No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Republicans' last-ditch effort to distract from abortion fails miserably

Episode Date: September 25, 2022

The Republican Party makes a last-ditch effort to turn our attention away from abortion before the midterms and fails miserably. Brian interviews former prosecutor Glenn Kirschner about the $250 million lawsuit against Trump from the NY Attorney General, his failed gamble with the special master, and even what punishments Ron DeSantis could face from his migrant stunt. And Jocelyn Benson, who’s running for re-election as Michigan’s Secretary of State, joins to talk about rightwing protests outside her home, running against a Trump-endorsed election denier, and how her race is looking so far.Shop merch: https://briantylercohen.com/shopYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/briantylercohenTwitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohenFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohenInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylercohenPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/briantylercohenNewsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-upWritten by Brian Tyler CohenProduced by Sam GraberRecorded in Los Angeles, CASee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today we're going to talk about the GOP's last-ditch effort to turn our attention away from abortion before the midterms. I interview former federal prosecutor Glenn Kershner about the $250 million lawsuit against Trump from the New York Attorney General, his failed gamble with the special master, and even what punishments Ron DeSantis could face from his migrant stunt. And I'm joined by Jocelyn Benson, who's running for re-election as Michigan Secretary of State about right-wing protest outside of her home, running against the Trump-endorsed election denier, and how her race is looking so far. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No. So things are getting desperate on the right. It seems like every day is another Hail Mary.

We've seen Ron DeSantis ship migrants to Martha's Vineyard to try to turn the national conversation toward immigration, and instead the guy landed himself in the middle of a bunch of investigations and likely lawsuits. He's also taking heat now from a key voting block, Latinos. One South Florida radio host compared DeSantis' actions to Fidel Castro, the former Cuban dictator who relocated Cubans in the 60s. We also watched as Kevin McCarthy and the GOP leadership introduced their commitment to America, which is important, I guess, because Republicans are so unwilling to actually do anything

that when they come up with a platform, it's actually news. It's news that one of the two major parties might actually stand for something that's not blindly following whatever words fall out of Donald Trump's mouth, although I'm sure they'll still do that too. The rollout was just a bunch of platitudes about, you know, creating a strong economy and safe streets and a free future and an accountable government. I mean, really, really groundbreaking stuff. A strong economy, as opposed to the Democrats who, as we all know, are running on a we would like a weak economy platform. We've even watched them lean into abortion by trying to retake the narrative that way, which is the funny strategy to me because you've got Lindsey Graham, who's so high on his own supply, like so instantly.

by these far-right theocrats that he surrounded himself with, that he's like, everyone I've spoken with wants a nationwide abortion ban, so let's lean into it. Let's not run from who we are. And every other Republican is like, what the fuck are you doing? We're not supposed to say the things that we're going to do. And so now Republicans are simultaneously trying to divert attention away from abortion while also contending with people like Lindsey Graham, who keep saying the quiet part out loud and advocating for exactly what they're trying to hide.

But at the end of the day, that's our answer right there. Like the old Dan Pfeiffer adage, we need to focus on issues that unite our party and divide the other party. The issue of abortion unites the entire left and very clearly divides Republicans. And I'm not just talking about their strategy in terms of how to deal with it between hiding it and embracing it.

I'm talking about their actual support for reproductive rights. You've got half of the GOP who wants full-blown, handmaid's tail, ban abortions with no exceptions. And then you've got the other half that maybe recognizes the cognitive dissonance between being the party of small government and also being the party that wants to dictate what a woman can or can't do with her own body. Kansas is proof of that. The anti-choice faction got crushed 60-40 in a reliably red state.

