Jack - By Word and Deed

Episode Date: November 14, 2021

This week: there’s new evidence about interference with the CDC by the Trump administration; the FEC has reason to believe that Tom Tillis and John Bolton may have violated the law by working with Cambridge Analytica; the Office of Special Counsel issues its report on the Hatch Act during the Trump administration; plus a highly anticipated Fantasy Indictment League.Follow AG and Dana on Twitter:Dr. Allison Gill https://twitter.com/allisongillhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://twitter.com/dailybeanspodWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://dailybeans.supercast.tech/Orhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansPromo Codes Protect all of your online information and devices with one simple subscription. For a limited time, Aura is offering our listeners up to 40% off plans when you visit http://aura.com/MSW. With Scribd you get instant access to millions of ebooks, audiobooks, magazines, and more—all with one low monthly subscription. Right now, we’re offering listeners of this program a free 60-day trial. Go to http://try.scribd.com/AG for your free trial.  I highly recommend it for all podcast lovers! Follow “Operator” on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or you can listen early and ad-free by subscribing to Wondery Plus in Apple Podcasts or the Wondery App. Head to CreditKarma.com/LoanOffers to see personalized offers with your Approval Odds right now.

Season 4 of How We Win Is Here For the past four years, we've been making history in critical elections all over the country. And last year, we made history again by expanding our majority in the Senate, eating election denying Republicans and crucial state house races, and fighting back a non-existent red wave. But the Maga Republicans who plotted and pardoned the attempted overthrow of our government now control the house. Thanks to gerrymandered maps and repressive anti-voter laws. And the chaotic spectacle we've already seen shows us just how far they will go to seize

power, dismantle our government, and take away our freedoms. So, the official podcast of the persistence is back with season 4. There's so much more important work ahead of us to fight for equity, justice, and our very democracy itself. We'll take you behind the lines and inside the rooms where it happens with strategy and inspiration from progressive change makers all over the country. And we'll dig deep into the weekly news that matters most and what you can do about it, with messaging and communications expert,

co-founder of Way to Win, and our new co-host, Jennifer Fernandez-Ancona. So join Steve and I every Wednesday for your weekly dose of inspiration, action and hope. I'm Steve Pearson. And I'm Jennifer Fernandez-Ancona. And this is How We Win. This is Greg Oliar, the author of Dirty Rubles.

And you're listening to Mueller, she wrote. So to be clear, Mr. Trump has no financial relationships with any Russian oligarchs. That's what he said. That's what I said. That's obviously what the opposition is. I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I didn't have, and I have communications with the Russians. What do I have to get involved with Putin for?

I have nothing to do with Putin. I've never spoken to him. I don't know anything about a mother than he will respect me. Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. So it is political. You're a communist. No, Mr. Green. Communism is just a red herring. Like all members of the oldest profession I'm a capitalist. Hello and welcome to Muller She Road. I'm your host, formerly known as AG, but you can still call me that if you want.

Or you can call me Allison Gill or Allie, whatever. I'm flexible now that I'm no longer bound by the Hatch Act. And speaking of the Hatch Act, whoo buddy. Do we have some all-time records for Hatch Act violations coming out of the last administration this week and a report from the Office of Special Counsel. But that's not even the big news this week, as I'm sure you're all aware of and very excited about the fantasy indictment league. We have some legal wins and losses also for the former guy, and there's new evidence

about interference with the CDC by the Trump administration. And the FEC has reason to believe that Tom Tillerson John Bolton may have violated the law by working with Cambridge Analytica. And the FEC has reason to believe that Tom Tillerson, John Bolton, may have violated the law by working with Cambridge Analytica. I want to take a minute to thank our patrons without you. These series would not be possible. I also encourage you to check out this week's MSW Book Club, which is also out today, a new episode, season or excuse me, episode two of Hear Right Matters by Alex Vindeman.

