Speaker 1: Good morning, peeps, and welcome to ok F Daily with
Speaker 1: Meet your Girl Danielle Moody. Recording from my Brooklyn bunker. Folks,
Speaker 1: you know, I was thinking over the weekend and because
Speaker 1: there was a headline that I didn't pay attention to
Speaker 1: last week because I was so outraged by the state
Speaker 1: of the Union that I missed it. Did you know
Speaker 1: that that motherfucker Joe Manchin sat with Republicans last week?
Speaker 1: Did you all catch that? And so I'm looking, you know,
Speaker 1: through the news, and I was like, how was this not?
Speaker 1: I mean, of course, like what could be a bigger
Speaker 1: story than the fact that we're headed towards World War three?
Speaker 1: I have no idea, But when I think about people
Speaker 1: in the way that they want to defend Joe mansion
Speaker 1: and they want to talk about the fact that no
Speaker 1: one else could win in Virginia, and I'm like, this
Speaker 1: motherfucker is trolling us like out into public in the streets.
Speaker 1: You're not even sitting with your own team. You're actually
Speaker 1: sitting with the enemy who in that very chamber there
Speaker 1: were people that voted to decertify the man that was
Speaker 1: speaking in front of you, but you sat with them
Speaker 1: to show what exactly. I am so sick and tired,
Speaker 1: guys of this foe bipartisan bullshit. You know, I was
Speaker 1: thinking too about the fact that here we have Joe
Speaker 1: Biden wanted to tout the infrastructure bill, right, the only
Speaker 1: thing that his administration has been able to pass as
Speaker 1: this bipartisan and refer to Republicans as their friends. And
Speaker 1: I'm just like, the more that I sit with this,
Speaker 1: the more that I just get enraged at the state
Speaker 1: of stupidity and fuckery that we are in. That Democrats
Speaker 1: who are supposed to be We're supposed to be our
Speaker 1: saving grace from the hell scape that was the Trump
Speaker 1: administration are literally just taken out guns and shooting themselves
Speaker 1: in the foot, are just finding any way any way
Speaker 1: to lose. And this is the thing is that you know,
Speaker 1: you already know how this is going to play out
Speaker 1: in the next eight months. We know how Democrats are
Speaker 1: going to blame this, blame their loss in the midterm
Speaker 1: election once again on being too progressive, you know, giving
Speaker 1: the people the base too much of what it is
Speaker 1: that they want. Meanwhile, they gave us absolutely fucking nothing, right, like,
Speaker 1: absolutely not a goddamn thing, And it's going to be
Speaker 1: the same cycle of bullshit like, oh, we need to
Speaker 1: move for they're to the center. Republicans get to move
Speaker 1: as far off right as fucking possible off of a
Speaker 1: goddamn cliff, and we keep chasing behind them. The party
Speaker 1: keeps chasing behind them, moving us further and further. So
Speaker 1: their extreme What used to be considered a moderate Republican
Speaker 1: is now just the new Fengal Democrat and their plan
Speaker 1: is fucking winning. And it says if no one, no
Speaker 1: one is paying attention. So when I saw the headline
Speaker 1: with Joe Mansion and I'm just like, just become a Republican.
Speaker 1: Can you just change just change parties? I honestly I
Speaker 1: don't care. People say, oh my god, Danielle, then things
Speaker 1: will get so much worse. Uh huh, They're gonna get
Speaker 1: worse regardless, Right. I have said this so many times
Speaker 1: over that things are going to get bloodier in this
Speaker 1: country before they get better. We are headed into the
Speaker 1: fucking dark ages. Friends. Okay, so light a match, because
Speaker 1: that's the only light that you're going to be seeing.
Speaker 1: And so the idea here is just like, let's just
Speaker 1: all tell the fucking truth. Joe Mansion is not a Democrat.
Speaker 1: Joe Mansion doesn't sit with Democrats, he doesn't fucking vote
Speaker 1: with Democrats. So what exactly are we holding onto? Because
Speaker 1: the fifty fifty split is just that, right like, there
Speaker 1: is no power here, whatever power, whatever procedural power that
Speaker 1: Democrats have, they're not using, right Chuck Schumer is not
Speaker 1: using it. He's not using the power that he has
Speaker 1: right now in the way that Mitch McConnell would if
Speaker 1: there was a fifty fifty split. So, you know, I'm
Speaker 1: so tired of us pretending that these people are our
Speaker 1: friends when they're telling you, showing you out in fucking public,
Speaker 1: that they don't fuck with you. And it's obscene, obscene.
