Jack - Prosecuting the Coup (feat Elie Honig)

Episode Date: August 8, 2021

This week, Allison goes into the recent revelations about some of the behind-the-scenes actions Trump was taking to attempt his coup and why she thinks these things point to a broader DOJ investigation.

Hi, I'm Harry Lickman, host of Talking Feds. Around table, the brings together prominent figures from government law and journalism for a dynamic discussion of the most important topics of the day. Each Monday, I'm joined by a slate of Feds favorites at new voices to break down the headlines and give the insider's view of what's going on in Washington and beyond. Plus, side bars explaining important legal concepts read by your favorite celebrities. Find Talking Feds where ever you get your podcasts. Hey all, this is Glenn Kirschner and you're listening to Muller Shee wrote.

So to be clear, Mr. Trump has no financial relationships with any Russian oligarchs. That's what he said. That's what I think. That's obviously what our position is. I'm not aware of all of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time of truth in that campaign, and I didn't have, not 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 Mueller, she wrote. I'm your host, A.G. But you can call me Allison Gil now. Today, we're going to talk about the Department of Justice and possible wide-ranging investigations into Trump's conspiracy

to overthrow the government. And whether or not they're happening, I'll be speaking with Ellie Honeig. He says we haven't seen any public reporting that the conspiracy to overthrow the government is being investigated, and that's a problem. He and I have somewhat differing opinions on whether the DOJ is investigating.

And to be fair, he has way more experience than I do in this, having been at Southern District of New York and Coronal Division in New Jersey, former federal prosecutor for a state prosecutor. I'm a comedian who tells Dick jokes, who reads the news now. That's why I wanna bring him on and talk about this.

And I'm also an eternal optimist, as you know, there are a lot of old school updates this week, though. And even though we didn't have any indictments and despite you hearing me making this episode, I am technically off this weekend. I'm in New York, so if you heard a loud roar, that's there, conditioning or sirens might happen downstairs. But I am technically off.

So that means indictments could drop, right? Like we could get, yeah. Like we could see a Matt Gates indictment on Friday, which is today, August 6th, although you'll be hearing this on August 8th. That charging time frame was July August, so we do have a few weeks left, and we still don't know if the continuance of Joel Greenberg's sentencing, he was supposed to be sentenced on August 19th, but he said, no way I can tell you about all the crimes between now and then. So they extended his sentencing.

We do not know. We don't have any public reporting. Not that I've seen anyway. That is pushing back the gate's charging decision time frame either. We don't know. We just don't know. The last we heard was before Greenberg wanted a continuance on his sentence and the time frame was July, August.

So here we are. But anyway, I'm off. I'm just telling the universe. I'm technically off, even though I'm recording it episode right now, it doesn't count. So you can feel free to indict. Feel free to indict anyone from the Trump world. But I am looking forward to speaking with Ali,

because I think that the Department of Justice is investigating this. At the very least, they know that this happened because they've been handing over all these materials to Congress, right? They know. And if they know, to me, there's just no way they can't be investigating. And if they aren't, that's a huge problem, right? I so I tend to think that they are. I hope that they are.

They have to be in my head. Maybe I'm just like, I can't imagine them not, and that's why I'm feeling this way, but Ellie will be on later to talk about it. All right, we do have a lot of other stories that happened this week, so let's jump in with just the facts. All right, first up, one of my favorite people, Jane Mayer, is back with another incredible New Yorker piece.

This one's about dark money. She talks about the deep rig. This is a film called the Deep Rig, financed by Patrick Byrne of all people who, as we know, is the overstock.com CEO, dated Maria Bhutanah for a while, dated in quotes here. And during a premiere of the film in Arizona, there were live appearances by Byrne, who also supports the fraudet in Arizona,

and his friends with Doug, the guy who runs, the Cyber Ninja, this guy's a dipshit. Anyway, Byrne was there at this film premiere in Arizona, and a local QAnon conspiracist called BabyQ, who claimed to be receiving messages from his future self was also there. They were joined by the film's director. But if you can time travel, why wouldn't you,

you know what? I'm not gonna get into it. I'm not gonna get into it, baby, cute. But anyway, the film's director was there who had previously made an expose contending that the real perpetrators of 9-11 were aliens. So this is the group that we're talking about. And if you saw the CNN interview with Michael Indow,

