Speaker 1: Good morning, peeps, and welcome to Okay f Daily with
Speaker 1: Meet your Girl Danielle Moody, recording once again from the Bunker.
Speaker 1: You know, folks, I will say this that so far,
Speaker 1: I believe that the j six Commission is doing an
Speaker 1: incredible job. I think that they have compiled such a fascinating, layered,
Speaker 1: eye opening, jaw dropping case that I've ever seen. The
Speaker 1: way in which this last hearing laid bare and shocked
Speaker 1: the shit out of me, As you'll hear in my
Speaker 1: upcoming interview with our friend Glenn Kirshner. You know, this
Speaker 1: entire time that we've been talking about the insurrection, talk
Speaker 1: about this white domestic terrorist mob that overtook our Capitol building,
Speaker 1: that killed police officers, beat them, cursed them, you know,
Speaker 1: destroyed property at the behest of Donald Trump. In my mind,
Speaker 1: I'd been thinking that, you know, these people, they don't
Speaker 1: believe in democracy. They just want authoritarianism and fascism, and
Speaker 1: that's why they went to the Capitol building. But then
Speaker 1: the third hearing and I had a lightbulb moment because
Speaker 1: the third hearing was all about the fact that Donald
Speaker 1: Trump wanted to cause harm to his vice president. Donald
Speaker 1: Trump sent that mob to the Capitol Building not to
Speaker 1: just disrupt quote unquote the vote count, No, the certification,
Speaker 1: excuse me of the election. No, No, he sent them
Speaker 1: to the Capitol Building to disrupt his vice president by
Speaker 1: any means necessary. When you hear that Donald Trump, as
Speaker 1: his goons were saying, hang Mike Pence, that his reaction
Speaker 1: to that was maybe they should. And hearing that, Mark
Speaker 1: Meadows then walks out of the office all fucking shook,
Speaker 1: as if he didn't know who the fuck he was
Speaker 1: dealing with, that he didn't know Donald Trump as a mobster,
Speaker 1: that he didn't know that he wants power for power's sake,
Speaker 1: and that like the rule of law, murder, whatever it
Speaker 1: is that you need to do in order to hold
Speaker 1: on to that power, this motherfucker was willing to do
Speaker 1: so for me. I'm like, oh shit. This mob scene
Speaker 1: outside and inside of the Capitol Building wasn't just about
Speaker 1: stopping Congress from certification. It was particularly targeted at stopping
Speaker 1: Mike Pence because Mike Pence had finally declared that one
Speaker 1: person was not going to hand over the presidency to
Speaker 1: another person, that that is not how America works, it's
Speaker 1: not how democracy worked, and that he knew, much like
Speaker 1: fucking Donald Trump knew and everybody around him knew that
Speaker 1: this motherfucker lost the election. Right, so you lost the election.
Speaker 1: You've tried every which way until this moment in order
Speaker 1: to get these votes thrown out. Do these motherfucking recounts?
Speaker 1: And what did everybody tell you that when we're talking
Speaker 1: about recounts, you're talking about hundreds of votes, not making
Speaker 1: up ten thousand plus. That just doesn't happen. So in hindsight,
Speaker 1: now I'm sitting back and I'm like, this motherfucker tried
Speaker 1: to kill you, and you ain't say boo. The fact
Speaker 1: that Mike Pence didn't want to get into the car
Speaker 1: for a couple of reasons, and this is the thing
Speaker 1: that I really hope gets unpacked at some point. Mike
Speaker 1: Pence didn't want to get into the car to take
Speaker 1: him and his staff away to safety because One, he
Speaker 1: didn't want to have that image of the vice President
Speaker 1: of the United States fleeing the Capitol Building. So I
Speaker 1: get that, right, because that message that would have been
Speaker 1: sent there not great, not great. Two, he told his
Speaker 1: own secret service person, I don't know who's driving that car,
Speaker 1: now what Glenn and I surmise and this conversation is
Speaker 1: that he knew exactly who was driving that car, right,
Speaker 1: it's the same person that brought him there, and it's
Speaker 1: probably the same person that drives him around all the time.
Speaker 1: But what can be inferred from that statement is that
Speaker 1: I don't know who's in charge. Am I going to
Speaker 1: end up in somebody's alasco or am I going to
Speaker 1: end up, as Glenn will say later, in somebody's cement boots.