Speaker 1: Do you know what else is obscene? Fucking Merrick Garland
Speaker 1: sloth ass, That's what's obscene. This fucking slow walk in
Speaker 1: backwards motherfucker? Who has yet, who has yet with his
Speaker 1: Department of Justice to get us any type of justice
Speaker 1: with regard to the insurrection and the organizers of the insurrection.
Speaker 1: I don't care. I don't care anymore about the little people,
Speaker 1: right the little foot soldiers that went in and shit
Speaker 1: inside of the Capital. Bill, I don't give a fuck.
Speaker 1: I care about the people that brought them there. So
Speaker 1: now we have right the one six Commission doing literally
Speaker 1: all of the heavy lifting, over five hundred interviews, right,
Speaker 1: millions of documents lining up the fact and saying so
Speaker 1: in a California court that there was criminal activity, that
Speaker 1: the former president of the United States committed crimes, he
Speaker 1: defrauded the American people. You would think that after this
Speaker 1: bombshell news drop last week, that Merritt Garland's Justice Department
Speaker 1: would be announcing the seizure of American oligarchy, from the
Speaker 1: Murdocks to the Cookes, to the Trumps, to the Eastman's,
Speaker 1: to the mcconnells, to whomever they believe in suspect was
Speaker 1: in part of funding the fucking insurrection. But no, do
Speaker 1: you know what a task force that the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice decides to announce, Oh, the task force to go
Speaker 1: after the Russian oligarchs. They moved like this ten days
Speaker 1: into war. Ten days into war, and the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice created an entire task force to go after Russian oligarchs.
Speaker 1: We are a year, right, a year in three fucking
Speaker 1: months following the insurrection. Where the fuck is the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice's task force? Where the fuck was the press
Speaker 1: conference that he gave with his tepid bullshit that would
Speaker 1: tell us here's what it is that we're doing so
Speaker 1: that we can have some transparency and fucking accountability. But no,
Speaker 1: the only smoke that America has right, the only tough
Speaker 1: talk that they do is about other nations securing other
Speaker 1: countries democracies right now. Folks will say to me, you know, Danielle, well,
Speaker 1: you know, there's really there's a lot of important things
Speaker 1: going on. You know, we're talking about a potential nuclear crisis.
Speaker 1: If you don't think that the upending of America's democracy
Speaker 1: isn't just as dangerous as the potential fucking nuclear attacks
Speaker 1: that we are facing. If you do not think right,
Speaker 1: just imagine what would be happening right now if Donald
Speaker 1: Trump was president. Do you think that we would be
Speaker 1: working with NATO. No, we fucking would not. We would
Speaker 1: be working with Putin Right, America would have formed a
Speaker 1: new access of evil. This is what we are talking
Speaker 1: about when we say that the state of our democracy,
Speaker 1: the fate of the free world is resting on what
Speaker 1: it is that the Department of Justice is choosing not
Speaker 1: to do. They want to talk about, oh, securing institutions
Speaker 1: and agencies and all of this bullshit, and at the
Speaker 1: same time going and putting full weight money and resources
Speaker 1: into getting Russian oligarchs and doing nothing about the Trump
Speaker 1: family that literally literally we know our frauds. Everything they
Speaker 1: touch has been shut down, folks, Right, Their university shut
Speaker 1: down because it was a fucking money grammed scheme, just
Speaker 1: like their entire time in the White House. But it's
Speaker 1: as if Merrick Garland and everybody just wants us to
Speaker 1: forget about it. Let's turn the page, Let's turn the page.
Speaker 1: It is mind boggling where we are mind boggling to
Speaker 1: me because you have the only people that are doing
Speaker 1: work right now are people without the actual teeth to
Speaker 1: bring criminal charges. So we have a couple of cases, right,
Speaker 1: we know that Alvin Bragg, the new Manhattan DA ain't
Speaker 1: doing dick right because we had the two prosecutors that
Speaker 1: quit two weeks ago, right who By the way, when
Speaker 1: we talk with our friend Glenn Kushner in a minute,
Speaker 1: Glenn will tell us that Alvin Bragg, when Foyer requests
Speaker 1: came in, Freedom of Information Act came in to say
Speaker 1: they reporters want to see the fucking resignation letters of
Speaker 1: the two prosecutors that quit. Well, guess what he's saying.
Speaker 1: Oh no, there is pertinent and important information in there
Speaker 1: specific to the investigation, so it can't be released. How
Speaker 1: much you want to bet that the fucker's just really
Speaker 1: worried about how their resignation letters will make him look. Right,
Speaker 1: and I keep saying, follow the money. Why did Alvin Bragg, right,
Speaker 1: who is backed by Bloomberg and others, why did he
Speaker 1: decide after his predecessor called for a special grand jury
Speaker 1: to sit for a longer period of time, Because that's
Speaker 1: how much evidence there is to indict Donald Trump, that
Speaker 1: then he would get in and decide that, oh no,
Speaker 1: we're not going to do this. Who gave to his campaign?
