Speaker 1: Good morning, Peepsen. Welcome to Okay f Daily with Meet
Speaker 1: your Girl Danielle Moody recording from the Home Bunker. Folks.
Speaker 1: News has come out. Alan Weisselberg, Trump's former CFO, who
Speaker 1: was a part of a fifteen fucking year scheme to
Speaker 1: evade taxes defraud the government, has received a whopping one
Speaker 1: hundred days uh sentencing from Alvin Bragg, the compromised Manhattan
Speaker 1: District Attorney, if you remember, and Glenn is going to
Speaker 1: walk us through where we are in terms of the
Speaker 1: investigation and search in Mara Lago to Weislberg sentencing. And
Speaker 1: the fact is this, Alvin Bragg had two top prosecutors
Speaker 1: quit publicly a couple of months ago. I know that
Speaker 1: it probably seems like years ago at this point given
Speaker 1: all the things that have transpired. And the reality is
Speaker 1: because they said that they had more than enough information
Speaker 1: to be able to bring charges and indict Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: and Alvin Bragg said no. Now in this bullshit deal
Speaker 1: that the Manhattan District Attorney gave to Weisselberg, is that,
Speaker 1: oh guess what, you get a hundred day slap on
Speaker 1: the wrist and you don't have to testify against Donald
Speaker 1: Trump in this ongoing investigation, Can somebody explain to me
Speaker 1: what the fuck is going on and why Alvin Bragg
Speaker 1: has yet to be investigated. Because when something smells rotten,
Speaker 1: when something don't smell right, it usually isn't right. And
Speaker 1: I'm so sick and fucking tired of watching these wealthy
Speaker 1: white men do whatever the fuck they want and face
Speaker 1: no accountability for it. People say, oh, well, at least
Speaker 1: it's something I don't want, just something I actually want, justice,
Speaker 1: which I'm beginning to think is impossible to come by
Speaker 1: in this country. And I should pretty much just give
Speaker 1: up the hope and the idea that anyone is going
Speaker 1: to be held accountable because, as Glenn tweeted, thank god
Speaker 1: Alan Weisselberg didn't sell loose cigarettes, Thank god he didn't
Speaker 1: have suspicion of stealing a backpack. Thank god right that
Speaker 1: he didn't sell a rock of crack, because otherwise he
Speaker 1: would I've either have been executed and brought fucking daylight
Speaker 1: in the streets or right be thrown in jail and
Speaker 1: locked up without a key. When people continue to tell
Speaker 1: me to have faith and have hope and then we
Speaker 1: see bullshit like this, This is what has me outdone
Speaker 1: right and has me continue to just be like, you
Speaker 1: know what, at the end of the day, I'm starting
Speaker 1: not to give a fuck and pretty much want people
Speaker 1: to just take care of themselves elves right in the
Speaker 1: best possible ways that they can, because authoritarianism, fascism, kleptocracy,
Speaker 1: it's all here. The democracy is a farce. Right. What
Speaker 1: America has always had is really good fucking pr right,
Speaker 1: the ability to go around to other nations and decry
Speaker 1: that we are the beacons of hope and freedom and
Speaker 1: look at our country and this melting pot, and it's
Speaker 1: all a lie. It is all a lie, just like
Speaker 1: white supremacy is the lie of white exceptionalism right, which
Speaker 1: has also had the pr to go around the world
Speaker 1: stoke anti blackness right and uphold whiteness as something right
Speaker 1: as the ultimate currency. Also a fucking lie. And I
Speaker 1: just want everyone to wake up to the fact that
Speaker 1: we have all been bamboosled, let astray right by the
Speaker 1: lies of this country, and we're seeing it play out
Speaker 1: every single day. And there's no starker way to look
Speaker 1: at inequity in America and not look at the mountain
Speaker 1: of evidence against Donald Trump and know that ain't not
Speaker 1: a fucking thing going to happen to him or anyone
Speaker 1: around him. Coming up next my conversation with our friend
Speaker 1: Glenn Kirshner to walk us through the fuckery that is
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. Hey, I'm David. Plots of Slates Political Gabfest.
