Speaker 1: Good morning, Peezza, and welcome to WIKAYF Daily with Meet
Speaker 1: your Girl Danielle Moody recording from the Home Bunker, Folks.
Speaker 1: Today we get another supersized episode with our friend Glenn Kirshner.
Speaker 1: As you know from Friday show, I was absolutely outdone
Speaker 1: and beside myself with the absolute spinelessness that Merritt Garland
Speaker 1: has shown over the last eighteen months of him being
Speaker 1: Attorney General. In my conversation with Glenn, Glenn reminds us
Speaker 1: that when the Mulla Report came out, there were ten charges,
Speaker 1: ten areas. Ten areas. Let me say that, not charges,
Speaker 1: ten areas where Donald Trump had committed crimes, and based
Speaker 1: on some bullshit policy, not a law, but a bullshit
Speaker 1: policy from the Department of Justice, you cannot try or
Speaker 1: indict a sitting president of the United States, which Glen
Speaker 1: will tell us in this upcoming interview makes us pretty
Speaker 1: much like a Banana Republic, because basically, what you're saying
Speaker 1: to a criminal president like Donald Trump is crime away,
Speaker 1: crime away, because nothing is going to happen to you.
Speaker 1: Merritt Garland had the ability as soon as Donald Trump
Speaker 1: was no longer president of the United States to roll
Speaker 1: out indictments based on those obstruction charges, based on what
Speaker 1: it was that he did with regard to conversations around Zelinski,
Speaker 1: the emolument's clause, and other things he chose not to.
Speaker 1: And so here we are in a position where we
Speaker 1: have had Robert Muller fail, We've had Merritt Garland fail
Speaker 1: to pick up Robert Muller's ball, and now we have
Speaker 1: Jack Smith away from Merritt Garland to continue kicking the
Speaker 1: responsibility can down the road. Glenn will provide us with
Speaker 1: some very interesting updates as it pertains to Jack Smith
Speaker 1: and his investigation and whether or not we are actually
Speaker 1: edging closer to Trump and anyone in his inner circle
Speaker 1: being held accountable for their crimes against his country and
Speaker 1: against our democracy. So coming up next, dear friends, our
Speaker 1: supersized episode with our good good friend, the host of
Speaker 1: Justice Matters and MSNBC Legal analyst Glenn Kirshner. Folks, you
Speaker 1: know that whenever I have the opportunity to talk with
Speaker 1: our dear friend, the host of Justice Matters in an
Speaker 1: MSNBC Legal analyst Glenn Kirshner, I am always thrilled but
Speaker 1: yet exasperated because every week for the past couple of years,
Speaker 1: Glenn and I have been sitting around wondering is justice
Speaker 1: ever going to matter again? And this week, Glenn, yet
Speaker 1: another blow. I am interpreting Merrick Garland's recent appointment of
Speaker 1: a special counsel to look into the handful of documents
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden's lawyers discovered, contacted authorities to say that
Speaker 1: they had said documents, then did their own search, found
Speaker 1: a few more, handed them over readily. It took Merrick Garland,
Speaker 1: according to Sawyer Hackett, seventy one days to appoint a
Speaker 1: special counsel to look into Joe Biden. It took him
Speaker 1: five hundred and fifty seven days to appoint a special
Speaker 1: counsel for Donald Trump. After Donald Trump lied about taking documents,
Speaker 1: then that they were his, refused to bring them, refuse
Speaker 1: to let them go. And we know that the documents
Speaker 1: that he had were nuclear secrets in a place that
Speaker 1: was unlocked. Glenn, make this make sense? Sure? So I
Speaker 1: think people are right to be frustrated that it took
Speaker 1: forever for him to appoint a special counsel for Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: and it took him two minutes to appoint a special
Speaker 1: counsel for Joe Biden. But I think we have to
Speaker 1: take a step back and look at why he appointed
Speaker 1: special counsel when he did. And I'm going to argue
Speaker 1: that under the special counsel regulations and statute, he it
Speaker 1: was appropriate to do it when he did it for
Speaker 1: those two issues. So there didn't have to be a
Speaker 1: special counsel appointed to investigate the crimes of Donald Trump
Speaker 1: until the moment Donald Trump announced he's Joe Biden's political
Speaker 1: opponent in the upcoming election, because that's what gives rise
Speaker 1: to the cont licked that Merrick Garland then had, because
Speaker 1: if he kept going after not that he was going
Speaker 1: after Donald Trump, nobody can accuse Merrick Garland of aggressively
Speaker 1: going after Donald Trump. I don't know why the Republicans
Speaker 1: aren't taking Merrick Garland out to lunch to celebrate every
Speaker 1: day because Merrick Garland has not aggressively gone after Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: As I was yelling and screaming on air with NICOLEJ.
