No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Trump reheats old election conspiracy theories

Episode Date: July 15, 2026

Trump dives into a new round of election denialism. Brian interviews Senator Jon Ossoff about Trump's election denialism, Senator Adam Schiff about Todd Blanche’s disastrous Senate confirmation hearing, and California attorney general Rob Bonta about his new lawsuit seeking to block the Warner Brothers-Paramount merger.Order THE DAY AFTER: https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/thedayafterWritten 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.

Donald Trump dives into a new round of election denialism, and I've got three interviews. Senator John Offsoff discusses that very election denialism. Senator Adam Schiff talks Todd Blanche's disastrous Senate confirmation hearing, and California Attorney General Rob Banta discusses his new lawsuit seeking to block the Warner Brothers Paramount merger. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. We are, once again, neck-deep in a new round of election denialism, as Trump has began issuing the same reheated claims of foreign interference and rigged votes as he has in every other election that's taken place in this country. So here's a brief

smattering of what that looked like at his speech on Thursday night. Tonight, I'm announcing the immediate declassification and release of critical intelligence revealing shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure. The People's Republic of China carried out what is believed to be the largest compromise of election data in history. China and other countries have been trying to meddle in our elections. Evidence of fraud has been buried. And yet we still have elections with no voter ID, no proof of citizenship, and tens of millions of ballots floating aimlessly through the mail.

Congress must pass the Save America Act. That China got access to 200 million voter files. Venezuela was using software that could flip votes. A quarter of a million non-citizens were on the vote. voter rolls. Now, fact checkers have already come out and debunked all of this. For example, the voter files that China got access to are largely available for sale online. Venezuela, experimenting with being able to manipulate their software, is not something that could have been done abroad. That's according to the CIA. And those 250,000 non-citizens on the voter rolls

is exaggerated by about 225,000. And there is no evidence that the undocumented immigrants on the rolls have actually cast any ballot. It's worth noting that this issue in particular was studied in Utah, no Democrats in that state, to gum up the works. Those Utah Republicans looked at the entire 2 million voters on the voter rolls because they were searching for undocumented immigrants. They found one. And that person never actually cast a ballot.

And then, of course, after Trump's speech, there was this moment later in the evening from MS. now's Vaughn Hilliard. So this is John Solomon. He's a prosecutor that Trump hired at the White House to investigate. elections. You acknowledge that there were no votes changed in 2020? I, all I can acknowledge is what the intelligence shows, right? I only know. The intelligence committee has zero evidence that someone that's flipped, that a foreign power flipped a vote in 2020, 22, or 24. And you have no, you're able to acknowledge that we're not through all the documents. You're able to acknowledge that

Venezuela has not tampered with voting machines in the United States. No, they, the, uh, intelligence is very clear. They did it on their own machines. Why is important that they did it on their machines? Their machine protocols are the same as America. Why? Because for a long time, they did exactly. And so the 2020 election was in fact the results as we, the American public. I'm still researching. So let me, let me, this is the first.

But there's no intelligence. Now yeah. You've got to go. There is no intelligence that the election would have said that Donald Trump was brought on. So even the guy who Trump hired expressly to investigate elections says there was no foreign interference. And of course, you can hear Carolyn Leavitt in full- freak out mode trying to shuttle him away. So why is Trump doing this? Because he is desperate to seize

control of how elections are run in this country. His DOJ is suing 31 states for their unredacted voter roles. DHS is demanding access to run those roles through citizenship verification systems, which keep wrongly flagging eligible voters. You've got the Save America Act that would amount to a federal takeover of state-run elections. You've got Republicans refusing to rule out sending ICE to the polls. So they're definitely trying. But haven't been able to succeed. They've been stymied by the courts and judges and the filibuster, you name it. So clearly they need a new route, a new justification to shoehorn through some more aggressive action, but you need a pretext. You can't just declare that you're taking over

elections. And so what we're seeing right now with these speeches and more speeches, I presume, that are going to come in the future, is that foundation being laid to try and claim fraud, that, you know, the system is broken and China or Venezuela or whatever other country Trump lands on this week is going to steal our elections and as such, he has to take extraordinary action to prevent that from happening. Is it true? Not at all. But Trump doesn't need it to be true. He just needs people to believe it. And this is a recurring theme. Remember this from the aftermath of the 2020 election? On December the 27th, there was a phone call between President Trump and the acting attorney general and his deputy. According to notes taken by that deputy, they told Mr. Trump,

understand that the DOJ can't and won't snap its fingers and change the outcome of the election. It doesn't work that way. And Mr. Trump responded, Just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the our councilman. See, he has done it before. Again, doesn't have to be real. It just has to be repeated enough that people think it's real. And that's what this moment is about for him.