Speaker 1: Check his fucking bank accounts. I'm just tired, folks, I'm
Speaker 1: exhausted by this bullshit. I'm exhausted by these people that
Speaker 1: have power and don't do anything. So we have Tish James, right,
Speaker 1: we still got Tish James. But Tish James is dealing
Speaker 1: with a civil suit. That's not jail time, right, that's
Speaker 1: shutting down Trump organization. That's maybe millions of dollars in
Speaker 1: fines and shuttering their business. But guess what, They will
Speaker 1: just pop up under a new shingle with a different name.
Speaker 1: We need fucking prosecution for crimes, crimes against the people
Speaker 1: of this country. Not only have we talked about it
Speaker 1: so many times with Glenn about the fact that he
Speaker 1: believes that there is a criminal negligent case in terms
Speaker 1: of COVID. Right, Donald Trump knew how dangerous COVID was,
Speaker 1: he knew how transmissible it was in December of twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: and he did nothing except lie to the American people
Speaker 1: and tell us that it was a hoax, tell the
Speaker 1: world that it was a democratic hoax. Now we're at
Speaker 1: almost a million people dead. No one is being held
Speaker 1: responsible for that. And my question is why you know,
Speaker 1: And I said this last week on Woke Wednesday, I said,
Speaker 1: you know, the problem here is money in politics. That's
Speaker 1: the problem is that everybody is being paid off, right,
Speaker 1: everyone is being paid off. And we are hoping what
Speaker 1: that these people are going to investigate themselves. We're hoping
Speaker 1: that magically they're just going to do the right thing
Speaker 1: because of what their morals. Oh, it's just you know, folks,
Speaker 1: there is so much cowardice that I am seeing right
Speaker 1: now from our leaders from these elected officials, and when
Speaker 1: we lose, when we lose in November, it isn't going
Speaker 1: to be Republicans faults. It isn't because we have nothing
Speaker 1: to show. We have nothing to show. I have no
Speaker 1: idea what those people were standing up and clapping for.
Speaker 1: With the state of the Union. I'll say it again,
Speaker 1: the state of our Union is basura. It is trash trash.
Speaker 1: But everybody's walking around like everything is a okay, like
Speaker 1: our impending doom as we're watching war unfold, right that, folks,
Speaker 1: what is happening there is going to happen here, except
Speaker 1: it's not going to be a foreign invasion and we're
Speaker 1: doing nothing to stop it, not one good goddamn thing.
Speaker 1: So in the coming weeks, in the coming months, is
Speaker 1: Merritt Garland gonna wake the fuck up? Right? Is Joe
Speaker 1: Biden gonna start to actually realize that these people that
Speaker 1: he keeps calling his friends are not that if given
Speaker 1: the opportunity, they would build the guillotine and hang his
Speaker 1: ass out front, that as soon as Republicans get power back,
Speaker 1: that they're going to begin impeachment proceedings and just base
Speaker 1: it on bullshit. And then everybody who's gonna once again
Speaker 1: look around all fucking shocked, like, oh my god, this
Speaker 1: came out of nowhere. I just I don't understand how
Speaker 1: it happened. Negligence is how it happened, folks. Coming up
Speaker 1: next is my conversation Weekly conversation. We're so grateful for
Speaker 1: his time with Glen Kershner, who is going to walk
Speaker 1: us through where we are with the one six Commission
Speaker 1: where he believes that the Department of Justice is going
Speaker 1: to end up and whether or not we're gonna see
Speaker 1: testimony right from Kimberly Gilfoyle, who is the coked up,
Speaker 1: fucking fiancee of the other the other coked up one
Speaker 1: Trump Junior, and see whether or not we're gonna get
Speaker 1: anything other than I plead the fifth over a hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty times like every other Trump spawn is done.
Speaker 1: That's coming up next, folks. I have been waiting for
Speaker 1: this conversation with our friend MSNBC legal analyst and host
Speaker 1: of Justice Matters Glenn Kirshner to walk us through the
Speaker 1: one six Commission's conclusion that they believe that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: and company, including Eastman, may have committed actual crimes and
Speaker 1: in saying so, in saying that Eastman may have committed crimes,
Speaker 1: meaning that he is no longer able to use his
Speaker 1: privilege right of confidentiality between him and Donald Trump. Glenn,
Speaker 1: make us make this make sense? Is this? Should we
Speaker 1: be energized by this? Should we get excited? Or should
Speaker 1: I not go head out too far on the limb
Speaker 1: with this latest reporting from the Commission in the New
Speaker 1: York Times, this is a decidedly good development. But even
Speaker 1: more important than this development in isolation, as I'm with
Speaker 1: Joy last night doing a pretty extended one on one
Speaker 1: for which I was grateful, and I told her, I said,
Speaker 1: you know, this has actually brought something into full focus
Speaker 1: for me. Maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake,
Speaker 1: but here's what we can now say. We have three
Speaker 1: coequal branches of government. Only one has the power to
Speaker 1: prosecute people. But let's look at what the other two
Speaker 1: have said and done regarding Donald Trump's crimes. How Select
Speaker 1: Committee one is conducting this unbelievably deep, broad, far reaching investigation.
