37 Burst results for "DOJ"
Fresh update on "doj" discussed on CNBC's Fast Money
"Right now. Coming up. A pot plan on the hill. The cannabis legislation in the works that could have a big impact on the space around Tim Seymour will join us next to dig into the weeds on this one. We're back in two. Welcome back to fast money pop stocks higher today on reports that marijuana legislation could soon be making its way through the Senate a bipartisan group of lawmakers reportedly getting the green light by the Justice Department to allow cannabis companies access to banking institutions. The legislation, the result of pairing the safe banking and hope acts around Tim Seymour joins us on the fast line. Tim, I feel like we've been through this before. It's getting close. It's getting close. Is this even closer at this point? It is closer and again, this is not only bipartisan, but it's essentially buy camera. You've had both the House and the Senate and the House has already voted for this, but the Senate really is close. And as we all know with all legislation, lame duck is pretty chaotic and I think today going into the weekend, especially when Republican senators met with the DoJ who months ago had some questions about whether you could actually implement some of the necessarily expungement in criminal justice reform. That's a go. Axios over the weekend put out an article. That got the market very worked up. The market's already been worked up as the expectation is that we are close to something, but we have heard this before. I've been very skeptical on cannabis legislation passing. I think Schumer and Booker are much more reasonable in the ask. But a lot to jam in in a short amount of time. Yeah. In terms of the trade Tim, I have the socks pretty much made the move on the hopes of this already, which stocks do you think still could benefit? I mean, I understand that all of these stocks would benefit from more access to banking, but I'm sure some more than others. Well, the U.S. multi state operators are the ones that are in probably the most light here because of the impact this could have for not only the potential to these guys at some point be building upon lower cost of capital, possibly again, this legislation isn't about exchange listings, but it may be about the incremental dynamics that might even allow a lot of the institutional investors that watch our show be able to finally invest because they could get custody. I think if you've seen the move in the canvas markets over the last week or ten days, it's about a 20% move. I don't think these stocks have priced in, but I do think investors are properly cautious because we've heard a lot of this news before. Cannabis charts have bottomed in base for 6 months. They're all through the 200 day now. The moves over the last week have been on higher volume. And I think multiples and expectations are largely reset. So look, cure leaf truly GTI, these are three of the top positions in my cannabis ETF. And I do think that the entire U.S. sector will rally, although the Canadian stocks have been rallying along with the U.S. stocks. All right, Tim, thanks for phoning in. Thank you. And Seymour are resident cannabis king. Jeff mills with the passage of the safe banking act. Would that change anything for you in terms of investing in the space? I mean, it certainly will help, right? Because not all of these companies currently have access to capital. I think probably less companies go out of business. And obviously the ones that survive, I think, end up being in better shape from a fundamental standpoint. And that's critically important. But I think for this market right now, I think companies that can demonstrate either a path to profitability or a path to free cash flow. That's the critical moment where some of these companies get off the mat and to Tim's point, stop bottoming and actually move higher. I think that's the key right now. All right,
Fresh update on "doj" discussed on Stephanie Miller
"Says they love Hitler and also we should suspend the United States competition. Everyone. Everybody's the same. It's all the same. They're not dying. Wow, wow. Okay, Rob Reiner, uncle rob says, you know what I like about him is once you bring him out of his shell, he has a lot of thoughts. He really does very shy. But once he is reserved, he says, now the idiot wants to get rid of the constitution, so he can somehow, in his idiot world, be president. Republicans have thousands of chances to rid themselves of the idiot, but they just can't seem to find the courage to turn their backs on their idiot, racist base them. Okay. Uncle rob, come out of your shelf. What do you really think? No, I wish you would really love to know how he feels. Here's the tweet that maybe the happiest Joyce Vance our friend, our buddy, our legal lady. The chicken? Our chicken lady? Yes. Speaking of chicken, Chris. Not that way. Pet chickens, silky chickens. Chickens are delicious they're bastards. She tweeted Trump must be really scared about what the DoJ is learning about the classified documents he stole from The White House and kept at Mar-a-Lago, including the empty folders. I've reared
Bahamas AG Defends Its Crypto Savvy in Wake of FTX Crash
"To sum up where we left off, the last non interview show was Saturday November 19th. At that point, we had discussed how the $420 million meme raise went directly into Sam's pockets, how Sam's white collar crime lawyers had fired him as a client, how the SEC, the CFTC, and the DoJ all said their investigating, and how new CEO chief overseeing the restructuring John ray claimed that the bahamian bankruptcy was at odds with the U.S. process and further that given that The Bahamas asked for FTX to transfer some assets to them after the chapter 11 bankruptcy was declared that they might actively be compromised as well. And this gets us to one of the stranger dimensions of this whole conflict, which is the international dimension. On Sunday Night, Ryan pinder, who's The Bahamas attorney general, as well as the senator and the minister for legal affairs, made a national address detailing the nation's view of the FTX collapse. One might hope that he would use this as a chance to denounce the fraudulent practices that the company perpetuated. But, alas. That is not what we saw. Instead, pinder characterized the collapse as a quote insolvency crisis, which has been, quote, experienced around the world in practically every sector. He claimed the case should be properly understood as a quote very large business failure as a result of questionable internal management practices and corporate governance. He viewed the catalyst of the FTX collapse as the exchange suffering a liquidity crunch or a run on the bank. And of course, we've seen this framing in media sources as well. Basically blaming binance CEO CZ for instigating a bank run on a competitor and treating the collapse as a normal corporate failure rather than asking why FTX failed to be able to service customer withdrawals, especially given that their terms of service laid out the customer funds were held on trust rather than used for other purposes. Now, sidebar, this is one of the most important things to be paying attention to right now. As relating this entire situation. It is extremely clear that Sam is trying to turn this story his FTX story into one of managerial and competence rather than fraud and deception. This is to be clear another lie.
US DOJ Seizes 7 Seven Domain Names Used in “Pig Butchering” Crypto Schemes
"9 p.m. Wednesday, November 23rd, 2022. U.S. DoJ seizes 7 7 domain names used in pig butchering, crypto schemes. The U.S. attorney's office for the eastern district of Virginia has seized 7 domain names used in committing pig butchering cryptocurrency crimes.
Senators Demand Investigation Into FTX
"10 p.m. Wednesday, November 23rd, 2022. Senators demand investigation into FTX. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Sheldon whitehouse have demanded an investigation into FTX failure. Warren, White House demand DoJ action FTX could soon face further investigations. In a letter published today, senators
Who Is DOJ Special Counsel Jack Smith?
"What happened here In this case several years ago about The Republican governor Bob McDonnell who had a hell of a political career ahead of him Bob McDonald took a lot of gifts Mostly his wife did too At the time there was not a legal in the state of Virginia Was a wise No Did he commit a federal offense That's the issue The public integrity section of the criminal division of the United States Department of Justice was headed by this guy Jack Smith Jack smith's wife just done a documentary on excuse me Michelle Obama And is donated heavily to the Biden campaign So these are radical Democrats very very partisan You can assume this U.S. attorney or this head of the public integrity section is the same So what happened Well there's a definition in federal law in terms of bribes official bribes There's a definition for it In the bribery statutes in the interpretation of it Basically it's an official act The official act done on behalf of somebody as a result of receiving a gift a quid pro quo There is no evidence whatsoever The governor MacDonald had done an official act for anybody That there was any quid pro quo But that didn't stop Jack Smith the new special counsel investigating Trump From expanding it
Lawyer Sentenced to 15 Months for Fireboming NYPD Car
"I think most of you are familiar with the very famous Asian Indian prostitute, Uruguay, actually no, she's not a prostitute. She's a lawyer. I don't know if that's. I don't know if it's a big difference. Uru drama is a public interest lawyer in New York. And if it seems like I'm defaming our well, it's very well deserved. Why? Because this is the woman, the activist who firebombed a police cruiser during the 2020 George Floyd riots. She's one of these so called social justice warriors. And she was arrested and she was facing ten years in prison, which seems appropriate if you try to fire bomb a police vehicle. But the Biden administration decided to start protecting her. And pushing a judge and this is U.S. district judge Brian kogan of the eastern district of New York liberal Democrat to give this woman a very light sentence and in fact he did. So here's what she gets 15 months in prison. Wow. This is outrageous. You got January 6th defendants nonviolent who've done nothing who have comparable or worse sentences in this, not to mention this woman was never in solitary confinement, in fact, left wing activists came forward and put up money for her to be bailed. So she was given the opportunity to have bail. Why? Because she was not deemed to be a danger to society in the way that, let's say, just say some mom or grandmother or some guy in January 6th, there's a danger to society. We got to lock him up right now and keep him locked up until trial. Why? Because he's an election denier. Now, this woman Uruguay drama and her accomplice a guy named Colin Ford Mathis. These are people who they've been getting these glowing media profiles. And now they evidently have this kind of sweetheart deal with the Biden DoJ and with a judge going along. So, I mean, justice is really about proportionality, the it's not just so you get punished, but the punishment should bear some resemblance, some proportion to the offense.
Closing Arguments Are Underway in the Oath Keepers Sedition Trial
"Closing arguments are underway in the oath keepers sedition trial. And I haven't been watching the trial, but I'm keeping track of a sort of running account of it. That is it's been covered by two or three different people, including our friend Julie Kelly. And quite clearly what the government is doing and this does not surprise me at all, is giving a completely distorted picture of what was happening. Now, we have an adversary judicial system. So the prosecution is going to do this to the defense's job to counter it. But let's go through some of the claims that they're making in their closing statements because I think they're on the face of it. Exaggerated, if not, in some cases absurd. So the first one is they called for the violent overthrow of the U.S. government. Now that part I think is true because you're talking about people who are given to a hyperbolic rhetoric. Oh yeah, so we're gonna, this is, you know, we're gonna have a new American Revolution. So there is this kind of language. Granted, it by itself does not amount to any kind of conspiracy of heated rhetoric by itself amounted to sedition. You'd have to lock up half the country at some point or the other. What disturbs me more is when they say things like, here's the government. This is the Biden DoJ. They brought their weapons with them. Now the implication here is that the old keepers brought their weapons to Washington, D.C., but that is not true. They brought their weapons to Virginia and they left them in a hotel room or hotel rooms in Virginia, where it is legal to have those weapons. They were very conscious. Listen, we are not going to take our weapons where we will be an illegal possession of them in Washington, D.C.. So you can't have an insurrection in my view without weapons. If you take the weapons and you leave them in another state, what you don't have access to them, the statement they brought their weapons with them is false.
