Speaker 1: Good morning, peeps, and welcome to Woke at Daily with
Speaker 1: me your girl Danielle Moody, recording live from our podstream
Speaker 1: studios in Times Square. Folks, if there can be yet
Speaker 1: another reason why we need an expansion of the Supreme Court, well,
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court gave it to us at the very
Speaker 1: end of last week. So, in a stunning move, in
Speaker 1: the midst of a global health pandemic that we are
Speaker 1: reeling in the United States with having the most COVID
Speaker 1: positive cases of anywhere in the world, even though we
Speaker 1: have the most vaccines, the Supreme Court has decided to
Speaker 1: strike down Biden's e fiction moratorium extension. So let me
Speaker 1: read this to you from USA today. The Supreme Court
Speaker 1: rule that Joe Biden's extension of a coronavirus pandemic eviction
Speaker 1: moratorium was unconstitutional last Thursday. The Court had already ruled
Speaker 1: the moratorium, issued via the CDC in July twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: was unconstitutional without an Act of Congress that would pass
Speaker 1: it into law. Biden's administration issued the extension while acknowledging
Speaker 1: that its legal standing to do so was questionable at best.
Speaker 1: The High Court's three liberal justice assented the conservative majority
Speaker 1: opinion read this. It would be one thing if Congress
Speaker 1: had specifically authorized the action that the CDC had taken,
Speaker 1: but that has not happened. Instead, the CDC has imposed
Speaker 1: a nationwide moratorium on evictions in reliance on a decade
Speaker 1: old statute that authorizes its implement measures like fumigation and
Speaker 1: pest extermination. It strains credutility to believe that the statute
Speaker 1: grants the CDC the sweeping authority that it asserts. Folks.
Speaker 1: There is sometimes when we have to recognize that laws
Speaker 1: that are on the books are meant to be broken,
Speaker 1: that sometimes they are just cruel and unusual. When I
Speaker 1: see things like this Supreme Court decision that is going
Speaker 1: to affect tens of thousands of American families that they
Speaker 1: will be out on the street. That we are already
Speaker 1: at a place where we have crippled our hospital system.
Speaker 1: We are overwrought with people who have lost their jobs
Speaker 1: because of COVID nineteen. We are now seeing hospitalizations uptick
Speaker 1: for children again. So think about what is going to
Speaker 1: happen when tens of thousands of people now lose their homes. Right, So,
Speaker 1: when I think about this Supreme Court decision, in them
Speaker 1: saying that the CDC does not have legal standing, they
Speaker 1: could have just extended the moratorium. Given the severe situation
Speaker 1: that America and American families are in right now. Right,
Speaker 1: And when we think about what is legal versus what
Speaker 1: is right, I remind you slavery was legal, the Holocaust
Speaker 1: was legal, Apartheid was legal, colonization legal. All of these
Speaker 1: things that have destroyed communities, our humanity, our morals, countries
Speaker 1: all were legal. Right. And so when you talk to
Speaker 1: me right now about whether or not the CDC actually
Speaker 1: has the standing to issue right a moratorium on evictions, well,
Speaker 1: they're not doing it from a place of legality. They're
Speaker 1: doing it from a place of morals. Right. Who the
Speaker 1: fuck would think that it is a great idea to
Speaker 1: throw people out of their homes. There's a reason why
Speaker 1: we had a moratorium on evictions, on mortgages, on remp
Speaker 1: on all of these things, right, because people need help.
Speaker 1: And what I recognize about Republicans is that they don't
Speaker 1: give a fuck about who needs help. They don't want
Speaker 1: to help the American people. They are the cruelest group
Speaker 1: of people that I have seen. And you know what,
Speaker 1: speaking of cruel I have to tell you this story,
Speaker 1: which I find so reprehensible. It's you know, where we are.
Speaker 1: It is we're in like our apocalyptic present, right, We're
Speaker 1: in our Orwellian present, right, We're in this space where
Speaker 1: cruelty has just become the norm. What I believe is
Speaker 1: that we are having, as Congresswoman Ayana Presley had said,
Speaker 1: when we were talking about whether or not people should,
Speaker 1: you know, leave Congress on vacation and leave their constituents
Speaker 1: out in the cold. As they continue to do so,
Speaker 1: we have a crisis of empathy in this country. Think
Speaker 1: about that for a minute, that if people had even
Speaker 1: a drop of empathy, wearing a mask wouldn't be such
Speaker 1: a big fucking deal, right, putting a piece of cloth
Speaker 1: over your face, over your nose and your mouth, because
Speaker 1: I don't understand why people still don't get that, that
Speaker 1: would just be an act of solidarity. It would be
Speaker 1: seen as your most patriotic duty. Right now, we are
Speaker 1: at a place where this whole live free or die,
Speaker 1: this whole pull yourself up from your bootstraps. I am
Speaker 1: an island onto my self. Mentality is destroying us. And
Speaker 1: so here's this story, folks that if this doesn't make
Speaker 1: your stomach turn. I don't know what will which is this.
