Jack - Episode 91 | The Hamilton Live (feat. Glenn Kirschner, Pete Strzok, Brian Greer, Dana Goldberg, and Andy McCabe)

Episode Date: August 25, 2024

This week we are sharing the discussion part of our MSW Media live show in D.C. at The Hamilton Live. Big shoutout to the crew at the venue! They are all top notch and we can’t wait to go back!We’ll be back with a regular episode next week to discuss Jack Smith’s filings that are coming due soon!Follow our guestsGlen Kirschner - glennkirschner.com/Pete Strzok - twitter.com/petestrzokDana Goldberg - twitter.com/dgcomedy Follow AG Substack|MuellershewroteBlueSky|@muellershewroteAndrew McCabe isn’t on social media, but you can buy his book The ThreatThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and TrumpWe would like to know more about our listeners. Please participate in this brief surveyListener Survey and CommentsThis Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at the Justice Enforcers level and above:https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://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. I signed an order appointing Jack Smith. And nobody knows you. And those who say Jack is a finetic. Mr. Smith is a veteran career prosecutor. Wait, what law have I moved? The events leading up to and on January 6th. Classified documents and other presidential records.

You understand what prison is? Send me to jail. Hey, everybody. Welcome to episode 91 of Jack, the podcast about all things special counsel. I have a very special treat for you today. We have the discussion that we had live on stage at the Hamilton in Washington, D.C., a discussion between myself, Dana Goldberg, Pete Strzok, Glenn Kershner, Brian Greer, our SEPA expert, and of course, Andy McCabe. So I hope you enjoy it, and we will see you next Sunday when we're going to get to talk about all of the filings that are due this coming week in both. cases. Actually, we have a filing that is due on appeal for the dismissal of the Florida case on the 27th,

and we have August 30th deadlines for what Jack Smith plans on doing moving forward with the DC case in Judge Chuckkin's courtroom. He was originally supposed to hand that in, I believe, August 9th, and he asked if he could have more time to the end of the month, to August 30th, the last day of the month, that court is in session. So we'll be covering all that on the next jack. So in the meantime, enjoy this discussion. All right. Okay, so should we, okay, here we go.

Bachelor number one. Yes. Not a bachelor. For the record, my wonderful wife is in the audience. I'm not a bachelor. Yes. That's how you handle that. That's right.

That's how you handle the mainstream media. Andy, I have a question. for you about the Harris-Walls campaign from a national security perspective. You and I talk on the Jack podcast a lot about the dangers that Trump posed to our national security, even just with the documents case. But now we have a chance to elect Kamala Harris and Tim Walls, and that, I think, in and of itself is incredible. But talk a little bit about how this could impact national security, especially this election, and especially, Especially when the Oval Office now has a cloak of immunity around it.

We have to keep people like Donald Trump out. Yeah, I mean, there's so many ways that we could answer this question for hours, right? But I think there's a couple of basics that people should focus on. And the first is, of course, neither of the two of them, Waltz and Harris, have been accused of stealing national defense information, classified information, and hiding them in places like this or the bathroom around the corner. So that's...

We should have stacked up boxes on the front of the stage. I know it's a low bar, I got it. It's a low bar, but they're over it. So I give them credit for that. All right. Neither of them incited a riot on our capital fueled by positive messages to militia members and racists

to kind of stop the peaceful transfer of power. again, another low bar, never happened ever before, but these two are over it. You know, more seriously, the thing that makes us successful, particularly on the world stage, there's a lot, there's having the greatest military in the world, there's having the money and the resources to be able to make effects happen on the ground, but primarily it's consistency, to be a consistent ally and supporter of those nations that are in the same fight with us for, to be a consistent ally. democracy and against autocracy. And Tim Walton and Kamala Harris are two people who will support that fight, unlike the other guy who's threatening to collapse NATO, who coesies up to dictators, who outwardly admires Vladimir Putin who's wreaking havoc across Ukraine.

So there's a thousand reasons why we are safer as a nation and the world is a safer place if he's not behind the stick. Yeah, and I think the thing that strikes me is how the rest of the globe and the world leaders see us in that light. And I can't even imagine, maybe Pete, you can talk to this, the amount of damage that was done to our partnerships with other intelligence agencies globally and how that impacted our ability to be trustworthy to other nations. but I'm assuming, you know, when Biden came in or when we elect Harris and Walls, that, you know, the trust is kind of back. I mean, it's tough to do because it isn't, trust is easy to lose and hard to regain.

And part of the problem when you're talking about is. The reservoir of trust. First is, like, the amount of intelligence sharing that goes on between the United States and foreign nations, both ways is extraordinary. And we rely not just on, you know, the Canada, the UK, Australian, New Zealand, but a wide variety of books going both ways.

And so when somebody like Trump so obviously compromises national security, whether he's allegedly sitting in the White House, sharing foreign allied information with the Russians in the second, first week of office, whether he's then talking about, you know, with Abe down at Mar-a-Marlago going out overhead. Oh, yeah, you got to, you're like.

Street it like you like it. Choke up on it. I feel that's what you. I think that's what you guys say, right? Choke up a little, there you go. Yep, yep. I should not be the one that knows how to use something shape like this so close to my face, by the way. Be careful.

You shouldn't either. That's how it starts. Yeah, because if you move it away, they have to turn it up and that's what a feedback starts. So if he's sharing, if allies are looking at the way he treats classified information, they're necessarily going to pull back and not share with the U.S. But the problem is that doesn't stop when he leaves because information doesn't just disappear. It's not something a foreign nation can take back. So if you're sitting in London, if you're sitting in Canber, if you're sitting in Paris, and you're trying to decide whether to share something with the United States now,

in the back of your mind is the real possibility that Donald Trump is going to be sitting in the White House in five months. And so that information is not going to disappear. So unfortunately, it's not a simple, hey, it's good with Biden. It's going to be good with Harris. Because right now, around the world, people are sitting, truly thinking, appalled, worried, about what Donald Trump is going to do, whether he's going to blurt it out to some businessman, whether he is going to take it back to Maraago or bury it with Ivana. It is not something that goes away.

