Jack - Flynn is a Co-conspirator (Feat. Andrew Torrez)

Episode Date: July 15, 2019

Joining us this week is co-host of the Opening Arguments Podcast and real-life lawyer Andrew Torrez as we discuss Michael Flynn, Mazars, emoluments, Epstein, and the citizenship question on the 2020 census. 

They might be giants that have been on the road for too long, too long, and they might be giants aren't even sorry, not even sorry. And audiences like the shows too much, too much. And now they might be giants that are playing their breakthrough album, all of it, and they still have time for other songs. They're fooling around. Who can stop? They might be giants and their liberal rocket gender.

Who? No one. Decide which pay for it with somebody else's money. Thanks to third love for supporting Muller She Road. Third love knows there's a perfect broth for everyone. So right now, they're offering our listeners 15% off their first order. Go to thirdlove.com slash AG to find yours today.

And thanks to Rothy's for supporting Muller She Road. Have you heard about this company making stylist shoes for women and girls out of recycled plastic water bottles? Oh, and they're insanely comfortable and machine washable. Get yourself a pair today with free shipping, rothies.com and use promo code AG. This is Jack Bryan, the co-writer and director

of Active Measures and you are listening to Muller She wrote Lucky You. So to be clear, Mr. Trump has no financial relationships with any Russian oligarchs. That's what he said. That's what I said. That's obviously what the opposition is. I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I didn't have and I have communications with the Russians.

What do I have to get involved with Putin for having nothing to do with Putin? I've never spoken to him. I don't know anything about a mother than he will respect me. Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. So, it is political. You're a Communist! No, Mr. Green. Communism is just a red herring. Like all members of the oldest profession I'm a capitalist. Hello and welcome to Muller She Wrote.

I'm your host A.G. and with me today is Jordan Coburn. Hello. Julie So Johnson is out today. She is a feeling under the weather so we wish her well and send her Our best we do have a big show for you this week We have tons of court filings and hearings to cover and tons of Mueller news and I also wanted to let you guys know that starting July 22nd, which is what, a week from tomorrow, we are going to launch the daily beans. It's our new daily news pod. It's going to be released in the morning for you, for your morning commute.

It'll be about 30 minutes, kind of much more reasonable than the hour and 45 we usually drop on you Sunday nights. We're continuing to do Muller Shee wrote, as long as you guys continue to listen to it. It'll be here for you. And also if you go now to patreon.com slash the daily beans, it takes you to the patreon.com slash Mullershi Road page because we're doing it all in one thing. So patrons for one are patrons for the other. So you don't have to be a patron on two different podcasts. And you'll get ad free episodes of the daily beans as a patron. We don't know, we know as long as we remain independent, as long as the show remains independent, you'll

get ad-free daily beans episodes there. You'll get our newsletter, which will be kind of geared toward both shows. You'll get all sorts of great gifts and things and we're gonna set up a video link in here and you'll be able to watch us record the daily beans, So that'll be interesting. If you're interested in that, I don't, people love that. I don't know what it is, but people have asked for that. And you get that as a patron. All for as little as three bucks a month.

So head there, check it out. Member patron of one show is automatically a patron of the other show. So if you're already a member, if you're already a patron of Mueller, you don't have to sign up to be a patron of Daily Beans. But you can get both just by heading to either patreon.com slash Muller Sheerot or patreon.com slash the Daily Beans. It'll be cool. Good deal. Yep. And we're also working on integrating

our website together too. So that the Daily Beans pod.com will take you to the page for both shows. So anyway, and they'll be overlapping for a while as long as this smaller thing keeps going on. Keep pushing back his testimony. Yeah, they keep pushing it back. We'll be here as long as it as long as it takes. We promise. So Jordan, how was your week? It was good. I got to... what did I do? I've been working out lately. So it seems to define what's presently on my mind now. Not in a Joe Rogan way, more like an enlightenment pain constantly. The story is, it's like the front, foremost of my mind, down in the moment's situation. But yeah, it's been a good week.

Good. How was yours? It was good. It was a lot of ups and downs with some of the court filings that we had and then the Mueller testimony was on. And then it was off. And then we're going to be in Philly that day. And so we were always going to be in Philly that day. But then it was going to be on the same day as the Mueller testimony.

And then it came out that they're delaying it till the 24th. We're still going to be in Philly. And Osharangapa is still going to be joining us. Oh, cool. So we'll be there and we will see you and we will still have plenty to talk about. I promise. Don't worry. We're not going to get up there and be like, well, we got nothing. There's so much happening as you will find out in today's show. But let's see, before we get to all that, we have all this news. We have my favorite segment, Corrections.

It's time to start. It's time for me to say I'm sorry. Oh, I made a mistake. OK, and the name of the guy in the mob that breaks thumbs for loan sharks is called an enforcer. That's what we were trying to find. We were trying to find. And if you, like Arna Paitre, and you don't listen to our daily updates, and you only hear our weekly episodes, you're going to hear a lot of corrections from the daily updates in here because you're going to be like,

what are you talking about who breaks thumbs? And that was, that came from a daily episode. Uh, we had said, Shawshank Redemption wasn't quotable and we got so many emails we could basically piece together the entire script. Nice, that was my bed. But the line we received the most was get busy living or get busy dying. Oh, 100% I've heard that a million times. That was the one that we got the most.

This is more just a function of my age, I imagine. No, I mean, you know, when I think quotable movies, I think more comedy, more like a Holy Grail, of Money Python or Anchorman or, you know, something like the Zoolander, but yeah. There's a lot of good quotes in Shawshank, but it is a verbose movie, so. Yes, around the time that it was out in popular

I think I was still trialed. Yeah, that's true. So my friends were running around the playground quoting Morgan Freeman and his plight of Right. And carrying his wall out of his cell into the yard. Yeah, handful at a time. Yes Okay, so that we got that and then the school is pen not you pen. We don't call it you pen No one should call it that. That's what I've been told go Quakers The inspector general report on the DHS Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Patrol or Border Protection was written by the DHS acting Inspector General for Castello and not Horowitz who is right Inspector of the Department of Justice.

Yes. And that's it. Those are the corrections. That's all we had. That's all we had. Yeah, not bad. Just three mistakes all week that people cared about anyway. If you have any corrections for us, do not hesitate to send them by visiting mullershearote.com,

clicking contact and selecting corrections where you can build us a compliment sandwich. We will get it right eventually. All right, guys, there's a lot to go over and news. So let's jump in with just the facts. All right, guys, this week Deutsche Bank appears to be in a bunch of financial trouble as it slashes 20,000 jobs or about a quarter of its global workforce. And this is part of a major restructuring that involves cutting its brokerage program and shuddering offices in London in New

York. The bank, as we know, has been Trump's laundromat for years and recently paid over $400 million in fines, million dollars in fines for money laundering. William Barr banked there, Wilbur Ross used to work there as did retired Justice Kennedy's son Justin and Epstein has investments in loans there as well. And there are several investigations and congressional subpoenas involving Deutsche Bank right now, including the New York Attorney General, who has launched an investigation into Trump's finances. So when we covered this in daily beans this week, one of our patrons sent me a note saying

that maybe perhaps the reason why they closed offices in the UK and the US is because they have more strict stricter laws when it comes to trading than it then they do in the other places that are still open. So that's that's an interesting theory. Yeah, that is weird. Uh-huh. Did they shut down their entire trading arm, though? I can't say for certain. Yeah, but I remember when we reported on it Monday, I know specifically New York and London offices, but I don't say for certain. Yeah, I never. But I remember when we reported on it Monday, I don't know, specifically New York and London offices, but I don't know if it was the entire brokerage arm and those exist in New York and London,

and those are the only ones, or if they have other brokerages. Yeah, the way that it was reported made it seem like it was just a huge sort of, like, okay, we're just not going to handle this stuff as its own entity anymore. If someone's representing a specific client and they need those services, I think I read that they would still obviously help manage their stuff, but I don't know. Yeah, I don't know.

I have to fact check myself on that. Well, look it up. But they are slashing a ton of jobs. Yeah. And there's going to be, I think there was loss of just like 200 jobs in New York alone, at 20,000 total. So it's pretty big. That's a pretty big slashing.

And in other rich asshole investigations news, Broidy. Elliott Broidy is now reportedly under federal grandeur and investigation for his role in the inaugural, more specifically that he used that position to strike business deals with foreign leaders. The US Attorney's Office in Brooklyn recently sent subpoenas to 20 individuals and businesses tied to Brody. And this is all to see if he violated that foreign corrupt practices act which says you can't offer foreign officials anything of value to gain a business advantage.

And this is likely tied to the story we reported last month that FBI questioned his one-time business partner, Lisa Korbatov. She was the first of his associates to be questioned in the case. And of course, Steve Win, another former deputy finance chair of the RNC who also had to resign over a sex scandal, is said to be cooperating with the feds on the matter. This is not Steve Win, Las Vegas, Steve Win. It is. It is, okay.

And that's according to The Washington Post. Brewery was also bribed by Jolo in the 1MDB case where he was offered $75 million if he could get the money laundering case against him dropped. And the Brewery case is in the Southern District, which is federal, and it's overseen by the Department of Justice. And the Southern District in New York was also investigating the Trump organization for fraudulent claims that the $140,000 in payments that made to Cohen were for legal work when they were actually reimbursements for hush money payments, right? Cohen brought those checks

in to Congress member when he testified and they were signed by Weiselberg, Trump Jr., and Trump himself. CNN reported that the investigation, that investigation, seems to have gone dark five months ago, but also failed to mention that five months ago is when bar was confirmed. So I hope someone is looking into the termination of that probe so we can feel comfortable that the US attorney is like in the Southern District, New York are pursuing actual justice and not just what Trump decides is okay, because this whole broady case is in the Southern District. There's a lot going on in the Southern District of New York There's a lot going on in the Southern District of New York and the DC US Attorney's Office and US Attorney's General all over.