The first step to getting people to believe a brand new big lie is repeating that lie day in and day out. And just look, take a step back here. It's worth noting that if Trump was operating from a position of strength, he wouldn't need to do this. He wouldn't have to serve up a tired 2020 redux to interfere in the next election. But he's not operating from a place of strength.

And Americans know it. And he knows it. He's got full control of government, House Senate White House, and we have watched prices surge, inflation rise, new war start, Epstein files get suppressed, and his approval ratings plummet. You don't do this because you feel like you're winning. You do it because you know you're not. Next up are my interviews with John Ossoff, Adam Schiff, and Rob Bonta.

But before that, we are nearing the end of the first week of the release of my new book, the day after, how to wield power in a post-Trump world. If you'd like to support my work, please grab a copy today. I should note that if I have a chance of making the New York Times bestseller list, my best shot is week one of the sale of the book, which ends on Saturday. So if you think you might be getting it, please do me a favor and try to grab it during that first week period. I really appreciate it. Okay, here are my interviews with John Ossoff, Adam Schiff, and Rob Bonta.

No Lie is brought to you by Hymns. You've got weight loss goals, but hitting them is another story. Enter Weight Loss by Hems. It's designed to support you in losing weight and keeping it off, and Hymns now offers access to an affordable range of FDA-approved GLP-1 medications, including the Wagovi pill and the Wagovi pen. With Wagovi at Hymns, lose up to 20% or more of your body weight when combined with diet and exercise.

It helps you regulate your appetite and eat less, so success is within reach. Plus, Wagovi is the first ever GLP 1 pill for weight loss, so there are no needles needed. Through Hymns, everything happens online. You'll connect with a licensed provider who will determine if treatment is right for you. If prescribed, your medication is delivered. right to your door, no insurance necessary. And it doesn't stop there. HIMS makes hitting your goals seamless by offering access to 24-7 messaging with your care team and in-app lifestyle and nutrition

support like recipes, meal plans, fitness videos, sleep content, and more. Even better with a range of affordable GLP1 options, HIMS makes it simple to find a weight loss approach that fits into your world and your wallet, if eligible. You'll get a treatment plan personalized to you and unlimited dosage changes as needed. Ready to reach your goals, visit HIMS.com slash BTC to get a personalized affordable plan that gets you. That's HIMS.com slash BTC. HIMS.com slash BTC.

Weight loss by HIMS is not available in all 50 states. We'll go to use the registered trademark of Novo Nordisk AS. To get started and learn more, including important safety information, we'll go be clinical study information and restrictions, visit HIMS.com. We're joined now by Senator Asop. Senator, you've been in the news in a big way because now we have Donald Trump who is expected to come out in just a couple of days and make a speech, and there are rumors that the speech is going to include this idea that your election was

illegitimate or tainted by fraud. What's your reaction to that? Let's just put aside the notion that the president has any power to declare city U.S. senators illegitimate. Yeah, he does not. But here's what's amazing to me. In Georgia, people, People are furious at this administration and not just Democrats because it's so clear the president doesn't care about the economic pain Americans are feeling. And he cares about himself, lining his own pockets, building a ballroom. Now, what's he doing now? He's pivoting from the ballroom to election, denial, and conspiracy theories. Only a shrinking share of his base believes him on any of this.

And he continues to demonstrate. He doesn't understand the depth of the whole. dug for himself. He has lost the trust of the American people. He's lost the trust of people in Georgia. The flip side of it is that this is very dangerous stuff. I mean, we can laugh about it and ridicule it, and it is ridiculous and absurd. But he is making it very clear, but he intends to abuse federal power to try to interfere in the upcoming election. And we need to make sure that people are galvanized to turn out like they have never turned out before. Do you think that we have the tools necessary to make sure that he is unable to interfere in upcoming elections. I know that, for example,