Speaker 1: Wallace yesterday. But let me get my blood pressure back down,
Speaker 1: so breathe, breathe. So But the moment he announced, that's
Speaker 1: when he became Biden's political opponent. That's when Merrick Garland
Speaker 1: couldn't be perceived as going after Joe Biden's political opponent,
Speaker 1: so he had to appoint a special counsel. Here is why.
Speaker 1: So that's why it took so long. But Danielle and hindsight,
Speaker 1: I'm glad he did because I don't know that Merrick
Speaker 1: Garland ever would have aggressively gone after Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: Jack Smith is which we can talk about in a
Speaker 1: few minutes. And he's doing it and really important ways.
Speaker 1: So why did he Why did he instantly appoint a
Speaker 1: special counsel when Joe Biden was found to have some
Speaker 1: documents he shouldn't because he can't investigate his boss because
Speaker 1: that's a conflict. He can't. He can't even say I
Speaker 1: took a quick look at it, there's nothing there, let's
Speaker 1: move on. Everybody would yell and scream it's your boss.
Speaker 1: Of course you're going to protect him and say let's
Speaker 1: move on. Now. We know the Republicans are going to
Speaker 1: scream regardless of what Merrick Garland does or doesn't do.
Speaker 1: But even the legal purists, the people who don't you know,
Speaker 1: who really want to see the Department of Justice operate
Speaker 1: in a fair, a political, legitimate way, people like me
Speaker 1: and be like Oh, dude, that's not right. It's not
Speaker 1: he's your boss. And here's where the deal was sealed.
Speaker 1: For special counsel. Merrick Garland followed the guidance of the
Speaker 1: regulations and the statue, and he turned to this US
Speaker 1: attorney out in Chicago, who is a Trump appointee. I
Speaker 1: don't know why Merrick Garland forever feels like he needs
Speaker 1: to give everything to Trump appointee. You have no idea.
Speaker 1: I don't either, other than he thinks that it fosters
Speaker 1: the perception of fairness. I think it's a recipe for disaster.
Speaker 1: But let's set that aside. He gives it to this guy,
Speaker 1: John Loche, one of only two remaining of the ninety three,
Speaker 1: one of only two remaining. Trump appointed US attorneys for
Speaker 1: a preliminary review, which is appropriate, right, So he looked
Speaker 1: at it. He did a little bit of digging around,
Speaker 1: a little bit of investigating. He said, Hey, Attorney General Garland,
Speaker 1: based on my preliminary review, I think you should probably
Speaker 1: investigate this, and I think you should probably appoint a
Speaker 1: special counsel. Well, that sealed the deal, because Merrick Garland
Speaker 1: at that point can't say, okay, I asked you to
Speaker 1: do the review. I asked for your opinion. Your opinion
Speaker 1: is there should be a special counsel and that person
Speaker 1: should give this a look. I reject that and protect
Speaker 1: my boss Joe Biden. That would not have been a
Speaker 1: good look for Merrick Garland or the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: So the concern and the complaint that one thing took
Speaker 1: forever and one thing was done instantly, that doesn't resonate
Speaker 1: with me. There are some things that do resonate with him.
Speaker 1: So people are trying to say there are some similarities.
Speaker 1: Trump had documents he shouldn't have had. Biden had documents
Speaker 1: he shouldn't have had. And that's true. But Danielle, that's
Speaker 1: where the similarities end. They end. What did Joe Biden do, frankly,
Speaker 1: what any good, honest, ethical, law abiding public servant would do.
Speaker 1: His team told him and mister President, we found some
Speaker 1: stuff at your pen office that shouldn't be there. They
Speaker 1: instantly told the National Archives, because that's who owns those documents,
Speaker 1: that's where those documents belong, and they return earn them.
