Tangle - The (new) Trump special counsel.

Episode Date: November 22, 2022

We're breaking down the appoinment of another special counsel investigator to look into Trump. Plus, a question about who Democrats might try to run in 2024 (if not Biden).Find our previous coverage of the Mar-a-Lago search here, and of January 6 here.You can read today's podcast here, today’s “Under the Radar” story here, and today’s “Have a nice day” story here.Today’s clickables: Quick hits (00:54), Today’s story (1:56), Right’s take (6:50), Left’s take (11:36), Isaac’s take (16:14), Listener question (19:56), Under the Radar (22:06), Numbers (22:50), Have a nice day (23:46)You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and produced by Trevor Eichhorn. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, a place where you get views from across the political spectrum. Some independent thinking without all that hysterical nonsense you find everywhere else. I am your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we're going to be talking about the new special counsel in the investigations into Donald Trump. Yes, we have another special counsel. God bless this country. Before we get into it, as always, we'll start off with some quick hits. First up, the alleged club Q shooter in Colorado Springs was charged with five counts of murder and five counts of bias-motivated crime after a mass shooting at an LGBTQ nightclub.

Number two, Ukrainian authorities have started to evacuate civilians from recently liberated parts of the country, warning that a lack of power and heat could make conditions unlivable this winter. Number three, Iran's national soccer team did not sing their national anthem at the World Cup in an apparent show of solidarity with protests happening across the country. Number four, a 5.6 magnitude earthquake on Indonesia's main island has killed at least 268 people and injured over 1,000 others. Number five, the largest railroad worker union in the United States says it has rejected the latest collective bargaining agreement brokered by the

Biden administration, renewing fears of a December strike. Well, on to the legal woes now of former President Donald Trump. A special counsel appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland will begin its investigation into Donald Trump today. The new special counsel, Jack Smith, is a former acting U.S. attorney who said the investigations would not pause or flag under his watch. It may potentially lead to criminal charges. Some of my minds can disagree. I think I share Neil's view that it wasn't necessary here, but Merrick Garland thought that it was. But there are some advantages here. Neal's view that it wasn't necessary here, but Merrick Garland thought that it was.

But there are some advantages here. On Friday, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to oversee two Justice Department investigations into Donald Trump. Smith is a former federal and international war crimes prosecutor who once led the Justice Department unit that was responsible for public corruption cases. He will be the third special counsel that has looked into Trump in the last five years and will be responsible for leading the investigations into Trump's handling of the classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago and the purported efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn his 2020 election loss. The appointment was made three

days after Trump announced his plans to run for president. A quick reminder, special counsel investigators are a relatively new idea brought forward in 1999 in an effort to help hand over politically sensitive investigations to more independent prosecutors. In 2016, special counsel Robert Mueller was appointed to investigate Trump's potential collusion with Russian officials because the Justice Department believed it had a conflict of interest overseeing an investigation when many of its appointees were going to be nominated or tapped by the president-elect himself. In Mueller's official report, he described Russia as engaged in disinformation and hacking campaigns to harm Democrats in the 2016 race and found contacts between Russia-linked entities and Trump campaign advisors, but did not discover any conspiracy between the two sides.

He did prosecute several senior Trump advisors for trying to curtail the investigation by lying to investigators, and some for financial crimes, but Trump pardoned most of those advisors in his final days in office. Before Trump left office, his hand-picked Attorney General William Barr appointed John Durham, another special counsel investigator, to look into the origins of Mueller's investigation into Trump and Russia. So far, both of Durham's criminal trials have ended in acquittals, and he is expected to release his final report in the near future. With Smith's appointment, this is the first time in U.S. history that two special counsel investigations are active at the same time. Special counsels still report to the Justice Department and have to follow DOJ

rules, but they create separation between the department and the investigation. It's a sign of the political sensitivity of the Trump investigations that Garland, who was nominated by Biden to lead the DOJ, tapped Smith, a political independent, to lead the investigations. Based on recent developments, including the former president's announcement that he's a candidate for president in the next election, and the former president's announcement that he's a candidate for president in the next election, and the sitting president's stated intention to be a candidate as well, I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint a special counsel, Garland said in comments on Friday. This appointment will not slow the completion of these investigations.