Speaker 1: The fact of the matter is that the reality that
Speaker 1: we're even having this conversation isn't just about how far
Speaker 1: off the rails Donald Trump had gone. It's how far
Speaker 1: off the rails Donald Trump has always been. And so
Speaker 1: when these people had the audacity to say, well I
Speaker 1: was on team normal and they were on team crazy,
Speaker 1: We're like the rest of us are like, so, wait,
Speaker 1: were you not around the entire four years? Because the
Speaker 1: ship that you all were doing purposefully blowing up political
Speaker 1: norms right like the way in which Donald Trump was
Speaker 1: governing and admonishing staff via tweet, threatening nuclear war via tweet,
Speaker 1: like talking about alternative facts? What part of fucking normal
Speaker 1: did you think that this was? You don't get to
Speaker 1: rebrand yourself in the aftermath that we're still all fucking
Speaker 1: spinning from talking about you were the grown up in
Speaker 1: the room, bitch, when right, you'all were crazy. You got
Speaker 1: behind a fucking TV reality host who everybody in New
Speaker 1: York has known, has been a motherfucking drifter, right, A
Speaker 1: liar and a cheat and a tax evader, a cheater
Speaker 1: in multiple ways, right, a sexual assaulter, and just an
Speaker 1: all around piece of shit human. You knew this and
Speaker 1: you got on the Trump train because y'all want power,
Speaker 1: and you believe in power for power's sake, not power
Speaker 1: to do good, not power to do right, just power
Speaker 1: to oppress and power to do harm. So don't talk
Speaker 1: to us now after the fact, when you realize just
Speaker 1: how far Donald Trump and company were willing to go
Speaker 1: that now you want to catch yourself in the eleventh
Speaker 1: hour talking about, oh, we were on team normal, bitch
Speaker 1: missed me with it, right, No one should be falling
Speaker 1: for that bullshit, just like the tap dance that William
Speaker 1: Barr was doing in all of his interviews, talking about,
Speaker 1: Oh this is bullshit and these people crazy. You got
Speaker 1: on CBS Bill Barr and you said you didn't give
Speaker 1: a fuck about your legacy. Right, you did all of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's bidding, particularly what you should be going down
Speaker 1: for what you won't because this Department of Justice just
Speaker 1: don't got that teeth and that backbone and that swagger
Speaker 1: to actually get shit done. But when Bill Barr stood
Speaker 1: up before the American people and lied about the contents
Speaker 1: of the Malla Report, you showed us just how far
Speaker 1: you were willing to go for trump Ism and the
Speaker 1: Trump train. So you don't get to turn around in
Speaker 1: the eleventh that we're talking about. Oh that's why I left, bitch,
Speaker 1: You left two weeks before the next president came in.
Speaker 1: Shut up. I just you know the audacity, right, the
Speaker 1: audacity of these people to try and recharacterize themselves as
Speaker 1: somebody's patriot, as somebody is like believer right of democracy
Speaker 1: and the rule of law. Like, oh, that line seems
Speaker 1: too far for you to break, bitch. You crossed at
Speaker 1: least a thousand before we got to the insurrection point,
Speaker 1: and all along you kept saying, no, that's good, that's good.
Speaker 1: So here we are, folks, halfway through, halfway through these
Speaker 1: public hearings. We now know that the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: has signaled once again and this time even more with
Speaker 1: firmness that they want all the documents, They want the
Speaker 1: transcripts to all the over one thousand interviews that the
Speaker 1: Sixth Commission has done over the past twelve months. And
Speaker 1: my question is, why did you all wait? What were
Speaker 1: you waiting for? You knew that we were having public
Speaker 1: hearings in June, So I'm confused about why you're asking
Speaker 1: for the motherfucking transcripts. Now, you could have asked for
Speaker 1: that ship back in January when we had hit the
Speaker 1: year anniversary of the insurrection and the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: show no signs of doing that a fucking thing. And
Speaker 1: at that time this Commission had already been working, so
Speaker 1: we can say, oh, well, they didn't want perception in
Speaker 1: this that the other thing. Perception is bullshit. We all
Speaker 1: know Donald Trump as a criminal, and he's still walking
Speaker 1: around on the streets. So why is it that we,
Speaker 1: when going after criminals, have to make sure that we
Speaker 1: got all our eyes and cross all of our teas.
Speaker 1: I'm just confused by the dumble standard that we're all
Speaker 1: the only ones living under. Nonetheless, coming up next, my
Speaker 1: conversation with our friend Glenn Kirshner to unpack the latest
Speaker 1: one six Insurrection hearing to discuss John Eastman and the
Speaker 1: fact that that motherfucker is headed to federal prison, and
Speaker 1: wondering whether or not anyone is going to subpoena Jinny
Speaker 1: Thompson instead of peacefully and nicely requesting her to come
Speaker 1: before the committee and lie straight to our faces. That
Speaker 1: and much more is coming up next. 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. The Damage Report with
Speaker 1: John Idarola is one of the most popular shows on
Speaker 1: the TYT network that serves as your daily breakdown of
Speaker 1: the genuine threats and challenges facing our country and world
Speaker 1: these days. We're confronted with an overwhelming sea of shocking, confounding,
Speaker 1: and devastating news stories. The Damage Report is your life raft,
Speaker 1: helping you navigate the day's news and understand the damage
Speaker 1: caused by the corrupt establishment, politicians, corporations, and everything in between.