Sebastian and Jennifer Discuss Trump's Commitment to America
"An aspect of support for president Trump. And I don't get mushy here because I'll ruin my rep. But it's not just about the policies and making a rational political decision. My God, his commitment to this nation, and he said it yesterday, he said, I was living a very happy life before I was president. I don't need to do this again. The only reason because he's losing money, he's being attacked constantly, he's paying millions in legal fees because the DoJ is coming after him, the southern district of New York. Jen, I want to support a man who's doing this because he loves America. Why is that wrong? Yeah, I think that people get it really wrong with him. And I have never, I mean, I've had dinner in the same room with president Trump, Ben de Mar-a-Lago, never met him and spent a lot of time with him. But I'm telling you that the gut instinct that I have with him is that he doesn't need to do this. I think that, yes, he has a big ego like everyone else in politics and everybody else that runs big businesses. But I don't think he's running, and I don't think he ran before to feed that. What I think is that he really believes that this country can be great. He sees the potential in America. He loves the country, and he knows that he can lead us in the right direction, and I really believe that he is running for all the right reasons. This is not for a book deal. This is not to become a television producer like the obamas. This is because he really believes that he can make a difference. And I'm all on board. And as far as Ron DeSantis goes and I know we're going to get to this, I really think so much of what's been going on is a construct of the mainstream media and these never trumpers who would like nothing more than to blow Trump out of the water because they're afraid of the backbone that he has.
Rep. Andy Biggs: The Priorities of a Republican-Led House
"And then what do you want that fight to look like What should the priorities of a Republican led House be So the first fight is you've got to use every tool that you have So you have to leverage to reduce spending because that attacks with attack inflation You have to leverage to reduce oil and gas prices And because that would help all Americans get back to living their lives the way that they would like to live them But then you also have to do things that bring the border close the border with these guys want to have Amnesty Chuck Schumer just said basically said he actually advocated the replacement theory today or yesterday without even realizing which we were told you're terrible if you say but he can say it Weird world we live in congressman But yes historic carry on could continue talking about the priorities So you're dealing with the policy side but that's going to take leverage to get there And so you need a speaker who's going to have the courage to use those leverage points Then on the other hand you've got to hold them accountable like the judiciary and oversight send them both of those committees And oversight we announced yesterday we're going to investigate Joe Biden using evidence that we've already been receiving and from whistleblowers And Jim Jordan is probably going to be the chair of judiciary And we're working on the DoJ And the FBI and how they've been weaponized to attack for political purposes Their political enemies I mean this has got to stop and that and Jim is told he told the public yesterday and he told me privately told others privately that means we're going to follow wherever it leads to to reveal what the DoJ and the FBI has done to abuse their power against their political opponents And those things right there that has to happen And then of course you have to do COVID You have to get to the origins of COVID You have to do that
Trump Attorney Alina Habba on Trump's New Campaign Announcement
"Now is alena haba, who is the attorney for president Donald Trump, lots to ask her about. Welcome back to the program. Hey Charlie, how are you? Very good. Thank you. So the president announced for his third time for his second term to try to get his second term back, I guess I could say. What does this change legally? It's been such a topic of the mainstream media with all the investigations, what does this change if anything? Obviously not much. I know that there's speculation that it will change the optics of the DoJ or the FBI in terms of putting in any additional investigations or bringing any charges. But I think that that's a very dated thought. I think that the DoJ and the FBI that we're seeing these days don't really care. Especially when it relates to Trump. So I honestly nothing. I know that it makes it politically charged that appearance if they do bring something, but that doesn't really matter. I can tell you, you know, all of my cases are still going and are very active and there's been absolutely no change in directions since you announced.
Finally, Great News for Mayor Giuliani and Victoria Toensing
"Jennifer, Victoria town Singh, welcome back to mark the first one on one. Oh, it's always great to be back here. Need to be with you. Why was anybody surprised at president Trump made that announcement? Before yesterday. I mean, people were asking me, is he going to is he yeah, he's going to. Of course. You guys would have surprised, right? No, no, not at all. All right, let's start with some very, very good news that we managed to preview yesterday before you're right. You got some very good. Well, you didn't receive good news indirectly you found out about some good news concerning you in America's mayor. So please share. My lawyers got a letter that the case was over. It was oh, good. So tell us what happened to you and how it all fell apart for Biden's DoJ. Yeah, let me give you a quick background. In 2019, Rudy Giuliani called me and said, I'd like you to represent the prosecutor general, which is like the equivalent of attorney general. Of Ukraine because he's coming to me for representation. I have conflict. I represent Trump, but would you please do it? Because he wants to provide evidence of Biden, family corruption in Ukraine, and also Victor shoken, who Biden got fired because he was investigating burisma and Hunter Biden. That absolutely infamous moment, that video whereby he says. I'm going to hold back this $1 billion credit loan from America unless you fire Victor shokin and then Biden says son of a gun. He fired him. So so clever. So they were coming to say Biden's corrupt. And at that time, Rudy and I didn't think Biden would run because of all of this stuff that we had. And then representation never came through because there were threats and we were going to go to Ukraine to talk with them and the U.S. ambassador. Yovanovitch said she wouldn't protect us if we came. And so forth. So the U.S. ambassador said you're on your own. Right. And there's threats against you. The same U.S. ambassador, by the way, I'm sorry. That's the fight. We're going down rabbit warrens already, but the same use ambassador who we found out illegally tasked the State Department to monitor the social media council. And including my account, John Cena. John Solomon, Donald Trump Jr.'s because I guess that's what the State Department does monitor U.S. citizens. So what did that all develop into? So I didn't think anything more of it. They representation never came through. And I continued with my life. And so you can imagine my surprise. In April of 2021, when Merrick Garland and Chris ray sent the FBI to my house, our
Jim Hanson and Kash Patel Assess Kevin McCarthy's 'Backbone'
"Now looking at the house and Kevin McCarthy. And I think that's a fair statement you made that he understands what time it is in his caucus in the House. We've got essentially we've got, like you said, subpoenas and investigations and those kind of things. And potentially he should be open to impeaching someone like Mallorca. It's a waste of time to impeach Biden. We should leave him there. But what about the power of the purse? Has Kevin McCarthy got the backbone to shut down the government if that's what it takes? Well, I think that's the extreme measure and hopefully he does, but here's the incremental measure. We did it during Russia gate, right? When we issued subpoenas to get the DoJ and FBI to cooperate and provide us documents, they stonewalled us. They being rod Rosenstein and Chris wray, who still is head of the FBI. What do we do? We did this maneuver, which is only possible in the budgeting process of Congress. It's called fencing. And you literally put up a proverbial fence around pockets of money from the FBI DoJ because Congress has that authority. So you don't have to seize the government from operating. But the second we took their money, which we have to remind your audience is American taxpayer money. And we said, we're taking X millions and we're putting it on hold until you turn over the documents. You know what I got the next morning? Thousands of dollars. Three O twos. The corruption at that fisa court. The fisa applications themselves. The exposure of Christopher Steele and how he was a fraudulent confidential human source in the FBI knew that. So Paul Ryan only let us do this once a speaker. What I hope Kevin McCarthy lets the chairs do unilaterally without going to him begging for it is use this maneuver every single day.
Trump Keeps Confessing to Crimes With Glenn Kirschner
"This is how we know God loves us and wants us to be happy is because Trump has committed more crimes since we booked you yesterday. So what is it? Yeah. Yeah, good morning, Steph, and how about we see some indictments for some of these guys? Yeah. Yeah. I think Joyce fans said the best part of social media is the confessions. With Trump always I mean, and again, I know he's a notorious liar, but I mean, what do you make? I don't know if it's part of him trying to burn Ron desantis and the Republican Party to the ground or, you know, but obviously that needs to be investigated, right? It does. And it needs to be invested in the Department of Justice actually has no choice because once they have been attacked and it's been alleged that DoJ was part of Trump's efforts to unlawfully interfere in the Florida election. Let me tell you, DoJ has absolutely no discretion. They have to look into it if only to debunk it. Right. So another good development, something else that needs to be investigated.
Caller Reports That a Candidate Was Missing on His Ballot
"Sal have you been out to vote yet? Yes, I was into this morning. And a candidate that I wanted to vote for was not on my ballot. Well, who are you trying to vote for? Amy, Jennifer white, she's running for House Senate seat against Teresa piers, Democrat. And I asked the gentleman after I put my ballot in the box, I told them my candidate that I wanted to vote for was none of my ballot. And he didn't have an explanation. When I got home, I called the town manager left the voicemail. I called you a show, spoke to grace. I called my local TV station W CSH. They got back to me and gave me the name of John Osborne of the DoJ. I spoke to him, he told me to call a Secretary of State, which I did. I spoke to two people there with no satisfaction. I called the FBI. I was on hold for 20 minutes. Never got through. I talked to the Jennifer white office. And ray ritcheson, I couldn't reach, but something is wrong, okay? Now, if I were you, I would call her campaign office and let her know about that. I mean, if there's a candidate, if there's a candidate on the ballot or who's supposed to be on the ballot and her name is not on the ballot, that is something that I would be fired up as if I were a candidate. So my encouragement to you, Sal, reach out to the campaign, and let's see, let's see what they tell you.