Speaker 1: As another election season accelerates, it can be tricky to
Speaker 1: sort through all the noise and the news. Each week
Speaker 1: on the Gapfest, John Dickerson, Emily Bathlon and I decipher
Speaker 1: the headlines, break down the races, and tell you what
Speaker 1: issues really matter. We do not always agree. We definitely
Speaker 1: do not always agree, but we always deliver thoughtful debate
Speaker 1: and we always have a good time. So subscribe to
Speaker 1: Slate's Political Gapfest, new episodes every Thursday. Get a behind
Speaker 1: the scenes look at Comedy Central's The Daily Show On
Speaker 1: Beyond the Scenes, an original podcast from the Daily Show
Speaker 1: with Trevor Noah. Every week, host Roy Wood Junior goes
Speaker 1: deeper with the notable guests and experts from the Emmy
Speaker 1: Award winning series. Together, they use comedy to tackle current
Speaker 1: topics from gentrification to gun laws and take a closer
Speaker 1: look at how and why these topics matter. Listen to
Speaker 1: beyond the scenes from the Daily Show with Trevor Noah
Speaker 1: on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcast, new episodes every Tuesday, folks. You know that
Speaker 1: whenever I have the opportunity to speak with our friend
Speaker 1: host of Justice Matters and MSNBC legal analyst, Glenn Kirshner,
Speaker 1: I'm always thrilled to dive into the latest legal news.
Speaker 1: And there is a lot. Glenn, we had not spoken
Speaker 1: since the search, the FBI search of mar Lago, since
Speaker 1: now Trump's former CFO has now been sentenced to a
Speaker 1: whopping one hundred days after more than a decade of fraud,
Speaker 1: tax evasion, lies, schemes, and I want to get a
Speaker 1: sense from you. Let's start with the now Republican party,
Speaker 1: who wants to defund law enforcement, who wants to defund
Speaker 1: the FBI. They're totally okay when police are killing unarmed
Speaker 1: black people and cheering them on and wanting to back
Speaker 1: the blue at that point. But if you have law
Speaker 1: enforcement that has the audacity to get a warrant to
Speaker 1: legally search a known criminal, right that all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: it's everything. Everything is a mess, and every agency is
Speaker 1: a fraud and everything needs to be destroyed. And not
Speaker 1: only that, but we also need to use political violence,
Speaker 1: which that rhetoric is escalating as well. I want to
Speaker 1: get your thoughts on where we are right now two
Speaker 1: weeks post the search of Mara Lago. We're not in
Speaker 1: a great place. But I'm going to look for the
Speaker 1: silver lining on a couple of these issues, and I
Speaker 1: will warn you I won't be able to find it
Speaker 1: on one of these issues. But first of all, with
Speaker 1: respect to the Republican calls for to defund the FBI,
Speaker 1: I have seen my friends in the FBI and the
Speaker 1: law enforcement communities outraged in a way that I haven't
Speaker 1: seen them outraged before. And here is the silver lining.