Trump responded on Truth Social, his Twitter competitor, saying, quote, Here we go again, and argued that the January 6th investigation was, quote, a dead issue, and that, quote, likewise he felt that the document hoax case was dead, or at least dying fast. The Democrat Department of Justice had nothing except Trump haters, so they just appointed a special prosecutor to go after me further. Disgraceful, Trump said. Even some allies of Biden and Garland were worried about the appointment of a special counsel, arguing that it might drag out any potential prosecution of Trump, while also making it seem as if the Justice Department is incapable of conducting independent investigations. Today, we're going to take a look at some reactions from the right

and the left to this news and then my take. You can find our previous coverage of the Mar-a-Lago search with the link in today's episode description, as well as our previous coverage of January 6th. Alright, first up, we'll start with what the right is saying. Many on the right criticize the special counsel, saying it does not depoliticize the investigation. Some call out the hypocrisy of not having a special counsel in the investigation into Hunter Biden. Others suggest the special counsel may be appointed because Democrats want Trump to be a viable 2024 candidate. Inspectator Jed Babin said the appointment is meant to prevent any prosecution from being labeled political, but that attempt will fail.

Thanks to the repeal of the awful independent counsel statute, any special prosecutor works for the attorney general, and he, in turn, works for the president. Those facts render it inevitable that any prosecution of Trump, now a declared presidential candidate and likely opponent to Biden, is politically motivated unless proven otherwise, Babin said. Any trial of Trump would be held in Washington, D.C. because the conduct destroying documents in the January 6th speech took place there. A D.C. jury would convict Trump of anything from the Lindbergh kidnapping to the death of George Floyd, and no D.C. federal judge will order a change of venue because of that.

This is the second time that Trump has been investigated by a special prosecutor. Robert Mueller's investigation took two years and spent over $30 million trying to tie Trump and his 2016 campaign to Russia. Jack Smith's investigation won't take that long because it has a deadline, the next presidential election, he said. The Smith investigation will aim to interfere with Trump's campaign with selective leaks and may tie him up in a trial next year or even in 2024. Former Attorney General Bill Barr has said that the prosecutor probably already has enough evidence to indict Trump. Investigation and prosecution of political opponents are common in third-world despotisms, but not in America. We deserve better, and so does Trump. Jonathan Turley called

out the hypocrisy of Garland not appointing a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden. In making the case for a Trump special counsel, however, Garland may have made a case against himself for refusing to appoint a Biden special counsel in the Hunter Biden scandal. Garland's department is investigating potential wrongdoing that could involve the other reference candidate, President Biden, in the Hunter Biden matter, he said. That investigation should be looking at numerous alleged references to the president using codenames such as the big guy in the context of receiving percentages on foreign deals and other perks. Yet Garland has refused to appoint a special counsel in an investigation that not only could prove highly embarrassing to the president, but, in the view of some of us, could implicate him as well. House Republicans are now

poised to look into those foreign deals and how the Justice Department may have stymied or slowed any investigation before the 2020 election, Garland said. While the special counsel appointments help insulate Garland from claims about the use of his department for political purposes on any Trump charges, he may soon face new challenges, including possible contempt referrals, if Biden officials or Democrats refuse to supply information or testimony to Republican House investigators. Garland has sharply departed from prior cases in which the Justice Department largely refused to prosecute such contempt referrals. He has now been very active in pursuing Trump officials who failed to cooperate with Congress. He now may be asked to show the same willingness to pursue those who

obstruct or defy House Republican investigations. In National Review, Andrew McCarthy called it an ironic special counsel. The reason for appointing a special counsel is to create a layer of insulating independence, assuring the public that the conduct and outcome of a criminal probe are being driven by pure law enforcement considerations, not by politics. Realistically, though, the special counsel provides no such assurance. In our constitutional system, the authority to prosecute is executive, so any federal prosecutor, special or ordinary, exercises power as a delegate of the president, he said. There's no getting around the fact that Jack Smith, as he decides what to do about Donald Trump, will answer to the Attorney General and to President Joe Biden, against whom Trump hopes to run in 2024.

