“The power of checks and balances”

Summary

Deadline: White House — "The power of checks and balances"

Host: Nicolle Wallace (Feb 12, 2026)

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Nicolle Wallace explores the vital role of checks and balances in American democracy amid escalating attempts by the Trump administration to use federal power for political retribution. With a sharp focus on the failures of politicized prosecutions, judicial pushback, whistleblower controversies, and citizen-led resistance, Nicolle is joined by investigative journalist Carol Lennig, political analyst Tim Miller, law professor James Samplesier, reporter Jacob Soboroff, and Professor Scott Galloway. The panel examines both the institutional and grassroots responses to autocratic overreach, detailing how ordinary Americans, lawmakers, and the judiciary are pushing back against executive excesses.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Grand Jury Defeats Politicized Prosecutions

[00:44–03:51]

• Context: Six Democratic lawmakers faced potential indictment after releasing a video urging military to refuse illegal orders—an act framed as criminal by the Trump DOJ, led by appointee Jeanine Pirro.
• Grand Jury Rejection: The grand jury unanimously refused to issue indictments—a rare and public embarrassment for the DOJ, highlighting a breakdown in prosecutorial standards and a reaffirmation of basic democratic guardrails.
• Judge Rebukes Retaliation: A federal judge scathingly rejected Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s attempts to punish Sen. Mark Kelly, clarifying limits on military discipline and the importance of First Amendment protections for retired service members now in Congress.

Notable Quote:

“They just can’t be doing this with impunity... There is going to be accountability. I am not going to be sitting back in a foxhole where they lob grenades at me.”
— Rep. Jason Crow ([03:18])

2. Analysis of DOJ Failures & Political Pressure

[04:50–11:39]

• Reporting from Carol Lennig:
  • These “no true bill” rejections signal a Justice Department increasingly staffed by political loyalists lacking prosecutorial integrity or experience.
  • Basic prosecutorial standards were not met; grand jurors, as laypeople, saw a clear lack of evidence—an “embarrassment” for the DOJ and an ethical violation.
• James Samplesier explains:
  • The Supreme Court (Wood v. Georgia) established grand juries as a defense against “hasty, malicious, and oppressive” prosecutions—exactly the abuses surfacing now.
  • When grand juries rebuff prosecutors so consistently, it’s a failure of pre-screening and signals prosecutorial misconduct driven by political, not legal, motives.

Notable Quote:

“If regular people walking off the street... say, that’s nothing, that's a huge problem. It's... a violation of the justice manual. It's a violation of the ethical duties of the prosecutors.”
— Carol Lennig ([08:10])

“The lawyers... are doing the work of political appointees for political purposes... not at all about the law, not at all about democracy, not at all about our system of government.”
— Prof. James Samplesier ([11:12])

3. How to Repair the Justice System

[11:39–16:48]

• Systemic Damage:
  • The Trump administration has replaced career DOJ professionals with “hacks,” undermining expertise and experience.
  • Turnover is rampant; prosecutors unwilling to do political bidding are quitting en masse (e.g., 75% of Minneapolis U.S. Attorney’s office).
• Political Implications:
  • The Democratic Party faces an internal dilemma: keep focusing on experience, or prioritize those “ready to fight” autocratic overreach.
  • Bipartisan resistance is forming not on ideological lines, but between “fighters” and “everyone else.”

Notable Quote:

“Now this administration has replaced a lot of real expertise with a bunch of hacks... That's going to have to be a house cleaning if we ever get through this.”
— Tim Miller ([13:00])

---

4. Whistleblower Complaint: Tulsi Gabbard and Jared Kushner

[19:05–25:22]

• Latest Reporting by Julian Barnes:
  • A high-level whistleblower complaint alleges DNI Tulsi Gabbard blocked access to an intelligence report mentioning Jared Kushner during Iran negotiations.
  • Critics argue Gabbard’s restrictions made the report a controversy; had it circulated normally, it likely would have faded into bureaucratic obscurity.
  • Inspector General ultimately found Gabbard acted within her powers, but the episode underscores the administration’s aversion to transparency and proper process, especially regarding Trump and top allies.

Notable Quote:

“The administration has consistently... shown contempt for process... Protocol and trust in individuals’ integrity is being eroded.”
— Prof. James Samplesier ([24:23])

5. Citizen & Economic Resistance: Scott Galloway on Modern Protest

[28:27–35:50]

• Protesting via Pocketbook:
  • Scott Galloway advocates for economic boycotts as the most potent weapon in a capitalist society—specifically targeting tech companies enabling the Trump agenda.
  • The “most radical act... is non-participation”: unsubscribing from platforms can materially damage their market value and send a message.
  • Historical analogies (e.g., Montgomery bus boycott; late Weimar Republic) illustrate both the stakes and strategies for today’s resistance.
• Corporate Cowardice:
  • Executives excuse their silence by citing fiduciary duties, waiting for the administration to blow over; Galloway urges them to consider their legacy and seize the historic moment to champion American values.