Speaker 1: Join the Damage Reports notorious fan club, the Dragon Squad,
Speaker 1: where you become part of the fantastic community of progressives.
Speaker 1: Create a fun dragon nickname that fits your personality, collaborate
Speaker 1: and participate in fun activities like voting for the Garbage
Speaker 1: Person of the Week, and much more. Listen to The
Speaker 1: Damage Report on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. If you like what you hear, be sure
Speaker 1: to subscribe so you never miss an episode. Folks, each week,
Speaker 1: whenever I get the opportunity to be joined by our
Speaker 1: friend Glenn Kirshner, MSNBC Legal Analyst and the host of
Speaker 1: Justice Matters to discuss the latest in legal news, I'm excited.
Speaker 1: I'm excited this week, Glenn, for a couple of reasons.
Speaker 1: We are now at the third installment of the one
Speaker 1: six Committee hearings. So far, I think that they have
Speaker 1: been doing a good job of their roll out. What
Speaker 1: do you what, I want to get a sense of
Speaker 1: your feelings around the bombshells before we go into specifics
Speaker 1: that were dropped in in this week's third installment. You know,
Speaker 1: they keep sort of tightening the investigative circle around Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: He has committed criminal acts. He has absolutely no argument
Speaker 1: that he didn't have criminal intent when he was committing
Speaker 1: those acts. They have wiped all of that away, and
Speaker 1: now they went after his co conspirator, Don Eastman. And
Speaker 1: you don't have to take my word for it that
Speaker 1: John Eastman is a co conspirator of Donald Trump's because
Speaker 1: of federal judge in California, David Carter, has ruled that
Speaker 1: they acted together in a conspiracy to commit crimes against
Speaker 1: the United States and to obstruct an official proceeding the
Speaker 1: certification of Joe Biden's win. So I was still surprised
Speaker 1: at the nature of the incriminating evidence that they presented
Speaker 1: about John Eastman. I mean, it's mind blowing that a
Speaker 1: lawyer not only put together a treasonous memo setting out
Speaker 1: how to orchestrate a coup, but he acknowledged in some
Speaker 1: of his emails that, look, I know this is kind
Speaker 1: of against the law, but just a little bit against
Speaker 1: the law, the Electoral count Act. And then I mean,
Speaker 1: as if you thought it couldn't get any crazier. After
Speaker 1: the riot, he said, look, can we just break the
Speaker 1: law a little bit more? Because we ought to be
Speaker 1: all in to kill our democracy. At this point, he
Speaker 1: was undeterred by the violence that had unfolded at the Capitol.
Speaker 1: He was still pushing the coup. And then to top
Speaker 1: it all off, he said, oh, by the way, I'm
Speaker 1: really going to need a pardon. So that just screams
Speaker 1: consciousness of guilt. He knows he committed a crime and
Speaker 1: the only way he could get away with it is
Speaker 1: if his corrupt co conspirator, Donald Trump issued him a
Speaker 1: presidential pardon. John Eastman, will, I mean, he must be tried, convicted,
Speaker 1: and end up in the Federal Bureau of Prisons. There's
Speaker 1: just no two ways about it, after everything we've learned
Speaker 1: about his conduct. You know, let's just clear up the obvious, right,
Speaker 1: if I'm innocent, if I'm a person that is above board,
Speaker 1: do I casually send out emails? Would you send out
Speaker 1: an email that says, hey, that pardon parade still happening,
Speaker 1: because I'd like to jump in. Is that something, Glenn,
Speaker 1: as a thirty year federal prosecutor, that you would ever
Speaker 1: just happen in your breast pocket be walking around with
Speaker 1: a presidential pardon just in case. No, only people who
Speaker 1: believe they've committed crimes request pardons, And the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: has said that offering a pardon is some indication that
Speaker 1: the person committed a crime, and accepting a pardon is
Speaker 1: some admission of guilt by the pardon recipient. Now, those
Speaker 1: principles haven't been tested all that directly in court, but
Speaker 1: let me tell you not to get sidetracked. If New
Speaker 1: York State prosecutes Steve Bannon for the state crimes that
Speaker 1: arose from his bogus we build the Wall scheme by
Speaker 1: which he stole money from Donald Trump supporters, Donald Trump
Speaker 1: pardoned him federally. If I were the prosecutor, you bet
Speaker 1: I would introduce that pardon as evidence that Steve Bannon
Speaker 1: knew he committed and because he accepted that pardon, that
Speaker 1: equals an admission of guilt, and let the judges sort
Speaker 1: that out. But you absolutely have to start making these
Speaker 1: arguments in the court. So let me tell you what
Speaker 1: I thought was the most interesting thing that came out
Speaker 1: of the third hearing. It hadn't occurred to me, Glenn,
Speaker 1: and you and I've been talking now for god like
Speaker 1: two years, right like every week, and it had really
Speaker 1: hadn't occurred to me until it was laid out by
Speaker 1: the Committee that Donald Trump really did send that mob
Speaker 1: to attack his vice president. It wasn't in my mind.