So my worry is it's not a problem limited to Trump. It is something that Trump has brought on to our entire nation, and something we're going to have to deal with as long as on political scene. Yeah, I agree. And, you know, I think about that a lot because the chilling effect that, you know, what Donald Trump has done and what Donald Trump has done, continues to do in these cases, the chilling effect on other witnesses who are willing to come forward and talk to law enforcement or our global partners being willing to come and talk to us,

you know, because he's still trying to get this stuff out, you know, through trying, you know, even if it's just motions that he's filed to release witness lists and testimony, that can't be hopeful. And, you know, I think it happens too often. And remember Pete's very articulate comments, when the Mara Lago case comes back and we're talking about immunity there, Trump is going to have to argue

that his ability to designate these classified records as personal, that being prosecuted that infringes on the powers of the presidency and the importance of the presidency. As you've heard, it's the exact opposite, right? Like what he's done has compromised the presidency and our ability to kept secrets so much that there's no argument.

We'll see what the Supreme Court does, but there's no argument, I think, that that actually infringes on the presidency to prosecute someone for doing what he did. Very true. Glenn, my friend Glenn, you're a veteran. We actually have a few veterans on the stage right now. Thank you for your service.

I wanted to ask you about your thoughts on the attacks on Tim Walz's military service, because I know that this, like me, incenses you. Yeah, they're flipping disgusting. And I wouldn't say flipping, but I don't work group. So I'm going to go with, they're flipping. They're flipping, disgusting.

And the fact that mainstream media insists on now obsessing about and asking him and others at every turn, well, he only served 24 years. He only served 24 years. And then he got out a few months before his unit deployed, notwithstanding the fact that he deployed before. But I find it disgusting that anybody's military service, anybody's service to this country,

gets mocked and ridiculed. And, you know, 24 years, I only served six and a half years active duty as an Army Jack. My pop retired as an Army reservist after more than 25 years. And what I love about Tim Walls, the more, I didn't know who the hell Tim Walls was until recently, but the more you listen to him and watch him, the more you feel like he's like your pop, he's like your brother, he's like your uncle, he's a real person. He talks like a real person, and something that I think we're going to begin to give

him more and more credit for. He's a really good messenger. But, you know, messaging is important, and we make fun of, you know, the Dems, we don't message that great, but you have Donald Trump, who's good at messaging, right, these three-word mantras, build the wall, drain the swamp, lock her up, stop the, you know, he's like a fascist mother goose, but it's like an earworm, right? Okay, that was Brian Tyler Cohen's, my buddy's line, so I have to give him, credit, but I love that line so I used it. But listen, like Tim Walls, you know, one of my favorite lines,

mind your own damn business. Get out of my bedroom, get out of my womb, mind your own damn business. And how about we're not going back, right? So, you know what? We're beginning to message. So both Walls and Harris are people and candidates of substance, deep substance and experience,

but they're also getting pretty damn good at messaging, and that's important. Very well put. Yeah, I want to give whoever is running the Harris Walls' comms team a big old hug and a lot of drinks if they drink because they are doing a hell of a job with messaging. They really are. Finally, finally.

Dana, I have a question for you. Before we take a quick break, you have raised, my friend, you have raised tens of millions of dollars to support LGBTQ plus issues. And I wanted to ask you. you your thoughts about Harris and Walls and their records. They're very strong records on LGBT Q plus issues.

They really are. I can say this, and I think most of you know, the Harris-Biden administration is the most pro-equality administration we've had in our history as a country, thank God. And gotta give props to Joe, even before Obama came out, Joe pushed him right into the limelight. It was like, yes, we support marriage equality.

And Obama had to, he had to evolve. and a lot of people do on that. Harris has been there on the front lines since she was Attorney General and probably even before that. In California, when Prop 8 went through and they would not do marriage licenses, she got on the phone with

the person who was supposed to be giving these out and said, this is the Attorney General of California, start issuing these marriage licenses now. And they did. As Vice President, she and Biden Harris have protected people in the federal jobs, that's not the right way to say it.

Say it again? Federal workforce, thank you so much, with non-discrimination protections. They have fought for our trans community to have health care. They are a hell of an administration, and I know that there are a lot of people in here that even if you're not part of the LGBTQ community of children who are, and they are your pride and joy, and you will fight to the death for them. So, Harris will continue that on. Now Wall's amazing.

We've talked about this before. He knew that at the high school he coached football at, that he wanted to start and be part of the administration, that visibility for their gay straight alliance, because he knew how powerful would be if a football coach was the voice of a gay straight alliance for kids. That is the man that he is. In 1999, 1999, since he's been the governor,

He has signed health care for trans kids into law there. Also, his state is a safe place for families that may have to flee states where they live in, like Texas in Florida, to go get health care for their trans children in his state. He has signed that. He has been on the front lines for a very, very long time. He has always been for marriage equality. He never had to evolve on that topic. And the two of them together would get shit done.

Harris, what she did, you talked about this a second ago, Clarence Thomas, when he overturned Roe v. Wade, what did he say? We need to revisit Griswold. We need to revisit Obergafel. You know what he didn't say we need to revisit? Loving versus Virginia. And what we did is a community is when they went to go threaten our marriages. Harris signed the respect for marriage act. And we are the ones that protected interracial marriage. And Clarence Thomas, I don't know if you notice, but your wife is white. Very white, D.C. Like Storm the Capitol White. She's very...

Very white. It's also a new paint color at Sherman Williams. But listen, it sells very well down in Florida. This administration, it's literally life or death for this community. If Trump were to get back in, God forbid, and he will not, there'll be the trans man in the military. He will take away health care. They will come after marriage equality.

I do HRC gala around this country. Please don't think that this is safe. They are talking about it behind closed doors. they want to come after the marriages, and they will do it. We cannot let them. So just remember, as you're having conversations with other people that care about humanity and empathy, this isn't just about the presidency. There's a very good chance of Lido and Thomas are going to retire, and we need those seats.