Speaker 1: I don't care call it what you will. It's a
Speaker 1: criminal investigation. And what that investigation has produced after more
Speaker 1: than five hundred and fifty witnesses and countless documents is
Speaker 1: a court filing and I have it here John Eastman
Speaker 1: versus Benny Thompson and Danielle This court filing was signed
Speaker 1: by more than a dozen lawyers, some of whom I
Speaker 1: know well and worked with. These are deadly serious people.
Speaker 1: There is not a Roodie or a Sydney Powell anywhere
Speaker 1: near the signature page of this mega pleading in federal court.
Speaker 1: In this pleading, it says how Select Committee has developed
Speaker 1: evidence that Donald Trump committed fraud against the United States,
Speaker 1: against the people of the United States, and obstructed the
Speaker 1: congressional proceeding designed to give Joe Biden his win. But
Speaker 1: the House Select Committee, Congress, the legislative branch, can't prosecute anybody,
Speaker 1: but they're acting as prosecutors. Let's shift over to the
Speaker 1: other coequal branch of government, the judiciary. Judges have been
Speaker 1: screaming from the rooftops in the cases where the foot soldiers,
Speaker 1: the people who breached the capital are being prosecuted. They said, listen,
Speaker 1: Department of Justice, we understand that you're prosecuting the people
Speaker 1: who actually invaded the capital and committed crimes, and we
Speaker 1: appreciate that, but they are but pawns in Donald Trump's game,
Speaker 1: and then recently, Federal Court Judge A meet Meta said
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump's conduct on January six is quote the
Speaker 1: essence closed, quote of a conspiracy. But the judiciary can't
Speaker 1: prosecute anybody, Danielle, I'm not going to say two branches
Speaker 1: of government can't be wrong, because they probably can. But
Speaker 1: they're not wrong. They are yelling and screaming and documenting
Speaker 1: and filing in court serious legal pleadings saying Donald Trump
Speaker 1: committed crimes against the United States. And from the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice, the only of the three branches of government
Speaker 1: that has the power to prosecute people, we hear nothing crickets.
Speaker 1: All of this in combination, Danielle tells me the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice cannot decline to prosecute Donald Trump. They can't.
Speaker 1: They can't. They will prosecute him when they will do it,
Speaker 1: How they will do it, Will they do it in
Speaker 1: time to save our democracy? Those are open questions. But
Speaker 1: I will bet everything in my bank account much that
Speaker 1: they will. You went above a dollar glen one dollar
Speaker 1: betting limit that time they will prosecute him. The other
Speaker 1: two branches of government are saying, we've got the goods
Speaker 1: the federal government has the goods DJ move out. And
Speaker 1: Merrick Garland stepped to the mic the other day yesterday,
Speaker 1: I think, or the day before, in a rare you know,
Speaker 1: showing of a sign of life, and said, we are
Speaker 1: going to fight like Keck to protect Ukrainian democracy. I sweitt,
Speaker 1: I don't forge, I don't forgrudge him. This is not
Speaker 1: a criticism. I want us involved in the fight on
Speaker 1: behalf of the Ukrainian people fight, broadly speaking, one way
Speaker 1: or another. I want to help our brothers and sisters
Speaker 1: in Ukraine. But come on, Sport, how about you? You
Speaker 1: fight just as hard for American democracy. So it's coming,
Speaker 1: you know. I know it's coming. I know it's coming
Speaker 1: because of what the other two who equal branches of
Speaker 1: government have said and done and found. It's coming. I
Speaker 1: just don't know if it's going to be soon enough.
Speaker 1: Glenn walk us through the court filing and why this quote?
Speaker 1: Like why did they file? Why why was this file
Speaker 1: filed in court? Like what what? What is it? What
Speaker 1: does that actually mean? Um? And and is and is
Speaker 1: this normal? Is this normal proceeding for a commission? Because
Speaker 1: I want the listeners to really understand, like why this
Speaker 1: step was taken. Sure, So John Eastman is a treasonoust
Speaker 1: lawyer who authored a memo. It was a blueprint how
Speaker 1: to corruptly overturn the elections results. That wasn't the express title,
Speaker 1: but that was the substance, right, the memo, And so naturally,
Speaker 1: Oh and by the way, let me add he went
Speaker 1: on TV and said, and I can almost quote him verbatim,
Speaker 1: anybody who thought my memo should have been taken seriously
Speaker 1: is crazy. That's his word. So what does that tell us?