Notable Quotes:

“The most radical act in a capitalist society is non participation.”
— Scott Galloway ([28:27])

“You have some fidelity or you should have some loyalty to fair markets, to civil rights, to American values that have made you a billionaire...”
— Scott Galloway ([32:16])

6. Judicial Pushback on Immigration: The Barranco Case

[35:50–42:54]

• Judicial Restraint Against Mass Deportations:
  • Immigration judge dismisses deportation case against Narciso Barranco (father of three U.S. Marines), contradicting the administration’s characterization of him as “the worst of the worst.”
  • Despite judicial relief, Barranco remains nervous, reflecting deep mistrust of government assurances. Advocacy continues as families like Barranco’s highlight the human cost of “law and order” rhetoric.
• Host & Reporting Perspective:
  • Nicolle and Jacob Soboroff emphasize the American values embodied by families like the Barrancos, directly challenging the administration’s narrative and deportation priorities.

Notable Quotes:

“If there’s ever been a candidate for your podcast the Best People, it is Narciso Barranco... a man who is so unbelievably proud of his three boys, one of whom is still currently an active duty Marine...”
— Jacob Soboroff ([41:09])

“This is actually the best of the best.”
— Nicolle Wallace ([40:51])

7. Empowering Ordinary Americans

[42:55–end]

• Rosie Perez appears in a short segment, emphasizing civic agency and the personal cost of protest, but highlighting voting as the most accessible act of resistance.

Notable Quote:

“You may not have to go out and protest, but you can go out and vote.”
— Rosie Perez ([42:54])

---

Notable Segment Timestamps

• Grand jury/DOJ checks on Trump: [00:44–06:25]
• Expert analysis on failed prosecutions: [06:25–11:39]
• Repairing DOJ/systemic problems: [11:39–16:48]
• Whistleblower/Kushner–Tulsi Gabbard controversy: [19:05–25:22]
• Scott Galloway on economic resistance: [28:27–35:50]
• Immigration/judicial resistance – Barranco case: [35:50–42:54]

---

Memorable Quotes (w/speaker & timestamp)

• “There is going to be accountability. I am not going to be sitting back in a foxhole where they lob grenades at me.” — Rep. Jason Crow ([03:18])

• “If regular people walking off the street...say, that's nothing, that’s a huge problem... a violation of the justice manual. It's a violation of the ethical duties of the prosecutors.” — Carol Lennig ([08:10])

• “The lawyers... are doing the work of political appointees for political purposes... not at all about the law, not at all about democracy, not at all about our system of government.” — Prof. James Samplesier ([11:12])

• “The most radical act in a capitalist society is non participation.” — Scott Galloway ([28:27])

• “This is actually the best of the best.” — Nicolle Wallace ([40:51])

• “You may not have to go out and protest, but you can go out and vote.” — Rosie Perez ([42:54])

---

In Summary

This episode spotlights both the peril and resilience of American democracy. As the Trump administration intensifies efforts to use federal power for political ends, the grand jury system, federal judiciary, lawmakers, and everyday Americans continue to push back. Whether through legal decisions, whistleblower complaints, or economic boycotts, these forces collectively demonstrate that checks and balances remain alive—though fiercely contested—in American public life.

Transcript

[Progressive Insurance Announcer]

For a small business owner, every day is full of surprises. Some great, some not so great, like when a client cancels their order at the last minute. But here's a surprise you will like. Progressive provides small business owners with 30 customizable coverage options to help keep their business going strong. So go ahead, surprise yourself. Get a quote in as little as 8 [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates and third party insurers. Coverage is not available in all states or for all vehicles and coverage selections.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start.

[Host Nicole]

Thumbtack knows homes so you don't have to don't know the difference between matte.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

Paint finish and satin or what that.

[Host Nicole]

Clunking sound from your dryer is. With thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

You can hire top rated pros, see.

[Host Nicole]

Price estimates and read reviews all on the app Download Today the heroes of Yesterday were these 20 anonymous grand jury members. I don't know who they are. They were picked at random and they taught us more about just basic democracy and rule of law than the President of the United States and the Attorney General. And that is where we are, ladies and gentlemen. Hi again everyone. It's now five o'clock in New York. There are signs everywhere that there are in fact some checks remaining on the Trump administration's worst impulses and excesses. We saw it this week with the Department of Justice when they were handed a resounding defeat by a grand jury when Jeanine Pirro's office tried and failed to indict six Democratic lawmakers who simply released a video, 90 seconds, urging the men and women of the military to refuse any illegal orders. The rejection of the indictment by the grand jury, which is called a no true bill, was nothing short of an embarrassment for the Trump administration. And it is something so rare for a U.S. attorney, any U.S. attorney, that many go their whole careers without that happening to them, without ever facing rejection from a grand jury like this one. But it is now a common occurrence for Donald Trump's political appointees inside doj. Adding to the Trump administration's failures to target these six lawmakers, a federal judge issued a scathing rebuke of Defense Secretary and former Fox News Weekend anchor Pete Hegseth today, finding that Pete Hegseth is unlawfully retaliating against Senator Mark Kelly. That judge wrote this quote, secretary Hegseth relies on the well established doctrine that that military service members enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections given the fundamental obligation for obedience and discipline in the armed forces. Unfortunately for Secretary Hegseth, no court has ever extended those principles to retired service members, much less a retired service member serving in Congress and exercising oversight responsibility over the military. This court will not be the first to do so. Adding this quote, this court has all it needs to conclude that the defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly's First Amendment freedom and threaten the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees. The six lawmakers themselves are also going on offense today to act as a check on Donald Trump and his administration's retribution agenda. Here's what Congressman Jason Crow said on our network last night.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

It's really important right now that we start imposing costs on people who are abusing the system, who are turning their back on the Constitution, who are violating the law. They just can't be doing this with impunity. They have to know that we're making lists, I'm keeping names, I'm taking names, and there is going to be accountability. And we're going to start imposing costs on people for abusing positions of trust, for abusing our system in the Constitution. I am not going to be sitting back in a foxhole where they lob grenades at me.