Speaker 1: A Wisconsin school district has decided that they are going
Speaker 1: to eliminate their free meal program, which is federally funded. Right,
Speaker 1: and this is what these people in Wakeisha School District
Speaker 1: board have said. Karen Rajanik found herself saying that she
Speaker 1: was aminating the free lunch program because families would become
Speaker 1: too spoiled. I don't know about you, but I don't
Speaker 1: think that poor people who cannot afford to feed their
Speaker 1: children that without these programs, their children would go fucking hungry.
Speaker 1: I don't think that giving them federally funded free lunch
Speaker 1: is going to make them spoiled. I think it's going
Speaker 1: to keep our children from being sick and hungry and
Speaker 1: the ability for them to actually learn, because you see,
Speaker 1: kids can't learn on a fucking empty stomach. They can't
Speaker 1: learn right in this type of intoxic environment where we
Speaker 1: are making poor people the problem as opposed to the
Speaker 1: systems that they fucking live in. And so now in
Speaker 1: this Wisconsin school district, nine hundred parents and teachers have
Speaker 1: banded together to oppose the move, calling it in sense
Speaker 1: and out of touch. Well, it's not just insensitive and
Speaker 1: out of touch. It is downright fucking cruel to be
Speaker 1: able to look at children that cannot afford school lunch
Speaker 1: right and tell them, well, fuck it, fuck you, and
Speaker 1: fuck your family. That's essentially what this school board has
Speaker 1: just said. You know, there's another report that came out,
Speaker 1: and this is again going back to the cruelty that
Speaker 1: the Republican Party is just all about these days. They
Speaker 1: don't even have any qualms about stating it because of
Speaker 1: death scantists de Satan's decision to not have mandatory masks
Speaker 1: in schools. There is another report that has come out
Speaker 1: that is beyond heartbreaking, folks, And what is it? A
Speaker 1: fifth grade teacher right who our friend Glenn Kirshner will
Speaker 1: tell us about in a little bit. A fifth grade
Speaker 1: teacher in Florida school district who was already immuno a
Speaker 1: compromise because of her battle with leukemia, decided to go
Speaker 1: back into the classroom, even though her doctor had told
Speaker 1: her she was going to be unable to get the
Speaker 1: vaccine because of how immuno a compromise. She was double
Speaker 1: masked and doing all of the right things, but without
Speaker 1: her students being masked, she was still putting herself at risk. Well,
Speaker 1: guess what, that well meaning teacher who wanted to show
Speaker 1: up for her students a job that she loved has
Speaker 1: now caught COVID and has died. That is yet another
Speaker 1: one of De Satan's constituents that he has killed. This man,
Speaker 1: this party has blood on their hands, and instead of
Speaker 1: us being honest about who the fuck they are and
Speaker 1: what it is that they're doing, we continue to treat
Speaker 1: them as if they are a normal political party instead
Speaker 1: of a death cult. Because I don't know what else
Speaker 1: you would haul them. Right, You have this Wisconsin school
Speaker 1: board saying fuck you kids, right, you don't need free lunch.
