Jack - DOJ Leaks Volume II

Episode Date: July 5, 2026

Acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte has begun firing dozens of intelligence officials as he installs an election denier as his Chief of Staff. The Justice Department accidentally sent three copies of Volume II of Jack Smith's final report to the defense attorneys of the woman they charged with emailing herself Volume II of Jack Smith’s final report. Kash Patel has sent over 250 FBI personnel to Atlanta to assist in an investigation into the 2020 election in Georgia. Former CIA Chief John Brennan has sued the government to preserve records regarding the grand conspiracy investigation into him and others in the Southern District of Florida. Plus listener questions. Do you have questions for the pod or something for HITMEINTHEHEADWITHABAT?   Shop Mint Unlimited Plans at MINTMOBILE.com/UNJUST Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/ Follow AGMueller, She Wrote SubstackMueller She Wrote on Blueskyhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://twitter.com/dailybeanspodMore from Andrew McCabeThe Real McCabe on [e-mail] on BlueskyThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump This Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr when you Subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3YNpW3P Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

M-S-W Media. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Bill Pulte, has begun firing dozens of intelligence officials as he installs an election denier as his chief of staff. The Justice Department accidentally sent three copies of volume two of Jack Smith's final report to the defense attorneys of the woman they indicted for sending herself copies of volume two of Jack Smith's final report. Cash Patel has sent over 250 ever. FBI personnel to Atlanta to assist in an investigation to the 2020 election in Georgia.

And ex-CIA Chief John Brennan has sued the government to preserve records regarding the grand conspiracy investigation into him and others in the Southern District of Florida. This is Unjustified. Hey, everybody, welcome to episode 76 of Unjustified. It's Sunday, July 5th, 2026. Allison Gill. And I'm Andy McCabe. Allison sitting over here in Virginia just basically on fire. On fire. Yeah, I think it's like 108 degrees today or something. It's crazy. You go outside like in the, and like, you know, 11 o'clock at night and you leave the house, it's still hot. It's like Phoenix. It's

like being in Phoenix like that. Well, let's see. Opening my weather app, we have, Ooh, it is pretty warm here today at 78. You're killing me. And it's a dry 78 probably. Yeah, yeah. We got a nice breeze winds out of the southwest at 11. And we have a giant front of jealousy coming in from the rest of the country here in San Diego. Yes, you do.

That joke belongs to my friend Jesse Egan. It's always a crowd pleaser. So credit to where credit is due. And speaking of credit where credit is due, we actually have more news. than what we read in the introduction. We ran out of room in the introduction to get to all of the news today. And, you know, we rarely get, this isn't unjustified.

We cover the Trump Justice Department. We rarely have good news these days. But I think this qualifies as good news. It's from courthouse news. Guo Wang Wei, self-exiled, Maga-linked media mogul from China, was sentenced to 30 years in prison on Monday. after he was convicted of ripping off his supporters to the tune of a billion dollars while espousing anti-communist views.

Guo, also known as Ho-Wan Kwok, or Miles Guo, stole at least $550 million from thousands of victims who invested in his companies, according to trial evidence, and did not appear to regret his actions at all, according to U.S. District Judge Annalisa Torres. Mr. Guo, to this day, denies responsibility and exhibits no remorse for the harm that he has caused so many people, the Barack Obama appointee said before handing down the sentence. In 2024, Guo was convicted on nine fraud and conspiracy counts and acquitted of wire and securities fraud charges related to GTV, a Chinese media platform and anti-censorship venture he founded with former Trump advisor Steve Bannon. Bannon was arrested aboard Guo's yacht in 2020 on separate fraud charges.

They buy the post office cops. Yeah. By the road. Don't confuse Bannon's arrest on Guo's yacht with Guo's fraud charges, which were different from the ones that Bannon was arrested for. Anyway. Bannon's fraud charges were stemmed from the We Build the Wall scheme. Yeah.

Now, those were eventually thrown out. But then I think he was brought up on separate charges in New York. But he's only ever been to jail for four months, and that was for contempt of Congress. Different charge. Different charge entirely. Yes. Awesome. Only the best people. Shortly after Guo's March 2023 arrest, his penthouse at the Sherry Netherland Hotel on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan caught fire while investigators were still inside. Nothing about this story makes any sense except for the fact that the guy got 30 years. Yes. Now, I picture in my head that he had some sort of a remote thing that he could light his apartment on fire in case somebody came to. search it like that's what is in my mind.

It's like Mission Impossible, right? In the old days, which we used to watch as children, because we're that old, and it, you know, it was just like you get the tape recorder and then it would like self-destruct at the end. Yeah, it's probably what he was doing, something like that. Now at Guo's seven-week trial in 2024, prosecutor said he built an online following through his outspoken opposition to the Chinese Communist Party. They actually ejected him from China. President Xi ejected this guy from China for corruption.

that's you're too corrupt for for china he didn't flee he was kicked out yes it's different it's different it's like it's like saying you know i broke up with her in fact she kicked you out of the house right like it's uh right yeah no i quit no you're fired right but then he cheated supporters out of their savings through sham opportunities tied to his businesses one of those who invested way chen spoke at monday's hearing and said her family lost their entire savings and was pushed deep into debt because they believed investing with Guo would pay off. Quote, this fraud destroyed my life and my family, she said. It took our peace of mind. It took our hope. It took our life from us. The best years of our lives. Now, Guo and his attorneys say he plans to appeal. And I think the going rate

for a pardon from Trump right now is about $2 million. Right? According to recent. And that's not a joke. It sounds like. I've seen that reported in multiple outlets. that so hard hard to pin a specific number around but there's an entire industry now around getting pardons from this president and none of it has anything to do with the pardon attorney which i guess is still ed martin but like who cares really right if he's the rubber stamp like i don't care puts his finger is his inner ears and says la la la la pardon whoever you want exactly that's what he does as the as the the paw part of his former whack-a-dag-dag-paw title there you attorney. There you go. All right. So our other extra story comes from the Times.

