What do you mean? He goes,
Speaker 1: what do you mean? Why are we doing video? He goes,
Speaker 1: we're not. And then Minus did video and then Legal
Speaker 1: Aft did video. So when I said to him, and
Speaker 1: at the time, I think it's sort of changed now.
Speaker 1: But five years ago there were people who only got
Speaker 1: our audio download, had no idea what we looked like,
Speaker 1: and didn't know we were on YouTube.
Speaker 3: Huh.
Speaker 1: Now I think that's sort of changing people.
Speaker 5: That's ironic because I didn't know you were on audio only.
Speaker 5: I've only watch I only watched you on video.
Speaker 1: We were started out as audio only. And then I
Speaker 1: convinced Bend when he when the brothers went video went YouTube,
Speaker 1: I said, why are we on YouTube? We should be
Speaker 1: on YouTube, And that's how that happened.
Speaker 3: So I so all that.
Speaker 1: So I hope people like this inside baseball stuff. I do.
Speaker 3: It's a great story.
Speaker 1: What's the next? Give us end it this way? I
Speaker 1: know you're being generous with your time. You got to
Speaker 1: go like now, just ended this way? But what should our
Speaker 1: what should our audience be? What should they be watching?
Speaker 1: What is the what is a couple of things they
Speaker 1: need to be on the lookout for through your organization mind.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so number one, the Republicans are going to try
Speaker 5: to exploit the what happened in New Jersey with this
Speaker 5: vendor to try to justify all kinds of crazy stuff.
Speaker 5: So like, don't don't buy into the lies, Like understand
Speaker 5: the facts. You can get them for Michael, you can
Speaker 5: get them for me. Hopefully he and I will continue
Speaker 5: to have uh these uh uh these joint appearances where
Speaker 5: we can kind of explain it together, but be skeptical
Speaker 5: when you when you hear those things. The second thing
Speaker 5: is Donald Trump's only going to get more desperate. And
Speaker 5: so the speech that you just gave was a failure.
Speaker 5: It was a failure to try to ignite energy behind
Speaker 5: the idea that there had been foreign interference. But Donald
Speaker 5: Trump doesn't go away, right, It's not like he tries
Speaker 5: it once and then he leaves. He will simply escalate.
Speaker 5: He'll escalate the lies, he'll escalate the tactics. So be
Speaker 5: able to look out for that. And then, finally, despite
Speaker 5: the wins we just had that I described about voting
Speaker 5: by mail, voting by mail is still under attack, in particular,
Speaker 5: the assault on the use of the postal Service by
Speaker 5: the Trump administration remains very much a hot topic of litigation.
Speaker 5: It's a lot going on there, and maybe Michael, we
Speaker 5: will cover that next time.
Speaker 1: Oh absolutely, I think the postal Service is a great
Speaker 1: win for us to cover Mark Elias Democracy docket. If
Speaker 1: if this is the first you've heard of it, go
Speaker 1: on now and subscribe and can help mark the content
Speaker 1: there and the and the reliability of the content is unmatched,
Speaker 1: really unparallel. And then you'll catch Mark here. You'll catch
Speaker 1: Mark on with Brian don Cohen.
Speaker 5: And at some point, at some point, I'm going to
Speaker 5: announce this and Michael is going to be like, no,
Speaker 5: we're not. At some point, maybe Michael and I will
Speaker 5: do a joint in person in Durham, North Carolina.
Speaker 1: Oh that I love. I love that. I definitely in
Speaker 1: person anywhere, but definitely a Durham urreactly a Durham, North Carolina,
Speaker 1: our old, our old stopping.
Speaker 3: You'll figure you'll figure the venue.
Speaker 1: That's easy is uh, is Bullock's Barbecue still around? I
Speaker 1: don't know. I'm gonna find out. We're gonna find out.
Speaker 1: And UH separately has a law firm, Elias Lock Group,
Speaker 1: Elias Lock Group. They have a website to follow them there.
Speaker 1: Mark Olias, thank you for being so generous with your
Speaker 1: time with our audience and I can't wait to see
Speaker 1: you again in the next next week or so.
