Speaker 1: Good morning, Pezza, and welcome to Okay f Daily with
Speaker 1: Meet your Girl Danielle Moody, recording from the Brooklyn Bunker. Folks,
Speaker 1: this week is supposed to be a major week in America.
Speaker 1: Why is that because on Thursday, for the first time
Speaker 1: on prime time, we are going to learn more details
Speaker 1: about what happened on January sixth, that one six House
Speaker 1: Commission will be finally presenting their case to the American people. Now,
Speaker 1: I am praying on everything and every stone and every
Speaker 1: bundle of fucking sage that this presentation is a hell
Speaker 1: of a lot fucking better than what was presented to
Speaker 1: us with the Muller Report. Unfortunately, in this country, you
Speaker 1: need to entertain people. They need to be brought in,
Speaker 1: They need to see video clips, they need to hear outrage,
Speaker 1: they need to understand the urgency of what is still
Speaker 1: a slow moving coup that's not that fucking slow. Coming
Speaker 1: up next my conversation with our friend MSNBC legal analyst
Speaker 1: and the host of Justice Matters, Glenn Kirschner. We'll talk
Speaker 1: about what we are going to see this week, what
Speaker 1: we are hoping to see, and of course, once again,
Speaker 1: you know I asked the questions about is Merritt Garland
Speaker 1: paying attention, is he operating on the same fucking timeline
Speaker 1: for the demise of our democracy, or is he, like
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, still operating in twentieth century reality. The things
Speaker 1: that we have to understand and what Democrats need to
Speaker 1: do is present the facts. Republicans are a dangerous fucking cult.
Speaker 1: They have ex community dicated two of their own because
Speaker 1: of their refusal to participate in the big lie. And
Speaker 1: the fact is that if we do not take action,
Speaker 1: if this Department of Justice continues to move at a
Speaker 1: fucking sloth like place pace and not take action, we're done.
Speaker 1: You know, for the past couple of weeks, I've been
Speaker 1: speaking with so many people who are saying to me
Speaker 1: things like, I think that New Zealand seems nice. I'm
Speaker 1: looking into Portugal. I'm looking into leaving this country because
Speaker 1: I believe that it's going to become increasingly dangerous. This
Speaker 1: is what people who a couple of years ago, a
Speaker 1: year ago, would never have uttered these things, who wouldn't
Speaker 1: consider themselves to be hyperbolic. But the reality is is
Speaker 1: that if you're paying attention, the writing is on the wall.
Speaker 1: Look at what just transpired over the weekend. There were
Speaker 1: mass shootings in multiple cities, and we're doing nothing about it.
Speaker 1: We continue to say in the media, Oh, we're going
Speaker 1: to be having these bipartisan talks that will go nowhere,
Speaker 1: like they always do. We'll be outraged for a little
Speaker 1: bit and then we will move on to something else.
Speaker 1: I believe that things in this country are going to
Speaker 1: get bloody or before they get better. I believe that
Speaker 1: there are attacks that are being planned. I believe that
Speaker 1: what is happening with the rise of white supremacy and
Speaker 1: white domestic terrorists violence is that it's going to hit
Speaker 1: a fever pitch this summer, which is when shootings tend
Speaker 1: to go up anyway. But now we have in the
Speaker 1: next couple of weeks, we will learn the fate, the
Speaker 1: final fate of Rov Wade. We will learn if the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court has decided to just make it open fucking
Speaker 1: season in New York City and allow allowing assault rifles
Speaker 1: right to be a part of the equation. Just over
Speaker 1: the weekend again, our governor here in New York put
Speaker 1: together a list of gun restrictions, raising the age to
Speaker 1: twenty one years old, red flag laws, doing all of
Speaker 1: these things in anticipation of the Supreme Court thwarting states
Speaker 1: as rights, because it's okay to have states rights when
Speaker 1: it is about what abortion and control in that way.
Speaker 1: But if you try and limit guns and violence, then
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, we have a fucking problem if
Speaker 1: we do not, if Democrats do not begin to connect
Speaker 1: the dots and stop imagining for themselves that there are
Speaker 1: some quote unquote rational Republicans that are left. If they
Speaker 1: don't understand that sixty five percent of Republicans believe that
Speaker 1: it is okay to use threats of violence against the government.