Speaker 1: He knows just how guilty he is. That demonstrates his
Speaker 1: consciousness of guilt walking away from his own legal memo.
Speaker 1: He's going to get God, He's going to be Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I believe so. Not surprisingly, the House Select Committee subpoened
Speaker 1: him because they wanted to hear all about you know
Speaker 1: how he came to write this treasonous memo and help
Speaker 1: his friend Donald Trump try to corruptly retain power. He
Speaker 1: and they subpoened documents from him, emails and text messages
Speaker 1: and all sorts of communications that would assist the House
Speaker 1: Select Committee in its investigation. And he sued. He said, nope,
Speaker 1: I'm filing suit to stop you from getting all that stuff.
Speaker 1: You can't have my emails or my phone records or anything.
Speaker 1: And so that was actually helpful because it gave the
Speaker 1: House Select Committee the opportunity to file a response to
Speaker 1: his suit. And the response said, guess what, you can't
Speaker 1: invoke attorney client privilege to keep to keep from giving
Speaker 1: us these things we have subpoena because there's a little
Speaker 1: thing called the crime fraud exception. We have evidence that
Speaker 1: you and Donald Trump were involved in committing crimes and
Speaker 1: fraud together. So you don't get to hold up the
Speaker 1: shield of attorney client privilege and say you can't have
Speaker 1: the incriminating evidence that I have in my possession that
Speaker 1: you have now subpoena. So that's just the crime fraud
Speaker 1: exception is just one of the reasons the How Select
Speaker 1: Committee puts in this pleading as to why John Eastman's
Speaker 1: claims fail. So that's procedurally how we got where we are, okay,
Speaker 1: And so Eastman's lawyer, right, according to the article in
Speaker 1: the New York Times, Eastman's lawyer is coming out and saying, well,
Speaker 1: this is obviously their favorite refrain, a witch hime, and
Speaker 1: that the Commission is saying that there is there's potential
Speaker 1: criminal or fraud here so that they can get him
Speaker 1: out of the attorney client privilege and that so now
Speaker 1: is the burden of proof put back on the commission
Speaker 1: to then prove that there is actual criminal activities so
Speaker 1: that they get his documents. Where do we go from here?
Speaker 1: So now this will be litigated, and I think technically
Speaker 1: in this civil proceeding, the burden of proof will be
Speaker 1: on the person resisting the subpoena got it, and he'll
Speaker 1: have to prove. But it's all going to be part
Speaker 1: and parcel of an evidentiary hearing. I assume if the
Speaker 1: judge orders an evidentiary hearing, judges can do two things.
Speaker 1: They can decide the issue on the papers, which means
Speaker 1: they can just look at the two pleadings and the
Speaker 1: attachments to the two pleadings. They usually will attach affidavits
Speaker 1: and other information. And if the judge says, you know what,
Speaker 1: I've reviewed it all and the decision in this case
Speaker 1: is absolutely clear. And if and if they do that,
Speaker 1: I predict they will rule in favor of the House
Speaker 1: Select Committee, not in favor of John Eastman. Or they
Speaker 1: could say, you know what, there's a contested issue of
Speaker 1: fact that I need to resolve with an evidentiary hearing
Speaker 1: before I can make my ruling, and then he'll set
Speaker 1: a hearing in the case. So that's kind of procedurally
Speaker 1: how this is going to play out. But listen, John Eastman,
Speaker 1: as a set out on page one of this pleading,
Speaker 1: went into the House Select Committee and he pleaded his
Speaker 1: Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination one hundred and forty
Speaker 1: six times. So he's not starting from a place of
Speaker 1: strength when he's trying to say, oh, there's no crime
Speaker 1: fraud here, no crime fraud, well Sport, you just invoked
Speaker 1: the fifth one forty six times, which means you're truthful.
Speaker 1: Testimony would tend to incriminate you. So listen, John Eastman
Speaker 1: will lose. It's just a question of how quickly you know,
Speaker 1: here's my thing too, and you know you you mentioned
Speaker 1: it a little bit before or and I do not
Speaker 1: hide my anger and rage at Merrick Garland and this
Speaker 1: Department of Justice when they decided to come out full
Speaker 1: force against the Russian oligarchs. Right, we're going to seize yachts.