the My Pillow Guy, a couple of days ago, you kind of get an idea of what it's like to even try to speak to these conspiracy theorists. The film, the deep rig, quotes Doug Logan a lot, and again, that's a CEO of Cyber Ninjas. We know the story of the fraudet, and Jane Mayer goes into this in depth from beginning to end. That's why I really want you to read this New Yorker piece by her. But we know the crux. We know the crux of the story. It's that although the Arizona audit may appear to be the product of local extremists, it has been fed by sophisticated well-funded national organizations whose boards of directors include some of the country's wealthiest and highest profile conservatives, dark money organizations. She says

sustained by undisclosed donors, have relentlessly promoted the myth that American elections are rife with fraud and according to leaked records of their internal deliberations that they have drafted, supported, and in some cases, taking credit for state laws. That make it harder to vote.

We've saw that video. We've seen these. We've heard about this. This is public reporting. Quote, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat from Rhode Island, who has tracked the flow of dark money in American politics, told me, this is Jane Mayer speaking, that a flotilla of front groups, once focused on advancing such conservative causes as capturing the courts and opposing abortion, have now more or less shifted to work on the voter suppression thing. So these groups have cast their campaigns as high-minded attempts to maintain election

integrity, but the White House, Sheldon White House believes they are in fact tampering with the guardrails of democracy. And they are. One of the movement's leaders, Heritage Foundation. Yep, the prominent conservative think tank in DC. It has been working with the American Legislative Executive Council, also known as ALIC, ALEC, a corporate-funded non-profit that generates model laws for state legislators on ways to impose voting restrictions and voter suppression laws.

Among those deep into fight is Leonard Leo. We know him and love him as the chairman of the Federalist Society. I should say we know him and hate him. That's the legal organization known for its decades-long campaign to pack the courts with conservative judges. They did it pretty successfully. In February 2020, the Judicial Education Project, a group tied to Leonard Leo, quietly rebranded itself as the Honest Elections Project,

which subsequently filed briefs at the Supreme Court and in numerous states opposing mail-in ballots and other reforms that make it easier for people to vote. Another newcomer to the cause is the Election Integrity Project, California, and a group called Freedom Works. Remember, Freedom Fest, Freedom Works, which once concentrated on opposing government regulation, is now demanding expanded government regulation of voters with a project called National Election Protection Initiative.

These disparate non-profits, Jane says, have one thing in common. They all receive funding from the Linde and Harry Bradley Foundation. Based in Milwaukee, the private tax-exempt organization has become an extraordinary force in persuading mainstream Republicans to support radical challenges to election rules, a tactic once relegated to the far right. With an endowment of some $850 million, the Foundation funds and network of groups that have been stoking fear about election fraud in some cases for years. Public records show that since 2012, the Foundation has spent some $18 million supporting 11 conservative groups involved in election issues. It might seem improbable, she goes on to say that a low-profile family foundation in Wisconsin

has assumed a central role in current struggles over American democracy, but the modern conservative movement has depended on leveraging the fortunes of wealthy reactionaries. In 1903, Linda Bradley, a high school dropout in Milwaukee, founded what we become the Allen Bradley company. He was soon joined by his brother Harry, and they got rich selling electronic instruments such as RIO stats. Harry, a John Birch Society founding member, started a small family foundation that initially devoted much of its giving to needy employees and civic causes in Milwaukee. In 1985, after the brother's death, their heirs sold the company to the defense contractor, Rockwell International, for $1.65 billion, generating an enormous windfall for the foundation.

The Bradley Foundation remains small in comparison with such liberal behemoths as the Ford Foundation, but it has become singularly preoccupied with wielding national political influence. It is funded conservative projects ranging from school choice initiatives to the controversial scholarship of Charles Murray, the co-author of the Book the Bell Curve, which argues that blacks are less likely than whites to join the cognitive elite. And at least as far back as 2012, it has funded groups challenging voting rights in the name of fighting voter fraud that doesn't exist. She says, what explains then the hardening conviction among Republicans that the 2020 race

was stolen? Michael Podhorser, a senior advisor to the president of the AFL CIO, which invested deeply in expanding Democratic turnout in 2020, suggests the two parties now have irreconciorable beliefs about whose votes are legitimate. Quote, what blue state people don't understand about why the big lie works is that it doesn't actually require proof of fraud. What animates it is the belief that Biden won because votes were cast by some people in this country who others think are not real Americans.