Ever since the Justice Department charged the Southern Poverty Law Center in April with defrauding donors by using its money to secretly pay informants inside extremist organizations, the prominent civil rights groups' lawyers have wondered how the investigation came about. After all, the Law Center's informant program had faced an earlier round of scrutiny for potential tax violations during President Trump's first stint in the White House. But the inquiry was closed during the Biden administration. In court, I mean, honestly, Donald Trump just really hates the Southern Poverty Law Center because they exposed the Charlottesville rally, and which was like led to one of Trump's biggest gaffes by saying there were fine people on both. Actually, not a gaffe. He meant it

by saying there were fine people on both sides actually prompted Joe Biden to run for president that particular event. Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right. How he feels about him. Now, in court papers filed on Monday night, the lawyers shed new light on the origins of the renewed investigation using records recently provided to them by the FBI. They said the inquiry appeared to have been prompted, at least in part, by a letter sent in September from several right-wing organizations that had been criticized by the Law Center. It was addressed to Stephen Miller, the powerful aid to Mr. Trump, who has often exercised significant influence over decisions at the Justice Department. The letter jointly written by groups, including Moms for Liberty,

and Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA, used language about the Law Center that was almost identical at times a language that appeared in the FBI document from October that laid out the basics of the new investigation. Quote, to put it succinctly, the lawyers wrote, the Justice Department's justification for opening a full investigation into the SPLC in October of 2025 that led to the indictment in April of 2006 appears to be a rehashing of a letter sent by conservative groups to Stephen Miller, complaining about being designated as hate groups by the SPLC. The lawyers acknowledged that the documents the FBI provided did not explicitly reveal whether Mr. Miller had directed the Justice Department to reopen the investigation,

but they added that, quote, the facts suggest that may be the case. Wow, you think? Mm-hmm. Holy cow. They also suggested that Mr. Miller had another potential reason to set the Justice Department after the SPLC. In 2019, the group wrote a series of articles drawing on hundreds of Mr. Miller's emails to assert that in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, he, that is Stephen Miller, promoted white nationalist literature and, quote, racist immigration stories.

Yeah, man. And if you're a group like the Southern Poverty Law Center that tracks Nazis and fascists and white supremacist groups, and you're a target of our government, I think it's pretty safe to say our government has been infiltrated by neo-Nazis and white supremacists. Or either people who are like-minded

with neo-Nazis and white supremacists. I mean, did you ever think you would, you would, it's one thing to have political differences and you know, you vote with one party and you don't agree with the positions of the other one. But man, did you ever think you'd see the other party embracing white nationalism

and white supremacy I mean like that was so long that has been for so many decades of the third rail of American politics right it's it's radioactive to anybody that comes near it

and everyone denounced it right nobody was in danger of getting into bed with them nobody was courting that vote but that all changed yeah we've got it all right we're now just now

getting to our first headline from the introduction. The stories from MS now, the FBI, and I'm really excited to see what you have to say about this because I think you know a thing or two about this kind of thing. But the FBI issued a memo requesting all field offices surge a total of 200, over 250 personnel into what it describes as a priority effort for Director Kosh Patel's office, which two sources familiar with the effort, said centers on the investigation into the 2020 election in Georgia. Find me 11,780 boats. That.

Find me 250 analysts. Yes. So he's now dispatching 260 people. Quote, in support of the director's office priority effort, the Directorate of Intelligence, D.I and Criminal Division are requesting all FBI field offices to immediately surge support to an FBI Atlanta priority investigation. That's what the internal memo says, which was obtained by NBC News. One of the sources said it's an effort to dig deeper into the 2020 election, focusing on individuals and records to support President Donald Trump's election fraud theories, lies, that he continues to push. I added a little bit there.

The directive came directly from Patel's office and includes 260 personnel, apparently mostly analysts, who will join agents already working the Fulton County investigation. Each analyst is expected to review 708 records. I don't know how they came up with that number, but we'll see how that actually looks. It's interesting. They don't tell us in the article either. They're not like, well, it's because we know they seized this many tens of thousands of things. So each of the 260 has to, you know, no, they don't. And I mean, I'm sorry, this is a little inside baseball, but don't put the number out there because these crafty analysts will blaze through that in like a day and be like, can I go home now?

Can I go home now? Can I go back to my regular work now? Because you want to say, no, they'll stay until the job is done. And then if they're really fast, just keep giving them, I don't know, 800 and 900 records. I'm just saying. Now, the number of personnel being asked to work on the case and the approval of the costs, including overtime for weekends and holidays, because they have to do this by July 17th, is extremely unusual. And that's kind of where I wanted to pause and say, Andy, do you agree?

Is this extremely unusual? Oh, it's unusual, all right. The FBI investigating a particular American county's voting apparatus and taking 600 boxes of their records, you're already way, way outside of usual. Okay, this is not something that the FBI does. Yeah, and getting on the phone, on speaker phone with the DNI and the president after you execute that search. Yeah, the DNI lurking around in the back of a truck trying to hide from reporters. Well, she's gone, though, because she commissioned two reports that say there was no vote flipping. voting machines. So she's out. How dare you? So that this is all weird town. But this process of

drafting people out of the field offices to be temporarily assigned, we call TDII, to a big high priority project that's going to go on for a long time. That's not, that's not different theoretically. That's been happening years and years. Like did they do that for January 6th? Investigations, maybe they surged agents to. I would expect they probably surged agents to WFO. Also, The Jan 6 investigations actually took place in the different field offices, right, wherever the person was. Oh, that's right. That's right. You know, residing. That's where they got arrested and the file got kind of built. And then it came to DC for prosecution. But anyway, you do, this is a massive scale, though. Typically, you would do this for like half a dozen, two dozen, maybe agents or analysts that you needed to do some job typically at headquarters. And you would pick a couple big field offices and say, okay, you give me. like three, you give me five, you give me two, and each, and they each have to do a month, and then you just keep rotating people. This is a massive number of analysts, because in the

bureau there's about 12,000, maybe 13,000 agents, a little bit less than that when I was there, but that number's gone up. There's only about 3,000 analysts in the entire FBI. and they work, each of those analysts has to essentially assist or work with, partner with multiple agents in the field offices where they work. Also, a lot of the analysts, a lot of that cadre of 3,000 works at, is assigned to headquarters anyway. So taking all these hundreds of analysts from the field, you are greatly depleting the field's ability to continue the very important work that those analysts do. Some of them support cases

