Speaker 1: Good morning, peeps, and welcome to will gae F Daily
Speaker 1: with Meet your Girl Danielle Moody, recording live from our
Speaker 1: pod Stream studios in Times Square. Dear friends, you know,
Speaker 1: sometimes I go on to Twitter and I'm like just
Speaker 1: waiting waiting for the hashtag Trump indided, waiting for the
Speaker 1: hashtag that is Trump is going to jail and it
Speaker 1: actually be a real thing. We are still waiting for
Speaker 1: that moment, although I feel like it is getting closer.
Speaker 1: But I'm not going to hold my breath because i
Speaker 1: don't want to pass out and knock my head. But
Speaker 1: dear friends, something interesting has developed from the investigation that
Speaker 1: had been underway by the House Committee on Oversight and Reform.
Speaker 1: They issued a press release that will shock no one
Speaker 1: that paid attention to the four years under Donald Trump
Speaker 1: and the fact that he was using the White House
Speaker 1: as essentially a cash cow, the fact that Mara Lago
Speaker 1: was an extension of that place so that he could
Speaker 1: meet with folks that wanted to wine and dine him
Speaker 1: throw money into Mara Lago and throw money into his pockets.
Speaker 1: But when the House Oversight and Reform Committee, run by
Speaker 1: Representative Carolyn Maloney issued this statement, I was like, Oh,
Speaker 1: is that what we're doing? So let me read you
Speaker 1: the title. Committee chairs release new documents showing Mara Lago
Speaker 1: Trio violated transparency law and improperly influenced veterans policies under
Speaker 1: President Trump. Now in small print, lean in to listen
Speaker 1: to this. Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and other White House
Speaker 1: advisors were aware of efforts to skirt the law. Funny
Speaker 1: when I'll tell you exactly how they were skirting the law,
Speaker 1: because you know you'll conjure the memory of what about
Speaker 1: her emails? So here's the statement. Today. Represent Carolyn Maloney,
Speaker 1: Chairwoman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, and
Speaker 1: Representative Mark Takano, Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs,
Speaker 1: release new documents showing that Ike Pearl Mutter, Mark Sherman,
Speaker 1: and doctor Bruce Mauskowitz, associates of former President Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: known as the Mara Lago Trio, violated the Federal Advisory
Speaker 1: Committee Act and attempted to exert improper influence over government
Speaker 1: employees and policies involving the Department of Veterans Affairs. Here
Speaker 1: is what the joint statement says. VERBTA, our Joint investigation
Speaker 1: found that Ike Pearl, Mutter, Mark Sherman, and doctor Bruce Maskowitz,
Speaker 1: bolstered by their connection to President Trump's private Moralago Club,
Speaker 1: violated the law and sought to exert improper influence over
Speaker 1: government officials to further their own personal interests. The documents
Speaker 1: we are releasing today shed light on the secret role
Speaker 1: of the trio played in developing veterans affairs initiatives and programs,
Speaker 1: including a hugely profitable plan to monetize veterans medical records.
Speaker 1: The committee's investigation demonstrates the need for Congress to pass
Speaker 1: the Federal Advisory Committee Transparency Act, which would ensure that
Speaker 1: the American people know who is providing advice to federal
Speaker 1: policymakers and would require agencies to disclose whether individuals on
Speaker 1: advisory committees have conflicts of interest. Here's the thing, folks
Speaker 1: about this, is that I am really fucking tired of
Speaker 1: policy initiatives and acts being introduced that are nothing more
Speaker 1: than lip service. What we want is, instead of an
Speaker 1: investigation to get more material, I want a criminal investigation
Speaker 1: into how this trio, among other people in the Trump
Speaker 1: administration were using right their connection to Donald Trump, his
Speaker 1: connection to power in order to enrich themselves. That is
Speaker 1: breaking the fucking law. And yet we're calling for more
Speaker 1: acts so that things like this don't happen. Do you
Speaker 1: know what stops people from you know, undermining our democracy
Speaker 1: in order to enrich themselves by throwing their asses in jail.
Speaker 1: That's what stops them, not an act like many others
Speaker 1: that the Trump administration officials decided to you know, just ignore.