This anti-democratic belief has been bolstered by a constellation of established institutions on the right, quote, white evangelical churches, legislators, media companies, nonprofits, and now paramilitary groups. Trump won white America by eight points. He won non-urban areas by over 20 points. He is the democratically elected president of white America. It's almost like he represents a nation within a nation. That's such an interesting and key point, a stupe observation. So please take some time to read this article. Familiarize yourself with folks like Clea Mitchell, George F Will, Robert George, just read the read up on this. This is scary stuff and I'm glad that Sheldon Whitehouse is on top of it.

In other news, California Republican Congressman Devon Nunez, I wish Jordan was here to read this news. Nunez is suing NBC Universal Media alleging that MSNBC's show host Rachel Maddo defamed him with on air suggestions he'd conspired with a Russian agent to rig the 2016 presidential election for Donald Trump. Devon, when are you going to learn? The truth cannot be considered defamation. I'll say it right now. Nunez, who's the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, still says Maddo

has repeatedly targeted him with the Famutory statements that accuse him of obstruction of justice and treason. Nunez said Maddo has also called for him to lose his committee post and be stripped of his security clanses. I do that too. Nunez has been busy even the last few years suing media and critics he been losing, by the way, that he thinks unfairly throw shade at him. In addition to suits against CNN, the Washington Post,

Esquire and Maclanchee, which owns the largest newspaper in his home district, Nunez sued Twitter over anonymous accounts that mock him under the handles Devon Nunez's cow, and Devon Nunez's mom. As we know, Nunez specifically complained about the statements Mato made during her March 18th cable TV show, and repeated on YouTube, Twitter, and her blog. She didn't repeat them. They were just casted. She played the repeats. He refused to give the FBI a package he'd received from a suspected Russian agent, according to the complaint filed by the Congressman Tuesday. But that happened. Instead, Nunez claims MSNBC a a motto new prior to the broadcast that Nunes had told other reporters he voluntarily gave the FBI a package.

The suspected agent sent to him through the Congressional Committee. He said the fact that Mato didn't ask him for a comment before publishing the false statements is proof of actual malice. Like he would have come on the Rachel Maddo show. Fuck off. Quote MSNBC and Maddo Harbor and institutional hostility hatred extreme by a spite and ill will towards plaintiff. Due to plaintiffs emergence as the most prominent skeptic in the Congress of Maddo's marquee news narrative from 2017 to 2019,

the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to hack the 2016 presidential election. They did New Nes is asking for a jury to determine unspecified damages for insult pain embarrassment Humiliation mental suffering and injury to his reputation new Nes. You do not need another person for all that And we have an update on the two-year-long plus battle between Trump and Richie Neal, the Houseways and Means Committee, over his taxes. So this week, I think this happened since the last time Mola Shiro came out, the Office of Legal Counsel, a Department of Justice, Garland's Office of Legal Counsel.

I know it doesn't belong to him. It belongs to the people, but you know what I mean. This particular Department of Justice, Garland's Office of Legal Council. I know it doesn't belong to him. It belongs to the people, but you know what I mean? This particular Department of Justice issued a memo saying, the Treasury Department has to hand over Trump's taxes to the House Wayne's and the Maine's Committee. We read the law. It says, you shall hand over the taxes, so you shall hand over the taxes.

We're no longer fighting this in court on behalf of Trump, like the last Department of Justice was. Right, and so that of justice was. Right. And so that that was news. And then we heard Inglings, then Trump was going to fight it. He had until Wednesday to file. And he did. Ronald Fischetti, Trump's lawyer, said in a statement, there's no evidence of any wrongdoing here. Nobody accused him of wrongdoing. The whole premise, besides handing over the taxes, is so that Richineel and the House Ways and Means Committee can review the effectiveness of the automatic presidential tax audit program. Right? That's it.

They aren't going to release them to the public. They've told the courts they won't. They aren't going after crimes. But Trump's. They've told the courts they won't. They aren't going after crimes. But Trump's lawyer, there's no evidence we're wrong doing here. Yeah. Well, let me think that, Doth, protests too much. I object to the release of all the returns.

Not only on behalf of my client, but on behalf of all future holders of the office of the president of the United States. Note Trump is the only, one of the only presidents in the last 50 years to not release his returns. Other candidates will presumably follow the precedent set by those with nothing to hide, right? Feshetti also called the opinion from the Department of Justice, absolutely ridiculous.

