The Philip DeFranco Show - This Secret ICE Memo Leak is Crazy!!

Episode Date: January 22, 2026

Go to http://vessi.com/defranco for 15% off your first order. LISTEN TO THE SHOW iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-philip-defranco-show/id1278424954 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6ESemquRbz6f8XLVywdZ2VWATCH CRASHING OUT w/ PHILIP & ALEX Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCergKLoy-Yv9zlPk3XQYK7Q?sub_confirmation=1 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2DkU87umhGH9mH1z24Bi9w?si=6sSdjhVNQjyVeBQDLiXcyg Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crashing-out-with-philip-defranco-and-alex-pearlman/id1843429519 WATCH/LISTEN TO MY NEW PODCAST w/ MAXINOMICS Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2CePXwDrvdQTes844wflKp?si=55a6b6049c4841ed Youtube: https://youtube.com/acw?sub_confirmation=1 iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/in-good-faith-with-philip-defranco/id1827016835 JOIN OUR COMMUNITY 📸Instagram: https://instagram.com/PhillyDeFranco  🐦Twitter: https://twitter.com/phillyd  🎵TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@philipdefranco  TODAY’S STORIES 00:00 - ICE is Entering Homes Without Warrants and Taking Kids09:01 - Sponsored by Vessi 10:02 - Trump’s ‘Board Of Peace’ is Coming for the UN 18:28 - Jack Smith Testifies in House Hearing  25:43 - Oversight Committee Votes to Hold Clintons in Contempt  THE TEAM Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino   ———————————— #DeFranco #ICE #JackSmith Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's the Golden Moment. Triumph on the podium, Golden Hand. But with Corona Cerro, Golden Moments go beyond the Winter Olympics. They're enjoying sunsets, time outside, reconnecting with nature, and laughs shared with friends. For every golden moment at the Winter Olympic Games, enjoy your own with Corona Serro, 0% alcohol and a source of vitamin D. Corona Cerro, the official non-alcoholic beer of Milano Cortina, 2026. This war playing out in Minnesota, it's getting scarier and scarier by the day.

Right, because ICE has said goodbye to Warrens and they've begun terrorizing children as a matter of routine. Pull your kids now! Don't do this to my kids! Come on! Oh my god, my kids! My kids are so young! Oh my god! You guys, my kids! Yay!

And there's a lot we're gonna have to dive into and break down, but first up is this crazy internal memo kept secret by ICE but just now leaked by an anonymous whistleblower. Right, because it instructs ICE agents that they can forcibly enter someone's home, your home, even if they don't have a judicial warrant, which is something that not just ICE, but all law enforcement agencies have been explicitly barred from doing for decades because of the Fourth Amendment. And this memo, it's dated May 12th, so presumably ICE has just been following this for months. Right, and we're only learning about it now because the agency has kept it under wraps, and it took the whistleblower a while to get it out safely. In fact, only supervisors were generally given the memo itself, and they just used it to verbally brief employees.

And if an employee was allowed to read the memo, reportedly, they had to have to give it back to the supervisor when they were done. So now, you know, if this policy is the new normal, the conventional advice given to immigrants about how to protect themselves, it just goes out the window. Right? Even as recently as last month, you had Zoran Mamdani telling New Yorkers. Know your rights.

If you encounter ICE, these are the things that every New Yorker should know. First, ICE cannot enter into private spaces like your home, school, or a private area of your workplace without a judicial warrant signed by a judge. That looks like this. But the memo, which was signed by acting ICE director, Todd Lyons claims that all agents need is,

an administrative warrant issued by immigration officials themselves, which is why for decades it's held far less authority than a judicial warrant. But the incredible thing is that ICE itself knows this. Where it's own written training materials from just last year called this practice the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed citing Supreme Court precedent. In fact, the whistleblower says that ICE is telling new hires and agents still in training to ignore those written training materials and just follow the memo's guidance instead. And so all of that may go some way toward explaining why we've seen these videos of agents in tactical gear, bust and down doors with assault rifle, but no warrant, which is what you saw happening with examples like this guy in Minneapolis recently. But then, you know, even putting the warrant issue aside, the memo itself states that agents must knock on the door and share who they are and why they're at the residence,

and then the people inside must be given what's described as a reasonable chance to act lawfully. But from all these videos that we've been seeing pouring out of Minnesota, that is often not happening. And that's also assuming that the person being arrested is even an immigrant at all. Are you seeing things like in another case, agents entered a home without a warrant, guns drawn, and they pulled out a 56-year-old U.S. citizen who was only in his underwear out into the freezing cold. So your grandson watched everything? Yeah, my grandson watched everything.