Speaker 1: And tell me if it was illuminated for you, But
Speaker 1: in my mind, I was just like, Oh, these people,
Speaker 1: these mobsters, these terrorists, they're breaking in to our capital building.
Speaker 1: They just want to ransack democracy. They want to you know,
Speaker 1: they want to upset this election. But this is not
Speaker 1: what the Committee drove home on with the third hearing.
Speaker 1: It was really about expressly painting the picture that it
Speaker 1: was Donald Trump who sent his legions of folks, including
Speaker 1: the oath Keeper and Proud Boy militia, to go get
Speaker 1: his vice president. That as the vice president was evacuated
Speaker 1: into that bunker, Donald Trump was still tweeting that he
Speaker 1: was weak, that he needed to stand up for his country.
Speaker 1: So it was that always illuminated for you? Or do you?
Speaker 1: Was that brought to clearer a clearer picture after listening
Speaker 1: to this hearing. I think it comes into sharper and
Speaker 1: sharper focus as we continue to learn more. You know,
Speaker 1: I think one of the tipping points for me, Danielle
Speaker 1: was when we heard the reporting as maybe some weeks ago,
Speaker 1: that Mark Meadows came out of an Oval Office meeting
Speaker 1: during the attack on the Capitol and he appeared to
Speaker 1: be shaken and he said, you know, Trump just said
Speaker 1: maybe Mike Pence should be hanged. And we're going to
Speaker 1: hear more evidency. I think the investigative circle and the
Speaker 1: presentation of evidence continues to tighten around Trump because I
Speaker 1: think what We're going to begin to hear are some
Speaker 1: of Trump's direct communications to his DOJ officials when he
Speaker 1: tried to get them to weaponize the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: to do his nefarious bidding. Then we're gonna hear about
Speaker 1: statements he was making, an acts he was taking during
Speaker 1: the insurrection itself. We're going to see photographs, maybe even
Speaker 1: here some recordings. I don't know, but I think the
Speaker 1: circle tightens more and more and more and more. But
Speaker 1: when we heard that reporting that Donald Trump was angry,
Speaker 1: he was upset because Mike Pence was being whisked too
Speaker 1: safety and then he said maybe Mike Pence should be hanged.
Speaker 1: I also think we're going to get more about the
Speaker 1: direct connection between the Proud Boys Oathkeepers, and the White
Speaker 1: House and Trump. And I think those are still some
Speaker 1: blockbuster revelations that are going to come, and you know,
Speaker 1: there will be nothing left for the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: to do but indict Eastman, Trump and the others. You know,
Speaker 1: I got to tell the other thing that came up,
Speaker 1: and I was watching the MSNBC kind of reflection, the
Speaker 1: special reporting there after what you know, they're the big panel,
Speaker 1: and Nicole Wallace said something too that took me, took
Speaker 1: me aback, and she said, Mike Pence told his secret
Speaker 1: service person I believe his name is Tim, that he
Speaker 1: wasn't getting in the car because he trusted that secret
Speaker 1: service person. But he said, you're not driving the car.
Speaker 1: We don't know if Mike Pence was afraid to being
Speaker 1: whisked away to Mars right, or something else a lot
Speaker 1: more nefarious. What did you interpret from that as well?
Speaker 1: So there are two ways we can interpret the statement
Speaker 1: I don't know who's driving the car, because think about this,
Speaker 1: he actually probably did know was physically driving the car
Speaker 1: in which he was transported to the Capitol and would
Speaker 1: have been transported from the Capitol. I assume it would
Speaker 1: have been part of his usual security detail. So when
Speaker 1: he said, look, I'm not leaving because I don't know
Speaker 1: I don't know who's driving the car to me, that
Speaker 1: could also mean I don't know who's in control of
Speaker 1: everything right now. And you know what, Trump may have
Speaker 1: arranged to take me somewhere out in the meadowlands and
Speaker 1: fit me for some cement shoes. I mean, yes, that
Speaker 1: sounds hyperbolic, does it. But when the president says maybe
Speaker 1: he should be hanged, maybe my supporters got it right.