The opinion of the law that says the shall furnish the taxes. They didn't even need a legislative reason, but Ritianiel gave them one. We're going to fight this to the nail, okay, best of luck. They're going to lose. Trump filed in court Tuesday. The requester tailored to an impractical operation will affect only President Trump. The requester, no, that is, first of all, that's untrue. Let's just break this down. So this is what this, this is what their filing says. The requests are tailored to an impractical operation will affect only President Trump. Not true. They are assessing the effectiveness of the presidential tax audit program based on what they find in Trump's taxes and what made it through that audit program. And if there were any federal crimes committed, that,

you know, that, that will impact every single future presidential tax audit and the presidential tax audit program. So it's not only President Trump to go on the request single out President Trump because he's a Republican and a political opponent. No, that isn't the case. Again, they're not single, single Trump out. Quote, they were made to retaliate against the president because of his policy positions as political beliefs is protected speech, including the positions he took during 2016 and 2020 campaigns. No.

This isn't retaliation. This is determining and studying the effectiveness of a program. It would be hard to assess the presidential tax audit program without reviewing the president's taxes. Trump's lawyers disagree with Richie Niel's reasons saying that's not why he wants the taxes. He wants them for political purposes without providing any evidence. Just saying it. The thing is that this request is filed with Trevor. You know, we, you and I, we've talked about Trevor McFadden. He's a Trump appointee, but we've always got the appellate court and on-bong. I don't know how Supreme Court will rule, but the law is pretty clear.

Next up from Ryan Barber at Insider, he writes an article called Trump World is being tormented by this tiny legal office that no one's ever heard of. Unquote. First of all, I'd like to congratulate all of you who are listening to this, who are not only familiar with this tiny legal office and know what it's called, though, you know, Ryan Barber says no one's ever heard of it, you have. Not only have you heard of it, but you can probably tell us who runs it, or at least who did up until recently, and what that person used to do. The tiny little legal office is called the Fera Unit in the Department of Justice for an Agents Registration Act. I'll give you a moment to yell into the universe who runs that office and where they came from. If you yelled Brandon Van Grack from Mueller's team, congratulations, and Lolls to me, whoever may have heard you scream out that name for

no reason. But Van Grack went by, bye, by listen, let me quote from this article, when Brandon Van Grack left the Justice Department in January stepping down from a top role, policing foreign influence, his government colleague sent him off with a curious going away present, a pink cat Pinyata. Before becoming a gag gift, the Pinyata sat in the office as a mascot of sorts for the Justice Department unit tasked with enforcing a decades-old federal law requiring the disclosure of foreign lobbying. It was a tongue-in-cheek totem, a nod to what the unit saw as the unfair notion that it took a lax approach to enforcing FARA until the special counsel Robert Mueller's team returned the pre-World War II law to prominence with high-profile prosecutions of Paul Manafort

and other MAGA accolades. Since parting ways with its papier-mache party prop, the Ferra unit has only continued to shed its reputation as a feeble and flimsy justice department backwater. More broadly, the Justice Department has in recent months escalated its enforcement efforts most notably with investigations and prosecutions of prominent Trump world figures suspected of monetizing their access to Trump administration, to the Trump administration by working illegally for foreign governments and other overseas powers.

Quote, the Justice Department and Fera, Unit haven't skipped a beat in the last six months of anything. They've continued the historic ramp up of Fera enforcement. That's Van Graak speaking, again, who served in Mueller's special counsel office before becoming the fairer unit chief in 2019. Jennifer Gellie, a federal prosecutor with experience in espionage,

replaced Van Graak in January as the chief of the fairer unit. Yay, Jennifer. Van Graak, now a partner at the law firm Morrison and Forrester, told Insider that the Justice Department's approach to foreign influence had featured a little bit of everything, quote, there are prominent criminal cases moving forward, significant criminal cases being charged and unprecedented resources and personnel being dedicated to it. Yes. From all directions, Fera is being enforced like never before.

Yes. The Justice Department's scrutiny of foreign influence has bedeviled Trump associates. In the face of criminal prosecution, they've admitted to lobbying for foreign interests without disclosing their activities, as federal law requires. And the criminal investigations, Brad says,

have captivated the nation. In April, federal agents raided the Manhattan Home or Rudy Giuliani, escalating an investigation that is focused in part on whether the former New York City mayor and Trump lawyer illegally lobbied the Trump administration on behalf of Ukrainian interests. Oh, and probably Venezuela, too. Oh, and Hawk Bank issues. Giuliani recently called the investigation lawless.