It is about the Supreme Court, and it's about keeping that. So this would be a hell of a ticket to advance the LGBTQ movement in this country, and actually they care about people. They truly deeply care about people. Yeah, that's why I like to say that abortion is on the ballot in all 50 states. Absolutely. The quality is on the ballot in all 50 states.

Even if you don't have an initiative on your ballot, we have to think about the Supreme Court because that's kind of the, I mean, that's the center of the wheel for everything. And right now it's, I hate them. All right, so that's my creative phrasing. But we have to take a quick break, but we're going to be right back, and we're going to talk a lot more about the headlines.

So everybody, stick around. We'll be right back. So everybody, you ready for some hot notes? All right, first up, I have a question for Brian Greer. Ted Cruz is trafficking and disinformation again. This time he is tweeted, if Joe Biden and Kamala Harris actually gave the Ayatollah the names of undercover Mossad agents in Iran, it would be a level of betrayal of Israel and America difficult to fathom.

Now, you responded on Twitter, my friend. You said, quote, a U.S. senator recklessly parroting anti-U.S. propaganda from the Iranian regime in order to score political points is a level of betrayal that is difficult to fathom. So your former CIA, secret agent man. Talk about like seriously, though, how egregious this is. I'm thinking back to the Mueller days, the Nunes, midnight ride to the capra Uber ride. I'm thinking of Ron Johnson,

taking Rudy Giuliani, Durkotch, and shokin shit and spewing it to the Congress. And it's so frustrating to me that we're actually laundering propaganda through our Congress. So talk about what Ted Cruz did. Yeah, it's a sad commentary on how far the Republican

Party has fallen over the last 10 to 15 years. And even just look at how we've been dealing with foreign propaganda in our elections. You know, in 2016, it was a covert effort by the Russians, right? It ended up being not that covert, but that's how they intended to be. And then we've gone from that to everything you live through the Mueller days with Ron Johnson. And it became basically overt at that point, right? There was no one... Hello, my baby.

Hello, my honey. No one in the Republican Party is hiding it anymore, laundering Russian disinformation like Ron Johnson did. The same thing J.D. Vance has done with Ukraine funding. But even then, not one to defend J.D. Vance, but at least that's a legitimate policy discussion. How much should we fund Ukraine? Like, that's within the realm of at least a normal political discourse. You shouldn't repeat Russian disinformation when you do it, but it's still a fair topic. Ted Cruz, in what he did, there's no goal in that, in what he said, which he knows is made up. It's sourced from a Kuwaiti newspaper sourcing it to an Iranian official. Come on.

And he knows that and he does not care. And that just shows how far they have fallen. His only goal is to hurt the Biden administration and to do it on the eve of the hostage negotiations with Israel and Hamas, where lives are on the line. Sorry, I don't have a joke. Lives are on the line with American and Israelis

and he does not care. That's how far they've fallen. I have no words beyond that. No, it's really, it's kind of hard. to fathom that you know as you said in your tweet in mockery of him it the republican party to me when I was growing up used to be the party of security and intelligence and I don't mean like smart intelligence I mean like intelligence intelligence and law enforcement I guess is the way to put it law and order and everybody like when whenever the Republicans come out and say the FBI is full

of Democrat of deep state leftist I'm like are you fucking kidding me? Did you know those guys when we were there? Because I don't remember those people when I was there. Yeah, right? Yeah, it's just it's pretty astonishing. Andy, I wanted to ask you

about your thoughts, and we talked a little bit about this for the Jack podcast that'll be out on Sunday about the alleged Iranian hackers. Because you remember, you guys remember, I think it was in 2021 a couple of guys were arrested,

Iranians, arrested for posing as proud boys, threatening people that if the Democrats, you had better vote for Donald Trump. And now we've got Roger at AOL.com. No, excuse me. Robert. Robert Stone, not Roger Stone. Everybody knows Roberts are Iranian spies.

Come on. With AOL accounts. On dial-up? Anyway, I was just very, like, and the first thing I thought was bullshit. This is the Trump campaign. They want to get out ahead of all the oppos. Research is going to come out against JD Vance. So they have said they've been hacked, and now they're, you know,

they give it to these news sources, and the news sources is like, we're not printing that. And they're like, come on, but you really want to. I'm not sure what to believe here, but that's kind of the problem, isn't it? Yeah, for sure. There's no really undeniable connection at this point between what Microsoft warned us all about and what the Trump campaign claims to have happened. Now, it may have actually happened that way. We know the Iranians have tried to meddle in the elections before. We know they've tried to do it with cyber hacks. They tried it in 2020. It was not successful, but it was similar to the way that it may have happened here. So Microsoft comes out.

and says we know that a group out allied with the Iranian intelligence service targeted a campaign with a spearfishing campaign that they launched from the email account of a trusted advisor and then of course we get Robert and his leak to the media and if you listen to the way folks in the media have been talking about that they're really in the way they characterize it it's clear there's a lot of reticence about going all in on this story. And there's definitely a, I think, an underlying concern among commentators that what you're getting from Robert may not have actually been hacked from the Trump campaign, whether they

were hacked or not. So there's still a lot to be seen here. But at the end of the day, what you have, it's quite possible that what you have here is two actors, the Iranians and the Trump campaign. playing with information in a way that's designed to obfuscate and confuse and kind of flood the zone with false information or irrelevant information because that is actually a time honored, and Pete, correct me here if I'm wrong, but a time honored Russian technique. Flood the zone with misinformation and lies and conflicting information again and again and again over and over about things that are provably true or false. lie about them anyway, and eventually the population just checks out. They're disgusted. They can't follow this anymore. It's too hard to try to tease through it, so they stop caring and stop

participating. And so that may be the end game in this entire thing. I mean, if they really wanted them to get out, they should have given them to James Comey. I mean, that probably would have been a better. I would have worked better. But I don't think that happened here, but you never know. At least I'm not saying too soon anymore. It's okay now. I feel, I'm starting to feel a little more comfortable. 2016, we're all still fucking mad about it. You're going to let that go, Pete.

