Jack - Secretary of Vibes (feat Renato Mariotti)

Episode Date: December 30, 2019

Today on Mueller, She Wrote, it’s our last show of 2019! We’re discussing the new DoJ loophole for lobbyists, an impeachment update, news about Andrew McCabe and Gina Haspel, and news of a new Flynn filing. We also have an interview with Renato Mariotti you won’t want to miss. Become a patron and support us in 2020 at patreon.com/muellershewrote!

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 rock agenda. Who? No one. Disadvantaged pay for where somebody else is money. Thanks to Everlane for supporting Mueller, she wrote, would you buy a t-shirt for $50 if you knew it only cost $7 to make?

We wouldn't, either. With Everlane, you never overpay for quality clothes. And right now, you can check out their personalized collection at Everlane.com slash AG, plus you'll get free shipping on your first order. And thanks to native for supporting Mueller, she wrote, native makes safe, simple, effective products that people use in the bathroom every day

with trusted ingredients and trusted performance. For 20% off your first purchase, visit nativedeodorant.com and EnterPromoCodeAG during checkout. And thanks to Buffee for supporting Muller She Road for $20 off your Buffee Comforter, visit Buffee.co and EnterPromoCodeAG. And finally, thanks to Daily Harvest for supporting Muller She Road. Daily Harvest makes it easy to eat well, the deliver thoughtfully sourced chef crafted

food right to your door. Go to dailyharvest.com and under promo code AG25 to get $25 off your first box. This is Greg Olyar, the author of Dirty Rubles, and you're listening to Mueller 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 our position 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, 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 Mollarshi Road. I'm your host A.G. And with me today is Jordan Coburn. Hello. How are you? I'm good. I'm better. I was very sick last week.

You were. Oh, I'm so glad you're better. And now Amanda's sick. Yeah, it's going around. And your boyfriend. And my boyfriend is sick. Yeah, it is going around. So everyone, please be safe.

Yes. Happy holidays to everyone. Happy New Year as well. Happy Hanukkah. And I hope everyone had a good Christmas or whatever it is that you celebrate. This is our last show of the year. Please consider supporting women in podcasting.

Sign up to become a patron. Coming in January, probably toward the end of the month because we're redesigning this studio, we'll be turning on the video cameras in here. And only patrons will have access to that. And you also get a newsletter with all the articles we cite plus my personal research notes. We have a lot of great thank you gifts and super like super space beans beans mugs and shirts and you get bonus content like Q&A and corrections episodes along with book reviews, pre-sale tickets to live events and meetups and add free episodes of our sister podcast the daily beans. So, head to patreon.com slash muller she wrote, become a patron in both shows for the low low price of one show and your pledge helps us pay high wages and offer health benefits and 401k plans for our staff, even the part-timers.

So thank you for supporting women in podcasting and thanks to all our patrons out there. We have a great show today, including an interview with former federal prosecutor, Renato Marriotti. We haven't spoken to him since Chicago, Chicago, July 27th, Love him. Which was the day that I thought they opened the impeachment inquiry because NADLAR filed for the Mueller Grand jury materials under Article 1 powers. And of course we're going to play the fantasy indictment league, that, that, that things heating up.

But before we get to the news, it's time for my favorite segment, Corrections. It's time to stay. It's time for me to say I'm sorry. Oh, I made a mistake. All right, we don't have too many corrections because it's the holidays, everyone's sort of out and about traveling, but Michelle Spencer did write to us and said in one of the daily beans episodes, Amanda mentioned being arts president and Jordan said that we should have a secretary of art.

Well, not quite a separate executive department, There is a federal council for the arts and humanities broken up into the national endowment for the humanities and the national endowment for the arts. That's great. We do have councils. All right. We take a council. But I like your cabinet level position, I think, as well.

I know. Secretary of art. That's in this country's really going soft. I'm not. I'm like, um, art. We also have secretary of vibes. We have our... Maria Williamson.

Yeah. Secretary of healing stones. She also says, my husband's grandfather served for a time as the director of museum programs under chairman of NEA Nancy Hanks. Very cool. Very cool. From Anonymous, says John's correction about Andrew Shear is an accurate. Going back, the Seafer-Rechions page?

Be among the listeners. This is going back with Shear. He resigned and we were trying to figure out if it was because of his financial issues or etc. This person says, his correction follows the line initially pushed by party spokesperson Dustin van Vatt Who himself was summarily fired the party brass including former prime minister Steven Harper are still looking into whether the use of funds was proper and Seemed to be leaning towards improper, so there we go. All right If you want to

clap back if you want to clap back, you know what to find us. And finally, Alex Schaeffer said, part of your bit about the succession and the highly unlikely event of Trump's removal is not quite correct. Pence would become POTUS and appoint a new VP, however, the new VP simply,

or excuse me, needs a simple majority vote confirmation by both the House and the Senate. So if the House sat on it, for example, like if Pelosi started acting like McConnell until Pence went down, Pelosi would indeed become president. I just learned this myself, but even though Reich wasn't really right, it's misleading to conclude Pelosi couldn't become voters.

Yeah, and I think we did address this in some last week's corrections too. I'm not saying she can't. I'm just saying she probably won't. Unlikely? Yeah, it's very unlikely because one of the main arguments that the GOP has right now with impeachment is that it overturns the will of the voters. And while that's the dumbest argument ever because impeachment is to remove a president

and we presume the president was voted into office, at least, you know, yeah, maybe not properly, but, you know, at least by whatever counting standards we had at the time. And we know Mueller didn't investigate that. Remember, he said, I didn't look into whether the vote count changed. But that's their big thing, overturn the will of the voters. If she did that, that actually probably would be overturning the will of the voters because while Trump wasn't properly elected, Republicans were put in office and to to usurp the office of the presidency as a Democrat would lend credence to that. I'm not saying I don't love it. Right.

Right. But it would. Yeah. Exactly. It would be like, see, you just didn't want the Republicans to be in charge. Yeah. You want to be in charge this whole time. Yeah. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. be like, see, you just didn't want the Republicans to be in charge. Yeah, you wanted to be in charge this whole time, et cetera. And while that's not the case, or necessarily the reasoning behind it, it would still lend

credence to that. I also think that since they can't even get Trump, they can't get Republicans, I should say, to come out against Trump in the face of all this evidence, there's no way that they would come out against Pence. No, and we haven't even begun to even file anything in the courts against Pence. That would be well and to pass the election anyway. Right. Yeah.

So we have to vote, kid, podcasts here. Oh, meow. So we have to vote. That's, we are the mullers we've been waiting for. Like we said, so, but yes, thank you for that correction. It is feasible. It is possible. I think it's just very unlikely.

So those are corrections. If you have any, please head to mullichiroat.com, click contact, select corrections and build us a compliment sandwich. We'll get it right eventually. We have a lot of news to get to. So let's jump in with just the facts. All right, so the Treasury is about to borrow another trillion dollars to cover the cost of the tax cuts that never generated the revenue promised because surprise trickle down economics doesn't work. This is very controversial. Does anyone know what Vice President Bush called this in 1980? Anyone? Something D-O-O economics.

Voodoo economics. So this is the second year in a row the Treasury has done this. How to borrow a trillion dollars. So let me explain what's going on here. Trump is borrowing money off our backs to buy himself a good economy to win reelection so we can continue to line his pockets off of his position. All the while playing the market using trade wars and tariffs to cheat the stock market. Somebody's running away with billions of dollars on that. So this is the greatest Somebody's running away with billions of dollars on that. So this is the greatest grift of all time. And if you vote for him or support him, you are a sucker.

You have been conned. You're a mark in the biggest con of the century. I just can't believe people don't see this. Yeah. Yeah, why don't Democrats talking about that more? That should be a huge, that should be the first thing they say against him because he's 100% going to run on the economy. That's all he's got. Yeah.

And yeah, while the stock market screaming and unemployment is low, unemployment is low when he took office. And the thing, the numbers that he cites are lies anyway. And the stock market, yay. So I'm like, yeah, how many of us, you know, who among us? No, yeah, I mean granted, if you've got a 401k plan, et cetera, et cetera. But this is a false good economy. It's going to create a bubble. It's going to burst. You're going to lose money. And it's going to be bad. And it could happen under

the Democrat we elect. And of course, they'll get blamed get blamed for it. But he's doing this by, with all the tariffs and trade wars, he's doing this by pressuring the Fed to keep the rates low when we actually shouldn't be. We should be ticking rates up a little bit because the economy is doing better. But he's not. He's purposefully manufacturing a false good economy. And he's borrowing money from us, from our future, to do that. Yeah. And you're totally right.