Speaker 3: Same here.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mark Elias. You know this is because of you,
Speaker 1: our audience vibrating on that same frequency. We're able to
Speaker 1: have the street cred to get people who want to
Speaker 1: come on the show, want to talk to our audience.
Speaker 1: There's no arm twisting going on. You know. I have
Speaker 1: another programming note. I've got the General the new General
Speaker 1: Counsel for the nuble A CP, will be joining me
Speaker 1: on Friday for an interview. We just had the nuble
Speaker 1: A CP, who's going to be a more regular contributor
Speaker 1: and collaborator with us on the Legal af YouTube channel,
Speaker 1: joining the American Civil Liberties Union as well. Senator Warnock,
Speaker 1: you know I don't make these things happen. You The
Speaker 1: audience makes things, makes makes these things happen. If it
Speaker 1: was just like you know, old curmudgeon Popac phoning up
Speaker 1: a senator or a governor, or a congress person or
Speaker 1: a judge, they'd be like, who what when I say
Speaker 1: legal AF, I'm your ambassador, and that helps us land at.
Speaker 1: Governor Shapiro from Pennsylvania is going to be joining me
Speaker 1: in the next week or so. Just just a tremendous
Speaker 1: amount of fantastic programming, all not only for you, but
Speaker 1: as a result of you, because of you, and so
Speaker 1: while you're here, a number of ways to support what
Speaker 1: we do. We've got the from those who just heard
Speaker 1: about the substack. You heard Mark Elias joined us on
Speaker 1: Legal AFF substack. Hit the button, help us continue to
Speaker 1: let's get us into the top ten of all US
Speaker 1: news and politics substacks. And I promise you we won't
Speaker 1: let you down on the content side, and never will
Speaker 1: Legal AF. The YouTube channel literally while we were on
Speaker 1: the air, we crossed over to one million, one and
Speaker 1: seventy thousand subscribers, adding twenty thousand subscribers in the last
Speaker 1: two weeks. And again that's all because of your fervent
Speaker 1: support and generosity of what you do. And we'll pull
Speaker 1: our weight, you know well, with our contributors. And then
Speaker 1: one and one last kind of plug here. I think
Speaker 1: people know that I formed a law firm sort of
Speaker 1: dedicated to the intersection. Might have touched in legal af communities.
Speaker 1: It's called what else the pop Pok Firm. There's a
Speaker 1: QR code. Hit the QR code. It's a brand new website.
Speaker 1: Same tireless fighters for you. Any kind of injury, negligence,
Speaker 1: medical malpractice, car accidents, truck accidents, God forbid, the death
Speaker 1: of somebody in your life or your family, you're going
Speaker 1: to want to call the Poppak Firm. And there's your
Speaker 1: opportunity to do it at www. The Pope Pockfirm dot com.
Speaker 1: So let me round out with just a couple of
Speaker 1: things to update here as we came on the air.
Speaker 1: Remember Peter Navarro, one of the architects of the Green
Speaker 1: Bay Sweep also known as the attempt to Steal the
Speaker 1: election in twenty twenty, along with Ken Chessburrow and John Eastman. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Peter Navarro, who went to jail for four months, came out,
Speaker 1: wrote a book and is now I think some sort
Speaker 1: of trade representative or trade in policy or tariff policy
Speaker 1: representative for Donald Trump. So he got convicted for not
Speaker 1: testifying to Congress and refusing to produce documents related to
Speaker 1: the jan sixth committee. Okay, then he went to jail. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and so he decided he was going to write I
Speaker 1: think he got a partner ready, but no, no, he
Speaker 1: wants to He wanted to prove in a court of
Speaker 1: law that does conviction was unjust. So he filed an appeal. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but we just got a thirty seven page ruling from
Speaker 1: judge's Millet Child's and there's one more. If I find
Speaker 1: my note, i'll tell you who it is. It's coming
Speaker 1: Millet Child's in Pollard, all Democratic judge president appointees, and
Speaker 1: they've rejected Peter Navarro's his appeal. This is what they said,
Speaker 1: and they kind of sum it up in the first
Speaker 1: page or two. In twenty twenty one, Peter Navarro, a
Speaker 1: former aid to then President Trump, published a book about
Speaker 1: his stint in politics. In that book and in promotional interviews,
Speaker 1: he took credit for devising a plan to leverage the
Speaker 1: Vice president's authority that would be Mike Pence under the
Speaker 1: Electoral count Act of eighteen eighty seven to delay the certification.