Speaker 1: The Republicans are losing votes and support every day because
Speaker 1: the FBI community and all of the people that surround
Speaker 1: the FBI community, friends, families, any number of organizations, and
Speaker 1: I think the American people who say, you know, the FBI,
Speaker 1: among other things, goes after child predators, child pornographers, people
Speaker 1: who kidnap across state lines, etc. Every single day. With
Speaker 1: every stupid thing that comes out of the mouths of
Speaker 1: the Grass and the Grahams and the Jordans, I believe
Speaker 1: the Republican Party continues to die a slow death. That's
Speaker 1: the good news, that's the silver lining. Now, the fact
Speaker 1: that the Republicans are inspiring violence against law enforcement agencies
Speaker 1: that have the temerity of trying to hold a criminal
Speaker 1: former president accountable is absurd and obscene. It's obviously dangerous
Speaker 1: and what I hope the Department of Justice will also
Speaker 1: begin to wrestle with Danielle is holding politicians accountable for
Speaker 1: their speech that is designed to incite imminent violence, because
Speaker 1: that doesn't enjoy First Amendment protection. And DJ has to
Speaker 1: get over its timidity and its fear of being criticized
Speaker 1: for trampling on our First Amendment rights. Don't you don't
Speaker 1: have First Amendment rights to incite imminent violence. That's what
Speaker 1: some of these Republicans are doing. So, I mean, I
Speaker 1: know we're screaming into the void saying we hope DJ
Speaker 1: does X, but you know, I do think in the
Speaker 1: long run, even though they're going to try to steal
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty two midterms in the twenty twenty four
Speaker 1: presidential election with this dirty state legislation they keep trying
Speaker 1: to pass, in the long run, the Republican Party is
Speaker 1: destined to become extinct. Does Liz Cheney rise up from
Speaker 1: the ashes? I don't know. Ideologically I hope not. But
Speaker 1: dispositionally she's fighting for our democracy, so I hope so,
Speaker 1: because then maybe we can get back to fighting over
Speaker 1: policy and ideology instead of fighting over whether we should
Speaker 1: be a democracy or a dictatorship. You know, Glenn, I
Speaker 1: want to ask you something about this rise in the
Speaker 1: rhetoric for political violence that is coming from Republicans because
Speaker 1: it is one sided, right, as much as the media
Speaker 1: wants to talk about it, generally, it is one party
Speaker 1: that is doing this, and the reality is, like you're saying,
Speaker 1: we don't really have strong laws in my humble opinion
Speaker 1: around what it is that politicians can and cannot say.
Speaker 1: I mean, we have seen Republicans running for office that
Speaker 1: are using their political opponents as target practice, literally using
Speaker 1: an holding an AR fifteen and having their face and saying,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm going hunting for rhinos, or remember before
Speaker 1: Gabby Giffords was shot, right that Sarah Palin had her
Speaker 1: on her website in gun crosshairs. This type of attitude
Speaker 1: and demeanor by the Republican Party is not new. It
Speaker 1: is just gotten it is just increased, right, and the
Speaker 1: and the rhetoric has risen, and so I wonder, you know,
Speaker 1: do you feel as if, and this is a question
Speaker 1: that was posed by the Washington Post a couple of
Speaker 1: weeks ago, are we headed towards some type of civil
Speaker 1: war here? Like? Is this something that shouldn't continue to
Speaker 1: be ignored as we did with Palin and as we
Speaker 1: do with these other members like a Marjorie Taylor Green,
Speaker 1: who again used visual political violence in her campaigning for
Speaker 1: Congress like it, do you feel that they are just
Speaker 1: egging this on? And what can be done with the
Speaker 1: laws that are on the books to actually stop this?
Speaker 1: I actually believe there are plenty of laws on the
Speaker 1: books and including communicating threats, threats against public officials, what
Speaker 1: we need. I don't. I don't think we are actually
Speaker 1: heading towards civil war because I don't think the Trump
Speaker 1: supporters that sort of ugly ten percent of the most hateful,
Speaker 1: most dangerous Trump supporters are brave human beings. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know they're brave when they walk around with their
Speaker 1: big automatical weapons strapped across their bellies. But they're not
Speaker 1: brave people. They're not going to organize. They're not going
Speaker 1: to fight if it means putting themselves in harm's way.
Speaker 1: Will there be pockets of violence? Where will there be
Speaker 1: lone wolf idiots Trump supporters who will attack an FBI
Speaker 1: field office with a nail gun? You know, yes, there
Speaker 1: will be pockets of violence, isolated incidents of violence. I
Speaker 1: don't believe that we're heading toward a civil war, but
Speaker 1: there actually is an easy way to if not put
Speaker 1: a stop to it, send a great, big signal of deterrence.