And of course, check out the daily beans every weekday morning. And I believe this week, Dana will be back with us. So yay. We have a lot of news to get to. So let's jump in with just facts. So the US Office of Special Counsel, which is now to be confused with the appointed special councils like Ken Star or Bob Mueller,

they issued a Skating 63-page report in response to complaints received largely about alleged R&C hatch act violations. So let's go over the executive summary of this report. Quote, this report presents the United States Office of Special Counsel's Investigative Findings and Conclusions regarding complaints they received in response to the 2020 Republican National Convention, R&C, alleging that senior Trump administration officials used their official authority or influence to interfere with or

affect the 2020 presidential election in violation of the Hatch Act. As described herein, OSC investigated those complaints and determined that hosting the RNC at the White House did not itself violate the Hatch Act, but that at least 13 senior Trump administration officials did violate the Hatch Act prior to the election. Each of these high-profile violations was committed by an official that OSC believes based on current law could only have been disciplined by then-president Donald Trump. Thus, the case is described here and demonstrate both a willingness by some in the Trump administration to leverage the power of the executive branch to promote President Trump's re-election and the limits of office of special counsel's enforcement power under the existing statutory scheme to prevent them from doing it.

OSC is issuing this report to educate employees about Hatch Act prohibited activities, highlight the enforcement challenges that the OSC confronted during its investigations and deter similar violations in the future. During a press conference on August 5, 2020, then President Trump was asked about the Hatch Act implications of using the White House as the venue for the RNC, and he responded, there is no Hatch Act because it doesn't pertain to the President. Although true that the President is exempt from the Hatch Act, law almost certainly does apply to senior members of the president's administration.

Nonetheless, with respect to an administration's senior most officials, whom only the president can discipline for violating the Hatch Act, the Hatch Act is only as effective in ensuring a depoliticized federal workforce as the president decides it will be. That means a lot to me, particularly. It's only as good as the how the president decides. And where, as happened in the Trump administration, the White House chooses to ignore the Hatch Act's requirements, there is currently no mechanism for holding senior administration officials accountable for violating the law. Part two of this report briefly describes the history

and restrictions on federal employees, political activity, and the developments that led Congress to pass the Hatch Act in 1939. It focuses in particular on why Congress chose to prohibit federal employees from using their official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting elections. Each of the violations described in Part 3 implicates that prohibition. Part 3 contains OSC's determination that some officials in Trump in the Trump administration intentionally, intentionally ignored the law's requirements and tacitly or expressly approved of senior administration officials violating the law.

Many of the complaints that prompted this investigation were filed during or after the RNC, which, because of the coronavirus pandemic, featured events held on White House grounds. As far as the OSE is aware, it was the first political party convention since the passage of the Hatch Act to do so. The complaints raised three issues. The first issue is whether the former president or then vice president Mike Pence violated the Hatch Act. Neither did because both the president

and the vice president are expressly exempt from coverage onto the provisions of the Hatch Act that the OSC enforces. Two, the second issue is whether the Hatch Act that the OSC enforces. 2. The second issue is whether the Hatch Act prohibits a political party from holding a convention at the White House. It does not. The Hatch Act only applies to federal executive branch employees, assuming that the President

or vice president, either of whom is subject to the Hatch Act, authorizes the use of the White House for a political convention and the convention itself is produced by non-federal employees. That circumstance alone would not violate the Hatch Act. And as OSC said publicly during the R&C, ambiguities in existing law mean that there are certain areas of the White House and its grounds, in which even federal employees are permitted to engage in political activity. And the final issue is whether a number of senior Trump administration officials violated the Hatch Act in connection with the R RNC or otherwise prior to the 2020 election. OSC concludes that at least 13 senior Trump administration officials did so, and furthermore, they did so with the administration's approval. Under current law, Office of Special Counsel may seek disciplinary action up to and including removal from federal

service against most federal employees who violate the Hatch Act by prosecuting alleged violations before the Merit Systems Production Board. That's the MSPB. You'll hear me refer to that again. But in this case, a violations by Senate confirmed presidential appointees and in OSC's view, also by commissioned officers within the executive office of the president, OSC may only submit a report to the president.