It's just, uh, can you speak quick, Andy, to what, if that happens, you're advising a campaign, how do you not report it to the FBI when that happened? It's, you know, that's just, uh, absurd. Okay, there's a little bit of water under the bridge between the Trump. campaign in the FBI. I get it. But nevertheless, there's no world in which you don't report that. And I think they actually looking quite stupid for not having reported it immediately. Now, supposedly, they've met with the FBI, and they had a great meeting, and it was beautiful. I mean, the Biden administration literally reported it immediately. Immediately. Yeah. Well, he was asked a while

ago, if you were given hacked information from a foreign adversary, would you report it to the FBI? And he's like, we'd have to see what it was first. He said absolutely not. George Stephanopoulos, asked him that question in the Oval Office. And he said, well, I think I would take it to see how good it was. Unless it was an Epstein file, and then, ah, we have to hide. We don't want to.

Take it over to Meadows's fireplace. Pete, question for you. Trump is trying to postpone his sentence. sentencing in Manhattan, pulling out every trick in the book in his letter to do so. It's unfair. Biden is in charge of the prosecution. When he pulls out the fake accordion, the lies are happening. The more nervous he gets, the faster the accordion.

I still want you to recuse because you're a conflicted judge, your bad judge. I don't like your people. And now your daughter supports Kamala since the candidate changed. So, yeah, so, you know, I mean, we could talk a little bit. I'm going to talk to Glenn about the third motion to recuse. Third motion to recuse. But I wanted to ask you what you thought about him trying to postpone his sentencing. Do you think that he will get his wish here in Manhattan?

Or do you think we will see, well, first of all, they're going to decide on the immunity issue by September 16th. And then the sentencing is on the 18th. Yeah, I don't think he is. I mean, as I understand it, there are three different arguments. The first two are absolutely frivolous. This last one does touch on the Supreme Court's immunity ruling, and to the extent things are admissible as evidence, and the problem is the Supreme Court's ruling,

and I defer to Glenn and Andy and the attorneys in the room, but my read of it, and those I respect, is it is abysmally, horribly ill-defined, and it is not clear to anybody reading it, whether a prosecutor, a judge at the district court level, at the circuit court level, what exactly it is that the Supreme Court? court is saying in it with specificity. So I don't think Judge Merchant is going to grant this.

I do suspect he is going to sentence him that that will go ahead. I don't think that sentence will be implemented. In other words, you know, if he is going to jail, you know, report on Monday to Rikers, I suspect that will be suspended until whatever point comes. And yeah, so short answer. It's like 18 people just came in their seat when you said that, by the way. They're like, 19, 19 people. Take that energy, go to vote blue, and use that energy and donate $25 for your excitement. That's a very good time to pitch that. Yes, thank you.

But no, short answer, I don't think he's going to throw it out. I do think he'll get sentenced. I fully expect it's going to be appealed. It is not going. And all the more reason to elect Kamala Harris is that a black female prosecutor president can see over sending Donald Trump to jail, whether in the federal system or in the various state systems. So, Glenn, I briefly mentioned it,

but recently Donald Trump had a fit on truth social, saying that Judge Mershan has denied my gag order again. And I think what he was trying to say was that he actually denied his recusal again. Judge Mershan hasn't made a ruling on the gag order for two months. Just throwing that out there. I think he was talking about the fact that Judge Mershon said, no, again, I'm not going to recuse myself.

Talk about this, I think now, third time asking him to step aside for bullshit. Yeah, and Judge Mershahn summarily dismissed it in about a two and a half page ruling, and he even got a little poetic because he said, innuendo and mischaracterizations do not a conflict make. Which I thought was, for a judge, that's pretty damn poetic. So let me pull back to the Supreme Court for a minute, follow up on what Pete was saying, because let me say this as clearly and concisely as I can. The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution is unconstitutional. And that is also quoting one of our preeminent constitutional scholars,

he'll read a mark. because in not one but two places in the Constitution, it makes plain that a president has some responsibilities to the law and can be prosecuted to take care clause. The president shall take care to faithfully execute the laws of the country. That's kind of the opposite of the president may violate the laws of the country with impunity and immunity. And the second place, it says even if a president is impeached,

by the House and convicted in a Senate trial on those articles of impeachment, he can still be indicted, tried, convicted, and punished for the exact same conduct, in case anybody wanted to try to apply double jeopardy to that. So they ruled the Constitution as unconstitutional. We actually have a governmental remedy for that. We have impeachment investigations in the Congress, and we have criminal investigations at the Department of Justice, and people will jump to the conclusion, well, they're not going to be successful. It doesn't matter. They have to be done.

People also said, well, the J6 House Select Committee investigation, what can they do? They can't bring charges. They can't prosecute. What are we going to get out of it? What did we get out of it? We got some blockbuster public hearings that prodded my beloved DOJ into wakefulness and actually got them investigating the crimes they should have been investigating two years earlier. So that's my take on the Supreme Court. I mean, they have to be held accountable. We also got Josh Hawley running away. What's that?

We also got Josh Holly running away in fear. Yeah, that young man's heels never touched the ground on the way out of the Capitol. So circling back, I agree and disagree with something Pete said. And I disagree, and it breaks my heart to disagree. I don't know that Donald Trump is going to be sentenced on September 18. And here's why.