After they took me, he was crying, looking for me. They just took me out there without any clothes on, unless only the blanket, only my grandson's blanket. With DHS then defending itself after the incident, claiming that he was living with two convicted sex offenders and saying that he matched the description of the men that they were actually looking for. Though, neither of those people they were talking about

were found during the raid. And it was actually later revealed that one of them's in prison already serving a four year sentence. So it's unclear why ICE thought he would be in that home. So with all these tactics now out in the open, you had a legal expert telling the AP. If DHS implements this new procedure, what will happen is those arrests will be challenged

as an unlawful search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. And if judges rule that agents were not supposed to enter the home without a warrant, or some other exception to the warrant requirement, such as consent, exigent circumstances, hot pursuit, then that arrest will be dismissed as a constitutional violation. But then there's also another ice tactic

that's shocking a lot of people right now, and that is what they call the detention, though others call it the abduction and kidnapping of children. Or with just example after example, going viral like this 16-year-old boy and his father in Texas. Reportedly, they were driving a school when two unmarked vehicles pulled them over and mass men with guns with no badges jumped out.

And without identifying themselves or even stating you're under arrest, they just started pulling on the car doors and so the pair drove off. The boy here, he was a US citizen, but his father was undocumented and video obtained by MS Now. You can hear him virtually having a panic attack fearing that his dad's going to be deported. Then you have the agents chasing after them, repeatedly ramming their car from behind. And eventually they pulled over, the boy was restrained, and now, ended up in the hospital and his father, well. I saw like three men like fully like started kicking him down, punching him down.

Get away from my dad, bro. Get away from my dad, bro. Get away from my dad, yo. And I was like not gonna like just let that happen because you know, like they're punching. They're like treating him bad. I'm pretty sure everybody will react to the same way if they saw their dad getting beat down.

But also with this, I gotta know that, you know, 16 is actually relatively old for some of the kids that ICE has been snatching up. Or reportedly, agents have detained at least four children from the same Minnesota school district in just the past couple of weeks, and one of them was a five-year-old boy. His name is Liam Ramos, and the school says that just after he and his father got home from his preschool, ICE met them in the driveway. And with that, you had DHS saying that the father fled on foot, and so the Aden stayed with the boy for his safety while one chased down the dad. But then, according to the school,

the Aden said Liam knock on the door of his own home to see if any other people were inside, essentially using a five-year-old as bait. When Liam's middle-school-aged brother came home 20 minutes later, reportedly he discovered that his younger brother and father had been taken. So now with all that, you have the Family's lawyers saying that the pair are being held in San Antonio, even though they've been going through the asylum process perfectly legally. You also have the school district superintendent saying, Why detain a five-year-old? You can't tell me that this child is going to be classified as a violent criminal. As far as the DHS response, they said they were just targeting the father and claimed that the boy was abandoned. And with that saying that the policy is for a child to either stay with a safe person designated by a parent or be removed along with a detainee.

There, you've got the school saying that another adult living in the home who is outside at the time begged the agents to leave Liam with them and the agents just refused. And again, that's just one of the four I'm talking about, right? We've still got three other kids to talk about. Two weeks ago, a 10-year-old student, fourth grader, was taken by ICE agents on her way to elementary school with her mother. And with that, you had them adding that the girl called her father and told him that ICE agents were bringing her to school, but by the time that he got there, both his wife and daughter were already gone. And with that, you had school officials saying that they're now in a Texas detention center, just like Liam and his dad, and continuing.