When shit goes real south, and hopefully Democrats in office, they're going to get blame for it, which I think is something that both sides need to stop doing is, I don't know too much about econ, but it does seem that it's usually the presidency after the one that implemented huge changes that winds up seeing the effects of it So then the credit good or that yeah, so it's like Maybe stop using that as a talking point both of them. Yeah, but then again It's like you have to talk about the economy though. So I don't know But yeah, just be like well, you know this person did this back then and is what's happening. And I'm going to tell you all because you're not dumb. And, and presidents generally can't

make the economy good, at least not for real. Right. Unless they're doing this stuff that he's doing. Right. Like, human rates low of suppressing rates against all advice. Right. And, and so, but a president can fuck up the economy, but to say that it's good now, because job creation is job creation. Now, some people could argue probably rightfully that with the bailout that Obama did, we did rescue some parts of the economy, some sectors of the economy,

which allowed for the job growth, et cetera. But this tax cut, for example, where all it'll pay for itself in new jobs and new tax revenue, that didn't happen. And we knew that it wouldn't happen because like we said, trickle down economics doesn't work. And it, it basically, the company's just sort of hordered that money. Yeah. A point of, I've also heard about the new job metric is that, yes, we have, and please some correct me if I'm wrong on this

because I only heard another economist say this. So obviously, I don't have the knowledge to corroborate it or not. You're saying? Yeah, so you're saying, you're party. Yeah. Here say, you can't say any words. You can say anywhere actually from here,

I'm proud to make it. Yeah, I, or this flat, therefore the earth is flat. Yeah, but, but I haven't seen it. That's true. It is science is here, say, yeah, isn't it? Yeah, everything. Uh, but, but I heard that multiple, uh, job growth can also currently, and this gig economy be attributed to, yes, maybe there are more jobs, but a lot of the times it's a woman,

single mother or single father or just someone that's needing to work multiple jobs. And so it inflates the number. Yeah, where it's like, yeah, but that's not really a great sign. That someone has to door dash, lift, also, you know, whatever, just whatever gig, yeah, whatever house was exists for them. It's like, is that really growth, you know? I mean, the great that that exists, but it's not the best case scenario, which is like solid jobs with healthcare and 401Ks and all the stuff that, you know. But we have to think about, like what,

the economy and what the job market looks like, in general would You know, I I feel like a good job economy has both now and there's like the the gig economy is going to be a part of it Yeah, and it's great that it exists because it allows flexibility for a lot of people Right, but on the other hand, they don't have a choice sometimes. Right, and for like healthcare, for example, people in the gig economy don't get help benefits. Yeah, they get screwed pretty bad. I doordashed for a long time. When I was starting off, yes, we do.

And I suppose this is a gig in a hustle. But yes, right. Yeah, but this is such a rare, beautiful... This is when capitalism is like chill, you know? We also did incorporate though, and you know, legit create jobs. So yeah, yeah, actually. I mean, it's, you know, six and a half dozen, but you're right. Like, what does the economy look like?

Because we can't certainly go back to our 70s, manufacturing, factory, automobile worker, salary enough, one salary enough for a family scenario. Yeah. Because we have to take into consideration the gig economy, have to take into consideration automation. Or union jobs where people were getting paid like 60 grand a year to do something that they do not get paid that amount anymore. And 60 grand a year could pay for a family afford a lift.

And now it absolutely cannot. Yeah. Now those folks are like, what's wrong with you? Pick yourselves up by your non-union bootstraps. Bootstraps made in China. Yeah. My bootstraps were made in China. Oh, sorry. We're dealing with Podcat. Podcat? We're leaving it in though. Be roll.

Yeah. We're seeing roll for cats. Podcat really loves just climbing right on the table. That's just all over the wires. Yeah, he's very aggressive about affection. He is presumptuous. Yeah, he's intense, he said. He's just love me. He's sweet. He'll grab your arm with his murder mittens and like pull it into his face. Pat, pat me. They're so funny. What a turkey. All right, moving on to the next news story,

but just be aware, you're being conned. You all know, our listeners know. So let's move on here. Five Saudi hitmen were sentenced to death in a closed non-transparent trial in the death of Jamal Khashoggi. This is an outrage. Let's walk the people who orchestrated the hit.

I mean, none of them were even looked at. It was a sham trial, I hate to say it. I hate to use a phrase from the other side, but it was. And it seems to me it's just a way to silence the people with direct knowledge that it was. Muhammad bin Salman, that ordered to hit, just like our intelligence community has confirmed. Trump is praising the trial as a good start and hasn't said anything negative about the total lack of transparency, or the fact that none of the people who ordered the hit were

held accountable or even investigated probably. Trump is fighting sanctions on Turkey. Now, moving on to this sort of related story. And some of these sanctions would help our Kurdish allies by allowing them to be refugees to the United States. He's shutting that down. This is not a surprise because the sanctions are to punish Turkey for buying Russian missiles. And the sanction would ban the US from selling Turkey F-16 or F-35 jets until Turkey abandons the S-400 missile defense system it purchased from Russia. These sanctions are supposed to be automatic because when we pass sanctions against Russia for interfering in the 2016 election,

there were provisions in those sanctions that mandated sanctions against any country that makes major Russian weapons purchases. So despite that being the law, Trump has ignored it, pissing off Congress and forcing this legislation to enact sanctions that should be... They're in the first place. Automatic. This is another major separation of powers problem, if you ask me. Trump violated the impoundment act, as we know, by holding duly appropriated congressional funds from Ukraine to extort investigations out of his political or

out of Ukraine against his political rival. He violated the Magnitsky Act by failing to make a declarative statement within 120 days after the murder of Koshchokji. And now he's violating the Russian sanctions by not automatically sanctioning Turkey for making major weapons purchases from Russia. These are blatant violations disregarding the power of Congress and would be just as flagrant as ignoring a court order.

We've talked about this, you know, when will we be in a constitutional crisis? It would be if Scotus said, hand over the tapes and he refused, he would be in full defiance of a court order. But the judicial and legislative and the executive are co-equal branches of government and defying congressional appropriation funds from the Empowerment Act, defying these automatic sanctions that are supposed to be placed, defying having to make declarations under the Magnitsky Act that were triggered by Congress.

That's the, that is to me constitutional crisis time. Yeah. He is defying congressional authority. Yeah. Against the will of Congress too. Yeah. Like it's not like it's one of those things where everyone's kind of like, eh, do we really need to like follow this?

That's, yeah. That was from a different time, that language. It's like, no, this was passed after your last election because they fucking interfered so you won. Yeah, and now talk about actually going against the will of the voters. We elected this Congress to do their job and they have been. So two to five Congress is to defy the will of the people. Really, if you think about it.

Absolutely. And it's also a separation of powers violation. It's amazing what he's been able to just ignore. That is law and that is a Congress congressional mandated shit that has to be followed. I guess it seems like he does this thing with dictators where he initially will not come down on them like he needs to. And then maybe after he's had a chance to talk to them

or something or whatever, hit with Russia, I can't imagine that there hasn't been so many conversations between him and Putin that were just like, you know, we have to do something. I'm not going to come down and do everything that I could do right now, but we have to do something eventually just for the look of it. That's kind of what it seems like he does. Right. You know, optics. Right. Because you're. Because you're saying he's now finally imposing, or they're now finally imposing these sanctions on Turkey

that were supposed to be imposed. They're trying. And Trump is fighting it. Right. And fighting additional us. I'm so sorry. That was in the very first episode. Oh, God, I got it.

Okay. But yeah, he's done so well. Well, then that's even worse than. So not only is he not, you know, taking following the law, you know, because Turkey made Russian weapons purchases, they should be automatically sanctioned. He's just not, but he's blatantly ignoring that law

and the things that the sanctions for Russia laid out by Congress who we elected. Yes. But now, you know, he's now he's fighting them one. Like they've got it. Dude, we're Congress. Yes. You have to do this shit.

We told you to. Yeah. You have to faithfully execute what we do. Mm-hmm. And I guess to my previous point, I was found it on nothing, because I'm as interested. Um, I, I could see him eventually being like,

okay, fine. And then signing off on it, and then trying to get some credit for it. I could see him eventually being like, okay fine, and then signing off on it, and then trying to get some credit for it. After he's already talked to Herdawan, being like, hey, I gotta do this, but I'll give you this kickback, or like, 100%. Yeah, or maybe this is like a, you know,

yeah, I helped you out. But he's also probably pressured by Herdawan to not allow these sanctions to go through. Oh, of course. Because we have the Kashouji tapes. Right, you know? Yeah, it's just a mess. Yeah, it's all a mess.

I mean, it's like, if they're climbing on such a global scale like that, it's just a constant game of cost-benefit analysis for them, I imagine, unlike. How do they keep track of who owes who what? Right. I'm having a hard time. Like the Illuminati, the Koshojee thing,

but then Syria, the pullout, but we did bomb Syria. So like, is it Trump, three, Erdogan, four, and we owe him one? Like, I don't know, I can't fucking keep track of all of the quids pro quo. And that's only the stuff that we know about. You know that there's so much stuff that we don't know about. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist,

but it's like, obviously there are other things. And I know that quids is not the Latin plural for quid. I know quids pro quo. You don't need to send me a correction on that. I have to look up the plural of quid. But you know what I mean. Yes. So, yeah, and now there's even something freaky

that just happened this week. And this absolutely blows my mind. And we'll be right back after this break with this. I'm a little freaked out by this. And then we also have an impeachment update. So stick around. Hey everybody, it's A.G. Are you sick of overpaying for fashionable clothing that you know has an astronomical

markup? Well, so are we. But we never have to overpay again because we discovered Everlane. Everlane makes premium clothes with the finest materials, but without the insane markups. They eliminated the middle man, middle person. And they partner with the best ethical factories around the world and share the true cost of every product that they make with the consumer. So it's full transparency.

They call it radical transparency, actually. And Everlane's clothes look and feel better. They last longer. They're really good quality. They cost less because they sell directly to the consumer. The prices are often 30 to 50% lower than traditional retailers. They have everything from premium Japanese denim and Italian made leather shoes to 100% grade A cashmere and outerwear made from recycled materials.