I do believe on September 16th, Judge Mershan, Justice Mershan, because they got everything asked backwards up in New York, even though I was born in Brooklyn. Judge Mershahn, I think, will deny the motion to just throw the charges out, the conviction out, because of this hairbrain presidential immunity ruling from the Supreme Court. But then there's this two-day period between the 16th

and the 18th. The sentencing is on the 18th. And because immunity is one of those things that you can have, you can take. an interlocutory appeal. Fancy word for, you can appeal something before you're sentenced, before the case is over. I fear that Donald Trump will be flooding the appellate courts,

both state and federal, trying to make sure in those 48 hours, because it's an immunity ruling, he wants to appeal it, and he doesn't want to go to sentencing on the 18th. I hope I'm wrong, and Pete's right. I hope he sentences him on the 18th. He will almost certainly stay execution of the sentence. In other words, not order him.

immediately into confinement while the case works its way through the appeal. I hope he does sentence him because then he will be a convicted and sentenced felon who's trying to retake the reins of governmental power. That's a really good point because we had always said, you know, if they have to decide the immunity thing by the 16th, I think the judge is going to say no, there's no immunity here on these few pieces of evidence that you brought to me and then there wouldn't be enough time, enough runway for him to get an appeal out before the sentencing happened. but there is that 48-hour window, so we'll see what ends up happening.

This is just, I worry that if they say we're going to lock him up, but I'm going to wait on it, the fuckery that's going to happen between that day and the election is going to be horrifying with the voters because he's going to do everything he can knowing he's going to prison, not might, but know he's going to prison if he loses this election. So, I mean, I know it's hard because you don't want to postpone until after, because God forbid something goes wrong and he ends up back in the White House he's going to have a DOJ and get rid of everything.

But if we do sentence him on the 18th then he gets to use that whole, you know, politicization of the whole sentencing of they're coming after me. Look what they're trying to do. They're locking me up because they know I'm going to win this election. I still want them to sentence him to jail.

I'm just worried about that month between then and November 5th. Yeah, I agree. Yeah. And if they can come after me for falsifying 34 business records to cover up and cash money for a porn star payment. They could come after you too.

Thank you. Thank you. Those have been the headlines. Those have been the hot notes. Everybody, we've got one more segment. Then we're going to take some questions. We'll be right back after this brief break. Everybody, welcome back to the Daily Bean's Live. Thank you, thank you. Good evening. Good evening. Okay, so this is an important segment. Thank you.

Well, well left. You're right. Right? But I can't remember what comedian was, but he was like, oh, Mitch Hedberg. The problem with a great laugh is we can tell exactly when you're not laughing. That's true. That's when I hit that joke and I was like, nothing from you on that. Oh, awesome.

Laugh. Didn't think that joke was funny. All right. So I wanted to talk about something that is very, very important. And not just so we know what the Trump plan is, but so that we know how to talk to people in our communities. because the number one return, greatest return on investment, on getting out the vote, is talking to people that you know, whether it's family, friends, community members, somebody that you know at your church, at your synagogue, somebody who bags your groceries,

the person who does, you know, whatever. Like, people in your community, you know that there may be either low-information voters, and that's not an insult. There's just a lot of people out there who don't pay attention to things as much as we pay attention to them. I remember being at a bar doing karaoke, and Roger Stone came up on the screen. He was on CNN, and I'm like, I fucking hate that guy. And everyone's like, who's that?

And I'm like, have you seen who killed Roger Rabbit? It's like him, except worse and evil. It's Roger Stone. How do you not know Roger Stone? And they're like, you need to get out more. I'm like, I am out. I'm a karaoke. But talking to people, I think, you know, if you postcard,

you get about like a 4 or 5%, return on people getting out to vote. If you phone bank, I think it's like 7%. Knocked doors, it's like 9%. Text banking is like 2 to 3%. Talking to someone you know who trusts you, 86% of the time you can get them to go out and vote. That is just massively different. And the reason I wanted to bring this and tie this into Project 2025 is because literally inside of Project 2025, there's something for everyone in Project 2025. There is something in your life that will be utterly fucked if they get into office and implement 2025 no matter who you are. So you need to know, understand Project 225,

find out that person who you want to get to the polls, find out what they care about that's in Project 2025 and tell them about it. Pitch it that way. I was with Stephanie Koff, who is Lincoln's Bible, we did a live show in New York, and she's been personally impacted by gun violence. And she said, it is not beneath me to beg the people in my life to please go out and vote because this has impacted us personally. So I just wanted to kind of keep that in the back of your head as we talk about this, and I want to ask you,

let's start with Brian. Something near and dear to my heart, Schedule F, which was a program, that Donald Trump tried to stand up and did for, I think, a minute before, or, you know, because he fired me before he did Schedule F. He wished he had Schedule F when he fired me

because he, the only way he could get me out of my job was to move my job across the country and get me to quit. And so, Schedule F means you now take civil servants, you make them at-will workers, right? right to work workers so that you can fire them for whatever you want. It's never been very easy to fire a federal worker. So talk a little bit about how Project 2025 will impact the federal workforce because I think they're looking at getting rid of about 50,000 people and it's not just the political appointees. They're looking at GS as well, general schedule. Yeah, I know all night

we've been preaching to the choir and I assume with Schedule F that's going to be especially true. So I'll speak for a second to the three people in the room who aren't federal employees or federal contractors. I'll explain it to you three. The rest of you take your phones out. Yeah. So there's two flavors of what they want to do to dismantle the federal government, I'd say. There's the way that they're going to do, which is not legal, but they're going to try to present it as legal, which is Schedule F, which is say, we're going to create this new category based on some ambiguous reading of federal law about the federal

workforce and strip those people from civil service protections. Those will be senior level people in a quote policy making function, which as you know, it's a lot of freaking people. We don't know how many 50,000 is sort of estimate. But then there is a whole other flavor of this, which is like, fuck it, let's just call it that, which is the JD Vance model of we're going to get rid of even more than that. If we think anyone in the federal workforce, and he said this, I'm parroting him, anyone in the federal workforce who we think is disloyal, we're going to get rid of them. And you know what? courts come try to enforce it if you rule against us so what again this is what his words he said so what try to enforce it in the immunity this is even before

the immunity decision so now with this immunity decision emboldening them to ignore courts as well they're gonna I would think try to implement that more extreme version or do other things like you but for a whole agency let's move the EPA to San Antonio you know there'd be a whole fight about funding for that and everything like that, but that would be another flavor. And I think in terms of talking to people, look, let's be honest, defending the federal workforce is probably not the most politically, you know, persuasive issue, but talking about how the federal government affects people's

everyday lives, I think is, and you can go by agency. Corporate America, first of all, should really freaking care about having a functional federal workforce. But if you get rid of that expertise, what's going to happen to CMS? What's going to happen to Social Security Administration? What's going to happen to your Medicare to the environment? I think we'll talk a little bit about law enforcement. Or at the CIA, if you take all those people who've worked 20 and 30 years at the CIA, get rid of them, that place is going to become dysfunctional.