The five special elections since Dobbs have seen an average nine-point swing to the left compared to Biden's 2020 numbers. There is a problem on the right when it comes to abortion. The election results show that, the polls show that, and the Republican officials who are flailing to desperately change. the subject are proof of that. Like, honestly, they're doing our jobs for us. By looking at the rights desperation to talk about anything but abortion, they are telling

us, broadcasting to us, that what we should be talking about is abortion. So look, they can try to rewrite the narrative with gimmicks like their commitment to America and by showing just how inhumane they can be with migrants. But the fact is that we already know what their platform is because they've shown us. Their agenda is banning abortion nationwide. It's eliminating Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. It's banning books. It's punishing teachers. It's throwing doctors in prison. It's pretending climate change doesn't exist. It's coddling fossil fuels. It's giving tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. It's making sure that guns flood the streets without any precautions. And it's refusing to accept any election results where they don't win. That is their agenda. And we know that because they've shown us. So don't listen to what they say. Watch what they do. So if that's what you're looking for, by all means, vote for the GOP. But if you want a party that made sure that you got free COVID vaccines. a party that upgraded our country's infrastructure,

a party that passed the first gun safety package in decades, a party that funded the biggest climate investment in history and allowed the governments negotiate lower drug prices and made the rich pay their fair share and forgave student loan debt for 43 million borrowers and added 10 million jobs and brought the unemployment rate down to a 50-year low and strengthened NATO and stood up to the world's dictators and autocrats.

If those are your priorities, then support the party that just made sure all of those things are a reality. Next up is my interview with Glenn Kirsch, Okay, now we've got one of my favorites, 30-year former federal prosecutor, Glenn Kershner. Glenn, thanks for coming back on. Hey, great being with you, Brian. So another raft of legal news when it comes to Trump and others in the Republican Party this week. Let's start off with this.

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a $250 million lawsuit against Trump, Don Jr., Eric Ivanka, and some other Trump organization associates. Now, you mentioned during our last interview that the Trump org was as good as gone. So I do owe you that dollar. I do owe you your betting limit. This is ostensibly an open and shut case. We know Trump inflated his asset values to drive benefits on loans. And we know he deflated those values to lower his tax burden.

Is there any potential defense for Trump here? Like, is there anything that he could hinge his hopes on? No, this is not a triable case. You know, Trump has already tried to settle. And reportedly, Attorney General Tish James said, no, we're not going to sell. settle. You know, the only settlement offer that I would accept if I were sort of on the prosecution side or on the attorney general side of the case would be $250 million and a ban from, you know, holding offices or being on the boards of any New York companies or corporations, which is

precisely what Tish James is seeking from Trump, Don Jr., Eric and Ivanka, plus Weisselberg and Jeff McCannie, two other high officials in the Trump organization, that's the only acceptable settlement offer. Because not only does Letitia James have the goods, as can be seen in that 220-page complaint, she has the witnesses who will deliver those goods. Because when you read through the complaint, it is replete with phrases like, and then Donald Trump personally directed X, Y, and Z. And then Donald Trump personally certified the following representations. And then Donald Trump told his staff to do X, Y, and Z. She's got the goods. Donald Trump loves to try to insulate himself like a mob boss from that kind of evidence. Well, Tish James

has that kind of evidence. Well, okay, so if she's got the goods and she's overseeing this civil case and Alvin Bragg was overseeing the criminal case for what I believe is the same matter. And that case seemed to be on ice. Where does the disconnect come here? How does she have something that's such a home run that she can wage a $250 million lawsuit? And yet Alvin Bragg is over there laying off prosecutors that were working on this case. Yeah, the simplest explanation is something smells fishy in Alvin Bragg's office. The reason I say that's, the simplest explanation. Letitia James made it clear in both her court filing and in her press conference that there was criminal conduct that she found by Donald Trump. And she is

referring that criminal conduct to the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney's Office and to the Internal Revenue Service for further investigation. And what we also know is that Alvin Bragg's own top prosecutors told him, we have enough evidence to indict Donald Trump, and we have enough evidence to win a conviction. When you book a bookend those two things and you put Alvin Bragg in the middle, something is not right. And it doesn't seem to be the evidence.