"doj" Discussed on Business Wars Daily
"From 1°, I'm David Brown and this is business wars daily on this November 7th. Happy Monday, everyone. Last week, a federal judge handed down a ruling that could have big implications for the world of book publishing. The decision could impact what manuscripts actually end up being published. And also how much compensation authors make from their published works. But let's back up a bit, okay? For the past several years, the book publishing industry has been getting bigger and bigger, while also getting smaller and smaller. What I mean is major players in the space have been on a tear of acquisitions. Take hachette book group, for example, hashat is currently the third largest trade publisher in the U.S., and it got that way by acquiring other smaller companies, a lot of them. Last fall we told you how a shed required workman publishing the house behind such classics as what to expect when you're expecting. They closed the deal for $240 million, and that acquisition was the 6th by hachette in the previous 8 years. Quite a spree you might say. But as yet not the publishing house making headlines for its acquisitions lately. That company would be penguin random house, the biggest book publisher in the United States. But perhaps being the biggest publisher isn't quite enough for Penguin Random House. It wants to be even bigger. For the past two years, it's been trying to acquire rival publishers Simon and Schuster. The plan was for penguin to acquire Simon and Schuster for over $2 billion. And that would have all been well and good. Except that last fall, the Department of Justice stepped in and said, hold your horses. The DoJ sued to block the deal between the two mega publishers claiming that too much consolidation in publishing was bad for authors and in turn bad for consumers. Right now 5 publishing houses make up 90% of the market for bestselling books in the U.S., according to the LA times. If penguin were to acquire Simon and Schuster, that merger alone would control 50% of the book market. And that, the DoJ argued, would mean that authors would receive smaller advances and worse contract deals. And if compensation for authors were reduced, the DoJ went on, the quality of books published, would go down, which they said in so many words is bad for anyone who loves to tuck into a good book. The DoJ had a star witness on its side, horror author Stephen King, who testified that the merger would be bad for book riders, especially. Those just starting out, according to The New York Times. King took a contrary position to his publisher, which is part of Simon and Schuster. The publishers, for their part, said in their pre trial briefing that the merger would quote incentivize other publishers to compete even harder for consumer attention. The LA times noted that the publishers argument relied on a common piece of logic in publishing that if publishers consolidate, they can better take on the growing dominance of Amazon in book selling. Wondering, by the way, is owned by Amazon. Well, last week a decision in that case was finally handed down. Penguin Random House can not acquire Simon and Schuster after all. Judge Florence pan agreed with the DoJ that the merger would lessen competition in the industry. The DoJ said the decision was a win for authors and readers alike, but Penguin Random House has already said it will appeal the decision. So buckle up folks, the chapters of this multiyear battle are still being written, and we can't say for sure who, publishers or the authors and readers who rely on them, will have the happiest of endings. From wondering, this is business wars daily. I'm your host David Brown written and produced by Jessica yoro masky. Our executive producers aretino Rubio and Marshall Louis. A mysterious death happened in April 2022 in Lynchburg, Virginia. Johnny cashman's mother, who lived far away in Maine, hadn't heard from her son in a few days and started to worry. It wasn't like him. She asked the police to go to his house for a welfare check, where they found Johnny on his back with pools of blood around him. His death was quickly ruled a medical issue, and the case was closed. But the family was suspicious and demanded an autopsy. They were denied, being told to trust the system, but when Johnny's ex-girlfriend entered his apartment a few days after he was cremated, it was obvious his death was not a medical issue. There was blood everywhere. The bathroom looked like a murder scene. The generation Y podcast has spent the past ten years breaking down cases like Johnny cashman's, diving deep into the details, and combing through all the evidence to find out what really happened..
Robby Starbuck Unpacks the Censorship Efforts of the Biden DHS
"Now is Robbie starbuck, great guy who should be in Congress and we'll see if we can get that done one day, but he has some really important commentary and information to share about the bombshell story, the media has ignored of the Department of Homeland Security leaks, Robbie joins us now. Robbie, welcome back to the program. Thanks for having me, Charlie. Good to see you. Robbie, for those in our audience that are not caught up to date to this story because there just got a lot of things going on. We've been so focused on the election, which is where we should be focused. Walk us through this story. Yeah, so I mean, it's pretty wild. This is honestly groundbreaking in many different ways in terms of the lines crossed by the U.S. government, but essentially Department of Homeland Security and State Department, both coordinated with a group called the EIP, which stands for the election integrity partnership. It's composed of four entities. Those four entities have been given over $12 million in grants by the Biden administration, including over 3 million specifically earmarked for going and fighting misinformation through the EIP and as a part of this whole project. The EIP created an enemy's list that includes you and me and about 20 other people on it. What's unique about this list is when they made this, I was an active candidate for federal office. So this would be the first time the U.S. government has essentially engaged in open censorship paying a group and outside group to go and get involved in a political race. I'm sure given all the abuses we've seen from the FBI and DoJ that this is stuff that may have been going on for a very long time without people knowing, but they did this in a very bold manner. And so we saw the story from the intercept this week that kind of furthered this showing the portals that DHS and other entities had access to and these portals would allow outsiders within the EIP and within governments to go and make specific requests to the social media companies.
Kyle Seraphin: The Government Is Famous for Mission Creep
"I think what you and I are uncomfortable with And the listening audience is the abridgment of free speech portion clearly prohibited by the First Amendment It's obvious you haven't been in former FBI agent with a gun in a shield and a commission book that if you are emailing Twitter and even winking and nodding like hey this account's saying some stuff we really don't like whether criminal or not that you're not speaking as Kyle seraphin you're speaking as former FBI agent Kyle seraphin That's a whole different ball game That's right So I kind of drew this little this path And the government is famous for mission creek That's the military term for it It's always looking for that reason to have funding and to exist Some people remember that the ATF almost got disbanded in the 90s and they went out and found a mission set and they joined the Department of Justice They haven't always been a DoJ entity And all government agencies sort of have that instinct It's just people want to keep their job and they want to justify what they're doing So the first thing that this sort of this process it happened in 2016 and I think Trump broke a lot of people's minds when he was elected so they started looking for information This information from a foreign entity And so that's part one But it leads you to advocacy of that position and that it shouldn't exist and that we should do something about it because people in the government they need to first gather information but then they need to advocate And so that leads to research to justify the budget and that advocacy eventually leads to trying to quell the quote unquote threats that they find and then they have to maintain their appearance They have to improve their work so they need metrics to be able to measure it And so this entity just grows out of control from a not a terrible idea which is to see what is the exposure that we have to foreign this information And suddenly we realize now they're looking at domestic information And so that's really where that dangerous creep happens
The Left Is Very Bitter About the SCOTUS Dobbs Decision...
"The left is very bitter about the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision overruling roe versus wade. And they're trying to do whatever they can in a desperate, angry way to strike out, to lash out in every direction. Now, the Biden DoJ is arresting pro lifers, accusing them of violating the so called face act, the face act basically by obstructing or by blocking access to abortion clinics. Again, the left does this all the time. They do this on campus. They do it elsewhere. They are either not arrested or they are arrested and released immediately, but these pro lifers are facing long prison terms. So this is the deep inequity of injustice, the deep inequity of our society, and here we see the left in a different way trying to go after justices. Now, we've seen how they have protested at their homes. They've chased them out of restaurants, but now they're trying to get their books canceled. Wow, this shows the extent of it. So Amy Coney Barrett has a book contract with penguin random. This is Random House merger with penguin books. And it's apparently $2 million book advance for Amy Coney Barrett to tell her story and to lay out her judicial philosophy. And but there is a revolt in the publishing world. Several hundred, it turns out the number originally was a couple of hundred now it's over 600 publishing industry staffers. By the way, not just from Penguin Random House, but from all kinds of other publishers, Simon and Schuster, and Harper Collins, McMillan, they've all written a joint letter. Basically asking the publishing house not to publish Amy Coney Barrett's book to cancel the book.
What Can Be Done About DOJ Corruption? President Trump Weighs In
"The big question. What can be done with the corruption at the DoJ, the FBI after multiple impeachments against yourself that failed the Mueller probe? I designed this a few weeks ago. My producers said it was excessive. It is now the hottest selling item on our website. It is a mug that says, Biden's Gestapo, the FBI. Can it be fixed with a new director, or do we have to scrap it? Well, we have no choice. If we don't fix it, you're not going to have a country left anymore because our country, we're not a confident country anymore. And we always had a law enforcement system that we thought, and you know, if you go back to the local level and the police and the job they've done, even there, they've taken their authority away. So the opposite. They've taken their authority away. And we have crime in these Democrat run cities. We have crime, like nobody's ever seen before. People being pushed randomly from the subway trains that are coming down at rather rapid speeds. Look, what's going on is just not even thinkable. I just saw that and I'm not sure this is possible, but I'm just seeing that truth to vote two of the people were arrested. Catherine, engelbrecht, who, as you know, is a fantastic woman. Have you seen that? This morning, I mentioned it 7 a.m. thanks to a corrupt judge in Houston, both Catherine engelbrecht, the heroine and the hero of 2000 mules her partner Greg Phillips were arrested for refusing to give up their source for the Chinese company that was taking election data to Mainland China. Is this fixable? Because I know you have great respect for both Catherine and Greg. They were central to the national film. This shouldn't be happening in America. And the job they did was on tape. It's not like, oh gee, they made something up. I mean, they have cameras. Government cameras taking nobody bothered to go look at the tapes, right? But they have government cameras that have it absolutely on tape. The job they've done. And then you say, well, how come they don't do this with the leaker? The leaker of the Supreme Court, because if you went and got to that reporter, that's a terrible thing that happened. It puts our justices at tremendous risk and that continues. So they can't find the liquor. It's very easy to find the leaker. If you did the same thing to the reporter, as you did to Catherine engelbrecht, who's a great woman, you say, we want to know who the leaker was because the leaker gave the story to this reporter.