My favorite, right now, you know how like I have to have like 10 black tank tops at all times. This is where I get them, and I got this really cool coat made from recycled water bottles. So they're not only beautiful and comfortable, but they're sustainable and ethical and they're far less expensive. And right now, you can check out our personalized collection at Everlane.com slash AG. Plus you'll get free shipping on your first order. That's Everlane.com slash AG. Again, Everlane.com slash AG. You'll be glad you did.

All right, welcome back. So the thing that's freaking me out this week, and I've been walking around pontificating on this to myself, pacing shaking my finger in the air and ranting in my own home So the Department of Justice recently issued a new legal opinion that appears to exempt a sought-e-owned oil company It exempts their lobbyists from registering under the foreign agents registrations. Oh God The citizens for responsibility in ethics in Washington who by the way I would love to work there So if you're hiring They have analyzed lobbying disclosures and they're telling us that lobbyists have been allowed to file under the less rigorous lobbying disclosures act instead of fairer and as a result

The lobbyists don't have to report meetings with government officials thus hiding details of lobbying of a lobbying campaign that could be considered part of Saudi Arabia's efforts to influence U.S. policy. More broadly though, and this part caught my eye. The new Department of Justice Legal Opinion opens a giant loophole in the Federal Agents Registration Act that allows corporations that are wholly owned by a foreign state-owned company to obscure the full extent of their influence efforts in the United States. And when I hear a foreign state-owned company, I immediately think of the Supersecret subpoena battle with mystery company from country A. Yeah. That Mueller subpoenaed, and we held in contempt for a long time, and we haven't heard anything about.

The one we haven't heard, this is, we haven't heard about it since June. And as we know, this administration has a habit of whipping up legal DOJ opinion memos to cover for past bad acts. Like when he finally found a lawyer to write up a memo saying he was allowed to withhold the Ukraine aid. That memo came out in December and well after. And also after several lawyers in the office of management and budget who had issues with him violating the Empowerment Act, which was a law that says you can't, the executive can't withhold, duly appropriated congressional funds, then he comes out with this opinion saying it was okay. It's like this retroactive thing only after several of these lawyers resigned, which I think I think in protest, to having to write this opinion for me, finally found

a Patsy to write the opinion for him. And I can't help think this new opinion gives cover to any lobbyists that might have been working in the US on behalf of the secret company from country A, for example, which I think is the Qatar Investment Authority, but could be a Saudi or a Russian bank. But it would definitely behoove the Trump administration for lobbyists to not have to disclose things like meetings with officials about directing the commissions funds from the sell-off of Rousal, which, you know, the Cudder Investment Authority brokered, or any meetings with officials for QIA trying to buy influence with Trump by bailing out Kushner's devil building at 666 Fifth Avenue, right?

It's just very fucking fishy. And this could also provide cover for Giuliani for not registering under Farrah. Yeah, what I'm thinking too is now if he's registering for Gazprom, a wholly owned foreign subsidiary or a wholly owned foreign company, he wouldn't have to disclose meetings he had with Gazprom executives. Now, we already know a lot of this. Is he considered an official? Oh yeah, no. But he could be considered a lobbyist. Yeah, or could it be a government official? Yeah, okay. But he would have to disclose meetings he had with government officials as a lobbyist, right? Because anybody who lobbies for a foreign country without registering is subject to the law. So you don't have to be a government official to be a lobbyist. Yeah, right. Unfortunately, most of them wind up being lobbyists.

I know that's where we get most of our lobbyists anyway. Greg read comes to mind. Yeah, this all seems like a giant scheme to protect oligarchs. It is, right? And so now we've got, and this could also protect Flynn if you think about it. Because Flynn, as you know, would have been charged with fair violations. Had he not cooperated, quote unquote. And he was supposed to be a witness in the Bijon-Keyon trial because he and Bijon-Keyon lobbied illegally on behalf of Turkey and he went from being a cooperating witness to an unadided co-conspirator. This could provide cover for Flynn

to not be indicted under phara for those for, you know, for blowing up as plea deal and not cooperating anymore, particularly in a phara violation case. Wow. That's bad. It's really it's fucked up and I and it freaks me out a little bit. Not too many people are talking about this. No, and that I mean without even understanding all the nuances of it, it's just deregulation basically.

Yeah. You're taking away requirements for people. Yeah, and requirements that prevent foreign entities from interfering in our policy. Yes, and that is, which is how Trump leaves his life. Exactly, exactly. It's like if I could think of one thing that we do not need to ease up on,

it is the fair of registration process. Yeah, especially a light of Ukraine and everything. We could go into the Grand Barg and all the other nations that we fucked with. So, yeah, that's frightening to me. But hell, what do we do? Crew, I'm glad you're looking into it. I'm gonna see if I can reach out, have somebody from crew come and talk to us about it. Ooh, that'd be great.

Richard Painter, maybe. He's not with them anymore. Not them anymore. I think I have a friend, maybe Robert McQuack. I can't remember. I've got a couple of folks inside. He might be with someone else anyway. Also, in the news, Turtle Dick Mitch is now saying

he would be open to hearing from witnesses in this bullshit senate trial where he and Lindsey Graham have already promised not to be impartial. So he might be cool with witnesses. He just refuses to put that in writing ahead of the trial. So Mitch McConnell is basically saying, trust me. No. Great.

Eat a dick. Get it writing. Yeah. I just still can't get over the, I'm not being impartial jurors comments. I just cannot can't get over the, I'm not being in partial jurors comments. I just can knock it over that. It's like, if you went to a courtroom and someone said that, in a literal juror said that, you would not be allowed.

That's how I get out of jury duty. Right. Oh, sketchy. What else? Cat attack. It's an aggressive affection attack. What? He doesn't understand microphones. Want to talk to the people? Man, oh.

Oh no. He doesn't. You go over there. Pod Cat Attack. Stay down there. Stay down there. Everyone should stick around. Because later during the interview, I have a thoughtful discussion with Renato Mariotti who disagrees with the strategy of withholding the articles from the Senate. So you won't want to miss that.

And in some new court filings, House Democrats are confirming that they have said before what they've been saying before and what they you know that they're not closing the impeachment inquiry uh... just because they passed two articles for the Ukraine shakedown and a pair of filings that were due on twelve twenty three per a minute order issued by the dc circuit court of appeals in both the mcgan subpoena case and the muller grand jury material case dog letter that's the lawyer for the House Democrats, says explicitly, not

implicitly, doesn't even imply it. He just says it, that the documents and testimony are part of the ongoing impeachment investigation and could lead to additional articles of impeachment. So this is my justice porn come true, super seating articles of impeachment. Yeah. The DC Circuit Court will hear both cases January 3rd and what we're calling the separation of powers Super Bowl. I put my beans on Trump losing. The court refusing, I think the court will refuse. The DC Circuit Court will refuse to grant stays. But the allotted judge for the DC Circuit Court

who is Chief Justice John Roberts, who also happens to be presiding over the impeachment trial when it gets to the Senate, if it gets to the Senate. I think he will grant a temporary administrative stage just like Ruth Bader Ginsburg did in the Mizar's case. Or the Deutsche Bank case, excuse me. I think he will grant a temporary administrative stage, just like Ruth Bader Ginsburg did in the Mizar's case. Or the Deutsche Bank case, excuse me. I think he will grant a temporary administrative in administrative,

in both cases until Trump can file for a writ of a searcherari with a Supreme Court. That's a fancy way of saying appealing to the Supreme Court. And I think Scrovis will take the case, putting it on the same schedule with the two Mizar's cases in the Deutsche Bank case, and we'll get the decisions for all five in the June, July timeframe.

If it's what you say, I love it, especially in the summer. Yeah. God, they're gonna get so much shit just for that leading up to the election and stuff. You know, gotta do what you gotta do. Yeah, and it's not. They're followed everything, take six months. No, I'm actually kind of surprised that it wasn't put on a faster track. Yeah, but that's worst case scenario.

I think they'll get to stay. I think he'll get to appeal both of these. I think we'll get the decision in June, July. 99.99% sure, a Trump will lose all five cases. But he's got Kavanaugh in there, but this is a really clear, well-established thing that we're going for. Yeah. Well, Kavanaugh clearly only cares about himself, so hopefully in that sense, he's going to be like, this is not an issue that I'm going to go down on. Yeah, maybe abortion, yes. Right, but not this. Right, The Federalist Society doesn't say I have to do this. Right. Yeah, exactly.

These are more uncharted territories. Right. This is a judge. There's no real litmus test for the Federalist Society on this kind of shit. So now Nancy can withhold the Ukraine articles that long or She'll send them along To the Senate have a trial and then draw up new articles. And the new articles would be separate either way, right? And I think that you would just need one additional article because we've got them on abusive power and obstruction of Congress, then you add an obstruction of justice article. And you get that from the McGand testimony and you get that from the Mueller documents, the documentary evidence that Trump lied to Mueller about having four knowledge of the wiki

league stumps because he did, and there is documentary evidence, but it's in those grand jury materials. We can't use it as evidence until we get our hands on it. And that would be an obstruction of justice as well, lying to a federal prosecutor, lying to Mueller. And so you would have Article 3, obstruction of justice, subsection one or subsection A, underpants A, um, you know, trying to obstruct and curtail the Mueller investigation through 800 ways. Actually, I, they're probably five in there. That's my beans are on five. And then subsection two,

uh, lying to federal prosecutors, which is what Clinton went down for. So that's one additional article. And you put it all together, send everything over to the Senate. Now you've got a case that's harder to acquit for for Republican senators. We would hold them to account for that. But you know, she might not send them at all. I don't know. I really don't know. We'll talk I'll talk to Renato about that a little bit because think about I don't know, I'll talk to Renato about that a little bit. Because think about, the question becomes, do we have one senate trial with all the articles, or do we have two senate trials?