It seems to be Alvin Bragg's decision-making abilities. Is there anything about Alvin Bragg that would lend itself to this idea that he would be willing to go easy on Trump? Nothing that I know of, but I have been hoping that we could find some really hard-hitting aggressive investigative journalists who will dig down to see, for example, who were the biggest campaign contributors to Alvin Bragg's campaign? I'm not accusing him of being

corrupt, but I sure would like an answer to the question, why did he seem to make an unsupportable prosecutorial decision and kill the investigation into Donald Trump? Okay, so going back to this civil case then, is this the kind of thing where Trump just closes up shop in New York and then reincorporates in Florida and just kind of gets off scot-free. What does Trump actually stand to lose here by virtue of losing the Trump organization? That's a great point, Brian. He stands to be run out of New York on a rail because he will not be able to do business in New York, but the Attorney General's action doesn't sort of move beyond the borders of New York. So he can go elsewhere. You know, I think

where he will likely find himself, is in criminal court year after year. I believe he'll be indicted. I believe he'll be held accountable for his crimes. Really, the open question to me is, when he is ultimately sentenced to serve a period of confinement, does our government, does our judiciary have the appetite to have him serve that sentence in a confinement facility,

or will they sentence him to, to home detention, which Brian, to me, always felt like sentencing somebody to stream Netflix for a year and have DoorDash food delivered to your house. Right, not exactly a punishment if you're being banished away in your 11,000 square foot home. Okay, so onto another Trump lawsuit,

this one regarding the DOJ's investigation into stolen documents at Mar-a-Lago. You had Judge Cannon's order granting Trump everything he asked for with regard to the special master. Then his handpicked special master and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which included two out of three Trump appointees. They cited against Trump. Is that it for this tactic by the Trump team? Did his long game of trying to delay just get derailed after like five days? Yeah, Trump's criminal defense team is really not very good at

this lawyering thing because they've painted themselves into a corner. Now, let me first answer your question. Is this it? Probably not because you know Donald Trump will appeal and appeal and appeal. Now, they will be frivolous appeals. There really is no law. There are no facts that would support a successful appeal. And I certainly hope when he tries to appeal it up to the Supreme Court, they refuse to accept the case for review because there is no constitutional principle to be reviewed by the Supreme Court. But, you know, this is really a delicious development because team Trump said, we want a special master. Judge Cannon, with no lawful support for her decision, said, you got it, Mr. Trump. Then they said, we want Judge Raymond Deary to be our special master

and Judge Cannon said, you got it, Mr. Trump. And now Judge Deary is trumping the Trump defense team at every move. And he's doing it precisely the way a federal judge should be doing it. Think about it. He was directed to review the classified documents and other men. materials that were seized by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago for any possible privilege. Now, let's set aside the frivolity of that proposition, that there would be any protected, privileged materials in these classified documents. But he said, okay, this is what you, Team Trump, want me to do. First thing I need you to do is certify what documents, if any, Donald Trump, declassified. Much to my surprise, Brian, team Trump came back with,

no, we're not going to do that, Judge Deary. And the explanation they gave, which is mind-blowing for criminal practitioners, is because that would damage our ability to defend Donald Trump in the future if he is criminally indicted. That's usually not what defense attorneys say when they're responding to a judicial request. So that is an indication that even Team Trump thinks Donald Trump is sort of, you know, on his way to a criminal indictment. And then Judge Deary just made a second demand, said, okay, I need you to certify what, if any, documents you claim the FBI planted. Why would Judge Deary ask that? Well, he is being tasked with going through all of these materials that were seized from Mar-a-Lago for possible privilege. But if the FBI planted them,

Well, guess what? Then they weren't at Mar-a-Lago, and I don't really have to review them for privilege, do I, Donald Trump defense team. So I want you to certify what documents, if any, you claim, are planted. Guess what? Trump's defense team can't answer that question either because they would hurt their litigation position in any future defense of Donald Trump. Here's what they may be doing right now, Brian. I'm not going to predict this or even bet a buck on it. They may be huddled together saying, okay, one, we really blew it by making this special master request because they're moving through it in a timely manner. We're not even getting the delay we saw it. And it looks like all of these things we're being asked to do are hurting our litigation position in the future.