DOJ Raises Threat of ‘Selective Enforcement’ Against Red States
"The administration knows what it is doing I guarantee you it is targeting Republican areas and Republican precincts And this is nothing more than intimidation by the Biden administration during the midterm election I'm telling you this Department of Justice is the most contemptible Political rogue operation We've ever seen Ever seen And it is hiding the ball Hiding the ball people want to know where exactly well they're investigators and prosecutors be looking They won't say So that tells you what the goal is here is to intimidate Republican voters Woodson's group has been trying for months to force DoJ to hand over its strategic plan For implementing Biden's executive order and voting access FGH sued for access to the plane so far justice has only released a heavily redacted copy which and said DoJ's broad explanation of its plan this week still falls short of details FDA's looking for and said the department is still failing to be transparent about its actions less than two weeks before the election Said the limited information the OJ is released amounts to a warning to red states that their processes could be picked apart by the Department of Justice
"doj" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Of his mouth. No, there is no evidence whatsoever that the barrel of the gun was inside of his mouth. Who wrote this? This was the Department of Justice's civil rights division. Is this a person who's trained at all in forensic pathology? Because it doesn't seem like it. JJ explains again that the DoJ had forensic pathologists review the autopsy. Could you the highlighted section right there? Yeah, yeah. It kind of explains their analysis. Could you read? Sure. Sure. It says they disagreed significantly regarding the entrance site exit site and path of travel. And determined that it was an intra oral shotgun wound to the head, meaning that the muzzle of the gun was in his mouth. And that the manner of death should have been a suicide. Heavy soot deposition and injuries to the tongue indicate that the muzzle of the weapon was located in the mouth when the shotgun was actually fired. Yeah, I disagree with that. So the DoJ report says the soot on Billie Joe's tongue is one reason why they think the gun was inside his mouth. We sit in doctor Lewis office in silence while she looks to the DoJ's findings. Huh. This did not have the typical appearance of an intra oral shotgun wound. At all. And I have autopsied several of those. I don't agree with your interpretation. So we were trying to figure out what why this discrepancy, like how could two different pathologists just look at the same thing and come up with completely different conclusions. And we should say that you actually saw the body. Right. They did not. Correct. They are basically doing a paper review. Yeah, and they're looking at the looking at the photographs. And the x-rays and all of that. I think that if my understanding of reading that is sort of the soot on the tongue made them think that it was an indoor oral. In any case, so we reached out to a bunch of different pathologists like Judy melanic in San Francisco and James Lawrence and Alabama and such. And they kind of all came to the conclusion that the most likely scenario was the DoJ's. Really? That it wasn't oral shotgun in the brow was an inside. I believe doctor Lawrence said it was a fact, not a theory. Okay. I just wonder what you make of that. Does that at all make you reconsider your findings? I'd be happy to go back and reconsider it and look at the look at the photographs again and reconsider it that way, sure. The case is never closed. Doctor Lewis didn't elaborate on why she disagreed with the independent pathologist main claim. That the gun was in Billy Joe's mouth because of those soot marks. And that the hole in his head was an exit wound, not the entrance wound like she thought. You testified in the grand jury. I did. And you basically testified to sort of what you just said here. Yes. And they ruled ultimately that it was an accidental shooting that for some reason he was reaching for the gun at accidentally discharged and it went off. If it was if the barrel was inside of his mouth. How does that square with the idea of accidental? It doesn't. If the barrel was in his mouth, it's a suicide. If the barrel was in his mouth and he intentionally fired the weapon, it was a suicide. Then does that then negate the grand jury's findings that it was well, you know, the manner of death is a medical opinion. So I guess what you're asking is, if the gun was in his mouth, could it still be called an accident? Or could be a homicide? It could be a homicide if someone else fired the gun while the barrel was in his mouth. It's quite unusual to have an unimpaired adult die of a homicidal intra oral gunshot wound or shotgun wound. It's possible. It's possible. If doctor Lewis was wrong about the gunshot wound and based on our experts and the DoJ that seems a real possibility, then that brings into question the grand jury's conclusion that it was an accidental shooting, which would leave only two possible scenarios, either Billy Joe Johnson intentionally killed himself. Or he was murdered. Knowing how he died matters. If he was my family member, I would want to know. If he was yours, you would want to know. We
"doj" Discussed on The Larry Elder Show
"They want to purge local law enforcement as the good guys. It's unbelievable. It's unbelievable. The war in charge Mike with a mark with violating the freedom. That's what it is. The freedom of access access to clinic entrances act. So that's what face stands for. Freedom of access to clinic entrances act. Now, here's what happened. Basically Mark had gone to downtown Philadelphia area and there was a very now vile nasty man screaming at him marked him pay any attention to it until the guy came up to his son and started calling him him and his son all types of names. The guy even told his son, hey, your father is a faggot and all this kind of stuff. Just being just being extremely vile. And there were other things that he caught the sun and the father that he could not that they could not convey. It was so despicable. But the man got right into his son's his kids face. And when he did, he pushed the guy aside. The guy happened to fall as a result of that because the guy was coming towards his kid. So when the father pushes the man back, the man happens to fall and this was apparently the guy had tried to press charges that's had gone to a district court as a matter of fact. The charges were charges were dropped. The case was thrown out. So this happened a couple of years ago, by the way. And so now the DoJ resurrects it and says, wait a minute, this guy violated the freedom of access to a clinic entrances act because he was in front of an abortion clinic. Now, the guy wasn't on the abortion clinics property. He was on, he was on city property, basically. But the left is going after whom they can. Now, who's the real enemy? See, the real enemy you guys might think the real enemy is, you guys might think the real enemy is this pro life advocate. And yes, to some degree you would be right, but the real enemy is God. See, God is the enemy of the Marxist. God is the enemy of the communists. What are the building blocks of society? The family, the church, a government, hopefully government that obtains or upholds the rule of law. Rather than overreaches like our current federal law enforcement does and labor. In labor, so you have to have those. You have to have people that work, you have to have a government system and place that's fair. To everyone, obviously the family is the best structure known to man for building civilized society and the church. The church is there not only to keep us moral to keep pointing us back to God to make sure that our lives are balanced and we're helping those that are in need we're helping those that are less fortunate and we remember our place and our duties on this earth. So the left wants to tear down all of those and they are working to do it. This is what the communists have to do. This is what the marxists have to do. That's why they're coming for you. This isn't just about a man that happens to be a sidewalk preacher or counselor. But what scares me or what's disconcerting to me is that they're doing this and they're ignoring the real issues, the real threats that we're going to experience had to breitbart..
"doj" Discussed on CNN Political Briefing
"We also learn this week that the Defense Department wiped the phones of top departing DoD and army officials at the end of the Trump administration, deleting any texts from key witnesses to events surrounding the January 6th attack on the capitol. That is according to court filings in a lawsuit against the Defense Department brought by a watchdog organization. CNN is also learned from two sources familiar with the matter that the Secret Service is thinking about potentially changing its current policies and may also temporarily disable text messaging on employees cell phones. The agency has said it cooperated with the inspector general and the allegation that it maliciously deleted these text messages that is a false allegation and that the texts were only lost during routine phone replacement for their agents and staff. It's unclear what any text messages said, but as the panel and agencies conduct their own investigations into exactly what happened on the 6th, any information obviously would be useful to help peace everything together. And it clearly raises a ton of questions as to why these messages around this critical moment in time have disappeared. That's it for today's political briefing. Thanks so much for listening and please take a moment and be sure to follow us wherever you get your podcasts. We'll talk to you tomorrow. I'm David axelrod, CNN, senior political commentator, former senior adviser to president Obama and host of the axe files podcast. This week marks a milestone for the axe files as we celebrate 500 episodes. I'm honored to mark the occasion with singer songwriter and activist John Legend. You can hear our conversation by listening to the axe files wherever you get your podcasts.
"doj" Discussed on CNN Political Briefing
"Hey everyone, I'm David challenging, the CNN political director, this is the CNN political briefing. Here's what you need to know in politics for Thursday, August 4th. This is probably bad for former president Trump. I mean, that might be an understatement, as the Department of Justice's latest subpoenas signal that investigators have reached inside Trump's inner circle. Obviously, the select committee on Capitol Hill investigating the events leading up to January 6th, the events of the day itself that insurrection that occurred at the capitol have been very public. It's been the very outward facing part of looking at what occurred at that historic moment and yet what we are learning now is there is as robust an operation that has been largely happening behind the scenes at DoJ that is now creaking into public view. So keep in mind everything that the committee on Capitol Hill has put forth in their public hearings has been obviously quite compelling, a timeline of what occurred, a lot and lots of testimony from Trump aides, not these are not political enemies of Donald Trump in any way, who are stringing together the narrative of what went on between election day and the 6th of January. But what we're seeing happening at a courthouse in Washington, D.C. we are seeing people coming into provide testimony in a Department of Justice, grand jury probe into these very same events, and obviously a criminal probe from the Department of Justice carries far more significant consequences than public congressional hearings, right? The role of Congress may be to make some recommendations or referrals. The role for the prosecutors at the Department of Justice is to bring criminal charges and get convictions. And the latest moves from DoJ could not be more threatening to Donald Trump. Former White House counsel pat cipollone and his former deputy council, Patrick philbin, have both been subpoenaed by the federal grand jury. That's according to sources familiar with the matter. Philbin did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A source familiar with the cipollone matter said that cipollone and his attorneys are now in discussions about an appearance before this federal grand jury, including how to deal with executive privilege issues. Now, both cipollone and philbin spoke to the House select committee and we know through their testimony that has been revealed publicly that they were present for some very chaotic moments in the aftermath of the 2020 election. Cipollone was a top voice among a chorus of Trump aides who testified up at the congressional committee, saying that Trump was repeatedly told that there was no evidence that the election was stolen. And yet, there was a real question in my mind and a real concern, particularly after the attorney general had reached the conclusion that there was a sufficient election fraud to change the outcome of the election. When other people kept suggesting that there was the answer is what is it? And at some point you have to put up or shut up. That was my view. You may recall there has been quite a bit of criticism of DoJ through much of this year when it comes to this matter, whether Democrats on the hill did not believe Merrick Garland was being aggressive enough or even some Republicans like kinzinger and Cheney who were on the January 6th committee who had concerns about the pace of any potential DoJ investigation into all of this. Well, now that we see that Trump's White House counsel and his deputy have been subpoenaed, this DoJ investigation has clearly reached not just inside the west wing. But basically to the door of the Oval Office. I mean, we're talking about very senior people around president Trump. Here's Republican Adam kinzinger, who serves on the January 6th committee with his take on what these developments mean. It shows that this is more than what did John eastman do attorney that basically came up with that crazy scheme to overturn the election. And it probably is a very deep interest in what the president did. We'll see where this goes, but there's no doubt that this investigation has developed further one than where we either knew it was or thought it was a few months ago. Now, attorney general Merrick Garland has repeatedly made clear. No person is above the law in this country. I can't say any more clearly than that. There is nothing in the principles of prosecution in any other factors which prevent us from investigating anyone. Anyone who is criminally responsible for an attempt to undo a democratic election. And that clearly includes former president Trump in the mind of the attorney general. And he's been clear that it is the law and nothing else that will guide his team of prosecutors and investigators through this process. He was pressed today at DoJ by a reporter if a window exists, a window of time to bring about any charges, given the political calendar this fall. This is something I can't comment about. I'm sorry. Now, all of this is happening, of course, as Donald Trump himself is weighing whether or not to announce a third bid for the presidency this fall and whether that should happen before the midterm elections or maybe after the midterm elections, though there's no indication from Garland or anyone else at DoJ that whether or not Donald Trump is a presidential candidate again is going to impact the department's decisions around any charges that may get brought from this grand jury process. And more and more information keeps coming out, whether through the January 6th committee through reporting through court filings, all while the DoJ criminal investigation is proceeding. The latest developments that we've learned about in recent days are dealing with the missing text messages from government phones during that period around the 6th of January of 2021. You may recall the Secret Service has been under heavy criticism after the Department of Homeland securities inspector general told Congress last month that the agency had a race text messages from the time period surrounding January 6th that had been requested by Congress. We're finding out today through an agency memo that DHS will immediately stop wiping mobile devices of high level officials and political appointees without backing them up and will launch a 30 day review of policies and practices for retaining text messages and other electronic messages.