Or not a Attorney's General, but US Attorney's Office. It's Attorney's General are different than US Attorney's. But this falls under the purview of Bill Barr and if this investigation into Cohen and the push money payments in the Trump organization was shut down, and they remember how Cohen mentioned those three execs and they never called them, they never followed up on any of it. And it was wise men. He wasn't one of the three that, I mean, additionally to Weissman and Trump Jr. and Trump,

there were three other executives. It might have included Weissman too. There might have been an overlap there. I don't have the, I don't have the Van diagram in front of me, but there was just, there weren't, there wasn't follow up done. And so that's just really weird. And even in Congress,

Congress didn't bring those three execs in too, but it might have been because Southern District of New York was investigating. And there's no public documents on when it closed or why? No, it just seemed to have gone dark five months ago. According to CNN, but CNN failed to mention that that's also when Bargott had pointed February. Yeah, that would look to conjecture you for them, I mean? Probably a little too

little too be and Z for them, but but yeah, that's where there's broady investigation is, but that seems to be going on. Um, and you know, as we know, broady was the RNC finance chair. Okay, so yeah, when we reported on this earlier in the week during one of the daily things, he was like, he had something going on with a couple of Angolan officials and then somebody from, I think the prime minister of,

let's see, Romania or authorities in Romania, because in recent months federal authorities searched Mr. Brody's Southern California office and subpoenaed records related to him from one time business partner and for Mr. Trump's inaugural committee and they have reportedly asked authorities in Romania for assistance in investigating associates with Brody worked with to win military intelligence contracts worth as much as $64 million in that country. And they charged four people who worked with Brody on plans to influence the administration, including on behalf of interest in Asia and the Middle Eastern Europe,

while the charges against the three of his associates were unrelated to their work with Brody. Most have been asked about his relationship with him, according to several people familiar with this investigation. So I'll take an altogether these steps suggest that there's mounting pressure on Brody. their relationships with him, according to several people familiar with this investigation. So I'll take an altogether these steps suggest that there's mounting pressure on Brody and they underscore legal questions raised by his efforts to sell his access into, or his closeness to the Trump campaign

and then parlay that into having massive business advantage advantages in the weeks leading up to the election. So this is all very fascinating. There was a great article in the weeks leading up to the election. So this is all very fascinating. There was a great article in the New York Times about it. You should check that out by Kenneth Vogel, really good, really strong reporting. But I think, you know, Brody's close to going down, but you know, as I'm talking about with this SDNY stuff, I'm just hoping that it doesn't get blocked somehow by interests, a Kk.a. William Barr, who now seems to be just working at the pleasure of the president when he's supposed to be working at the pleasure of us.

Guys, it was a rocky week in the fight to add a citizenship question to the census, ultimately Trump caved and lost. But Andrew Torres and I will talk about that in more detail during the interview. He's sat in here now for that. Yeah, it's really interesting. He's got a lot of good information from the legal side of it for us. And also this week, there were a few things that happened in the Epstein case, just a couple. As we know, he was arrested and charged with sex trafficking last Saturday and the indictment was unsealed the following Monday when he was arraigned. As we know, over a decade ago, he was accused of sexually abusing girls as young as 14, but was given a sweetheart of a deal by the US attorney in

Southern Florida who at the time was Alexander Acosta who was, you know, now, well, was Trump's leader secretary. We'll get to that. He spent 14 months Epstein on a work-release jail sort of jail program and his co-conspirators were offered total immunity in this in this deal But he may have committed more crimes in more places as investigators are now looking beyond Florida and New York Because these new charges were in New York, but they're looking in New Mexico at Santa Fe and his private island in the Caribbean And he can get charged conceivably in each of those states. Yep Spokesperson for the New Mexico Attorney General is said to be interviewing multiple people in Santa Fe who have visited the $12 million compound there that Epstein owns. Then the findings from that and his private island would be sent

to authorities in New York where he pleaded not guilty on Monday. So they could either send those to charge or they would be charged in their jurisdictions depending on the crimes. New York Times is now reporting he may have been abused and girl as far back as the 70s when he worked as a teacher at the Dalton School. And it was Bill Barr's father who hired him for that job, even though Epstein didn't have a college degree at the time. Donald Barr is his name.

Couple of days ago, Epstein's attorney presented a bail package that was stupid, saying he would ground his jets. He wouldn't fly anywhere. He'd hand over his passport. So where an ankle bracelet on my dick, I swear. I have a babysitter and he put up his plane and he put up his $77 million mansion as collateral, but prosecutors were like, you know, we're going to seize your mansion in the asset for virtue anyway, no thanks. We already have the mansion, basically.

And also, Epstein has access to over 500 million in cash and assets right now, and then currently makes about 10 million a year. So he's still a huge flight risk. Anyone with a jet is literally a flight risk. And he can fly anywhere in the world. But not only did they say no to bail in this filing that was put out, they accused him of witness tampering in the court filing.

Because as we know, at the end of last November, the Miami Hero released a series on Epstein, this was six, seven months ago. And apparently within two days of that article being published, Epstein paid two co-conspirators, $350,000 total, $100,000 to one and $250,000 to the other. And for those reasons, he should not be allowed bail. And, you know, we, because we saw this go down in the manifold case, witness tampering, they revoked his bail for it.

Did, sorry, go ahead. And just that he's as recently as six or seven months ago, he's been tampering with witnesses, not to mention all the way back in Florida when he hired a private eye who ran one of the victims' fathers off the road or something like that. Yeah, did anyone ever answer our question about if witness tampering technically is only

witness tampering if there's like an active case going on against someone? No, nobody answered that. Okay. I'm curious. Because I saw the reporting say witness tampering as well, which makes me think that it doesn't have to be part of like an actual trial that's currently happening or whatever leads up to a trial for someone to witness tamper, but I see. Well, I mean, he has been arrested. And he paid these people after he was arrested. No, he paid these people back in December or November right after the article started coming out. Right. I'm a very young, he hurled. Yeah. I wonder then if he can actually get charged for that. Yeah. I think so. Cool. Maybe. I mean, maybe he has to be arrested in order to tamper with these witnesses, but that seems like it's because of a crime also.

If it's not specifically witness, tampering. Right. And people have to not talk about your crimes. And they said, you know, this is a one-off situation. So they weren't recurring payments. So it's not like he was paying them for work or anything. Like bribery, maybe, or something. It's witness tampering.

Yeah. Yeah, it's just totally, here's a bunch of money to keep your mouth shut. And I would tend to think that these would probably be his lieutenants, maybe it's just laying Maxwell or some of the other women who worked for him as co-conspirators and not rich wealthy, powerful co-conspirators because $100,000 and a $250,000 payment isn't shit for, you know,

like a broidy or a Trump or something like that. Yeah, that's like a Stormy Daniels payment. It's a Stormy Daniels payment, exactly. So I think it's probably one of these women who work for him, and maybe not even that high up, because I would imagine that the women who work for him probably get paid pretty well, but honestly, I don't know, they might be just working there

because they have to. Uh, you know, he's got his blackmailing them. Uh, but anyway, he shouldn't, he should not be allowed out on bail, mainly not just because he has access and to flight risk, but, and he's got a jet, but also because he's tampering with witnesses and he's breaking the law still. He's, he's currently crime. So you have to get him off the streets and keep him off the streets. We'll keep you posted as to what they say there. My beans are that he was on this whole

Epstein case is that he was actually blackmailing the super wealthy through his hedge fund, I think, and providing dirt on influential people to maybe even the Kremlin and Israel. Mostly because his lieutenant, we were talking about her, just Lane Maxwell, is the daughter of a former business associate of Mogul Aivich, and the former prime minister of Israel. It's all over the newspapers this weekend that he has connections to Epstein as well. And it's even possible that one of those countries is what pushed Acosta into offering the Epstein deal.

As Vicki Ward reported, that Acosta told the Trump administration that quote, Epstein was above his pay grade. And they hired him anyway, as labor secretary, but as you were hinting at, he resigned this week after his press conference. He actually said he called to resign Friday and then did his press conference after he resigned. It was just a weird timing thing. I think he was fired.

Trump paraded him out in front of the cameras and was like, this guy I'm firing him pretty much, or he resigned and he's a good dude and Acosta just sort of stood there and nodded his head like yeah I'm a good dude. Weird, it was a weird display but he's gone and that press conference was weird too. He basically he was asked about his secret breakfast meeting at the Marriott with Epstein's lawyer, left Goetz, his name. And he was like, we already signed the deal by then. It wasn't a private meeting to figure out the deal.

We'd already signed the deal by then, which is correct, a deal had been signed, but it didn't have the part where he actually spoke with left Goetz to decide that they were going to allow or have Epstein higher attorneys and pay for attorneys for the victims. And not only would he hire and pay for the attorneys, he had the right to veto any attorneys that he didn't want representing his victims. That was in his non-prosycution agreement. And that was what was discussed at that breakfast

and Acosta admitted to that during his press conference. And he also said that that is specifically the reason that he didn't tell the victims about the plea agreement because he said, had I told the victims that Epstein was gonna compensate them or pay them restitution through paying for lawyers for them and choosing their lawyers for them, that would kind of impeach their credibility as witnesses. Like, oh, you know, you're testifying, or you only have this lawsuit because Epstein's

paying for your lawyer, right? And so he didn't tell them, so he broke the law by not telling the victim's rights act. He broke that law and didn't tell them because he thought that because Epstein was paying for their lawyers, it would impeach their credibility. Are they going to keep that a secret that he's paying for their lawyers until like the whole thing's over? Of course they're going to find out he's paying for their lawyers. Yeah.

And we all just found out because, well, if you can look at the non-possacution agreement. And it says that not only is he paying for the lawyers, but he can veto. He has veto power over what attorneys they pick for his for civil suits against him. Yeah. That's such a shitty argument by a cost of that's really what it was. And it's like, yeah, I mean, that's. I think he was told that he couldn't do it. And I think it might have been somebody high up, not in our government, but in a different one.

Maybe Mossad or the Kremlin. But yeah, he's not the secretary anymore. And he's going to be replaced by Patrick Pizzala, who is already under scrutiny for his work with disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He reported that this week, Jordan, in one of our daily's. When they tried to pressure Congress, not to impose a minimum wage in the Northern Mariana Islands, where at the time there was a maximum wage of $3.5 for foreign workers. But regardless, cost is gone. And we had thought Bill Barr recused himself from the Epstein case.