Speaker 1: You know, he could have ended up in the metal lands.
Speaker 1: I you know, it is the picture that has painted
Speaker 1: for me is just what a mobster Donald Trump is,
Speaker 1: and that he was looking for anybody right that was
Speaker 1: going to answer the call to how to get this
Speaker 1: done by any means necessary. So you had this group
Speaker 1: that wanted to dub themselves Team Normal, which there was
Speaker 1: no actions that this administration took from the beginning until
Speaker 1: the end that should have ever been deemed as normal. Right.
Speaker 1: They broke every political norm that you could possibly ever
Speaker 1: think of. But then you had Team Coup, right, who
Speaker 1: believed in their minds that they are somehow somebody's patriot,
Speaker 1: that they're willing to take whatever is given so long
Speaker 1: as they keep their person in power. And so what
Speaker 1: does that say, Glenn about now? They're only halfway done.
Speaker 1: The House Commission is only halfway done in terms of
Speaker 1: the public hearings. The Department of Justice now has said,
Speaker 1: in no uncertain terms, give us all of your documents
Speaker 1: otherwise you're impeding. And a criminal investigation that was released
Speaker 1: you know as well, what are these things add up
Speaker 1: for you? And what should we be extracting from this
Speaker 1: back and forth that we are seeing. So yeah, I've
Speaker 1: got the letter here from the Department of Justice to
Speaker 1: Tim Heafy, one of my former RICO co council from
Speaker 1: the US Attorney in DC, Matt Graves and Matt Olson,
Speaker 1: who was also on the same RICO cases with Tim
Speaker 1: and I. What I take away from this is a
Speaker 1: couple of things. I think most importantly, The Department of
Speaker 1: Justice is in the grand jury investigating the insurrection, and
Speaker 1: they have been for a very long time. They make
Speaker 1: clear in this letter something we all know, at least
Speaker 1: those of us who come from the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: That because the grand jury proceedings are secret by law,
Speaker 1: nobody knows what witnesses have gone into the grand jury.
Speaker 1: But as the letter makes clear, there's obviously lots of
Speaker 1: overlap between what DJ is investigating and what J six
Speaker 1: is investigating and what THEOJ is saying. I actually see
Speaker 1: this as a healthy back and forth between two coequal
Speaker 1: branches of government with both with both branches flexing their
Speaker 1: coequal muscle. And I can tell you how I think
Speaker 1: it ought to play out. But if I were in
Speaker 1: the DJUL, I would be making this request too. I
Speaker 1: would say, Look, we're gonna we're preparing to bring indictments,
Speaker 1: but we can't really fully vet the information and the
Speaker 1: testimony we're presenting to the grand jury from witnesses. If
Speaker 1: those witnesses also gave sworn testimony to you J six committee,
Speaker 1: we need it all before we're comfortable telling the grand jurors, okay,
Speaker 1: indict these people. And that's what they're trying to do.
Speaker 1: They want to collect up all of the sworn testimony
Speaker 1: of relevant witnesses so they can have complete confidence in
Speaker 1: their work product and what they're requesting the grand jury
Speaker 1: to do. Think about it. If a witness went into
Speaker 1: the grand jury and said one thing, but then there's
Speaker 1: an inconsistent transcript over in the J six Committee that
Speaker 1: could blow up a future prosecution. DJ is trying to
Speaker 1: do everything right and cross all its teas and dot
Speaker 1: all its eyes. I will continue to complain that they've
Speaker 1: taken far too long in my estimation seven time they're
Speaker 1: doing they say, look, we have prosecutions up and running
Speaker 1: that are being impacted by the very evidence we see
Speaker 1: unfolding in the public hearings. And the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: also takes seriously its responsibility to collect up any information
Speaker 1: that could be exculpatory to defendants, that could be helpful
Speaker 1: to defendants. That's called the Brady doctrine. The Supreme Court
Speaker 1: has said, if the government has evidence that could help
Speaker 1: a defendant, exonerated defendant, impact a defendant sentence, then constitutionally
Speaker 1: it must be given over. So I think they're also
Speaker 1: trying to collect up what they can from Congress and
Speaker 1: make sure that they satisfy their Brady obligations to all
Speaker 1: of the defendants that they're prosecuting. Let me just add,
Speaker 1: I don't want to make this a law school class
Speaker 1: that the Brady doctrine generally only applies to the executive
Speaker 1: branch because that's where the prosecutors and where law enforcement resides.