But the irony does not end there, not by a long shot. We need a special counsel, lest the public believe that Democrats are using the government's law enforcement power to neutralize a threatening political opponent. In our almost inconceivable situation, however, these are not the politics we're dealing with. The Democrats want to run against Trump. The last thing they want is to neutralize him. They believe he can count on the subset of pro-Trump Republicans who adore him to vault him to the GOP nomination, thereby vanquishing Republican candidates who would pose more of a threat to Biden in the general election, McCarthy said.

At this point with Trump, they are playing with House money. If he does not get charged, he is a political asset for Democrats in the 2024 campaign. If and when he is no longer a viable GOP candidate, he can be charged and anti-Trumpers everywhere will exult. It's a win-win. All right, that is it for the rightist saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. Many on the left support the appointment and call out Republicans for being impossible to please. Some argue Garland had no choice and nothing he did will persuade Trump supporters he deserves to be investigated. Others say the special counsel will drag out the investigation and

harm the Justice Department. In the Los Angeles Times, Harry Littman said the right has DOJ derangement syndrome. Almost as soon as Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the appointment of a special counsel to provide independent, nonpartisan oversight of a criminal investigation related to Donald Trump, Republicans started screaming, Lippman said. The appointment in itself, they said, demonstrated the Department of Justice's corruption and politicization. Smith, a registered independent, is a career prosecutor who has honorably worked at the state, federal, and international level. I wouldn't be surprised if he has never been in the same room with Garland. Friday's pile-on reveals that the GOP is working from an already formulated script

that neither facts nor the law can change. For the rest of Joe Biden's first term, the most orthodox or routine Justice Department decision we flogged as a political scandal with no regard for the specific merits of the cases. It's just who Republicans are now, transparently politicizing and hyper-partisan actors. Their stance is not only deranged, it is fundamentally dishonest, he said. These Republicans demonize Garland, notwithstanding that any honest broker or Washington insider, including many of them, fully understands that Garland's integrity, fair-mindedness, and commitment to justice without fear or favor are beyond reproach, and that the investigations

and potential prosecution of Trump is driven, indeed required, by a commitment to equal justice under the law. This year with DoorDash. Don't want to holla do the most? Holla don't. More festive, less frantic. Get deals for every occasion with DoorDash. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot.

Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca. Ruth Marquez called it both cautious and bold. I thought Garland had more leeway to make the judgment call the other way, but in retrospect, it seems almost inevitable that the by-the-books attorney general would go the special counsel route, Marcus said. Justice Department regulations

provide that the attorney will, quote, appoint a special counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigations of a person or matter is warranted and that investigation or prosecution would present a conflict of interest for the department or other extraordinary circumstances, end quote. The regulations offer an out, one I previously wrote that Garland should take. The Attorney General doesn't have to name a special counsel if he decides that would not be in the public interest. But consider, an administration headed by a president who has announced his intention to seek re-election is investigating a former president who just declared he will run again. If this does not constitute an extraordinary circumstance, what would, Marcus asked. Naming a special counsel is never going to assuage the concerns of Trump

partisans that the Biden administration is out to get him, as the immediate reaction from Trump world underscored. But Garland's goal was not to persuade the unpersuadable. It was, in the familiar language of law, aimed at how a reasonable person would perceive the fairness of the investigation and whether a reasonable person would think a special counsel was warranted under the facts at hand and the language and spirit of the regulations. In NBC News, Michael Conway criticized the appointment, saying it will bog down the investigation and contradicts the regulations. In NBC News, Michael Conway criticized the appointment, saying it will bog down the investigation and contradicts Garland. The stunning sweep of the mandate Garland conferred on special counsel Jack Smith likely doomed a prompt and focused