Speaker 1: They told the Department of Justice. They instantly launched a
Speaker 1: search of any other place where these documents could be.
Speaker 1: Like Joe Biden's garage. They found a few more and
Speaker 1: they turned them over and they alerted the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice and of story. So if there's a legitimate investigation,
Speaker 1: I think what we're going to find now we can't
Speaker 1: prejudge the conclusions of the investigation, which will be conducted
Speaker 1: by another Trump appointed former DOJ official, Like, why can't
Speaker 1: we find a Bush appointee? Like why can't we find
Speaker 1: and like like I think that Bush isn't corrupted in
Speaker 1: his own way, but like, I'm just confused about why
Speaker 1: Merrit Garland believes that having the perception of some type
Speaker 1: of equal treatment with people who do not follow the
Speaker 1: rule of law is somehow going to make him seem
Speaker 1: like a equal and full age. They don't care, and
Speaker 1: they know we know that if you are a Trump appointee,
Speaker 1: I don't give a damn where you were appointed. You
Speaker 1: follow the rule book of make it long, make it last,
Speaker 1: make a media frenzy. So whether or not you find
Speaker 1: absolutely nothing, you're going to drag it out because it's
Speaker 1: going to be great for a media cycle for the
Speaker 1: Republicans and it's something for them to sink their teeth into.
Speaker 1: How Glenn does he keep doing this. That's a concern
Speaker 1: that I can't answer. But here is where I'll push
Speaker 1: back a little bit, Danielle. There are Trump appointed people,
Speaker 1: including judges, who have actually proven to be fair and impartial.
Speaker 1: The reason I say that is, look at the Trump
Speaker 1: appointees who delivered judge appointed a lean canon or Trump
Speaker 1: appointed judge a lean canon, a royal SmackDown, I mean,
Speaker 1: a much harder SmackDown than all at court judges typically
Speaker 1: deliver to trial court judges. Those were two Trump appointees.
Speaker 1: There are some Trump appointees on the Federal DISTRICCORD in Washington,
Speaker 1: DC who actually have been doing a darn good job,
Speaker 1: and some of them are even announcing, hey, you know,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is kind of responsible for the insurrection. When
Speaker 1: are we going to see charges for him in substance? Right,
Speaker 1: So it's not all Trump appointees, But I agree with
Speaker 1: you that Merrick Garland falls into the trap every time
Speaker 1: of thinking it seems, oh, I got to find a
Speaker 1: Trump appointee to handle this. No, you don't, No, you don't.
Speaker 1: Robert Muller was a lifelong Republican, and he instantly became
Speaker 1: an angry Democrat in the propaganda and disinformation campaign of
Speaker 1: the Republicans. So why do you think it's a good
Speaker 1: thing to keep reaching for Trump appointees. I'm with you there,
Speaker 1: but water under the bridge, even though the bridge has
Speaker 1: been watched out a couple of times over So, we
Speaker 1: just talked about what Joe Biden did, how he handled
Speaker 1: this exactly as he should. I think what you're gonna
Speaker 1: find is that a bunch of folks packed up his stuff.
Speaker 1: This is not an excuse, but it's a reality. Anytime
Speaker 1: and administration changes political hands, everybody starts packing stuff up,
Speaker 1: throwing it in boxes, getting it the heck out of
Speaker 1: the federal offices. And it's not the most sort of thoughtful,
Speaker 1: controlled process. And you're gonna find some folks who are
Speaker 1: being interviewed now who used to work with Joe Biden
Speaker 1: when he was president, who we're going to say, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I boxed up a whole bunch of stuff. Frankly, I
Speaker 1: didn't pay much attention to it, and we had a
Speaker 1: shipped to location X. So I suspect that's what you're
Speaker 1: gonna find. We know that's not what Donald Trump did.
Speaker 1: Why because Donald Trump posted the following, I openly and
Speaker 1: transparently took all those documents. Well, thank you for letting
Speaker 1: us know that and helping the prosecutors prove that element
Speaker 1: of the crime that you know, we appreciate that. So
Speaker 1: and he also said, and they were mine, and I
Speaker 1: did classified them with my mind, and then when can
Speaker 1: I declassify them with my mom an x men? Exactly,
Speaker 1: It's like an old Kreskin act. He's gonna bend a spoon.