Republicans refuse to rule out the prospect of ICE going to the polls. He continues to try and pass the Save America Act, which would basically be a federal consolidation of state-run elections. And so do you have confidence as we look toward midterms and beyond that we can have confidence in our elections? I think that this is a real challenge, and it is the challenge of our lifetimes. This is the most important civic task that our generation will ever have, is to get out the vote like never before bespaw, to protect voting rights, to educate voters, to navigate whatever obstacles are put in their way or see through whatever misinformation is thrown at them. And in Georgia, this will be the most crucial and competitive Senate race in the country. Remember that I am the only

Democratic senator running for re-election in a state with Donald Trump won. And by the way, everybody out there who cares about this, you want to take action and do something about this. And it's electjohn.com. I'm going to put that link right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video. Can I have your reaction to when Donald Trump, after having campaigned on this idea that he was going to focus on regular issues that impact Americans like rent and housing and groceries, was handed on a silver platter, a housing bill that his own party had advanced, bipartisan, but his own party had participated in advancing that bill, refused to sign it because he wanted instead use it as a hostage to again try and pass a law that would ultimately just be a federal takeover of elections.

This is all part of the great betrayal of MAGA. He promised his movement that he would be for the working man and the working woman. He promised his movement that he would drain the swan. Instead, this is government of by and for the elite and the ultra-rich. They have slashed Medicaid and jacked up people's help insurance premiums in order to cut taxes for the ultra-wealthy. for corporate America. He promised that he would extract America from foreign entanglements and foreign wars, and instead, he's getting sucked deeper into the quicksand of his quagmire in the Strait

of Hormuz. So his refusal to sign a bill aimed at lowering the cost of housing, because instead what he wants is national voter suppression legislation is just a demonstration of how out of touch he is, why he's so unpopular, but also why he remains dangerous. Is that breaking through? I mean, you just mentioned that you were running for re-election in a state that voted for Trump, the only senator running for reelection in a state that Donald Trump won. Among the constituents who you've spoken to on the campaign trail, is that understanding of what he's doing breaking through to those voters? It's absolutely breaking through.

And what they see is that my opponent, Congressman Mike Collins, who first of all is a notorious bigot, who is only a congressman because his daddy was a congressman, is such a MAGA loyalist. that he will put Donald Trump's interests in Donald Trump's wishes above the interests of the state of Georgia. This is Mike Collins, who voted with Donald Trump against releasing the Epstein Files, who voted with Donald Trump to double health insurance premiums for more than a million Georgians, who voted for Donald Trump's tariffs, who voted for Donald Trump's war.

Over and over and over again, Mike Collins puts Trump ahead of Georgia. But remember, this is the most competitive battleground state in the country. No one should take this race for granted. I need people across the country to chip in to make sure we defeat my colleagues. Leave it there. Again, I'm going to put the link to donate to Senator Ossoff's campaign right here on the screen and also in the postscript. But you up, Senator, I know you bro.

No lie is brought to you by Simply Safe. So imagine it's the 4th of July holiday. A lot of people leave their homes unattended for vacations and don't have security protection in case of an unwanted intruder. In the U.S., there is a break-in every 26 seconds. That means somewhere, right now, an intruder is getting closer. The problem is most security systems only. alert you after a break-in has already started, and that's too late. So that's why I chose

SimplySafe to secure my home. Using the Outdoor Camera Series 2 and advanced AI alerts, SimplySafe's U.S.-based live agents identify threats on your property and help deter them stopping crime before it starts. That's real peace of mind. SimplySafe has been a game changer for me. Here's what I love most about it. There are no long-term contracts. Like we've all been there where we're locked into a long-term contract and suddenly the service that was great when you we're signing up isn't so great anymore now that they've got you. No long-term contracts mean Simpli-Safe has to earn your business every day. And of course, there is the peace of mind. Whether I'm going to sleep at night or leaving on a long-term vacation, I am 100% assured that

my house, my stuff, my valuables are all safe and protected. Don't miss out on this exclusive Fourth of July deal just for my listeners. Right now, you can get a massive 70% off your new system at Simplysafe.com slash BTC. That is an incredible 70% off your home security system just by going to simplysafe.com slash BTC. Hurry because there's no safe like SimplySafe. I'm joined now by Senator Adam Schiff. Senator, I wanted to get your reaction first and foremost to the hearing that just took place with Todd Blanche, who is, of course, vying to be the next attorney general.