On the way to school, a 17-year-old high school student, a minor, was taken by armed, masked agents. Alone. No parents were present. And then lastly, you had the school saying that the aides pushed their way into an apartment and detained another 17-year-old student as well as their mother. And so understandably, you know, many of the remaining kids, they're terrified with as many as a third of the students in the district, reportedly staying home in recent weeks out of fear. In fact, you've had the Minneapolis and St. Paul districts canceling class the past couple of weeks while teachers have switched to virtual learning. Ice agents have been roaming our neighborhoods, circling not. our schools, following our buses, coming into our parking lots and taking our children,

and our hearts are shattered. And all these stories, they just keep coming and coming with federal agents, for example, raiding a home in St. Paul, letting a woman and her baby stay, but taking the other six people there, including a 12-year-old boy. With neighbors saying it, they were told that it was about narcotics, not immigration, but they're skeptical because of the surveillance footage showing a package getting dropped off just minutes before the raid. Federal agents inside were telling those drugs in it, and if no one inside of the time

claim that package that they were going to take every, And then when a family friend tried to pick up the little boy from a federal building the next day, he said that he was told that the kid had been sent to San Antonio. Right, and something you may have noticed at this point is that a lot of these kids, they're ending up in Texas. You know, that's not a coincidence. And it's something that more and more people have been speaking out on, for example, Senator Chris Murphy posting, last night in San Antonio, I met two traumatized young boys who were locked up for six weeks at Trump's baby prison in Texas. And saying they were taken when they checked in for a routine hearing with their mom just waiting in the car with their backpacks for school, saying,

it's insane this is happening. And actually on the topic of ICE detention facility, in Texas. I mean, we've got to talk about the update at the case of Geraldo Lunas Campos, a 55-year-old father of four who died in ICE custody this month Right, because at first, ICE claimed that he was moved into solitary after he was being disruptive and then they called medical staff over after they noticed him in distress But last week, you had a witness telling the AP that he was handcuffed as at least five guards held him down and one put an arm around his neck and squeezed And only then did DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin a notoriously fierce defender of Trump's immigration agenda to revise the initial story, claiming that Lunis Campos actually tried to take his own life and guards merely tried to help him, claiming that he violently resisted the guards and

in the ensuing, struggle, he stopped breathing and lost consciousness. But now, we've got the autopsy report, and his death was ruled a homicide, with the cause being asphyxia due to neck and torso compression. And so then in response to it, McLaughlin issuing a statement saying that he was a, quote, criminal, illegal alien and convicted child sex predator. But all of that, as his death was just one of at least three reported in little more than a month at this facility. which has also been described as really little more than a sprawling tent city. Then there's even more we're going to dive into in just a minute, but first, let me thank a sponsor and say, you know, if your New Year's resolution is stop living like a wet raccoon, I have the shoe for you.

Because today's sponsor, Vessie and their Stormburst sneakers, they're here to rescue your socks and your dignity. They're 100% waterproof, which means rains, slush, spills, and sidewalk, but trails no longer own you. And I wear them on coffee runs, chaotic errands, dog walks, and, you know, I forgot it was winter days and my socks stay dry every time. The traction's also top-notch, so you're not ice skating to your car. And they've got a supportive heel, removable insoles, easy pull tabs, and a design that works with joggers, jeans, or real pants if you're feeling ambitious. Plus, they come in both high top and low top style, so you can go full ankle coverage or keep it clean in every day. They're also made with sustainable materials, which is just objectively a win. This is a true one-pair solution shoe, not a closet ornament that you only trust on perfect weather days.

And Vessi, they back them with a one-year warranty and a 30-day hassle-free return, which is the opposite of buyers' remorse energy. So, hey, if you want to actually enjoy winter instead of fighting it, had to Vessie. dot com slash Defranco or just scan that QR code and get 15% off your first pair. But then diving back into the news, Donald Trump's replacing the UN. That's what you're seeing people shout right now as he's now launched his new so-called Board of Peace of the World Economic Forum in Davos. With several world leaders signing a charter describing an organization that really completely is unlike what was originally proposed, which was an already controversial temporary body meant to oversee the rebuilding of Gaza. In fact, it was actually the UN Security Council that adopted a resolution endorsing the

establishment of the so-called Board of Peace. And it described the board, as a transitional administration in Gaza with a two-year mandate to start. Now at the board starter, it makes no direct reference to Gaza at all. Instead, describing itself as an international organization that seeks to promote stability, restore, dependable, and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace and areas affected are threatened by conflict. And in the signing ceremony today where Trump claim that the world is already richer, safer, and much more peaceful than it was just one year ago, he also claimed that the board would

become one of the most consequential bodies ever created. And then adding that it will be the most prestigious board ever, it's going to get a lot of work done that the United Nations should have done in saying, once this board is completely formed, we can do pretty much whatever we want to do it. Now with that, I do want to know that he technically followed up by saying, we'll do it in conjunction with the United Nations, but that doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

Especially given how often and how strongly he's criticized the UN, and that's without mentioning that earlier this month, he moved to withdraw the United States from 66 international organizations described as contrary to the interests of the United States. And many of those were UN-related bodies dealing with issues like climate, labor, and migration. And on Tuesday, he straight up said that he thought that this board of peace might replace the UN.