directly. They're called tactical analysts. Others do strategic work. So they're looking at like figuring out what the threats are that are coming that we should expect to see to help us like move resources to try to address things that might become bigger problems, threats to national security, criminal violations, things like that in the future. So this is all really important work that we figured out how to do in the aftermath of 9-11. So to take 260 of them out of the field, you really leave a field offices kind of running on fumes in terms of their analytical capability. And that's something that's going to be felt for a long time because that work doesn't get done. And then you never really catch up. You know what I mean? So this is a massive investment in something that we know is,

by all reporting, an absolutely illegitimate effort. This is a place. political errand to try to prove a theory that's already been disproven through over, what, 60 civil lawsuits in the aftermath of the election, however many investigations have been done by the House, the Senate, everybody else, there is nothing to this. And continuing to dig through it and forcing people to look closer, like go back and look again, go back and look again every time they give you the answer you don't want, is just pushing a workforce to deliver the answer that you want, not the actual, you know, not an actual. You know, not an answer. actual reflection of fact. True. And what it says here, Andy, is that they're requiring small field

offices to send three staffers each. Medium and large offices have to dedicate five staffers, and extra large field offices have to send eight. Yeah. That's a lot. That's a lot. They're going to feel that. Like people who are fighting crime, they're having to dig through ballots in Fulton County for chasing Donald Trump's dream of election fraud in 2020, of which Joe Biden won and is now done is out of office. Yeah, you're, you're back, you know, like, why are we still, why are we still arguing about this? But, yeah, what I would like to, if I were in, if I were in Congress and doing some oversight over DOJ and the FBI, like, I want a list of the work that these people did in the field and therefore had to abandon for whatever period of time this

ends up being. And I want to know how you're addressing that. Like, these people came out of, They're supposed to be done by July 17th. I think they're trying to hurry up and justify coming and yanking our voting machines out of the wall during the midterm elections. Could be. Or maybe they're preparing for some sort of round of indictments. And they have to review some stuff before they can finalize those. I don't know. We'll have to watch it closely, though.

Yeah, we definitely will. And if you are one of these analysts that they send to Atlanta, My signal is Mueller, she wrote.23. Reach out to me. I'll keep you anonymous. There you go. Just like the FBI analysts and DOJ personnel I spoke to during the review of the Epstein files to redact Donald Trump's name. All right, everybody, we have to take a quick break.

We've got a lot more news to get to, but stick around. We'll be right back. A lot of people hear that it's only $15 a month for Mint Mobile and assume there has to be a catch, right? Our producer, though, thought the same thing until he actually switched. Turns out, there's no catch, no nonsense. no surprise fees, no fake perks, just unlimited talk, text, and data, reliable coverage on the nation's largest 5G network and an award-winning care team. Compared with his old provider, the service was just as good, and the savings are amazing. So please support our show and check out MintMobile, make the switch at mintmobile.com slash unjust.

MintMobile took what's wrong with wireless and fixed it. Premium wireless should not come with a ridiculous price tag. And Mint proves that with plans for just $15 a month, you can have it all. You can even bring your current phone number. Your contacts switching is quick and easy with an e-sim. And then you just choose the plan that works for you, whether there's a three or six or 12-month plan. And say goodbye to the usual monthly bill.

You ditch overpriced wireless with MintMobil. It's simple. Sign up online and get three months of premium wireless service for $15 a month. So to get your new wireless plan for just $15 a month, go to mintmobile.com slash unjust. That's mintmobile.com slash unjust. cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com slash unjust. That's it. There's no catch.

$45 upfront payment required, equivalent to $15 a month, new customers on first three-month plan only, speed slower above 40 gigabytes on unlimited plan, additional taxes and fees and restrictions apply. See Mintmobile for details. All right, everybody, welcome back. Next up is a pair of stories from MS Now about the acting director of national intelligence Bill Pulte, a guy with absolutely zero experience that shouldn't be allowed in the building, let alone to be in charge of it. Now, here's what the story says. Bill Pulte, acting director in national intelligence, has stirred fear by choosing as his chief of staff, a GOP election

operative who oversaw poll-watching programs that included Jack Posobiac and other conservative conspiracy theorists. The staffer, Christina Norton, also appears to have no experience working in the intelligence community. Sweet. Quote, it is horrifying. That's what a former senior U.S. intelligence official told MS now on Saturday. Not only does Norton have absolutely no background experience or expertise in national security or intelligence, but her principal qualifications appear to be loyalty to Pulte and an embrace of absurd election interference conspiracies. Senator Tom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, who has been a vocal critic of Pulte, also raised concerns about election integrity on Sunday

while taking shots at the Director of National Intelligence and the office itself. Quote, we should eliminate the DNI and we should eliminate Pulte from the DNI until that happens, he said on CNN, adding, I am concerned that we're going to continue to cast doubt on elections in November and erode what has been a 250-year tradition of a peaceful transition of power. Pulte's choice of Norton is also likely to increase concerns

among Democrats, the President Donald Trump intends to use the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to interfere in the midterm elections. Pulte, a loyalist with no intelligence experience, has used his current position as head of federal mortgage agencies to refer political rivals of the president for federal criminal prosecution, which, I will add, is also a function he does not due. No, and that includes Lisa Cook, who the court just ruled, can keep her job on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, but also Letitia James, Jim Comey. I think they were looking at Adam Schiff, but never brought anything. But yeah, that's what, that's Pulte, that's what Pulte does. Okay, he manufactures crimes where they don't exist. Jamie Raskin. Not well eitherly, right?

It's like zero for four at this point? Yeah. And that record will continue. But, you know, I mean, it's maybe a slightly better case than the one that Janine Piro brought against the canoeist at the reflecting pool this week. Well, I mean, you're really, you're really, you're really teeing up a clash of Titans there. Okay. I mean, Bill Pulte versus Jeannie Piro for prosecutorial success.

It might be a long time watching that bout before somebody actually lands a punch. You're really scraping the bottom of the reflecting pool. That's right. Allegedly. Now, Jamie Raskin told MS now on Sunday that the choice just confirms that the only job qualification is absolute political loyalty and devotion to Donald Trump. But he expressed faith in the judicial system during an appearance on the weekend. He noted that, quote, right now, we have federal courts across the land that are rejecting

their various attempts to take over the election process. Nine different federal courts have rejected the claim that the president by executive order can compel the states in the union to turn over all their voter lists to Donald Trump and the White House. That, by the way, is now at 12 to zero. Yeah. Now, the former senior, because we've added the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.