This is both legally required. As OSC believes there are significant constitutional concerns with the MSPB disciplining commissioned officers and as a practical matter, the only resource available to OSC when there's no MSPB quorum, as was the case during the entirety of the Trump administration. It is then up to the president to discipline those employees. Hello, my name is AG. President Trump not only failed to do so, but he publicly defended an employee O.S.C. found to have repeatedly violated the Hatch Act. The failure to impose discipline created the conditions for what appears to be a taxpayer

funded campaign apparatus with the upper echelons of the executive branch, and it allowed for, as one federal court said, of a senior administration official, members of the administration to, quote, violate the Hatch Act with seeming imp with seeming impunity. OSC received complaints alleging 13 senior Trump administration officials listed in part three violated the hatch act in one of two ways. By making statements supporting or opposing a candidate for partisan political office while speaking in an official capacity, or by using their official authority and connection with and in further ensue of the RNC. Section 7323A1 of Title V of the U.S. Code prohibits federal executive branch employees from

using their official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the results of an election. Under that prohibition, it's illegal for an employee to support or oppose a candidate for partisan political office while acting in an official capacity. Yet, Trump administration officials did precisely that. And while the specific facts of each case are different, they share this fundamental commonality. Senior Trump administration officials chose to use their office and their official authority, not for the legitimate functions of government, but to promote the re-election of President Trump in violation of the law. The administration's willful disregard for the law

was especially pernicious considering the timing of when many of these violations took place. OSC cannot in most cases stop violations from happening in real time. Even apparently straight forward violations of the Hatch Act may not turn out to actually be violations upon further investigation, therefore investigating alleged violations is the only way to ensure a fair result. Accordingly, OSC affords appropriate due process to the subject of a complaint and gathers the relevant facts before reaching a conclusion.

As a result, OSC's investigations can often stretch out for weeks or months. This reality creates a window for an administration that is so inclined to ignore the hatch act in the final months of an election cycle, knowing full well that any public reporter disciplinary action would not likely occur until well after the election. However, the benefit to the administration and resultant harm, the use of official authority

or influence to interfere with or affect an election, would accrue honor before election day. As described in part three, Office of Special Counsel has concluded that the Trump administration tacitly or expressly approved myriad Hatch Act violations committed within that critical period immediately prior to the election, during which OSC was unable to both investigate and resolve the violations before Election Day. Many of the officials who violated the Hatch Act

when speaking in an official capacity during media interviews expressly referenced the 2020 election campaign, or the candidacy of Trump's principal opponent, then candidate Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his running mate, then candidate Kamala Harris. For example, Brian Morgan's turn. Then a White House deputy press secretary said in one interview, that candidate Biden

was hiding away because the Biden campaign knows, quote, the more America sees of their ticket, the less they like them. Robert O'Brien, the national security adviser said in an interview, I expect the president to be reelected and reelected overwhelmingly. And moments later, rhetorically asked, who do you want to turn to to rebuild the economy? The guy whose proven he can do it, President Trump or somebody who's been in Washington for 40 years. And Mark Short, then Mike Pence's chief of staff said during an interview, the election

would quote, present a tremendous contrast to the American people to choose between a freedom and opportunity agenda that the Trump Pence administration stands for versus a path to socialism and decay that we believe the Biden-Harris ticket stands for. In short, each official campaigned on behalf of President Trump while speaking as a representative of the U.S. government. The decision by some in the Trump administration to flout the law by combing when campaign-related activity and governmental operations is further illustrated by the two cases related to the RNC.

The first involves then Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, who OSC concludes violated the Hatch Act by changing US Department of State policy to allow himself to speak at the convention, and then when engaging in political activity by delivering that speech, using his official authority by repeatedly referencing the work of the State Department, the second involves

then-acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolfe, who the OSC concludes violated the Hatch Act by presiding over a naturalization ceremony that was orchestrated for the purpose of creating content for the convention. Each took official acts and further ensured President Trump's re-election campaign. It appears that both violations stemmed from requests that originated within the White House or in Secretary Pompeo's case, possibly by the Trump campaign or President Trump himself, and thus they reflect the Trump administration's willingness to manipulate government business for partisan political ends.