Speaker 1: He called it the Green Bay Sweep. Doctor Navarro's public
Speaker 1: statements caught the attention of the Jen Six Committee. The
Speaker 1: Select Committee sent a subpoena Davarro that saw documents related
Speaker 1: to his book and public statements that ordered him and
Speaker 1: ordered him to appear for a deposition. He claimed executive
Speaker 1: privilege even though he wasn't in the White House, and
Speaker 1: refused to turn over the documents. After the deadline for
Speaker 1: compliance passed, the House voted to hold him in contempt,
Speaker 1: and a federal grand jury indicted him on two counts.
Speaker 1: Doctor Navarro moves to dismissed the indictment on the ground
Speaker 1: that President Trump had invoked executive privilege. The problem with
Speaker 1: that is he had no proof of that. I remember
Speaker 1: the judge at the time, Judge Mayta, I believe it
Speaker 1: was said, Okay, I get it. You say there was
Speaker 1: executive privilege that was invoked by President Trump. Where's the
Speaker 1: affidavit of President Trump. Where's the testimonial, Where's any scrap
Speaker 1: of paper anything that tells me that that actually happened. Hearing,
Speaker 1: nothing that didn't come in, and that got dismissed by
Speaker 1: the judge. After an evidentiary hearing, the appellate court concludes.
Speaker 1: The district court concluded that no such invocation of privilege
Speaker 1: had occurred and declined to dismiss the indictment. The district
Speaker 1: court also granted the government's motion inlimonae to preclude doctor
Speaker 1: Navarro from arguing to the jury that he mistakenly believed
Speaker 1: he was not required to respond to the committee's subpoena.
Speaker 1: A jury found him guilty on both counts. Navarro appealed,
Speaker 1: we affirm. I mean, there's thirty six pages of other analysis.
Speaker 1: But that sort of just tells you that judges wearing
Speaker 1: black robes, when presented with evidence or lack of evidence
Speaker 1: and facts, will do the right thing under our rule
Speaker 1: of law and to protect our democracy. And that's a
Speaker 1: good thing. It's going to piss off Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: he'll have some you know, there'll be some rapid response
Speaker 1: forty seven. I'm sure it's already gone out about how
Speaker 1: wonderful Peter Navarro is and how corrupt the appellate Court is.
Speaker 1: But we all know what that really means is that
Speaker 1: he's lost, just like he loses over and over again
Speaker 1: to the Mark Eliasis of the world. That should give
Speaker 1: you confidence, you know that we're just we're not blowing
Speaker 1: smoking or sunshine here. We're not being pollyannish, but we're
Speaker 1: not blowing smoke or sunshine either. I have real confidence
Speaker 1: in people like Mark and dozens of other marks from
Speaker 1: norm Iisen to Democracy Forward to the Attorney's General Democratic
Speaker 1: I just interviewed Rob Bonta about him getting a emergency
Speaker 1: temporary restraining order to stop the merger, forget the merger,
Speaker 1: to stop the acquisition of CNN and all those assets
Speaker 1: at order by paramount the billionaire boys club friends of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. That's because twelve Democratic Attorney's General joined forces
Speaker 1: and filed that lawsuit and won, just like they won
Speaker 1: to stop the acquisition of hundreds of local television stations,
Speaker 1: just like they won against Live Nation related to price
Speaker 1: gouging and sporting and live events. Who do you think
Speaker 1: is doing that? I mean, that's a rhetorical question. I know,
Speaker 1: I know who know who's doing it. These are the
Speaker 1: groups that have their hands firmly on the controls, know
Speaker 1: what they're doing, and are filing the suits that are
Speaker 1: being successful. I mean, I said. A couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: the American Civil Liberties Union, which I'm honored to have
Speaker 1: with us on as collaborators on legal af I interviewed
Speaker 1: their political director. She said they have twenty five tabletop
Speaker 1: exercises of doomsday scenarios evolving Donald Trump and voting, and
Speaker 1: they are ready with drafts of papers ready to be
Speaker 1: filed on any of those scenarios. And I assure you
Speaker 1: they are more creative about how diabolical Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: that even Donald Trump, because at bottom, he's not that smart,
Speaker 1: and neither are the people that are left in the government.