Although again, yes, it's Trump. He's often saying two things at the same time. He sort of walked it back, saying you got to let the UN continue because the potential is so great. But still, you're seeing people like an international law professor at Cambridge University saying this is a direct assault on the United Nations. This initiative is likely to be seen as a takeover of the world order by one individual in his own image. And they're right. This is being set up so that Trump just runs the show.

Where both the UN resolution and the charter names Trump is chair and the charter gives him the power to veto decisions approve the agenda, invite members, dissolve the board entirely, and designate his own successor. And on the topic of succession, it's possible that Trump could hold the chair position for the rest of his life, even after leaving the presidency. Or with a U.S. official saying the chairmanship can be held by President Trump until he resigns it. But adding a future U.S. president, however, may choose to appoint or designate the United States' representative to the board. Also, regarding who's on this board, while Trump has claimed that this is the greatest board ever assembled and everyone wants to be on it, the reality is that many countries, they're just not

enthusiastic about it. Right, one, while Trump said that the board is the backing of 59 countries, only 19 countries were actually represented at the signing ceremony. And so far, it seems like 25 countries have publicly accepted, including Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, and Indonesia, just to name a few. But also two, very notably, no major European allies have made a commitment yet, and some have just outright rejected the idea, including French President Emmanuel Macron. A move that then led to Trump threatening France with a 200% tariff on wine from the country. With that, I'll say, you know, some Europeans are on board, but it's also, so far at least a a certain kind of European.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has signed on. He's something of a Trump-style strongman himself. As well as president of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, who is also known as Europe's last dictator and he's a close ally of Putin. And actually on the note of Russia, they received an invitation with Trump actually claiming yesterday that Putin had accepted, but Putin has clarified that he has not,

and the Kremlin is still studying the proposal. You're seeing the involvement of Belarus and possibly Russia being why you had Zelensky saying that he was unsure if Ukraine could accept the invitation. As far as Trump, he defended his decision to include them and other countries considered to be autocratic telling reporters, I have some controversial people on it, but these are people that get the job done. These are people that have tremendous influence. Trump yesterday even said, sometimes you need a dictator.

You know, a very normal statement from the President of the United States, a position that is usually thought of as like the leader of the free world. So again, many of the world's most influential countries, at least so far, they're not taking part, including not only the biggest powers in Europe, but also countries like Brazil, China, India, and Japan. There's also been a lot of talk about the membership, because apparently that's flexible. Or because the Charter says that nations that accept the invitation will be given a three-year membership term. But the permanent membership, that don't only be given to member states that contribute more than a billion dollars in cash through the Board of Peace within the first year. With that, you had U.S. officials claiming that, technically, membership does not carry any mandatory funding obligation.

They're saying that if member states choose to contribute money, the Board of Peace will implement the highest financial controls and oversight mechanisms. You know, with that, it's not clear if anyone's opting for the paid tier so far, though I will say Putin has floated the idea of paying it with Russian assets that are frozen in the United States. And so also, it's still not entirely clear where the money is going to come from for rebuilding Gaza. Because even though Trump's so-called board a piece apparently has loftier ambitions, this is still seemingly its focus for now. And you actually had Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, laying out a $25 billion plan for doing so at the signing ceremony this morning. Or with Kushner saying the next 100 days will focus on increasing aid deliveries and rehabilitating essential infrastructure,

including water, electricity, and sewage systems, and reconstructing hospitals and bakeries. Then he also presented what's been described as a master plan that would turn Gaza into a futuristic tech and industry hub with skyscrapers and coastal resorts. And Kushner is saying that the White House wants to bring free market economy principles to Gaza, reflecting the same mindset and same approach that he says that Trump's implementing in the states. But of course, you know, while the people in charge here, they seem to see this as a big real estate opportunity. It's not clear that this is best for the people of Gaza. And the Palestinians, they seem to have little say. But they're supposed to be a technocratic governing committee made up of Palestinians, but it's at the bottom of the hierarchy. And for now, the situation in Gaza remains extremely dire, and the violence, it hasn't totally subsided.