Did you get the impression after having watched him that he was actually going to be adherent to the Constitution as opposed to continuing his job as Donald Trump's personal criminal defense attorney? No, he made it very clear that through his actions, he is really representing the person of the president, not the American people. And that's the central question at the heart of this hearing. And that is, who's representing the public in all of that the Justice Department is doing? So when it came to the Epstein files, for example, he took no responsibility for the fact the court has said the Justice Department is in violation of the law. He was asked whether he would apologize to the victims.

and he tried to obfuscate things by saying, well, I feel bad whenever somebody's victimized by a crime. And it was pointed out to him, no, no, the one who did the victimization in addition to Epstein was the Justice Department in releasing victims, photos, personal information. Will you apologize for your role in that? He very begrudgingly did. He wouldn't agree to meet with the victims. He initially claimed that he couldn't meet with the victims, which is preposterous. Then when we went to other matters like the slush fund or the bogus sham IRS settlement, he was once again defending the president really not the interest of the American people. I thought what was interesting was his claim that when he was asked by one senator if he would just get this over with, release the files, just get it done.

His initial words out of his mouth were that would be illegal. Is it illegal or against the law for Todd Blanche to release the entirety of the remaining Epstein files? And of course, I'm not talking about victim information, but there are still three million documents that haven't yet been released. So he is under illegal obligation to release these documents, not to withhold any of them because they might embarrass people or expose the identities of powerful people who were perpetrating any of these crimes that Epstein and his Confederates were responsible for. there may be some small set of material that is grand jury material where he would have to go before a court. But we know that there is millions of files still not yet released. And no one has any confidence and not the judge that oversees the case. No one has any confidence that Blanche and the department are trying to do anything but protect these Epstein offenders.

The, you know, Todd Blanche today tried to argue that Donald Trump wanted these files released. and he was pushing for it when we all know how hard he worked to stop the bipartisan legislation that mandated that disclosure. So his testimony was really duplicitous, particularly when involved the Epstein files, but also with the whole weaponization of the Justice Department. At times he would brag, like when he goes before the conservative CPEC convention, about firing all of the prosecutors and the FBI agents who investigated, his client, the president.

And then when I asked him about that, he said, oh, that wasn't me. That wasn't me. He took no responsibility for it. And that was what we saw throughout the hearing. It was this very duplicitous, Todd Blanche giving verbal approval of department policies, but in his actions demonstrating he had really no adherence to the rule of law. His only loyalty is to the person of the president. Now, just a quick note to say that my new book, the day after, is now available.

If you'd like to support my work and send a message to Donald Trump who put me on his enemies list this year that his efforts to silence us in independent media only make our voices louder, then please do me favor, support my work, and order a copy. You can click the link right here on the screen in the post description or the comments or go to link in my bio or to brian-tylercoen.com slash book. Senator, if you have a head of the DOJ who is engaged in a cover-up in blatant violation of a law that was passed, the Epstein-Files Transparency Act, does he show, shoulder any legal exposure by virtue of continuing to perpetuate this cover-up? Yes, he does. He's in violation of the law. And if he's misrepresenting things to the court, and the court has basically said the Department of Justice is misrepresenting facts, then yeah, he can be held accountable for it. But again, he's acting like he is Donald Trump's lawyer in Epstein-Files litigation. When he went, for example, to talk to Jislain Maxwell,

who is one of Epstein's top, his top co-conspirator. When he went to talk with her and interview her for two days, he brought no one who was familiar with the facts of the case. It was an absurdity of an interview. In fact, he even fired Maureen Comey, who was in charge of the prosecution, who would have been the right person to bring along to something like that. Absolutely.

Or the FBI agents that had worked on all those cases or other prosecutors that really knew the facts that could question her when she made denials, when she claimed that she never saw underage girls in the residence or at Marlago or whatever, giving out massages. When she made those preposterous claims, there was nobody to press her on it.

Certainly Blanche didn't. And when you go to do that kind of an interview, the question is, who are you representing there? And it was so clear that he was there to represent the president, And not surprisingly after she gave that superficial exonerating testimony, oh, I never saw anything about Donald Trump. She's moved to this camp, this prison camp, inappropriate for a sex offender like herself.

Right. I think the word flying around the streets was club fed. I want to switch gears a little bit here. So there is an expectation, a rumor that Donald Trump is going to use a 9 o'clock PM speech on Thursday evening to claim that the election. election in 2020 was rigged or illegitimate as the result of some foreign interference. There's also some rumors to suggest that he might claim that the election of Senator Warnock and Senator Assoff is consequently illegitimate.