We may need to withdraw our request for a special master because it's hurting us so much more than it's helping us. Well, that's the thing. I mean, like, what happens if you've been granted this special master and then the special master is trying to do his work by virtue of what you've asked him to do and then you don't let him do that. I mean, are we at an impasse? I mean, something's something's got to give right now. I mean, well, yeah, we're not at an impasse because Judge Deary can say, fine, you don't want to answer all these questions that I'm resolving every potentially contested issue of fact against you. And you know, I've gone through Judge Deary's seven page order and here's what I love because he threatens appropriately. So,

that I may need to hold evidentiary hearings on this, which means I'm going to need testimony from Team Trump side and from the government side to resolve any contested issues that I need to resolve before I can conduct a professional review of all these materials. The last thing Donald Trump and his lawyers want is an evidentiary hearing on any of this stuff because all of their claims are bogus. Yeah. Okay. So let's go for the low-hanging fruit here. Glenn, how long has declassification by mind control been a thing? I still don't believe it's a thing. Even if you do it in the Get Smart cone of silence, I don't think it's a thing.

And if it is, well, then Joe Biden in his mind has already reclassified everything. But here's the beauty of Donald Trump continuing to run his mouth. Donald Trump in 2019, I believe, declassified some documents. And he did it because he thought it might make the Dems look bad. turns out he was wrong. And he went through the proper process. And those documents he declassified got stamped, declassified, just as they are supposed to be. So what does that prove? It shows that he knows how to do it if he wanted to. Of course he does. So his claim to Hannity, maybe I declassified these in his minds. A prosecutor hears that and tucks it away because that's what we call

an admission by a party opponent, which is an exception to the hearsay rules. I would introduce these statements at Donald Trump's trial to prove that he knows how to do it. And it's an admission that he didn't do it by having to resort to. Maybe I did it in my mind. Yeah. Even if he did declassify via brainwave, it wouldn't matter because the charges that the FBI laid out in the search warrant didn't hinge on classification. So isn't this all a red herring anyway? And that is you just quoted the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion when they use that very term. This is a red herring. Thank goodness the judicial adults are back in charge, Judge Deary and the three-judge panel that just smacked down. Judge Cannon's unsupportable ruling,

telling the federal government to stop investigating the crimes of Donald Trump as they pertain to these classified documents. That's insane. And I'm glad the judicial adults are back in charge. And I'm also heartened that three of the four judges that we're talking about, Two, who were on the panel of the 11th Circuit, were judge appointees. One, Judge Deary is a Reagan appointee. These are Republican appointees, and they are standing for none of Donald Trump's nonsense. But let me go back to declassification. The three-judge panel just said he has presented zero evidence that a single document was ever

declassified. And in the next breath, they said, but it's a red herring anyway. because he's alleged to have stolen these documents, whether classified or declassified, he still stole documents that didn't belong to him. They belonged to the federal government. Okay, let's switch off to another darling of the Republican Party, and that's Ron DeSantis.

He just shipped 50 migrants off to Martha's Vineyard. Those migrants introduced a class action lawsuit against him, and they were alleging that they were induced by virtue of him exploiting their basic needs. In DeSantis' own statement from his his own office, he literally says that these people were hungry and he, and he explains that while having suggested that he did them a favor by getting them on that flight to a sanctuary state.

Did he just screw himself by basically validating their case, by basically validating this idea that he exploited their basic needs by giving them, you know, $10 McDonald's gift cards to get them on that plane? Yeah, he's a little like Donald Trump in that his every statement is an admission that could be used against him in court in the future if anybody deigns to prosecute him. And, you know, I was, when I saw what he did to these asylum seekers who were here actually following the rules we set for them by surrendering and seeking asylum, so they were here lawfully. And when I saw that he tricked them, he duped them, he deceived them by false promises

to get on a plane and move from point A to point B, immediately what came to mind for me was kidnapping by inveiglement. It's a word that we don't often use, we don't often hear, but it is a way to kidnap somebody. Usually we think of kidnapping as, you know, you hit somebody over the head time, throw them in the trunk of your car and take them to a house somewhere and do horrible things. Yes, that is kidnapping by physical force. But if you just read the federal law, 18 United States 1201, kidnapping by inveiglement is also kidnapping.