He said that he was more than willing to go to jail if they want to put me in jail. Good. And if they do, they're they want to put me in jail. Good. If they do, they're going to suffer the consequences in heaven. Yeah, no, it's not how heaven works. In July, prosecutors accused Tom Barrick, chairman of Trump's inaugural committee of secretly acting as a agent of the UAE. Then they talk about Brody, they talk about Flynn. They didn't mention Gregory Craig, the one Democrat who was charged, but then those charges got thrown out.

They didn't mention Bijan Keon. But of note, they mentioned why Farah came about in the first place. Quote, in the decades before the Russian investigation, the Justice Department had brought only about a half a dozen Farah prosecutions, which prompted the department's inspector general to criticize the enforcement record in a 2016 report, then came the Mueller investigation which found significant foreign interference in the 2016 election. Farah, an 80-year-old statute originally enacted to combat Nazi propaganda, suddenly transformed from a wet noodle to a bullwhip. Manafort pleaded guilty to Farah-related charges, tied to his unregistered lobbying for the Russia-backed government of Ukraine,

only to be later pardoned by Trump in the waning weeks of his presidency, as promised. The Justice Department didn't stop there. It pursued criminal prosecutions and threatening civil lawsuits that forced foreign agents operating in the U.S. to register and disclose their activities. In a South Florida federal court, the Justice Department successfully sued to force R.M. broadcasting to register as a foreign agent in connection with its airing of the radio channel Sputnik, whose parent company is owned and operated

by the Russian government. Remember them? Meanwhile, new Farrah registrations have been pouring in between the fiscal years that ended in September 2016 and September 2019. New registrations have more than doubled, jumping from 70 to 150. The Farrah unit now includes five full-time lawyers, that's an increase from three to 150. The ferry unit now includes five full-time lawyers

that's an increase from three from 2018. The 12-person unit also includes a detail-y analysts and support staff. In May, the Wall Street Journal reported the Justice Department was preparing for litigation against the casino mogul Steve Wynn, a major Republican party donor, to compel him to register as a foreign agent in connection with his 2017 effort to persuade US officials to send Guo Wang Wei a Chinese businessman living in New York back to China Wang Wei has been accused of several crimes including sexual assault and bribery Chinese authorities considered him a fugitive when himself is faced accusations of sexual misconduct which he denies

Wins defense lawyer read winegarten did not respond to a request for comment. Weingarten told the journal in May, Steve Wind never served as an eight lobby agent or anything for China. He was merely a loyal messenger of information he received from our government. Hmm. Now get this. Regarding the Rudy raid this past April. And you know what? We might as well call this sabotage.

Sonoran policy group reported expenditures related to a cocktail party thrown three years earlier in 2018 as part of a multi-million dollar campaign to improve relations between the Trump administration and then Congolese president Joseph Kabila. On that July evening in 2018, Rudy Giuliani posed for photographs on top on the top floor of the Hay Adams Hotel overlooking the White House. The reception featured remarks by the Democratic Republic of Congo's special envoy to the United States. Giuliani's presence conferred a sense of closeness to the White House.

It also fueled questions about Giuliani's foreign entanglements at a time when he was serving as a personal lawyer for Trump and the Mueller probe. When asked about his appearance, Giuliani gave a variety of explanations. He told the New York Times he wanted to say hello to people and impress a woman by taking her to the top of the Hay Adams to see the Washington party with a great view. Giuliani may have been laying on the charm that night, but his appearance has been arranged in advance by the firm of Robert Strick a big spending lobbyist who bonded with the former New York City mayor over a shared taste for scotch and Cuban cigars In March, Sonoran policy group disclosed it had spent a combined $50,000 on event consulting and talent appearances in connection with the 2018 reception Giuliani attended in Washington in connection with the 2018 reception Giuliani attended in Washington.

So Norehn made the $50,000 payment in two installments to frontline strategies and media, a public affairs firm run by Eric Beach, a California political consultant, and close associate of Giuliani. Beach worked on Giuliani's 2008 presidential campaign and helped oversee the pro-Trump Great America Political Action Committee in 2016. Giuliani appeared in some of the PACS commercials and later signed on as an advisor to a non-provet linked to beach and the longtime Republican strategist Ed Rollins. So Norene made the March disclosure to amend a previous filing. God, they do that a lot. That did not include the $50,000 in payments, among other costs of the 2018 reception.