Speaker 1: You have governors across this country saying fuck you kids,
Speaker 1: you don't need mass right. So where is the family
Speaker 1: values again? Coming up next, friends, is my conversation with
Speaker 1: our good, good friend Glenn Kershner to walk us through
Speaker 1: the latest legal nonsense and criminal web that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: and his sycophants are continuing to weave without accountability and responsibility. Folks,
Speaker 1: I'm always so excited when we have our friend MSNBC
Speaker 1: legal analysts and the host of Justice Matters Glenn Kirshner
Speaker 1: join us unwoke have to run through all of the
Speaker 1: legal leads that is happening across this country, particularly around
Speaker 1: our wayward twice impeached ex president who continues on his
Speaker 1: spree of the Big Lie and continues to attend hate
Speaker 1: rallies where he undermines our democracy. And eight months in Glenn,
Speaker 1: still nothing, no indictments, no nothing. So I want to
Speaker 1: start off on justice matters. You had Representative Eric Swalwell
Speaker 1: on your show to discuss the idea of a Presidential
Speaker 1: Crimes Commission, which would essentially allow for there to be
Speaker 1: independent investigations into the criminal acts of presidents. Can you
Speaker 1: give us like a big picture view as to what
Speaker 1: this would entail and why it's needed. So, Danielle, I
Speaker 1: have been calling for a very long time for a
Speaker 1: Trump Primes Commission the TCC. I am a little bit
Speaker 1: less politic than Congressman Swalwell, who I admire. He's a
Speaker 1: former prosecutor. He calls it the Presidential Crimes Commission, but
Speaker 1: I think we know which president he's talking about. And
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren was somebody who very early on called for
Speaker 1: a kind of presidential crimes commission to to investigate not
Speaker 1: only Donald Trump but his cabinet members who may have
Speaker 1: been involved in criminal activity, any of his criminal associates
Speaker 1: in and out of government, including members of Congress. And
Speaker 1: so you know, Eric Swalwell has gone on record as saying,
Speaker 1: we need a presidential crimes commission. What would that look like. Well,
Speaker 1: just as at the Department of Justice, we have a
Speaker 1: Civil Rights Division, we could stand up the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice could stand up a presidential crimes commission. They could
Speaker 1: draw from the most experienced prosecutors not only at Main
Speaker 1: Justice in DC proper, but the ninety four United States
Speaker 1: Attorneys offices around the nation. There are some remarkably experienced, dedicated,
Speaker 1: career process secutors among the hundred and ten thousand Department
Speaker 1: of Justice employees. The Attorney General could pull together a
Speaker 1: group of investigators from the FBI and other federal agencies
Speaker 1: and then assign a series of the most senior, most
Speaker 1: highly regarded, most experienced prosecutors, and the mandate, the jurisdictional
Speaker 1: mandate of that task force would be investigate all potential
Speaker 1: crimes by Trump and company. And I think, you know,
Speaker 1: there are so many crimes that we've seen committed in
Speaker 1: the harsh light of day by Trump, his family, members
Speaker 1: his associates, and people will say, yeah, it just seems
Speaker 1: like too much to get our arms around. And I've
Speaker 1: always argued, you know, it's too much not to get
Speaker 1: our arms around. And that's why I think if we
Speaker 1: have some sort of a dedicated, targeted unit, like a
Speaker 1: Presidential Crimes Commission, not run out of Congress like the
Speaker 1: Select Committee, run out of the Department of Justice, so
Speaker 1: they had full subpoena power, full indictment power, and full
Speaker 1: prosecutorial power. I think that is what's called for in
Speaker 1: the aftermath of the unique atrocities that we just experienced
Speaker 1: for four years at the hands of Donald Trump. How
Speaker 1: would this be different then, let's say the application of
Speaker 1: a independent like an inspector's general. How would that? How
Speaker 1: would how would this Presidential Crimes Commission look different than
Speaker 1: let's say the fact finding and gathering that happened in
Speaker 1: the Muller report that was with a you know, an
Speaker 1: inspector's general. What would be the difference here? Great question.
Speaker 1: So the inspector General for the Department of Justice one
Speaker 1: doesn't have subpoena power and two doesn't have prosecutorial authority.
Speaker 1: All they can do is investigate and issue reports with
Speaker 1: findings and recommendations about how to fix any problems that
Speaker 1: are found. The Mueller investigation had a very narrow investigative
Speaker 1: mandate all the all the letter of May seventeenth, I
Speaker 1: think it was granted to Bob Muller and his team
Speaker 1: was to investigate any contacts between Russians and the Trump
Speaker 1: campaign and prosecute any cases that are necessary to develop
Speaker 1: that investigative mandate. The Mueller team did not have a
Speaker 1: broad and sweeping mandate prosecute all crimes you find, and
Speaker 1: I think we lose sight of that. And what Bob
Speaker 1: Muller did was he followed the rules that he had
Speaker 1: to abide by, and that left us all frustrated because
Speaker 1: it's like, wait, WHOA, there's a whole lot more crime
Speaker 1: out there that seems to have unprosecuted, unaddressed, uninvestigated. And
Speaker 1: if Bob Muller could respond, he would say, please look
Speaker 1: at the May seventeen letter giving me my jurisdictional marching orders.
Speaker 1: And he followed them to a t, though it ended
Speaker 1: up ultimately doing a disservice to the American people in
Speaker 1: my opinion, not that he followed it, but the narrow
Speaker 1: mandate he was given in the first place. So this
Speaker 1: would be a wide open, no holds barred task force.