And it's when you trick or deceive or make false promises to somebody in order to get them to move from point A to point B, because at that point their movement is not voluntary. And I will say I was tickled when I saw on The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. He played my explanation of kidnapping by inveigleman. And that is precisely why I challenged the Department of Justice to take up this kidnapping investigation because it directly violates federal law. When you do that to somebody and in the process, you move them across. state lines. That's what makes it a federal offense. Look, you know, I'd love to see accountability

for Ron DeSantis just as much as anyone else. But what do you think the likelihood of that, you know, on this front would be because I'm not trying to have like a redo of the Mueller situation here. And by the way, just even the fact that I have to ask this, it really is a sad testament to the times here because it's so blatantly obvious that that was done. We have all of this evidence in broad daylight and the fact that I that you know just me sitting here thinking okay well I don't know maybe there's a 5% chance that anything like this would happen because this guy is a Republican in power is really does show like the two tiers of justice that we have in this country and how these Republican politicians keep are so successful in terms of not facing

accountability when they've committed these crimes so blatantly out in the open so first of all there already is a criminal investigation opened by a local law enforcement office in Texas of this. I actually think that our Department of Justice criminal division and our Department of Justice Civil Rights Division are already digging into this because what Ron DeSantis did is he committed crimes. He prayed upon the most vulnerable among us in our country. And I actually think that the chances are fairly good, that there will be a robust criminal investigation into what Ron DeSantis did to these human beings and that he might even be charged. Here's the thing. Look at some of what Merrick Garland's Department of Justice did in bringing a civil rights

prosecution for those who killed George Floyd, a civil rights prosecution for those who killed Ahmed Arbery. He didn't have to do that. And goodness knows the Trump Bill Barr, Department of justice would not have done that. And Merrick Garland's Department of Justice has opened pattern or practice investigations into the potentially biased law enforcement practices of multiple city police departments. They're not going to take the kidnapping of asylum seekers by a government official lightly or lying down. That's my prediction. And what is the punishment for this kind of thing if they do move forward with with uh some type of indictment or charges what what is the punishment for for the charges that he would face kidnapping carries with it 20 years and up to

life under certain circumstances so am i hopeful that if ron desantis is prosecuted he'll spend much time in prison that i'm not hopeful of but if if you want to deter other people including government officials state government officials from kidnapping migrants and a asylum seekers, this must be addressed. Would the fact that he's a government official give him any legal cover as an individual? So kind of like an LLC would give individuals cover. Does the fact that he's working on behalf of the seat of the governor of the state of Florida, does that give him individual cover?

Yes and no. There is something called sovereign immunity and qualified immunity, where if you're a government official acting within the scope of your official duties, you might enjoy some immunity against being dragged into court. That is generally a civil protection you have, not a criminal protection, but the bottom line is kidnapping asylum seekers is not within the official duties of the governor of Florida. Got it. I could ask you questions all day, but we'll leave it there because I'm sure that you have a lot of people that want to ask you questions like this. So, Glenn, thank you so much for coming on. If anybody wants

to hear or see more from Glenn. Check out Justice Matters on YouTube with Glenn Kershner. That's G-L-E-N-N. Glenn, thank you for taking the time. I appreciate it. Always great to be on with you, Brian. Now we've got the Michigan Secretary of State. Jocelyn Benson.

Thank you so much for coming on. My pleasure. Thanks for having me. Of course. So you were Secretary of State during Trump's effort to steal the election in late 2020, early 2021. I know that there were protesters outside of your home, Can you describe a little bit of what that was like? That night or just in general.