[Host Nicole]

In the face of these checks. On Donald Trump's autocratic tactics, his foot soldiers are doubling down and trying to carry out his desire for revenge. Punchbowl is reporting that the Trump administration will try to indict the six lawmakers again. Senator Alyssa Slotkin telling reporters this, quote, I'll be honest, we hear they're going again tomorrow. But she says she has no idea what the charges will be. Senator Mark Kelly said this to Punchbowl, quote, I don't expect this administration to give up. They have a pattern. This president doesn't like to lose so much. Losing for Donald Trump is where we start the hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends. Senior investigative reporter Carol Lennig is with also joining us, political analyst, host of the Bulwark podcast. Tim Miller's here. And with me at the table, former attorney for the Democracy program at the Brennan center for justice at NYU School of Law, James Samplesier. He's currently a law professor at Hofstra University. Carolina. You've been all over this story. Just take me through what you're reporting this week.

[Carol Lennig]

Nicole. You know, you are right. It's so right in the introduction to say that no true bills are becoming all too common. And I myself, the night that we were hearing that the grand jury had rejected plans to indict these six Lawmakers, two senators, and four members of Congress for their role in a video in which they stated what the existing law is. I remember thinking, okay, here we go again. But it is worth noting that when the grand jurors refused to take this up, they were refusing to charge six members of Congress with a felony. That would be, as I've heard from so many DOJ sources, one of the most historic cases in DOJ history, one that would have involved many, many FBI agents, dozens of the best prosecutors in the country, and months of deliberation and debate if it had been a legitimate case. But this case, seemingly so serious, didn't even make it out of the gate because all the grand jurors, we are told by a source, refused to even grant it. The movement forward refused to find that it met the bare threshold of probable cause. And we are hearing, just as Ms. Slotkin is, we are hearing that this case may be presented again tomorrow. So we'll will be reporting more tomorrow with you for sure.

[Host Nicole]

Carol, Something that Senator Slotkin said with us yesterday was that the story is that it made its way into the grand jury at all. Who's taking this case into the grand jury?

[Carol Lennig]

The prosecutors that brought this case have either none in the case of one person, no experience in the Department of Justice prior to joining Jeanine Perot, or they have very limited experience. They are Steve Vander Velden, a former Westchester local district attorney who worked as a prosecutor in a local office with her many years ago. And the other is Carlton Davis, who worked primarily for Republican members of Congress and had a short detail as a member. A detail is a special assistant U.S. attorney, a fairly junior position at almost like a temporary role in one year in the 2000 teens. And so these people are not what you'd consider the top flight of the Justice Department to handle such a case. And in this situation, for Mr. Vanderbilt, and have no experience in the Department of Justice, I wanted to underline something that Congressman Crow said, which is, you know, he says he's taking names. He's going to have demand some accountability for this. There is a wonderful document. The Justice Department prosecutors live by the Justice Manual, and it requires prosecutors to have a duty to believe that they have the evidence to sustain a conviction on the crime. They are bringing in a court of law conviction, which is not the grand jury. Right. That's the trial. They have to believe before they go to the grand jury that they have enough evidence in hand at that moment to convict someone and to sustain that conviction on appeal. And there is very little Doubt that the lack of evidence in this case was so stunning that grand jurors who are not lawyers and who had no defense lawyers in the room believe that that evidence just didn't exist. If regular people walking off the street with no law degree and no adversarial process in which a defense lawyer can be telling them, hey, what about this? If they walk off into this jury room and say, that's nothing, that's a huge problem. It's not just an embarrassment. It's a violation of the justice manual. It's a violation of the ethical duties of the prosecutors.

[Host Nicole]

I mean, James Sample. It's also, I think. I think Carol has led us up to the right place where the questioning should begin. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt that for how inexperienced they are and how loyal to Jeanine Pirro they are, someone gave them a copy of that manual and they knew they had to go in with a case to try to indict a case that they could win in court. They either had a plan for manufacturing evidence at some point between achieving an indictment, or they were simply going in to say they went in. Both seem to represent a broken Department of Justice.

[James Samplesier]

Either or. Or maybe both. Right. You think about it. There's a Supreme Court case that goes back to 1962 called Wood v. Georgia. And that case is all about the role of the grand jury. And the Supreme Court said then that the role of the grand jury, quoting here, I want you to listen carefully for the adjectives that the Supreme Court used is to security to the innocent against. And here come the adjectives. Hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecutions. Hasty, malicious and oppressive. Anyone think we've seen hasty?

[Host Nicole]

Three for three. Yeah.

[James Samplesier]

That's literally the reason that grand jury so rarely return findings of no, true Bill is not that grand juries are suddenly rising up and having their moment. The reason is, as Carol says, that the prosecutors are pre screen and filter out the cases that they're taking to the grand jury. That's why we're seeing grand juries have these moments right now. That's why this is occurring. I mean, the case involving the lawmakers, we're talking about bringing a criminal case. That is for, number one, pure political speech and number two, where the content of that speech is follow the law.