It hurt us across the board. And the last thing I'd say, and this is what drives me crazy, that the media barely focuses on this. They wrote an article in the post just real quick. They focused on the impact on the D.C. economy. I'm like, come on. That is like the least of the problems with dismantling the thorough workforce. Anyway, talking about it, how it affects everyone, is imperative, and the media is just really ignoring it. Hey, can I add one thing to that real quick?

You're absolutely right, and the impact of the details of Schedule F are going to be devastating. But remember, you don't have to fire these, you don't have to actually fire anyone. All you have to do is put Schedule F in place and communicate that if there's any experience, that's perceived as disloyalty, you will be fired. It's organized crime rules. You don't have to kill everyone. You just have to beat up one guy and everyone else gets in line. So everyone, there are many, many people in the federal workforce who will change the way they think about their jobs, the way they do their jobs, the courage they have to speak up to their supervisors or their bosses when they think something is wrong.

That will go away. and on a day-to-day basis, the decisions that are made and not made as a result of that climate of fear based on the politicization of our professional government agencies will, it will be decades before we can fix that damage, if ever. That's, I think, the most important is it is decades of expertise that will be lost, and it will take decades, decades to rebuild it. Yeah, and a little bit, to go a little bit further, Andy, the FBI in Project 2025 is absolutely prohibited from engaging in activities that would combat misinformation and disinformation. Yeah. So you would not know. Yeah, because all of a sudden we're pro-disinformation.

Like, I can't even get my head around some of these things. But it's true. It's there. Read it, share it as much as you can. This is the playbook that they've been writing for years and that they're now. you know, Donald Trump is running away from publicly because he knows it's toxic. But Russ Vote, his quarterback.

Oh, we covered it yesterday. It was beautiful. On this thing is giving interviews to people that are being surreptitiously taped and then shown on TV where he says, yeah, yeah, we're saying that. But this is really what we're doing. So, yeah.

I mean, the FBI has been dealing with and communicating with social media platforms for years. and typically it's around things like extremism. When ISIS uses Facebook to recruit new operatives, the FBI will bring that content to the attention of Facebook and simply say, we think that this content violates your terms of service. We'd like you to review it. And usually it does, and so they take those things down.

That's the extent of the communication. There's no political arm twisting, you know, we want to take all Republicans off of Twitter. There was from the Trump White House. Yeah, I'm just saying that it doesn't happen at the FBI level. But the nonsense about Twitter and the infamous Twitter files

and Elon Musk's very strategic kind of manipulation of that story, that's what gets us to this point. That's actually in Project 2025. The FBI will be prohibited from essentially interacting with these companies that have such a massive impact on people's communication,

and the way that extremists and bad guys and people use those platforms to do their kind of evil deeds. Yeah, and they're actually trying to prohibit the FBI from engaging in activities related to combating the spread of misinformation, period, not even just with social media. So that's extremely frightening when you think about the impact. When the FBI goes to the social media companies, it's not because even it's misinformation, it's because a foreign malicious actor is behind that account. Right. That is what they are telling them.

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Pete, let's talk a little bit about how this impacts our intelligence agencies, Project 2025, and how that reaches people in their everyday lives. Yeah, so I think it's a lot of nightmare for real. I do agree with Andy that you can't, I don't think any administration can wholesale turn every agent and an analyst in the FBI or within the Department of Defense, but what they can do is neuter them, right? They can say, we have these priorities, and most of you, whoever you're working, counterintelligence, counterterrorism,

we're moving you all to the border, and you're going to work immigration. A big chunk of people may quit, which is great. We're reducing the size of the deep state. But when it comes to the intelligence community, I think a lot of folks, if you think back in our nation's history to the last time we had wild abuses of the presidency during the Nixon years, Watergate, one of the main things about Watergate was Nixon leaning on the CIA to say, hey, look, can you go to the FBI and and tell them to back off on this investigation of the burglary. And that coupled with the things that the CIA was doing overseas, you had through the Church and Pike committees,

a new, robust set of intelligence committees on the Hill and an oversight of the intelligence community by Congress. Now, think if you have the ability to say, I want to take everybody, give me the roster of everybody working the CIA and the FBI, take those names and run them against the FEC, the Federal Election Commission database. Anybody who donated to a Democrat,

I'm pulling the clearance. There's no appeal. You cannot, that the granting of a clearance is absolutely a presidential right. So you clear out folks, take away anybody who voted for a Democrat, and then find the people who donated to Trump. And those are my SACs's of field offices.

Those are my chiefs of station overseas. When you couple that with this immunity ruling, say Trump goes to the CIA and says, look, I know for the past 50 years you've been focused overseas, But I really need you to start doing some work on subversive elements in the United States. I really need you to go break into these democratic leaders in blue states and put in microphones.

I need to start trailing people. So again, do I think the large, overwhelming majority of CIA officers, the FBI agents, are going to say absolutely no way, I won't do it. Might they go to the press? They might. But you're not looking to change an entire organization. You're looking to find a group of 50, 60, 80 people

who can go out and do really awful and terrible things and have the training and the ability to do it. So those are the sorts of things that are at stake. And again, thanks to the Supreme Court, whether or not that's legal doesn't matter. Because the president is absolutely immune, and he can call in that group of 50, 60 people, say, here's your preemptive pardon.

I'm going to tell you to do these little things. Here's your pardon in advance. I just need you to go do it. So we could go on and on and on. But suffice to say, this is not anything that anybody should be sitting easily, resting easily, in terms of saying, because when it comes, oh, you know, their employee rights,

we can get a class action lawsuit, we can file wrongful termination, it won't matter. Trump will not care. He does not care. A judge issues an injunction. Make me. The marshal is going to do it?