As he announced, he would shortly after his arrest, after Epstein's arrest. And he also did in his confirmation hearings. But after his arrest, he said he told CNN or CNN reported he was going to recuse from all things Epstein. But then the next day, he unrecused himself from the new case, saying he spoke to ethics people who told him he didn't have to recuse from the new one, just the old one, because bars old law firm represented Epstein in the old case. But bars father hired Epstein. He should be recuse from the new one, just the old one, because Barr's old law firm represented Epstein in the old case. But Barr's father hired Epstein. He should be recused from everything involving Epstein. And I'm 100% certain, although I have no proof of this, that he said he was going to recuse

himself from all things Epstein after Epstein was arrested, Trump flipped out and called him and asked him to unrecuse himself. And he did. Just like Trump asked sessions to unrecuse himself. And he did, just like Trump asked sessions to unrecuse himself, but sessions did not. Right, I think you're right, because there's too many, I mean, there's already photos that exist of both of them together, and that alone could start just a huge nightmare for him,

maybe, to put them up together. Trump and Epstein. Oh, right. I don't know though. His base doesn't seem to give a shit about anything like that. Oh, he's totally don't know though. His base doesn't seem to give a shit about anything like that. Oh, he's totally connected into this. He owned a modeling agency. I think he supplied some of the girls. Yeah, I think he is too. So it makes sense to me that

Barber was asked to be unrequeased or to unrecuse himself. Yeah, and Trump has a pattern of this is weird that now you have a pattern of asking people to unrecuse them So he has a pattern of asking his asking people to unrecuse themselves. So he has a pattern of asking his attorneys general to unrecuse themselves from stuff that he might be involved in. Yeah. So it seems obvious to me. Maybe it's tinfoil at time. Maybe it's conjecture, but I'm right.

As we used to say. This week, the fourth circuit has dismissed the emoluments lawsuit brought by the Maryland and DC attorneys general, saying they lack standing. So only the emoluments suit left is the one brought by congressional Democrats. Maryland and DC could ask for the case to be rehered and bonked, which means in front of the full panel of judges at the fourth circuit and not just the three that decided this case. But also this week in the other emoluments case, Trump has prematurely filed an appeal. Basically ignoring Judge Sullivan's ruling that discovery can go forward in the congressional

Democrats suit. Yes, that Judge Sullivan. Trump is arguing that if his finances are made public, he would suffer a reputable harm. So, yeah, so he just basically admitted that if his finances, that his finances And why is that Mr. Reed? Because it's devastating in my case! Overrule! Good call! So yeah, he's so he just basically admitted that if his finances that his finances have all sorts of tragic shit in them that would implicate him and make him look bad. So he's just totally admitted that in this ruling or in this filing. He also says Sullivan's interpretation of a monument is wrong as are his views on congressional oversight and And we'll continue to follow the emoluments stories for you as they unfold it to see if

this case is re-heard or if they just drop it and focus on the Dems lawsuit. And you know, the standing might work better for the Democrats in Congress because Congress by the Constitution can provide oversight on emoluments. Congress has to approve emoluments, right? So it makes sense for Congress to be the plaintiffs in this case. It might have been part of the reason I haven't read the decision yet. On why the case was dismissed from the attorneys general, but I talked to Andrew Torres about it. It won't be in this interview, but it will be available to patrons. We're gonna release the entire and edited interview for patrons,

because we talked for a good 20 minutes about a monument, and he gave us a lot of really important like legal factual advice on this, and like, I have my feelings, but he has, you know, rules. A legal feelings, every time. Because I'm like, no, it's because it's Congress, right? He's like, sort of, and then he goes over

the two different kinds of emoluments with me, and he wants to, there were two. Yeah, he walks me through the whole thing. So check that out if you're a patron. Also, uh, Annie Donaldson handed in her written answers. She was supposed to come in and testify, but she didn't to the judiciary because she was pregnant. And uh, she beats Hope's, Hope picks record for refusing to answer, because Hope Hicks refused to answer 155 questions, but she hit over 200 on some kind of made up privilege. As we know, Hope Hicks invoked the imaginary absolute immunity privilege, but Andy Donaldson used constitutionally based executive brand confidentiality interests. Oh, executive. So yeah, so wait, let me read that again for you. Constitutionally based executive branch

confidentiality interests. That was her made up imaginary immunity. She's that whole thing every time she didn't answer a question? Yeah, when she typed it out, because they were written, they were written answers. So yeah, she did type it out, because I remember, yeah, I wouldn't hope Hicks testified in Adler after the fourth or fifth time

of her spiel about the, and she's like, you don't have to say it out. Because I remember, yeah, I wouldn't hope Hicks testified in Adler after the fourth or fifth time of her spiel about the, she's like, you don't have to say it every time. Just say objection. I have a code word. Right, just give us the high sign or whatever. Yeah. But Annie was writing her answer. So she wrote them over 200 times.

She wrote that. She did tell the committee that Richard Burr called the White House and leaked targets of the investigation to them. She remembers that happening. Burr needs to step down as the head of that, um, as of that, so the Senate intel committing, I think personally. Yeah. You should be removed.

Yeah. They have been doing one of like the most bipartisan investigations. So I give him some credit for that. So it is like it is, yeah, technically the most bipartisan investigation of all the committees. Yeah. Um, but, uh technically the most bipartisan investigation of all the committees. Yeah, but uh but still I'm all forgetting the GOP around it. It would still be a GOP lead committee but um yeah, but any of them yeah any of them gone even if they were placed for some reason it might be sad as I thought to me. Corn in or something terrible. So I mean, we might just be better off with Berr there.

Donaldson provided some of Annie Donaldson, provided some of Mueller's most compelling evidence in the obstruction volume for her multiple contemporaneous notes that she kept. The Judiciary Committee, she should, by the way, Don, against the Chief of Staff, like main right hand girl Friday. The Judiciary Committee also issued 12 subpoenas this week.

A lot of them are folks who never worked for the administration, so they can't use that weird blanket immunity, although they'll come up with some other imaginary immunity, I'm sure. And some of these people include Pecker and Howard from the Inquirer or American Media Inc. Keith Davidson, former lawyers to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, who I think was in Cahoots with Cohen, and Lewandowski also. But there's a lot of folks who worked for or are still working for Trump in this group of subpoenas, including Kushner, Sessions, Rob Porter, and Mike Flynn.

So the news is saying, kind of, oh, he's trying to go around the immunity thing by having people who weren't in the administration, but there's a lot of people who are in the administration. I think what they're trying to do is they're just trying to get every single person that is involved in this on record subpoenaed as denying subpoenas. Probably they have to deny them twice so that they can just file a huge, like one giant contempt lawsuit.

And we'll see what happens. And speaking of contempt, even though Pelosi is still fighting opening an impeachment inquiry, it appears she wants to vote next week on Tuesday to hold bar and Wilbur Ross in criminal contempt. So she can enforce the subpoenas in the 2020 census citizenship case. As I say, that vote will take place Tuesday,

according to Steny Hoyer, a majority leader in the house. Let's see, Trump's narrative against the investigations into him hit a road bump this week. This is all, you know, for going back there, the Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Trump, all the Trump supporters are harping on the oranges of the investigation and the Carter page and spying and all that other stuff. And they seemed to have Bill Barr on their side now, but they hit a road, they hit a road bump this week because the Inspector General Horowitz grilled the author of the dossier, the dirty dossier as Trump calls it, Christopher Steele, and found him to be very credible. And this is one of their biggest sticking point.

This is one of their, it's a bullshit argument, but this is one of Trump's major arguments is that the Steele dossier was used to get a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. And that's wrong for 800 reasons because first of all the FISA application was over 800 pages and the steel dossier is like 17 pages long. And it was used as part of to get the FISA warrant to to surveil Carter Page who has been a Russian asset two other times in his life 2008-2013. We've got it on record. And so, and Carter Page left the Trump campaign before the Faisal warrant was put in to look into him. So, it's like nine ways wrong. And now, but now that, you know, they're actually Horowitz, who is the Inspector General under Trump. He's a nobala holdover is saying now he's credible dude. He's credible. They had been conducting

a probe. Like I said, into the they've been doing this for over a year, Michael Horowitz has been looking into it. But this questioning of steel was about to work was about his work on Russian election interference globally and his intelligence collection methods and his findings about Carter Page, but investigators with the IG not only say not only is he credible, but his testimony was surprising. So apparently there was some new stuff they found in there. I don't know. Why do you think Trump hasn't tried to get rid of his IG yet? I don't know why Horowitz is still there. It's interesting, right? Because Horowitz came out and found he they were wrong when they said page and struck

were biased and it impacted their work. They found out they were wrong when Comey, and Comey's handling of the Clinton email stuff. They said it was messed up, but he didn't break any laws. He's sided with the correct answer against Trump a few times. So I've been waiting for him to be let off the, to be kind of.

It seems like that's the first person you'd try to get rid of. The Inspectorate. As an Obama rollover. Yeah, specifically in the Department of Justice, right? And Barr is there now, and I'm surprised Barr didn't get rid of him when he got in there.

Yeah. But I mean, Barr is the person who would be inspected by the Inspectorate General. So maybe that's a conflict of interest in that. Not that that's ever stopped this administration from doing anything before. Yeah. Uh, next two stories are about Flynn and about the side group. And we're going to go over those in hot notes.

Uh, lots of stuff happening with Flynn this week. Lots of stuff happening with side group. Um, and we'll cover that in a little bit. Uh, say it or also testified this week behind closed doors and apparently did a shitty job because the Senate and tell committee said he was very uncooperative and they want to keep him under subpoena. Sators, a guy who worked with Cohen on Trump Tower Moscow and makes an appearance in the Mueller report several times actually. And then we had some interesting things happen in the Greg Craig trial, our Democrat, our

one Democrat guy caught up in the Mueller bro. Jordan's going to have that for us in hot notes. Indeed. And the Mueller testimony has been delayed as we said one week. And we'll now take place July 24th. It's going to be one hour longer in the Judiciary Committee. Apparently, freshman members were pissed. They didn't get their five minutes and fucked the whole thing up, pushing it back another

week so they can get their five minutes and fuck the whole thing up pushing it back another week So they can get their five minutes on TV to ask questions. So they better be good or I'm gonna be mad and our apologies to Philly. We thought we'd be there the night of the testimony But as I said the inimitable Aasha Rengapa will still be joining us on stage along with Andrew Torres And we can't wait for that and then we're gonna have the meet and greet the following day and we've got a lot of people coming to that. So it's gonna be really fun. Yeah, that also means that our Chicago show is gonna be extra fun.

So it's a couple days after that, the molar testimony. Exactly. And Renato Marriotti is gonna be joining us for the Chicago show. Maybe we can pull in somebody else since it'll be right after that testimony we'll see. And the Mazar's case had oral arguments this week, Friday

morning, I listened to them because I'm a nerd. And you give a quick recap of that origin just of the Mizar's case? Oh, yeah. I was like, what? Yeah, sorry. I mean, you were going back to the Mizar's case. Yeah, quick recap of the Mizar's case is a refresher.