determination of whether Trump should be indicted. Despite assurances from Garland that a special counsel will not bog down the investigation, reality suggests otherwise. The newly named special counsel will inherit the team of FBI agents and government prosecutors who have been conducting these investigations for months, Conway said. If there were any taint of bias by these investigators, and there is none, then simply allowing the same Justice Department personnel to continue the investigation under a new boss wouldn't cure any claim conflict. Smith will simply be a new supervisor for the same investigators. Additionally, Garland's comments implicitly acknowledge the perception that a standard by-the-book investigation of Trump by the Justice Department could be

perceived as an appearance of conflict of interest, which undermines his own off-repeated statement that no one is above the law. Not to mention that past practice demonstrates that the Justice Department has regularly shown that anyone can be held accountable without resorting to a special counsel. Local federal prosecutors investigated Spiro Agnew when he was vice president for taking bribes when he was an official in Maryland. Former Republican Representatives Chris Collins of New York, Duncan Hunter of California, and Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska were indicted by federal prosecutors and convicted. The fact that Trump is a former president running for re-election makes no difference. Alright, that is it for the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. I'm not sure how much choice Garland really had here.

He is a Biden appointee, and Biden says he is running for re-election, and Biden's chief political opponent says he is running for re-election. There is an ongoing legitimate investigation into a legitimate issue on Biden's chief political opponent, and not even trying to create separation there would be a huge problem. Is the special counsel a perfect solution? No. Does Jack Smith seem like a good choice? Yes. Will this calm the political waters at all? Almost certainly not. Look, based on Trump's own words, reporting photo evidence released by the Justice Department and a slew of other facts, we know that Trump took classified documents from the White House and stored them at Mar-a-Lago. We can say fairly confidently that he did not store them with much caution.

We can imagine pretty easily that they were mishandled in the legal sense. There are questions about why he did what he did, and if he destroyed any such documents, but those basic facts alone require an investigation. As I've written before, comparisons to Hillary Clinton don't fit cleanly here. But, obviously, Clinton not being charged will make it harder for Garland or Smith to justify prosecuting Trump now. They'll need to demonstrate that Trump passed a clear threshold well above what Clinton did. Even if they do so successfully, though, the story of Clinton's email server broke in 2013.

It has been a story for nine years since. She was investigated and cleared by the FBI and the Justice Department Inspector General. She was also investigated by numerous partisan congressional committees and the State Department. Those investigations took years. If we want to treat her and Trump fairly or evenly, then he has to go under the microscope the same way she did. The investigations into January 6th are much more difficult, and in my opinion, much more politically perilous. We are less sure what exactly Garland was looking for,

and what exactly he has. Trump's role on January 6th was both public and obvious, but also squishy. Are they going to try to charge him for inciting a riot because of the rally he held in DC? Will they try to get him on obstructing the count of the electoral votes? Is there something that happened that we still don't know, even after the January 6th hearings? It's all harder to know. Regardless, it is true that having this special counsel, but not one for the investigation into Hunter and Joe Biden, is kind of mind-boggling. We know that investigators believe they have enough evidence to charge Hunter Biden with

tax and gun crimes. We also know that Biden's defense team is meeting with the Justice Department to counter the government's potential case. We know that the emails published from Hunter Biden's laptop were authentic and showed he tried to peddle his father's influence for foreign business deals, even floating the idea of potentially breaking off some profits for the now president. The idea that an investigation into the president's son and potentially into the president himself, does not require separation from the Justice Department, but an investigation into his political opponents does, is just as ridiculous as it reads. Of course, the whole current state of affairs is frankly quite unprecedented if you pause to think

about it. We now have two active federal investigations into the odds-on Republican favorite for 2024. We have an active federal investigations into the odds-on Republican favorite for 2024. We have an active federal investigation into a previous federal investigation of that same candidate. We have an active federal investigation into the current president's son, one that may touch the president himself. And we have a new Republican House majority promising to launch at least five separate investigations into the president and several of his high-ranking administration officials the moment they get control of Congress. As Jonathan Turley so eloquently put it, there seem to be enough torpedoes in the water in Washington this week that you could walk