Now, the former senior intelligence official who requested anonymity due to concerns of retaliation told MS. Now, the choice also, quote, signals as clearly as could be that Pulte has been put at ODNI to misuse the awesome power of the U.S. intelligence community to interfere with the upcoming midterm elections. Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, appearing on CBS News Face the Nation Sunday, said his objection to Pulte is, quote, that he used personal information to target a political enemy of the president, a reference to New York Attorney General Letitia James. quote, you should not be using the force of government to crash upon someone just because the person in charge does not like them or finds them inconvenient. You think? The fact that Bill did not. Do you know anything about that, Andy?

The fact that Bill did that is disqualifying for someone to be the director of national intelligence, Cassidy said. It's disqualifying to be anywhere near any kind of government job or even to be a decent human being. Now. Yeah. Yeah. Trump has said in interviews with the news media, I like how they wrote that out, that he would like to see Pulte shrink the size of the ODNI and put a pin in that because that's our second story. And investigate election fraud. Pulte's predecessor, Tulsi Gabbard, participated in investigations in Georgia and Puerto Rico to find proof of Trump's false claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

What's left out of this is that there were two reports. Both of them said there was no fraud found and the White House has blocked their release. Democrats and some former intelligence officials say they worry that Pulte may try to falsely claim that his office has found evidence that foreign governments are secretly funding Democratic candidates in the midterms. Yeah, of course, because Tulsi Gabbard found the wrong answer, right? Yeah, exactly. Keep going. Go back. Yeah. Don't bring 260 people to Atlanta. We've got to find those 11,780 votes.

Exactly. Now Pulte could falsely claim foreign actors have hacked U.S. voting machines, they say, and altered vote totals in favor of Democrats during the midterms, which again, they didn't. Or Trump could instruct Pulte to be present if the FBI agents seize ballots and election records in November, as they did earlier this year in Fulton County, Georgia. Like, just go take all your ballots. We're investigating so you can't count them.

Yeah. And dozens of intelligence officials began receiving notice of their terminations on Thursday, Bill Pulte, the new acting director of national intelligence. An intelligence official who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the potential for reprisal told MS now that the individuals being removed by the Trump administration are officials, quote, who they believe are deep state. Okay.

Intelligence leadership alleges that the fired workers have not provided complete pictures of available intelligence, the official said. The moves come after Pulte's elimination last month, of six political appointees who served under Tulsi Gabbard, the previous director of national intelligence. Now, that would be six people that came in under this administration. Yeah, but probably had something to do with putting those reports together

that found no voter flips, no vote flips. How dare you actually produce intelligence? Okay. Yeah. Now, four former senior intelligence officials told MS now that they had never heard of intelligence officials withholding information from officials above them. The premise is absurd. one of the former officials said.

Another former official, a question how Pulte, who has no experience working in intelligence, would be able to make such a determination so quickly. How do you, who don't know anything about anything? I would say that for two weeks. How do you do that? How do you fire all these people when you literally have no idea?

Hire me to be the president of General Motors and be like, okay, fire half the people. I guarantee you, it's did you touch these reports that found no voter fraud? I guarantee you. Of course. Are you not willing to go along if you, will you, if asked, take bolt cutters to an election office and take their ballots when we tell you to that no, then you're out. I mean, that's it, right?

Yeah, yeah. Quote, I have a real question of how he would know this. This isn't a guy who's familiar with intelligence, said a former official who spoke on the condition of anonymity, again, citing concerns about reprisal. Quote, how is he going to get to the bottom of this and rely on any information with a matter of fidelity. It would be like me taking over a hospital and firing dozens of surgeons in a matter of days. Exactly. It's good analogy. Both former officials noted that Pulte's office itself does not collect intelligence. Good point. The office of the director of national intelligence receives

intelligence from the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and 15 other agencies. He said that a CIA director, John Ratcliffe, for example, would know of such a problem. A fourth former senior intelligence official told MS now that the, quote, overwhelming majority of professional intelligence officers are motivated by a deep and enduring commitment to protect the national security of the United States. They take their oath very, very seriously, the former official added. Though individuals undoubtedly hold a wide range of political views, intelligence officers, and indeed most national security professionals approach their work in a non-political way and deeply resent the idea that doing so somehow confirms this idea

that there is some kind of a deep state. That is absolutely an accurate portrayal of the intelligence community. I have seen some really heated arguments bordering on fisticuffs between low to mid to high range intelligence officials. They get very heated up, but it's not about politics. They get heated up by things like an assessment of Iranian nuclear capability. Like, they fight over the facts and the interpretation of those facts and like the shadings of this intelligence versus that intelligence. Like do we have moderate confidence or high confidence or low confidence?

And that's actually one of the things that the election deniers consistently point. it out about the 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russia. Oh, look, the intelligence disagrees. The community is in disarray. They can't agree on anything. It's just because one was moderate and one was high or something like that. NSA was moderate and the other two, FBI and CIA were high. But that's because it's not really what NSA does.

So they didn't really have the confidence to make a high assessment. It wasn't because they doubted. We don't have any, what they were saying is we don't have any good signal intelligence to contribute to this conclusion. It's really based on human intelligence. That's not really our thing. So we can't get to high. So fine. This is the kind of thing that analysts put their dukes up about, which is great.

You want them to be like really dug in. And, you know, there are the experts. They are the nation's experts on these issues. But deep state out to help one side over the other. Definitely not. Yes, but can we see their mortgage documents? Yeah. I don't, I mean, I can't speak for all of them, but like, it's not a lot of vacation homes,

multiple residences among people in this community. They just make a government pay. Where do you summer, Andy? You know where I summer? I summer the same place I winter and spring and fall. It's called the house. I'm in it now. So, you know, it's pretty simple.