Speaker 1: There are cases that say, well, if there's exculpatory evidence,
Speaker 1: evidence that would help a defendant over there in the
Speaker 1: legislative branch, the executive branch doesn't really possess it. So
Speaker 1: Brady strictly speaking might not apply in full force, which
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. I can tell you I come from a
Speaker 1: culture of federal prosecutors where if we knew there was
Speaker 1: something that could help a defendant, we're giving it over
Speaker 1: because we don't want to. I don't want to be
Speaker 1: involved in convicting somebody like Senator Ted Stevens, only to
Speaker 1: have the appellate court overturn that conviction because prosecutors didn't
Speaker 1: give over the Brady evidence. So I think that's another
Speaker 1: piece of what's going on here. Why do you think, though,
Speaker 1: that it took them so long? Glenn, the Department of Justice,
Speaker 1: So why did they wait until here? We are in June.
Speaker 1: We knew, we all knew that the public hearings were
Speaker 1: starting in June. Why would they wait until this time
Speaker 1: to ask when this investigation by the Commission has been
Speaker 1: going on for a year. I don't know the answer
Speaker 1: to that, but here's one of my one of my
Speaker 1: thoughts about it is the Department of Justice, the executive branch,
Speaker 1: and the J six Committee the legislative branch. I don't
Speaker 1: think they wanted to be perceived as working together, as colluding, right,
Speaker 1: because you have different branches of government with very different
Speaker 1: mandates about what they're there and different authorities. Yep. And
Speaker 1: I don't think anybody wanted to make it seem like
Speaker 1: they're in cahoots they're working together, because that has implications
Speaker 1: because then there's a whole series of cases that say,
Speaker 1: if you're a prosecutor or you're an FBI agent, and
Speaker 1: you co opt somebody else to help you, well, then
Speaker 1: that person becomes your agent and they then have to
Speaker 1: follow every rule that you have to follow with respect
Speaker 1: to the Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and sixth Amendment. So
Speaker 1: I think they've wanted to remain separate to the extent feasible.
Speaker 1: And now I think it's all coming home to roost
Speaker 1: and they're like, Okay, we need those transcripts. If I'm
Speaker 1: Betty Thompson, who I think has been doing a brilliant
Speaker 1: job with all of this, I love the tandem of
Speaker 1: Thompson and Chaney. I just I love it. I love
Speaker 1: watching it. You know, every time there's a hearing, I
Speaker 1: would probably say, this is our work product. We understand
Speaker 1: your interest in it, we understand your need for it,
Speaker 1: and I assume you'll be subpoenaing it if you really
Speaker 1: need it, because that will give them some legal that
Speaker 1: will give Congress some legal cover to say, Okay, we
Speaker 1: received the lawful subpoena for these transcripts. We've assessed it.
Speaker 1: We don't think there's a legal infirmity or a challenge
Speaker 1: we need to launch against it. So here you go.
Speaker 1: That's how I can see this potentially playing out. So
Speaker 1: I want to talk quickly too, because I want to
Speaker 1: get to Jenny Thomas, but I need to stay on
Speaker 1: Eastman for a second. Eastman. They play his video. Eastman
Speaker 1: doesn't even get to the point. He gets to the
Speaker 1: point where he's not even saying I plead the fifth,
Speaker 1: because that's how often he's saying it. He's just saying fifth, fifth, fifth,
Speaker 1: every other word. He's a lawyer, So how how does
Speaker 1: this look Glenn? And does he do you believe that
Speaker 1: he knows how this looks. Yeah, he'll beat this bart
Speaker 1: eventually as well he should be, and he will also
Speaker 1: be prosecuted. In my estimation, I don't think there's any
Speaker 1: avoiding that. But here's here's I really am fixated. Some
Speaker 1: could claim on the pardons, and especially the secret pardons,
Speaker 1: the pocket pardons, because we have so many data points now,
Speaker 1: Danielle that inform my opinion that Donald Trump gave lots
Speaker 1: of folks pardons that we don't yet know about it.
Speaker 1: Here here's those data points we now know that. Jared
Speaker 1: Kushner said, I had my nose buried in a pile
Speaker 1: of pardons trying to get them all out before the
Speaker 1: end of my daddy in law's term. So I didn't
Speaker 1: really care that Pat Sippoloni, the White House counsel, was
Speaker 1: threatening to resign because my father in law was trampling
Speaker 1: the constitution. I don't really care about that. I was
Speaker 1: busy getting all these pardons out. One data pointment another
Speaker 1: data point. Kelly an Conway in her book said Donald
Speaker 1: Trump sidled up to her at the end of his
Speaker 1: term and said, and I'm going to use her word,
Speaker 1: I'm not being disrespectful. Hey, honey, you want to pardon.
Speaker 1: Everybody needs one, and she reportedly said, mister President, do
Speaker 1: you know something I don't. I don't think I've committed
Speaker 1: a crime, so I don't think I need a pardon.