Do you think that he's using this as justification to then shoehorn through some further voter suppression efforts? And if so, what do you think that would look like? Yes, I think that's exactly what he's doing. It is certainly true that he's never been able to accept his loss in the election, and he's lied about it ever since. And those lies led to that violent attack on January 6th. But it's also the case that the seizure of ballots in Georgia, that this speech that's coming up, this is also designed to lay the foundation for further interference in the upcoming elections to make some false claim of foreign interference that would justify seizure of ballot boxes or calling out the military. I think it is very much designed to sow doubts in the American people about our election system to somehow rationalize what he may do when, as he fully expects, they lose the midterm elections.

So we have to be prepared for everything. But I think in terms of what we can expect on Thursday, expect the president to come out and lie to the American people. After all, this is the guy who, in that very election, he's contesting, called the Republican Secretary of Georgia and urged to, him to find 11,780 votes that didn't exist but were just one more necessary than necessary to defeat Joe Biden in that state. So there was somebody trying to commit a massive fraud on that day and his name is Donald Trump. But expect him to bring more disinformation lies coming to us on Thursday night. Obviously this issue has been litigated and relitigated and relitigated to within an inch of its life. Everybody who's acting in good faith,

knows that it's complete bullshit. That's not going to stop Trump from doing it, but it does offer kind of an out for those who are, again, acting in good faith to recognize what the truth is. What have you heard from your Republican colleagues? Are they going to allow themselves to be swayed publicly and kind of glom onto his efforts to subvert the upcoming election? Or do you think that there's going to be some pushback to what is obviously the umpteenth effort by Donald Trump to claim fraud as a pretext to issue?

some voter suppression edict moving forward? Honestly, I have pretty low expectations about my Republican colleagues. Very few have been able to speak out about anything the president does. There were very few voices, for example, in the hearing with Todd Blanche, to push back on this slush fund and the bogus sham settlement about the president's tax liabilities or the weaponization of the Justice Department. They spent more time today during the hearing attacking Merrick Garland. of all people for so-called weaponization during Garland's tenure as Attorney General,

then they did even acknowledging the bogus nature of the Seychelles case against James Comey or the case they tried to bring against my colleagues in the Senate over a video they made. So, you know, I don't have a whole lot of confidence. You know, some of those that are on the way out might be willing to speak out. But we have seen these same senators who ran for their lives on January 6th have now so many of them become complicit in trying to completely rewrite the history of that day. What will they be willing to do going forward? We have to expect more of the same. It's nice to know that at least one group of people thinks that Merrick Garland was aggressive. Last question here. In your estimation, and this is

just a prediction, do you presume that Todd Blanche will be confirmed as attorney general? Well, there's one senator on the committee, John Cornyn, who the president had a big hand in defeating, who has said that he has not reached a conclusion yet. and he won't until he has to vote on it. I hope that he looks very carefully at this IRS agreement. He seemed to be pretty concerned about it today. He pointed out quite rightly that Todd Blanche, when he said the slush fund is dead, is really not in a position unless he's truly representing the president,

as opposed to what he claims, claims to be representing the Justice Department and the IRS. If he's only representing one party to that so-called settlement agreement, then how can he speak for the other party? And the simple answer is he can't unless it's the same lawyer for both. And the reality is, as we could all tell, he is representing both the president and the Justice Department, but truly only the interests of the president. We'll leave it there. Senator Schiff, thanks so much for taking the time. Thank you. No lie is brought to you by ethos.

I already feel like I aged twice as fast working in politics, but that notwithstanding, I've started having to think about making sure that I'm all squared away if anything were to happen to me. I have friends who've lost parents or loved ones suddenly who didn't plan, and I found that it makes things decidedly more difficult. So that's where ethos comes in. Ethos makes getting life insurance fast and easy 100% online. You can get a quote in seconds, apply in minutes, and get same-day coverage.

There's no medical exam, you just answer a few simple health questions, you can get up to $3 million in coverage. Some policies are as low as $30 a month, and you'll get your lowest rate from their network of trusted carriers. Take 10 minutes to get covered today with life insurance through ethos.com slash BTC. That's ethOS.com slash BTC. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. We have some major news coming out of California, a lawsuit that the entire country has been waiting for. I'm joined now by the Attorney General of California, Rob Bonta, to discuss. So Attorney General Banta, first and foremost, can you explain this new lawsuit that's just been filed today? Absolutely.