But I just, it absolutely kills me that this guy who knows nothing about intelligence or the DNI, and he brings in this chief of staff who also just knows him and doesn't know anything beyond him. Like, it's totally the blind leading blind. The only two things that these people can, the only thing these two people can accomplish at the DNI is just like blatantly destroying it, not even knowing. what you're swinging the hammer at, just swinging the hammer wildly at walls and furniture and people and whatever gets in your way. Because like, how do you, you know, you got to hit something, you got to destroy it. It's just, it's just pathetic. I'm also getting really sick of

seeing these former intelligence people on television talking about this uniformly negative about Bill Pulte for all the reasons that we've discussed, but then always throwing in this, you know, they should get rid of the DNI, but not like this. Hold on a second. The DNI was created by Congress. It's not Trump or anyone else's decision to just decide to get rid of it. It's created by statute. Like, there is this thing that, like, the president is not actually supposed to obliterate entities that were created by a different branch of government through statute. Could he go to Congress and tell them, get rid of it? I don't want it anymore. I want to keep all the money for it. myself. Yeah, he could and they could vote on that and maybe do it. But like,

separate from the issue of what Bill Pulte is doing. Yeah, it's ridiculous. Like, this is a bad thing. Whether you think DNI was too bloated or you didn't like them when you worked, you know, down the road from them or whatever, not relevant, not relevant to this decision. Not this. Yeah, not this. I don't, you know, well, we'll learn how we can do without a DNI because we don't have one right now. Yeah. We're about to... Barreling right back to the era

when we didn't actually share anything and the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing. And, you know, some of the... Well, 19 hijackers showed up and took us out on September 11th. So that's where it all comes from. But it's easy to forget.

It is. Yeah. Agreed. And like you said, regardless, Bill Pulte shouldn't be in charge of it. No question. that's the issue that we're discussing. And that should be the focus of the discussion. Like Tom Tillis,

no, we should get rid of it, but, you know, okay. Saying we should get rid of it really blunts your criticism that this is the wrong guy to run it. Okay, like if you're okay getting rid of it, then who cares who runs it? Let's bring in, you know, let's bring in the high school football team. It's just like knock it out,

run everybody out of there. I mean, like, you know, come on, people. Yeah. Anyway. All right, we've got some more stories to get to. The next one's actually kind of funny, and we'll get to it right after this quick break. Stick around. We'll be right back.

Welcome back. Okay, Allison, you wrote about this next story at Mullershewrote.com. And today we have TNR's version of it. So the Department of Justice, go with me on this. I'm already going to start laughing. I know. I feel like you always give me these ones that you know I'm going to not be able to hold it together. Okay.

I'm putting on serious face. The Department of Justice accidentally released the second volume of former special counsel Jack Smith's report on President Trump's handling, or shall we say, mishandling of classified documents in a legal case last month, according to a legal filing published on Thursday. DOJ lawyers sent the sealed report to lawyers for Carmen Lineberger, who was charged with stealing the report. by emailing it to herself disguised as a cake recipe. Oh, Carmen.

On June 3rd, DOJ officials handed over discovery items on a flash drive to Lineberger's lawyers. Included in those drives were documents embedded in electronic messages that were required to be disclosed. All sounds fine, right? But no. On June 9th, the defendant's attorneys reported that they found three documents and contacted the government to confirm. if they were supposed to be part of the discovery materials. Hey, did you mean to give us this? Hey.

After a review of the documents, DOJ lawyers confirmed that they were actually copies of Volume 2 of Jack Smith's final report. Oops. She got indicted for sending two copies. They sent them three. Can we just call it a wash? Can we just let this woman go home,

take her cake recipe or whatever it was? one was chocolate cake and one was bun cake if you remember now the defense attorneys told the government they stopped immediately re-reviewing the material before examining the report itself I bet they did and if you're one of those attorneys

and you'd like to reach out to me my signals Mueller she wrote dot 23 I'll keep you confidential anyway they stopped reviewing the material before they read it deleted the discovery materials they had downloaded and handed off the flash drives back to the government. Thursday's legal filing was to notify Judge Cannon, the judge presiding over Trump's classified documents case.

Of course. The accidental leak has to be embarrassing for the government, considering Trump's successful effort to keep Smith's report hidden from the public after he won the 2024 presidential election, the most transparent in history. But you can't see that. the defense counsel could have leaked the documents, but considering that their client was accused of improperly handling them, they chose to follow the rules. Probably not a bad decision by them, I'm just saying. When the situation is ironic, considering Smith's report was all about how Trump allegedly mishandled classified documents by keeping them at Mar-a-Lago instead of returning them to the government. Smith's case wasn't allowed to go to trial, thanks to Eileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, dismissing it on full. flimsy grounds, by the way.

It seems that the public may never know the full details of what Trump did. Now, I don't think that that's as ironic as it is that they accidentally sent the report to the woman's lawyers that they charged with sending reports. I'm with you on that one. I mean, in a story soaked in irony, I feel like that's the deepest puddle. Yeah, I think it was really, I mean, she, well, When her lawyers told her what happened, she must have been like, you got to be shit. What?

They must have all had a big laugh. And you're telling me they didn't read it. Come on. So this is so concerning. It's so important. It's so super sealed that they just sent it to me. And by the way, I just want to say, you know, as a lawyer, I'm available to join the defense team. I'm just saying, as a consultant to help you review discreet.

discovery, I'm here. My fees are very low. In fact, for you, Carmen, no fee. Pro bono help with reviewing discovery in the event that you feel like you need some help. That's all I'm saying. Okay. So. It feels like I remember when Judge Amy Berman Jackson got to read all of the Roger Stone documents before any of.

And they still haven't ever been released. and I'm like, just sit this picture in front of a fire with a warm cup of tea reading through this shit that I want dying to read through. Must be a fun job. Cup of tea or a glass of bourbon. I don't know. That could go either way. Okay. So I want to read the part of the indictment against Weinberger so we can really, really let this kind of wash over us.

The full impact here, okay? The indictment reads, on January 21, 2025, United States District Judge Eileen Cannon presiding over the related federal criminal prosecution issued an order regarding the report, which prohibited, quote, the Department of Justice, its officers, agents, officials, and employees from releasing, sharing, or transmitting the report outside the Department of Justice, or otherwise releasing, distributing, conveying, or sharing with anyone outside of, the Department of Justice any information or conclusions in the report or in the drafts thereof. The order issued by the United States District Judge Cannon has remained in full force and effect since issued on 2021, 2025. And I would say, is it really in full effect at this point now that basically copies of this thing being sent out? It sounds like everyone but us has a copy.