Speaker 1: He's like, no, everybody needs one. So if that's not
Speaker 1: if those aren't alternative facts, if we can believe what
Speaker 1: Kelly and Conway put in her book, Donald Trump offered
Speaker 1: her an unsolicited blanket hardened Danielle, do you really think
Speaker 1: he didn't offer his kids pardons if he's offering it
Speaker 1: to the likes of Kelly Ann. Here is another really
Speaker 1: important data pointment. John Eastman, in an email requested a pardon,
Speaker 1: and what we learned yesterday from the J six Committee
Speaker 1: is he did not receive one, and I want to
Speaker 1: know why. Well, what are the implications of that? Though?
Speaker 1: He went before the J six Committee and as you
Speaker 1: just said, I plead the fifth. I plead the fifth
Speaker 1: fifth fifth five five five five? Are we done? He
Speaker 1: didn't have a pardon to protect him, so he had
Speaker 1: to plead the fifth because his statements could have been
Speaker 1: used against him as incriminating evidence. Who else went into
Speaker 1: the grand jury? Don Junior, Ivanka, Jared Rudy none of
Speaker 1: them pled the fifth They all testified. What does that
Speaker 1: tell us? Can't we infer that they had the protection
Speaker 1: of a pardon so they could testify, they couldn't plead
Speaker 1: the fifth These are all data points that inform my
Speaker 1: belief that Donald Trump has given a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: folk pardons, and we will have to challenge those what
Speaker 1: I believe are largely corruptly delivered pardons in the court
Speaker 1: in the future. If he had given Eastman a pardon,
Speaker 1: it would have been one co conspirator trying to pardon
Speaker 1: another co conspirator. There's not a court in the world.
Speaker 1: I don't care if Trump did appoint the federal judge
Speaker 1: who would say, yes, that's a valid exercise of the
Speaker 1: pardon power. Do you think that they can get Eastman
Speaker 1: to flip on Trump? Yes. The reason I think that
Speaker 1: is because Eastman absolutely knows that he is going to prison,
Speaker 1: because it's not stupid, and we've all seen the evidence,
Speaker 1: and even he said I need a pardon to keep
Speaker 1: myself out of prison, and he wasn't given one. The
Speaker 1: only way out for him, and it shouldn't keep him
Speaker 1: out of prison, and it should only reduce his sentence correct.
Speaker 1: The only way out for him is to flip and cooperate.
Speaker 1: If I'm Donald Trump, if you're Donald Trump, what's Donald
Speaker 1: Trump doing right now? Still thinking that he has lived
Speaker 1: such a charm life, He's committed crimes all his life
Speaker 1: and never been held accountable. I think he thinks, yeah,
Speaker 1: they're not going to touch me. I'm going to announce
Speaker 1: very soon that I'm running for president, and the way
Speaker 1: I read the system is that that's going to scare
Speaker 1: everybody off, and they're going to continue to let me
Speaker 1: run a muck. I think he's wrong about it, but
Speaker 1: I have a feeling that's what's inside. That man's very
Speaker 1: very sociopathic, narcissistic, you know, criminal mind. Yeah, last question, Glenn.
Speaker 1: Jenny Thomas. Jenny Thomas is everyone's best supporting actress for
Speaker 1: the Insurrection. Her name has come up just as much
Speaker 1: as Mark Meadows, just as much as Eastman, just as
Speaker 1: much as any of the cast of criminal characters in
Speaker 1: this play. Jenny Thomas says that she's happy to sit
Speaker 1: down with the J Six Commission so that she can
Speaker 1: clear up quote unquote misconceptions thoughts. Jenny Thomas ain't testifying.
Speaker 1: If you take one of the former career prosecutors on
Speaker 1: the J six investigative team. We've been seeing them some
Speaker 1: during the course of the hearings, and these are folks
Speaker 1: who know how to cross examine a witness, and you
Speaker 1: unleash them to cross examine Jinny Thomas under oath. Let
Speaker 1: me just read one thing she said to Mark Meadows
Speaker 1: from a tweet she sent on November fifth, right after
Speaker 1: Donald Trump corruptly declared that, frankly, I won this election,
Speaker 1: even though every adult in the room told him, you
Speaker 1: can't do this because you didn't win the election, other
Speaker 1: than drunken Rudy, who said, Dad, just do it. Here's
Speaker 1: what Jenny Thomas sent to Mark Meadows quote Biden crime
Speaker 1: family and ballot fraud co conspirators, elected officials, bureaucrats, social
Speaker 1: media censorship mongers, fake stream media reporters, etc. Are being
Speaker 1: arrested and detained for ballot fraud. Right now and over
Speaker 1: the coming days, we'll be living in barges off GITMO
Speaker 1: to face military tribunals for sedition. Miss Thomas, what did
Speaker 1: you mean? Why did you send that to the chief
Speaker 1: of staff urging him to help overturn the elections results?
