Loading summary
Transcript120 lines
- [00:12]
Barb McQuaid
Welcome back to Sisters in Law with Joyce Vance, Jill Wine Banks and me, Barb McQuaid, Kimberly Atkins store is away this week, but we look forward to her return next week. Don't forget to check out our merch store. We restocked everything in time for the holidays. Just go to politicon.com merch now let's get on to the show where this week we'll be discussing the nomination of Pam Bondi as attorney general, the new guardrails that give us some hope from the states, and the status of the Donald Trump criminal cases in the states. But first, before we get rolling sisters, I wanted to ask you about Thanksgiving. You know, I'm finally kind of peeling myself up off the floor after the election and I'm looking forward to Thanksgiving, spending some time with family and sustaining myself and getting away a little bit. How about you? What are your plans for Thanksgiving? Joyce, let me ask you.
- [01:08]
Joyce Vance
Yes. So we're really excited because we'll have all four of our kids home for a very, very brief period of time. So that'll be a lot of fun. And I'm going to actually cook just a separate Thanksgiving just for us because we do a much larger Thanksgiving that one of our friends hosts and it's sort of big and spread out and a great opportunity to catch up with people. So we're hoping to have the best of both worlds this year.
- [01:34]
Barb McQuaid
Oh, that sounds nice. How about you, Jill? What are your Thanksgiving plans?
- [01:37]
Jill Wine Banks
I am going to a friend's home, someone I've been very dear friends with for a long time, part of my quince group, which I know I've mentioned before, the group that I talk politics with every week by Zoom. It started during COVID to keep us sane and has continued even now. And she does all the work. I'm going to bring a jello mold because that is my family's tradition is jello molds. And I'm going to bring at least one, maybe two different jello molds. And it's so wonderful to have friends that are as good as family.
- [02:12]
Barb McQuaid
Oh, that's nice. We are also going to have all four kids together. So I'm excited about that. We are, as we often do, going to visit the in laws for Thanksgiving. And it'll be really fun to have all the kids together. We usually do, you know, like a football game if there's snow. We often play football in the snow. Probably not this year, but I'm sure we'll, we'll do some football. We also do our own family turkey Trot where we run a little 5k in the late morning to build up our appetites for the feast. You know, we probably, we probably burn about 200 calories on the run and then consume like about a thousand calories in pie. So we're, we're a big pie family, so we'll look forward to that.
- [02:55]
Joyce Vance
What, what's your favorite pie, Barb?
- [02:57]
Barb McQuaid
So I, you know, there's certainly pumpkin and apple are good, but there's this great pie available in Michigan called Traverse City 4 Berry. It is so good. It's got, you know, Traverse City cherries and blueberries and, I don't know, raspberries and strawberries. It's just like bursting with berry flavor. I'm sure there's a lot of sugar in it too, but it's so good. Do you guys have a favorite pie?
- [03:17]
Joyce Vance
You know, yours sounds really good. I love berry pie with ice cream on it. I'm sort of a purist. At Thanksgiving, I'm all about pumpkin and pecan.
- [03:26]
Barb McQuaid
Oh, pecan. That's. That's a southern thing, isn't it?
- [03:28]
Jill Wine Banks
I'm a totally apple, but also lemon. Nobody else wants my lemon.
- [03:34]
Barb McQuaid
No, I like lemon. I like lemon.
- [03:36]
Jill Wine Banks
I like key lime and lemon. But you're having a run before. Sounds like such a great idea. I love it. But we've already had snow, so maybe you'll get your snow.
- [03:46]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, we might know. Yeah, we had a little dusting too.
- [03:58]
Joyce Vance
Whether your look is fresh faced, radiant, or autumn glam, join us in spicing up your fall routine with Thrive cosmetics. You've probably seen their viral tubing mascara all over your socials. It's the one in the turquoise tube and a personal favorite. Thrive has so many other amazing products, and each high performance and trademark formula is certified as 100% vegan and cruelty free. Zero parabens, zero phthalates, zero sulfates. It's no wonder that their bestsellers have thousands of five star reviews.