The oversight committee subpoenaed Mizar's accounting firm for Trump's financial documents and Trump filed a lawsuit against them suing Elijah Cummings personally and the oversight committee saying they had no legal standing to do this. Cons of Boy, Trump's lawyer this week was arguing on behalf of Trump told the three judge panel that the oversight committee does not have the power to investigate the president and the attorney for the oversight the oversight committee oversight committee Douglas Letter basically argued that that was a dietic and one judge the trump appointee her name is rouse yes a lot of questions about the separation of powers and she seemed to give the hardest

time to our side but the other two judges seemed to be siding with the oversight committee. It's not a slam dunk. I didn't get the feeling that it was like, oh, this is a slam dunk, but it should be. But I also got the feeling that a lot of the judges were asking questions just to make it seem like they were not biased.

Or they didn't have to already have their minds made up. Because they aren't biased. It's just the law is the law. So I mean, I guess if you're biased towards the law, which is what you're supposed to be in your judge. But anyway, my beans are the Dems will win this either two to one, row, dissenting, or three to nothing. And Trump will then appeal and bonk so it can be either heard before the entire panel or to the Supreme Court. Just go straight to the Supreme Court. The Dems will ultimately win, I think, no later than Spring. And you can hear Andrew Torres and I posit about it during the interview.

And a little bit. So stick around for that. Yeah, I say keep pushing it back. And then when it comes out, it'll be like high time for election season. Yeah, I think it'll probably come out sometime around the spring, sometime maybe early next year. I don't think they'll get it before the end of the year, but they could get it in August session. We don't know. We'll see. Yeah. But it's fast tracked. So Mazar's. All right. Yeah, that was a whole friendly subpoena too. If you recall. Yes, I do remember that because, you know, the oversight committee is like, hey, we want these documents.

And Mizar's was like, we're all cool to hand these over. These are our documents, they belong to us. Even though Concevoi, Trump's attorney argued in court, you know, these are Trump's financial documents. And Douglass Letter, who is the oversight committee lawyer, is like, there's no such thing as accounting, accountant privilege. You can't claim that.

These documents belong to a third party. We were subpoenaing the third party. They agreed to hand them over. And they asked for a subpoena so that they could basically go to Trump and say, we wish we could have helped you out, bro, but they gave us a subpoena. You know, that's kind of what the friendly subpoena means.

So we'll see how that ends up. I'm really confident it's going to still come down on the side of the DEMs, even if it goes up to the Supreme Court. I think Roberts can be shamed into voting the right way. So he does pretty cut and dry. So he doesn't embarrass his legacy. And then Facebook was fine. $5 billion for Cambridge Analytica

Privacy violations. Largest find ever. Drop in the bucket for them. Yeah, totally. That's the thing, right? Because this is, while it's the largest find ever levied by the Federal Trade Commission, it's still just a drop in the bucket for them.

It's like a parking ticket. And if you remember, the political consultancy company formerly known as Cambridge Analytica, now known as Emma Data, improperly obtained private information on more than 50 million of us, Facebook users. In 2012, Facebook promised it would better protect user privacy and a legal consent decree because they were in trouble for this before. And the FTC found that that decree had been violated when they gave this information over

improperly to Cambridge Analytica. But with this fine, it's just to find, no new rules or stipulations come with it. So this is good news for Facebook. It's so good in fact that the stock jumped 1% when the announcement was made Friday. All they have to do is pay the fine.

They don't have to follow. Usually when the FTC comes at you, they'll come at you with a fine. They don't have to follow. They don't, you know, usually when the FTC comes at you, they'll come at you with a fine and then all these new stipulations. Like you can't do this, you have to do this, you have to report everything you hand over, you have to give, there's gotta be oversight. There's usually some rules attached, nothing.

No rules attached to this fine. So. Where did you see Netflix is doing a documentary on Brittany Kaiser? No. Yeah. Dude, that's... Jaliza's like a favorite fan.

I know, fantasy type. Yeah. Yeah, or at least it looks to be, I think the overall topic is everything, but they're sort of picking Britney Kaiser as like the center, it seems. Yeah, she was a former CEO of Cambridge Analytica. Yeah. And as we know, it became... they switched their name, it became Emerdaada, and everybody just sort of transferred over to that.

And they were trying to hide, get their computers out of there, and take them over to Emerdaada, and do that all secretively. And it's just all a big faccocdom mess. And we know that Brad Parkscale, who was the data point guy in the 2016 campaign for Trump. Now he's been appointed as his campaign finance chairman. So, or not finance chairman, just camp chairman, the man of Ford, which means he'll probably end up in jail.

So, it's just not a smart job to take. Now, it's cursed. Brad, with your beard. It's a good beard though. Also, Carla provost Trump's border patrol chief. Uh, it's found out she was a member of the I'm 1015 group. Great. The Facebook group of over 9500 border patrol officers that was

recently shut down for making horrific racist and sexist posts. That's about half the entire border patrol who later this week in a statement said, this is not the voice of the border patrol, but it is actually literally the voice of the border patrol and they were saying things like about a 16 year old Guatemalan boy that was sick they posted a photo of this sick boy who said if he dies he dies or they when they had the picture of the two you know the father and daughter that were found in the Rio Grande somebody, have you all seen floaters this clean? Oh my God.

And then they had vulgar memes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez simulating her giving oral sex to Trump or to a board of patrol guard, saying that when she shows up, they'll throw warm burritos at her or something like that. Just awful horrible racist sexist nastiness And the board of patrol chief was part of this there were a lot of supervisors, but the chief was in there too

So that's terrifying gross. Yeah, it is and that's just that whole story is Sickening so anyway Guys, we will be back in just a few seconds Hey, this is AG from Mollershi, and I am totally obsessed with Third Love now. You guys, I have replaced every single one of my bras with Third Love bras. So I've got my pushup bra, my t-shirt bra, my work bra, my fun bra, my cocktail bra, my loka, and my dummy. Like, everything I've got now is from Third Love.

Not only are they coloned by a woman, and not only do they show real women's bodies in their advertisements, and not only are they totally disrupt by a woman, and not only do they show real women's bodies in their advertisements, and not only are they totally disrupting the male-dominated bra industry, go ladies, but their bras are by far the most comfortable, perfectly fitting bras I've ever owned. And that's because they have this awesome easy-to-use fit finder, and they use millions of measurements by real women, so they use mat and like mega data to put all this together, from real women. And they don't just consider your number and your letter.

They take into account issues you have with your off the rack bras like if the straps dig or if you have cup spillage. And as part of their fit finder quiz, they consider cup shape. And they're the industry leader with like over 70 sizes. So that's amazing. So it's easy to use just pop online, take their 60 second fit finder quiz. They help you identify your bra size, your cup shape. And they have half sizes too because 50% of women like me fall between cup sizes. And I could never get the perfect fit until I use third love and third love made it possible. So they have that also a 100% fit guarantee, returns a free and easy, and you have 60 days to wear it, wash it, put it to the test, and if it's not perfect, just return it, and

get this. Third love will wash it and donate it to a woman in need, and that's incredible. So as I said, returning to exchanges are free and easy. It's the most comfortable bra you'll ever own and they help women in need. Seriously, my favorite new company, Best Fitting Bra I've Ever Warned. So third love knows there's a perfect bra for everyone. So right now they're offering our listeners 15% off your first order. So go to thirdlove.com slash AG now to take the FitFinder quiz and find your perfect fitting bra, and you'll get 15% off your first purchase. That thirdlove.com slash AG for 15% off today. You'll be glad you did.

All right, welcome back. Lookin' awesome. Hot notes. See me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me see me me see me me see me see me see me see me see me see me me see me me see me see me see me me see me me me see me see me me see me see me me see me me see me me see me see me me see me see me me see me me see me me see me me see me see me see me me see me me see me see me me me see me see me see me see me me see me see me me see me see me me me see me me see me see me me see me me see me see me me me see me me see me see me see me me see me me me me me me see me me me see All right, so this week Jordan has an update for us on the case against Democrat Greg Craig, but first Jordan Has an update for us on the side group as well because you're covering for Jalisa today who's out. She's sick We you know, we've sent her our love. We hope she gets well soon and has a speedy recovery But yeah, Jalisa's been our girl Friday on the side group, but now, you know, so we're gonna cover for her today and so Since since she's not here, can you tell us what's going on with the Cygur?

Yes, so the Senate Intelligence Committee, that we were just talking about, they've sent an inquiry to Cygurbs founder, Roy Bernstein, and owner of Cygurbs, Joel Zamol, who we've talked about a lot on the podcast, and their continuing investigation on election interference. So Cygurbs is a group that offered a help

to help Trump with social media manipulation in the 2016 election and has really strong links to Israeli intelligence. Zammal was also president at transition team meetings when the undermining of Iran and the ultimate take down of its regime was being discussed the daily reports. So, I haven't heard that the daily police reports. Yeah, I hadn't heard that until I read this. So the Iran nuclear agreement. Yeah, apparently he was there talking with also Eric Prince was a part of those meetings. Yeah, because I remember that they had targeted the two guys who wrote the Iran deal basically

and they were Obama guys and they were getting death threats and stuff like that. Yeah, I remember reporting on that, but I didn't know Zammal was a part of those discussions, too. Yeah, so it looks like there's a lot to be discovered. So that's going to be a new focus for them, I imagine. I don't know if that information is new that the Daily Group Beast is just reporting that, or if they already had that information. Yeah, I never heard of it. We usually don't miss stuff, but so I'm thinking it's new, but that's just my ego saying,

oh, I've never heard of it, it's new. But there's a lot that we haven't heard of. Once again, we thought the entire Mueller report was going to be mostly shit we'd never heard before, and it's everything we reported on. There was only, like, so far, you know, going, you know, word by word, step by step, page by page, in the first volume, there's only been a couple things that were new to us, but this could be an old reporting that we just didn't pick up on.

Definitely, pretty big deal though. Bannon was there too, I read. So it's, yeah. And these guys were all part of that August 3rd, 2016 meeting, which the author of Proof of Conspiracy and Proof of Collusion, two books, really outstanding books, Seth Abramson has dubbed the most important part of this entire investigation was at August 3rd meeting. That's when they talked about the social medium manipulation campaign, the XAML put together. There was a couple of different proposals. Apparently, they said they didn't

use any of them, but Nader, Nader, George Nader, who's been arrested for child pornography, and was given partial immunity in this's been arrested for child pornography, and was given partial immunity in this case, not the child pornography case, had paid Xamal $2 million after Trump won the election, because they didn't use their products. That's a lot of me. They have like an idea deposit. That's a lot of money. And it's after Trump won?