And if you think about that for a second, two senate trials would be two acquittals for Trump. That is not good. No. So my beans are on holding these indefinitely. Not to mention she said she would send, at least until we get this third article, evidence for the third article. She said she would send, at least until we get this third article, evidence

for the third article. She said she would send the articles over once she thought the trial would be fair, which means if she does send the article, she's implying the trial is fair, giving Trump another talking point for acquittal. Nancy said the trial was fair, I was acquitted, I win. If we have a trial, I want only one, for a lot of reasons. First look how nuts Trump is going with his sham senate acquittal without his sham senate acquittal. Yes.

He's literally imploding and this will just continue. Second, two impeachment trials is a lot. Frankly, there's a lot of fatigue for this, not us, not our listeners, but a lot of the independent voters. Per the rules of the Senate, they'd have to take a second trial unless a majority vote went through to change the rules or something, allowing one impeachment per president per year or something. Maybe you could get like a punch card. Nine impeachment's 10th once free. Third, as much as McConnell is pretending he doesn't want the articles and doesn't care and doesn't want a trial, you know Trump is screaming at him to get it done. He wants his acquittal. He wants McConnell to steamroll the process and just have a trial

without even waiting for Nancy to appoint House managers. He wants his acquittal that badly. And this is why he and McConnell were pushing for a fast impeachment while simultaneously bitching about it being rushed. While all the Republicans, including TURLEE, that one guy testified as the scholar, asked for more evidence in a slower process. I said, be careful what you wish for. And here we are, a slower process, Nancy called their bluff and now they're pissed. Yeah, Republicans don't want that at all. And it's beautiful to me. Like I said, we have an opposing view, a posing viewpoint later in the show from the very

thoughtful, very expert Renato Marriotti host of the on topic podcast. So definitely stay with us for that. Also an impeachment news, Trump has given a promotion to a top Mulvaney aid who refused to cooperate with impeachment. Trump named Robert Blair as the special representative for International Telecommunications Policy and for work on the G5 efforts. This is highly, five G, not G5. Look at what's the five G, G5, five G,

electronic telecommunications. This is highly suspect. And now Blair's name is being floated for the Secretary of State, because now there are talks about replacing Pompeo. Jesus. Now Pompeo says he's not running for Senate next year. The deadline to file is June, so we'll know by June. Other names being floated to replace him

or Robert O'Brien, who is now the fourth national security advisor. Why does he need to replace him? I'm not saying that I want him to stay necessarily, but it's like he seems like he's been such a loyal de mentor. Yeah. Ah. Ah.

Mm. Yes. Another contender for Pompeo's job is Steve. Steve Mnuchin. Along with Richard Grinnell, the ambassador to Germany, though the Germans have complained about his aggro. He's got aggro. Until one is selected and confirmed, the brand new deputy secretary of state, Stephen

Baigin, I think that's how you'd be a good big, big, big, big guy. How do you spell it? I have nine, I'm just curious. IGUN, Baygon. He would become the acting until he confirmed somebody through the Senate. Other names being considered are Iron Brian Hook, that's a Kushner buddy and Marco Rubio and Tom Cotton. I forget hate that Kushner is still allowed to be there. I know.

Oh, he's forgetting sometimes. His name comes up again. I'm like, God damn it. You're not allowed to be here. He's gotten like such a security risk. He is so vulnerable. MBS and MBC have like joked about having him in his pocket, having him in their pocket. Yes, that's right. Remember with the ice cream thing, when ice cube got dragged into this whole mess? Yeah. He's a tool. So mockery of a loin. Yeah, and there's nothing wrong with doing international business unless you're trying to do this also because now you've got people have leverage over you, you know, you can be an international businessman or you can be a white house advisor, you can't be both.

Yeah. Well, apparently you can be everything if you set trumps. You can pull yourself up out of the net. Boots track. Yeah, exactly. I made them China. Yeah. Is it normal for people you were talking about someone switching over from, well, yeah, minution, treasury to secretary of state?

Are those kind of lateral moves normal at all? I don't know that you would actually even have to have a confirmation at that point because he's been confirmed by the Senate. Yeah. So that might be a way around having to get the Senate to confirm a new. That's terrifying. A new person. God.

But minutia almost lost his, like, that wasn't, that was a close vote. So he, no, people don't like him. He's a showed. Yeah. Well, none of them are really qualified for any of this, whatsoever. So them switching, it's not like qualification is the problem.

Was he even qualified to be a secretary of the treasury? No. So how do you find grifty, mobbed up people who are actually qualified to be a secretary? Right. It doesn't make any sense. And I'm surprised Chris Ray is still at the FBI, honestly. Yeah. Yeah. So, but we'll see.

We'll be right back though with hot notes. We've got a couple of really good ones, so stay with us. Hey, everybody, it's A.G. The segment of Mola Shirod is brought to you by native deodorant. For the longest time, I was looking for an aluminum-free deodorant that really works, and I finally found it. It's native deodorant.

Native is made without all the chemicals. No parabens, no talc, no aluminum, and a lot of those things may be linked to serious health concerns, and they use safe, simple, effective ingredients like coconut oil, baking soda, and shea butter, and it provides strong protection while feeling light and fresh. Native can hang with your tough workouts, your busy mom life, or a 16-hour day, which is me. Their deodorants come in a variety of awesome scents, like coconut and vanilla, lavender and rose, cucumber and mint, and my current personal favorite, Eucalyptus and mint.

They also offer an unscented and abaking soda-free formula for those with sensitivities. Native has over 8,000 five-star reviews and has been featured on the Today Show in Women's Health. Good morning, America, Hello Giggles and more. There's free shipping on every order, they offer 30 day free returns in exchanges, so no risk. And get 20% off your first purchase by visiting nativedeodorant.com and entering promo code AG during checkout.

So that's 20% off your first purchase by going to nativedeodorant.com and enter promo code AG at checkout. The segment of Mola Shiro is also brought to you by our friends at Buffy. Buffy makes the earth's most comfortable bedding that's super soft, very sustainable, earth-friendly, made with only renewable and recycled materials. All of Buffy's bedding is unbelievably comfortable from sheets and pillows to their cult favorite comforters made from an ultra-smooth eucalyptus fiber that feels softer than cotton. It's so breathable. Eucalyptus fiber is just it's cool to the touch it keeps me cool I sleep hot

Oh hot super keeps me comfy at night even though you know I am a hot sleeper But it's been cold lately, but it also keeps you warm. It's incredible I don't understand the you can live just technology But what I love is that buffy bedding is soft on the planet and you go Just fiber isn't just softer than cotton, but it's more earth friendly. It's sourced from renewable forests comes It consumes 10 times less water to grow and It's more of a source for maneuver for us. It consumes 10 times less water to grow. And it's transformed into ultra smooth fibers

that they do this in a waste-free production process, which I love as well. And all Buffy products are cruelty-free. They're hypologetic with no down feathers or animal products ever. I love Buffy. I'm not the only one. Customers have given Buffy's products over 17,000 five star reviews plus an overall average rating of 4.5. Buffy offers free trial, basically they ship it to you for free, they return it free if you don't, there's something weird about it, and they do that every day, so you can

try out Buffy betting for yourself. For free, and if you don't absolutely love it, return it at no cost. For $20 off your Buffy Comporter, visit buffy.co and enter promo code AG. That's buffy.co and use promo code AG at checkout for $20 off. You'll be glad you did. All right, welcome back. Hot notes. All right, welcome back. Our very, very good friend, front of the pod, Natasha Bertrand, right?

He's written up this really great piece about the CIA, and Jordan has that. Yeah, so bars do over investigation that's being led by John Durham is underway. And like you said, Politico did a really good piece on how the CIA is kind of being brought into the mix, not kind of very much so. Being brought into the mix, Brenn is, or sorry, not Brennant Durham, is putting pressure on now CIA director Gina Haspel to hand over former director John Brennan's communications that surrounded the intelligence community assessment back from January 2017. So this was that report that definitively concluded that Putin interfered in the election

to help Trump ultimately a report that was backed by the Republican lead senate intel committee. By the way, let's not forget that and Mike Pompeo So now that's put Haspel in a tough spot, right because she basically has to choose if she's going to play K bar And potentially throw her agency and precedent under the bus not because they did anything wrong But it would be opening the organization up to just further getting dragged into bar's efforts to discredit every unfavorable finding to Trump ever, essentially. Some CIA vets have been chiming in on this and what Haspel's ultimately gonna wind up doing.

And one guy, John Cypher, said that Haspel is probably confident there has been no serious wrongdoing and will therefore find a means to cooperate So we'll see what happens but she's in a really interesting position because She's not like shit dumped on Trump all the time, you know by Trump. No, yeah, not at all She's very quiet. Yeah, yeah, and and he Trump mostly only says good things about her too So like when he does tweet about her and stuff so she's kind of like an under the radar person who's

just been focusing a lot on sort of like recruitment is one of the big things she's been focusing on more internal things. I guess things that are less consequential maybe to what Trump has on his radar right now. So she's kind of been flying under it. But sadly because he doesn't talk so much shit about her, that's probably one of the things that's allowed her to do her job for the last year and a half. Yeah, she's gone surprisingly. She's very good about keeping her head down. Totally.