Both. I mean, overseeing Michigan's highest turnout election in state history, which was also very secure and done in the midst of a pandemic was a source of great joy and success, first and foremost. I mean, my goal as a democracy advocate and democracy defender is to ensure we always have a significant number of people who are informed and engaged in our. democracy and the fact that so many people participated and that we essentially got it right. We followed the data. We followed the best practices and collaborated with other election officials and essentially had a very successful election in the midst of really an unprecedented

effort from the former president and many of his most ardent supporters to not just undo the results after the fact, but try to interfere with the election itself. So the entire year, was a constant game of whackamol where you were consistently, we all as a team were trying to anticipate where the next lie was going to come from and what it was going to be so that we could or where the next attempt to interfere with, whether it is the election process before the election or the count of the valid ballots afterwards and what was going to come next. And I think what I'm really proud of is particularly up through the election, we really did stay ahead of the game. We anticipated he might try to mess with the Postal Service.

So we installed over a thousand drop boxes all around Michigan to ensure people could return their absentee or early ballots successfully and securely, even if the Postal Service was unreliable, as in some ways it ultimately shown to be. And it wasn't really until January 6th where they outplayed us in a way and that we never could have anticipated that challenge and threat. So it was really a constant effort of hoping for the best, but preparing for every contingency. And the vast majority of times, we met that need, and we ultimately saw a successful election. But, you know, it was also a constant sense of never, it never, you know, every day would think, surely this is as low as they could go. And then it got

worse up until January 6th where we said, okay, we're done thinking, giving anyone, and the benefit the doubt, we're just going to move forward and protect democracy. And so walk me through that night at your house and kind of like what kind of an eye-opening experience that was for you? And did it inform why you're running for re-election now? The night where protesters showed up outside my home was a harrowing one. It was a, it was a, it was a, it was filled with uncertainty because from the moment where we first heard people might be showing up at a female elected officials' house to the moment we heard the noise outside to really the whole thing was done. It was filled with a constant sense of what do we do? How do we protect

ourselves? What's going to happen? And at the same time, it was overlay with a real sense of purpose and duty to protect the will of the people in Michigan, knowing that these folks outside my home weren't protesting me. They were protesting democracy. They were protesting the results of a legitimate presidential election. And my job was to protect those results. You know, I started my career in Montgomery, Alabama, investigating hate groups and hate crimes throughout the country and was really getting a sense of the sacrifices that were made in Salma, Alabama, the lives that were lost so that we could have a voting rights act that instilled with me a sense of purpose for my whole career. So in many ways, I just felt connected to those who've come before us to protect democracy

in that evening. It wasn't without its scariness. And, you know, the harrowing moments of just trying to keep my family safe. But at the same time, I'm wondering where the police were and why I was taking so long for them to get there. But at the same time, you know, connecting with a real sense of duty that really just redoubled my purpose and increased my commitment to my work exponentially, which I imagine was the opposite impact of the intended impact to the protesters. You know, on that exact point, we've seen these efforts to overturn election results around the country, egged on, of course. by Trump and his acolytes. But it seems that their efforts in Michigan, in particular, are more

dangerous. Like, we've all seen those images of fully armed militia members at the state capital. There was obviously the kidnapping plot against the governor there. Why do these threats seem more concentrated and dangerous in your state? I don't know what it is about Michigan, in particular, although we do have a history of a large militia movement in the state. Timothy McVeigh, the mastermind of the Oklahoma city bombings from Michigan, and the clan was founded in Howell, Michigan. So there is a history of that here. But we're also, and up until recently, we're the only stay in the country that was run by all women. And when you have decisions made and people of authority who are women, all of us, you have to imagine that engenders perhaps

some negative reaction that is connected to violence. Also, the fact that the former president of the United States was frequently and consistently calling us each out on social media, in some cases directly, attacking and punching metaphorically down to the statewide officials who are simply trying to do our job. And I think what I've learned and seen is that hateful words can lead to hateful actions. And, you know, again, that's certainly what we've endured here in our state. So you mentioned Trump. Tell us about your opponent because she was endorsed by Trump. So what is