Speaker 1: We're going to do this, We're gonna do that. I
Speaker 1: tweeted Glenn, and I said, so what about the American
Speaker 1: oligarchs that funded the insurrection. There were chartered buses that
Speaker 1: were leaving from multiple states, right Like, there were hotels
Speaker 1: that were paid for. There were I mean, there were
Speaker 1: things like where is where is the logic here that
Speaker 1: we would put this kind of smoke and energy at
Speaker 1: Russian oligarchs and defending democracy in Ukraine and that kind
Speaker 1: of energy. I have been saying since the beginning, follow
Speaker 1: the goddamn money. Where is the where the insurrection was funded?
Speaker 1: Why haven't we been following money? Like I just I
Speaker 1: don't I don't understand, like how much longer the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice can twiddle their fingers And what I'm starting like,
Speaker 1: and again I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but what I'm
Speaker 1: starting to wonder is who else is entwined in this?
Speaker 1: Why they're slow walking? Yeah? Right? Like does this make
Speaker 1: sense at this point that the Commission has done more
Speaker 1: heavy lifting than our Department of Justice. It's a great
Speaker 1: point because we have two things working in combination that
Speaker 1: are killing our view of the legitimacy of our institutions.
Speaker 1: It is the inaction, as you point out, but it's
Speaker 1: coupled with a lack of transparency. Those two things in
Speaker 1: combination are corrosive to the public's confidence in our institutions,
Speaker 1: because if there's inaction, you're not moving out. When we
Speaker 1: have all seen the crimes Donald Trump committed in the
Speaker 1: harsh light of day, that's bad enough. But if there's
Speaker 1: no transparency regarding that inaction. If they could step to
Speaker 1: the mic and convincingly say, listen, friends, this is why
Speaker 1: things have seemed to be moving so slowly ABCD, and
Speaker 1: they gave us transparency, I think it would reduce the temperature,
Speaker 1: and it would reduce our anxiety because then they would
Speaker 1: be at least having enough respect for us to explain
Speaker 1: what the heck is going on. That is inexplicable, that
Speaker 1: is unjust, and that is killing our democracy. But it's
Speaker 1: inaction plus a lack of transparency that kills public confidence
Speaker 1: in our institutions. Same thing, in a smaller sense happening
Speaker 1: in the New York District Attorney's office. I just wrote
Speaker 1: a piece for MSNBC Daily on this that will go
Speaker 1: up this weekend. And you have Alvin Bragg who is
Speaker 1: apparently slow walking or disinclined to indict Donald Trump. So
Speaker 1: you have the two top prosecutors resigning. These are two
Speaker 1: serious people who have been involved in this investigation for years,
Speaker 1: and by all accounts, were moving toward indicting Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: They abruptly resign, They issue letters of resignation, and then
Speaker 1: Alvin Bragg refuses after a foyer or the version in
Speaker 1: the New York State law of a Freedom of Information
Speaker 1: Act request. After reporters make a foyer request, he says, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: no no. If I release these letters of resignation, it
Speaker 1: could divulge investigative details. And so I asked myself, Okay,
Speaker 1: did these two prosecutors in their resignation letters put all
Speaker 1: kinds of intimate investigative detail about the Trump? No? What
Speaker 1: did they do? They probably put a home came out
Speaker 1: critical of Alvin Bright, and now he's refusing to release them.
Speaker 1: What does that give us? In action plus a lack
Speaker 1: of transparency, and that's killing confidence in our institutions of government.
Speaker 1: You know what, if I let me tell you something,
Speaker 1: If I were those two prosecutors who resign, I would
Speaker 1: send it. I would send it to the media. I
Speaker 1: would they have they have? I mean what what what? What? What? What? What?
Speaker 1: What could they possibly do? Right? They can't fire you.
Speaker 1: You already quit? Right? Could they sue you? Sue you
Speaker 1: for what? Right? What would be what would be the
Speaker 1: grounds of a lawsuit? If I were them, I would
Speaker 1: absolutely publish the publish the letters. I would give it
Speaker 1: to whatever outlet. I would post it on medium, you know,
Speaker 1: and say, here's the resignation letter. I don't know why
Speaker 1: he didn't want to share it? Well, And then I
Speaker 1: would say, and by the way, do you see any
Speaker 1: investigative detail in the letter? Like Alvin Bragg said, was
Speaker 1: his basis for not releasing it? And what have you
Speaker 1: just done? You've proved that the new DA for New
Speaker 1: York is a liar if that is the way it
Speaker 1: plays out. So yet transparency, transparency is what we need,
Speaker 1: and transparency is what we lack. And it's just getting worse.
Speaker 1: What is it, Glenn about Donald Trump that when we
Speaker 1: are always on the precipice of an indictment, that it
Speaker 1: goes up in the air. This has been happening for decades.