Yeah. Very weird. Very weird. And they were offering help effectively to any sort of power that had any interest in taking down Iran. So Saudi Arabia, the person that wound up being ultimately blamed for Kishoggi's murder was involved in those talks as well. Yeah, so it's a pretty big deal. It's a pretty big deal.

And then we've got Soriano, this mystery British guy who's worked with Israel, Cy group, Wiki Stratt. Yeah, he's just in the middle of like everything. Yeah, yeah. And he's got connections to all of them. And there's some really great reporting out from forensic news that's run by Scott Steadman. You should check out, I think he tweeted about it.

I retweeted it. So go to, if you want to check it out at Mueller, she wrote on Twitter and see what he's writing about with Soriano because he's been questioned by the Senate Intel Committee along with Zammell and that Roy guy. What's his last name, Roy? Roy Burnside.

Yeah. Very, very interesting. Very, yes. Yes, Steph. Mm-hmm. So, all right. And then what do you got for us on the... Our Democrat.

Yeah. Our one Democrat guy who broke the law. Yeah. He had a hearing. He, of course. Yes, he did. This is a pretty short update. So on Wednesday, the judge in his granted a motion by his defense attorneys to keep

the jury from hearing about Greg Craig's efforts to get Maniford's daughter a job at his law firm. When Craig was working on that white wash paper on behalf of Ukraine, or what happened in Ukraine and there, essentially, the Tem Enkho thing trying to say that she was a, she should have been in prison. Yes, exactly. And so, yeah, Judge Amy Bourbon-Jackson said that I find the probative, value of the evidence to be quite minimal.

It's hard to characterize it as much more than an effort to go after the defendant's character in general." So they're not going to allow that to be seen by the jury. Could be prejudicial and I think they said they already have enough. They definitely said it was prejudicial. Like they already have enough evidence to show that he was willing to do what Man of Fort asked. 100%. That's exactly what she said. She said there's already so many other things. She said, basically, I believe in you to bring the court something else

That's not so blatantly just trying to be like well, he did this Yeah, yeah, but I don't know I think it's like I think it's understandable that that's that's a toss-up right because Offering someone's family member a job that has other implications it's outside of just being like one time I saw him push a homeless guy. You know, it's like, it's not like it's a complete non-sequitur. Right. Yeah, that's true. It is connected.

Yeah. But not enough, not in a way that she thinks is consequential enough. Yeah. But his trial set the star August 11th. Yeah. So we will be following that. Yeah. And I also think he wanted to strike a line

from his indictment and she refused to strike that line. Something bad about him. Man, he's a criminal. Yep, but he's, yeah, basically he was working with Manifort and Vandorswann and Skadenarp's on this whole whitewashed report thing and he failed to register. Yeah, before an agent. And I know to one of the counts I think against him or one of the things they're examining is how much he like petaled that report and it looks like they're not gonna really have too much to accuse him for on that front

of actually doing anything outside of just like presenting it. Yeah, which is still lobbying, right, technically. And he is a lobbyist. He shouldn't have worked for Manifort. Yep. All right, thank you for that. Yeah.

All right, Flynn. Flynn. Flynn, Flynn. As it turns out, the most cooperative muller witness is a fraud. You remember how they're like, we gave him offer no jail time because he cooperated early, he cooperated often, he was just such a robust cooperator with his pile of shit. Back at the beginning of June, we got the news that Flynn was firing his lawyers and replacing them with other counsel.

And most folks speculated this was simply a money-saving move since most of his case was over and there's only sentencing left to go. But having just gotten released the voicemail of Trump's lawyer dangling a pardon to Flynn's lawyer and that flag and Eagle-Giff message fiasco to Matt Gates after he trashed Mueller on Fox and then again after Bar was nominated. I decided I thought that the reason he was switching lawyers was because he was trying to back out of his plea deal. And a lot of folks thought I was being a little tinfoil hat about that. But when we found out who his new lawyer was, none other than Sidney Powell, folks started to change their

tune about that, right? So she's a right wing nut job. She's a muller hater. She was called the special counsels. She called the special counsels office creeps on a mission. And she even bought creeps on a mission.com and sells creeps on a mission shirts. Oh my gosh. How did I forget about that? Yeah, creeps on a mission. She sat on several occasions that she saw.

She thought Flynn's lawyer fucked him and that he should withdraw his plea deal. It can't believe he pled guilty and that Trump should pardon him and he shouldn't be cooperating with the government. Well, this week it's all tumbling down. It's all coming tumbling down. We learned from a court filing that Flynn's cooperation with the government blew up during

trial prep for the upcoming case against Bigeanne Reficion, also known as Bigeanne Keanne, and his associate Alp Teacon, who, they all worked together lobbying for Turkey without registering. And Bijan Khan and Flynn owned a lobbying firm and they failed to register as foreign agents when they lobbied for the Turkish government. I'll have the Turkish government to the United States. And Flynn wasn't charged with that because a part of his cooperation agreement with the government.

He was only charged with one count of lying to the FBI when he covered up his chats about sanctions with Russians and Turkey So he he was only charged with lying to the FBI and was it was recommended zero jail time by Mueller and as part of the agreement Flynn admitted to failing to register as a foreign agent with regards to his work with Bijan Kyan and Alp Teacon on Lobby in on behalf of the Turkish government Well now he's saying that he didn't intentionally lie on his phara forms, on his registration forms,

and that his old lawyers messed them up and he didn't know what he was signing. And this has led the government, led to the government pulling Flynn as the star witness in the Bijan Kian trial, saying they no longer trust what he says, and he's not a credible witness anymore. And they say they have tons of documentary evidence in whom win the Bijan Kian trial without him, they can win the case, but he's been removed as a cooperating witness and rec win the Bijanki on trial without him. They can win the case.

But he's been removed as a cooperating witness and reclassified as a co-conspirator. And not only does this dumbass move, like, now this opens him up to being charged with breach of plea. And he could also be charged with all this stuff. He wasn't charged with as part of the cooperation, like not registering as a foreign agent. But he's pissed off Judge Sullivan enough already

who delayed his sentencing in a hearing last December when he called him a traitor to the United States and asked the lawyers if they'd considered treason charges and told Flynn he doesn't want him to sentence, you don't want me to sentence you right now. You should go forth and try to cooperate some more because even though Mueller recommended zero jail time, Sullivan was seeming like he was gonna put him away.

He was gonna put him behind bars, asking about treason saying you, you know, shit all over my flag, he was mad, right? And then he tried to get them to release the kiss layout conversations, but the government objected and Sullivan agreed, but he did release the doubt, um, voicemail. But after the government removed Flynn as a witness and changed him to a co-conspirator, Sullivan then ordered both sides to file a brief saying how is this going to affect our DC case? And the government responded saying they don't

know how this could change or impact Flynn's sentencing in the DC case and asked for a delay in the sentencing until after the trial. It seems he wanted to see how everything is going to shake out. Like is he going to fully back out? What's he going to do? But why after the trial? I don't know, because he's not going to be in the trial anymore. But Flynn filed his response to that and said, he's fully cooperating. He's lived up to his cooperation. He's completed his cooperation.

He's satisfied his cooperation, and he's continuing to cooperate and this shouldn't affect his DC case at all. And they also asked for a delay in sentencing. But he's not cooperating. Yeah, you can't have it all, dude. Yeah, that's exactly what she wants. She wants to say he is cooperating, but he's not going to testify. And now the government's calling a co-conspirator and not a witness, not a cooperating witness.

But even though it's all of his pissed, Flynn and his lawyers might not care, because they might have either been promised a pardon or expecting one, just as Dowd promised in the voicemail that he left for Flynn's lawyer. So they're saying that his lawyers messed up his paperwork, and Mueller forcing Flynn to lie and is now retaliating against him for it. Retaliating? By recommending no jail time? Yeah.

And check this out. Are you ready for Zabatash? Oh, yes. In a court hearing on Friday, Flynn's hearing, we learned some previously unknown but widely assumed shit that we had, that he was actually doing secret work for the government of Turkey because of his relationship with an ongoing presidential campaign. Prosecutors wrote to Bijankhian's lawyer that the government was in possession of multiple independent pieces of information relating to the Turkish government's efforts to influence the US policy on Turkey and Fatula

Gulen. Gulen was the cleric guy that they paid $15 million to Kidnap, paid Flynn, tried to pay Flynn $50 million to Kidnap an extra diet on his own, not through the government. Including Neasen style. Yeah, he even needs his style. And this is including information relating to communications, interactions, and relationships between a chem outtaken in Michael Flynn and a chem outtaken's engagement of Michael Flynn because of Michael Flynn's relationship with an ongoing presidential campaign without every ever any reference to the defendant of F.I.G. which is the lobbying group. Flynn's lobbying group.

Sydney Powell responded saying she had no idea what the government was talking about and the whole thing smacks of desperation. Whatever it is, it can't be new information to the prosecutors and they had it when they recommended no jail time. And as we've said in our recent filings, this can only be retaliation for his refusal to answer a question the way that they wanted. That's a lot more than, yeah, that's like not cooperating anymore is not answering a question the way they wanted to. Like, the question being do you want to cooperate still?

He wanted to cooperate still, but they might have pulled him off of the cooperation because he's not a credible witness Yeah, but you know, yeah, yeah, that's that's fair I guess he wasn't like screw you guys. I'm explicitly not cooperating anymore But it was answering them that way it was the way to get it out Yeah, it was the way to do that. So Flynn's lobbying group contracted with Alp Teacon to smear Gulen in the US on behalf of Turkey, which required them as lobbyists to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. And we learned that Flynn has more ties to Alp Teacon than previously thought. And of course, we all know that if he blows

up his plea agreement, he opens himself up to being charged for things he was forgiven for, for cooperating in the first place. So with all that in mind, are you ready to play the fancy indictment league? Yes. I'm gonna be a dine-it! No way, this is gonna be okay. Dine-it! I ain't dick.

A dine-it! C'mon, I'm gonna be a dine-it! Hold it, they can't, it's gonna be okay. Just calm down. I can't calm down, I'm gonna be a dine. All right, I get to go first this week. And I am going with Flynn. I think he might be brought up on some additional charges.

I'm gonna go Soriano. I think that they're gonna start looking into a lot more stuff that they didn't look into as much before. For sure, he was on my list this week too. I'm gonna go with the inaugural. Okay. I'm gonna go with Samo. Samo, good, cool. Good, cool, good. Very legal, very cool. Very legal pick. I'm gonna go with Brody.