Trump administration officials knew of the Hatch Act's restrictions. Prior to the 2020 election, OSCE issued two reports to President Trump the Hatch Act's restrictions. Prior to its 2020 election, OSC issued two reports to President Trump documenting Hatch Act violations by senior administration officials, and an unprecedented 15 warning letters to senior administration officials notifying them they violated the Hatch Act. And OSC made itself available

and did provide advice on the Hatch Act to the White House as well as training materials and advisory opinions when requested. Well aware of the Hatch Act's requirements, House, as well as training materials and advisory opinions when requested. Well aware of the Hatch Act's requirements, some senior officials in the Trump administration disregarded the OSC advice and chose to engage in prohibited political activity anyway. From OSC's perspective, the administration attitude toward the Hatch Act compliance was succinctly captured by then chief of staff Mark Meadows, who said during an interview that nobody outside of the boatway really cares about Trump administration officials violating the

Hatch Act. In direct contradiction to that unfortunate comment, the Office of Special Counsel was inundated with calls, emails, and complaints from members of the public in response to the violations described in this report. The cumulative effect of these repeated and public violations was to undermine public confidence in the nonpartisan operation of government, equally troubling the obvious noncompliance by senior administration officials who also caused career federal employees to ask OSC whether they were still required to comply with the HATCH Act.

As OSC previously stated in a letter to Trump, documenting HATCH Act violations by senior administration officials, such flagrant and unpunished violations erode the principal foundation of our democratic system, the rule of law. Part four lists seven enforcement challenges that substantially affected the Office of Special Counsel's ability to ensure that senior Trump administration officials complied with the restrictions that Congress imposed upon their political activity. Those enforcement challenges and potential fixes for each are as follows. Number one, OSC's enforcement tools are limited with respect to Senate confirmed presidential appointees and White House commissioned officers. A potential

fix, a statutory amendment that one allows OSC to pursue substantial monetary penalties, and commissioned officers against PIS and commissioned officers before the MSPB. And two, grants the MSPB jurisdiction over former employees for Hatch Act violations committed during their period of federal employment. Meaning, we can find you even if you're not in office anymore because we can't investigate while it's happening and by then the damage has been done. So this is the fix to that. Number two, OSE did not receive from the Trump administration the good faith cooperation necessary to ensure full compliance with the HATCH Act.

Potential fix, a statutory amendment granting the MSPB greater authority to enforce OSC's subpoenas and other investigative requests. Number three, prior OSC HATCH Act advice to executive branch agencies that the HATCH Act does not prohibit agencies from defending and administration's policies, appears to have been interpreted in a way that allowed senior agency officials to engage in political activity under the guise of defending the Trump administration's policy positions. A potential fix in response to the incidents that arose during the 2020 election, OSC is using this report to provide updated advice to agencies regarding agency communications that reference a candidate for elected office, including an incumbent president, and are scheduled to be disseminated within 60 days of an election.

Agency ethics officials should conduct inquiries into the purpose of such communications to ensure they're not intended to promote or oppose a candidate. If agency ethics officials have concerns about a particular communication, OSC recommends they advise delaying the communication until after the election. Oh, okay, you could advise them all you want. OSC is also available to answer questions from agency officials about whether a given communication might implicate the HATCH Act. Number four, OSC does not have the authority to issue or update HATCH Act regulations, potential fix, either a statutory amendment expressly granting the Office of Special Counsel rulemaking authority, or a determination within the executive branch that rulemaking authority for Hatch Act, violation

should be vested with the Office of Special Counsel. Number 5. Existing law is unclear with respect to which portions, if any, of the White House may be used for partisan political events and who may authorize those uses. A potential fix? A statutory amendment, clarifying in which areas of the White House grounds employees are prohibited from engaging in political activity under what circumstances. If any, such areas may be used by non-federal employees for political activity, basically

define how you can use the White House for your election campaign. Number six, Office of Special Counsel has no clear mechanism for obtaining reimbursement for taxpayers when a government official engages in taxpayer-funded campaign activity while on official government travel. A potential fix, a statutory amendment allowing the Office of Special Counsel to seek reimbursement before the MSPB from the traveling official personally. And finally, number seven, the MSPB has not had a quorum since January 2017. Potential fix, ensuring there is always at least two confirmed MSPB members. Furthermore, a statutory amendment authorizing the Office of Special Counsel to seek enforcement of its subpoenas in Article 3 courts in the event the MSPB

does not have a quorum would guard against a recurrence of these issues if the MSPB were to ever lack a quorum in the future. And part five of this report concludes by noting that Congress's judgment in passing the Hatch Act was that quote, partisan political activities by federal employees must be limited if the government is to operate effectively and fairly. And none of these goals is achievable if the power of the federal government is used to campaign for candidates in partisan elections as happened during 2020. Moving forward, senior executive branch officials must not allow compliance with the Hatch Act

to be viewed as optional, or an unnecessary burden. Indeed, lower ranking employees have faced and continue to face potentially severe consequences. Hello, including removal from federal service for violating this law. I didn't, by the way. OSC hopes that the enforcement challenges identified in this report can be addressed, and that the conduct of the Trump administration officials described in part three turns out to be an anomaly and not a precedent. You can read this report in its entirety at osc.gov and I recommend you do.