"doj" Discussed on WSJ What's News
"Sprayed with tear gas and bear spray and being beaten with flag poles and a mob just sort of tearing through the halls of Congress, even today there are really no adequate words for it. And a year later, federal prosecutors have charged more than 700 people with crimes yesterday, attorney general Merrick Garland spoke about the DoJ's investigation. We understand that there are questions about how long the investigation will take and about what exactly we are doing. Our answer is and will continue to be the same answer we would give with respect to any ongoing investigation. As long as it takes and whatever it takes for justice to be done, consistent with the facts and the law. Those were the AGs first extended remarks about the department of justices strategy. What else can you tell us about that strategy and what's been happening at DoJ over the past year? Well, most significantly what we heard from Garland yesterday was that the Justice Department is far from done charging people responsible for the riot, and he made it clear that that would not just be lower level sort of foot soldiers who stormed the building, but also anyone else who instigated the attack from afar, which of course Democrats and some Republicans hope means former president Trump and his associates. But Garland didn't mention them by name, and he stressed that this is a massive and resource intensive investigation. He said it's not going to materialize overnight and that prosecutors are still following leads, and he also noted that, like in most major cases, prosecutors are working on charging smaller, sort of more straightforward cases before moving into more complex cases. And we have seen that playing out in court with prosecutors obtaining guilty pleas in mostly misdemeanor cases, but also some felonies and the trials are just beginning. So Garland stressed that the Justice Department has made quite a bit of progress so far and they're not done yet. At the same time, the Justice Department has been facing criticism over its handling of the prosecutions, including from some Democrats who say the department isn't moving fast enough to prosecute and taking too narrow of a view of possible crimes alleged perpetrators may be charged with. What are you hearing from critics? It's been interesting to see Democrats criticize Garland for not moving swiftly enough to indict Trump and Trump associates. People who Democrats believe had a role in inciting the riot. Some Democrats have criticized Garland, calling him weak, others have said that the Justice Department should be focusing on bigger broader cases. Republicans in contrast, particularly those who are supporters of the former president, have said that this is a politically motivated attack on their party and to some extent they think the Justice Department's investigation is not legitimate. Let's talk about changes at law enforcement and intelligence agencies in the wake of the attack several reports found the capitol police were understaffed and didn't have the necessary equipment to protect the capitol. The agency's inspector general recommended over a hundred changes. Can you talk about some of the biggest for the capitol police and the Department of Homeland Security? Yes, well, at the capitol police, which is really the agency that is born the brunt of the attack, officials are starting to slowly put into place those recommendations that were made by the IG. They're just now sort of giving officers their own cell phones and sharing daily intelligence briefings more widely throughout the department. They are having more frequent conversations about intelligence and what they're seeing. There have also been some changes at the top, including a new police chief, Thomas manger, who has been a very visible presence and has been making the rounds on media and is sort of a long time war horse is one official called him. He is a longtime police chief. And, you know, at a more micro level, this has been a very hard year on that police agency for the officers. They are very overworked. They're understaffed. And so what they've been doing is they've been reporting physical and emotional trauma following the riot and the police force has expanded its wellness services for them in bringing in experts and psychological trauma and wellness dogs and other efforts that have had some mixed success. The FBI and DHS were criticized widely for failing to do this before the January 6th attack. So now what they are doing is putting out more bulletins to other agencies, even if they haven't found a substantiated or credible threat, including one that we just saw last week warning of the heightened potential for violence on the anniversary, but law enforcement officials have been stressing that there is not a credible or specific threat for today's events. Attorney general Garland also said yesterday that the threats the nation is facing aren't limited to any one group. These acts and threats of violence are not associated with any one set of partisan or ideological views. But they are permeating so many parts of our national life that their risk becoming normalized and routine if we do not stop them. That is dangerous for people's safety and it is deeply dangerous for our democracy. Sadie, how is the nature of homegrown threats changed in recent years? Tell us about some of the challenges for law enforcement and intelligence agency is in preventing something like this from happening again. Well, one of the biggest challenges is that the threat now is complex and it's diffuse. It's dynamic, one of the law enforcement officials who we talked to said it's been the most volatile threat environments that he has seen in his career. And that's because law enforcement agencies are hard pressed to sort of assess what chatter online represents either keyboard bravado or this sort of a more urgent and pressing call to action that's going to result in violence. And so the Homeland Security department and other agencies have been boosting up intelligence to try to confront that sort of diffuse and more complicated threat, but certainly we're seeing a greater volume of threads across the political spectrum and that is sort of what Garland was alluding to with his remarks yesterday. That's Wall Street Journal Justice Department reporter Sadie gurman, Sadie, thank you so much for your time today. Thank And.
"doj" Discussed on Native Opinion Podcast an American Indian Perspective
"Yeah, that judge needed to be. I'm hoping the DOJ goes after him. Now, you can argue that the other two folks that were killed were there to provoke as well. I can understand that argument. But we don't know because they're not with us to tell.
"doj" Discussed on What Next | Daily News and Analysis
"Jeffrey clark seems to have left. The doj gotten another job moved on. But i'm not convinced that there aren't people with his. Pov still inside the government still inside an institution that has thousands of lawyers working for it. So is there any evidence. That merrick garland the new attorney. General has said about trying to establish a consensus about what the rules of the road are for his attorneys. For you know the people who work under him is that going on so first of all i think your your intuition is dead rights. And we've actually seen some whistle blowers come forward and say that jeffrey bossert clark Successfully burrowed in some super partisan political Folks at the justice department right before he left so he basically manipulated the rules of hiring to bring in some super partisan republicans into positions where they are treated like an considered to be career staff. and dot is that is kind of frightening and it strongly suggests that this was going on more broadly across the justice department and we only know about a little bit of it. There's not a ton. america orleans can do about the presence of these people. The whole point of burrowing in which trump and his and his allies really excelled at is that by deeming these people career appointees and a political they get these jobs protections and it's hard to sniff them out so i don't think bear garland is going to be able to clean house but i do think that he will be able to prevent these crazy people from putting their plans into motion. We may still have some insurrectionists at doj but they now answer to different bosses. and so. I'm fairly confident that we won't be seeing a lot of craziness coming out of of these offices. Because at the end of the day garlands can prevent them from unleashing. They're crazy or flying there freak flag but what i think comes through reading your reporting and others is how much some of these decisions hinge on the individual takes of like single people. You know the only reason. Why bossert clark did not become the acting. G. is because a number of other attorneys say we will all resign on mass and they wrote it down so that we know it which also seems quite intentional to me and so it does leave you with this. Feeling that we're we're a little bit of a breath away from someone being promoted and making a different choice Yes and that's another reason to be terrified about future elections Our republic itself rested on the shoulders of a few partisan republicans. Who just happened to have enough of a conscience to to draw the line somewhere. That might not happen in the future. And you can go for mike pence all the way down to these people at the justice department and see that each of them made a handful of decisions. Usually at the last minute sometimes for grudgingly that staved off disaster. And we just don't know if we replay this with a slightly different set of variables if that outcome will happen again. Merchants of starting. Thank you so much for joining me. Always a pleasure thanks. Mary marches of stern covers. Courts and the law for slate. And that's our show. What next is produced by. Daniel hewitt davis land. Mary wilson carmella shad andolina schwartz. We are led by alison benedict deletion. Montgomery and i'm mary harris. You track on twitter. that's where i was reacting. Live to governor cuomo's resignation. Yesterday i was supposed to be in a meeting. all right. had you back here tomorrow..