Oh, yes. Okay, I'm gonna go with... I'm gonna go with Rory. Oh, Rory. Rory, yes. Thank you. Rory Bernstein. Put me down for Lisa Corbatov. Okay. Who's she again? She's the associate of Brody. Ah, yes. Okay. So many

names. I'm gonna go with Tom Berg. How that freaking dude on my list for so freaking long. Is that five or do I have one more? You have one more. Go with the Pecker. All right. I've selected Pecker. And I will do... I'll random. Noise. Okay. Cool. Cool. That's the fantasy indictment link. Yeah, there we go. Post your picks. Go to the Mueller's Friends of Justice Facebook page.

That's our closed group. If you're a patron, you will allow you in. And you find the post that's in announcements. It's usually pinned there and you can pick your five. And you can pick whichever five you want, you don't have to not pick who we picked. We want you to use our picks to make you, you know, inform your picks. So check that out and if you're not a patron, be one. And you'll be one for the Daily Beans 2 and that's going to be Add Free Episodes for you. And maybe video, maybe we'll do dances. I don't know yet. It'll be great. But it's three bucks a month, you guys, for two shows, all the additional

content. It's mean greets if we ever come to New City. Yeah, and we do pre-sale and stuff like that. So you can get your first pick of good seats during our live shows and come to the meet and greets first, because those sell out real fast, and we sell it to patrons first. So anyway, we want you to become one because we love you and we think it's worth it. And it also helps pay for our health benefits for our staff. So thank you for that. We appreciate it. And we will be right back with the interview.

Hey guys, A.G. here to tell you about my new favorite shoes, Rothy's. Rothy's look good, they feel good, they're sustainable, which is very important to us. They pack well and they're literally the most comfortable shoes I've ever owned. Rathi's come in all kinds of colors and patterns, and they're available in four different styles, including the flat below for the point in the sneaker. And they transition beautifully from work events to cocktails to happy hour. I can wear them with yoga pants, skirts, dresses, jeans, suits, whatever I'm wearing. They go with them.

So I love these shoes so much. And when we do live shows, I'm on my feet for hours. And Rathi's are the only shoes I can trust me to get through it. And they launch new colors every week. They're constantly selling out. They're just absolutely fantastic company. I have one of each style. I bought them all in black because that's just how I am.

But I have, I wear them everywhere, pretty much. And they pack really well, like I said. They're breathable, machine washable, which is huge, and they pack really well like I said they're breathable machine washable Which is huge and they go with everything and you guys know how important the sustainability is to us at Mulershoe Road And I'm happy to say Rothy's are made in a zero waste factory and they ship directly in the box So there's not a bunch of extra packaging waste, but even better than that Rothy's are made from recycled plastic water bottles so cool So to date they've diverted over 25 million water bottles from landfills to landfills and oceans.

So you were years to work, right? I do. Yeah Working at the comedy store. I have to be on my feet, especially on the weekends for like five hours straight Yeah, they're really comfortable and the comfort stays to they're not like sometimes you get shoes and they're really comfy And then it wears down pretty quick and they kind of stop being really comfortable But these are like always comfortable. Yeah, and they're super breathable, so you don't get sweaty feet. And did you just throw them in the washing machine? And I can't believe they're made out of plastic bottles. They're so comfortable.

Yeah, they're really comfy. They're rad. So guys, Rothy's has an amazing deal for you guys. If you use code AG at checkout to get free shipping with no minimum, that's free shipping and free returns and exchanges on your Rothy's shoe. And trust me, you won't want to return them anyway. Just head to go at rathi's.com that's r-o-t-h-y-s.com and enter AG to get your new favorite flats with free shipping. You'll be glad you did.

Joining us today for the interview is the co-host of the opening arguments podcast which is coming up on 300 episodes. Please welcome real life lawyer Andrew Torres. Andrew, thanks for coming back on Mueller. She wrote, Hey, G, thanks for having me back on. I love coming on the show. Real life lawyers. Yeah. Well, you know, somebody's got to do it.

I always love talking to you because I passed your one question bar exam. The last time I appeared on you. your one question bar exam the last time I appeared on you. You gave the, without a doubt, the best answer that a non-lawyer has ever given on our show. And a better than many lawyers we've had on the show. Well, thank you. I attribute it to spending my nights, days, weekends, and evenings, and lunches reading court documents. Yeah, yeah.

No, I often say to people like a large part of what law school is, and particularly the first year of law school is just, you know, it's kind of like immersive foreign language, right? Like you have to learn all of the crazy words that lawyers use. And like I think you've been so hip deep in, you know, these kinds of documents that you know, you're you're starting to speak our language. And that's a little scary. But I know. There we go.

Last week I learned about having to petition the court to file second amended complaints. And with the whole coursey situation, which is just a shit show. But yeah, you get that you get the one. You get one freebie that's that. And then you have to file for amended stuff. And there was something about I don't even know the language was crazy. But I worked it out. Google helped. So I want to ask you the past two weeks, first of all, have been bananas with regards to the 2020 census citizenship question and Trump's attempt to add the question.

Can you give us a little brief breakdown because it seems to be over now, maybe? Yeah, I would say maybe on that, right? So I, look, I thought you did a really great job of this on the daily beans, but basically June to end of June, right? Because the government has been saying all along, hey, we absolutely have to get this out to the printers by the end of June. They represented that in two separate cases, right, in both New York and in Maryland, all the way up to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, end of June, super narrowly in an incredibly fractured opinion that I would wager every amount of money I have. It's not that much, but still, that this was going the other way until the whole Feller

docs came out, right? Like when you read the decision in the Department of Commerce versus New York decision, it does not say what a lot of people have reported, you guys reported this correctly, but you know a lot of people are saying, look, it's a win, sense of, you know, citizenship question, can't be on the census, it doesn't say that, right? It says, in general, substantively, it's totally fine to put a citizenship question on the census, even if there's evidence that that will depress a large swath of the population from answering the census. What it says is, but you know at the very very end, you know, we're kind of, you know, we managed to shame John Roberts into thinking that all right, when a document says in capital letters, how to advantage Republicans and non-Hispanic

white people that maybe that was just enough to shame Roberts into not signing on with the opinion, I firmly believe it was going to go the other way into the Hoff-Helladoc scheme. The Hoff-Helladocs are not a part of the Supreme Court opinion. So, Supreme Court remains back down to New York and there was a pending case in Maryland, the same thing. Four sanctions that are related to the Hofeller docs and basically the argument there is, hey, look, government lawyers came into court and said a whole bunch of stuff that they knew wasn't true, right? They said, oh, no, we absolutely have to do this to enforce the Voting Rights Act. And now the Supreme Court has said, yeah, no, that explanation is bullshit, right?

You never intend to do that. You used the DOJ as a puppet to write a letter that Wilbur Ross told them to write while all along secretly conferring with the puppet master of gerrymandering, the Sky Thomas Hoveler, to rig the census, to advantage, again, Republicans and non-Hispanic white people, and you can sanction lawyers for lying about stuff. So that's what was kind of left to resolve. It went back to both trial courts. And then we had the amazing colloquy on the record in Maryland, Judge Hazel, somebody in front of whom I practice, I have a pending case in front of Judge Hazel, who was like, I talked to the government's lawyers on Tuesday and they told me that

I talked to the government's lawyers on Tuesday and they told me that the Department of Commerce was going ahead and printing the census without the citizenship question. Then I wake up on Wednesday and I read a tweet from the president, which says, yes, we are. So I need you guys to come back from vacation, get in here and tell me and basically give them an ultimate. Again, you did a great job summarizing this. Either we're going ahead with discovery or you're prepared to sign a stipulation that says the question won't appear in the census. You gave them a two-day deadline to Friday. Friday came and the government was like, well, sorry, we're not going to be able to sign that stipulation. So discovery is proceeding and put a pin in that because that's going to be important.

And then Trump tried to replace all the lawyers in both cases. And that's, look, it's really easy to understand how that happened. That happened because these lawyers, particularly the lawyers in the New York case, who already have been replaced once, right? The New York case should have been handled by the DOJ lawyers for the, sorry, the New York case should have been handled by the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. This is in footnote one in the court's decision denying the government's lawyers the right to withdraw. But in August 18, the US Attorney's Office withdrew and they replaced them with the DOJ lawyers who were there. And now, like those DOJ lawyers are in a position

where they're like, look, Trump is gonna make us say stuff that we personally are not going to be able to say with a straight face. It compromises our ethics, so we need to get out. Andrew, Andrew, it reminds me of the wrath of Khan when they put the things in their ears and Chekhov says, Chekhov says, he made us say things. He put things in our bodies.

He put things in our bodies. Made us do bad things. That, look, we know, I mean, A, two point, that's a spectacular wrath of Khan reference. B, like, look, when you read the Mueller report, right, especially volume two, like is replete with instances of Mueller uncovering the fact that various executive branch officials were directly instructed by Donald Trump to break the law. And then they were like, uh, uh, uh, uh, Mr. President will go get right on that.

And then we're like, uh, we're not definitely, we're definitely not doing that. Um, court filing for hard to fake. Yeah. Go ahead. It was a court then says, no, you can't replace your lawyers. We've got sanctions going on. We've got litigation and process, right? And they're, and they're like, no, no, no, you, you just can't replace all your, you can add lawyers all day if you want, but there are rules in the court that says if a, if a lawyer is going going to leave you have to give me a good reason why in New York judge for him and was like you didn't give any reasons and then of course we know what happened in Maryland. Yep.

And so crucially in judge forman's order this is really, really genius. He says look, if you want to withdraw and I'm doing these backwards, right? But number two, you have to sign a piece of paper that says you're submitting to the continuing jurisdiction of the court because we're, you know, this court may issue sanctions against you as an individual for stuff you said in front of me, and you don't just get, you know, cut and run like, we're still trying to figure that out if we're going to sanction you so so you have to submit to the continuing jurisdiction of the court for the sanctions purposes and also and this is really the genius part you have to sign

a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury from each lawyer seeking to withdraw stating the quote satisfactory reasons for withdrawing at the stage. And that's like, if we're going to get through like what Trump has done, right? Like it's going to be through the fact that like a lot of, look, some people are irrevocably compromised, right? Like I whiffed badly on Bill Barr. I think all of us did.