Speaker 1: Last week, we were told that there were several folks
Speaker 1: Our friend Glenn Kirshner will walk through later in the show,
Speaker 1: will walk through exactly who is being subpoenaed by the
Speaker 1: one six Commission, right and whether or not those people
Speaker 1: are going to show up, because we know that during
Speaker 1: the Trump administration, these motherfuckers took subpoenas as if they
Speaker 1: were suggestions, as opposed to you know, you needing to
Speaker 1: show up because you are subpoenaed by a court of
Speaker 1: law to make yourselves present. Well, it's not a court
Speaker 1: of law when the subpoenas come from Congress, but it
Speaker 1: is in fact Congress does in fact have the power
Speaker 1: to enforce subpoena by holding people in contempt of Congress.
Speaker 1: And what we will learn from Glenn Kershner also throwing
Speaker 1: their asses in jail. And so here's the thing. I
Speaker 1: need Democrats to stop pretending that holding people accountable and
Speaker 1: responsible for their criminal activity during the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: seen as a partisan act. Republicans are going to call
Speaker 1: you out regardless. They're gonna call everything a hoax, a
Speaker 1: witch hunt, whatever it is that you want to give
Speaker 1: its name, They're going to do that because that's what
Speaker 1: they do. So you cannot continue to make movements right
Speaker 1: with regard to accountability and responsibility in fear about whether
Speaker 1: or not Republicans are going to point their finger at
Speaker 1: you and wave. They're going to sit down in these
Speaker 1: quote unquote collaboration meetings and then they're going to walk away.
Speaker 1: They're going to get up in front of Fox News
Speaker 1: and they're going to tell you that you're a bunch
Speaker 1: of liars and schemers. They are so obvious with their
Speaker 1: playbook that you would think by now that Democrats in
Speaker 1: power wouldn't pretend like they're shocked. I'm so tired of
Speaker 1: the performative bullshit. I don't need your Transparency Act. I
Speaker 1: need criminal charges brought against fucking criminals, regardless of whether
Speaker 1: or not they are quote unquote white collar crimes. These
Speaker 1: people need to have the book thrown at them and
Speaker 1: not read to them, and admonish them about better behavior
Speaker 1: as government officials. We know what was moving through Mara Lago.
Speaker 1: We know what was fucking moving through the Trump Hotel
Speaker 1: on sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue. We know what the fuck
Speaker 1: was running through the White House. Give me a break.
Speaker 1: You know, good, god damn well, that Republicans would not
Speaker 1: have needed some deep level of research and investigation to
Speaker 1: pull the hot Benghazi shit that they did under the
Speaker 1: Obama years, Right, they just kept hammering and hammering and
Speaker 1: hammering until they were through. Well, when the fuck are
Speaker 1: we going to do that? So I'm hoping that this
Speaker 1: statement that was released is a signal that we are
Speaker 1: moving in the direction of accountability. And again I'm not
Speaker 1: talking about, oh, let's pass another act that can just
Speaker 1: be overrode with some type of executive order. I don't
Speaker 1: care about those things. What I want is for them
Speaker 1: for this information that is unearthed to be scoop up
Speaker 1: by federal prosecutors and investigated. Right, that's what we need.
Speaker 1: So this is where we are at this particular moment, right,
Speaker 1: now with the investigations, and we will learn more in
Speaker 1: our conversation with Glenn Kirshner about the four Trump entities
Speaker 1: that are now being investigated now are being subpoenaed for
Speaker 1: their role in the insurrection. All right, folks. Coming up
Speaker 1: next is my conversation with our friend Glenn Kirshner, bringing
Speaker 1: us the latest in Trump world. I wish one day
Speaker 1: that we will talk about something else, but until then,
Speaker 1: Glenn is here to walk us through the latest, Folks.