"doj" Discussed on Trumpcast
"Jeffrey buster clark seems to have left the doj gotten another job moved on. But i'm not convinced that there aren't people with his. Pov still inside the government still inside an institution that has thousands of lawyers working for it. So is there any evidence. That merrick garland the new attorney. General has said about trying to establish a consensus about what the rules of the road are for his attorneys. For you know the people who work under him is that going on so first of all i think your your intuition is dead rights. And we've actually seen some whistle blowers come forward and say that jeffrey bossert clark Successfully burrowed in some super partisan political Folks at the justice department right before he left so he basically manipulated the rules of hiring to bring in some super partisan republicans into positions where they are treated like an considered to be career staff. and dot is that is kind of frightening and it strongly suggests that this was going on more broadly across the justice department and we only know about a little bit of it. There's not a ton. america orleans can do about the presence of these people. The whole point of burrowing in which trump and his and his allies really excelled at is that by deeming these people career appointees and a political they get these jobs protections and it's hard to sniff them out so i don't think bear garland is going to be able to clean house but i do think that he will be able to prevent these crazy people from putting their plans into motion. We may still have some insurrectionists at doj but they now answer to different bosses. and so. I'm fairly confident that we won't be seeing a lot of craziness coming out of of these offices. Because at the end of the day garlands can prevent them from unleashing. They're crazy or flying there freak flag but what i think comes through reading your reporting and others is how much some of these decisions hinge on the individual takes of like single people. You know the only reason. Why bossert clark did not become the acting. A is because a number of other attorneys say we will all resign on mass and they wrote it down so that we know it which also seems quite intentional to me and so it does leave you with this. Feeling that we're we're a little bit of a breath away from someone being promoted and making a different choice Yes and that's another reason to be terrified about future elections Our republic itself rested on the shoulders of a few partisan republicans. Who just happened to have enough of a conscience to draw the line somewhere. That might not happen in the future. And you can go for mike pence all the way down to these people at the justice department and see that each of them made a handful of decisions. Usually at the last minute sometimes for grudgingly that staved off disaster and we just don't know if we replay this with a slightly different set of variables if that outcome will happen again of starting. Thank you so much for joining me. Always a pleasure thanks. Mary marches of stern covers. Courts and the law for slate. And that's her show. What next is produced by. Daniel hewitt davis land. Mary wilson carmella shad andolina schwartz. We are led by alison benedict deletion. Montgomery and i'm mary harris. You attract me on twitter. that's where i was reacting. Live to governor cuomo's resignation. Yesterday i was supposed to be in a meeting. all right. had you back here tomorrow..
"doj" Discussed on What Next | Daily News and Analysis
"Entire movement or the entire conservative legal community. Yeah i mean the pushback of heard from some conservatives looking at the coverage of jeffrey bossert clark and serve rehashing. What happened at the doj in the winter of twenty twenty twenty. Twenty one is that this didn't happen like what. Why are we so concerned about a coup. That didn't take place. Trump didn't steal the election biden. Is president no harm. No foul so i guess. There's one more piece of this that that we haven't talked about that. That is responsive to this question. Which is mike pence right We know that generous jobs. Riders shouted hang mike pence We know that they storm the capital because they wanted to stop mike pence from doing what he was doing. And what was that. He was just reading out basically Which electors would be assigned to which candidate you know the results in each state. And then congress was gonna vote on it and one thing that geoffrey clark really wanted mike pence to do Was to refuse to acknowledge the results from states like georgia and according to clark and his allies. Mike pence should have said. Hey i know that the results in front of me. Say that that the joe biden one georgia but in my independent determination based on irregularities and investigations and the state legislatures actions i am determining that donald trump actually one georgia. And i guess that's not going to happen. In twenty twenty four because calmly harris is presumably still going to be vice president but it could definitely happen if republicans win in two thousand twenty four and then run again in two thousand twenty eight. There has now been a precedent where a considerable number of conservative lawyers argue that the vice president can do this and we saw them try to lay the groundwork for it for many weeks. They ended up failing but the came pretty close. I mean mike pence only announced that he wasn't going to do this minutes before he walked onto the floor of congress. This was sort of lost in the excitement and terror of january six but he released this letter right before. Going out there to say oh by the way. i'm not going to throw the election to donald trump. That's pretty close in my estimation and it suggests that if if these guys had pulled different levers they might have been able to get there they know which levers to pull in the future and they again are.
"doj" Discussed on Trumpcast
"Entire movement or the entire conservative legal community. Yeah i mean the pushback of heard from some conservatives looking at the coverage of jeffrey bossert clark and serve rehashing. What happened at the doj in the winter of twenty twenty twenty. Twenty one is that this didn't happen like what. Why are we so concerned about a coup. That didn't take place. Trump didn't steal the election biden. Is president no harm. No foul so i guess. There's one more piece of this that that we haven't talked about that. That is responsive to this question. Which is mike pence right We know that generous. Riders shouted hang. Mike pence We know that they storm the capital because they wanted to stop mike pence from doing what he was doing. And what was that. He was just reading out basically Which electors would be assigned to which candidate you know the results in each state. And then congress was gonna vote on it and one thing that jeffrey bossard clark really wanted mike pence to do Was to refuse to acknowledge the results from states like georgia and according to clark and his allies. Mike pence should have said. Hey i know that the results in front of me. Say that that the joe biden one georgia but in my independent determination based on irregularities and investigations and the state legislatures actions i am determining that donald trump actually one georgia. And i guess that's not going to happen in twenty twenty four because kamla harris is presumably still going to be vice president but it could definitely happen if republicans win twenty twenty four and then run again in two thousand twenty eight. There has now been a precedent where a considerable number of conservative lawyers argue that the vice president can do this and we saw them try to lay the groundwork for it for many weeks. They ended up failing but the came pretty close. I mean mike pence only announced that he wasn't going to do this minutes before he walked onto the floor of congress. This was sort of lost in the excitement and terror of january six but he released this letter right before. Going out there to say oh by the way. i'm not going to throw the election to donald trump. That's pretty close in my estimation and it suggests that if if these guys had pulled different levers they might have been able to get there they know which levers to pull in the future and they again are.
"doj" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"Joyce i'm gonna put a tweet of yours from today and then have you expound further you write you wrote the fact that doj turned these notes over to the house oversight committee the type of internal product. They typically fight to protect suggests that they believe this is very serious potentially potentially even criminal conduct talk further about that so doj typically will hold close any of its internal work product particularly notes that a senior official might take during a phone call. That's not something. Doj turns over without a fight but in this case they've made a bold statement indicating that they believe the events here are important and this information is so critical that they're going to permit former trump administration. Folks to give unrestricted testimony. I take that to mean that. They're not going to exert any kind of executive privilege and also they're turning over the physical documents this means. This is serious stuff whether it's criminal or not requires additional investigation but certainly that investigation is merited enjoys it. Is this information relevant to what's happening down. In georgia in the investigation the fulton county criminal probe into that phone call in which trump tried to pressure the georgia secretary of state referenced. Burger too. I think is fine me. Ten thousand seven hundred eighty votes. Jonathan the interplay between these two events is pretty interesting and let me talk about one way that it might be significant. Prosecutors worry a lot about proving defendants intent was he just sort of bumbling in saying stuff or was there actually a cohesive plan to overturn the results of a legitimate election. And something that makes it more likely that it was intentional rather than an accident or stumbling is if there's evidence of a repeated course of conduct in actually admissible evidence that you can put in say georgia were to indict. Prosecutors could very likely offer evidence of other similar related courses of conduct like this pressure that trump tried to bring to bear on the justice department to show that it wasn't a mistake unintentional but rather there was an intentional effort to subvert the election in georgia congressman swallow. Well considering you've been an impeachment manager and devised questions to ask witnesses. What kinds of questions should investigators be asking. Now we're at this point. It really trying to understand what donald trump and those around him new as to. Who was going to show up on january six mo brooks who you referenced earlier. He admitted this week that he was wearing body armor when he gave inciting remarks just outside of the white house. So what did he know that led him to wear body armor. What donald trump no about who was showing up and then of course what decisions that you make to protect the capital. What decisions that he not make. That could have protected the capital. I think that will be incredibly helpful for us as we try and ensure that we again have a peaceful transition of power in this country. One that we did not have an twenty twenty one transition as we go into the next presidential election comes. Swallow one more question to you. I think you alluded to this earlier. But how concerned are you that we really. We dodged a bullet in twenty twenty in that we had responsible people who were being pressured by the president of the united states members of his own party. Who did not bend to his will and did not subvert the constitution of the united states. How concerned are you that that kind of withstand withstanding pressure won't hold in two thousand twenty two. The midterm elections. Jonathan is is. I and my colleagues were running from the floor through an evacuation route. That the thought going through my mind was it can't end this way that this cannot be how democracy dies and i thought that's what was going to happen on january six and i would say at best it's on life support right now because nothing has changed. Donald trump is telling people. He's coming back in august mark meadows. Set some pretty disturbing things today about a cabinet meeting. They had plans. They have that they're going to announce soon i mean he's still assembling a shadow cabinet It sounds like and we still don't have the security posture at the capital. That we need to make sure that we could protect you. Know a future coup attempt. And so i am very very concerned in the best thing to knock late against. That would be the unity of republicans and democrats really really debunking. The big lie acknowledging. Joe biden is president and then putting in place laws so that this won't happen again otherwise again. We're just we're close to flat line right now for our democracy and on that note. We're gonna have to their congressman. Eric swallow enjoys fans. Thank you both for joining us tonight..