In the March filings, Norene said it had previously overlooked these funds due to an unintentional clerical error. We just, we missed 50,000, you know. I mean, we can't be held responsible for every single penny we spend on specific foreign things. Beech did not respond for repeated requests for comment and Giuliani couldn't be reached strict decline to comment as well. A month after the Sunorn thing, they submitted their amended filing the FBI rated Giuliani's home and office. Yeah, so when we were all asking if there was new evidence that allowed this

department of justice to raid Rudy when the last one wouldn't, maybe that's it. We'll look for that in the indictments. Remember Sonoran, remember that name. Before we get to the fantasy indictment league, I want to share a Twitter thread with you and then have a discussion with Ellie Honeig about where we stand with the Department of Justice. First of all, let me pull up this thread real quick because I pen to super space being thread recently and, you know, I'm getting a lot of pushback, which I kind of expected because no one can see

sort of any public hint or clue that the Trump conspiracy to overthrow the government is being investigated. And that's extremely frustrating to a lot of people, which I totally get and completely understand. So, you know, I, I want to go into this thread by saying, you know, I'm, I'm probably being overly optimistic about this. But here are my super space beans. I said, I have reason, me personally, to believe the Department of Justice is investigating Trump and his allies for attempting to overthrow the government. Here are the clues. The DOJ has made a series of document releases to Congress

in the past week. First, Department of Justice released contemporaneous notes of a phone call between Trump and the former acting attorney general Rosen, in which Trump pushes the DOJ to announce the election was corrupt. You know, just say it was corrupt and me and the Republicans in Congress will take it from there. That's what he said. Department of Justice released those notes despite the fact documents like that are usually covered by executive privilege.

During that call, which took place on December 27th, Trump insinuated, he could replace Rosen with Jeffrey Clark if he didn't comply. In addition to the call notes, the DOJ released emails in a draft letter written by Jeffrey Clark, the DOJ released emails in a draft letter written by Jeffrey Clark the day after that phone call saying the Department of Justice was investigating election irregularities and that Georgia should send their own, you know, you need to

have a call meeting of the Georgia legislature and send your own Trump delegates to Washington. And and Jeffrey Clark was looking for Donahue and Rosen to sign off on this letter. They did not. But the DOJ released that information. On top of that, the Department of Justice sent letters to Rosen, Donahue, and other former Trump DOJ officials saying, we're not invoking executive privilege. You're free to testify about Trump's election shit. All you want. I'm paraphrasing. Then we have the Department of Justice, Mo Brooks' decision in which they asserted that his speech at the ellipse was not within the scope of his duties as a congressman, and they

would not represent him in the lawsuit filed against him by Eric Swalwell. The DOJ went on to say that if the allegations in the Swalwell lawsuit are true, instigating an attack on a capital is not within the scope of Brooks or any federal employee's job. That is a shot across the bow, a signal to Trump to say, don't even apply for certification because you're not covered. Next prosecutors in the Department of Justice are reaching plea agreements with insurrectionists in which they admit to obstructing and official proceeding, which is the official proceeding being the verification of the electoral college votes. That establishes that those sent to the Capitol admit to obstructing the proceeding,

which sets Trump up as instigating others to break the law, and not just any law, a law which, if broken, could be seen as an attempt to overthrow the government by the person, or persons that directed it. Joyce Vance points out other calls showing a pattern. The January second call to Georgia asking for his 11,780 votes. On January 4, he tried to call election officials in Arizona two times, but they let it go to voicemail. They didn't want to talk to him after they heard the Rappensberger debacle. And then again, on January 4, a US attorney in Georgia resigned after Trump tried to get him to investigate imaginary voter fraud.

Well, all of this leads me to one conclusion. I believe Garland is going to connect the big lie, election interference, and the insurrection into one big fat multi-count indictment for conspiracy. That's what I think. Either a client conspiracy to defraud the United States, seditious conspiracy, a criminal civil rights violation for trying to deprive Americans of their votes, obstruction of a official proceeding, instigating the attack of the Capitol, or all of the above. And since I penned this tweet, many legal experts, Steve Vladik, Joyce Vance, Barb McQuade, Gentop, they've all come out with op-ed saying, here are the pathways for the Department of Justice to investigate this. This conspiracy. Now again, I have no inside source on this.

I am drawing conclusions based on the actions of the Department of Justice with regards to their recent document releases and their decisions on certification from O'Brook's and any federal employee. They're refusal to invoke privilege, executive privilege, the indictments of the insurrectionists and Garland's public remarks, right, saying, I'm going to go, I'm going to investigate the whole thing. Of course, we need testimony from Clark, Rose and Donahue, the GA US attorney that resigned in any other former current Department of Justice officials that witnessed Trump's attempts to overturn the election over through the government.