[Host Nicole]

Right.

[James Samplesier]

It says a lot that the grand jurors in that room that average citizens and have more common sense than Department of Justice lawyers.

[Host Nicole]

So how do you think lawyers walked into a grand jury with this case?

[James Samplesier]

I think the lawyers who walked into the grand Jury with that case are doing the bidding of superiors. They are doing the work of political appointees for political purposes. Maybe that's performative, maybe it's prosecutorial, maybe it's some of both. But it is all about what they are being told to do. And not at all about the law, not at all about democracy, not at all about our system of government.

[Host Nicole]

Tim, I always get picked for juries. I don't know what that says about me. I always get picked. And it's sort of awesome, right? Like, you see, these people have nothing else in common except they drew the same number. They're there on the same day. I wonder, though, how you fix this, right? Like we were talking to local officials in Minneapolis and Minnesota about how you begin to repair their communities. And this feels like as much of a long term effort as that, right? Because you know how we now live in a country, or at least in the District of Columbia and the Eastern District of Virginia, where jurors have on more than one occasion listened to one side of legal argument and said, no, I don't believe you. How do you repair the system after they're gone?

[Tim Miller]

Well, we're gonna have to clean house. And I think that's gonna be a big question. I mean, we have a lot of question between now and a Democratic presidential primary. A lot of work to do between now and then. But I think that'll be a big question for those candidates is how they navigate this. Because in the past you kept career employees in their jobs. That was the whole point. You had experts in all these jobs. But. But now this administration has replaced a lot of real expertise with a bunch of hacks. And I think one way that we're seeing the kind of nature find a way on fixing it without any intervention is a lot of folks are leaving. You know, I mean, I understand the idea that the prosecutors have brought this case, where we're certainly doing so on orders from political figures, up the food chain from them. But we've seen those orders be given to other prosecutors and have them quit. I mean, in Minneapolis, 75% of the Minneapolis U.S. attorney's office has quit already. And so on the one hand, that's, that is wonderful and those folks should be praised. On the other hand, you had the former chief of staff to Pam Bondi posting on X, I think, two weeks ago, saying, basically, if you're an attorney out there somewhere in the country that supports the Trump agenda, you call me. Because we need assistant US Attorneys, which is a crazy thing to post. And that's A very coveted job and Carol would know better than me. But so I do think they are going to be putting people in these roles that don't have the judgment for them or don't have the experience for them. And that's going to have to be a house cleaning if we ever get through this.

[Host Nicole]

Tim, I know you've interviewed a lot of these six, and we've had the privilege of interviewing them as well. There's. I just had your colleague Sarah Longwell on. She's talking about the rage that voters feel. There is something in waging this fight that they didn't really pick it. They released this video and Trump is threatening to charge them with crimes, crimes as serious as treason, which is punishable by death. He's brought their case before a grand jury. Their fight is something different than a lot of the things that you and I have covered really over the nine years of Trump. And I wonder what you see from, from Senator Kelly and Senator Slotkin and Jason Crow are the three that we have on this show the most. But they seem to get steelier and stronger and more direct and they seem to either be lifted or inspired by some of the courage in Minneapolis or maybe I'm projecting that onto them. But there is something about this fight they're waging against the injustices of the Trump administration that I haven't seen before in the Trump story.

[Tim Miller]

Yeah, well, look, I do think their rage has grown into this outside of the context of this authoritarian moment. We've seen this from politicians in the past, politicians that have arisen to the occasion that you might not have expected. The Mark Kelly that I watched in that Senate race in Arizona, maybe this was just out of strategy because Arizona, having been a swing state, was presenting himself really as you can have, a moderate bipartisan, you know, not really a bomb thrower. Like, that was not the face that he put put forth. And I think that that's maybe his nature probably like he'd rather be a problem solver than, you know, than, you know, like raging being the leader of a resistance fight. But this is the moment has been thrust upon him and this is what a lot of us have been calling for. And you want Democrats, they're going to rise to the moment and say, and say no, you know, and say hell no, frankly, in the face of like the abuse from this administration, he's done that. And, you know, I've been talking to a lot of Democrats about, like, what Democratic voters want and what Democratic strategists tell their candidates. And I'm really seeing right now like a, you know, instead of having like a left, right divide within the Democratic Party, like you're seeing a, like who is ready to fight in this moment divide versus who is not that is not that ideological. And you're seeing Slotkin and Crow and Kelly who are more traditionally moderates. And then you're saying kind of AOC or Zoran or whoever who are more traditionally on the left who arise in the moment. And you're seeing some folks who fit both of those ideological categories who are still catching up.

[Host Nicole]

Yeah, it's like the fighters and everybody else. That's exactly, perfectly put. Tim Miller and Carol Lanik, thank you so much for starting us off this hour. When we come back, one of the journalists on that breaking news we brought you at the end of the last hour that the highly classified whistleblower complaint against Tulsi Gabbard centers on a conversation between foreign nationals about Donald Trump's son in law, Jared Kushner. Also ahead for us, how to curb Donald Trump's thirst for power and hurt him where it makes the biggest impact politically. My conversation with Professor Scott Galloway and why he's calling for an economic boycott of companies who capitulate to Donald Trump and help enable his autocratic ways. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.