"doj" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)
"Which would hurt biden's chances. In the primary there it was in black and white in the transcript of that phone call. I would like you to do us a favor. Though the man who listened in on that phone call to take notes for the white house was a us army. Lieutenant colonel. this man alexander vitamin. I should tell you that colonel vitamin will be a guest on the show on monday night looking forward to that. You don't wanna miss it then may just told. Cbs news that. After donald trump's infamous phone call with ukraine. He immediately went to speak with his brother who also worked in the white house. He said he told his brother quote. If what i'm about to tell you becomes public the president will be impeached. And that of course is exactly what happened. Donald trump was impeached for pressuring ukraine into digging up dirt on his political opponent. And i know the story is not so distant but it's important context for this moment that we're in right now. It reminds us that donald trump's obsession with staying in power and winning reelection and the dramatic lengths to which he was willing to go to stay president. It all started way way before anyone cast a ballot last november. But of course that was just the start after joe biden actually won the twenty twenty election. Donald trump's obsession with joe biden morphed into a crusade to de-legitimize the results of that election and part of that crusade led to an insurrection attempt on the united states capitol and temp which is now being investigated by congress. Today the house select committee investigating the january. Six attack held a meeting behind closed. Doors there first gathering after this week's emotional hearing with law enforcement officers were attacked at the capitol on january six. The chairman of the committee congressman. Bennie thompson told reporters today that the committee will soon be sending subpoenas as part of their inquiry. But that's not the only investigation going on in congress right now. That could shed light on donald trump's efforts to overturn the election. We know another part of the former president. Scheme to overturn. The election was centered around the justice. Department to wield the power of the doj to somehow swing the results in trump's favor there were reports that trump considered ousting his acting attorney general and replacing him with one who would push his baseless claims about election fraud trump and his chief of staff stovepipe their election fraud claims right to the doj glee doj leadership demanding that the department investigate the fraud to bijal to de-legitimize. Joe biden's win just this week. We learned just how extensive this pressure campaign was washington post reporter that trump's called his acting attorney general. Jeffrey rosen almost every day about the so-called fraud in the aftermath of the election. the attorney general's top aide took notes. About what the former president said on those phone calls for anyone trying to get to the bottom of whether or not donald trump was trying to improperly weaponize the justice department to help him stay in power it would be important to know exactly what was said on those calls and today we found out the new york times it was the first to report today on the contents of those notes about donald trump's calls to the attorney general after the election according to the times donald trump called his attorney general as well as his deputy on december twenty seven th of last year to ask him about claims of voter fraud that doj had disproved that deputy attorney general told the former president that the justice had no power to overturn and election to which donald trump replied quote. Just say that. The election was corrupt. And leave the rest to me. Just say the election was corrupt. And leave the rest to me. Since viewer times. I broke the story this afternoon. These handwritten notes have now been made public and turned over to congress as part of a separate investigation into the former president's conduct after the election. So here we go joining us now. Katie benner who covers the justice department for the new york times. She's been way ahead of everyone else's reporting on donald trump's post election attempt to pressure the justice department. She was the first to report on these documents from the house. Oversight committee today katie. Good evening to see my friend. It would seem that the nine pages of handwritten notes released today are not the only notes taken by doj officials that are relevant to a house. Oversight committee investigation. It's a committee that is likely to receive more as it investigates. The trumps trump administration's efforts to reverse the election. What's the picture as you have it now. I think what we need to remember. Is that those committees including the house oversight committee and the senate judiciary committee. They've been asking the justice department for documents in the testimony of former officials. Basically since the beginning of this year the justice department began the process of handing over documents a few months ago. This is sort of the latest batch and just now the justice department said former officials are allowed to testify. And they're not going to vote executive privilege which means that congress now has far more access to information than ever had during the trump administration about the former president's behavior. We're going to see the justice department allow information to flow everybody to see congress to press as hard as it can to get everything it can documents and testimony. The language used by donald trump in his phone call to justice department had similarities to the language that donald trump used in his phone call with the president The president of ukraine. I'm going to read you. What he said to the call with zielinski. I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it. I'd like you to have the attorney. General call your people. And i would like you to get to the bottom of it. There's a lot of talk about biden's son that biden. Stop the prosecution and a lot of people wanna find out about about that so whatever you can do with the attorney. General would be great. Then he calls an leans on the attorney general of the united states. The acting attorney general of the united states. Just come up and find some fraud. I'll take care of it from there. Do we know from your notes. what happens. What trump means by. I'll take care of after that. You know he says. I'll take care of it. Himself and our congressman with note say republicans in congress who is ally so presumably they would use that statement from the justice department as a cudgel to both attack joe biden to also real seeds of doubt.
"doj" Discussed on This Week in Startups
"It in earnest with a major project you probably know about that already because they would have been hiring people and when they interview people typically the way these stories like the apple car story. It's very hard to hire one hundred engineers for a project and not find out about it. The way steve jobs figured out that google was going to watch chrome the chrome browser. Was they were interviewing safari team members the safari browser obviously by apple. So when you start recruiting in earnest for a project. That's when the stuff leaks because people will get interviewed don't sign. Nda's they might use a handshake agreement to not talk about it. But they'll say get some currency out of it. Sure some people will leak it. And that's how a lot of big projects like a are at apple as well. The reason people know there's a lot going are with a our cars and previously the watches because they were hiring tons of people to work on wearables to work on cars into on self driving and mobility but according to an article by coined. His desk speculating on bitcoin. Sunday run up. Here's the quote experts say short-squeeze of heavily leveraged traders may have added to upper pressure on prices. Okay so hearing about this. This is called defy decentralized. Finance people are taking their crypto holdings. And they're getting levered against him. What does that mean. They're getting alone just like High net worth individuals might able to have the had one hundred million dollars in facebook shares. They might be able to borrow a fifty percent of that as alone and banks typically provide the rich folks. Now it's coming down to anybody with crypto. You can borrow against your crypto but if the price changes radically either way if you're shorting if you're long whatever you make liquidated so supposedly a lot of people got liquidated so the prevailing theory amongst pro. Bitcoin people i think is the rumors of amazon which would be in the category of tesla buying a bunch of bitcoin. Just an incredible incredible. Check box to get amazon onboard. The bitcoin train but that turned out to be false. That think it's false because we're not hearing any jobs being posted about this or you know a bunch of people being recruited. So i doubt it that you know amazon's any more inquisitive than any other company but It costs enough of a price. Increase that little amazon. You know maybe got some people off the fence which then created the short stories if that makes sense but the pro pickling crowd is also i think downplaying the tethered doj prob-. I could see the tether doj pro being leaked yesterday amongst people who are insiders like let's say exchanges and then if you are on these exchanges especially offshore ones that use a tether if you saw people cashing in their tether for bitcoin. Which would be the smart thing to do if you think tether is going to collapse or they might get arrested etc and it all gets frozen. Will you would want to not have your money frozen because it could be frozen for five or ten years just like when poker sites assets got seized. You know you're you're just out of luck for years. You eventually were able to claim that you had some assets in there but you have to jump through hoops so any person hearing my voice right now who owns tether. And who's been listening for. The last month must be trying to get outta tether and move their tether into bitcoin or a theory you do not get the stability or supposed stability of a stable coin but you do have something that you can download and put it into your own wallet. Put in cold storage and get off of these crazy Exchanges that could also get seized. Tether could get shut down and these exchanges can get seized and everybody could lose everything where people can abscond with your money so you gotta get your coins into a wallet into cold storage off of these services unless it's maybe coin base or something that runs in the west and you feel a little bit more secure in so I think that is what we're looking at here is maybe some of that and it could be a combination of all of these things. Short-squeeze amazon rumors. Doj rumors tether tether people move into bitcoin. And you get this super storm. Dennis vinokourov hopefully pronouncing your name correct. Dennis is the head of research at synergy. Jia capital synergy capital He said that tether news is less of a market negative because it is an investigation into executives.
"doj" Discussed on WSJ What's News
"Of firms that help you with all those things alex. This deal was first announced. In march of twenty twenty under the trump administration and there were antitrust concerns back then led to an investigation. Then last month the doj of the biden administration filed a suit. What are their objections to this. Merger they say it will just create a brokerage. That's too big and will narrow the choices for companies and that will make you know be anticompetitive. So basically they'll be too few players out there advising companies on their insurance choices and and on the other services that these companies offer. What did the company say about those objections. And what are they saying now about their reasoning for scrapping the deal. Well i mean. They totally disagreed with the department of justice. They felt that they were going to be able to offer. You know bigger and better services through scale and through a wider network and this has been going on for a while and they've been hearing these objections not just from the department of justice but also the european union regulator and in response to those the companies have sold off bits of their businesses in order to have their be less overlap in what they do as way to address those antitrust concerns but the doj in the end felt that they had not done enough and that there was not a obvious remedy here that the companies were willing to undertake in order to make the deal pass. Muster didn't the companies also say basically that antitrust regulators didn't know their business. Yeah i mean essentially yeah. They were pretty dismissive of the doj calling them out of step and saying that they thought that they could have won in court but the judge in the case had set the court hearing for so long in the future. That for deal. That's already been sitting around. It was launched just as the pandemic started a lot of people thought back then it would never get done because the pandemic but they said no. No no we're gonna keep going. They went through it. And then this case cups and then the judge says well. I'm not gonna listen to you guys for months and months and they decided that it wouldn't work alex the european union approved of the deal. Why did it have a different perspective than us. Regulators part of it is the regulators look at their market so the european union regulator felt that the divestments that the companies made were enough to address the competitive concerns in europe in the european union. You know they. They felt that there were local factors. That made this deal passable whereas the department of justice took a different line. They felt that in the us where these to operate Against competitors like marsh and others. That just wouldn't have been enough players to provide the competition needed for the marketplace. The biden administration has signaled a tough antitrust stance. What does this mean for the future of such corporate mergers. I think this is a very big deal and it's being very closely followed. This was the first big case at the biden administration took on and said we're going to try to block this deal. We're gonna go to court and they succeeded so that's gonna probably embolden. Their strategy and the bite administration has been very clear that they want to take a muscular stance on antitrust appointed some people who are very sharp critics of companies getting bigger and bigger and bigger. And you know President biden had this executive order the other week those broad-ranging and all sorts of things but among the things that he asked for was specifically for the justice department to re look at their antitrust policy. And so it's pretty clear that this is probably the beginning of a whole bunch of actions that the biden administration may take and also be a warning sign to companies out. There that are thinking about doing deals in the calculus has now changed..