Who does the, who do the marshals report to? Head of the Marshal service? What's the president of the United States? Okay, judge, where's your gun in handcuffs? Make me, make me. They can't. And he will not listen. So all this high-minded,

idea we're going to challenge it in the court is not going to mean the goddamn thing. So again. And I'll just reiterate when the post wrote about this issue, they wrote about how it impact property values in Loudoun County, not all the things you just talked about. And for your Lawton County residents, it will impact your property values in Loudoun counties. Oh, no.

You're kidding. Well, there you go. That's how you would approach the subject. I thought that's where you went to France. Let me tell you what's going to happen to your property value. Are you ready? Glenn, I wanted to ask you about something in Project 2025 that I thought you might

really be passionate about, and that's the independence of the Department of Justice. Project 2025 wants the Department of Justice to control state and local prosecutions, DA's, attorneys general. And this is all stemming from the fact that he's got state prosecutions against him, that he really can't control, even as he's president. Because when he was president and had Bill Barr, he was

able to quash a lot of investigations into himself and his friends and get his friend's sentences commuted and get them off the hook. But he didn't, he was so frustrated that he didn't have that capability of doing that at the local level. And I know that this really burns you. So talk a little bit about that. Yeah, Ed, and you even wonder if he needs Project 2025 to corrupt and weaponize the Department of Justice. Think about what he did last term and then we'll get to what he might be able to do if 2025 is implemented and it reaches down into the states. But, you know, last term, he really did corrupt and weaponize the Department of Justice. There's a special place in hell for a guy named Jeffrey Clark, right?

I wouldn't even call him if we did have an oil spill. There's a special place in hell for a guy who will join a criminal conspiracy with a president of the United States, who's trying to unlawfully retain the power of the presidency and then misuse the powers of the Department of Justice to those criminal ends. But you know what? Project 2025 kind of picking up where Pete left off and Pete was even scaring me a little bit with that.

You're going to have nothing but Jeffrey Clarks in the Department of Justice. And can you imagine, you know, when I look back at how Donald Trump and his corrupt piece of shit attorney general Bill Barr, use the department to reward Donald Trump's criminal associates and punish his perceived enemies. Look at who I'm telling, right? It was so, it was so disturbing, so enraging.

You know, some of my homicide prosecutors, I was chief of homicide at the DCOS Attorney's Office, were populating all of those prosecution teams like the Roger Stone team and the lead prosecutor, John Cravis, he was so upset with the interference by the Department of Justice into what they were trying to do based on the evidence, the facts, the law, that he not only resigned from the prosecution, he resigned from the Department of Justice because he wouldn't stand for it. And that's great. But we don't want good people being forced to resign from the Department of Justice.

So it's populated with flunkies and lapdogs and syctophance. So listen, and if 2025 gives the Department of Justice the opportunity to run roughshod over the states, state district attorneys, Commonwealth's attorneys, and, you know, right now Jim Jordan, I didn't want to go to him, that yamoring fool that he is, you know, Jim Jordan, I think, is doing a different flavor, but the same thing, right? He's using and abusing the power of congressional committees to interfere and obstruct in state court prosecutions, trying to drag Alvin Bragg into his little Mickey Mouse committee

trying to drag Fawnie Willis. If it were me, and this is why I would be a really bad bureaucrat, if it were me, the minute I saw Jim Jordan and his little committee trying to interfere in an ongoing criminal prosecution, what happened to state's rights? Didn't the Republicans used to care about that? I would have opened a grand jury in New York in Manhattan, and I would have begun presenting evidence to grand jurors

to see whether Jim Jordan might be committing the crime of obstruction of justice. But, yeah, another reason to dislike Project 2025, there are so many reasons, because there really is the separation of powers between the federal government and the states, and thank God, thank God the states have stepped up, and they are prosecuting at least some of the commandstrived.

of the insurrection, the hierarchy of the insurrection, not just the boots. The guy that Donald Trump said, go attack the damn capital and stop the certification. That's what he did. And some of these people who are either unwilling or unable to discern fact from fiction, listen to their president. And I'm not going to say I feel bad for them.

I feel bad for our friends who are the police officers who got the hell kicked out of them. But what I think is a deep injustice at play every minute of every day is the fact that the federal government, the Department of Justice has not prosecuted and is not presently prosecuting a single member of the suits of the insurrection, just the boots of the insurrection.

That has got a change, and I hope, here's a look, take this to the bank, there are more federal indictments coming for January 6th, and not just against the boots. Of that, I am certain. Well, I'm sure, you know, we're trying really hard to prosecute Donald Trump, but the Supreme Court is making that extremely difficult. They're just corrupt, they're captured,

and they are willing to give future presidents a cloak of immunity turning the Oval Office into the seat of criminality in the United States, as Katanji Brown Jackson said, just to get this fucking guy off the hook, and it drives me mad. Dana, Glad has said the Project 2025 aims to gut protections for the LGBTQ community, which its organizers believe exists in opposition to the traditional American family

and it's Christian nationalist underpinnings. The project would prioritize families, Project 2025, would prioritize families, quote, comprised of a married mother, father, and their children, unquote, and would eliminate any federal policies that promote or protect LGBTQ equality or that assist single mothers. And so I think, you know,

going back to what I was saying about, there's somebody in your life it's going to be impacted by this, whether they're law enforcement, whether they're a crime, a victim of a crime. I'm going to talk about veterans, whether they're LGBTQ plus. We all kind of know somebody, so talk a little bit about it, because, you know, I was just quoting glad there, but we know what Project 2025 means for the community. How come you never ask me to talk about spycraft and counterintelligence?