Speaker 1: Um Kruskin's for the old, for the young kids. Kreskin
Speaker 1: was a mentalist who used to appear on Johnny Carson.
Speaker 1: I grew up on Johnny Carson. Okay, yeah, So but
Speaker 1: what did Donald Trump do when the National Archives said, hey, sport,
Speaker 1: you got our documents? He said, I don't care, you're
Speaker 1: not getting them back. Great, and months and months and
Speaker 1: months and months of fruitless negotiation with the documents hostage taker,
Speaker 1: with the documents terrorists, that is Donald Trump. Then the
Speaker 1: FBI and DOJ officials, including my former colleague Jay Bratt,
Speaker 1: went Tomorrow Lago and said, give us the documents back,
Speaker 1: and he wouldn't. Then a grand jury he subpoenaed the
Speaker 1: documents as part of a criminal investigation, and Donald Trump
Speaker 1: spit on that subpoena committing the crime of obstruction of justice.
Speaker 1: And then we finally had a breakdown and get a
Speaker 1: search warrant because a federal judge concluded that there were
Speaker 1: three crimes that were committed and that evidence of those
Speaker 1: crimes would be found at Donald Trump's home in Mara Lago.
Speaker 1: And when the FBI executed that search warrant, they found
Speaker 1: classified documents, including in Donald Trump's desk drawers, and Danielle
Speaker 1: here's the kicker. And I haven't heard many people talk
Speaker 1: about this as of right now today, Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: still in court. Federal prosecutors are demanding that he certified
Speaker 1: or he appoints somebody to certify that he has been
Speaker 1: over all of the stuff he's stolen, and he won't
Speaker 1: do it. Joe Biden instantly had searches conducted and said,
Speaker 1: you've got it all now, I mean talk about Knight
Speaker 1: and are you kidding me? So then, Glenn, I mean,
Speaker 1: here's the thing. I mean, this is why I think
Speaker 1: that the both of us are just breathless at this
Speaker 1: point right because the comparisons that are being made in
Speaker 1: mainstream media are absolutely irresponsible. They have just recently started
Speaker 1: to have any bit of nuance in their reporting. But
Speaker 1: you know, I said to folks on wok F the
Speaker 1: other day, I'm at the gym and I'm looking over
Speaker 1: at the woman in front of me who's on the
Speaker 1: elliptical machine watching Fox News. It takes everything in me
Speaker 1: not to jump off my elliptical machine and turn off
Speaker 1: what she's watching. All you see breaking news, Biden documents,
Speaker 1: You see McCarthy, Kevin McCarthy get up in front of
Speaker 1: reporters and talk about the Biden foux paw. And then
Speaker 1: you have Lauren Bobert Twitter and saying like I hope
Speaker 1: that that this is not just more of a cover
Speaker 1: up of the Biden scandal. All of this and it
Speaker 1: is just swirling, swirling, swirling, and the media, because most
Speaker 1: of them are owned by right wing Republican billionaires, are
Speaker 1: just running with it. So there's no nuance here. And
Speaker 1: I wonder how detrimental do you think that this actually is.
Speaker 1: I actually think the Republican politicians are not deep thinkers well,
Speaker 1: because every time they criticize Joe Biden for having documents
Speaker 1: he admittedly shouldn't have had, they are criticizing Donald Trump
Speaker 1: a thousand times over for doing the same thing with
Speaker 1: criminal intent. To the thousandth degree that Joe Biden did.
Speaker 1: So every time a Republican says Joe Biden needs to
Speaker 1: be held accountable for this, I say, and therefore what
Speaker 1: you're saying is Donald Trump needs to be held accountable
Speaker 1: a thousand times more seriously, because what he did is
Speaker 1: a thousand times worse than what you're saying Joe Biden did. Right,
Speaker 1: So the minute they start saying prosecute Biden, well then
Speaker 1: they're announcing that they agree Trump needs to be prosecuted. Now,
Speaker 1: Biden doesn't need to be prosecuted unless this investigation reveals
Speaker 1: that he intentionally took and criminally retained these documents. But
Speaker 1: there's one easy fact that does away with all this.