Speaker 1: Prosecute just one of them. Prosecute one politician for speech
Speaker 1: that is designed to incite imminent violence. Just one and Danielle.
Speaker 1: I don't care if they lose the case. It's more
Speaker 1: important to try cases than to lose cases, because once
Speaker 1: we try just one politicians for crimes they commit with
Speaker 1: their dangerous speech inciting imminent violence. These people are so
Speaker 1: weak and scared and motivated by self preservation that they
Speaker 1: will stop or cut back on their own reckless rhetoric
Speaker 1: because they ultimately won't say, well, if I get indicted
Speaker 1: by the Department of Justice, I will eventually beat the
Speaker 1: case like that other person did. They don't want to
Speaker 1: be indicted. They don't want to live for a couple
Speaker 1: of years in court fighting against a possible criminal conviction.
Speaker 1: They're weak and they're sniveling, and they don't stand on
Speaker 1: principle indict one, Just indict one if the evidence supports
Speaker 1: an indictment, and it does many times over, We've seen it.
Speaker 1: You've got to get off the diamond do it. Every
Speaker 1: day we fail to indict criminal politicians, we are adding
Speaker 1: fuel to their fire, and I don't know why we
Speaker 1: continue to do that. Let's talk about Mara Lago now
Speaker 1: and the fact that Merrick Garland, the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: has gone to court to want to unseal the affidavit.
Speaker 1: I want to understand the difference between you know, the
Speaker 1: push and for people to say that Trump needs to
Speaker 1: release the release the warrant because he has the warrant
Speaker 1: and knows exactly what he means affiantic. So explain to
Speaker 1: me the difference, Like, explain to me the difference with
Speaker 1: what it is that the Department of Justice is trying
Speaker 1: to do, what Trump is trying to cover up, and
Speaker 1: why they had to go into court. Okay, So there
Speaker 1: are three parts to a warrant for purposes of this discussion,
Speaker 1: and Let's be clear, it's a pretty historic thing that
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice went to a federal judge and said, Judge,
Speaker 1: we have evidence that there is crime, evidence of crime
Speaker 1: located on the property of a former president's home, and
Speaker 1: we can prove it by a by probable cause. And
Speaker 1: they convince the judge that there's evidence of crime right
Speaker 1: now as of the date they applied for that warrant
Speaker 1: on Donald Trump's property. That's pretty dramatic. The other thing
Speaker 1: I'll say before I talk about the three pieces that
Speaker 1: make up a warrant, is that there are three crimes
Speaker 1: that are cited in that warrant as the basis for
Speaker 1: having gone down and hit Marilago and recovered all of
Speaker 1: that evidence of crime, and none of those three crimes,
Speaker 1: Danielle require that the documents be classified. So I want
Speaker 1: to set aside all of this nonsensical debate we've been
Speaker 1: having over whether Donald Trump can think in his mind
Speaker 1: something's classified declassified and it magically is. None of that
Speaker 1: matters for the three charges in the affidavit that served
Speaker 1: as a basis for the search horn. Let's talk about
Speaker 1: the three pieces of a search horn. One is what
Speaker 1: i'll call the face sheet. All that is is the
Speaker 1: formal document by which a judge authorizes the search. So
Speaker 1: it has the location of the search, it has the
Speaker 1: date of the application, it has the judge's signature authorizing
Speaker 1: the search, and it doesn't really tell us anything about
Speaker 1: the evidence. It's like a bureaucratic document officially authorizing the search.