What about our gay spies? Okay, we're trying to talk about gay spies. There was a guy named Jimmy Hot. Okay, wait, hold on. Three people got that one, too. Project 2025 is, I mean, you basically covered it with everything Glad said. They want to get rid of marriage equality. They want to go back to this idea of a traditional family as mother, father, child,

which is absolutely fucking absurd at this point. And it goes back to this whole thing of, you know, it intertwines with everything J.D. Vance is saying about, childless women don't have as much stake in our society and women that are postmenopausal, your job is to take care of other people's children, right? He's all, I have no idea how that woman is still married to him because this is not the man she married. Like, it's mind-blowing to me. But it also is, it's worse than that. This, it will take away all health care from trans children and trans adults. This is not just,

this is life and death. And not only will take away health. care, they want to erase them entirely. They're going to say that trans identity doesn't exist. If Trump, God forbid, got back in, we already know that he would implement the ban in the military. And what Andy was saying that I know most of you maybe listen to yesterday's episodes, some of you have not. Is it VOT or Voigt?

Vote. It's vote. So basically what happened, which is beautiful when Trump's like, I don't know these guys, it's even more, you know, radical than I think. I've never heard of them. I've never seen them. I've never met them. Basically, this guy vote was duped

because there were some journalists from Britain that were posing as donors, Republican donors, and they were talking to vote, and he basically said to them, oh, Trump just says that in public, he knows all about this and supports everything we're doing. And he got fucked because that's when,

and it happened in D.C., and I cover this too, it's not a two-consent state. So they recorded all of this, and it's totally legal. both people don't have to consent. If you're recording two people talking, one of them has to consent, but if you're in a conversation with someone,

both people don't. So everything they did was legal. It may not be scrupulous under our media, but it is very legal. And at this point, really, what is scrupulous for mainstream media? It's super funny. Yeah.

The bottom line is this is horrifying for the people we care about. There's 65 million equality voters in this country, and what that means is there's people that vote. based on what this administration will do for their friends, their family, and themselves, and the community. 65 million, that's a lot of voters. And that is a reason enough.

If you care about someone, you love someone, you have a child, a parent that is part of the community, everything in Project 2025 is trying to hurt them. Everything. So we've covered it before. I talked about in other parts of this live podcast. If you care about this and anything that's in Project, 2025 and like we said we were preaching to the choir but when Allison's telling you that 85% return on talking to someone face to face about how to get them to vote a specific way there's a way

and I think one of you are talking about they're trying and hopefully they do this before the election to implement a website where you could just pop in a keyword and it'll go to page 465 and so you can send that to someone like they do on like any sort of a word document you can pop in fascism it'll go right to the document. And it can do that for Project 2025. So just to wrap up this part, I mean, before we go to AG, because it's also what it's going to do to veterans in this country is horrifying. There is something in all of this that will reach someone. So if you're like, I don't know how to talk to my family about this, this is a really great way. There's an over 900-page reference that you can look to. So I don't want to beat a dead horse on this. Our community is under attack.

this election and you're going to see a lot of people you love her deeply. So I know everyone in here's going to vote. I'm not worried about that and I really do think you're going to take 10 people with you and you're going to vote down ballot and we're going to win this fucking election. I really do. And we've talked about it on this podcast. Annie said it before. We're all saying it if they count all the votes this is going to be a landslide. A landslide. And I know a lot of people are afraid of the fuckery, but we know what has happened in 2020, there are things that have been put in place since then. We're worried about Georgia's election because they have all these rules now that they can say, I'm not certifying

because that person's got one blue eye and one green eye, so fuck this, I'm not doing it. And sorry, I'm cursing more than everyone on the stage, but thank you very much. The bottom line is it's still illegal to not certify an election in Georgia. Like there's still laws that will go into effect where judges and they go to the courts are going to follow the laws. But a lot of these people down there are these three Republicans on the Georgia election board

think they have more power now than the state. They don't. They're going to try. There are still laws. There are things in place. They are prepared more now than they ever were

because 2020 we knew there was going to be bad stuff but we didn't know there was going to be an attack on the Capitol. So there's stuff in place now that is going to help with that. So I know that you're worried. I know there is going to be

a lot of stuff happening but know that there are things in place to combat at this time. And not just that, the people, the only people in Georgia who are going to want to block these votes are the dickheads in the rural counties, so they're only going to be blocking Trump votes. So, okay. Great. Good job. So I'm going to see this up for you because you've been moderating the whole thing. Talk to the audience. Obviously, thank you for your service and everything that you have endured with this last administration. I have so much respect for you. I have so much respect for you. I say it on air and I know everyone in this room does what you have

gone through in your life both professionally and personally. And the fact that you're still on the front lines fighting every fucking day for democracy is mind-blowing. So thank you. Thanks. So talk to the audience about what project 2025, how it will hurt the veterans in this country? I can just tell you how it would hurt me specifically. All of my health care benefits and compensation and pension and disability would disappear. because he wants to remove disability benefits for veterans for things that happened to you

that didn't have anything to do with your service. And since I was sexually assaulted, and that's not part of my job being sexually assaulted, I would lose all my benefits and my health care. He also wants to take away for active duty service members and their spouses, something called B-A-H, which we used to call BHA-V-Q, or something. There's a lot of letters, but basically it's money every month that you get because they're making you move around and it helps you pay your rent and a cost of coal, a cost of living expense.

That would disappear. All of veterans' health care actually would disappear and it would all become privatized, which costs 115% of Medicare rates and about two to seven times as much as direct care provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs, which the Department of VA, like VA Health Care isn't like Medicare and Medicaid where we go to a private doctor. we can if we want, but we get our care directly from the government by employees paid by the government in buildings leased and for and built by the government. It is direct care. It is way more progressive than what Bernie Sanders wants. I want it for everybody because it's the least expensive proposition and you and you are removing for-profit entities out of the equation because even with Medicare for all, you're still going to private doctors who are for-profit, right? Anyhow, everybody knows veterans. Everybody knows somebody who's in the military or a veteran, and this would be absolutely devastating to their benefits and their health care. And so that's something that I think you can talk to folks about. But I appreciate you guys

listening to what we had to say about Project 2025. I know that y'all know what's in it. You can take it out there to help get out the vote because, like I said, there's something for everybody in Project 2025, and it's not good. bum bhawn bha...