And we remember, we've talked about her. She had a lot to do. She was part of upholding a lot of the enhanced interrogation techniques under the operation stellar wind. Do you remember? In Komi's book? Yeah. was part of upholding a lot of the enhanced interrogation techniques under the Operation Stellar Wind. Do you remember in Komi's book? Yeah. Yeah, I do.

And that was a big issue that a lot of Democrats had with her being confirmed as head of CIA. Yeah. Yeah, so she's already proven herself to Trump, I guess. At least, you know, not hard in the past. You're hired. You've tortured people, you're in. Yeah, but I mean, we don't know, but that's the allegation. Yeah, it does seem like she's, I haven't done like a ton of research

into her, her past, and what people kind of think about her. But the general sense I get is that she's kind of, I mean, she doesn't seem to have a lot of Democrats openly criticizing her right now. And then Trump also is not criticizing her openly very much right now. So it's just a really, it's one of the rare, you know, people that he doesn't have a super definitive opinion on, I guess, that are in those positions. At Christopher Ray just has been low-key slammed so many times, just even though he's another person that's like,

it's, I mean, Christopher Ray, I think is doing pretty much as good of a job as you could possibly do with that agency right now. But the fact that she's been there for 19 months, I think, means something in this climate. And hopefully she's not just doing a bunch of horrible shit. It sounds like she's focusing more on the internal workings of the agency. But who knows? Who knows what's going to come out in three years. But she was around when the Mifsa-Papadopoulos

meeting occurred, not physically, obviously, but she was the station chief in the US Embassy in London when it happened. And she was briefed on it all and the Republican theory that Miffsood was an intelligence asset and the whole thing may have been you know in appropriate or as they like to say like a setup that's that's something that Durham's probably gonna push her on as well kind of people are talking like you, did she handle it the right way when she was briefed on it, but her approach to it was, this seems like more of an FBI thing because it was. And yeah, and you have to also wonder, like, I don't know, it's just pushing that stuff

off is like, I mean, she, Mifsood, you know, was not part of that. But when we have this whole, like, Trump giving bar the freedom to declassify whatever he wants, which allows Durham to get these communications from Brennan, which are probably actually very important in national security and shouldn't be made public. That is what frightens me about this whole process, is the access that Trump's gonna have to these communications that he wouldn't normally otherwise have, because this shit's supposed

to be top secret. It's weird. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, she seems just very like, run of the mill CIA kind of personality, you know, someone that very much protects the intelligence community, stands behind whatever they collectively choose to do. Unfortunately, that comes with standing behind some really fucked up stuff sometimes, like the enhanced interrogation techniques. Right. And it's, but yeah, it's just it'll be

interesting to see how she winds up handling it. He has a way, Trump and bar have a way of putting people in this these positions where it's like they can't just preserving the status quo is not even which already was an issue, because obviously, this is America, The status quo was very broken and needed to be reformed, but not only can they, they can't even get by preserving the status quo now. They have to make some major ethical choice on whether or not they're going to play Kate. This presidency that is just trying to manufacture outcomes for themselves within

the intelligence community, or if they're just going to stand up for the status quo just to keep going and keep protecting what has been long-standing precedent. We'll see what happens with there. Yeah, it is kind of frightening to when you think about that, like the precedent and what they're going to do. I mean, oh yeah, and the way they're going about that, like the precedent and what they're going to do. I mean, oh yeah. And the way they're going about it, Durham's just like, showing up to other countries. I mean, basically, and they've worn out the phrase, which hunt metaphorically, which is literally what they're doing. They're, you know, they kept that IG report from coming

out. They kept, the Durham thing hasn't been finished yet because they're just looking for stuff to be wrong. Yeah. And the CIA is like the next place where it seems they're really gonna direct a lot of their efforts to see if they can uncover wrongdoing. Well, maybe we'll see Gina Haspel testifying some at some point soon about any of that. But you know, Mifso does not have an agent. So, I don't know, it's just weird. Yeah.

And you know, talking about these ambiguous lawsuits and keeping shit open and being on witch hunts, I have an update on Andy McCabe. His attorney, Murad Hussein, filed a declaration Christmas Eve on McCabe's behalf in his lawsuit against the FBI in the Department of Justice. As we know, McCabe is suing over his wrongful termination in March of 2018 by Jeff Sessions via tweet just hours before he was set to get his full pension. The new declaration alleges that several agencies and 30 individuals, including Chris Ray, Bill Barr and Trump, have failed to hand over any materials requested in the lawsuit. Really?

Saying, quote, at this time, the plaintiff has assembled a small set of supporting evidence with his own records in public reporting. However, much of the relevant evidence in this case is in the defendant's exclusive possession or the possession of current or former government officials. From what we already know, Barr opened a criminal investigation into McCabe for a lack of candor, but the grand jury, if you remember, failed to return an indictment, likely because there wasn't enough evidence. McCabe corrected his testimony to the inspector general and other agents. And because as the acting director of the FBI, he has sole authority to determine what information is given to reporters.

He, there's, there can be no underlying corrupt intent or motive to lie to cover it up about his actions. And that testimony came from Lisa Page, another favorite Trump target in the Russia investigation. A bar, however, did not close the investigation after the grand jury bogged on an indictment. He's left that open. It's still open. And a federal judge told Bar and the Department of Justice, they would need to fish or cut bait, either close the case or produce documents in a FOIA lawsuit that was seeking the documents related to McCabe's dismissal.

Communications related to it. DOJ came back and said, no, we're not going to close the case, we'll hand over the documents. But it appears they haven't yet done that, otherwise McCabe would have these. And continuing, they seem to want to continue to drag their feet on handing over the evidence, or closing the case, which is leaving McCabe in sort of a limbo. Now, naturally, if the documents were produced, they would exonerate McCabe, and this appears to be maybe a Brady violation, at least to me. I don't know if that's...

I know that it would be a Brady violation in the criminal case. What is that again? I forgot. That's when you fail to turn over ex-gulpatory evidence. Like, remember when Muller had to do something under the Brady? He had to basically hand over some updated information he got about Gates and Manafort, saying it was actually Gates who was taking the polling data and giving it to Kalimnik,

giving it to the Kremlin via Kalimnik, and not Manafort directly, but he was doing it on behalf of Manifort. And Muller had to put that into evidence because it could excuse Manifort from handing over the polling data. Of course, he wasn't really being investigated for that, or charged with anything like that, but you have to hand over anything that could Excal paint your The person you're prosecuting now that I think that works in a criminal case I don't know if that works in a civil case, which is what his lawsuit is against the DOJ You know, so I don't know if you can have a Brady violation in a civil suit I'm gonna have to ask a lawyer if you guys know send it to us in corrections

But the case remains open I suspect they won't close it because they're waiting for some sort of evidence They could actually use to indict McCabe and simply haven't been able to prove their case to a grand jury or maybe they're waiting for another grand jury. Spoke to Andy McCabe who seems to say that they are jury shopping to see if they can get an indictment out of maybe another impaneled grand jury for the same stuff. We'll keep you posted. Either way on both the status of the criminal investigation, was still open, and the lawsuit filed by McCabe for wrongful termination. As we know, he alleged that sessions did not have the authority to fire him, because he was no longer the acting director. And only the director of the FBI, Chris Ray, actually had any authority to fire McCabe, but sessions did it.

He also says, McCabe also says he had fulfilled his tour of duty for retirement purposes hours before sessions tweeted that he was fired. He was done with his time in the FBI. So he should have his pension. It's a solid case. I foresee his pension being reinstated. He'll be exonerated of the crimes. But I hope his lawyer is going to file for these documents either under Brady or something else, some other sort of ex-culpatory thing. But I mean, he will end up I'm sure getting a court order to have to hand over all that stuff anyway, because of that's what discovery is, right? I mean, you have to get all the evidence. Yeah. Leg, leg on purpose. They lolly gag around the infee. They're lolly gagging around the infee. They're lolly gaggers. Yes, they are. So that is my hot note update on my cave shout out to him He's a good dude. Mm-hmm and

He's cute. So All right, are you ready for sabotage? Yes Alright, congratulations to everyone who made it through Wemma Getten. I did not get taken out. Did you get taken out? My dad took me out on Christmas Eve on purpose. Oh, we know Christmas Day. Yes. No Christmas Day, you're fine.

Really? Yeah, you only have to make it to 11.59 on the 24th. Oh shit. Okay, well then I think I made it. You did, you made it. I'd play the song right now But I know it's Christmas Eve. I lost it. Oh damn it. Yeah But I think we have some people who are playing through New Year's. Okay nice Some of our lists for those

storefronts that don't know when to change and move on I mean, you know Christmas just happened and already people are putting up their Martin Luther King decorations. It's just ridiculous every year. Can't even give me a minute. No, yeah, so I don't want to sabotage those people who are playing through New Year's. I mean, you know, I guess you could just play it all year and just start the clock over January 1st. But chances are you're not going to hear it during the spring. And here's some new sabotage information. There is a extension filed in the Flynn case

for sentencing memo. We do on December 6th, I think, and they want to, or December 30th, and they're asking now for January 6th. This is the prosecution. They're saying, hey, due to the holidays and due to a bunch of people not being able to sign off on this shit, we need another week to file our updated supplemental sentencing memo. And they insinuated that it's because they're making changes to it. As we know, they've previously asked for probation only for Flynn. That was a previous sentencing menu because memo because he was what would you like tonight because he was cooperating at that point you know and so he was going to be a witness in the

B. Jankee on case he was going to be a witness in the stone and so here he is and he is now so I think what they're doing is they're amending the sentencing memo They're going to be asking for prison time. Oh god damn Because they need another week to do it. I'm those are beans But they did insinuate in the filing. Oh, you know, we may or may not need to amend our previous sentencing memo And because we're amending it that's why we need all these approvals and signatures and it's a holiday and so we need another week because we're amending it. That's why we need all these approvals and signatures. And it's a holiday.