Speaker 1: New Poland came out, we hadn't seen those numbers. So
Speaker 1: these people not only see the insurrection as something that's justifiable,
Speaker 1: they see it as the blueprint for how they plan
Speaker 1: on moving forward. So what are the rest of us
Speaker 1: going to do? I pray that this week is the
Speaker 1: beginning of real change, changing of people's minds and belief
Speaker 1: that they still have the power to shift our government
Speaker 1: from turning into a full on autocratic state. We are
Speaker 1: in so much fucking trouble. And if they just think
Speaker 1: that it's going to be enough to just show people
Speaker 1: what happened and not connect it to what is continually
Speaker 1: happening since the insurrection. It's a rap. Our democracy is
Speaker 1: a fucking rap. I am becoming more and more concerned
Speaker 1: having serious conversations with my family about what it is
Speaker 1: that we are going to do in order to be
Speaker 1: safe and to keep ourselves safe, and does that look
Speaker 1: like remaining in this country that is finding ways to
Speaker 1: kill us every day? So I don't know. I know
Speaker 1: that I will be watching on Thursday. I know that
Speaker 1: I will be in the tweets as this begins a
Speaker 1: six week rollout. But I would be lying if I
Speaker 1: said I wasn't scared that it won't be enough. So
Speaker 1: coming up next my conversation with our friend Glenn Kushner
Speaker 1: to unpack what we think that we will see in
Speaker 1: the coming days and what we're hopeful that it will do.
Speaker 1: Get a behind the scenes look at Comedy Central's The
Speaker 1: Daily Show on Beyond the Scenes, an original podcast from
Speaker 1: the Daily Show with Trevor Noah. Every week, host Roy
Speaker 1: Wood Junior goes deeper with the notable guests and experts
Speaker 1: from the Emmy Award winning series. Together, they use comedy
Speaker 1: to tackle current topics from gentrification to gun laws, and
Speaker 1: take a closer look at how and why these topics matter.
Speaker 1: Listen to Beyond the Scenes from the Daily Show with
Speaker 1: Trevor Noah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcast New episodes every Tuesday. Indisputable with
Speaker 1: Doctor Rashid Ricci is one of the latest shows on
Speaker 1: the TYT network and also the fastest growing news show
Speaker 1: in America. On his show, Doctor Ricci plays no games
Speaker 1: regarding policy, delivering a heavy dose of fact based truth
Speaker 1: and penetrating analysis on all the top news stories, focusing
Speaker 1: on racism, criminal and social justice, politics, police brutality, Karens
Speaker 1: and much more. Listeners can also expect interviews with fascinating guests,
Speaker 1: political leaders, commentators, and even fiery debates with conservatives on
Speaker 1: a wide range of policy topics in the Bullpen. It
Speaker 1: is an indisputable fact that you will love this show.
Speaker 1: Listen to Indisputable with Doctor rashad Ricci on Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. If you like
Speaker 1: what you hear, be sure to subscribe so you never
Speaker 1: miss a new episode. Folks, we are gearing up for
Speaker 1: what is going to be, I don't know, another blockbuster
Speaker 1: week in America. At the end of this week the
Speaker 1: hearings the one six Commission has finally, after thousands of interviews,
Speaker 1: thousands of documents, subpoenas, back and forth with Republican House
Speaker 1: members that are defying their own rules that they took
Speaker 1: an oath to, we will begin this hearing. I don't
Speaker 1: even know what a primetime spectacle. Who knows, but to
Speaker 1: prep us for what we can anticipate at the end
Speaker 1: of this week is our friend, host of Justice Matters
Speaker 1: and MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirshner. Glenn, A couple of
Speaker 1: things percolated up last week. I mean, in between multiple
Speaker 1: mass shootings that I know that you've been covering that
Speaker 1: I've been on TV discussing that I've just been losing
Speaker 1: my mind over there has been movement, more movement than
Speaker 1: we have seen and heard from the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: since the insurrection January twenty January twenty twenty one, I
Speaker 1: want to start with the you tweeted, and I'm a
Speaker 1: terrible person, but you tweeted and said that it seems
Speaker 1: as if Donald Trump is under investigation with the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice. Why is this leaking? Why are we hearing
Speaker 1: about this now after so many I guess well over
Speaker 1: a year now, well over a year of relative silence
Speaker 1: outside of the presser that Merritt Garland gave on the
Speaker 1: year anniversary of the insurrection. So what makes you lead
Speaker 1: to that assumption and and what do you think is happening? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I've got an opinion on this, Danielle, And I guess
Speaker 1: the opinions are like elbows. Everybody's got a couple, and
Speaker 1: they're often no use to anybody else. But I'm gonna
Speaker 1: take a stab at it because we have been waiting
Speaker 1: and dying, and you and I have been talking every week.