Speaker 1: That's been unsealed, and I think that is the document
Speaker 1: that showed us those three crimes that the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice is pursuing involving Donald Trump. The other thing that's
Speaker 1: been unsealed and that we have, although it's been redacted,
Speaker 1: is the inventory or the property receipt or the list
Speaker 1: of stuff that was taken, but it's redacted or it's
Speaker 1: generally described fifteen boxes of highly classified materials, right, So
Speaker 1: that we have that's been unsealed, But it's the one
Speaker 1: in the middle. The one in the middle is like
Speaker 1: the story of the crime. It is the affidavit, and
Speaker 1: affidavit is a fancy word for a long narrative describing
Speaker 1: all of the evidence that leads the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: to conclude the crimes were committed and evidence of those
Speaker 1: crimes will be found at Mara Lago. That's all the
Speaker 1: good stuff. That's the book, the story, the movie of
Speaker 1: the crime that gave rise to the probable cause to search.
Speaker 1: That is under sealed, and a hundred times out of
Speaker 1: one hundred remains under sealed in a criminal investigation until
Speaker 1: there's an indictment, and then we have to give over
Speaker 1: those investigative documents to the defense so they can prepare
Speaker 1: for trial. That's when it will first be disclosed and
Speaker 1: not disclosed publicly, mind you, only disclosed to the defense
Speaker 1: team so they have all the evidence so they can
Speaker 1: prepare for trial. But I think it's important for people
Speaker 1: to know that the hearing that was just held down
Speaker 1: in Florida was not the Department of Justice versus Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: It was the news media, the fourth estate, news organizations
Speaker 1: asking the judge to unseal in the public interest, and
Speaker 1: the public does have an interest in seeing what this
Speaker 1: criminal president has been up to and the evidence that
Speaker 1: led to the search of mar Lago Danielle. Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: defense team had every opportunity to jump in and join
Speaker 1: that motion and say we want to disclose too, and
Speaker 1: they didn't do that. Why because it's going to kill
Speaker 1: him if all a figuratively speaking in the court of
Speaker 1: public opinion. It's going to kill him if we see
Speaker 1: that movie of all of the evidence of Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: crimes that led to the search warrant. He doesn't want
Speaker 1: that unsealed. He wants it to remain sealed so the
Speaker 1: Republicans can yell and scream that it's a cover up. Right.
Speaker 1: His lawyers didn't even ask the judge to unseal it,
Speaker 1: but the news organizations did, including you know, my parent organization,
Speaker 1: NBC News MSNBC, and I don't. Not only do I
Speaker 1: not blame them. The public does have a right to
Speaker 1: know as much as we can know about Donald Trump's crimes,
Speaker 1: but I don't want to know anything that would impair
Speaker 1: the ongoing investigation, that would compromise national security, or that
Speaker 1: would hurt witnesses or deter other witnesses from participating in
Speaker 1: the investigation. So DJ actually a friend of mine, somebody
Speaker 1: I worked with for decades, I believe. Over at the
Speaker 1: DCUs Attorney's office, Jay Bratt was the attorney in court,
Speaker 1: arguing Judge, we can't unseal any of this because it's
Speaker 1: you know, involves highly classified national security information. It would
Speaker 1: disclose witnesses, and we know witnesses have been tampered with.
Speaker 1: Think of Cassidy Hutchinson. So Judge, we can't disclose any
Speaker 1: of it. And the judge took an appropriate middle ground,
Speaker 1: in my opinion, he said, Okay, I hear you. Here's
Speaker 1: what I want you to do. I want you to
Speaker 1: try to redact everything out of the affidavit that would
Speaker 1: compromise the investigation, hurt national security, or endanger witnesses, and
Speaker 1: show me the rest of it that you think wouldn't
Speaker 1: run the risk of doing any of those things, such
Speaker 1: that we can disclose at least some of it to
Speaker 1: the public, to the media. I think that's an appropriate
Speaker 1: middle ground. Now, it may be at the end of
Speaker 1: the day when DJ takes that crack at redacting out
Speaker 1: stuff it believes it needs to redact out, the judge
Speaker 1: may say, you know what, You've persuaded me that you
Speaker 1: really would have to redact so much that there would
Speaker 1: be no useful information for the public at the end
Speaker 1: of the day because it would be a word here
Speaker 1: and a line there that was not redacted. So I'm
Speaker 1: not going to order you to disclose anything. It could
Speaker 1: be the judge says, I agree with your redactions let's
Speaker 1: go ahead and disclose what you believe can be disclosed,
Speaker 1: or he might say, I disagree with your redactions. I
Speaker 1: want you to unredact more and show that to me,
Speaker 1: because this is going to be a work in progress
Speaker 1: until I'm satisfied that you know you're only redacting what
Speaker 1: would really hurt your investigation. So this is not over.