And so we need another week. DOG agreed to this. Both sides agreed to this. So they put it in there and the judge granted it. It does not change the January 28th sentencing day. It just gave everyone an extra week to file their shit. Because now they're going to have to, they're have January 6th, they're going to file

this new sentencing memorandum. And then crazy Sydney Powell will have until I think January 21st. I think 20th, 21st, to respond. To respond. Mm-hmm. In a surcer reply or whatever they call it. And then a week until, and then they have a week. Day-day. Yeah. And it's, I don't think it's gonna be good for Flynn, although Trump could just pardon him,

which would please, I dare you. You're right in the middle of being in peach, I dare you. Yeah, the Eddie Gallagher pardon's going well for you right now. Yeah, it's super great. Mm-hmm. Oh, that fucking guy. Have you seen all the videos?

Yep. Yeah, yep. Scary. Mm-hmm. Gross. Very gross. He's not gonna be able to take him on the road now to campaign for him, or maybe he will.

Maybe he thinks it makes it better, the supporter. I mean, people tend to not want to split their support. It's easier for them to just get behind the idea of supporting troops in general, but it seems like when there's so many other troops that are coming out saying, no, this guy was really fucked up and we had to go out of our way to protect him from being a crazy man.

I'm committing these crimes more than he already did. Gross crimes. The videos are horrible. I don't recommend you watch them. Yeah, it's like, oh, I didn't even see those. I thought you were just talking about there. Oh, I'm talking about the ones where he was posing and.

Oh, God, no, I didn't see those. I didn't see those. Oh, God, no, I didn't see those. I didn't see those. Oh, I didn't see those. I thought you were just talking about there. Oh, I'm talking about the ones where he was posing. then videos of what he did to like a teenage ISIS fighter and stuff. Oh my god. But you know, who knows what Trump supporters want and like, maybe they're under that? Yeah, that's true.

So there is a quite real possibility that with this new sentencing memorandum, I don't think they'll bring him up on indictments of past behavior that they were otherwise going to let him go on. I think they're just going to recommend the max sentencing for, or go within the sentencing guidelines for the lie. But he is guilty of some fair violations, but that weird memo we were talking about could provide cover for that and that could go through the courts again and they might not want to use the taxpayers money to fight that battle. I don't know, but there could be something

else coming out. I don't, I just have no, I literally no sourced information or indication of that at all. I'm just going by the court, the court violence here. So, with that in mind, you ready to play the fantasy indictment league. Yes Okay, so I Whose first isn't me or I have no idea Did you just do it solo last year? Yeah, I did it solo and I went first. Well, I know Amanda played too, so I went first. So that's your turn, your first. Oh, yay. I'm doing Gisling because I saw an article that said

she's finally starting to get looked into. Yeah, and in the UK as well. Yeah. All right, I'm going to go with Flynn. Nice. Because, you know, super-seating, it would be, I think, a super-seating indictment. I don't know what you call an indictment that would have happened, had he not cooperated. I don't know if it's considered super-seating.

That's a good question. Yeah, like it takes backsees. Here's what we were going to do. Yeah, take backsees indictment. Yes, that. Okay, cool. I'm going to do so many criminals. So little time. Fucking Giuliani. Okay, and I'll go with super-steeding Mmm. Supersteeting, Fruimann. Nice. I assume you're gonna do a plea deal. I am gonna hold out for that plea deal. Yeah, Parnas. Parnas plea deal. I know you. B'rack. No, I'm kidding. It's okay. You can have him. He hasn't done anything for me. Yeah, which means if we leave him off. Yeah, he'll be indicted. Probably. I'm gonna actually go with

Weiselberg. Mm. I'm gonna do Super Shining Parnas, double down. Didn't you just do that? I did plea deal. Oh, Super Shining Parnas, double down. Double down, I get it now. Mm. How about... Trump inaugural. Oh, let's...

Okay, I'm gonna do Trump inaugural. I'm gonna take Weiselberg off of there because the Sivance case is still going through the courts and I'm gonna make that walker off instead. She's the inaugural lady. Nice. Um, the inaugural lady. Nice. I will do. I think there's so much to be seen with a live and Igor stuff, so I'll do a Rando.

A Rando. I'll even make it specific. Rando, Russian national. Russian national. Randall Russian National Okay, I'm gonna go with Yeah, he got Giuliani Trump. I'll do bear I come in you know if you're I don't I don't want to leave him off this week Yeah, I'm a feeling yeah, I feel like a I'm a no-gural heavy nice. You're Giuliani heavy. Yeah with a touch of jizzling. Yeah. Well there They all know each other. Yeah It feels very

McCarthy-esque Saying random Russian national. I know I know sometimes I feel bad but like yeah I think what you mean is somebody Kremlin connector or mobbed. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah,, a literal bad guy. Absolutely. Not just like no, I know it just sounds like Bob the Russian walking around like you I know you. Yeah, not like that. Yeah. All right. That is how we play the fantasy indictment league. And now right on the other side of this break is the interview with Renato Marriotti. He is the host of the on topic podcast. He is a CNN legal analyst. He's also a former federal prosecutor and he has a little bit of a different idea. You know, we are, I'm very all for, you know, the withholding of the articles from the Senate,

you know, until summer or indefinitely or at least until a fair trial agreement can be reached, which I don't think it can. But Renato has a differing opinion and I think it's worth definitely worth listening to. It's very thoughtful and we're actually closer than I thought on a lot of this stuff. So I want you guys to take a listen, so stick around for that. Hey everybody, let's face it, New Year's resolutions do not always stick. Especially the ones with a focus on health, at least for me, because those require the most work. But not anymore, daily harvest makes it easy to eat well.

They deliver thoughtfully sourced chef-crafted food right to my door. They work directly with farmers to harvest organic fruits and vegetables at their peak, and then freeze them within 24 hours to lock in their nutrients. That's a very important part of that process. Everything stays fresh until you're ready to enjoy it. She's for more than 65 different options, like smoothies, hearty soups, harvest bowls, and overnight oats, I love. Daily harvest is quick and easy.

It's a quick and easy way to get all of your fruits and vegetables that you need every day, and everything can be prepared in five minutes or less, which I absolutely love. You know I love this. Each recipe takes one step with room to make them your own, too. You can add your favorite milk to blend up a smoothie or heat up a harvest bowl, top it with avocado or fried egg, whatever you, whatever you're into. Whether you're at home at your desk or on the go, daily harvest is the easiest way to have a delicious and nutritious meal or snack. I am loving the cauliflower rice and pesto harvest bowl. It's like pesto risotto. I also make the wheat grass banana cucumber smoothie a lot because I never get the veggies that I need to because I am just running around like a crazy person. I'm so busy all the time and I need to get that serving of fruit,

the servings of fruits and vegetables in. They have a wide variety of delicious nutritious foods. So for once it'll be easy to stick to those new years resolutions. So give yourself that little bit of a benefit. And go to dailyharvest.com and our promo code AG25 to get $25 off. $25 off your first box. That's promo code AG25 for $25 off your first box at dailyharvest.com. Again, dailyharvest.com. You'll be glad you did. Joining us for the interview today is former federal prosecutor, CNN legal analyst and host of the on topic podcast, one of my favorite podcasts.

Please welcome our friend Renato Mariotti back to the show. Renato, thanks for joining us on Mollershi Road. Thank you. Happy to be back. It is good to speak to you again. I don't think we've had you on since Chicago, which was July 27th. It's been a while. That was the day right around the day Moller testified. Again, I don't think we've had you on since Chicago, which was July 27th. It's been a while.