Speaker 1: When are we going to see some movement from the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice opening a criminal investigation into Donald Trump?
Speaker 1: Not that DOJ should announce it, we get that, But
Speaker 1: anytime we have a big old investigation going take it
Speaker 1: from a former federal prosecutor, that information leaks out into
Speaker 1: the public square, typically by what I call the leakers,
Speaker 1: the lawyers and the liars. Right it comes out. It
Speaker 1: just comes out. But we've heard nothing, and that's frustrated
Speaker 1: the heck out of us. Now all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: this avalanche of information is tumbling into the public square
Speaker 1: about dj criminally investigating Trump, and we'll talk about what
Speaker 1: that evidence is. But I have an opinion as to
Speaker 1: why it's coming out now. First of all, I do
Speaker 1: think the Department of Justice has been doing a lot
Speaker 1: behind the scenes that we haven't known about, but all
Speaker 1: of a sudden it's becoming very public. Well, what is
Speaker 1: about to happen In just a few days. We are
Speaker 1: going to see with our own eyes the evidence of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's crime, the crime of his co conspirators. The
Speaker 1: January sixth Committee is going to pull back the curtain
Speaker 1: on Donald Trump's insurrection, and as Jamie Raskin has said,
Speaker 1: it's going to blow the roof off the house. I
Speaker 1: believe that. And before I go to the evidence of
Speaker 1: why we know Donald Trump is being investigated criminally, I've
Speaker 1: said this before, but I think it bears repeating. The
Speaker 1: chief investigative counsel for the j six Committee, leading a
Speaker 1: team of former federal prosecutors, is one of the best
Speaker 1: rico prosecutors we've ever had. He also happens to be
Speaker 1: a former colleague and a friend of mine. His name
Speaker 1: is Tim Heafe. And let me be let me hasten
Speaker 1: to add I have no inside information I wouldn't ask
Speaker 1: him a question even if I could. He I saw
Speaker 1: him give the opening statement in the biggest Rico prosecution
Speaker 1: we ever brought in the courts of Washington, DC, and
Speaker 1: I got justice goosebumps, And I kind of reluctantly say
Speaker 1: that because I don't want to pump Tim's head any
Speaker 1: bigger than it already is. He's a very good man,
Speaker 1: but he's remarkable at putting together both the evidence of
Speaker 1: the crimes he's prosecuting and the message the way it's delivered.
Speaker 1: And I have every confidence that what we are going
Speaker 1: to see beginning on June ninth will look like the
Speaker 1: most compelling presentation of an opening statement to a jury
Speaker 1: that anybody has ever seen. Quite frankly, I'm that confident
Speaker 1: in the way the message is going to be delivered. Now,
Speaker 1: the difference, the difference between how one would present to
Speaker 1: a jury, obviously, and the presentation that we are going
Speaker 1: to see beginning on Thursday, is different because there is
Speaker 1: no representation or Donald Trump. This is not a court
Speaker 1: of law. So just explain to folks how this different,
Speaker 1: this one may differ from what we experienced with the
Speaker 1: Mueller Report, and how this differs you know, with our
Speaker 1: television law and order criminal you know show fantasies that
Speaker 1: we all watch on a regular basis. Two great questions.