Speaker 1: I think the judge is taking a sensible middle ground,
Speaker 1: even though as a prosecutor, I would be the one
Speaker 1: arguing Judge, please don't disclose any of it, because we're
Speaker 1: hard at work investigating the crimes of Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: we don't want anything to interfere with that. I mean,
Speaker 1: I just think that it is crazy, Glenn, that this
Speaker 1: man left the White House with fifteen plus boxes of
Speaker 1: classified information and we know, let's just put it out there.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is in debt, right and we know exactly
Speaker 1: where he gets his money from the people that are
Speaker 1: supposed enemies of the United States. MBS gave Jared Kushner
Speaker 1: two billion dollars post him leaving the Trump administration. You
Speaker 1: have putin and the amount of money that is held
Speaker 1: up over in Russia that the Trumps have, so I
Speaker 1: you know, my feeling is this. They went they retrieved
Speaker 1: the boxes that they've been asking for for the last
Speaker 1: nineteen plus months to get back and avoid right, avoid
Speaker 1: all of this. But do we not think that Donald
Speaker 1: Trump has already done something with those documents? I mean,
Speaker 1: we have computer scanners, fax machines. I mean, do we
Speaker 1: really think that America's national security hasn't been breached and
Speaker 1: isn't at risk. No. I absolutely believe he has already
Speaker 1: exploited those documents to his advantage, which is in part
Speaker 1: what continues to make this a national security investigation of
Speaker 1: one of the crimes listed in the search warrant authorizing
Speaker 1: the search. One of the crimes DJ is investigating falls
Speaker 1: under the Espionage Act, and it is removing, concealing transmitting
Speaker 1: national defense information that's under that's the charge under the
Speaker 1: Espionage Act that is being investigated, and that served as
Speaker 1: a basis for this search warrant. So do you think
Speaker 1: once Donald Trump stole and damn it, let's call it
Speaker 1: what it is. He stole the stell from the White House,
Speaker 1: He didn't have any right to it. And remember fifteen
Speaker 1: boxes is what the National Archives got months and months ago.
Speaker 1: And then DJ went down there the secure The National
Speaker 1: security officials went down there in June, and Trump and
Speaker 1: his team said, we've given it all. We've given it all,
Speaker 1: We've given it all. And that was a lie. And
Speaker 1: then they went down and got another ten or twelve boxes. Right, so,
Speaker 1: and and the part and see what I've just articulated
Speaker 1: there about the course of the way this played out.
Speaker 1: We know that and that that I just described as
Speaker 1: going to be in the affidavit, And that brings me
Speaker 1: back to how the judge could say, listen, everybody knows
Speaker 1: that part. So it doesn't really interfere with the ongoing
Speaker 1: investigation if DJ gives over big chunks like that that
Speaker 1: we already know. And frankly, this cuts against the prosecutor
Speaker 1: in me. I hope the judge orders unsealed as much
Speaker 1: as he can without damaging the ongoing investigation, because damn it,
Speaker 1: we do need to know, and the pressure needs to
Speaker 1: get ratcheted up, and all the ridiculousness coming out of
Speaker 1: the republic Republican Party needs to be met with the
Speaker 1: force of facts and reality. And we'll get some of
Speaker 1: that from the affidavit. I mean, the fact that this
Speaker 1: man is not indicted at this point the fact that
Speaker 1: he has not been indicted, the fact that we now
Speaker 1: know that he's a ligit. He is a traitor, right like,
Speaker 1: this is treason. He is literally selling state secrets, right like,
Speaker 1: never in our wildest dreams would we imagine a former
Speaker 1: president of the United States, anyone entering into this office
Speaker 1: doing something like this. And yet we're all carrying are
Speaker 1: your Republicans carrying around like carrying on as if like
Speaker 1: it's the it's it's the Department of Justice? Is you
Speaker 1: know vendetta? Unlike? Do you not get that we're under threat?