We'll be right back with more news. Stay with us. Hey everybody, it's AEG. Here's a scary statistic. Every 10 seconds someone becomes a victim of fraud or identity theft. What's worse, 23% of those people don't get their money back after the attack. If you think it could never happen to you, you could be the next target. And Aura can help. Aura protects your online finances,

your personal information, and your tech from online threats. It's an all-in-one protection from identity theft, financial fraud, malware, scam sites, and so much more. You'll be alerted to fraudulent activity and threats fast with Aura, for example. If your online accounts or passwords were compromised or if someone tried to open a bank account in your name,

they'd let you know. ORA's solutions are easy to set up, and all plans come with a proactive $1 million ID theft insurance policy, and you can always get in touch with a US-based customer service representative. ORA is a new type of security service that protects all of your online information

and devices with one simple subscription. With an easy online dashboard and alerts sent straight to your phone, Aura keeps you in control and guides you through solving any issues. And for a limited time, Aura is offering listeners up to 40% off plans when you visit Aura.com-msw. That's Aura.com-msw, and you can get a complete protection package and savings of up to 40% that's auraaurra.com slash MSW. And today's show is also brought to you by Scribd. I'll admit it, I am a big browser of content.

I constantly struggle to pick out my next book or audio book or podcast and there's an endless amount of content today. I feel like I spend as much time looking for my next book as I do actually reading it. But with Scribd, I get thoughtfully curated editors' picks and smart recommendations based on what I've read, which makes choosing my next book quicker and easier than ever. With Scribd, you get instant access to millions of ebooks, audiobooks, magazines, court documents,

dissertations, and more. Always one low monthly subscription. It's the ultimate reading subscription service, letting you explore all of your interests in any format you choose for only $9.99 a month. That's less than a cost of a single book. I love using their service. I get to discover must read new work from celebrated authors like Roxanne Gay and Charles D.U., who are premiering exclusively on Scribd. And when I want to change things up, I'm free to switch between titles, genres, and formats at any time

on my phone, tablet, or computer. And right now, we're offering listeners of this program a free 60-day trial. Go to try.scribd.com slash AG for your free trial. That's try.scribd SCRIBD.com slash AG and get 60 days of scribbed for free. All right, everybody. Welcome back. More news from this week, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, released to CNN on Friday, a new evidence showing how US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CDC officials

were pressured by the Trump administration and Trump administration officials to alter scientific guidance and they were prevented from communicating directly with the public. In new excerpts of transcribed interviews, Dr. Nancy Misaniye, that's the former director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, says she was made aware that then President Donald Trump was angered by her February 25, 2020 briefing during which she warned the public about the dangers of COVID. Remember this? Masaniye says in the transcript that she had calls with former CDC director Robert Redfield and former US Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar after the briefing and that she was upset after her conversation with Azar.

In the transcripts, other CDC officials described how requests to hold briefings about mass guidance and pediatric COVID-19 cases and deaths were denied. When asked about a CNN report that CDC officials felt muscled, Dr. Anne Schuchatz, the CDC's former principal deputy director, said that is a feeling that we had, many of us. CDC officials also appeared to take issue with invoking public health authority to expel migrants. Further, several interviews described efforts by the administration to alter or influence

the agency's guidance and weekly scientific reports. That's the morbidity and mortality weekly report, which typically is not shared outside the agency before they're published. It took, quote, great effort to protect that integrity," she Chott said in the transcribed excerpt, and active effort on the part of CDC officials to make sure that the attempts were not successful to alter the reports. In another interview, Dr. Christine Kasey, an editor of CDC's morbidity and mortality weekly report, described an email from a Trump appointee in former US Health and Human Services advisor, Paul Alexander, that she saw as a request to stop a report.