Speaker 1: What is it like does he have a dossier on
Speaker 1: every single person? Like I just I don't understand the
Speaker 1: cowardice here, and it has it has to come back
Speaker 1: to something that he has on these people. It's got
Speaker 1: to be some combination of fear, timidity, aversion to criticism,
Speaker 1: or losing a k It's got to be corruption in part.
Speaker 1: It's got to be compromise in part. I mean, think
Speaker 1: about how when the New York District Attorney's office, the
Speaker 1: career prosecutors wanted to indict Ivanka and Don Junior, and
Speaker 1: they had enough evidence, they claimed, and Sivance overruled his
Speaker 1: own prosecutors and then took a big fat campaign contribution
Speaker 1: from Don and then Ivanka's lawyer. Come on, now, if
Speaker 1: that doesn't smell like corruption, I don't know what does. So.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's one thing. I think it's it's
Speaker 1: a perience of things. Yeah. I think at its core,
Speaker 1: there is a fear in timidity that that prevents prosecutors
Speaker 1: from being the first one to step out to indict
Speaker 1: a former president of the United States. Somebody's got to
Speaker 1: step up, somebody's got to be brave, somebody's got to
Speaker 1: get over that fear and timidity and fight for the
Speaker 1: America people. I just don't I don't know who that is.
Speaker 1: Because I also want to say to you that the
Speaker 1: state of the Union that we all watched. I found
Speaker 1: sorely disappointing that in this chamber that a year plus
Speaker 1: before you had those very members that were in there
Speaker 1: hiding under their desks, barricading doors, and the President of
Speaker 1: the United States mentioned nothing about the insurrection, mentioned nothing whatsoever.
Speaker 1: And I said to my I'm like, this isn't just
Speaker 1: a missed opportunity, this is like gross negligence at this
Speaker 1: point of all of our leaders, the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: and the President of the United States. I'm like, what
Speaker 1: is going on here? The only people that are doing
Speaker 1: any type of heavy lifting here have no teeth or
Speaker 1: authority to take it any further than research. So I'm like,
Speaker 1: I am losing faith that even with the steps that
Speaker 1: we're taking this week in California, with this, you know,
Speaker 1: with this court, I just I'm like, Merritt Garland is
Speaker 1: going to do what with it? He has eight months,
Speaker 1: we have eight months until midterm elections. He hasn't done
Speaker 1: anything at all, and and the only time that he
Speaker 1: opens up his mouth is to talk about the Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Again important, but like, we can't look over there and
Speaker 1: say their democracy is falling and not pay attention to
Speaker 1: what's happening at home. And I understand the President of
Speaker 1: the United States is a salesman. That's what that's Politicians
Speaker 1: are salesmen and saleswomen. So he had to go out
Speaker 1: and try to put the best possible face on it.
Speaker 1: But let's be real. The state of the Union is
Speaker 1: precarious because of the insurrection, and that is the truth.
Speaker 1: It's a truth that a president probably feels he can't
Speaker 1: speak to the American people, which is what upsets us
Speaker 1: because we know the true state of affairs, and we
Speaker 1: know the state of our union is precarious because Donald
Speaker 1: Trump and his Republican allies and enablers and criminal associates
Speaker 1: are trying every day to kill our democracy, are trying
Speaker 1: every day to nullify our votes, are trying every day
Speaker 1: to pass legislation that claus back, particularly from women, their
Speaker 1: constitutional privacy rights. That's the state of our union. And
Speaker 1: I'm glad we're helping Ukraine, and I want us to
Speaker 1: help Ukraine. But this wasn't the state of the Ukrainian
Speaker 1: Union address. Come on, this was the state of our address,
Speaker 1: and the state of our Union is precarious. Glenn, Quickly,
Speaker 1: before I let you go, the last headline around the
Speaker 1: Commission was also around subpoena in Kimberly Gillifoile, who is
Speaker 1: the fiance of Don Trump Junior. What do we think
Speaker 1: about this subpoena? Is she gonna show and what do
Speaker 1: we think she knows? And my joke was, I'm certain
Speaker 1: this woman is going to get a quickie Vegas wedding.
Speaker 1: But then I was told that it doesn't preclude a
Speaker 1: quickie wedding. Wouldn't preclude what happened before. It just happened.
Speaker 1: Is what it'll cover what happens after. So just as
Speaker 1: John Eastman, who we were just talking about, went into
Speaker 1: the House Select Committee and pled the Fifth one hundred
Speaker 1: and forty six times, just as Roger Stone pled the
Speaker 1: Fifth countless times, just like Eric Trump pled the Fifth
Speaker 1: more than five hundred times in the Tiss James deposition.