Speaker 1: It differs from the Mueller Report in that it's going
Speaker 1: to come to us largely unfiltered Bill Bark and not
Speaker 1: block the truthful information about Donald Trump's crimes. This time,
Speaker 1: I go back and my blood pressure instantly rises when
Speaker 1: I think about how Bill Barr lied to us about
Speaker 1: what Bob Muller found regarding the crimes of Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: And one of my personal heroes, Judge Reggie Walton, is
Speaker 1: the federal judge who ruled and announced that Bill Barr
Speaker 1: lied to us about the Mueller Report. We don't have
Speaker 1: that problem this time. But the other way it's going
Speaker 1: to be a challenge, I think for them to present
Speaker 1: it to us is twelve jurors in a box or
Speaker 1: a captive audience. They can't go anywhere. They have to
Speaker 1: sit there and listen to us, and it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: You know, they don't have to change the channel, and
Speaker 1: you know, no different news organizations or broadcasting it, and
Speaker 1: they can pick and choose. So they're going to need
Speaker 1: to present this in a way that grabs hold of us.
Speaker 1: I always tell my prosecutors, when you're arguing to a
Speaker 1: jury your opening statement, you want to grab the jurors
Speaker 1: by the throat figuratively speaking, and you never let go.
Speaker 1: I don't care if you're opening statement lasts an hour
Speaker 1: or a day, and in big regal prosecutions they run many,
Speaker 1: many hours. So their challenge is to grab hold of
Speaker 1: us and not let the viewer go. And this team
Speaker 1: that has been working this investigation is as adept at
Speaker 1: delivering a message to the jury in this case the
Speaker 1: American people, as I think any team that has ever
Speaker 1: worked as part of a congressional investigation. So you know,
Speaker 1: buckle up, because I think we're going to get what
Speaker 1: we've been longing for. And then that transitions me into well, why,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden are we hearing that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: is being criminally investigated, Because we are hearing that all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, we've got information that, oh my goodness,
Speaker 1: they're using grand jury subpoenas to investigate Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis,
Speaker 1: John Eastman, and Donald Trump's fay collector's scheme. They delivered
Speaker 1: a grand jury subpoena to you know, mister green Bay
Speaker 1: sweet Peter Navarro, who I'm sorry is a stone called clown.
Speaker 1: I saw him on Ari again. He's a stone called clown.
Speaker 1: The arguments that he makes are absurd and juvenile and specious.
Speaker 1: But the grand Jury subpoenaed him and they directed him
Speaker 1: to provide all evidence of communications between he and Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: The Grand Jury is criminally investigating Donald Trump. There's no
Speaker 1: two ways about it. Why are we all of a
Speaker 1: sudden hearing about it? Because I believe the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice knows precisely what the January sixth Committee is about
Speaker 1: to unleash on the American people. And when we see
Speaker 1: in those public hearings the evidence of Donald Trump's crimes
Speaker 1: with our own eyes, and when we learn that there
Speaker 1: is evidence that can prove those crimes beyond a reasonable doubt,
Speaker 1: you know what's going to happen. We're going to explode.
Speaker 1: There's going to be a public outcry about why has
Speaker 1: a DJ indicted Donald Trump for these crimes that we've
Speaker 1: just seen broadcast in prime time? And I think DJ
Speaker 1: is trying to get ahead of that coming public outcry.
Speaker 1: I really do so. I think they've been investigating him methodically,
Speaker 1: perhaps slowly, and behind the scenes, But now it's all
Speaker 1: going to start to come out, and I'm going to
Speaker 1: use the O word optimistic. I'm feeling more optimistic right now.
Speaker 1: I have to. I have to kind of separate out
Speaker 1: the mass shootings, which drags me down to a very
Speaker 1: dark place. And I'm happy to talk about those if
Speaker 1: you want. But I'm feeling more optimistic right now than
Speaker 1: I have in a while. So here's the thing that
Speaker 1: I'm thinking about right because to me, all of this
Speaker 1: is for the public, is mostly about pr and branding
Speaker 1: right now. For the last six weeks, unfortunately, you had
Speaker 1: had the great displeasure of commenting on Johnny Depp and
Speaker 1: Amber heard right. Only one time. I was forced to
Speaker 1: go on Aaron talk about that the world had been
Speaker 1: captivated right all over social media on this celebrity and
Speaker 1: I call it celebrity crap. That's what I will say.