Speaker 1: The National Archives never even asked him for a document
Speaker 1: because they didn't know anything was missing. Because it's just
Speaker 1: like a handful of stuff that probably did get inadvertently
Speaker 1: stuck in a box and packed up by a staffer.
Speaker 1: That I mean again talk about night and day. You know,
Speaker 1: there is a defense in the criminal law called the stake.
Speaker 1: There's a defense in the criminal law called accident. I
Speaker 1: mean literally, if you look in the you know the
Speaker 1: rules of procedure, you look in the appellate case law.
Speaker 1: You look in the statutes, there are defenses called mistake accident.
Speaker 1: Those are defenses to crime. Why because if you do
Speaker 1: something mistakenly or you do something accidentally, there's no criminal
Speaker 1: act and there's certainly no criminal intent. So you know,
Speaker 1: come on, as long as this new Special Council is
Speaker 1: an honest, you know, broker of the facts and the law,
Speaker 1: then he should pretty quickly. And here's the other distinguishing feature.
Speaker 1: Everybody at this early stage, based on the reporting, everybody
Speaker 1: he's asking to interview, is like, please, if you if
Speaker 1: you want me there at ten am, I'll be there
Speaker 1: at nine thirty to tell you everything I know, as
Speaker 1: opposed to Team Trump fighting tooth and nail and saying
Speaker 1: I don't remember and not being willing to submit to interviews.
Speaker 1: Come on, at the end of the day, this has
Speaker 1: to shake out. I mean, my thing is that and
Speaker 1: then will transition to Jack Smith. But my concern, Glenn
Speaker 1: is that this turns into a Komy situation, which is
Speaker 1: in October right of twenty sixteen, Komey says, Oh, we're
Speaker 1: reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails three weeks before
Speaker 1: the fucking election. Two then turn around and say, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: but we didn't find anything. I'm great observation, great observation,
Speaker 1: and I hope that once Jack Smith and I'm excited
Speaker 1: to talk about Jackson in a minute, I really am.
Speaker 1: Once the indictments start to drop, that is going to
Speaker 1: take up all the oxy and I think a lot
Speaker 1: of these other flipping ridiculous distractions are going to melt away.
Speaker 1: You know, we had to contend with the judge a
Speaker 1: lean Kennon appointing a special mastered distraction, right, and then
Speaker 1: ultimately that melted away. I think once Jack Smith starts
Speaker 1: dropping criminal indictments on the heads of Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: his co conspirators, a lot of this other stuff is
Speaker 1: going to melt away. But what you just articulated is
Speaker 1: a huge concern if this special counsel her his last
Speaker 1: name is hu r Her, if he is not an
Speaker 1: honest broker of the facts and the law and doesn't
Speaker 1: move out in a timely manner. This is a very
Speaker 1: bite sized investigation. Who packed up the boxes how today
Speaker 1: end up where they ended up? Investigation concluded. So I'm
Speaker 1: less concerned about that unless her is a true Trump
Speaker 1: loyalist who is willing to unethically proceed with this investigation. Okay,
Speaker 1: switching gears to Jack Smith. What's what's the latest? This is?
Speaker 1: This is beautiful, It's beautiful and it's appalling all at once.
Speaker 1: So you know again, I was on with Carol Lennig
Speaker 1: and some others on with Nicole Wallace last night. We
Speaker 1: talked about all this. Carol and her team at the
Speaker 1: Washington Post broke some reporting that in early December, Jack
Speaker 1: Smith carpet bombed some folks with subpoenas, and those subpoenas
Speaker 1: covered more than a dozen categories of evidence. It was
Speaker 1: fake electors. It was all communications that Trump's people had
Speaker 1: with state election officials. It was investigating the financing of
Speaker 1: the Save America pack and the Legal Defense Fund pack,
Speaker 1: which we all know was all about fraud and not
Speaker 1: at all about legitimate fund raising. It was in this
Speaker 1: one I love. He was sending subpoenas to witnesses saying,
Speaker 1: I want to know who's paying your attorney's legal bills,
Speaker 1: and I want you to provide me with the attorney
Speaker 1: retainer fee fee agreement because I'm not going to take
Speaker 1: your word for it. I want to damn paperwork. Why
Speaker 1: because what we learned about Cassidy Hutchinson being represented by
Speaker 1: Stefan Passantino, who was on Team Trump rather than on
Speaker 1: Team Hutchinson his own client. Right, Jack Smith is going
Speaker 1: scorched earth, and he's going a million miles an hour.