That was the day right around the day Mueller testified. A lot has changed. That's for damn sure. Yeah, it was a couple days after that. And it was the day that Jerry Nadler filed for the grand jury materials under Article 1 impeachment powers. And I was convinced that is when we started the impeachment inquiry and not in September when Pelosi announced it. But speaking of impeachment, Donald John Trump is now the third president to be impeached. But you and I have some different feelings about

the next steps now that the articles have been approved. And as many of our listeners know, I wanted Pelosi to hit the brakes on impeachment. I thought she might do that by holding back the articles from a full vote in the House. But as it turns out, what she seems to have done here is she's refusing to select House impeachment managers, or at least until she sees what the trial rules look like in the Senate. So she can make her selection based on those factors and that seems to be The quote-unquote delay that everyone's talking about right now now I like this delay because I see it as leverage to demand fair rules in the Senate And I think it gives us time to wait for more evidence from other ongoing impeachment investigations like the obstruction of justice

evidence from other ongoing impeachment investigations like the obstruction of justice, Don McGahn, Supena that we're waiting for and the Mueller-Granjury, Materials, and also Trump's finances. But this process is still allowed for a fast impeachment to address the urgency of the Ukraine extortion scheme. But you don't like this still. You don't think it's the right approach for several reasons uh... the first one being that you don't see the democrats actually really have any real leverage here can you explain that

yes sir uh... look i don't i just to be clear i don't really have any opinion about the timing of impeachment if the democrats that decided the way to year uh... to do this and continue building evidence i would have been fine with that uh... but now they've been peach uh... to do this and continue building evidence i would have been fine with that uh... but now they've been peach uh... trump he's the issue point out he's one of the only a few president to be impeached so you know it's this point there's nothing that's in the constitution or some law book that

decades how things go forward uh... you know there are senate rules which of course can be changed by the senate and really what i expect mcconald to do is either ignore this or just uh... hold a vote anyway i mean it certainly i mean it i've seen these news reports that trump is upset but you know if you ever get distracted uh... then it really i don't see this really matter i mean it's more of a it's it's it's something that

uh... you know i think is capturing attention right now it's a slow time around the holidays but if we move on to other news why isn't mccano uh... you can care right and uh... i think the only reason for me that he would care is that trump's probably screaming at him that he wants his acquittal uh... but you said you know that that he could go ahead and just have this trial without waiting

yeah you could just say but if they do that would not be politically worse for them especially in an election year to just steamroll over the process like that i mean they're gonna do that anyway i mean i i i have no i have no faith in senate republicans and ever did you know this is something you would i disagree remember back when it was like romney was gonna get a band of people together and senate and i never had

any uh... hope for any of them and so i've always thought that they were going to do whatever they were going to do anyway and they were going to defend trump and so they're going to do that whether we send over the articles now or if we send them over and six one month on turn here they were going to defend Trump. And so they're going to do that, whether we send over the articles now, or if we send them over in six months or any year, they're going to just have their vote. And the question is, will the public care,

and I don't know, I'm not an expert on that. And it's up to Democrats to get that message out there, but I think that's going to happen. And I just think that we have to accept that reality and focus on things that we do control. Now, I understand people, I've gotten a lot of flack for this position because a lot of people are like, well, we should play hardball. As if I've never been aggressive in my career or been, you know, certainly I think you should do think when the stakes matter, when there's something where you playing hardball can can move the needle

I think we should but I to me This isn't like a supreme court seat where McConnell played hardball and he got a supreme court seat out of it I don't see us getting anything tangible I I understand that position at least and and you know I agree with you that when they held the articles of impeachment didn't matter much I think their reason was because this is urgent because of the 2020 election,

but I was sitting there saying, I don't see how impeaching the president protects the 2020 elections at all. It's the bills that we're trying to get passed in the Senate that would do that, that are sitting on Mitch McConnell's desk. And regarding the Romney stuff, I want to be clear, I never expected

them to do that. We were more, you know, call your senators and then also wouldn't it be funny if, because of this whole white horse prophecy, thing that we were talking about, where, you know, there's an old kind of, I think, de-fucked now, Mormon prophecy, where some Mormon will come riding out of the west on a white horse and save democracy and so we just thought that that was kind of funny yeah and i don't mean to i wasn't trying to be critical i i to me i think there's also a different you know there's a question that you have hope or are you more cynical about things and i'm probably too much of the

cynical side of times and i think that's part of the part of the reason people want to do this is because they have hope that seeing part of the part of the reason people want to do this is because they have hope that seeing witnesses are going to change the minds of senators. I don't believe that. I don't either and I don't think a lot of our listeners have that hope either. I think that the whole all the hope is lost on the Senate. But I think that what we are why we like this delay is for the

purpose of getting more evidence and more articles and not having to have a second Senate trial, which would be a second acquittal. But in order to get these other articles all in in one Senate trial, and then also because of that additional compounding evidence from the McGann testimony and from the Mueller Grand Jury materials, which will show that Trump lied to Mueller, which is a crime, then it becomes harder for these senators to acquit politically for the upcoming election and it puts it closer to the election because as we all know things fall out of the news cycle and we forget about them. It seems like it happened 10 years ago. So that's kind of where I think we sit on on on our opinion about this like wait until we have more evidence

We don't want to trials. That's a circus. That's a shit show and yeah, so that's kind of I think where we are And it's not it's got nothing to do with having any faith in Republican senators. Yeah, I think I'm glad that no one does faith in republican senators yeah i i think that i'm glad that no one does it no reason to have any faith in these people you know it'll be interesting and we'd one one thing that the republicans have developed is okay they're trying to be strom from day one they're trying to impeach him over everything

you know i wonder if caught continually adding articles of impeachment is gonna add to that narrative i mean what do you feel about that to which narrative to the narrative that democrats are just trying to be sure for everything i mean the truth matters is committed all sorts of a piece of that that's a lot to use wrong yeah if you've committed a hundred crimes it's it's it's hard to not

you know put them all forward i and i never really understood the simplicity of keeping it Ukraine. I never really, because I mean, the whole process with the hearings and 20 hours and, you know, and 17 witnesses, a, a lot, many of which we're publicly facing and then having the scholar Panel interview I I don't think that if that's Simple then fuck simple. I mean well, you know why even why even bother because you're just going to because it I think to me It appears that people are gonna be fatigued by this process Regardless of whether it's one crime or 50 crimes. So pile them on man make it hard for the senate to acquit

and hold them accountable makes it easier to hold accountable my main fear though a runato i have to say is to trials i just hate that you know it's interesting i do i i had a different take out of the security on the the simplicity thing i I mean, this is just, I'm not an expert on manipulating public opinions. So, you know, people who are PR people can answer that stuff better, but I just know as somebody who's tried a lot of jury cases, this issue that we're debating is one that prosecutors debate constantly when they're charging cases. Do we throw the book at somebody or and put

everything in there or do we streamline our charges i'm i've usually been in the streamline camp uh... in prop for prosecutors to be different is having more charges out there like like for example the charges against manifold where it was overwhelming i was just thinking about that like that that we're a lot it was like overwhelming right and that the purpose of it was essentially to try to get a complete i thought and flip i mean that was what they were

trying to do and that there that that that's a consideration that doesn't exist here but you know to give you a flip side you know when when rod bagoivist was charged there was so many charges that the jury just found it too confusing and they they hung almost every charge all but one in the first trial. You know the charges got streamlined for the second trial and he was convicted. You know to me you know this is complicated enough and people pay so little attention and they're only really looking at sound bites so to me having a simple story and hammering at home is

usually you know a good way of convincing a jury i don't know about uh... you know three hundred million people or whatever but certainly a jury uh... and you know i guess it remains to be seen here it just seems to me like uh... there's a lot to explain and i think people have already lost track of all of trump scandals and you know to me one of the assets that trump has is that he has so many scandals and so many problems that he's committing so many transgressions that I think there's a lot of fatigue out there amongst people who are less concerned about what's going on

in our country than you and I are. Yeah, that's probably true. And, you know, I'm not saying to add, you know, we could add abusive power when he tried to push the postmaster general to double the shipping rates on Bezos and Amazon. We could add, you know, a mulliamance, any number of domestic and foreign emoluments, we could add, we could add nepotism, we could add more article, obstruction of justice, which includes the multiple obstruction of justice felonies he committed, trying to cover up and halt and curtail the Mueller investigation, and the obstruction of justice. You could put subsection to lying to federal prosecutors when he lied in his written

answers to Mueller about having no foreknowledge of the WikiLeaks dumps. And I think just adding that third article and then having the documentary evidence and having the testimonial evidence from Don McGann is just going to make it very difficult to, I think, to acquit him. But again, we're not going to get that material provided the Supreme Court grants it, which I think they will I'm 99.99% sure they will. We don't get that until June or July, you know, and so, yeah. Now we're looking at, you know, if it's what you say, I love it, especially in the summer, but we're, you know, we're talking now about

pushing this back right into the depths of election season after the main candidates are chosen and and I think that the people want the dem candidate to run on anti-corruption, but also healthcare and you know everything else that this country's worry about climate change and jobs, et cetera, and not so much focus on the impeachment. But I'm still waiting for a dumb candidate to come forward and say that they're going to limit the power of the presidency when they get into office, and I just haven't heard that yet.

Yeah, that's for sure. I haven't either you know spend it actually a charlie savaget the near times uh... he has done a really good uh... questionnaire for all the candidates asking about their views on executive power and it's been interesting to see the response is a non-responsive by many you know the certain candidates that have responded at all so i'm i'm looking concerned about the kind of long-term effect of the presidency from Trump, but regarding the timing of all this, I'm not an expert on that. And frankly, it was really political people who were saying we needed to get this done before election

season. When I talked to members of Congress, they all said, oh, we have to get this wrapped up. If we do it after the Iowa caucuses and the Hampshire primary, the Republicans are just going to say that we should let the voters decide and they're going to ignore it. And I don't know, I don't know whether it's true or not, but that's what they say. I you know I think that regardless a lot of this is going to hang over Trump's head in the Mueller stuff which as you know I wrote a you know an op-ed with Mimi, Roka right after you know shortly after the Mueller report saying that if Trump wasn't in office,

he would be charged. And I really believe that. You know, when we wrote that letter, you know, that we got others to sign and so forth. So I am, you know, I'm very, I feel very strongly about that, but at the same time, you know, I realize that we have a very uphill battle to do anything to limit his power until

the voters throw a medal. Until that point, yes. You wrote another piece, because Pelosi says, well, there's now others saying that Pelosi could hold the articles indefinitely, never give them over to the Senate. You wrote a call about that. What prompted you to write that column and what are your thoughts on it in definite withholding of the articles

yeah so i spoke to a member of congress who said that there was movement in the direction of holding them indefinitely and just never send you get over to the senate and um... that you know polosies uh... folks were really talking like that was the very seriously consideration and i was concerned because you know to me the the the repeat you know that the republican kept saying all this impeachment

processes political you're just trying to tar trump and the end the mean him and what what what the response was from i, from our side of the aisle was, no, Trump is a danger. And we need to remove him from office. And this is a serious attempt to do that because he did something that is so wrongful that we need to act quickly. And that's why we're going as quickly as possible.