[Progressive Insurance Announcer]

For a small business owner, every day is full of surprises, some great, some not so great, like when a client cancels their order at the last minute. But here's a surprise you will like. Progressive provides small business owners with 30 customizable coverage options to help keep their business going strong. So go ahead, surprise yourself. Get a quote in as little as 8 [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates and third party insurers. Coverage is not available in all state or for all vehicles and coverage selections.

[Host Nicole]

Shipping, billing, admin, payroll, marketing, you're managing all the things. So why waste time sending important documents the old fashioned way? Mail and ship when you want, how you want with stamps.com, print postage on demand 247 and schedule pickups from your office or home. Save up to 90% with automated rate shopping. That's why over 1 million small businesses trust stamps.com go to stamps.com and use code podcast to trystamps.com risk free for 60 days.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Tyler Redicure from 2311 Racing. You think racing's tough? Try getting your friends to agree on dinner plans. I'm in. Wait, maybe what time again? While they figure that out, I rev up Champa Casino play on Your browser. No downloads necessary. No need to negotiate. Why wait on them when you can spin for yourself? Play [e-mail] no purchase necessary.

[Host Nicole]

VGW Group voidware prohibited by law.

[Carol Lennig]

CTNC's 21 plus sponsored by Jamba Casino.

[Host Nicole]

Back now with more on the story we brought you at the end of the last hour about a whistleblower complaint against Tulsi Gabbard that was so highly classified that it sat locked in a safe and had to be hand delivered to Congress. Both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times are this afternoon reporting that the complaint centered around a conversation between two foreign nationals who were talking about Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son in law. The whistleblower has accused Tulsi Gabbard, the dni, of improperly restricting access to the report. The New York Times reports that some people who have seen the complaint have questioned whether she was trying to protect Jared Kushner from scrutiny. We're joined by Julian Barnes of the New York Times, who has a byline on that new reporting that we're reading from about Tulsi Gabbard. So, Julian, take us through what you and your colleague are reporting.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

Well, this is an intelligence report from last year, right as the Trump administration was negotiating with Iran, preparing to strike Iran. And the intelligence report was collected, actually by another, a partner nation. We don't know yet what nation did it, but they handed it over to the nsa. They, they shared the intelligence. And these two people were talking about Jared Kushner. Now, the ORIG report redacted his name or masked his name as they, as the intelligence people say. But people who read it could kind of tell who was about. And the whistleblower read this and said, this is important, we want to, we should distribute this more widely. Tulsi Gabbard made the decision not to. And the intelligence report, some of it's mundane. It just says that Jared Kushner is the person to contact in the Trump administration, that he has sort of more influence with President Trump than other people negotiating Mideast peace deals. But it also had some gossip. And whatever this gossip was, we don't know, the whistleblower thought it should be distributed more widely. Tulsi Gabbard, the lawyer for the National Security Agency and then ultimately inspector general said, no, it did not have value and shouldn't be distributed. But that is the root of the controversy that has come to light in the last couple of weeks.

[Host Nicole]

You have this important paragraph that I think helps people understand why this is such a Big deal. And I just want to read it. Some official, quote, some officials who either read or were briefed on the intelligence report said that had Tulsi Gabbard not moved to restrict access to the report, it would have been quickly forgotten as one of the many that recount foreign officials trying to figure out who has influence with Trump. Is there any anything that you're able to report about why she handled it the way she did, why she didn't? I mean, isn't there a process for legally what you're supposed to do with the whistleblower report?

[Reporter/Correspondent]

There is. I mean, what you need to remember about this administration is they're very sensitive about naming politicians, naming Trump administration officials in intel reports. Tulsi Gabbard had pulled back some reports about Venezuela that involved Rick Grinnell and Nicholas Maduro. Right. So the issue of masked names or unmasking names was a big deal in the first Trump administration. And so officials are sensitive now. And I was talking to a former official who said, look, you know, a report with Jared Kushner's name comes across the desk of Tulsi Gabbard, they're going to take extra care because they know President Trump and senior administration people are going to be very sensitive about an intelligence report that talks about Jared Kushner. Now, you know, I'm told by people who looked at this, you know, had it not been restricted, it's the kind of thing that would have come and gone. But the fact that it got put in the safe made some people very curious. It struck the whistleblower as wrong, and they reported it to the inspector general. Now, when an inspector general looks at something, they have to give it to Congress if they find a problem. Now, in this case, the inspector general ruled that Tulsi Gabbard acted properly or within her power to restrict it. Still others have said, you know, once it becomes a controversy like that, there's a sort of duty or a best practice to give it to Congress. Now, it did not go to Congress in. Until the whistleblower's attorney started asking questions last November.

[Host Nicole]

James, there's a murky part of the story and sort of processes that are opaque by design. And then there's a basic thread that you could pull through anything that has a tie to firing the JAG officers. It has a tie to what Trump did last time there was a whistleblower. I think the perfect call started with a whistleblower report that was locked in a safe. A real aversion to the sort of regular order of handling whistleblower complaints.

[James Samplesier]

Yeah, process matters. That's how I would phrase this. This administration has consistently, you want to talk about a thread you can take through a variety of topics, a contempt for process and there's due process that's on a constitutional level. There's step by step protocol for things like this that both in statute and in regulations within agencies. And then there is a trust in individuals integrity that comes with a presumption of regularity. We've talked about that in other contexts. Judges have talked about that vis a vis U.S. attorneys going into their courtrooms and the idea that judges can't rely on the affirmations of the government attorneys appearing before them. This sounds like it may have been okay. It may have been copacetic. And the fact that an inspector general signed off on it gives me some confidence. It's worth noting that it is nice to have inspector generals in place because that's not something we have when you need them in every agency these days.