We sort of looked at him. We're like, this guy's a long stand. He's a Republican, but he's not a Trump toti, and he's a Trump toti. He's 100%. We've seen that. It's ridiculous. But you can't corrupt the entire executive branch in three, right? Lots of the day-to-day work still has to be done by people who are not personally loyal

to Trump. There aren't that many people in the country, right? These people know, you're a DOJ lawyer. You're not going to have that job forever. You want to go. But these lawyers were seemingly pretty upset that they were put in this position. I know that one of the lawyers was like, look, I'm where you're at, Judge. And I want to be candid with this court.

And I want to do the right thing. And then yet here we are. Yeah. Yeah. That judge Hazel transcript was just was heartbreaking. You know, near the end where the council for plaintiffs asked the judge and said, you know, I'd I'd really like to find out why the government, you know, said repeatedly and this court and the Supreme Court relied upon the representations that it absolutely had to know by the end of June.

And here we are after the fourth of July and they're asking for the weekend. And clearly that date was a total pretext, was complete nonsense. Really, really good point. And Judge Hazel's response was, quote, I understand that I suspect we're not going to get a useful answer to that question.

So I'm not sure I really want to wait into that at this juncture end of quote. I mean, that is astonishing for a sitting judge to say, yeah, you got a great point. I'd like to know, but I don't think the lawyers in front of me are going to tell me the truth because I think they're not in control of their client anymore. Who by the way is the president of the United States? I mean, that's just it's bonkers. So, that's all right. So, that's all the procedural stuff.

Trump, I was shocked by this. I don't know if you were shocked. I predicted the other way because, of course, Trump scheduled the press conference at 5 p.m. and I recorded the show at 3 p.m. yesterday, but I predicted the other way, right? Like that Trump with Bill Barr in tow was going to head into the press conference and announce that he was gonna promulgate

an executive order to include the citizenship question on the census. He didn't do that. I think he didn't do that because Bill Barr told him you have zero chance of that working, right? Like the district court is going to enjoy that the second you promulgate it and either through, you know, actual litigation

or just, you know, through running out the clock, like the Supreme Court's not gonna get to that. If they do, you're probably gonna lose Roberts. Like, I think that that was the advice that was conveyed. And not to mention, he probably, you know, Bar probably said, not to mention the Department of Justice Lawyers here who now are facing sanctions and who you have turned into giant, incredible liars,

non-credible, not incredible, but both liars. That's a non-credible hope. There you go. We have, we have no case, right? And he did he caved. I was surprised too. I thought he was first sure, just make an executive order or a presidential memorandum or whatever the fuck he does to say, we're going to put this, I thought for sure, also,

they were printing the census with the question on it or at least maybe two versions of it just in case I'd be interested to see if that went down. I would be very interested to see if that went down that will be like that kind of discovery is potentially relevant to the sanctions motions. So hopefully plaintiffs council in New York and Maryland will ask that question because if they do, I think they would be entitled to an answer and to documents and to copies, right? But let's not, I mean, take our eye off the wall. Look, this is good that we were able to stop them from hijack, from a plan that would weaponize the census to hijack districts in democratic states and convey them over to red states,

right? Like literally taking votes away from people, seats away from individuals in Congress by encouraging under reporting. What the Trump administration is going to do and already started doing yesterday is they're going to keep speaking about this, right? You know, there was an executive order requiring all executive agencies to turn over citizenship

data, blah, blah, blah. That's not just trying to pacify the right wing base and saying, see, look, we are still going to be, that is designed to promote a campaign of misinformation out to the low information households that the whole point of adding the citizenship question in the first place was to target right people who would think Absolutely, the census is now tainted And even if even if they don't go forward with the misinformation campaign, which they will it's already Tainted yep, and and the plaintiffs at least in Maryland have already raised that possibility and judge Hazel was Potentially on board. I mean, you read the transcript.

He was potentially on board with issuing relief beyond just in joining the government from putting the citizenship question on the census, right? He said, well, what if I issue some kind of order requiring the Department of Commerce to combat misinformation coming from the government wherever its source, which was again. That blew me away.

That was a, do I need to issue an order to keep the president from lying? Yeah, and written in exactly that way because Judge Hazel can't enjoy the president, right? But what he can do is he can enjoy, I say, can't, it would be a fight, right? Like he doesn't clearly have the power to enjoy the president, but he clearly has the power to enjoy the Department of Commerce, party to the case, subject to the court's jurisdiction from, and you can issue an affirmative injunction, right? You can say, look, you won't do this, you won't add the citizenship question. And also affirmatively, you will do this thing, right? Which is, you can say, look, you won't do this. You won't add the citizenship question. And also affirmatively, you will do this thing, right? Which is, you can say, you will issue a press release

every time the White House says nonsense, right? Like, it would be totally unprecedented, right? As Judge Hazel says, like, this is kind of a weird spot for the judiciary to be in, but here we are. And it is. So look, those sanctions proceedings are still going to go forward. And I mean, Judge Hazel is conservative small sea by temperament, right? He said, he's a sober, honest, head, you know, head down, you know, in the books, kind of judge. He might say, all right, like this is it, we've got it.

The government has admitted defeat were done. But I suspect plaintiff's counsel will ask him to revisit the question of, you got to protect us from disinformation. So still stuff worth watching and we'll fight with him. Yeah, it's not over by a long shot. So we'll obviously be keeping everyone apprised of that. Let's see, finally, did you hear the oral arguments today

in the Mazar's case? I am super cool. So I actually listened to them. And they were pretty amazing. And I was wondering if you had read up anything and do you have any feeling on which way the panel is leaning. I'll tell you, Judge Rao was pretty tough on Douglas Letter, who is fighting on behalf

of the oversight committee. But it seemed like the other two judges were really given it to what's his name, Ross. Yeah, something. Conross Convoy. Oh, yeah, yeah, Con Savoy. Con Savoy. No, Con Savoy, who, not much of a lawyer in my view.

His argument was so, he was basically arguing that the Congress doesn't have any oversight over the office of the president. And it was just everyone was like, wait, what, can you, how, what could you possibly, huh? And it just went on like that for a long time. Yeah. It seemed to me like the other two, and I think this is a panel of three, and it's a two, you know, best two out of three, Rochambot situation here, but I think that the other two are going to go for allowing, uh, Mazar's to respond to this subpoena. Um, I'm sure it'll be appealed up, but, uh, I don't know. I was, and I kind of was also wondering if this had anything to do

with the possible delay of the Mueller testimony. Maybe they're waiting for this shit, but I don't think that this Mazar's case could be decided any time in the next couple of weeks, let alone the next five or six months. Yeah, I think you're exactly right on all of that. So yeah, I don't think it has anything to do with dealing Mueller. Your read is entirely correct, the panel, it's a three-judge panel before the DC circuit,

the two judges to tell and Patricia Millett. To tell was a Bill Clinton appointee, Patricia Millett, and Obama appointee pretty reliably. I mean, that's not crazy leftist, but like pretty reliably liberal judges. Naomi Rao, this is a Trump appointee, Federalist Society Goon, and activist. And it's very, very weird, right? Like, if I were Concei, if I were the lawyer for the president tasked with this impossibly stupid argument in the face to, look, is you covered, right?

This is the appeal of Judge Maites, May 20th decision, right? Which you covered on the show. We covered on the show, like, Judge Maites is a friend of mine and former colleague. So, you know, as I'm full sum in the praise, like he keep that in that disclaimer in mind. But like, that's a brilliant opinion and it's bulletproof on appeal. And, you know, it was, that was the

one that was like, you know, you have managed to, you know, to do what James Buchanan could not. I mean, you know, it was, that was, that was a really great one. That's already opened up with a quote from Buchanan. And it you know, it was, that was, that was a really great one. That's already opened up with a quote from Buchanan and it was just, it was, it was a brilliant piece of writing. It's one of my favorite things I've read this year to come out of the courts. Yeah, it was, it was really good. And so like, and again, the heart of that opinion, right, as you saw in oral argument was, um, Congress has broad investigatory authority. Um, I, I did, I think I, I've won up to your geekiness. I was on the road during the oral arguments, so I came back and read the transcripts. So, you know, we are under twin geek powers

activate there. Well, I wish I would have read it because some of the stuff that Concerroy was saying, I was seriously much like two out of the three judges. I was like, what are you like and and like did you read about watergate? Like what are you even talking about? Right the fuck now. It just made zero sense to me that he did. They're saying, oh, no, there's no check on the presidency from Congress. The bur bur bur bur bur bur.

And then and then of course, Doug Letters,, this is a private third party. There's no accountant privilege. So you can't these these documents belong to them. And, and, and I thought like out of the box. So, so, so, so anyway, I mean, to cut to the punchline, it's going to be at least two one, affirming the district court opinion, they may even lose row, right? Like, they probably won't. But out of the box, they were like, you're saying that this is really pretextual,

but like HR1 is on records disclosure, and then Constable was like, yeah, well, we think that's unconstitutional. And the court was like, well, that's nice and all, but like, that's nice and all, but like that's still actual, actual congressional action. Like are we supposed to hold that Congress is kidding? I mean, that's almost the question they asked, right?

Like, you want us as a court to say, we think they weren't really serious when they passed that HR one. This is really about arresting the president. And you could almost kind of hear the command in the background. The other thing I will just land on is that throughout this, I just don't know why. This part of why I think Council is not a good lawyer. Their brief sights to four different Naomi Rao law review articles that she wrote. They're very clearly trying to pick up Rao. Like I don't know, like do they think

if there's a minority report like that, you know that they can spin it as a win? I don't even know what the game is, but like. Yeah, that's dumb. It's not Rao that you want to convince. Yeah. You've got Rao. You've got her.