Speaker 1: There are too many important things going on for us
Speaker 1: to be delving into, Oh, who's going to get hundreds
Speaker 1: of millions of dollars from whom? Right when people can't
Speaker 1: even put bread and gas in their house. At the
Speaker 1: same time, what do you make of the sensationalism that
Speaker 1: that trial had, that captivated people. It kept people tuned
Speaker 1: in for six weeks. And what is it that the
Speaker 1: hearings that we are going to see in prime time
Speaker 1: need to do in order to have that same captivation that?
Speaker 1: Say I and I'm sorry to say it. We are
Speaker 1: a reality TV celebrity junk junked up culture, right, and
Speaker 1: so if there is going to be any real movement here,
Speaker 1: the people need to be spoken to as if we
Speaker 1: are all collectively the jury. So what do you make
Speaker 1: of what we saw with the depth and heard and
Speaker 1: what we can anticipate in terms of how this is
Speaker 1: going to be presented and discussed to keep people in engaged? Yeah,
Speaker 1: so there are three things I think that captivated people,
Speaker 1: you know, regarding the depth heard circus trial. One, we
Speaker 1: love celebrity, we just do, and so we're always going
Speaker 1: to be drawn to a good celebrity story. Two, when
Speaker 1: those celebrities are struggling in their lives and fighting and
Speaker 1: feuding and it's ugly and there's all kinds of salacious
Speaker 1: stories about what one does to another, we love both
Speaker 1: the celebrity and I'm sorry to say, Danielle, we somehow
Speaker 1: it makes some people feel better when when rich celebrated
Speaker 1: people struggle and suffer, so there's that added bonus to
Speaker 1: those who are attracted to the tragedy of a celebrity
Speaker 1: relationship going bad. And then, third, I think it's the
Speaker 1: distraction because you know what, whatever Johnny Depp and Amber
Speaker 1: Heard did or didn't do to one another has nothing
Speaker 1: to do with the health and viability of our democracy
Speaker 1: or our day to day lives, so we can plug
Speaker 1: into it as escapism. So I think those three things
Speaker 1: in combination is what drew people to that coverage. But
Speaker 1: you know, this story we're about to see beginning on
Speaker 1: June nine, is all that, but a whole lot more.
Speaker 1: It's got celebrity, it's got ugliness, it's got you ugly
Speaker 1: feuds between and among people who used to be friends
Speaker 1: and family. But it also directly impacts our lives and
Speaker 1: the future of our democracy. So I do think it's
Speaker 1: a challenge to present it in a way that captivates
Speaker 1: people because I'm sorry, we need to be entertained. But
Speaker 1: I am going to go back to I have complete
Speaker 1: confidence in this team, both the team working as the
Speaker 1: investigative team, the former federal prosecutors, and the team in
Speaker 1: front of the cameras, the you know, the Jamie Raskins
Speaker 1: and the representative Thompson's and the Cheneys, who I believe
Speaker 1: know how to deliver the message in a way that
Speaker 1: it's going to resonate. So right now we know that
Speaker 1: there have been several subpoenas, right Petter Navarro, as you mentioned,
Speaker 1: and he I don't even know why the man goes
Speaker 1: on television. I guess to make himself look good, but
Speaker 1: he fails. He has been subpoenaed. We know that there
Speaker 1: are proud boys, there are still where I'm still waiting
Speaker 1: for an investigation into Jenny Thomas. What do you make
Speaker 1: of what we know about who has been subpoenaed? Who
Speaker 1: is also being requested to come for this prime time
Speaker 1: viewing to actually speak now in front of the American people,
Speaker 1: essentially reiterating what they did in their private interviews with
Speaker 1: the committee. Yeah, that's an interesting question. Who are we
Speaker 1: going to see? Who will the witnesses on our TV
Speaker 1: screens be beginning on June nine. I don't think we
Speaker 1: have an answer to that question yet. But if I
Speaker 1: investigate a pretty significant crime, let's say significant, something that
Speaker 1: you know has lots of witnesses lots of evidence, lots
Speaker 1: of damage to the victim and to public safety. I'm
Speaker 1: a grand jury. I'll just give you a ballpark. I'm
Speaker 1: a grand jury. One hundred people. I may only present
Speaker 1: twenty to the jury at trial because I have to
Speaker 1: winnow down the witnesses that will tell the story, will
Speaker 1: present the evidence, so I can prove every element of
Speaker 1: the charged offenses. But that won't bore the jury, won't
Speaker 1: distract the jury, won't be straneous, won't be perhaps inconsistent
Speaker 1: with the message I'm trying to deliver about the crime
Speaker 1: that was committed. So that is where again, the expertise
Speaker 1: of this team of former federal prosecutors in presenting information
Speaker 1: in exactly that way is why we're gonna see a
Speaker 1: very different presentation. I believe we don't know who the
Speaker 1: witnesses will be, but think back to the first impeachment.