And then I say, if the DOJ is not investigating this, the alternative here is the DOJ is just pushing it off on Congress and local and state governments. That seems antithetical to Garland's remarks before taking office, but must be considered as a way less awesome alternative, I say. So that's what I wrote there. And I concede at the end. He could just be blowing this all off and handed it off to Congress. But we haven't seen any public reporting that an investigation is

happening. And that's what I want to talk to Ellie Honeig about. So today I'm joined by Ellie Honeig who has written, we were just, I was just earlier today, Ellie, recording episode four of the book review of Hatchet Man, which is how Bill Barberg, the prosecutors code Bill Barr broke the prosecutor's code and corrupted the Justice Department. And you and I have been texting a little bit because I put out this massive thread saying, the DOJ is investigating, I just know it.

They have to be, they're looking at everything, they're tying the insurrection in with a big lie and et cetera, et cetera. And I know that you have, you know, you and I have talked about this, that we haven't heard a peep. It's just crickets from the Department of Justice. And there's no proof. And, you know, I say that in my thread, like, I have no proof. This is just a feeling. But, you know, I have to kind of default to your expertise here. And, you know, why the

silence? I mean, can they possibly even be investigating and keeping this quiet? So yeah, A.G., it's a tough situation. There's things we agree on and things we disagree on. What we definitely agree on is they should be taking a walk, right? I mean, it is making my brain explode that it appears they're not.

So we agree on that. I also will say this, it's possible, it's possible that they're taking a serious criminal look at the president for January 6 or election interference or maybe other things and they have it very tightly under wraps and maybe they have an elite force of 10 people and they're all sworn to secrecy and all of that and not only is nobody leaking but the thing is, well, how would we know about it? Because I've said before, there's been no public indication. People have said, well, what might those be?

One is leaks and reporting, which, by the way, is very, very good. I mean, when was the last time there was a major indictment dropped, a major arrest that we had no idea was coming, right? It happens, but not often. But also, even without leaks or anything like that, there's plenty of ways to tell. When subpoenas start to go out, people get subpoenas are free to say, hey, I got a subpoena,

when witnesses are spoken with, people are free to say, and often do, oh, the FBI spoke with me, when warrants are executed. So there's a million ways we would have learned about it, and it's hard for me to believe that there is a real full sum investigation of Donald Trump going on, and we've seen zero indications. Now, in your thread, you know,

you try to draw some inferences, but I don't agree with them because if I can generalize the primary thrust of your thread is, well, look, DOJ is now loosening up its grip on a lot of these documents and witnesses and sending them over to Congress. To me, that's the opposite of what you would do.

If you are seriously criminally investigating, you'd wanna guard this. You don't want your witnesses out testifying in Congress and public, you don't want your documents out there. So to me, what it more signals is Narik Garland's off ramp, which is, hey, look, this stuff's political. It has to do with the president. I'm doing my job.

I'm letting Congress get the information it needs, and that's worth something, but he's doing it because it'll soften to put it sort of cynically, but soften the effect of him doing nothing criminally. So that's my overall take. Yeah, I don't think that that's how people will receive it. No, certainly not how I would receive it.

Yeah, and at the end of the thread, I say, look, this might just be Merrick Garland handing this off to Congress, right? Right. And that's why I agree with it. Yeah, which I hope is not the case because you can't, I don't think you can separate the insurrection and the conspiracy charges with the proud boys, three percenters, etc. Oth keepers. I don't think you can separate that from the instigation of the attack on the Capitol and the big lie. I don't think you can leak. I, you can't legally separate those things. It just doesn't make any sense to me. I mean, you can, but you shouldn't, you know, like you said you and I agree. They should be doing this. If I can say Congress can't really do anything.

No, that's a little, you know, a little, maybe, glib. I mean, it's important that we learn, and there's transparency through Congress, and a lot of the stuff we're learning, important stuff is coming from the committees, the congressional committees, but they're not going to be teach, right? We know that, even if they should, and by the way, you can. I still legally can, but of course, that's not going to happen. But they can't charge. They can't, you know, I mean, the best they could do, I guess, if you want real consequences is to refer for criminal prosecution or investigation,

but guess where that goes? Right back up Pennsylvania Avenue to DOJ. So yeah, so I'm not sure where that all leads. Yeah, and there should be no reason that the attorney general would want that political taint on it before he looks into it. But in my head, it's like maybe he's been working with members of Congress to say, you can have this piece of evidence and you can have this piece of evidence. You can interview these people behind closed doors. You can't interview these people. You know what? I think we'll get maybe a better sense of it.