She called it highly unusual and quite concerning for somebody to ask to put an immediate stop on an MMWR report. I don't think in my memory that has ever happened," she said, and to be accused, because it is accusatory, language, that MMRMWR content is designed to harm our commander-in-chief, the president. Kaisy Shedshe was instructed to delete the email, and was told the direction came from Redfield. The transcripts also include a conversation with Dr. Deborah Birx, who served as a White House COVID response coordinator, in which she described how the Trump administration pushed for guidance that said people who were not symptomatic did not need to be tested,

despite disagreement from health officials. She said it was the intent of Dr. Scott Atlas, a Trump coronavirus advisor, to change the testing guidance. Quote, this document resulted in less testing and less aggressive testing of those without symptoms that I believed were the primary reason for the early community spread.

The committee also renewed its request for a bedfield to appear before the committee for a transcribed interview and requested interviews with three additional senior officials, Dr. Martin C. Tron, the director of CDC's Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, Dr. Daniel Jernigan, CDC's Deputy Director for Public Health Science and Surveillance, and Dr. Henry Walke, the Director of the Division of Preparedness and Emerging Infections, in CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, and he was a former incident manager of the CDC's COVID-19 response. And, the FVC Federal Election Commission found reason to believe, in 2019, that both Senator Tom Tillis and former National Security Advisor John Bolton violated federal laws against foreign interference in US elections

by working with now-defunct British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica in 2014. But the commission which found that the North Carolina Republican Party and the Perennial Republican candidate in Oregon also ran a foul of the same laws does not appear to be doing anything about it since the five-year statute of limitations for both cases has now expired and no criminal referrals appear to have been made. Quote, once again, the commission has failed to take meaningful enforcement action on complaints alleging serious violations of the foreign national ban. That's Commissioner Sean Abrissard and Ellen Wyntrop in a statement. Despite the commission's previous commitment to prioritizing foreign national matters, that

commitment appears in retrospect to have been lip service as we continue to skirt our obligations to the American people they continued. The two commissioners also said that former President Trump and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, both of whom worked with the British firm during the 2016 presidential campaigns, may have violated the same laws as well, but the two previous Republican commissioners Matthew Peterson and Caroline Hunter didn't want to take any action. Quote, they were willing to move forward only on claims that were already imperiled under the statute of limitations, setting the commission up for failure.

Again, that's the pair of commissioners. Unfortunately, there's no public explanation of why they could not move forward on the latter allegations against Trump and Cruz. Instead, the American people are left in the dark as to why the commission was unable to muster the necessary four votes to pursue these serious allegations of foreign intervention in the 2016 election. The saga, of course, began in March 2018 as the Facebook Cambridge Analytica data scandal in which personal data of over 87 million Facebook users was improperly obtained by the firm, all that came to a head. In March of 2018, watchdog organization Common Cause filed a complaint against Cambridge Analytica itself, while the campaign legal center filed a complaint against John Bolton's Superpack.

Two months thereafter, the chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party filed a complaint against Senator Tillis and the Republican Party, and another complaint against the Trump campaign by Resistance Committee Action Fund is also included in the case. Each complaint alleging violations of the Foreign Nationals' ban was broadly similar alleging that foreign nationals, in this case British employees of Cambridge Analytica had taken on significantly greater roles in the campaigns, and that foreign nationals participated in and in some instances directed the committee's election-related activities. A 2018 report by the Center for Public Integrity detailed the extent of Bolton's coordination

with Cam Anna, Cambridge Analytica. Additionally, the campaign legal centers complaint alleged that Bolton's super PAC had engaged in illegal coordinated activity with the Tillus campaign and the North Carolina Republican Party during the former's 2014 campaign. The commission voted in July of 2019 and found reason to believe that Tillus Bolton and the North Carolina GOP and even Oregon, an Oregon congressional candidate, Art Robinson, had all violated the Foreign Nationals' ban initiating an investigation by the commission. But then the FEC lost a quorum for the rest of that year and most of 2020, imperiling