Speaker 1: Just like the rest of them, will please the Fifth
Speaker 1: and the dish James case, Guilfoyle will go in and
Speaker 1: plead the Fifth. I have no doubt about that, because
Speaker 1: you know, she'll make a lot of noise and garner
Speaker 1: some media attention, but she's not going to testify because
Speaker 1: if she did, she would incriminate herself and she would
Speaker 1: incriminate Trump and others. And Ovonka hasn't testified yet, right,
Speaker 1: but they made her way in front of the committee.
Speaker 1: Yet they say she's cooperating. So when they say that,
Speaker 1: you know, if that's accurate. Maybe it is. Maybe they're
Speaker 1: saying it for pr purposes. Maybe they're saying it to
Speaker 1: try to drive wedges because they know if they tell
Speaker 1: people she's cooperating, other people might be like, oh no,
Speaker 1: if Ivanka's telling them x Y and Z, I better
Speaker 1: get in there and tell them x Y and Z
Speaker 1: as well. So there are tactical reasons to say she's cooperating, frankly,
Speaker 1: whether or not she is. But you know, she will
Speaker 1: probably also invoked the fifth when and if she ever appears.
Speaker 1: But I have to tell you based on this filing
Speaker 1: in court where Congress, a bipartisan committee let's not forget
Speaker 1: two Republicans and ten or so Democrats, eight or eight
Speaker 1: or ten Democrats, that is a bipartisan committee put in
Speaker 1: writing more than a dozen lawyers that there's enough evidence
Speaker 1: based on what they have learned, that Donald Trump committed
Speaker 1: offenses against the United States, defrauded the people of the
Speaker 1: United States, and criminally obstructed the congressional count of the
Speaker 1: electoral votes. Those are crimes that have to be addressed.
Speaker 1: And I'm telling you they will be addressed when and
Speaker 1: whether or not they're addressed they're addressed in time are
Speaker 1: open questions, but they have to be addressed. I mean
Speaker 1: we shall see. I mean we'll continue to follow in
Speaker 1: and we'll continue to be in conversation until we have
Speaker 1: the day that we say, oh, guess who's been indicted.
Speaker 1: Finally after decades of grift and crime and fraud and
Speaker 1: all of these things, that it finally comes to pass.
Speaker 1: But I am not holding my breath because I don't
Speaker 1: want to pass out. As always, Glenn, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for making the time to join woke a f
Speaker 1: We appreciate you and we'll keep fighting alongside you. We'll
Speaker 1: see you next week, then yell and now, dear friends,
Speaker 1: for your woke moment of wellness. It is Monday, and
Speaker 1: Monday sometimes feels like a drag And I say, I
Speaker 1: am very very big on rituals. I'm very big on
Speaker 1: rituals that will make me feel good. All we need
Speaker 1: to do these days, folks, is focus on what is
Speaker 1: making us feel good. We still have to work, even
Speaker 1: though you know, people want to pretend there's not a
Speaker 1: p pandemic. We want to put out of our minds
Speaker 1: that World War three is breaking out. We want to
Speaker 1: put out of our minds that black people just get
Speaker 1: killed in this country and no one, no one has
Speaker 1: any accountability around it. So create rituals for yourself. How
Speaker 1: you start your day is how you are going to
Speaker 1: feel all week long. How you start your Monday is
Speaker 1: going to be how you can carry that energy through
Speaker 1: your week. My rituals begin like this. I wake up,
Speaker 1: I open my curtains, I choose a meditation to start
Speaker 1: my day. Am I looking to feel, you know, abundant?
Speaker 1: Am I trying to manifest? Do I need a visualization?
Speaker 1: Am I feeling anxious? I check in with myself. I
Speaker 1: do not turn on the news right, I do not
Speaker 1: turn on the news until the afternoon. I read right,
Speaker 1: and I'm in social media. I make my coffee, I
Speaker 1: make my concoction right, which is apple side of vinegar,
Speaker 1: which I believe just works wonders on your digestion with
Speaker 1: the mother apple side of vinegar, A couple of shots
Speaker 1: of that a day. Rituals they allow me to feel
Speaker 1: like when I am out of control, when the world
Speaker 1: is out of control, that I have control over how
Speaker 1: I feel, how I approach my day, my work, my friends,
Speaker 1: my family. We need to be more conscious, more grounded
Speaker 1: on how we're using our energy, how we are storing
Speaker 1: our energy, and how we are releasing it out into
Speaker 1: the world. So I say to you on this good Monday,
Speaker 1: to really think about some rituals that you can add
Speaker 1: into your daily routine that are centered around your joy,
Speaker 1: your happiness and well being. That is it for me
Speaker 1: today here friends, as always, power to the people and
Speaker 1: to all the people. Power, get woke and stay woke
Speaker 1: as fuck.