Since the ceasefire began in October, you've had both sides accusing each other a violation. Israel's saying Hamas is delayed, returning a final body of a dead hostage, and Hamas saying that Israel has continued to restrict aid into Gaza despite an ongoing humanitarian disaster. Also, you've had Reuters investigating and finding that Israel's violated the ceasefire by moving the yellow line dividing Gaza deeper into the territory, destroying buildings and displacing Palestinians in the process. Also, that's as Israeli strikes have killed hundreds of Palestinians over the past few months, And in fact, just yesterday, Israeli forces reportedly killed at least 11 Palestinians in Gaza, including two 13-year-old boys and three journalists.

You know, ultimately, we're in this situation where people saying, you know, a bunch of world leaders and real estate developers calling themselves the Board of Peace. It doesn't make it so. And, you know, the whole thing, it seems especially ironic given Trump's recent action in Venezuela and the threats to take over Greenland. Although yesterday, you did have Trump threatening, but then also saying that he wouldn't use force in Greenland. And then he also dropped his threat to impose new tariffs on several European allies

as he claimed that he and the head of NATO had formed the framework. of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic region. And then today, you had Trump saying on Fox News that the deal essentially grants total access with no time limit. Right. And then with that, you've had the New York Times reporting that there are at least three main proposals on the table. One, a major new NATO mission in the Arctic. Two, restrictions on non-NATO countries, especially Russia and China, mining Greenland's rare

earth minerals. And three, an update to a 1951 pact between the United States and Denmark that basically already allows the American military to do whatever it wants in Greenland. But apparently the concern is that if Greenland gained independence, that it would threaten that access. So allegedly what's on the table is giving the United States sovereignty over pockets of Greenland's territory, basically meaning that these areas would be considered American territory. But, and that's a big BBL, but things are far from set in stone. And actually, you had Zelensky slamming European leaders today in a speech at Davos over their

handling over the whole situation. It seems like everyone is just waiting for America to cool down on this topic, hoping it will pass away. But what if will not? What then? Today Europe relies only on the belief that if danger comes, NATO will act. No one has really seen the alliance in action. If Putin decides to take Lithuania or strike Poland, who will respond? Europe needs to know how to defend itself. And if you send 40 or 40 soldiers to Greenland, What is that for?

What message does it send? Now, with all that, a very big thing is that he avoided criticizing Trump, and he actually kind of suggested that Europe should be more like Trump in terms of taking action, right, raising the possibility that they could seize Russian oil tankers the way that Trump's done with Venezuela. In fact, before that speech, you had Zelensky meeting with Trump, and it was a conversation that both leaders described as good without giving too much detail. But also you did have Trump envoy Steve Whitkoff,

who's also deeply involved in the Gaza stuff, saying, I think we've got it down to one issue and we have discussed iteration, of that issue and that means it's solvable. So with that, he's headed off to Moscow with Jared Kushner, to meet Putin, and there are now supposed to be trilateral talks involving the United States, Ukraine, and Russia, and the UAE on Friday and Saturday. Then, next up from that, we should jump back to the States because the federal investigation into Donald Trump developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity. Right, that is verbatim what former special prosecutor Jack Smith said under oath today before the House Judiciary Committee. And you know,

this hearing's a big deal because it marks Smith's first public appearance to defend his two attempts to criminally prosecute Trump for his alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the handling of classified documents. Smith, I mean, he's been under a gag order from a Trump appointed judge that prevents him from discussing major elements of the documents case, which is why lawmakers are largely avoided talking about the details of the probe. And so there were a lot of things discussed during the hours long hearing with testimony actually still happening while I'm finishing up recording. One of the main overarching themes was whether Smith's investigations were politically motivated or whether he had hard evidence that Trump committed crime. And so you had Republicans trying to paint the investigations as out of control political campaigns or part of a broader effort to weaponize the DOJ against Trump ahead of the 2024 election, whereas you then had Democrats largely using the hearing to give Smith a public stage to defend his

inquiries as legitimate and lay out Trump's alleged criminal actions in the cases that were shut down after he was reelected. And this is all very high stakes for Smith, right? Trump has made it very, very clear that he thinks Smith is one of his biggest political enemies, and Smith has said that he believes that the president is looking for any chance to investigate and prosecute it. Right, in his opening statement, you had Smith delivering powerful remarks that quickly went viral. Smith fervently defending his investigations, claiming that he and his team, politics, DOJ policies and observe legal requirements and argued that his actions were based entirely on facts and law, not political motivations.