I know. They sent it to, they accidentally sent it to Jack Smith. myth. Yeah. Before he testified and he's like, I sent it right back. I didn't even open it. I would argue, actually, that it's been released, shared, transmitted, distributed, conveyed, and shared again.

So I think they've basically violated all the different terms of that order. Yeah. Mm-hmm. And I feel so left out. I know, right? I feel so left out. love it more than us. Well, I mean, Lineberger, for sure, but she's already proven her, you know, well, she's read it. She's read it. She's got it. It's all up in the, it's all up in the noodle.

Yep. Maybe she even recorded herself reading it. She's, maybe she's got an audio copy. Anyway. Bake the cake, as it were. Yeah. All right. And here's a bit from my article that I wrote on Mueller, she wrote. And by the way, this quickly turned into one of my most popular articles on Sub-Tac. Oh, I bet. I bet. The indictment does not say why Ms. Lineberger sent herself two copies of volume two. So who's going to indict the prosecutors who violated Judge Cannon's order by sending three copies to outside counsel? The 11th Circuit, by the way, was set to hear oral arguments on third-party challenges to Judge Cannon's order blocking the report's release. But on June 30th, that hearing was mysteriously canceled, quote, to be rescheduled at a later date.

So the oral arguments before the 11th Circuit that were supposed to happen on September 28th have disappeared. You know, at some point, if enough people, employees, others, whatever, have actually seen this thing. I think the court's going to be like, you know what? I mean, what's the point? It doesn't need to be sealed any longer because everybody has already seen it. Yeah. We're making our way to that. Yes, indeed. All right, it is that time of the show where you get to hit me in the head with a bat with the presumption of regularity we're going to talk about.

We got a doozy for this week and we'll cover it after this break. Stick around. We'll be right back. All right, everybody, welcome back. Time to Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. This week's installment involves the grand conspiracy, deep state investigation into ex-CIA chief John Brennan et all, present company included. Since late last year, senior officials at the Justice Department and their allies in the news media have been unabashedly discussing a pair of investigations into John O. Brennan, the former CIA director, who's long been one of Trump's most reviled political enemies because, God forbid, he. He unearthed Russian interference in the 2016 election. On Wednesday, Mr. Brennan's lawyers publicly fired back,

putting the Trump administration on notice by filing a lawsuit, that if prosecutors bring charges against him, they intend to fight them by claiming they are an act of vindictive retribution. His lawsuit is chock full of hit me in the head with a bat moments. It has a whole section dedicated to hit me in the head with a bat, the presumption of regularity. I would have loved to see Section 4 hit me in the head with the back. I was dying for them to quote us somewhere.

Didn't happen. But you never know. We got a long way to go with this thing. We do. You should join the lawsuit. I'm intrigued by it. As you know, Allison, we have a settlement here. You and I, I stay out of talking about this so-called case in Florida because of the subpoenas that I've already received as a part of that.

investigation. But this to me is different. This is like grand conspiracy adjacent, right? This is a separate lawsuit. Yeah, because there's something else that's, it's, it's grand conspiracy adjacent, but also there's an additional investigation into Brennan for, I think, lying to Congress, right? Yes, that's correct. Yeah. So it's different. I think it's different. Yeah, it is different. So that's why I'm kind of blurring the line here a little bit. Anyways, so all right, so here we go to the to the papers in Brennan's lawsuit. They say to fully consider those motions, the reviewing judge, now what they're talking about here is he is anticipating that if he gets indicted, actually I should, I should be stronger about this. He makes it very clear in this filing that if he gets indicted, he is going to bring a motion for selective and vindictive prosecution.

Okay. Mostly vindictive, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, so the suit goes on to say, to fully consider those motions, the reviewing judge would need to scrutinize the motivations of the Justice Department officials who directed, oversaw, or undertook those actions to determine whether they violated Director Brennan's rights and specifically whether they were motivated by a desire to vindictively prosecute him as an act of retribution. That scrutiny would be more probing and less deferential to the government than usual because of the Justice Department's recent record of overreaching in this and similar matters, which has negated the traditional, quote, presumption of regularity that generally insulates most government investigative activity from probing judicial scrutiny.

Yeah, and boy, they have a lot of examples too, which I love. And we've talked about them all here in the hit me in a head with a bat segment. So that's kind of a little hat tip to us, I think. A court evaluating Director Brennan's well-founded challenges would do so without granting the deference traditionally afforded to representatives of the government under the presumption of regularity. Traditionally, quote, in absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts presume that government representatives have properly discharged their official duty. and thereby refrain from closely scrutinizing the propriety of their activities. As demonstrated by the above recited litany of irregular activities, however, there is more than clear evidence to the contrary in this case.

As of December 22, 2025, when the undersigned counsel for Director Brennan sent the attached letter to Chief Judge Altonaga, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the department has already engaged in more than enough irregular conduct to lose the presumption of regularity. And the intensified pace of irregular activity since then has only confirmed the need for courts to carefully examine all allegations of government overreaching targeted towards Director Brennan, particularly his vindictive and selective prosecution challenges against any eventual indictment in this case. importantly, the concern about the preservation of records of value to Director Brennan is only heightened by the evidence that this administration has shown itself willing to withhold records that cut against its interests. For example, in the prosecution of Congresswoman Lamanica McIver for interfering with federal officers during a fracas while conducting an oversight visit to an ICE facility, the prosecutors initially refused to provide any discovery. When compelled to do so by the court, it was revealed that significant important discovery material had been lost,

including relevant messages on the phones of federal agents at the scene that had not been collected, and information on a senior official's phone that had been wiped despite the existence of a litigation hold. I don't remember, Alison, us hearing these details when we talked about that case a couple of weeks ago. This is really bad. Like wiping a senior official's phone. Yeah. I mean, it's like, I mean, could be obstruction of justice. Yeah.