the body's work and resulting in the eventual lapse of the statute limitations on the 2014 error case. The FEC, as we know, is made up of six commissioners, and the commission loses a quorum when there are fewer than four. And in 2019, then vice chairman Matthew Peterson resigned, bringing the commission down to three. Quote, unfortunately, the office of general council's investigation of the 2014 activity never gained traction. The commission voted on September 30th of this year to close the file, apparently ending

the matter before the FEC and Ravel, a former Democratic FEC commissioner, told Insider that it was unlikely that any criminal referral had been made to the Department of Justice, as that would have been noted in the documents made public this week. Quote, it's unlikely that they would, if they failed to take any action on this case. Making a referral to the Department of Justice also takes four votes. So a couple of criminals getting away with it again. All right, we'll be right back with this week's highly anticipated fantasy and diamond lakes. Stay with us.

Hey, everybody, it's aging in the 90s ads for phone sex lines could be seen everywhere flickering on late night cable channels and printed on the back of fantasy indictment lake stay with us. phone Pimp. He was joined by tech genius and co-founder Michael Self, who was known as the Bill Gates of Phone Sex, but it was the women behind those phones who created the close knit yet dysfunctional family that turned American Telnet into a multi-billion dollar company and revolutionized the sex industry. And as fortunes grew, the founders were sailing lavish yachts, fueling wild drug parties, and burning through cash by the minute. And the FBI was watching their every move. Wondering on Topic Studios new podcast Operator is the untold story of a company which dominated the phone sex industry until the money blinded them and it all came crashing down. I've really been enjoying Operator, it's a fascinating and entertaining show that keeps your attention with thrilling and interesting content.

I highly recommend it for all podcast lovers. Follow Operator on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or you can listen early and add free by subscribing to Wondry Plus in Apple Podcasts or the Wondry app. And today's show is also brought to you by Credit Karma Personal Loans. Do you feel overwhelmed when it comes to handling your personal finances? You are not the only one. Credit Karma is here to help make those big calls with more confidence. Whether you're refinancing credit card debt or paying for an upcoming expense, Credit Karma uses your credit data to show you fresh personal loan offers that are personalized to you.

On Credit Karma, you can check out multiple loan offers side by side. Members who compare loan offers at Cron Credit Karma save an average of 30% on interest rates. It's completely free and it's easy to sign up for Credit Karma with no effect on your credit score making it simple to search for the right personal loan for you. Credit karma will even show you your approval odds. And yeah, that way you can choose offers that you're more likely to get approved for and apply with more confidence. And once you have the loan, credit karma can help you track your progress as you pay off your debt. And it even lets you know if you can refinance and save. Finding the loan that fit my needs when I needed to pay off from my home renovations, it was tough, but with credit karma, they made it incredibly easy

and helpful for me along the way. Credit karma, apply with more confidence today. If you're ready to apply, head to creditcarma.com slash loan offers to see personalized offers with your approval odds right now. Go to creditcarma.com slash loan offers to find the loan for you. That's creditcarma.com slash loan offers. All right, everybody, welcome back. It's time for the fantasy indictment league.

I'm gonna be a dick. No it is gonna be okay. I'm gonna be a dick. I'm gonna be a dick. And I'm going to go ahead and collect my points for drafting Steve and Kay Bannon for my fantasy indictment league last week. November 5th, I predicted he would be indicted within seven days, and he was indeed indicted on the seventh day. I posited that Department of Justice was either one waiting for the Chutkin ruling, which it got. That was the one that determined that there was a legislative purpose. There's a stay on that ruling right now, but it's administrative going up through the appellate court, but the ruling was clear. Two, we were waiting for graves, Matthew Graves, the new DC-US attorney to get there, which happened November 5th. And three, what Joyce Vance and I talked about on the daily beans earlier this past week about the Department

of Justice needing time to prepare for the defense of Bannon and prepare for pretrial motions. So, any of those three things are some combination of them. And here we are, from the Department of Justice, Friday, November 12th. Stephen K. Bannon was indicted today by a federal grand jury on two counts of contempt of Congress stemming from his failure to comply with the Zappina issued by the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th breach of the U.S. Capitol. Ban in 67 is charged with one contempt count involving his refusal to appear for a deposition and another involving his refusal to produce documents despite a Zapina from the House Select Committee to investigate the January 6th attack on the Capitol.