Speaker 1: Because Miss Thomas. Every word in there was flat out false.
Speaker 1: And I mean that's one question of a thousand questions.
Speaker 1: Jenny Thomas cannot survive cross examination on what she has done.
Speaker 1: That doesn't even begin to talk about her interaction with
Speaker 1: the Arizona electors or or what she and her husband
Speaker 1: were discussing. And not to go down a trim law
Speaker 1: one oh one rabbit hole, but can we ask her
Speaker 1: about what would otherwise be privileged spousal communications because the
Speaker 1: crime fraud exception applies. I mean, this has so many
Speaker 1: dimensions to it. I think what you're going to hear is, oh,
Speaker 1: you know what, there were scheduling conflicts and we you know,
Speaker 1: I just couldn't work it out to find time to
Speaker 1: appear before the committee. I would bet a buck Jenny
Speaker 1: Thomas will never hit the witness stand. Is she going
Speaker 1: to hit be hit with an indictment? Is her husband
Speaker 1: going to be investigated? Because there are two cases apparently
Speaker 1: that he should have refused himself from that he did not.
Speaker 1: You know what, I am always looking at the glasses
Speaker 1: being half fulled. I don't think our federal government has
Speaker 1: the appetite or the determination to investigate a Supreme Court
Speaker 1: Justice and his wife. I think they should because there's
Speaker 1: adequate predication, enough evidence to open an investigation. I also think,
Speaker 1: and I'm more inclined to think this might happen, Congress
Speaker 1: at some point should open an inquiry into Justice Thomas
Speaker 1: to consider to investigate what happened when he unethically failed
Speaker 1: to recuse himself, remove himself from a case that involved
Speaker 1: his wife's treason, his text messages, and determine whether they
Speaker 1: should consider drafting articles of impeachment. I think that should happen.
Speaker 1: I don't know that that happens either, because our government
Speaker 1: is not good at getting its arms around all of
Speaker 1: the crime I'm in corruption. It needs to unbelievable. Well, Glenn,
Speaker 1: this was a blockbuster hearing. Can't wait to discuss hearing
Speaker 1: number four with you. What are you looking at? What
Speaker 1: are you waiting on? That? We haven't seen Jesse yet?
Speaker 1: So they're kind of teasing us a little bit because
Speaker 1: I believe we're gonna begin to hear more evidence of
Speaker 1: statements directly out of Donald Trump's mouth. Now we heard
Speaker 1: some of that yesterday. Mike Pence is the P word
Speaker 1: because he won't criminally overturn the results of the election,
Speaker 1: and wouldn't it be cool if you could just do it?
Speaker 1: You know this is it's just abject criminal conduct. I
Speaker 1: think You're going to hear more about Trump's statements. You're
Speaker 1: going to see pictures, photographs, I hope even video. But
Speaker 1: at least we know we've been teased with the White
Speaker 1: House photographer. Yeah, I captured a bunch of the stuff
Speaker 1: in real time during the insurrection. Pictures worn't a thousand words.
Speaker 1: So I think we get closer and closer and closer.
Speaker 1: And I do think the bombs get bigger and bigger
Speaker 1: and bigger, and they're going to end big. They're not
Speaker 1: going to end on a fizzle. Well, fireworks and time
Speaker 1: for the fourth of July. Glenn Kirshner, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for always breaking down what seems to be the
Speaker 1: breakdown of our democracy. We appreciate you, and we'll see
Speaker 1: you next week. You next week. Danielle Indisputable with Doctor
Speaker 1: Rashid Ricci is one of the latest shows on the
Speaker 1: TYT network and also the fastest growing news show in America.
Speaker 1: On his show, Doctor Ricci plays no games regarding policy,
Speaker 1: delivering a heavy dose of fact based truth and penetrating
Speaker 1: analysis on all the top news stories focusing on racism,
Speaker 1: criminal and social justice, politics, police brutality, Karens, and much more.
Speaker 1: Listeners can also expect interviews with fascinating guests, political lead commentators,
Speaker 1: and even fiery debates with conservatives on a wide range
Speaker 1: of policy topics. In the Bullpen, it is an indisputable
Speaker 1: fact that you will love this show. Listen to Indisputable
Speaker 1: with Doctor rashad Ricci on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts. If you like what you hear,
Speaker 1: be sure to subscribe so you never miss a new episode.
Speaker 1: That is it for me today? Hear 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 Noa on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcast. New episodes every Tuesday.