Speaker 1: These subpoenas Danielle that he sent out went out in
Speaker 1: early December. We're just learning about them now. Jack Smith
Speaker 1: was appointed on November eighteenth. What does that and he
Speaker 1: wasn't even in country, he was recovering from a triathlon accident.
Speaker 1: What does that tell you about the pace he is setting? Okay,
Speaker 1: that's a good thing, and I want to talk about
Speaker 1: how hopefully the third time a charm Bob Muller, Merrick Garland,
Speaker 1: jack Smith, what we can hope we finish up with that.
Speaker 1: But so that's a beautiful thing from this aggressive former
Speaker 1: prosecutor's perspective. But it also tells us that these basic
Speaker 1: investigative steps that Jack Smith is taking, we're not taken
Speaker 1: for a year and a half under Merrick Garland. And
Speaker 1: what we're gonna have to do when this sad chapter
Speaker 1: of our nation's history is behind us and Trump and
Speaker 1: company are in orange jumpsuits, We're going to have to
Speaker 1: do an autopsy why the Department of Justice failed to
Speaker 1: meet the moment under Merrick Garland. I still don't happen
Speaker 1: to believe it's because Garland is corrupt. I think he's
Speaker 1: too much judge and not enough prosecutor. I don't think
Speaker 1: he had I don't think he had it in him
Speaker 1: to make difficult, aggressive law enforcement decisions, prosecutorial decisions. He
Speaker 1: treated everything like it was, you know, a meeting of
Speaker 1: his clerks in his chambers, trying to figure things out,
Speaker 1: and engaged in what I call legal naval gazing and
Speaker 1: analysis paralysis and all that. But we're going to need
Speaker 1: to know why the Department of Justice under Merrick Garland
Speaker 1: failed to meet the moment? What was that a product
Speaker 1: of because we're going to have to learn from it,
Speaker 1: just like the J six investigation is helping us learn
Speaker 1: what legislation is needed to avoid this from ever happening again.
Speaker 1: But at the end of the day, and I feel
Speaker 1: like I've been fooled a couple of times, and I
Speaker 1: run the risk of being fooled a third time because
Speaker 1: I thought Bob Muller was going to bring it home
Speaker 1: full disclosure, he was my chief of Homicide. I think
Speaker 1: highly of him. I think if you read his report,
Speaker 1: he documented in meticulous fashion the obstruction of justice crimes
Speaker 1: Donald Trump committed, and he testified that Donald Trump can
Speaker 1: be indicted the day he leaves office. But of course
Speaker 1: he never was. And that's Marrek Garland's decision as well.
Speaker 1: Even though Marek Garland wasn't in place on the day
Speaker 1: Donald Trump left office, he came, I believe in March,
Speaker 1: a couple of months later. Still the principal holes. There
Speaker 1: were these crimes that could have been brought and you
Speaker 1: decided not to bring them that we will need to
Speaker 1: do an autopsy on. Right, So Bob Muller couldn't bring
Speaker 1: it home. And let's remember I always have to say this,
Speaker 1: Bob Muller was laboring under this horrific DJ policy that
Speaker 1: you can't indict a sitting criminal president, which is the
Speaker 1: stuff of banana republics. I don't understand why we announce
Speaker 1: mister president, please please commit all the crimes you want
Speaker 1: because we were Trump is running again. Why do we
Speaker 1: think that, right? Because it's the best cover for him,
Speaker 1: exactly so? And then so Bob Muller couldn't bring it home.