[Host Nicole]

Yeah. Julian, thank you for your reporting on this story. It's been one of those enduring mysteries of the first year and your reporting helps illuminate what it's all about. James Sample, thank you for being here with us at the table. When we come back, my conversation with Scott Galloway and his argument that the best way to stand up to Donald Trump right now in this moment is to render him politically impotent. It's an economic boycott against the companies that are standing by him and enabling his excesses. We'll show you that conversation next.

[Progressive Insurance Announcer]

As a small business owner, sometimes it feels like no matter how much planning you do, there's always surprises, like an urgent, expensive repair. But here's the surprise you will like with progressive. Small business owners save 13% on their commercial auto insurance when they pay in full. So enjoy a surprise for once. Get a quote in as little as 8 [e-mail] progressive casualty insurance company and affiliates. Discounts not available in all states or situations.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Lifelock, how can I help?

[Carol Lennig]

The IRS said I filed my return, but I haven't.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

One in four tax paying Americans has.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Paid the price of identity fraud. What do I do?

[Host Nicole]

My refund though.

[Carol Lennig]

I'm freaking out.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Don't worry, I can fix this.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

Lifelock fixes identity theft guaranteed and gets your money back with up to $3 million in coverage.

[Host Nicole]

I'm so relieved.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

No problem. I'll be with you every step of the way.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

One in four was a fraud paying American. Not anymore. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com Specialoffer terms apply.

[Scott Galloway]

Bubba Wallace here with Tyler Reddick.

[James Samplesier]

You know what's more nerve wracking than.

[Host Nicole]

Waiting for qualifying results?

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Waiting for the green flag to drop.

[Tim Miller]

Instead of pacing, you rev up with.

[Scott Galloway]

Chumba Casino's weekly new releases.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

It's like a fresh set of tires for your brain.

[James Samplesier]

Play for free at.

[Host Nicole]

Let'S Chumba.

[Scott Galloway]

No purchase necessary.

[Host Nicole]

VGW Group Void we're prohibited by law. CTC's 21+ sponsored by Jamba Casino. It's a story we've been covering all afternoon, really all week and all month. The sheer power exhibited by the ordinary people living in Minneapolis in response to this overreach, this authoritarian moment in American history. That's where we started our conversation with powerhouse podcast host, entrepreneur, author, professor Scott Galloway earlier this afternoon about a fast accelerating movement in this country of protest in the face of everything we're living through. Watch what he had to say. The one and only Scott Galloway joins us now. Scott, I follow you. I look for your posts when I wake up because you're a few hours ahead of us in London and I've been riveted by the effort to sort of speak out using our keyboards. And I think I've watched your coverage of Minneapolis. I think it changed something in this country. But not everybody is either able or willing to go out into the streets and protest. But there is something that every single person can do and this idea of agency. I want to talk to you about the tech boycotts, explain.

[Scott Galloway]

Oh, it sounds good to see you, Nicole, and thanks for having me on. So when Secretary Noem described an ICU nurse serving veterans as a domestic terrorist, I think like a lot of people I felt very frustrated and even sense of anxiety. And my friend Dan Harris at 110% happier, says Action absorbs anxiety. And I'd like to think I've stumbled upon something that most Americans don't recognize and that is they have a very potent weapon hiding in plain sight. And that is the most radical act in a capitalist society is non participation. And that if you were to just unsubscribe from OpenAI's paid ChatGPT, you are taking $10,000 out of the market capitalization because that's $240 a year. They traded 40 times their revenues. And 10 companies responsible for 40% of the S and P companies highly sensitive to subscription revenues. And if you look at when the President has crisply walked back his actions, whether it's plans to annex Greenland for tariffs, it's when the markets go down.

[Host Nicole]

Can you take us through. I mean I think you've got, especially in my audience, a feeling of people who've been frustrated by not knowing what the how was an audience that has been frustrated by watching Democratic party leaders not fight. And I think that what has changed and I agree with you that one of those moments is the killing of Alex Preddy and obviously 17 days early, the earlier the killing of Renee Nicole Goode. But I think that what, what has pierced that is this idea of agency. And I wonder if you can just be really practical and really how to for us, what are the companies?

[Scott Galloway]

So if you go to resist and unsubscribe, I've listed what I call ground zero. And these are tech platforms that the President seems to listen to and in some instances are enabling his infrastructure in ice. And who text me and I'm sure they text you with one narrative around I hate what's going on but aren't willing to speak out. And these companies are highly sensitive to any slowdown in subscription. And then there's what I call the blast zone. And that's companies that are directly enabling ice. But the whole point is, you know, the most famous economic strike is the Montgomery bus strike. And there was a very cinematic moment where a very brave woman refused to give up her seat. But what actually caused the change in the buses policy, the bus systems policy, was a year long carpool effort that took $2 million out of the municipal bus systems coffers. That's when they decided to desegregate the bus system. So this is meant to be a cumulative effort. And you can either have five families not buy groceries, which will have a $10,000 impact on Kroger's market cap, or you could unsubscribe from one streaming media platform. And the free gift with purchase here, Nicole, is you're going to find out like me that you had Amazon one since 2000, the healthcare 2020 that cost you $199 a year, that you had three Amazon, you had three Apple TV accounts that you didn't know about. This is an easy way to save money and not miss it. So like dry January where you might calibrate your drinking, this is a way to save money and send a signal.