I mean, we don't know the facts, but that's certainly in the scope of the possible. Right. And you have to remember this is just one of the litany of examples that you're talking about. The next one. In the criminal prosecution of protesters United States v. Rabbit, that is the Broadview six case. Federal prosecutors balked at the court's request to review the grand jury transcripts. Papa, papa, papa, you don't need to see those. At first, they provided only redacted versions. And then when the judge insisted on the full transcripts, they even reduced the felony charges to

misdemeanors in an attempt to moot out the grand jury proceeding that had produced felony charges. When the judge finally received and reviewed the unredacted copies of the transcript, she observed, quote, I have never seen the types of prosecutorial behavior before a grand jury than I saw in those transcripts. Yikes. In a recent civil case involving the mass termination of grants awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the judge faulted the government for conducting an inadequate search for relevant documents, determined that the government had provided a record that omitted clearly relevant materials, and therefore concluded that, quote, the presumption that, quote, the presumption of regularity gives way in light of these irregularities.

There you go. No more presumption for you. You've been caught with your hand in the cookie jar. We cannot trust you around cookies anymore. No. And here's the last one here. Finally, in a recent challenge, again, this is all from Brennan's lawsuit. Yeah. Finally, in a recent challenge to the termination of federal probationary employees, a district court found the administrative record was a sham. That's a quote that was scattered with innumerable references

to calls, discussions, documents, and decisions that underpin but have been excluded from the government's narrow record. As the judge colorfully explained,

the experience, and I hadn't seen this before and I love this. The judge explained colorfully, the experience of reviewing the government's intentionally

incomplete record was as though one were, quote, being led, blindfolded along a carefully plotted path through a dense unseen wood. Here and there, he may hear a rustle in the trees, feel the dark silhouette of a towering

form, or intuit some other hint at the forest beyond, but never is he afforded an unfettered view of the landscape through which he passes, unquote. I feel like we went full Lord of the Rings on that one. Right? Oh, my goodness. So, who. I mean, I got chills to read that. For sure. I mean, so the whole purpose of this lawsuit is to have the judge sign an order directing the government to preserve all these sorts of materials, right?

Tax messages, emails, internal memos, all that stuff. There's a lot of legal requirements before they're going to get to that. I'm not sure of, you know, we'll see if the judge is comfortable doing it. The judge might be, might say, like, well, they're already required to do all that by the various, like, laws and policies. And so why do I have to, you know, order them to follow the law? Well, it's a pretty obvious answer to that question. But so I don't know that it's 100% they're going to get what they're shooting for here. But it is still, even if they don't get the order they're looking for, it's a really effective first shot. Brennan is going on offense. He's been maligned and vilified by this administration and this clown car of prosecutors,

half of whom are already gone, been fired, left cases, got moved because they wouldn't bring this case. And now they're into like round, God knows what. And they're just, they're doing this as a way of controlling the narrative, at least at this point, in what has been a really long process for him already. So good for them. I think it's an interesting move. Yeah, it's fascinating to me. I don't think I've ever seen a preemptive, vindictive prosecution request to preserve records.

But it's because of hit me in the head with a bat. But it is now kind of something you sort of have to do. And he gave only a handful of tons of examples. And so I think that that's pretty, I think that's pretty fascinating. Yeah, like in normal times, this thing would get dismissed. Right. But we're not there. We're in a time when a judge might look at this and be like, you know what?

Probably needs this. So we'll see it. It'll be interesting to see how this goes. Yeah. All right. That is, well, oh, by one other thing too I wanted to talk about, and this is probably just going to be me talking about this, is that something else we learned this week about what's going on in Reading, Kenya. I meanes' backyard there.

In addition to bringing on fraud guarantee Dmitri Firtas lawyers, de Genova and Tonzing, who should be in prison, they have brought in John U. Tell everybody what John U is famous for. John U, aka the torture guy. He was the number two in the Office of Legal Counsel, which we have referred to before on this show.

That's the part of the Justice Department that's basically the big-headed constitutional lawyers when there isn't a law directly on some issue and the administration goes to DOJ and says, like, what's the policy with respect to sit? Like, for instance, you can't indict a sitting president. So, John, you was the number two in OLC in the Bush administration in the immediate aftermath of 9-11,

when the administration was really pushing the envelope doing basically anything anyone could think of to go after the people who al-Qaeda, who had perpetrated the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, right? Right. And we now, that's what got us to the detention and interrogation program run by the CIA, where we had these undercover sites around the globe where suspected or known terrorists were being interrogated under what we call enhanced interrogation techniques. And they were able to do this because OLC and John You wrote a series of opinions

that basically said what you're proposing to do, all these different techniques that involve like assaulting people and putting them in boxes and putting them in boxes with roaches and just all kinds of psychological coercion and torture is not actually torture. doesn't qualify as torture, and therefore you can keep doing it. Those memos were later pulled and reversed by the Department of Justice and replaced with new guidance, obviously, years later. So that's kind of the thing that he's most famous for. He's been teaching at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law,

which I think is Hastings School of Law. If I have that right, I'm not sure. and he yeah he's a very conservative guy he's on TV a fair amount doing like commentary on things and so they've decided to add him to this team to provide like advice on constitutional issues wow um okay okay i'm just gonna let that one hang out there for a while so the torture memo guy is going to advise you on constitutional stuff All right. Yes.

Not you. Not me. But, but, DeGneva and Tonzig and Quignonez, right? Yeah. All there, like in Eileen Cannonland. That was something else, by the way, in Brennan's lawsuit. He really went hard after him for judge shopping.

Yeah. Because this whole thing is, as I have talked about in-depth before started in Pennsylvania, went to D.C., went to Miami, and then ended up in Fort Pierce, 130 miles from any grand jury. Yeah. which is just, hey, hello, hi, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, a, ridiculous subpoena, when, when, when Janine Piro had a fat, I'll bring all the crimes, you know, because her subpoenas of the Federal Reserve, right, Board of Governors got quashed, just quashed.

No, you can't, you can't do that. You're on a fishing expedition. And she's like, well, I'm allowed to have a fishing expedition. She thinks that's how the law works. I like fish. I'm just saying this would be my last comment on this thing. And I'll go back into my cave as respect to this topic. But if you got to move, if you got to move districts three times going further and further away,

you got to go hundreds of miles away from where the things that you allege happened would have had to have happened to get to the one judge in the country who you're confident can give your investigation a chance to go forward. I'm feeling like you don't have a lot of confidence in your investigation. but I don't know. I'm just me. That's just my view from the peanut gallery. Good observation, sir. Now back into your cave. All right.