President Trump was charged because the evidence established that he willfully broke the law, the very laws he took an oath to uphold. Rather than accept his defeat in the 2020 election, President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results and prevent the lawful transfer of power. After leaving office in January of 21, President Trump illegally kept classified documents at his Marilago Social Club and repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents. As I testify before the committee today, I want to be clear. I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.

If asked whether to prosecute a former president based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that president was a Democrat or a Republican. No one. No one should be above the law in this country and the law required that he be held to account. So that is what I did. To have done otherwise on the facts of these cases would have been to shirk my duties as a prosecutor and as a public. And something you saw throughout the hearing where Republicans trying to control the narrative, making a wide range of sweeping allegations and implications and at times using unproven, misleading, or just outright false allegations about Smith and the outcome of the 2020 election. Where with members, also repeatedly peppering Smith with rapid fire questions and then cutting him off when he attempted to respond. Whereas with the Democrats, you largely had them focusing on giving Smith that public platform to defend himself as an independent actor who was just doing his job and following the facts. And so you had multiple Democrats repeatedly asking Smith if he was pressured by Biden or anyone in his administration to launch

the investigations into Trump in order to target a perceived political enemy or sway the 2024 election. And time and time again, you had Smith responding, no, saying that he always acted independently and came to the decision to bring charges on his own accord based on the overwhelming evidence. And that was something you saw Smith reiterate during his notable exchange with Representative Ted Liu. Or anyone in the Biden White House ever direct you to seek retribution against anyone perceived to be Biden's political opponent. No. Did the Biden administration or President Biden or anyone in the White House ever write a social media post directing you to seek retribution against any particular individual?

No. Did President Biden or anyone else in the Biden White House ever directed you to take any prosecutor step whatsoever? No. With Lou, then going on a note that those are all things that Trump has done publicly arguing that it's ironic that Republicans are trying to claim that Smith was at the center of a broad conspiracy to weaponize the DOJ to go after Biden's opponents when that is exactly what Trump is doing. A point that Trump himself only affirmed by going to truth, social, and posting during the hearing where he literally said he hopes Attorney General Pam Bondi is investigating Smith, who he also called a deranged animal. Also during the

hearing, when asked about Trump's repeated threats against him, you had Smith giving this response. The statements are meant to intimidate me. I will not be intimidated. I think these statements are also made as a warning to others what will happen if they stand up. And I am, as I say, I'm not going to be intimidated. We did our work pursuant to department policy. We followed the facts and we followed the law. And that process resulted in proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed serious crimes. I'm not going to pretend that didn't happen because he's threatening me. But beyond that, we also saw Democrats spending a lot of time trying to prove that Trump knew that he lost the election and incited the insurrection because of it, which is notable because Smith would

have had to prove that Trump had intent in order to secure a conviction against him if the case had gone to trial. And there, you saw Smith repeatedly saying that his investigation found, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Trump knew his election fraud claims were false, he privately acknowledged so, but he still took illegal measures to overturn the election and then incited an insurrection when his attempts failed. And with that, you had Smith saying, based on his interpretation of the law, he believed that he had enough evidence to secure a conviction against Trump, and he repeated this line numerous times throughout the hearing. Our investigation revealed that Donald Trump is the person who caused January 6th, that it was foreseeable to him, and that he sought to exploit the violence.