Speaker 1: Marek Garland couldn't bring it home. We have a saying
Speaker 1: third times a charm, and you know it may sound
Speaker 1: trite and cliche, but it's a saying that has grown
Speaker 1: up for a particular reason. And now we're on the
Speaker 1: third go round Jack Smith. I'm hoping third time is
Speaker 1: a charm. And at least I'm comforted by the fact
Speaker 1: that Jack Smith has brought some scorched earth prosecutions against
Speaker 1: Republican criminals, Democrat political criminals, CIA officers. He is a
Speaker 1: hard charger against criminals who are Republicans and criminals who
Speaker 1: are Democrats, and he brings difficult cases and sometimes he
Speaker 1: wins and sometimes he loses. And I like the fact
Speaker 1: that he loses because that proves to me he's not
Speaker 1: afraid to bring them. And so I have some confidence,
Speaker 1: based on his bona FIDE's that maybe the third time
Speaker 1: will be the charm. The last question for you, Gleam,
Speaker 1: it is January. We are two years removed now from
Speaker 1: the insurrection. We have watched the copycat version play out
Speaker 1: in Brazil. Low and behold. Law enforcement in Brazil reminded
Speaker 1: us that people can be arrested same day for the
Speaker 1: crimes that they commit and broad frigging daylight. So we
Speaker 1: now know about these subpoenas. What are we I mean,
Speaker 1: shake your crystal ball for me. What are we thinking
Speaker 1: in terms of these magical indictments that we've been waiting
Speaker 1: on for two plus years? And if you include the
Speaker 1: Mueller Report, we're going back further than that. Yeah, And
Speaker 1: so you know what, I've got Georgia on my mind
Speaker 1: because what we learned about Fannie Willis's investigation is her
Speaker 1: special grand Jury has concluded its work and issued a
Speaker 1: report that is not yet public. And listen, I gotta
Speaker 1: give props to Fannie Willis because she just beat those
Speaker 1: scared little boys who kept running away from the grand jury.
Speaker 1: You know, I call him the littlest General Mike Flynn,
Speaker 1: the littlest Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and the littlest Senator Lindsey Graham,
Speaker 1: all of who whom were so scared to go into
Speaker 1: the grand jury in Georgia, and they ran to the courts.
Speaker 1: Lindsay ran all the way up to the Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: and all three of them went in the grand jury.
Speaker 1: And that is because of Fannie Willis's determination. She beat
Speaker 1: them like a drum. Now with the report in hand,
Speaker 1: which if I had to look into the crystal ball,
Speaker 1: I would bet says crimes were committed, here's the folk
Speaker 1: that committed them. They need to be charged. Fannie Willis
Speaker 1: goes back to the regular grand jury in Georgia that
Speaker 1: has the power to indict, and she indicts. That's what
Speaker 1: I think is coming. That's what I think. There's a
Speaker 1: court hearing on January twenty the issue of should the
Speaker 1: report be released publicly. There are open open reports laws
Speaker 1: in Georgia that have an exception that say, you know,
Speaker 1: stuff should be made public unless it would impede an
Speaker 1: ongoing investigation. I have a feeling we're not going to
Speaker 1: see that report because this investigation is ongoing. But the
Speaker 1: regular grand jury is also back sitting on January twenty fourth.
Speaker 1: We could see we could see indictments within a matter
Speaker 1: of weeks, but stay tuned for that. I think. I
Speaker 1: think those are the first indictments were likely to see.
Speaker 1: You know, Jack Smith, the documents crimes. It seems to
Speaker 1: me that they have everything they need. Now do they
Speaker 1: feel like they need more? Do they feel like they
Speaker 1: need belt and suspenders before bringing charges? Maybe? But I
Speaker 1: think that those charges could drop in the next couple
Speaker 1: of months. Insurrection charges I think are still a pretty
Speaker 1: you know, complex and instigation. Lots of these subpoenas that
Speaker 1: just went out involve the insurrection. I don't expect to
Speaker 1: see those. I think those will be charges to drop.
Speaker 1: So I would say Georgia documents crimes insurrection. Okay, all right,
Speaker 1: Well we'll sit tight, Glenn, and we will talk to
Speaker 1: you next week and see where we are. As always,
Speaker 1: really appreciate your insight and analysis, and hopefully one day, Glenn,
Speaker 1: we will sit here and say, with our champagne cheers,
Speaker 1: justice finally does matter. Appreciate you, Thank you, Daniel. That
Speaker 1: is it for me today. Dear friends on woke app
Speaker 1: as always, power to the people and to all the people. Power,
Speaker 1: get woke and stay woke as fuck.