Speaker 1: I'm always so thankful when we have the opportunity to
Speaker 1: run through the latest legal breakdowns happening with the former administration,
Speaker 1: with the one six Select Committee, and just you know
Speaker 1: the crazy that continues to funnel through America. Glenn, breaking
Speaker 1: news was that, finally, months after the putting together of
Speaker 1: the one six Select Committee, we have seen now our
Speaker 1: first major round of subpoenas. Six of Trump's closest aids,
Speaker 1: including Steve Badden, including Mark Meadows, have been subpoenas. I
Speaker 1: want you to walk us through one how we finally
Speaker 1: got to this place that you and I have been
Speaker 1: talking about and waiting for for months, but also what
Speaker 1: we can expect because if I recall, none of these
Speaker 1: Republican folks like to, you know, follow the rules, show
Speaker 1: up for subpoenas, and what we have seen thus far
Speaker 1: from Democrats is that they don't actually enforce and use
Speaker 1: the power that they have to the fullest extent. So
Speaker 1: walk us through the announcement of these subpoenas and what
Speaker 1: we can expect in the coming days and weeks. So, Danielle,
Speaker 1: I am the eternal optimist, bordering on being naive or polyganna.
Speaker 1: And so I say that because of what I'm about
Speaker 1: to say, which is that I feel like a kid
Speaker 1: in the justice can be shop with these four With
Speaker 1: these four subpoenas being issued, it doesn't mean justice will
Speaker 1: come soon or ever. But here's why I think these
Speaker 1: four subpoenas are so and I think it maybe four,
Speaker 1: maybe six. I may be wrong about the number. But
Speaker 1: here's why I think they're so important. First of all,
Speaker 1: they were issued for you know, Bannon and Meadows and
Speaker 1: Patel and Scavino. These are Donald Trump loyalists, acolytes, sycophants,
Speaker 1: and perhaps criminal associates, co conspirators in the insurrection. That's
Speaker 1: one that's why they're important. But as you say, Republicans
Speaker 1: at least in the age of Trump, view subpoenas as
Speaker 1: like party invitations that you can politely or not so
Speaker 1: politely decline, Yeah, no, thank you very much. Right. So,
Speaker 1: here's why I think these subpoenas are so important, both
Speaker 1: for who is being subpoenaed and what we're gonna now
Speaker 1: learn about our institutions and our systems of government. Have
Speaker 1: they learned from their mistakes of the past. Are they
Speaker 1: going to be willing to stand up and fight for
Speaker 1: our democracy? Because here's how this is going to play out.
Speaker 1: These people who have been subpoened. First of all, they're
Speaker 1: going to try to claim executive privileged. Trump has already said, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm going to put a stop to this. Going to
Speaker 1: claim executive privilege, the executive privileged dog won't hunt. Here's why. One,
Speaker 1: former presidents don't get to invoke it. Only current presidents
Speaker 1: get to invoke it. And Joe Biden will not invoke
Speaker 1: it because that would be viewed as covering up the
Speaker 1: attack on our democracy. One. Two, guys like Steve Bannon
Speaker 1: couldn't even possibly assert executive privilege because he wasn't a
Speaker 1: federal government employee at the time. So that's two. And
Speaker 1: then three, even if they try to assert executive privilege,
Speaker 1: they'd be trying to cover up crimes. And the crime
Speaker 1: fraud exception will negate any claim of executive privilege. So
Speaker 1: there's three reasons why the executive privilege dog won't hunt.
Speaker 1: Let's move on to the next phase. They're gonna challenge
Speaker 1: these things in court, right even if they start with
Speaker 1: a bogus claim of executive privilege. Now we're gonna learn
Speaker 1: will the courts continue to allow themselves to be weaponized
Speaker 1: so that the people like Don McGann can claim bogus
Speaker 1: privileges and then run out the clock for two years.
Speaker 1: Have the courts learned anything from that experience? Because Danielle,
Speaker 1: the courts don't have to say, Okay, I want briefs
Speaker 1: in three months, and then we're going to have arguments
Speaker 1: three months later, and then I'm going to take three
Speaker 1: months to decide the case. This is why I've been
Speaker 1: screaming for an inter branch dispute court, which can be
Speaker 1: stood up like that, just a rules change within the
Speaker 1: court itself. You want to attack on executive privilege grounds,
Speaker 1: this lawfully issued congressional subpoena. You got two weeks to
Speaker 1: file your brief two weeks later, we're going to have
Speaker 1: oral argument. Two weeks after that, you'll have my ruling
Speaker 1: six weeks done. The courts can do this if the
Speaker 1: courts are willing to learn from their mistakes of the past.