You know, like you said, it's been cricket and we should have heard something. I don't know that that's necessarily the case. You know better than me. But, you know, maybe they, like you said, super elite, small group of, of tight lift lawyers. But, you know, I, and I know Benny Thompson has said we have to get with the attorney general to make sure we're not stepping on each other's toes. It's just, I feel like there's just all sorts of clues out there that, that say that, that he's doing this, that in his rhetoric, America, Garland's rhetoric when he took this position, you know, it would be a gigantic letdown, not just personally, but of justice, of equal justice

under law if he does not do this. And the reason I immediately thought of all this is because, you know, I'm reading the book, catch it your book hatchet man everybody needs to get this book and you talk about the derelict dereliction of duty with with billion bought bill bar not looking into the Ukraine matter where there was plenty of criminal predicate open investigation and just keep you know stay and and we need to change that concept and and Merrick Garland talked a big game and so I just have to hope he's doing it. We'll find out soon enough Yeah, I agree with you on the on the the Delta for last For lack of a better way to put it the Delta between the rhetoric and the action and it's interesting that you draw the comparison

To Bill Barr and you create. I mean the reason I pause it in the book. I think it's obvious bill bar Didn't even open investigation because he didn't want to see what was in there. He's protecting it. I, this is sort of the opposite reason. I just think Garland, I guess maybe doesn't want to see what's in there. He doesn't want to open this box of demons, right? Because he knows, I mean, look, Marik Garland seems to just want to keep his low profile for himself and DOJ as possible. And at times, although he's, he's coming out of this a little bit, but at times it seems like Merrick Garland's decision making process is will this action be perceived as a shot against

what Bill Bard did and against Donald Trump if so do opposite. And like I said, he's coming out of that a bit, but you know, does he really have the appetite, the aggressiveness to go after Donald Trump? I just have not seen a single indicator that he is. Well, he better or I'm gonna be mad. Well, now America is gonna spring you to action. He doesn't want to do that. Yeah, exactly. Read my thread, Justice Department.

All right. Well, thanks so much. Everybody pick up Hatty Man. I appreciate your time today. I know you're super busy with all the news that's coming out. So I thank you for taking the time today, Ellie Honeig. Always a pleasure, thanks, A.J. Alright, everybody.

Welcome back. It's time for the fantasy indictment league. I'm gonna be a date. No, it is gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date.

I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I'm gonna be a date. I's gonna be okay. Just calm down. I can't calm down, I'm gonna be dead! And I think my picks are staying the same. Ingers, Saul, Engels, Gates. Ivanka? Ah, that's a tough one.

Calamari plea agreement. Yeah. Yeah, that's what I'm going with. That's what I'm sticking with. I'm gonna stick with it. I'm gonna stick with it. I'm going to stick with it another week. Those gates and diamonds, or at least a charging decision has to drop.

Remember, there's no guarantee of indictments. It's just the charging decision is supposed to come either this month or last month. And again, to reiterate, we don't know if that got pushed back by Joel Greenberg pushing his sentencing hearing back. We don't know if he's still got more to tell them about macgates or not, or if the macgates thing is wrapped up, or maybe there's more people involved, we don't know. They aren't telling us. But anyway, thanks so much for listening. Everybody, until next week, please take care of yourselves, take care of each other, take care of the planet, and take care of your mental

health. I've been Alison Gill, and this is Mollarshie Road is written and produced by Allison Gill in partnership with MSW Media. Sound designed in engineering or by Molly Hockey, Jesse Egan is our copywriter and our art and web designer by Joa Reader at Moxie Design Studios. Mollershie Road is a proud member of MSW Media, a group of creator-owned podcasts focused on news, justice and politics. For more information, visit mswmedia.com. Music Season 4 of How We Win is Here

For the past four years, we've been making history in critical elections all over the country. And last year, we made history again by expanding our majority in the Senate, eating election denying Republicans and crucial state house races, and fighting back a non-existent red wave. But the Magga 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-Ancona. So join Steve and I every Wednesday for your weekly dose of inspiration, action, and hope. I'm Steve Pearson. And I'm Jennifer Fernandez-Ancona. And this is How We Win.

And this is How We Win. you