All right, I'm in. And everybody else, it's now time for listener questions. If you have a question, there's a link in the show notes, you can click on. I think we got time for one today because we had so much news. Okay, so we're going to go with this one from Michael, New York City, and I picked it again because a couple of them this week really ended up. with the same request. And every once in a while, I think it's good,

even though we've talked about this a bunch. We should bring it up again just to let people know nothing's changed. Michael says, love the podcast. You two are excellent. The corruption of Trump and his family are disgraceful. How can this be stopped? And I understand we have to get the house back in November. And will Trump ever be held accountable?

And I understand, Michael, why you are asking this question, particularly this week in the revelation of Donald Trump's filing of his disclosure, mandatory disclosure forms, which quite frankly, I'm amazed he filed them. He doesn't have like a real history of like following those sorts of laws and rules and things. But nevertheless, he filed them and it turns out he's made like, I don't know, $2 billion in the last year, something like that, mostly off the crypto stuff. $2.2 billion in 2025. 1.4 billion of it is in crypto.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Most of that coming from people overseas, most of whom do business, with the government. So yes, it's a good time to think about this corruption that's happening at a scale that this country's never, ever seen before. But will he be held accountable? Short answer, no. Yeah, I don't think so.

He's not going to be held accountable the way that you want him to be, the way that you think he should be. And there's, you know, there's, you have the Supreme Court to thank for that. It's not going to happen. We have to just, we just got to push forward and keep focus. on how we want the country to be and what kind of people we think are the best to lead it. And I tell you what, I think that if you make Jack Smith,

who, by the way, did a great interview on Deadline White House this week, if you make him the Attorney General, I would put money on him trying to revive the January 6th case because he worked so hard to get it dismissed without prejudice. Maybe you will. And he talked a lot about being able to live. the fact that if you're president and you're unable to be indicted or prosecuted, that that has to toll the statute of limitations. He brought that up in three separate filings.

Really? He did. All right. But who knows? I don't know. I'm sure he would do it if he were tapped to be the attorney general. Of course. But I feel like he's like, damn it, I got to go back to the Supreme Court and find out if my case would have stood.

You know, we don't even know. The way that the Supreme Court set up this immunity deal. is that not, they get to decide on a case-by-case basis, basically, because you've got to file an interlocutory appeal. It gets sent back down to court for the lower courts to decide what is official and what applies to when does immunity apply. And then it goes right back up to them. And we didn't get to that part yet. Yeah. Yeah.

That whole thing would have taken another year. it's so amorphously referred to. I'm not even going to say defined in that in that opinion. And it's so. I think it literally says incredibly narrow. And there are so many things that you cannot possibly rely upon to make that, to prove that case in point, official statements. So like the chances of that there's like, that's the eye of a needle in my judgment.

So I just feel like it's more productive to like, you know, keep marching. Yes. And anyway, I'm sorry that's not the answer you wanted Michael and seem like a great guy, but I think that's where we are. But nobody escapes the ultimate justice. That's right. And July 4th has a special way of, I think we've had three former presidents pass away on the 4th of July. Really?

Uh-huh. I didn't know that. And at least two for sure, Jefferson and Adams both died on America's 50th birthday. Oh, yeah. And if I blow out a candle for America's 250th birthday, I will be making a wish. All right, there you go. We will see what happens this weekend. Otherwise, and forever, Andy and I will be back next week.

Yes. For more hitting me in the head with a bat and more listeners. our questions. Thank you for that question. There is a link in the show notes where you can submit your questions. We got to get back in touch with spin doctors. Yeah, oh my God. That's on my to do list. I'll take care. I got to do that. Yeah, we got to get back in touch. We need a jingle. I mean, this thing is this thing's got legs. Brennan filed a whole lawsuit about it. It's going nowhere, but up. It's number one with the bullet. All right. And at the time, Casey, Casey. I spent some time

listening to that man. Very good. I just do a generic morning drive. Morning drive DJ, you know. Nice. But anyway, we're going to see everybody next week and I hope you have a safe weekend. I know it's going to

be hot and loud there in D.C. and I'm sorry about that where there's like 96 flyover scheduled between $2 million worth of fireworks or something. Yes. I have friends who've left town taking their dogs and left town. They're like, we're out of here.

My dog's going to be doped for like the next 48 hours. Oh, do you get some Gabapentin? Oh, yeah. He has terrible, terrible time. It's so sad. But we're getting through it. We're going to hang out out here in the suburbs and just kind of have a own little fourth of July and, you know.

Get a little thunder shirt. Yes. Put on our thunderwear. Thunderware? Oh, my God. It's got to ride it out. You know one time I accidentally called it a lightning vest. Whoa.

I don't want one of those. I was like, what's that thing called? You should get him a lightning vest. And my friend's looking at me like a what? It's like a thunder shirt. Static electricity doesn't bother you enough. Go full lightning vest. Lightning vest.

All right, everybody. Thanks so much for listening. And hey, if you want to become a patron, we're going to be doing an election night watch party here in San Diego. I've rented out a whole ass bar. And we're just going to sit and we're going to buy you food and drinks. And we're going to sit and watch election results on November. third Tuesday. And if you want an invitation to that, you got to become a patron. It's just

five bucks a month. You get this show, ad free and early. You get to daily beans and beans talk. And all you got to do is chip in five bucks a month. It really helps us out. It helps support independent media. And you can do that at patreon.com slash Mueller. She wrote. So any final thoughts, my friend? No, I think we're good. We covered a lot and buckle in for next week, as always. Yeah, we'll see you then. Thanks so much. I'm Alison Gill. And I'm Andy McCabe. Unjustified is written and executive produced by Alison Gill with additional research and analysis by Andrew McCabe. Sound design and editing is by Molly Hawkey with art and web design by Joelle Reader at Moxie Design Studios. The theme music for Unjustified is written and performed by Ben Folds, and the show is a proud member of the MSW Media Network,

a collection of creator-owned independent podcasts dedicated to news, politics, and justice. For more information, please visit MSWMedia.com.