Speaker 1: This is what I was thinking, because I was the
Speaker 1: first impeachment was pretty compelling. It was pretty compelling. And
Speaker 1: you know when you had Ambassador Marie Ivanovitch and Bill
Speaker 1: Taylor and Fiona Hill and even that, you know, ridiculous
Speaker 1: human being Gordon Sondlin, one of Trump's lackeys, even he
Speaker 1: testified everybody was in the criminal loop, right right right.
Speaker 1: That was pretty compelling. And that was the time when
Speaker 1: we had a Congressional staff that consisted of Republicans and Democrats.
Speaker 1: So we still got the stupid dog and pony show
Speaker 1: by the Republicans who were questioning the witnesses. We're not
Speaker 1: going to have that this time. This time, the entire panel,
Speaker 1: the entire J six Committee, is lockstep marching toward justice,
Speaker 1: trying to save our democracy. That's why I say we're
Speaker 1: going to see a very different presentation, perhaps unlike anything
Speaker 1: we've seen before. Let's remind folks too, with a couple
Speaker 1: of minutes that we have in terms of what the
Speaker 1: criminal charges could be that come out of this presentation.
Speaker 1: The whole point, just to remind everybody listening, the whole
Speaker 1: point of this investigation was to get to the bottom
Speaker 1: of who was involved with the insurrection, who knew what when?
Speaker 1: Was this something that was premeditated, preplay or was it
Speaker 1: just people getting quote unquote as many of the infut
Speaker 1: soldier insurrectionists have said that they just got caught up, right.
Speaker 1: But what we know from the PowerPoint presentation, what we
Speaker 1: know about phone calls back and forth to Mark Meadows.
Speaker 1: What we know about the oath keepers having stationed people
Speaker 1: in Virginia and different places who eventually take over all
Speaker 1: of the other congressional buildings. This was not just a
Speaker 1: caught up in the moment, And so that is going
Speaker 1: to be what I believe is laid out to the people,
Speaker 1: that this was a coordinated plan. That's what I hope
Speaker 1: that they say still is continuing. Right. So what if
Speaker 1: we're looking at this and the people are going to
Speaker 1: reach a fever pitch with regard to how could all
Speaker 1: of this criminal mountain be in front of us and
Speaker 1: there be no indictments? What are the possible charges Glenn
Speaker 1: that we are looking at not just for Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: but for all of the lackeys surrounding him that allowed
Speaker 1: this to take place. This is a criminal conspiracy, and
Speaker 1: there is a precise law in the United States Code,
Speaker 1: my big, ugly blue book of federal laws, the US Code,
Speaker 1: is across my office. I'm tempted to run and get
Speaker 1: it and hold it up as a prop, but I
Speaker 1: won't do that. In that book, the United States Criminal Code,
Speaker 1: there's a crime eighteen United States Code, Section three seventy one.
Speaker 1: We call it shorthand a three seventy one conspiracy. It's
Speaker 1: a conspiracy to commit offenses against or defraud the United
Speaker 1: States of America. That is the precise federal statute that
Speaker 1: was used by Bob Muller to indict the Russian Internet
Speaker 1: Research Agency for interfering in our election. This is what
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, Mark Meadows, and a cast of thousands did.