Speaker 1: And so the brain drain. You know, where all those
Speaker 1: top level Department of Justice people are in private practice
Speaker 1: or working for the state attorneys general, or are working
Speaker 1: as state prosecutors, they're still around defending democracy. And speaking
Speaker 1: of defending democracy, you're not gonna want to miss this Thursday.
Speaker 1: It's the first time we've ever done it with a
Speaker 1: group called Not Above the Law. We're doing there. It
Speaker 1: is Block Blanche live stream Special Senator Dick Durbin, Representative
Speaker 1: Lamonica mcgiver of New Jersey, Representative Rocanna CALLI, oh, look,
Speaker 1: I got my picture there, Michael Pope Buck. We just
Speaker 1: put that up. That's pretty good. That is right now
Speaker 1: under live tab for Legal AF YouTube Legal aff YouTube
Speaker 1: live tab Thursday, eight pm Eastern Time, one hour. You're
Speaker 1: gonna get lots of information that you need to block
Speaker 1: Todd Blanche. It's gonna be like a it's gonna be
Speaker 1: like a toolbox that they're gonna effectively give you about
Speaker 1: how to do it, and they need your help to
Speaker 1: do it. That's why I wanted to live stream it.
Speaker 1: So join us there. I'll open the show, open the
Speaker 1: live stream, and then we'll go right into a heavy
Speaker 1: work you know, eat dinner before or lunch whatever, heavy
Speaker 1: working session about how to block Todd Blanche's vote, which
Speaker 1: is coming up probably the week of August the third.
Speaker 1: And then lastly, as we end our night tonight, as
Speaker 1: the time has come. Uh yeah, we got a ruling
Speaker 1: out of the out of a three judge panel. Actually,
Speaker 1: you know, just I guess to prove our point that
Speaker 1: judges are independent and judges do the right thing when
Speaker 1: they have the facts in law in front of them.
Speaker 1: Judge Shrevenasen, who is the chief Judge of the DC
Speaker 1: Appellate Court and as an appointee of one of the
Speaker 1: Democratic presidents, he just ruled against Joe Biden along with
Speaker 1: a couple of other people on his panel, one a
Speaker 1: Trumper Katsis and are releasing the Biden tapes subject to
Speaker 1: a final appeal at the United States Supreme Court. Seventy
Speaker 1: hours of musings with Joe Biden trying to prepare for
Speaker 1: a biography, talking to is not his ghostwriter, but his writer,
Speaker 1: Mark K. Schwanitzer, and those tapes ended up being turned
Speaker 1: over by subpoena or voluntarily by Joe Biden to Robert Hurr,
Speaker 1: the special counsel investigating with her he had leaked classified
Speaker 1: information after his vice president and Judge Shriven Austin, writing
Speaker 1: for the Majority, said, it's a great public interest that
Speaker 1: people know about it. And what are we going to see?
Speaker 1: We're gonna hear a guy who recently lost his son,
Speaker 1: who has memory problems, you know, talking privately and candidly
Speaker 1: in a house to his ghostwriter, his writer about a
Speaker 1: book that he wanted to write.
Speaker 8: I mean, if you don't already have an opinion about
Speaker 8: Joe Biden, who's been in public life for fifty years,
Speaker 8: was a president for four, a vice president for eight,
Speaker 8: a senator for twenty.