[Host Nicole]

I mean, I also feel that their actions have seem to be worse. I mean they are the executives that stood shoulder to shoulder with Donald Trump at his inauguration, which was an appalling spectacle. But I think Tim Cook was at the White House in a tuxedo the day after Alex Preddy was killed. Why do they act so immune to the things that enrage not 30, 40% of Americans, but 67% of Americans don't approve of Donald Trump.

[Scott Galloway]

Well, I can tell you what they tell me, and I have empathy for them, is that they're a fiduciary for shareholder value and they just want to wait this guy out. And while they may not agree with all his actions, that a good autocrat and kleptocrat does a very good job of punishing anyone that goes first. So everyone is kind of scared to speak out. In addition, if you'll notice, the people who he parades around have avoided tariffs, might get carve outs from Chinese tariffs, might get a government backed program that helps pay for their data centers or their chips programs. But the logical or the retort is the following. You have some fidelity or you should have some loyalty to fair markets, to civil rights, to American values that have made you a billionaire and built these incredible companies. And what I try to do, and I've spoken to about 20% of the CEOs on the list, is appeal to their emotions. And that is, these are all older men. You're going to be dead soon. When your kids are around you towards the end, do you want to be known as the guy who got your shareholder value up 3% or 10%, or do you want to be known as the guy that did the right thing even when it was really hard? So for the life of me, Nicole, I can't understand why these guys. This is such an incredible opportunity to demonstrate some leadership and speak out and have the 70% of the American public stand up and say, right on, brother. So to me, this is not only the wrong decision, it's an economic opportunity for one of them to take a leadership stand.

[Host Nicole]

I hear the same excuse. And I was obsessed with trying to find out where the padded room was where people were studying the first years of Putin, because Putin didn't start the way he is now. Right. And neither did Orban. And it was pretty hard to get anyone to admit that they were studying with the early years of autocracy would be like. And I was so angry that companies didn't seem to feel or at least wouldn't say publicly that they had any skin in the game in the country having the rule of law. Does the assault on the Department of Justice or the dismantling of large swaths of the FBI shake any of their conviction that they have this fiduciary duty to go along, to get along?

[Scott Galloway]

I think they've even admittedly stopped using the term stakeholders. They just talk about shareholders now. But I'll leave it. If you want to talk about historical context, I'll go deeper than that. I only have one piece of art in my house and it's a picture of Otto Frank revisiting the basement or the attic that he hid out with his family. I want to be clear, I think it's unfair to compare the administration to the Third Reich. I think that's not accurate and not fair. However, I do think you can draw parallels with late stage Weimar Republic where there was inflation, a loss of economic and cultural standing of middle class men. In addition, essentially what you had is the captains of industry, of German industry at the time of the biggest manufacturing companies were very worried about the rise of fascism. But Hitler said to them, if you keep quiet and support me, I will crush the trade unions and you will all get much, much wealthier. And then it got out ahead of them and there was no turning back. And one of the greatest societies of the last several centuries descended into dark. I think there are some analogues now where the captains of our industry are purposely avoiding American values and not speaking out in hopes that they'll just get wealthier and they can wait these guys out. And history is brutally clear. Appeasement and waiting out a slow descent into fascism does not end well.

[Host Nicole]