Speaker 1: They committed that crime three seventy one conspiracy, crimes against
Speaker 1: the United States or defraud the United States. And I
Speaker 1: can say with complete confidence and certainty they committed those
Speaker 1: crimes because the federal judge has already found Donald Trump
Speaker 1: committed that crime and another crime, which is a felony,
Speaker 1: and that's obstructing an official proceeding the certification of Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's win. Judge David Carter in California made a ruling
Speaker 1: after an evidentiary hearing that Donald Trump and John Eastman
Speaker 1: is one of his treasonous lawyers together committed a conspiracy
Speaker 1: against the United States and obstructed an official proceeding. And
Speaker 1: he found by a preponderance of the evidence that they
Speaker 1: committed those crimes. Preponderance of the evidence is a fancy
Speaker 1: way to say fifty one percent of the evidence support
Speaker 1: arts the conclusion that they committed those crimes, and Danielle
Speaker 1: to arrest somebody and indict somebody, you don't even need
Speaker 1: fifty one percent. You only need probable cause, which is
Speaker 1: well below the finding that Judge Carter made about how
Speaker 1: much evidence there was that Trump and Eastman committed those crimes. So,
Speaker 1: once you have somebody involved in a conspiracy, every other
Speaker 1: crime that is committed by every other co conspirator, whether
Speaker 1: known or not to the other co conspirators, as long
Speaker 1: as it was committed during the course of the conspiracy
Speaker 1: and in furtherance of the conspiracy, even if Donald Trump
Speaker 1: didn't do it himself, he gets charged with it. So
Speaker 1: there are going to be bookoo crimes. That's a legal
Speaker 1: term that can be charged against Donald Trump and the others. Now,
Speaker 1: of course, Congress is investigating for a couple of reasons,
Speaker 1: to legislate to make sure this never happens again, and
Speaker 1: to make criminal referrals to the Department of Justice. So,
Speaker 1: and there was one other thing I wanted to touch on. Oh,
Speaker 1: Mark Meadows, for example, we just saw CNN report that
Speaker 1: there are some three thousand, I think almost three thousand
Speaker 1: texts that involve every branch of government involved in Trump
Speaker 1: and Meadows and Eastman's conspiracy to overturn the elections results.
Speaker 1: So I think for Mark Meadows, the only question left
Speaker 1: is is he best characterized as Donald Trump's underboss or
Speaker 1: consigliari because he is a martee member of this criminal conspiracy.
Speaker 1: So I keep saying buckle up because you know, I
Speaker 1: actually am starting to feel again like justice is coming.
Speaker 1: Last question for you because as you're playing this all
Speaker 1: out and I'm remembering what the federal judge said, I'm
Speaker 1: also thinking about our gutted, compromised Supreme Court. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: thinking about how this if the Department of Justice begins
Speaker 1: their paradi of indictments following the presentation by the House
Speaker 1: won six Commission, it begins in what court I'm assuming
Speaker 1: the DC Circuit Federal Federal DC Federal District Court. The
Speaker 1: trial court is where the first challenge will be launched.
Speaker 1: Then it will go up to the DC Circuit Court
Speaker 1: of Appeals, then the Supreme Court. I mean, Glenn, I'm
Speaker 1: going to ask you to read some tea leaves. I mean,
Speaker 1: we have a compromise Supreme Court. We have a justice
Speaker 1: that is sitting on there, who I believe him, along
Speaker 1: with his wife, was working to overturn our free and
Speaker 1: fair election. That being said, what does justice look like
Speaker 1: when we are compromised? So the Supreme Court is compromised,
Speaker 1: it's lost much of its legitimacy. And you know, they're
Speaker 1: busying themselves going after their own law clerks to see
Speaker 1: who might have leaked the Roe Vweight opinion when they
Speaker 1: should be going after one of their own justices, Clarence Thomas,
Speaker 1: and his insurrection is quite Jinny Thomas. So yes, they
Speaker 1: are determined to take away our constitutional rights, women's right
Speaker 1: to privacy, and I'm convinced that contraception, gay marriage, and
Speaker 1: probably desegregation will be next, mark my words. However, on
Speaker 1: the election challenge front, the Supreme Court held strong they
Speaker 1: could have accepted review of any number of cases when
Speaker 1: the election results were being challenged, and Trump's lawyers lost
Speaker 1: sixty four of sixty five federal court challenges because they
Speaker 1: were end state court challenges because they were all bogus,
Speaker 1: But they didn't. They didn't do that. And even more recently,
Speaker 1: Danielle when Donald Trump was trying to hide the incriminating