"doj" Discussed on Stay Tuned with Preet
"I think what's really important and i'm not. I'm not criticizing the department yet. But i will say that. In the context of the information being sought the significance of the people from whom it was sought. Lots of questions. About what the guidelines are what the boundaries are lots of confusion. I think the department has to figure out a way that's appropriate inconsistent with grandeur secrecy and everything else to explain because it's very confusing now. One thing that we mentioned that has happened is that i think it was our friend lisa. Monica who's the deputy attorney general has asked for an g inspector general investigation of all of this And i think inspector general has agreed to do. So that's great. You know we talked about i g reports here on the show all the time over the years but that takes a long time. It's very laborious process. That's months and months and months away from our seeing anything right and then the question is is there some other thing even before jerry nadler and his committee to work that garland or some other officials from doj can explain. I think they have to say something don't you i really do. And and i've actually spent the weekend writing a piece on this that i'm still working on but increasingly i've come to the view. That merrick garland has an opportunity. Here he has got to make a lot of difficult decisions while he's attorney general more so i think than the usual attorney general because of the situations that he has inherited and this is his opportunity to become a trusted voice in american society. He's there's been a lot of criticism of him over the last couple of weeks. I was the failure to disclose an unredacted version of the bar memo. Which you and. I discussed more recently. It's been his decision to continue to try and defend trump in the gene carroll case he surely has strong institutional reasons for making those decisions whether you agree with them or not but instead of coming out and explaining why. Doj is taking those positions. He's just let it go out into the ether and really suffered unnecessary criticism. So here he could engage in transparency with the public as she say. Doj can't talk about the details of ongoing investigations for a lot of really good reasons but he can explain process. He can talk about what they're doing to get their arms around. Whatever it is that's buried inside of the portfolio that they inherited from bill barr in fact i saw yesterday statement where he referenced the fact that he had asked lisa monaco to engage in top to bottom review of cases at doj to surface any problem cases. That's an important thing for people to know. He can share details regarding these subpoenas. I'm not sure that there's any reason in this situation with a closed case to be so hesitant to come forward with more facts and less. Maybe there's some sort of crazy ongoing leak investigation here that we don't know anything about on on other people. There is a lot of good that comes from telling the truth. There's a lot of hesitation at doj to over engage with the public to share details in a way that might compromise cases. And of course. There's the recent example of comedy that still hangs over everybody's head but now is the time to go ahead and do something different in bold. I think a couple of everything you said is correct and one of the things that i think the oj can answer. Is the question you pose at the beginning. Which is was direct targeting of members of congress for their information or was it incidental. I don't know that violate anything by making sort of a general statement about the fact that you know were there particular people whose information was targeted and then as happens in investigations leak investigations and other kinds of investigations. That there was incidental collection. And we're going to engage in this review etcetera. Now what's interesting about the attorney general statement that you referred to is. He repeats again that he directed that the inspector general investigation. As i said that's gonna take a long time and then as you also pointed out. He's directed lisa. Monaco who says quote is already working on surfacing potentially problematic matters deserving high level review to evaluate and strengthen departments the departments existing policies and procedures for obtaining records of the legislative branch end quote but there is no commitment there that they will come forward and explain everything and one possibility is i know we think of this is that through. No fault of their own. They were caught a little flat footed by this. I mean some people have raised the question. Why is it that we're finding out about the seeking of this sensitive information from apple as the gag orders with a nondisclosure. Orders are expiring rather from the rather than from the department itself who should have been ahead of it. And it's not clear to me how much information since they've been there a short while they have in their possession. Are they getting ahead of the fact that you know we might be finding out in the coming weeks. And some of these officials have been saying this on social media that many other people probably have their information sought and that their nondisclosure orders with respect to the as well do you think that they didn't really know the full scope of this and part of the reason why they're not coming forward and explaining is they're trying to get a handle on it. I've been really curious about that. And the question was did merrick. Garland learn about this of on the front page of the new york times like the rest of the country. The reporting that. I've heard on that and i don't know obviously what the sources was rachel maddow when she broke. The story discussed it on thursday night on on her show and she indicated that garland had found out about it with the rest of the country. I'd like to know more about that. Because as these sort of gag orders expire typically as a prosecutor year. Aware that that's going to happen. I mean maybe you have a lot going on and you don't notice but there were congress. People involved here calendar. I wouldn't you think somebody would have given the brand new attorney general a heads up so that raises all kinds of questions right. Was it just inadvertent or was there an ongoing deliberate effort to conceal these cases. That seems a little bit far fetched but we just don't think about my own question for another minute and looking back at the statement that i read from the attorney general i get the sense that there's a hint that they don't know what other time bombs are sort of lurking in the department right because he doesn't just say the deputy attorney general lisa. Monaco is conducting review of this issue relating to obtaining information from members of congress. But i'll say it again. Lisa monico who is already working on surfacing potentially problematic matters deserving high level review suggests that they don't know what's below the surface and they don't know what other kinds of things were put in place or that were operational before they took over and as we do know the transition process was not wonderful smooth and there was a fight about the election up until the last day and so the kind of briefing about sensitive matters and ongoing matters that normally takes place. Maybe didn't now the counter to that. And i'm curious what you think about this. The reporting is that there are multiple officials including the former and outgoing chief of the national security division. John boomers had information about this new about the leak investigation and should have would have been in a position to brief the new leadership and people are asking the question should they be removed from office. That seems to me to be a situation where The devil is in the details right. We just don't know exactly what happened whether there were briefings or not. I think it's important. Obviously for merrick garland to figure that out. But beyond just this subpoena matter and without thinking very hard..
"doj" Discussed on What Next | Daily News and Analysis
"And let lord jones show you how good it can feel to bring cbd into the max. Jones has everything from handmade hemp derived. Cbd gumdrops in white peach to cbc infused bath salts. Everything's all packaged. Up and beautiful. Little boxes. almost like a present to yourself and who doesn't want to present these days. I personally think it can be a little funny to order personal care products online. I'm always wondering what does this stuff smell like. So i'm gonna use the body lotion right now and i will describe exactly what it smells like. Okay it smells citrusy. It smells a little spicy food. Good i would give this to my mom. I would use this and i'm not really a body lotion person. So that's telling you something for years. People in the know have been using joan's premium cd products in their self care rituals. Why not see what they can do for you. Go to lord jones dot com slash next to get twenty five percent off your first order. That's lord jones dot com slash. What next for twenty five percent off your first order. Lord jones dot com slash. Watch next. let's talk about. Merrick garland because a lot of people were surprised by these legal decisions over the last few weeks. And you weren't and your lack of surprise really seems to come down to merrick. Garland is a leader and someone who regards himself as very much an 'institutionalised someone who believes in the institution of the department of justice. Do you remember watching his confirmation hearing. And what stood out for you when you do. I do because. I was actually quite take the back but i wrote about recipes for another site i was taken aback by because i just saw someone who just seemed to be berry said in his orientation as a judge again. This conception of the rule of law that i think is laudable but not exclusive value that our legal system tries to to uphold. He said he didn't get enough. Scrutiny from liberals what would you say that so garland obviously rose to public prominence as the nominee to fill justice scalia. Seed in twenty sixteen prevented from taking that seat by mitch. Mcconnell republican congress and so when he was nominated by joe biden to be attorney general. I think that there was this dramatic sort of arc instead of dramatic. Come up and said. I think a lot of people thought great. We're going to have sort of this reckoning we're going to try to wind the harms of the trump years great. We're gonna have this guy who was unjustly prevented from taking a cd. Should have gotten in him. Sort of in the second best legal position in the country and isn't as wonderful. It's like a movie. yeah it is. it's it has a very nice dramatic arc to it but what some very simple questions. I thought really didn't get sort of aired out in the way. I think they probably should have. Like for instance. Does it make sense for the department to be led by someone who hasn't worked there in a quarter century and kushtia sentiment. That merrick garland might not be responding as aggressively as he should was only cemented in the last few weeks that's when journalists and politicians started revealing that under president trump. The department had been seeking subpoenas for their private communications. More president biden eventually intervened said he wouldn't allow the department to snoop like that again on kush. That's the kind of call garland himself should have been making these things seem to be unfolding in a way very haphazard way that he and his senior officials aren't exercising control over How to figure how to detect misconducts whether when and how will become public. It's almost like they're just passive observers to these events like kind of just unfolding around the. It's very odd to me. Because it's like you actually run the place like you can decide. I wanna go back. And i want to try to figure out whether we really know everything. And if not how we should produce this information to the public probably deserves to know. They don't have a plan right so i forgive them or be much more forgiving their pasta here if it were the case that they had some sort of plan in place or some sort of intellectual framework that they seem to be bringing to bear to think about this problem if they do have a plan right to affect some sort of institutional organizational culture. That is something. I think it would be very helpful to tell the public to Provide some confidence into You know what's going on to justice department in whether or not they're doing anything to really uncovered the worst excess and this is again i come back. This is our department not his. It's not the career employees whose like feelings were all like i think overly preoccupied with what they do is our name. And if they're abusing their power we deserve to know it. I mean i have read. Some legal analysts who straight out said merrick garland himself is beyond saving. At this point. I sort of wonder if you agree or disagree with that. I wouldn't go that far by what. I'm sincerely hoping is that. We'll see of course correct. I don't share that dire assessment. Because i do think one thing we can tell from his public appearances Sincere person honest person seems to be a good. And here's what's been going on in dc. Let my little space Over the last month what people have been saying is basically a couple of things one. It's too soon to judge him like he's just getting situated and you may be unhappy about somebody's to you being me complain in my regular life to be happy about unhappy about some of these decisions but like just be patient right and i've been patient and you know what the bad decisions. Just keep coming. So i you know what you're what you're hearing from kind of some frustration. That is finally boiled over. And i think it's frustration that a lot of people have kind of kept to themselves because garland has a very robust network of friends confidence sympathetic parties in dc who had been expressing this view to people sincerely and i think some of us like myself are now saying you know. It's been long enough like he's like he's now. He owns everything that's happening. And he's not just going to get the benefit of the doubt because he's a great guy that we all know from. I can't even believe. I'm saying it but the cliche is true. Dc cocktail parties and group. Just a mess right now. No i think that people have finally like thing like kind of seeing this past week. Is i think a serious inflection points and the other thing people say about garlan these friends and people who are who like it is that he's very attuned to elite narratives and with that means of craft is i think is not high minded is that means he cares about. What would people depressed and he cares about is reading the post and the new york times. Yes i think he cares about is placed in His self image not as an ego maniac necessarily part because maybe he does see him say south above the fray political figure as potential sees himself as a potential historical figure in that he tends to. He's interested in what people think about him and say about him and i am told responsive we'll be responsive to sort of how he's.