her platform? Well, you'd have to ask her. I'm not sure. I mean, I've been focused on really my work as a competent professional election administrator and chief motor vehicle officer to simply ensure our government works well for everyone and that our democracy produces reliable, safe, secure results. And I know, you know, my opponent has spoken out significantly about her views and the conspiracy theory she ascribes to. But despite all of what she has said, in my view, voters are and should rightly be focused on the question of what is the truth and really who has a track record for furthering the truth and acting with integrity in our state. And it's particularly marked that, you know, on election night in 2020, while I was working to ensure every valid vote was counted, she was actually trying to interfere with the counting of valid votes in Detroit. And, you know, the fact that she still has not accepted or acknowledged that the results of the 2020 presidential election in Michigan were indeed an accurate affection of will the people, I think, says all you need to know about her position. and her willingness to nullify the votes of millions of Michiganders simply because she disagrees with them.

With that said, can you walk us through these two scenarios if you're elected and if your opponent is elected and what that looks like in 2024, for example? Well, certainly in 2020, we saw how democracy prevailed because people of integrity on both sides of the aisle, stood guard and held the line and ensured that truth and integrity prevailed and that the will of the people ruled the day. And in my office, as the chief election officer, there's really three ways in which you can both protect the vote and ensure, even in a perilous moment, the will of the people rules the day. And we did that by, you know, pushing back against lies and misinformation with truth and facts and data and hundreds of audits that reaffirmed the election results. We worked to ensure the election itself. Secondly, was administered in a way that was secure and accessible to all.

And then thirdly, we worked to ensure the election results. were canvassed and ultimately certified. And then once certified that the rightful slate of electors was what was transmitted to Washington. So if you flip that and you have someone like my opponent in charge of our elections, imagine each of those things going the opposite way. Instead of the Secretary of State being a trusted source of truthful information, you'd have the potential for an individual to use this platform and the spotlight that comes with it to spread lies and to validate conspiracy theories. You'd secondly have a, a chief election officer who may implement policies making it more difficult or confusing for voters

to simply vote or participate in democracy and making it more challenging for election administrators to run smooth and secure elections. And then finally, perhaps most perilously, you would have an individual who would be willing to block certification of a fair and free election simply because she disagrees or they disagree with the results. And as someone who if a candidate, or the former president himself were to call and say, find me 11,000 votes, this could be someone who would say, yes, I will do that, as opposed to someone who would simply withhold, refuse to do that and uphold the law. It truly is, you know, to the extent that there's a fabric underlying our entire government, if you pull the threads out of that fabric, it will fray

and dissolve and pulling out fair election administrators and secretaries of state and replacing them with election deniers. It simply does create a disintegration of democracy itself. It's akin to putting an arsonist in charge of a fire department, a bank robber in charge of the bank safe and ultimately would lead to the destruction of our ability as citizens to choose who runs our government and hold them accountable. So with all of that said now, what's the polling looking like in this race so far? Give me like a snapshot of the race as it stands today. There are a significant number of undecided voters in this race and in many other Secretary

of States races around the country because they don't capture the same amount of attention as a gubernatorial or a Senate race. I've been gratified that there has been a lot of eyes on this race in this cycle. but in Michigan, there's still a significant proportion of the population who may just see two names, one with a D and one with an R after it, and make their choice accordingly. So our work between now and Election Day over the next seven weeks is to make sure as many voters as possible know the truth, know the clear choice in this race. And my hope is that if we can do that successfully, then we will be successful in protecting

democracy this November. I understand when you say that, obviously, the Secretary of State races don't get the same attention that a gubernatorial race or a Senate race is going to get, for example. But with that said, do you still sense anything of a shift from a few years back when Secretary of State races were probably the most obscure races on the ballot? Yes. In fact, in 2008, I wrote a book on the Secretary of State Office to try to encourage voters to pay more attention to these individuals who are elected in the vast majority of states and