across the Potomac without getting your feet wet. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one is from Matthew in Houston, Texas. He said, is there a Democratic candidate outside of Biden that can successfully challenge Trump? Sure. Yeah, I think there's plenty, actually, who'd have a decent shot. I mean, Labor Secretary Pete Buttigieg is loved by the Biden administration. I think he's pretty adept at going on Fox News and talking to independent and right-leaning voters. I think he's probably the best communicator the party has had since Obama, even if he's loathed by some progressives. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer just cleaned

house in her election in a swing state. California Governor Gavin Newsom has the name recognition and executive experience in the most populous state in the union, however tattered its reputation. I think there are other lesser-known folks who may be more known soon, too. North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper is an interesting prospect, though he's shown no sign he's going to run. I think Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown has real working-class appeal and could win in red states, but again, no indication he wants to step up. Colorado Senator Michael Bennett couldn't get any traction in 2020, but I wouldn't be shocked at all if he gave it another run in 2024 and if voters gave him another long look. Colorado Governor Jared Polis should be in the conversation too. Obviously, Vice President Kamala Harris will be on the map, though I don't think

she could beat Trump. Even if she were anointed by Biden, her time in the spotlight has afforded her too much baggage, and her role as vice president has been, well, underwhelming. Democrats will probably have their best shot of recruiting someone lesser known, meaning Harris, Senator Elizabeth Warren, and Senator Bernie Sanders should all probably step aside. It's a long way off, but I'm especially keeping an eye on the governors across the country. It has been a while since we had a governor elected for president. The last one was George W. Bush in 2000. But Congress is just so poisoned in the public's eye, and I think Democrats would be wise to look to some purple state executives for a Democratic

replacement. That is, of course, if they actually seek one out. replacement. That is, of course, if they actually seek one out. All right, next up is our under the radar section. For the first time in decades, it may be more economical to eat out for Thanksgiving than to shop for, cook, and clean up a traditional meal. That's according to a new Wells Fargo analysis that dives into the current state of food inflation. The combination of record food prices with turkey and cranberry shortages has a lot of Americans looking to restaurants to fill the gaps. Those restaurants who are still trying to recoup the pandemic losses are happily welcoming them. It's just a simple numbers game. The cost of dining out has gone up

5.8% over the last year, while the cost of groceries has risen just 9.8%. Axios has the story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. The percentage of Americans who say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right just about always is 2%. The percentage of Americans who say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right most of the time is 19%. The percentage of Americans who say they believe Trump broke the law in his handling of classified documents or in his efforts to overturn the 2020 election is 45%. The percentage of Americans who say they believe Trump did not break the law on

his handling of classified documents or his efforts to overturn the election is 44%. The percentage of Americans who say his storing of documents at Mar-a-Lago was not illegal but it was unethical is 17%. The highest percentage of Americans that ever said Trump broke the law in regards to the Russia investigation was 40%. that ever said Trump broke the law in regards to the Russia investigation was 40%. Alright, that is it for our numbers section, and last but not least, our have a nice day story. A new report shows that South Korea is successfully recycling close to 100% of its food waste, a remarkable feat that experts think could be a model for the rest of the world. Using a combination of low-cost food composting bags,

automated food waste collectors in apartments, and the spread of processing plants, South Korea went from recycling just 2.6% of its food waste in 1996 to nearly 100% today. In the U.S., food waste still winds up predominantly in landfills where it releases methane into the air or pollutes waterways. As many as nine states now have bans on landfilling organic waste, and several cities are introducing experiments to introduce food waste recycling. The Guardian has the story. There's a link to it

in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. We will be back here tomorrow, though it will not be a typical podcast edition. That's all I'm going to say. And then we're taking a little time off Thursday and Friday for Thanksgiving. So keep your ears out for tomorrow. You'll be hearing from us. And in the meantime, be sure to spread the word about Tangle and give us a five-star rating if you haven't done that yet. Go to readtangle.com slash membership if you want to support our work.

See you then. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and produced by Trevor Eichhorn. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Sean Brady, and Bailey Saul. Shout out to our interns, Audrey Moorhead and Watkins Kelly,

and our social media manager, Magdalena Bokova, who designed our logo. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. For more from Tangle, subscribe to our newsletter or check out our website at www.readtangle.com. Thanks for watching! award-winning book. Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases.

What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.