Speaker 1: evidence that was in the possession of the National Archives,
Speaker 1: hide it from the j six Committee, the Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: all of them. But Thomas ruled no, that information goes
Speaker 1: over to Congress, even though it is likely to be
Speaker 1: deeply incriminating of Donald Trump. Think about it. What the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court will not do, I believe, is turn our
Speaker 1: nation into a dictatorship by corruptly ruling for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: Here's why I say that they're going to take our
Speaker 1: rights away unless we fight to retain them. Unless this
Speaker 1: administration gets serious about increasing the number of justices the thirteen,
Speaker 1: so it will mirror the thirteen federal jurisdictions that have
Speaker 1: grown over the years. It's just the right thing to
Speaker 1: do forever, every reason. Plus it would ideologue the Court
Speaker 1: a little bit. So hopefully the administration will start to
Speaker 1: pay attention to that in Congress will as well. They'll
Speaker 1: take away those rights. They will give people even more
Speaker 1: weapons of mass destruction in the Second Amendment arena. So
Speaker 1: I am not confident with the direction of our Supreme
Speaker 1: Court except on the election front. You know why, if
Speaker 1: they turn our nation into a dictatorship by the legal fiat,
Speaker 1: if these cases bubble all the way up to the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. Then they are cutting off their nose to
Speaker 1: spite their face, because one of the first things the
Speaker 1: dictator will do is say, I'm no longer recognize Supreme
Speaker 1: Court supremacy. I don't. In fact, I want all the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court justices rounded up and put in prison. And
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court will have given the dictator the ability
Speaker 1: to do that with impunity. So the Supreme Court, motivated
Speaker 1: by their own self selformation ye, will not turn us
Speaker 1: into a dictatorship because then their power is at an end.
Speaker 1: Follow the money, follow the power. That's what motivates people.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court is not motivated to do the right thing.
Speaker 1: They're motivated to save their own fat sorry asses. All right,
Speaker 1: I'm going to hope right that word that I say sparingly,
Speaker 1: I'm going to hope that you are indeed correct, because
Speaker 1: as you are saying this, I'm thinking, oh, well, maybe
Speaker 1: we don't relitigate loving the Virginia, because then Clarence Thomas
Speaker 1: and Jinny's little love story would just crumble before us.
Speaker 1: So it is really about people's own self interests and
Speaker 1: their ability to hold power above all else. It isn't
Speaker 1: about the good of the country. It is about the
Speaker 1: good of them. Well, Glenn, this is going to be
Speaker 1: a blockbuster week. I look forward to our conversation as
Speaker 1: these hearings unfold, because I know, like me, you will
Speaker 1: be glued and be on our television screens and on
Speaker 1: your own show, Justice Matters, covering covering this, and keeping
Speaker 1: us all up to date. So I look forward to
Speaker 1: our continued conversation, as do I in part because Danielle,
Speaker 1: you always bring the Brooklyn and Jersey guy out, and
Speaker 1: I love that. I don't get to unleash that all
Speaker 1: that often, but I love that well, I appreciate. I
Speaker 1: appreciate that, thank you. It's no secret that the news
Speaker 1: is horsepill hard to swallow. Thankfully, there's The Bituation Room
Speaker 1: podcast hosted by comedian and commentator Francesca Freer and Tiny
Speaker 1: for a lighter take on the heavy stuff. Each week,
Speaker 1: The Bituation Room brings you progressive comedians, experts, and activists
Speaker 1: to break down the issues in a way that won't
Speaker 1: just leave you crying under a weighted blanket. Get The
Speaker 1: Bituation Room on Apple Podcasts, Scottify, Stitcher, and streaming on
Speaker 1: YouTube and Twitch. That is it for me today, Dear
Speaker 1: friends on woke app As always power to the people
Speaker 1: and to all the people. Power. Get woke and stay
Speaker 1: woke as fuck. Get a behind the scenes look at
Speaker 1: Comedy Central's The Daily Show on Beyond the Scenes, an
Speaker 1: original podcast from The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. Every week,
Speaker 1: host Roy Wood Junior goes deeper with the notable guests
Speaker 1: and experts from the Emmy Award winning series. Together, they
Speaker 1: use comedy to tackle current topics from gentrification to gun laws,
Speaker 1: and take a closer look at how and why these
Speaker 1: topics matter. Listen to Beyond the Scenes from The Daily
Speaker 1: Show with Trevor Noah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcast. New episodes every Tuesday.