Yeah, convince one of the other too with a legit legal argument and I just love that he kept saying it like I think I think it was even I think it might have been the other judge. She's like, can you tell me of a time when it's okay for Congress to provide oversight to the office of the presidency and he examples at all. And and and again, like that the position like and when a judge asks you that that sort of question, right? And they're like, so essentially the rule you're arguing for here has no bright line, and

there's no possible way that we can implement it. Like, that's not a real good sign, right? So yeah, I was very encouraged by that. So since we've had a lot of depressing stuff in this segment, we at least we get to end with, like, I think this is really, really clear and those records are coming out. And you know, this is something you have preached from the beginning of your show. And you know, I talk about a my show all the time. Like the wheels of justice churn slowly. It's a lengthy process. And you know, this is actually moving

along pretty quickly for court stuff, right? Yeah, they put it on a pretty fast track, but I was going to ask you, when do you think, I mean, because did judges come back, let's say it's two to one or three to nothing that the case, they can, you know, the house oversight committee wins. I am assuming it will be appealed to a circuit court and then possibly go to the Supreme Court. We're looking well into next year. This was the DC circuit. Oh, that's right. So the appeal from here yeah, is to the Supreme Court and it would not supply. Look, like more likely than not, the Supreme Court will grant cert because it's a case involving the president. On the other hand, like it wouldn't surprise me, right, if Roberts goes to the Howler Monkey contingent and

says, guys, like, you know, you for can grant and buy that, you know, I mean, Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and goes to those, because, because look, John Roberts is 96% as conservative as those guys. It's just that he can be shamed from time to time, right? Like, and the census case is a good example of that, right? Because it's called the Roberts Court, right? And he doesn't want his grandkids taking APUS history to read in the textbook like the Roberts Court is the most disgraced court in US history,

narrowly edging out the, you know, the court that passed the Dred Scott decision, right? Like, he cares about that institutional legacy slightly more than he cares about ruling in favor of conservative outcomes in every single case. Again, it's close, right? It's neck and neck. It's a thin re-dehang something on. So they'll hear it, but you don't think that they'll maybe, I mean, because isn't there, like a short way to hear it, just to give a hand down to decision without actually hearing it,

but you're still hearing it? Yeah, they certainly could, but I think it is possible that Roberts might convince the court, you know, convince the Howler Monkey continue. Look, you only need four votes for cert, but do you really want to take this up and have me rule the other way? Now, they may still want that

because again, delay serves the purpose of the president. So, you know, so Rao may take a long time writing her dissent. The Supreme Court may grant cert, but at the end of the day, like we're gonna get, this is gonna be brought to a conclusion, no later than spring of 2020. I wish it were earlier than that,

but at some point, there's the end of the line. So. Yeah, but spring 2020 is also a real nice time for the election. So, you but spring 2020 is also a real nice time for the election So yeah, you know you win some you lose them. There's pros. There's cons and Yeah, that's I mean, I don't know. I think it's an open and shut case

I'm putting all my beans on the oversight committee winning here. They have the Congress has broad investigative authority They just always have and if you rule that they don't that's yeah like a your legacy is shameful And I'm glad that Roberts cares about it a little bit. He's one of the last people on earth to care At least on the side of the right because bar clearly doesn't give a shit about his legacy So we'll see what happens. But I, you know, and I've asked this before, but like if you traveled back in time, right? And it's January of 2017, like we're all nursing that massive hangover

in which we can't believe that this is the America we've woken up in. And you took a look at that like first roster of Trump appointees, right? That was, you know, each one more terrifying than the last. And Jeff Sessions, as Attorney General, was certainly one of the terrifying ones, right? And if, at the time, instead of Jeff Sessions, it had been Bill Barr, you would have been like, okay, well look, like all these picks are terrible, but like this is like a Rex Tillerson,

not like a Betsy DeVos, right? We would have been happy if it had been Bill Barr. And in retrospect, like, thank the Republic for the ethics of Jefferson Beauregard sessions. The third like Wow like but but but really like bar at barben AG like he wouldn't have recused himself. There would have been no Rod Rosenstein There would have been no Mueller like it did yeah, so Everybody thank the ethics That's hard to do

backwards to do that. Before I let you go, do you have any idea why the House Judiciary Committee is negotiating with the Department of Justice regarding the rules they're developing for the Mueller hearing? And because we've just learned today, a couple of an hour ago that this could be delayed a week because the Dems, as we spoke before we turned the recording on here seemed to want to really they care about their five minutes in the spotlight instead of what the purpose of the hearing is is which is to get the information in the Mueller report to the public.

Yeah, so this is another classic example of like you know you can give democrats the football on the one yard line and uh... you know that they want to draw up some like super complicated passing play instead of like just diving over the goal line oh my god you're right the democrats are playing the democrats are playing marty ball here you're you're exactly right they're marty shot in him or in the country right now uh... uh... you've got you got you got, you got four downs, all you have to, yeah, anyway, it's, it's, it's crazy.

What they should do is what the Republicans did in the Kavanaugh hearings, bring in a prosecutor and yield all of your time to the prosecutor so that the prosecutor can, with two hours under his belt in a very lawyerly way, get Robert Mueller to say the stuff that's in the Mueller report, right? Because I honestly believe that would be transformative, right? Like, the Mueller, I think you and I sort of share the feeling of like, we got this bombshell Mueller report. And like, because it's long and Republicans can't read like it hasn't made an impact, like that's nonsense, right?

But when the guy who wrote it is on the stand and you're like, hey, so can you tell me, like, you know, can you just read this portion of the Mueller report out loud and then he reads it out loud, like that, that would have a huge effect, right? And, but no, the are going to do their stupid everybody gets five minutes because our freshman congressman on the you know house oversight the house judiciary committee needs an opportunity to grandstand for five minutes despite the fact that you know there are former hockey player and like you know no less about the law, you know, is left on the grounds from, you know, it's just, it's going to be a nightmare. And Mueller doesn't really, I mean, he said out loud, like, he doesn't want to testify. He's not a pithy guy, right? Like, he's, he's

not a James Comey type, right? Who Comey knew how to work the press and knew how to give pithy answers. Muller is just a lawyer, right? Like, as you've seen from this interview, like, lawyers are long winded and we meander and like, we don't make pithy points. And we're garbage. And like, and look, even if he wants to, like, these five minute sessions are going to be like preliminary question. And then Muller is going to give a wandering answer for four minutes and 52 seconds. And then time's like these five minute sessions are gonna be like preliminary question and then Mueller is gonna give a wandering answer for four minutes and 52 seconds and then time's gonna be up. I'm really, I'm really disappointed.

And hopefully some folks coordinate to come into like make sure that just like some basic questions get asked and answered. So, you know, look, like getting the question, did you intend for Congress to make the decision or did you intend for the attorney general to exonerate the president? That's a good question to ask, right?

Because I think Mueller will say, I intended for Congress to make that decision, right? And that will be, that will be big, right? Just saying, like if the individual, we're not, I want to make sure, you know, Mr. Miller, I'm reading this correctly, if the individual were Donald Smith, instead of Donald Trump, you would have recommended an indictment in this case, right? Like, it, it, just asking those questions will help. But, you know, asking structured systematic

follow-up questions would, would make this a lot more powerful. I agree. I agree. And I just before I let you go, I want to go on record. You gave me permission to interrupt you and you aren't hurt by my interruptions, is that correct? I actually told you to interrupt me more and I interrupted you. So anybody upset about interruptions, all of that hate mail should go to open arguments at gmail.com. Let the record show. I always get emails. So I just wanted to make that clear that you and I had a little pre-conversation about this because you and I tend to talk a lot. So it was all agreed upon before these hearings proceeded that council could interrupt one

another. And so I just went, I'm not really a lawyer, but you are an honorary lawyer in my, I'm interrupting. You are an honorary lawyer in my book. So, oh, well, thank you so much. You're an honorary comedian. So I appreciate you. That beats more to me than my word decree, actually.

I know all this stuff that I'm doing means more to me than my doctoral dissertation. And for some reason that took me two years to write 200 pages and now I do it in a week, but here we are. All right guys real-life lawyer co-host of the opening arguments podcast who will be joining us July 17th at the World Life Cafe as part of the Philly podcast and Ritorez. Andrew thanks for coming on Mueller. She wrote, oh, A.G. Thank you so much for having me on this. This is so much fun. Alright guys, that's our show. I love that interview. Andrew Torres is so great. I can't wait to see him in Philly.

It's going to be so much fun. And you guys, we've got a few tickets left for that show show. So grab them while you can. We're going to have Asha Ran Goppa with us as well. So it's going to be super loads of awesomeness. She's amazing. She's so super smart. Whip smart.

And just, you know, former FBI agent, she's just cool. Could you be able to answer a lot of questions about the now upcoming Mueller testimony? Yeah, that the just finished Mueller testimony. Yeah. That guy's not, I mean, that's it. Do you have any last final thoughts or anything? No, not really.

Have a good rest of your weekend. Whatever hours remain of it once we release this. It's like two hours left. Sorry. Yeah, go out and enjoy it. Well, yeah, no, thanks for listening. And check out Daily Beans next week. We'll watch it.

It's going to be so cool. And happy pride, San Diego. And Comic-Con's coming up next week. We're going to have an interview. This is cool. After Philly, we're going to have somebody on that was who's doing the comic book, the illustrated comic book of the Muller Report. So she'll be on with us. That's doing the comic book, the illustrated comic book of the Muller Report, so she'll be on with us.

That's right. I'm doing that in honor of Comic Con. Yeah, that's good. That'll be fun. Yep, we'll see you guys in Philly. Take care of yourselves, take care of each other. I've been AG. I've been Jordan Coburn.

And this is Muller She Wrote. ["Muller She Wrote"] ["Muller She Wrote"] ["Muller She Wrote"] ["Muller She Wrote"] Muller She Wrote is produced and engineered by AG with editing and logo design by Jolissa Johnson. Our marketing consultant and social media manager is Sarah Lee Steiner and our subscriber and communications director is Jordan Coburn.

Fact checking and research by AG and research assistants by Jolissa Johnson and Jordan Coburn. Our merchandising managers are Sarah Lee Steiner and Sarah Hershberger Valencia. Our web design and branding, our by Joelle Reader with Moxie Design Studios, and our website is mullershierote.com. For the past four years, we've been making history in critical elections all over the country. And last year, we made history again by expanding our majority in the Senate, eating election denying Republicans and crucial state house races, and fighting back a non-existent red wave. But the Maga Republicans who plotted and pardoned

the attempted overthrow of our government now control the House, thanks to gerrymandered maps and repressive anti-voter laws. And the chaotic spectacle we've already seen shows us just how far they will go to seize power, dismantle our government, and take away our freedoms. So the official podcast of the persistence is back with season four. There's so much more important work ahead of us to fight for equity, justice, and our very democracy itself.

We'll take you behind the lines and inside the rooms where it happens with strategy and inspiration from progressive change makers all over the country. And we'll dig deep into the weekly news that matters most and what you can do about it. With messaging and communications expert co-founder of Way to Win and our new co-host, Jennifer Fernandez and Kona. So join Steve and I every Wednesday for your weekly dose of inspiration, action and hope. I'm Steve Pearson and I'm Jennifer Fernandez and Kona. And this is How We Win. M-S-W Media.