Today we filed a lawsuit in federal court in the Northern District of California, we being California and 11 other state attorneys general from throughout the country, seeking to block the merger of Paramount and Warner Brothers based on the fact that it violates antitrust law, anti-monopoly law, specifically the Clayton Act, Section 7, which prevents mergers that substantially lessen competition. And in three markets that we have to find in our complaint, the Paramount Warner Brothers proposed merger is presumptively illegal because it substantially lessens competition.

That's specifically the distribution of wide release theatrical films, the distribution of top grossing theatrical films, blockbusters or tent pole films we call them, and also the licensing of basic cable channels to cable distributors. In those three markets throughout the United States of America, this merger, if it were consummated, would create a concentration in the marketplace that's substantially lessens competition and is illegal. So this is an illegal proposed merger, and we are moving to block it.

To what extent is Warren Brothers and Paramount already merging together? And I ask that because there is some concern that they're getting the process started so that it'll be that much easier for them to eventually say to a court, you know what? It's too much to unwind at this point because look at all of the merging that's already been done up to now. Is that a concern? No, that's not a concern. We have filed timely here.

preserved all of our rights. We have asked Paramount and Warner Brothers to delay the closing until the court decides on the merits of our case, and we think we will prevail in this case. If they don't agree to that, then we will be seeking a temporary restraining order to block the closure of the deal. So the deal has not closed. They are obviously trying to get towards ultimate closure of the deal. Paramount and Warner Brothers are, but they have regulatory scrutiny. need to go through in multiple jurisdictions, including in the EU, in the United States. So our next TARTegna case, we sued quite a bit later in the process just before the closure, and we still got a timely lawsuit filed and got a preliminary injunction. So they are moving down the road

towards ultimate closure. I know is their desire, but we have filed our lawsuit timely, preserved all of our rights, and preserved our ability to block the merger, should the court agree with A quick note, my new book, The Day After, is now officially on sale. If you appreciate my videos and would like to support my work, please consider grabbing a copy this week, since this week is my best shot at hitting the New York Times bestseller list. I also have my book tour happening this week in Washington, D.C., New York, and L.A. You can find the link to order the book and to go to the book tour in the post description

or at bryantylercoen.com slash book. So as we talk about the consolidation of media, and especially the administration's behavior toward the media, to what extent does even the latest act by this administration sending subpoenas and federal agents to the doors of five different New York Times reporters fuel or have some impact on this litigation? Because I feel like that is a small part of a similar story. Yeah, you know, I've always been a vocal supporter of a free independent press.

as a watchdog to keep government accountable, to tell stories to do investigative journalism, to reveal truths and bring those to light. And that remains important. And the Trump administration, unfortunately, one of the signature components of Trump 1.0 and 2.0 has been to attack the press. Yeah.

To use words like fake news and alternative facts and to berate journalists. And that is wrong. is bad for democracy. He needs to know that the press is there to keep him honest and hold him accountable and that's an appropriate and important role in our democracy. So, you know, here we, of course, are not naive and see the potential impacts on a free press and independent press. You know, the proposed merge company would have both CNN and CBS. But our analysis is just a straight-up antitrust analysis based on the facts and the law, the concentration of the markets,

the anti-competitive impacts of the proposed merger. What one outcome is that there's likely to be an erosion of the quality of the content of, you know, TV series and movies and news, less perspectives, less diversity perspectives, fewer views, fewer types of light being shed on the truth. And that is also part of a at the competitive impact, anti-competitive impact that we are talking about here in our lawsuit. So let's talk a little bit about the mechanics of this case. Where is it being filed? And is there any precedent from whatever federal court that is that might inform how a judge

might view this case in particular? Yeah, we filed in the Northern District of California, the federal court in the San Francisco Bay Area. And we are seeking to be involved. front of a judge who already has a private plaintiff's case that's challenging the merger. So we think that's a good thing to have a judge that is up to speed on this issue that has seen another case already in that courtroom to be informed and to have an understanding of the case. And, you know, we think that we'll prevail in front of any judge in any court, but particularly one who has some knowledge, you know, a depth of insight into this issue because