And also during a line of questioning about what would happen to American democracy, if a president is not held accountable for trying to steal an election, Smith responded with a dire warning. My belief is that if we do not hold the most powerful people in our society to the same standards of the rule of law, it can be catastrophic. I think if we, don't hold people to account when they commit crimes, it sends a message that those crimes are okay, that our society accepts that. I believe that if we don't call people to account when they commit crimes in this context, it can endanger our election process, it can endanger election workers, and ultimately our democracy. But of course, you know, we're talking about

this a year into Trump's second presidency, and that second presidency is also ended. Smith's probe and so it seems unlikely that he'll ever be held accountable for his attempts to overturn the election. But then also, one of the big questions getting thrown around with this hearing is, will Trump be able to pull something out of Smith's testimony that he can use to go after him? Because that's exactly what he tried to do with James Comey. I mean, he had a loyalist prosecutor charged the former FBI director with making false statements and a testimony that he gave to the Senate. And while many, many, many legal experts say that the charges against Comey and Trump's other enemies, they're bogus, the fact of the matter remains that you have the

president itching for something that he can use against Smith. And so for now, whether there's really any basis for it or not? It really feels like more of a when he goes after Smith, not an if. And you know, Jack Smith, he's not the only person that congressional Republicans are putting in the hot seat right now because the House Oversight Committee just voted to recommend holding Bill and Hillary Clinton in contempt. And you actually had Democrats joining them in this effort, right? Because the Clintons, they refused to testify in the ongoing Jeffrey Epstein investigation, arguing that the subpoenas were invalid and legally unenforceable. Also, you have them noting that other officials have avoided testifying by submitting sworn statements. And since the Clintons provided

similar statements they think they should be excused as well, especially since they say they have no relevant information anyways. But members of the committee from both parties believe that the subpoenas were legal and that because Bill Clinton had ties to Epstein, they should testify. So the vote to hold Bill in contempt was 34 to 8, with nine Democrats joining Republicans and while fewer cross-party lines for Hillary, they still went in favor with a vote of 28 to 15. And with that you had Democratic Representative Stephen Lynch, who supported the Bill Clinton measure telling Axios that there is plenty of evidence that he might have information given the amount of times that he had flown or traveled with Epstein and since he knew Galane Maxxie. That said, as far as what happens next, right, the big thing is that this is just kind of the first step in what could be a very consequential proceeding for the Clintons Where the full house would have to vote in favor of this and then pass it over to the DOJ But contempt charges could actually land them up to a year behind bars and a hundred thousand dollar fine And while you had Republican committee chairman James Comer believing that he has the votes to move it forward

Still, you had some Democrats not supporting the effort Arguing that this is politically motivated Or with for example representative Robert Garcia saying that it's interesting that it's this subpoena only that Republicans and the chairman have been obsessed with putting all of their energy behind and adding Donald Trump is leading a White House cover-up right now of the Epstein files. And that is he had Rokana arguing that if anyone should be held in contempt, it's Attorney General Pam Bondi because her department hasn't released the files of compliance with the law that was passed last year. Which, I'll say on that note, Donald Trump, as administration, have done a really good job of distracting people.

Because we are now one month past the deadline set for Trump's DOJ to fully release the Epstein files. And we are nowhere near that actually happening. Right, nowhere near close to a full release. And so you had Kana, who co-authored the bill, calling this an obstruction of justice. And while he and Representative Thomas Massey also took it to the courts to try to force the release along, a judge issued a ruling that's mostly an L for them, right, denying their request to get an independent monitor to ensure that the DOJ complies with the law and releases the file, and the judge saying that he didn't have the authority to supervise the DOJ in this case. Though, we'll say, the judge also said that Kana and Massey raised legitimate concerns about whether DOJ is faithfully complying with federal law. And then with that, the judge said that they could file a separate lawsuit to request an independent monitor and they could use other congressional tools to add oversight to the DOJ. And so Yudana, saying they respect the judge's decision, and we will continue to use every legal option to ensure the files are released and the survivors see justice.

So that's also not where this whole situation ends, because you have the House Oversight Committee actually deposing Galane Maxwell next month. With that, I've got to warn you that right now it remains to be seen if this is actually going to be helpful. Or because Maxwell's attorney has already suggested she's keeping her mouth shut, saying this is not a negotiating position or a tactical choice. It is a legal necessity in saying that this deposition is a waste of taxpayer dollars in political theater. And the quote, the only certainty is a public spectacle in which a witness repeatedly invokes the Fifth Amendment. And as for any other details, we know, it appears that the deposition will be held virtually as Maxwell's currently in prison in Texas. But that, my friends, you beautiful bastards, is where your Thursday, Philip DeFranco show dive into the news is going to end.

Thank you for watching, thank you for subscribing, thank you for sharing, and thank you just for being you. I love you, old faces, and I'll see you right back here on Monday. Was that lame? Maybe. Whatever. I liked it.