oversee everything that goes into running a fair and smooth election and ultimately protecting democracy. So I'm really glad that the spotlight has increased exponentially on these offices that more people are paying attention than ever before and understanding the real weight of their vote and their choice in these races. And that gives me a lot of hope that democracy won't just prevail through this moment. But if voters so choose, we could emerge out of this moment with a stronger, healthy, or more robust democracy than ever before, with more eyes and attention being paid to the processes of how we elect our representatives and the importance of making sure those processes, regardless of who emerges

as the victor, operate with integrity. So I've started asking this question a lot now, but I'm wondering if you've had any memorable interactions with independents or Republicans since you've been campaigning. Yeah, I've built really work to build a cross-sum. partisan coalition of support for our campaign, which is simply based on an election administration that is grounded in professionalism and not partisanship. I just had a former Republican Congressman David Trott reach out to me earlier today, offering his support and wanting to know what he could do. Several business leaders as well who have typically

supported Republican candidates and consider themselves Republican have reached out and really supported my campaign in significant ways, which is great. I think saving and protecting democracy is a team effort, and it's not a partisan one. So we've had very meaningful, supportive conversations, even with Republican lawmakers who simply broke from their party, looked at the truth behind our elections and the audits conducted to their own investigation and found indeed that the election was safe, secure, and an accurate reflection of the will of the people. That type of stuff gives me hope because a lot of the reason why misinformation continues to spread is because elected officials are. repeating the misinformation, some knowingly. But if we have more Republican leaders, like I've been able to interact with, willing to simply speak the truth and tell the truth to their followers,

we can, I think, get through this time sooner rather than later, I hope. So what's your message now to those Michiganders who might be on the fence? I think this race as well as the Attorney General's race and the gubernatorial race in our state all have clear choices before the voters. It's really not a choice between a Democrat and Republican. It's a choice between truth and conspiracy theories. It's a choice between facts and an experience and nonpartisan leadership and mistruths and a willingness to lie and put party first above what's best for the people and what's best for Michigan.

So in my race, I'm really proud of the fact that, We have completely transformed our customer service office. We've made government work for everyone in our state and will continue to protect and ensure democracy works for everyone. And I'm proud of that record. I'm proud and hope to continue furthering that record. And I think the choice is clear between someone who has achieved that success and someone who seeks to dismantle it all.

All right. Let's finish off with this. How can we help? I think, you know, one, we ask people to invest in our race. you can go to my website, votebenson.com, and make a contribution. That helps us get our message out to residents throughout Michigan. You can even see the ad we have playing on television right now and help us fund that ad to get it out to more people.

And also spread the word. I mean, there are 11 states where election deniers are running for Secretary of State. And whether it's in Michigan or in Arizona or Nevada or in several other states like Minnesota that oftentimes are off the radar, these races are critical and will determine. the future of our democracy. So make sure you evaluate the candidates in every race in your ballot this year and know that in nearly every state in this country, voters will have an opportunity to elect pro-democracy candidates and reject those who've been spreading conspiracy theories, lies, and efforts to dismantle or destruct our democracy. That's great. We'll leave it

there. Thank you for the work that you've done and that you're trying to continue to do right now. I should mention, too, that you're on the cover of Time magazine this week. So obviously, you know, that sentiment is echoed in terms of how appreciative people are of that work and the work of other secretaries of state who are, you know, working to protect our election. So thank you for taking the time and best of luck on the campaign trail. Thank you. I appreciate you having me. Thanks again to Jocelyn Benson. One quick note, the January 6th committee is back for what's being billed as its final hearing.

I'll be live streaming the whole thing. So if you want to watch along with me, just subscribe to my YouTube channel by searching Brian Tyler Cohen. Okay, that's it for this episode. Talk to you next week. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen, produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesie, interviews captured and edited for YouTube and Facebook by Nicholas Nicotera, and recorded in Los Angeles, California. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app. Feel free to leave a five-star rating and a review, and check out Briantylercoen.com for links to all of my other channels.