Speaker 1: We're already under threat under so many different ways in
Speaker 1: this country, and Donald Trump up the ante and no
Speaker 1: one cares. Um, Glenn, let's let's quickly talk about Weisselberg
Speaker 1: and the fact that you know what, I quote quote
Speaker 1: tweeted your tweet because I know that you'll be doing
Speaker 1: a video on his hundred day sentencing, which he doesn't
Speaker 1: have to testify against. Donald Trump doesn't have to do
Speaker 1: much of anything. Basically, fifteen years of stealing, thieving, lying
Speaker 1: gets you one hundred days. I quote tweeted you because
Speaker 1: I wanted to remind America about Calife Browder. I wanted
Speaker 1: to remind people about the sixteen year old black boy
Speaker 1: that was picked up under suspicion of having stolen a
Speaker 1: backpack and spent three years three years and rikers and
Speaker 1: then was released, no trial, no guilty charge, nothing was
Speaker 1: released after three years, and he would kill himself like
Speaker 1: a little bit after that release because of the trauma
Speaker 1: that he went through. Glenn, how do we continue to
Speaker 1: say that we have a justice system when we see
Speaker 1: things like this happening and we know that these people
Speaker 1: keep criming because nothing ever happens to them, nothing of note. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a darn good thing. Alan Weisselberg didn't snatch a purse,
Speaker 1: sell a rock of crack, or selsom loose cigarettes, because
Speaker 1: then he would have been in real Oh wait, no,
Speaker 1: he's white. He wouldn't have been in any trouble if
Speaker 1: he had done those things either, And he didn't get
Speaker 1: in any significant trouble by running a fifteen year criminal
Speaker 1: scheme to defraud in the first degree at the Trump Organization,
Speaker 1: with Donald Trump defrauding the taxpayers of the City of
Speaker 1: New York in the State of New York out of
Speaker 1: millions of dollars, not to mention the taxpayers of the
Speaker 1: United States because he also committed federal tax crimes for
Speaker 1: which he has not been indicted, and he gets a deal.
Speaker 1: So when we deal with cooperating witnesses, defendants that we
Speaker 1: want to flip and turned them into cooperating witnesses, Danielle
Speaker 1: I did it hundreds of times. I was known as
Speaker 1: the King of the cooperators, and that was not a compliment.
Speaker 1: But I worked a lot with cooperating witnesses because they
Speaker 1: were my de facto experts on crime. They were inside
Speaker 1: the criminal world. They were the ones who could tell
Speaker 1: me who did what, who killed whom, who was running guns,
Speaker 1: who was, you know, manufacturing drugs. I dealt with them
Speaker 1: a lot in my thirty years as a prosecutor. And
Speaker 1: here's what I did. When there was an important defendant
Speaker 1: that I knew could give me a bigger criminal fish
Speaker 1: that I needed to take down to protect the community,
Speaker 1: I told that person basically, it's my way or the highway.
Speaker 1: My way is that you tell me the truth about
Speaker 1: everything everything you did, and then everything that the bigger
Speaker 1: criminal fish did, and then you plead guilty to all
Speaker 1: of your crimes only, and I will only give you
Speaker 1: a benefit if you testify truthfully against everybody. And if
Speaker 1: you say nope, I'm not giving up the bigger fish,
Speaker 1: I don't say, okay, even though you're facing life in prison.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna give you a one hundred days anyway, thank
Speaker 1: you very much. That feels beyond recklessness by Alvin Bragg.