Speaker 1: How about Congress. Will Congress learn from its mistakes of
Speaker 1: the past when they would issue subpoenas lawful subpoenas, and
Speaker 1: then they would refuse to do what they could do
Speaker 1: to enforce them because they can do three things civil
Speaker 1: civil enforcement. That's really not viable because that's the Don McGann.
Speaker 1: Let's run out the clock approach. Criminal contempt. Here's why
Speaker 1: that real player. Why criminal contempt takes the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice to cooperate with Congress. Right, criminal contempt not inherent contempt.
Speaker 1: I'm going to get to that in a minute. When
Speaker 1: Congress can just go out and arrest people, that's one
Speaker 1: of my favorite vehicles. We'll get to that. One. Criminal
Speaker 1: contempt is where somebody fails to comply with a subpoena
Speaker 1: and the Department of the Congress makes a referral to
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice and asks the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: go into court and help us enforce this via criminal contempt.
Speaker 1: Having a judge, say you're in contempt, go cooperate. We
Speaker 1: couldn't do that under the Donald Trump years, with Bill Barr,
Speaker 1: the corrupt Attorney General in power, because he wouldn't let
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice do what it is supposed to do.
Speaker 1: Help Congress use the courts to enforce their subpoenas via
Speaker 1: criminal contempt. That is a tool that's back in Congress's toolbox,
Speaker 1: and that can be done fairly quickly, unlike civil enforcement.
Speaker 1: And then the third one, which I hope to hell
Speaker 1: Congress uses, is its inherent power to enforce its own
Speaker 1: subpoenas via congressional contempt. It was last done in the
Speaker 1: nineteen thirties. It was done successfully, and nobody seems interested
Speaker 1: in pulling that old tool out, dusting it off, and
Speaker 1: using it again. It's a lawful tool, and Congress should
Speaker 1: consider using it. What they have to do is vote
Speaker 1: out a contempt citation against somebody who fails to appear,
Speaker 1: and then they can start finding them ten thousand dollars
Speaker 1: a day, twenty five thousand dollars a day until they
Speaker 1: appear and purge the contempt. That's what it's called. When
Speaker 1: you finally give up the ghosts and go in and testify,
Speaker 1: or they can jail them. They can literally send a
Speaker 1: sergeant at arms of the House out to arrest the
Speaker 1: person and put their butts in the witness chair before Congress.
Speaker 1: Has Congress learned anything by its failures of the past,
Speaker 1: by its undue timidity of the past, Will it enforce
Speaker 1: its own subpoenas aggressively this time around? Because it's only
Speaker 1: our democracy at stake. So that's why I'm so excited,
Speaker 1: because there's an opportunity here to make progress on so
Speaker 1: many fronts, personal and institutional. Let's do it. We're now,
Speaker 1: do we know where the DC District Attorney is? Where
Speaker 1: is the actual Again, we're on a fact finding mission
Speaker 1: with the Select Committee, but where is the actual criminal investigation?
Speaker 1: Because if I see one more damn headline, Glenn, that
Speaker 1: tells me who knew what? That is obvious? Right that
Speaker 1: if Republicans, let's just say, had a quarter of that
Speaker 1: information on the Obama administration or on Benghazi, which they
Speaker 1: tried to turn into a thing, we would be in
Speaker 1: a different place. So where is the criminal investigation that
Speaker 1: should be moving in tandem to what the Select Committee
Speaker 1: is doing? It is moving in tandem I believe, but
Speaker 1: we're not supposed to know about it, because nobody's supposed
Speaker 1: to be talking about the criminal end of the insurrection
Speaker 1: case being investigated by the Department of Justice and most directly,
Speaker 1: sixty federal prosecutors at the DC US Attorney's Office. These
Speaker 1: are my friends, colleagues, some of my former homicide prosecutors,
Speaker 1: some people I tried cases with when I was there.
Speaker 1: These are the men and women heading up the insurrection investigation.
Speaker 1: Sixty prosecutors are assigned to it. I believe the investigation
Speaker 1: is moving forward, albeit behind the scenes so we don't
Speaker 1: know about it. But two days ago, Christopher Ray, I'm
Speaker 1: not a fan, but Christopher Ray, director of the FBI,
Speaker 1: testified before the Homeland Security Committee, and this kind of
Speaker 1: flew under the radar, but Scott McFarland of NBC DC
Speaker 1: four News tweeted it out. Yesterday, Ray testified that there
Speaker 1: are more superseding indictments on the way in the January
Speaker 1: sixth investigation. That's big news. Frankly, he probably shouldn't have
Speaker 1: said it, because we typically don't say things like that
Speaker 1: as law, but it was an important little sound bite
Speaker 1: because when he says more superseding indictments are on the way.