Speaker 1: You watched him age in place in the White House,
Speaker 1: if you saw what happened at the debate, you saw
Speaker 1: what happened on the campaign trial. If you don't already
Speaker 1: have an opinion about him, this is not going This
Speaker 1: is not going to form one and it's not going
Speaker 1: to change it if you have an opinion about him already.
Speaker 1: I already have a well formed opinion about Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: which I'll keep to myself for right now. But and
Speaker 1: I mean the entirety of his body of work, not
Speaker 1: just the last you know, year or two, or what
Speaker 1: he did to the Democratic Party in the final year.
Speaker 1: And so you know, this is just about the Heritage
Speaker 1: Foundation trying to execute on Donald Trump's plan to embarrass
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, to undermine its idols, to go after
Speaker 1: the Barack Obamas and the Joe Biden's and the Hillary Clintons,
Speaker 1: and to try to make our party and try to
Speaker 1: make the party sorry, weak and ineffectual, and make people
Speaker 1: run away from it because they're running away from the
Speaker 1: Republican Party in mega. And so this is their plan,
Speaker 1: and this is what they are doing with our taxpayer
Speaker 1: dollars in time. Anyway, I'm sure Joe Biden has announced
Speaker 1: that he's going to be taking a feel up to
Speaker 1: the United States Supreme Court, and we'll see whether, you know,
Speaker 1: whether they're going to allow it. It was a two
Speaker 1: to one decision. The dissent reminded everybody that he wasn't
Speaker 1: indicted who wasn't indicted. This is information that was obtained
Speaker 1: but not it was referenced in the report but not
Speaker 1: released by the Special Council. Certainly would never have been
Speaker 1: released at Kamala Harris become president, ran the Department of Justice,
Speaker 1: and that's where we are at. But I try to
Speaker 1: report on everything at the intersection, and a lot of
Speaker 1: people think I was avoiding that. You know, sure, Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden won a couple of million dollars off of the
Speaker 1: overstock dot com guy for defamation. That's good to I
Speaker 1: appreciate that too, But thanks for being here. Here here's
Speaker 1: the programming list for POPAC that you can follow tomorrow morning,
Speaker 1: nine thirty am Eastern time. Up on Legal Aff YouTube channel.
Speaker 1: My interview with Katie Fay Up right now on Legal
Speaker 1: aff YouTube. My interview with Rob Banta, the Attorney General
Speaker 1: of California, and my interview with Brendan Blou who is
Speaker 1: the the lawyer for Katie Fang and has filed other
Speaker 1: cases against Donald Trump, including one alleging bribery at the
Speaker 1: highest levels concerning the corporate merger of Warner in paramount.
Speaker 1: I've got an interview with the head of Immigration Rights
Speaker 1: at the American Civil Liberties Union. Tomorrow I interview Senator Warnock,
Speaker 1: Reverend Senator Warnock of Georgia about all things Supreme Court
Speaker 1: and voting. You're not going to want to miss that
Speaker 1: as well. I've got Danny Benski, as I said, joining
Speaker 1: me on Thursday, just a action packed group. Along with
Speaker 1: that Thursday night Block Blanche Block the vote for Todd
Speaker 1: Blant stream that's going to be up on we're hosting
Speaker 1: on legal AF YouTube channel. So thanks for being here.
Speaker 1: I appreciate the generosity of your time and spirit. Until
Speaker 1: my next report, you know that's coming up in about
Speaker 1: an hour. I'm my co Popebok. Shout out to the
Speaker 1: Midas Mighty, the Legal A efforts and the intersectionists. Can't
Speaker 1: get your Legal AF mean either. That's why we formed
Speaker 1: the legal AF substack. Every time we mentioned something in
Speaker 1: a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a
Speaker 1: oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the
Speaker 1: court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily
Speaker 1: roundup that I do call wait for it, mourning a
Speaker 1: f what else. All the other contributors from legal AF
Speaker 1: are there as well. We got some new reporting, we
Speaker 1: got interviews, we got a free versions of the podcast
Speaker 1: and hot takes where legal A f on Substack. Come
Speaker 1: over now to free subscribe