And I believe that. I mean, I didn't, to me, that wasn't a talking point. That was something I think is the truth. And so to me, never to send these things over is really undercut that message. And I appreciate the sentence going to do, this is not going to have a real process. I don't know if it will be any better

if we had Mitch McConnell sit there and pretend to listen to witnesses for a few days. I don't really know whether it's... Even to be set out saying, yeah, we're gonna hear what this is. We're gonna have a fair trial. Does anybody really believe that? And the problem here too is though, on the on the other hand, Renato Pelosi has said she'll send the articles over when she feels that the trial will be fair, which means that she's now implicitly giving her blessing of a trial, calling it fair, once she sends the articles over. And when she said that, that's when I instantly thought she is never planning on sending these over, because she can't.

If she does, she's saying that the trial is fair. Now to be like, to talk about how it would undercut the message of, we've got to remove him. It's the process. This is the process we go through. It's our duty. We have to remove him. If you guys don't remove him, that's on you.

And that's why we want to send those over. We don't want to undercut that message. But maybe it's just getting to the point where Democrats are like, look, given all the egregious crimes from the other side is undercutting a message really a problem these days because, you know, who knows with this political climate? But, you know, I am concerned about this whole fair trial aspect just like you. I don't think it happens even if the rules look great and they have witnesses and everybody's happy.

I don't think that it's going to be an acquittal you regardless right they'll just ignore will they'll just ignore they're not going to have on our witnesses they'll have two or three witnesses or whatever you know trial wasn't that long i mean i lived through that so uh... you know they're they're gonna they'll have a few witnesses though they'll they're not getting out and it's not like the center there's an expensive hours porn or any documents are doing

anything else but the local plan though that they didn't have enough time to review them or right i'm sure there'll be some excuse offered but you know whatever i mean we know what the results gonna be so i mean the questions is there anybody who vote to remove trump any republican even one i mean, that's where I'm at. I'm not sure you'll get a single vote to remove Trump. I don't think so. You know, people are saying Morkowski is bothered by something and Collins is disturbed. And you know what, they've been bothered and disturbed. For, you know, for a while, I don't trust. I, hey, cool. Hey, pleasantly surprised me if you want.

But I'm not, I'm not expecting one single Republican vote. If this goes to a Senate trial, but we'll see, you know, like I said, I'm concerned that, you know, now that having said that, sending the articles over is giving us, is basically Pelosi saying this trial was fair, which gives them another, you know, a stronger acquittal talking point. So that's why I was like, I don't think girls are going to send these over at all. But, you know, if I was McConnell, I would have given her just a few witnesses or whatever. And then just so we'll take three days off and listen to the same people we heard in the house say the same thing and then you wrote. I mean, I don't know completely why he didn't just do that. Maybe the Democrats are pushing for more.

I don't know. I'm pretty sure they want Bolton and Mulvaney and Blair and Duffy and those would take the senator's case like they do not want those folks testifying. Yeah, that's not going to happen. Yeah. No. All right, well, we're a lot closer on this than I thought. So I'm glad that we had the chance to talk, and I wanted to bring you on because I like

to get, you know, I love your podcast, your extremely intelligent, thoughtful, and, you know, I wanted to get your differing opinion on this, on out to our listeners, because I want our listeners, we have very, again, thoughtful listeners, and I wanted them to have another argument so they can make up their own minds instead of just listening to me, I'm around about what I like.

I think it's great, I would just say that, I think it's with Seth as a support from trump in his supporters i mean you know we have it we have different views and that's a good thing and you know i look i got a lot of napfie gram uh... and hate mail from the that column i wrote but you know the point was i knew that people wouldn't necessarily want to hear what i had to say on that but it's important for us to have different views and debate them and

to actually be thinking about what the right thing to do is and I'm proud to be and besides it's doing that. Yeah, me too. I think the only issue is is that, you know, I think Seth, it was Seth Abramson wrote a giant threat about the winds and how we're winning and how we're losing with what Pelosi's doing right now. And he sees that the only thing that could hurt the Democrats by delaying sending the articles would be if the media made Pelosi out as a villain in all this. And I think that that might be probably what prompted some folks to come at you and be like, look, you know, let Mama Pelosi do her shit. Let's not vilify her and give the Republicans more talking points. But I think a lot of people, I think there's just a lot of knee jerk reactions out where, you know, it's not a vilification of Pelosi.

It's a, this is, I think that, here's the problem with what's happening, but, you know, I think people just see things differently. Wow, well, that helps me understand what's going on. Yeah, and that was a really popular thread. That got a lot of traction. And so I think now everyone's just sort of getting their hackles up defending Pelosi,

which for a long time, I was criticizing her for not impeaching him for the Mueller stuff. I was like, what are you doing? And now I see she's got this sort of long game planned here. And I'm like, all right, you know what? I'm going to trust what she does and see what happens. But it would be, it doesn't, but who have anyone to not talk about the intricacies and benefits

and, you know, negative, negative aspects of a process or of a strategy. So I appreciate you coming on and talking with us about it today. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. Yeah, anytime. And everyone, please check out the on topic podcast with Renato, Marriotti. You can get it wherever you get your podcasts. And we also follow you on Twitter.

Where are you out on Twitter? So Renato underscore Mariani, hard to spell, our ENATO underscore, M-A-R-I-O-T-T-I. One R-2-T's got it. All right, well thank you so much for joining us. And I'm glad you came out and to have this discussion. So have a wonderful new year and we will speak to you soon. Thanks again.

All right, so that is the interview and that is our show, final show of 2019. I think 2020 is going to be a much better year for us. 2019 and five words or less, what the fuck was that? That's just my 2019 hashtag, what the fuck was that? That's funny. Just an insane year, just a fire hose of a year. I do have a quick final thought. I wanted to send out all the 11 light I possibly can to all of the victims and their families in the attack in Rockland,

New York, on the seventh night of Hanukkah at the rabbi's home. About 100 people were in there. They left his door unlocked for the lighting. He was lighting the menorah. Somebody came in with a long knife. Stabbed a bunch of people. They caught him. He's pleaded not guilty. Rockland is a small community, about 90,000 people, but a third are Jewish.

So it's a very close knit Jewish community there. And this is just, this is domestic terrorism. And we need to take action on this. We need to call our senators, make sure that we adjust the domestic terror laws to include domestic American terrorism, homegrown, bolster those domestic terror laws. This, I don't understand why you are in America if you don't like diversity. That's what we are. This shit is not welcome in my country. I just want to really send my thoughts out to everybody there. Everybody impacted.

All the people of New York, Rockland County, everybody. It's just awful. I'm speechless about it. And it continues to happen. Southern Poverty Law Center has some pretty horrible numbers on this. Yeah, I just don't understand. I just don't. I don't understand.

It's also been going up acts of violence against Jewish people. It's been going up. Yes. And it's 13 attacks in New York in the last three weeks. I believe just so crazy. I don't understand any of it, but this is particularly nonsensical to me because I wonder where... because straight up racism comes from the top down in many ways with Trump. the sort of, you know, zeitgeist of a lot of people that are very high up in influential in our country and so does anti-semitism.

But with Trump and Trump nation, it seems like their anti-semitism is not nearly as blatant as their straight up racism is, which is indicative to me just of how deep-seated that hate is, that it's just been festering for so long, and something about just the culture of hate in general is triggering that. He'd never allowed to have it be openly. Yeah, full. Even though Trump and his people will try to say, you know, that Democrats, that the squad is anti-Semitic, you know, or something like that. So it's, yeah, it's just, I don't understand any of it. Yeah, I'll turn it around and make it about BDS and, and all that. And, um, turn it around, you know, like you said, uh,

blame it on his opponent. Right. Ugh. Yeah. Well, much peace and love to them in this holiday season. And everyone to you as well and to your families, your chosen families, and you're not chosen families. We all have, I think, a little bit of both. And do you have any final thoughts, Jordan?

No, have a safe new year. And I hope that you all are surrounded by people that you love. 100%. Take care of yourselves. Take care of each other. I've been Angie. I'm Jordan Copern. And this is Mollershi Road. Mollershi Road is executive produced and directed by AG and Jordan Coburn with engineering

and editing by Mackenzie Mazell and Starburn's industries. Our marketing manager, production and social media direction is by Amanda Reader, fact checking your research by A.G., Jordan Coburn, and Amanda Reader, and our knowledgeable listeners. Our web design and branding are by Joao Reader with Moxie Design Studios, and our website is mullershyrob.com. Hi, I'm Harry Lickman, host of Talking Feds. Around Table, it brings together prominent figures from government law and journalism for a dynamic discussion of the most important topics of the day.

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