Speaker 1: Maybe we shouldn't call it a commission because that conjures
Speaker 1: up notions of congressional commissions. This would be a prosecutorial
Speaker 1: task force and their mandate would be investigate all potential
Speaker 1: presidential crimes and any Trump associates, enablers, co conspirators who
Speaker 1: may have been involved in Trump's criminal shenanigans. So well,
Speaker 1: because this would be outside of congressional purview, right, so,
Speaker 1: how would this be formed and who would be the
Speaker 1: person or people that are able to appoint the members
Speaker 1: of this commission so that it wouldn't turn into what
Speaker 1: we have seen right now with the Congressional one six Commission,
Speaker 1: which is just a partisan nightmare. So I think this
Speaker 1: would be entirely within the purview of the leadership of
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice to put this task force together,
Speaker 1: to draw from the many federal law enforcement agencies that
Speaker 1: would be available to contribute investigators, agents, resources to this task.
Speaker 1: But here's the thing right now, there is you know,
Speaker 1: there's a Civil Rights Division, there's a National Security Division,
Speaker 1: there's a frauden public corruption that depend the public Integrity Section.
Speaker 1: There are all of these different units at the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice, and they have different jurisdictional mandates broken down
Speaker 1: by crime by person. Donald Trump has committed crimes across
Speaker 1: the spectrum of all of those different divisions, civil rights crimes,
Speaker 1: white collar crimes, national security crimes. And so if we
Speaker 1: put a task force together that is not bound by
Speaker 1: its own sort of little jurisdictional slice of the prosecutorial
Speaker 1: pie because it's either civil rights, or its white collar,
Speaker 1: or its national security or it's something else, that's what
Speaker 1: we need, a holistic approach to investigating Donald Trump's crimes,
Speaker 1: you know, and I see when I hear this, I think,
Speaker 1: oh my god, this is absolutely what we need. But
Speaker 1: then in my other side, in my heart, I'm thinking, well,
Speaker 1: what happens when there is another Bill Barr or Jeff
Speaker 1: Sessions that is the head of the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: and we're looking at a President Obama situation where we're
Speaker 1: going after you just simply because we are looking. We
Speaker 1: are nail. Uh, We're a hammer looking for a nail.
Speaker 1: So how does that how do you how would you
Speaker 1: possibly stop something like that? I think we've just learned
Speaker 1: that you can't stop something like Bill Barr and Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: which was our nation's most dangerous tandem combination of president
Speaker 1: and corrupt attorney general. You can't stop it if coequal
Speaker 1: branches of government are willing to endure or endorse it
Speaker 1: the way the Republicans did in Congress. The Republicans basically
Speaker 1: neutered themselves. They made themselves a second class branch of
Speaker 1: government by allowing the executive branch to, you know, be
Speaker 1: a runaway, lawless executive branch. Congress is like, okay, that's
Speaker 1: okay for us, because if we if we serve as
Speaker 1: a check against that, then we Republicans might lose Donald
Speaker 1: Trump's base in the next election, and then we will
Speaker 1: lose power, we will lose money, we will lose prestige.
Speaker 1: And that's what's more important to so many members of
Speaker 1: the Republican Party than actually governing. Honestly, we see it
Speaker 1: with Dasantis right now. I don't want to go off
Speaker 1: on the Dasantis rant, but he is willing to kill
Speaker 1: Florida citizens by prohibiting school masked mandates. We just had
Speaker 1: a horrific report of a fifth grade school teacher who
Speaker 1: had a compromised immune system. She was battling leukemia, could not,
Speaker 1: on doctor's orders, received the vaccine, but went back to
Speaker 1: her classroom because she loved and was dedicated to her
Speaker 1: fifth grade students. She was double masked. She was sanitizing
Speaker 1: every day, but Dasantis had prohibited masked mandates so the
Speaker 1: students didn't have to be masked. She contracted of it
Speaker 1: and die. This was reported out in recent days. That's
Speaker 1: Ron the Santis sacrificing the men, women and children of
Speaker 1: Florida so as not to alienate Donald Trump's base. I
Speaker 1: don't know when we reached the conclusion, Danielle, that it's
Speaker 1: okay for politicians to kill the citizenry and have that
Speaker 1: go unaddressed. I don't know why we have settled on
Speaker 1: this point, rather than holding criminal politicians accountable when they
Speaker 1: commit what I suggest is a negligent homicide or an
Speaker 1: involuntary manslaughter of the citizens they were elected to govern.
Speaker 1: That is it for me today. Folks on the Woke
Speaker 1: a f daily podcast. To hear more conversations like the
Speaker 1: one I have with our friend Glenn Kirshner, check me
Speaker 1: out on patreon dot com. Slash Woke a f power
Speaker 1: to the people and to all the people power, get woke,
Speaker 1: and stay woke as fuck.