Speaker 1: That doesn't mean more foot soldiers of the insurrection are
Speaker 1: being arrested. A superseding indictment is a term of art,
Speaker 1: legal art, so it's the ugliest kind of art, but
Speaker 1: it's a term of art. A superseding indictment means basically,
Speaker 1: you are going to return a bigger, more inclusive, more
Speaker 1: serious indictment on more significant charges than what you have
Speaker 1: already had the Grand jury vote out. You're building on
Speaker 1: it in a significant way. It doesn't just mean we're
Speaker 1: locking up ten more foot soldiers. So stay tuned, because
Speaker 1: I do believe that this work is being done quietly
Speaker 1: by the Department of Justice. I also will go out
Speaker 1: on a limb and say, when Congress issued these subpoenas,
Speaker 1: Congress is already in at least communication with the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice on the timing and the logistics of these
Speaker 1: kinds of things, because I don't think Congress wants to
Speaker 1: interfere with the ongoing criminal investigation, which frankly, in my book,
Speaker 1: is more important than the congressional investigation. Right the congressional
Speaker 1: investigation is designed to figure out, Okay, who knew what,
Speaker 1: who did what? How can we prevent it from happening
Speaker 1: again in the future, But they can't hold people accountable criminally.
Speaker 1: Only the Department of Justice can. So I think the
Speaker 1: dj peece is more important for the future of our
Speaker 1: democracy because really, you know, Mark Meadows runs his mouth
Speaker 1: and he only seems to open his mouth to change
Speaker 1: feet because he's always sticking a foot in his mouth.
Speaker 1: And so he said, wait a minute. You know these
Speaker 1: subpoenas are out of bounds because the House Select Committee
Speaker 1: is only supposed to be in investigating you know what happened,
Speaker 1: what were the security shortfalls, and how can we prevent
Speaker 1: them from happening again, to which I would respond, Okay, Mark,
Speaker 1: the way we figure out what happened and the way
Speaker 1: we prevent it from happening again is by prosecuting the
Speaker 1: people who were responsible for it the first time, so
Speaker 1: you deter future criminal politicians and criminal presidents from doing
Speaker 1: it again. That's how you stop it from happening again.
Speaker 1: So I think d OJ is working on it, albeit
Speaker 1: behind the scenes. We shouldn't be hearing about it, even
Speaker 1: though we all celebrate the leaks when they come out.
Speaker 1: So I still believe. Let me go back to where
Speaker 1: I started being naive, maybe, Pollyanna, I still believe we're
Speaker 1: going to get there. You can't investigate the biggest gang
Speaker 1: case in the history of our nation, which is the
Speaker 1: gang that attacked the capital, without investigating the funders and
Speaker 1: the organizers and the insiders, including the insider in chief.
Speaker 1: You can't take it from me. I've investigated big gang cases.
Speaker 1: You can't ignore or parcel out that piece of it.
Speaker 1: It's all the attack on the Capitol. And I happen
Speaker 1: to believe DJ is going to get there because I
Speaker 1: have confidence in the leadership. No, Merrick Garland hasn't shown
Speaker 1: himself to be a strong, aggressive leader the hope the
Speaker 1: way we had hoped. But I trust Lisa Monica the
Speaker 1: number two, and I trust Merrick Garland. I trust Lisa
Speaker 1: Monica the number two. I trust Nita Gupta, I trust
Speaker 1: Kristen Clark. These are strong, solid, law and order oriented
Speaker 1: women and in Merrick Garland's case, men who are heading
Speaker 1: up our Department of Justice. I have confidence in them.
Speaker 1: That's it for Today's Woke, a f daily podcast. To
Speaker 1: hear more from today's show, including my full interview with
Speaker 1: Glenn Kirshner, support me on Patreon at patreon dot com.
Speaker 1: Slash Woke a power to the people and to all
Speaker 1: the people. Power. Get woke and stays fu