Speaker 1: It feels worse than just recklessness because they gave Alan
Speaker 1: Weisselberg a sweeththeart deal and they said, and by the way,
Speaker 1: you don't want to testify about Donald Trump or help
Speaker 1: us in our investigation of Donald Trump's crimes, That's okay,
Speaker 1: you don't have to. That's what's on paper. That's what
Speaker 1: played out in court in Weiselberg's guilty plea. That is
Speaker 1: the opposite of what prosecutors should do. If you didn't
Speaker 1: want to plead guilty and cooperate against bigger criminal fish,
Speaker 1: then you're going to trial or you're taking what we
Speaker 1: called a soldier's plea. The soldier's plea is when somebody says,
Speaker 1: I ain't cooperating because I'm scared, or I'm loyal to
Speaker 1: the mob boss or whatever. I am going to plead
Speaker 1: to every single count in the indictment, and I'm going
Speaker 1: to go to jail for the rest of my life
Speaker 1: because I'm not. I am less afraid of jail than
Speaker 1: I am of cooperating against bigger fish. You can make
Speaker 1: that decision. I can't stop you from entering a soldier's plea,
Speaker 1: but you know what, You're not going to get one
Speaker 1: day of benefit from me, and instead the prosecutors gave
Speaker 1: him a hundred days when he was facing life in
Speaker 1: prison given his age that I don't understand, and people
Speaker 1: are saying, wait a minute, Alvin Bragg has a double
Speaker 1: secret probation plan and he's gonna still use Weisselberg, to
Speaker 1: which I say, and why then with the top prosecutors
Speaker 1: Pomeranson done, who said Alvin Bragg killed the case when
Speaker 1: we had enough evidence to try and convict Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: we resign what they didn't know about the double secret
Speaker 1: probation plan to hold Donald Trump accountable. Okham's raiser, the
Speaker 1: simplest explanation is the most likely. Alvin Bragg blinked or
Speaker 1: he is compromised. I don't know which, But boy, you
Speaker 1: talk about a deeply unjust resolution that highlights the deep
Speaker 1: injustice of our system. Exhibit A. Alvin Bragg in my
Speaker 1: humble opinion needs to be investigated. And I have said
Speaker 1: this since those two high profile prosecutors quit that after
Speaker 1: all this time special grand jury, all of this work
Speaker 1: being done, they just decide to leave because he's not
Speaker 1: going to do anything right. There's only I mean, if
Speaker 1: something smells, it's because there's something rotten, right, And I
Speaker 1: don't know if we'll ever get to the bottom. I'm
Speaker 1: assuming we won't, but my goodness, it's just so blatant
Speaker 1: it's obnoxious at this point. Glenn, as always, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for walking us through this tangled web of Trump,
Speaker 1: trump Ism and criminality that I don't know if we'll
Speaker 1: ever find ourselves out of. To be honest. Public service announcement, Danielle,
Speaker 1: Let's remember that Donald Trump launched an armed attack on
Speaker 1: the Capitol try to stop the peaceful transfer of presidential power.
Speaker 1: That's the end of the PSA. In case anybody's forgotten that, Yep,
Speaker 1: stolen classified documents, weaponized your own white militia mob. And
Speaker 1: he still has a tea time this morning. Yep, Sure
Speaker 1: it does. Oh, Glenn, Well, we'll talk more. You keep
Speaker 1: your eyes open, folks, make sure that you are following
Speaker 1: Glenn on Twitter. That you are watching Justice Matters because
Speaker 1: if you want to know the inner workings of what
Speaker 1: is happening and why you want to pull your hair out,
Speaker 1: Glenn is making the case every single day. We appreciate you.
Speaker 1: That is it for me today. Here friends on Woke
Speaker 1: a app as always Power to the people and to
Speaker 1: all the people. Power, get woke and stay woke as fuck.
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 at your podcast. New episodes every Tuesday.