An arraignment date has not yet been set and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Quote, since my first day in office, this is Merrick Garland talking, I have promised Justice Department employees that together we would show the American people by word and deed that the Department adheres to the rule of law follows the facts and the law and pursues equal justice under the law. Today's charges reflect the department's steadfast commitment to those principles. As detailed in the indictment on September 23, 2021, the select committee issued a subpoena to Mr. Bannon, said US Attorney Matthew Graves for the District of Columbia. The subpoena required him to appear and produce documents for the select

committee and to appear for a deposition before the select committee. According to the indictment, Bannon refused to appear to give testimony as required by Sipina and refused to produce documents and compliance with Sipina. In its Sipina, the select committee said it had reason to believe Bannon had information relevant to the understanding of the events related to January 6. Bannon, formerly a chief strategist and counselor to the president, has been a private citizen since departing the White House in 2017. Each count of contempt of Congress carries a minimum of 30 days and a maximum of one year in jail, as well as a fine of $100 to $1,000. A federal district court judge will determine any

sentence after considering the U.S. sentence and guidelines and any other statutory factors. An indictment is merely an allegation all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The case is being investigated by the FBI's Washington Field Office. The case is being prosecuted by the public corruption and civil rights section of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia. Investigated by the FBI's Washington Field Office. It is of note that we did not hear a peep about this indictment or what Department

of Justice was doing or considering while they were putting this together. So let's keep that in mind as we are inundated on social media with posts saying Garland has done or is doing nothing. And don't get me wrong. I'm still mad. We haven't seen obstruction of justice indictments of Trump from volume two of the Mueller report, but let's keep in mind that if the Department of Justice waited to indict Bannon until the new U.S. attorney got there in his office in DC, perhaps two, they were waiting for him in the obstruction of justice charges, which would fall within his jurisdiction. So give yourself some points if you drafted Bannon. And for my picks this week, I'm going to stick with Matt Gaetz, Engelsen, Ingersoll from

the Tallahassee ship bags. And then I'm going to stick with Rudy Dijoniva and Tonzing from the Fraud Guarantee ship bags. I'm going to add Donald fucking Trump to my draft this week for obstruction of justice or potential Manhattan D.A. charges, though I don't think he's there yet. He just impendled a new grand jury for another six months. And let's stick with the Weiselberg and Trump org superseding as one charge along with plea deals from Kalamari and Makani to tail that. And I think we'll have a Tom Barrick plea agreement

in the Eastern District of New York. That's it. Oh, by the way, Andrew Weissmann has surfaced. He made an appearance on the Talking Feds podcast, our friend Harry Littmann's podcast. First public thing he's done since 10 days before the Tom Barrick indictment came out of his old He made an appearance on the Talking Feds podcast, our friend Harry Littmann's podcast. First public thing he's done since 10 days before the Tom Barric indictment came out of his old office. And Barric was the one who appointed Manafort and Weissmann was in charge of team Manafort on the Muller probe. I'm sure it's coincidence. He didn't mention where he'd been though since July, but he did offer that he's not been appointed special counsel. And that's it for this week.

We will see you next week. Thanks again to our patrons and our sponsors who make this show possible. Until next time, everybody, please take care of yourselves, take care of each other, take care of the planet, and take care of your mental health. I've been Allison Gill, and this is Mullershi Road. [♪ Music playing in background, music playing in background,

music playing in background, Mullershi Road is written and produced by Allison Gill in partnership with MSW Media. Sound Design and Engineering, or by Molly Hockey, Jesse Egan is our copywriter and our art and web designer by Joa Reeder at Moxie Design Studios. Mollershy Road is a proud member of MSW Media, a group of creator-owned podcasts focused on news, justice, and politics. For more information, visit mswmedia.com. Hi, I'm Harry Lickman, host of Talking Feds. Around table, it brings together prominent figures from government law and journalism for a dynamic discussion of the most important topics of the day.

Each Monday, I'm joined by a slate of Feds favorites at new voices to break down the headlines and give the insiders view of what's going on in Washington and beyond. Plus, side bars explaining important legal concepts read by your favorite celebrities. Find Talking Fedsware, wherever you get your podcasts. M-S-O-W-Media.