That was just the beginning, believe it or not, to what turned into a much longer and comprehensive discussion with our friend Scott Galloway. You can hear the entire conversation on the Best People podcast starting Monday. If you haven't done so already, check out this week's conversation with actor and activist Rosie Perez. When we come back, another example. The judicial system and the American people reining in or standing up to Donald Trump. An immigration judge has ended the deportation case against an undocumented father of three US Marines, paving the way for him to seek legal permanent residency in the United States. Jacob Savarov spoke, except exclusively with one of his sons, a Marine. And he'll be our guest next. Another judge has ruled against Donald Trump and his administration. This time. It's a case that became an early public symbol of the Trump administration's violent immigration practices. You might remember this video. This is Narciso Barranco on the ground there. He's an undocumented Mexican national. He he's the father of three United States Marines. He's lived in the United States of America for three decades. He was arrested last June during ICE's massive operations in Los Angeles. While clearing weeds outside an IHOP restaurant, Barranco raised the head of his Weed tremor as he retreated, but ICE agents pinned him down on the ground and handcuffed him. They accused him of assaulting law enforcement. Barranco was then transferred to a detention center, released on bond, and fitted with an ankle monitor. New York Times explains that Judge Kristen Piedemire has dropped Barranco's case, saying that he had provided proof that he was the father of three American sons in the United States military, rendering him eligible to obtain lawful status. I want to bring in senior political national reporter Jacob Sobroff, who's been on this story since it happened, and he has exclusive new reporting in an interview with one of Narciso Barranco's sons, Alejandro Barranco. I'm sorry. Happy to have you on the day that this news breaks and that you have Alejandro.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Yeah, me too, Nicole, and you, too. And the show have been on this since the very beginning. You and I both talked to Alejandro Barranco before anybody heard from Narciso. He said that if he had treated the detainees in Afghanistan when he was there serving as a Marine the way that the Department of Homeland Security had treated his father, he would have been tried for a war crime. I got to go for your podcast, sit down with Narciso Barranco at his home in Santa Ana, California, after he was released. And he told me about how proud he was of all three of his sons, how proud he was of how much they loved this country and what an awful experience this has been. And now that this immigration judge has dismissed this deportation case, I wanted to know from Alejandro today. We caught up earlier this afternoon about how his father's doing, how he's feeling, and whether or not he feels like he's out of the woods. Let's watch what he said. Would you say that your dad feels safe now after the deportation case has been dismissed, or is he still in fear of potentially being detained again? Yeah, he's still, he's still nervous. He. He's not, he doesn't feel like he can live his, his life normally just yet until he gets something in hand or something in paper that will defend him. So he's still, he still doesn't want to go out and just would rather stay home. He's only going out to church, right? Yeah, I believe so. He's just playing it safe right now. Just playing it safe right now. Nicole, when he says something on paper, he means this parole in place option that his father has as the father of three US Marine Corps sons because they are serving in the military. He does have a pathway to legal status here in the United States. And after the Department of Homeland Security was harshly critical of him this summer as he went through this, I wanted to know to Alejandro, from Alejandro, what his message is to the Department of Homeland Security today in the wake of all this. Here's what he said. He never intended to hurt anybody. He never really showed that. And it's just like clearing that and clearing his name, because he's not that person. He's not a bad person, or what they wanted him to be. Any message now to the President of the United States as they continue these operations across the country? Well, let's try to solve this and do the right thing and maybe actually spend time in the community or come out to our communities and see what's actually going on. So, finally, Nicole, unfortunately for the Barranco family, that message has not been received by this White House. The Department of Homeland Security sent me a statement just a couple of minutes ago, reading in part, we will appeal this lawless ruling. This activist judge's ruling does not change the facts that Narciso Barranco is an illegal alien. It goes on to say all kinds of stuff, like the agents took appropriate action and an appropriate use of force. But given what we've seen on the tape, it is very hard to believe all that, as you and I both know.

[Host Nicole]

But this is why Trump's at a lower standing in terms of approval with the American people. This is not only not the worst of the worst, this is a man who came to America, works as a landscaper, and raised not one, not two, but three kids who served in the United States military. This is actually the best of the best.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

I was going to say the exact same thing. If there's ever been a candidate for your podcast the Best People, it is Narciso Barranco, a man who is so unbelievably proud of his three boys, one of whom is still currently an active duty Marine, which is part of why he can apply for this parole in place system. Alejandro, I spoke to today from Washington, D.C. who has been going back to our nation's capital to talk to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle through the Forward US Organization to try to let them know that his dad is just one of many in similar situations just like this. And that exactly as you said, the idea that in any way, shape or form, a guy cutting bushes outside of an IHOP is the worst of the worst. By the way, Alejandro, the former Marine, in between going to Washington, has been picking up his dad's roots and shifts continuing to cut those bushes because Alejandro himself is too nervous to go outside and continue his work until he has that paper, until he gets parole in place. If there's ever been a family that is more dedicated to this country, I truly have not seen very many of them. This is an extraordinary family. And I say that having spent so much time with them myself personally, just.

[Host Nicole]

Quickly, they've announced a drawdown in Minneapolis. Do you believe that or do you feel as many Minnesotans do, Trust But Verify.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Trust But Verify has passed its prologue here in Los Angeles. You look at what's happening on the streets where raids continue every single day despite the fact that Greg Bevino is no longer here and no longer the commander at large. Tom Homan, in many respects is Greg Bevino in a suit and tie, the father of the family separation policy. And we know that he was the one that pushed mass deportation during that convention, during this administration. And mass deportation is family separation. So he's still the man in charge.

[Host Nicole]

Jacob Soborough, thank you so much for bringing us all your reporting. It's great to see you, my friend.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Thanks, Nicole.

[Host Nicole]

One more break. We'll be right back. I mentioned it a moment ago, but wanted to remind everyone that this week on the Best People podcast, I had a chance to talk to my friend Rosie Perez about everything happening, everything we cover on this show, ice's deadly use of violence, using our voices, even if we're afraid to do so. Watch. I just think that the price that those two individuals did pay with their lives, the price that the individuals, like you said, who got shot, who are suffering in detention right now, it has woken America up. It really has. It's made everyone get up and look in the mirror and say, man, what am I doing? What am I doing? And I think that whatever you're doing, you may not have to go out and protest, but you can go out and vote. You can hear our entire conversation on this week's episode of the Best People. Just scan the QR code on your screen or download it wherever you get your podcasts. You can also watch the episode on YouTube by scanning the QR code on your screen. Now. One more break. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes. We are grateful.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Ready for big fun. Start for free at Chumba Casino. Sign up and enjoy a welcome bonus with gold coins and sweeps coins to explore hundreds of online social casino games.

[Reporter/Correspondent]

All from your phone.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

Spin, play and discover something new whenever.

[James Samplesier]

You feel like it.

[Reporter Jacob Soboroff]

With no downloads needed. More games, more ways to play let's Jumba no purchase necessary. VGW Group Void where prohibited by log seed Terms and conditions for details 21 +.