of this prior case, now it's a co-existing case, then I think we think that that's helpful. And again, the next step will be to decide whether we need to bring a temporary restraining order to temporarily halt the proposed merger during the pendency of the litigation, or if Paramount Warner Brothers will agree to that. And then we know we'll go through the process, just like we did in Ticket Master Live Nation, and just like we are next Artegna, where we respond to any motions by the defendants, we, bring our case. We have our experts talk about the appropriate markets and the impact of the proposed merger on those markets. And then in Ticket Master Live Nation, we had a jury make the ultimate

decision here. We'll have a judge make the final decision. But the next step will be to see if the merger will be temporarily halted during the pendency of the litigation. Two questions here. One, will your case merge with the private case that's going on right now? And the second question question, how long do you expect this whole process to take roughly? Right. So for the first question about the private plaintiff's case, the cases won't merge, but they'll be what we call in legalese related. They are related cases. They're separate cases, so they won't merge, but they are generally on the same topic. They're challenging this Paramount Warner Brothers proposed merger. So they'll be before the same judge, related, but not merged.

And with respect to time, it depends on what the defendants do. Sometimes they can bring motions to dismiss or for summary judgment. They can make things difficult in discovery, which require us to bring motions to get the information, additional information that we need or take the depositions that we need or get the materials that we need. So some of it's dependent on them. But typically it would be over a year and less than three is sort of a broad, book-ending framework of, you know, the earliest to the latest. Is there anything to prevent CNN and CBS from moving forward with the merger anyway,

other than a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction? Otherwise, do you expect the Ellison's to make it so that this merger still moves ahead while litigation is happening? I'm not sure what they're going to try to do, but if they don't agree to halt the merger voluntarily will go to court and seek the temporary restraining order, and we think we'll get it. They do, I think they're clearing the final hurdles in their regulatory scrutiny in the different jurisdictions around the world. And so I think the EU still needs to finalize its decisions. I think it's made some indications about where it might land. But there's a reason they haven't closed

yet because they're not through all the final regulatory hurdles yet. Can you talk about the fact that, you know, you are obviously the Attorney General of California, even though we've seen the entertainment industry kind of dissipate and go to different states. And in some cases, even different countries, there's obviously a thriving industry in New Jersey and New Mexico and Georgia and New York and Vancouver and Toronto and the UK. So it's all around the United States and around the world. But still, there is, I'm presuming there is still some. claim of ownership over the industry as a whole. And so can you explain why it was important for you

to spearhead this case as we're kind of protecting the integrity of a huge aspect of this industry? Sure. You know, Paramount and Warner Brothers each are massive companies, you know, each in their own right as a merged company as they're proposing to be. They would be an entertainment behemoth, you know, absolutely gigantic across multiple markets. from streaming to film distribution to cable channel ownership and beyond, you know, owning news companies, networks as well. And so there's a national impact here, and we've argued in our complaint that the appropriate geographic market for this case is the United States of America, the whole country.

And, you know, California, the largest state in the nation, the fourth largest economy in the world, the home of iconic Hollywood. And the press comments I had earlier today. was in front of the iconic Hollywood sign. That was by accident. It was by design to talk about the history and the legacy of Hollywood right here in California and the incredible movies that have been created and the studios that have started here and grown here and produced movies here, the work and the jobs that have been created

for so many creatives and members of teams that produce content that, that, that, create storytelling that can inspire, that can shed new light on things we haven't seen before, that can open up our minds to things we maybe didn't know we needed to know. And that has all been created in Hollywood. It's, you know, the place where so much of it has started and grown, of course, films are shot all over the world and all over the country and all over North America, but there's only one Hollywood. And this is particularly important to California, to me, California's Attorney General to our people, to our state, to our future, because of the legacy and the history and the ongoing durability of a thriving Hollywood.

Perfectly put. We'll leave it there. Attorney General Bonta, thanks so much for taking the time. And thanks for the work that you're doing on this case. My pleasure, Brian. Thanks to have me. Thanks again to John Alsoff, Adam Schiff, and Rob Banta. That's it for this episode.

Talk to you this weekend. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen, produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesie, and interviews edited for YouTube by Nicholas Nicotera. If you want to support the show, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app and leave a five-star rating in a review. And as always, you can find me at Brian Tyler Cohen on all of my other channels, or you can go to bryantellercoen.com to learn more.