- [04:29]
Jill Wine Banks
I am in love with their mascara and with their brilliant eye brightener. It's a luxurious highlighter eyeshadow combo that makes your eye look effortless. Whether you're preparing for a meeting, hosting friends, or out enjoying a fall day, there's nothing better for a fresh, vibrant look. It comes in 17 buildable shades to play with, and I do love playing with them. So you can use as little or as much as you'd like. Just apply a light shade to the inner corners of your eyes to open them and give them a glow. I use a slightly different color on the lid And a darker one in the crease. For a subtle blend, I recommend the Stella, but you can also use a metallic shade all over your eyelid and blend it with your finger for an easy smokey eye. It's my secret for making my eyes pop on camera. You have to try it.
- [05:21]
Barb McQuaid
Jill, you talk about effortless looking eyes. I can show you effortless looking. If you've seen me in the morning, you know what effortless really looks like. But I do love the Thrive mascara. I will agree with you on that one. Another thing we love is that cause is in the name for a reason. Thrive not only defines luxury beauty with their clean skin, loving ingredients and uncompromising standards, they give back too. Every purchase supports organizations helping helping communities Thrive. Thrive donates to eight major causes, including the fight against cancer and domestic abuse, veteran and education organizations, and more. I'm so glad we're a part of it. Like us, you'll feel and look great with Thrive. So spice up your fall look with Thrive Cosmetics, Luxury beauty that gives back. Right now, you can get an exclusive 20% off your first order at Thrive Cosmetics. That's Thrive Cosmetics. C A U S E M E t I c s.com sisters for 20% off your first order. You can also find the link in our show notes. Well, we now know that the nomination of Matt Gates lasted less than 1. Scaramucci. You guys remember that term? Scaramucci?
- [06:53]
Jill Wine Banks
Absolutely.
- [06:54]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah. Anthony Scaramucci was Donald Trump's press secretary who lasted, I think, was it 10 days?
- [07:00]
Jill Wine Banks
Yeah, I think so. Maybe less.
- [07:02]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, so he, he lasted eight days. But the former Florida congressman is out. He has withdrawn. As Trump's nominee to be the next attorney general, it became apparent that his history of alleged sexual misconduct and very thin resume as a lawyer, practiced for less than two years in private practice, was not gonna cut it with even Republican members of the Senate. And so now Pam Bondi is in. So let's dig into this new development. Jill, first, what happened to Gates? Why did he withdraw his name from consideration?
- [07:37]
Jill Wine Banks
Of course, what is being said is not necessarily what actually happened. So some speculation is required. To answer your question, there's the most, I would say, devious plan that's being discussed was that this was a deliberate strategy to take attention off all the other bad nominees that Donald Trump has mentioned. And that by making this really awful person who wasn't liked by any of his fellow congressmen and who clearly had no qualifications, he had no prosecution experience, he had no real trial experience, he had no management experience. So he really wasn't qualified to be the Attorney general and he wasn't liked, so he wasn't going to get the votes. And it was pretty clear that although the Senate was maybe going to cave to a lot of what Donald Trump wanted, this was one that might not make it so. There is this theory that he was nominated just to take attention off all the others. He withdrew from Congress. He resigned from Congress to prevent the release of a apparently very bad report from the House Ethics Committee. But it would have come out if he had gone forward with the nomination, if he had gone to hearings, I think there's no question it would have come out. So I'm not sure he ever really intended to see stay in it. And he was nominated after flying on a plane and with Donald Trump and having it announced immediately. And it may have just been a plot to take attention from other bad nominees.
- [09:18]
Barb McQuaid
Jill, that's really interesting that you mentioned that, because, Joyce, I want to ask you whether you think the Gates nomination was ever intended to go through or was it simply a ploy to get out from under the ethics investigation for child sex trafficking allegations?
- [09:34]
Joyce Vance
Yeah, you know, according to Matt Gaetz, this is sort of a witch hunt. It's just an effort to detract from Donald Trump getting his administration off to a good start. Which is all to say, of course, this was a ploy for him to resign from Congress without having to say he was doing it to keep the report from coming out. I mean, you know, there's no such thing as coincidence when it comes to timing like that. He resigns out of the blue just a couple of days before the report is going to get released. There's no need to resign from Congress to go through a confirmation proceeding. Nobody ever does that. It's pretty unprecedented. You know, I just think that we don't have to check our common sense at the door when we evaluate how these people behave. And Gates was clearly trying to avoid public release of this report. It's pretty interesting because now he faces this conundrum. He was reelected to the next Congress. If he actually goes in and takes the oath and becomes a member of Congress again, then the report is back in play. Right? It can be released again. Probably would be. So I'm just going to crystal ball. I never like to use my crystal ball, but I will here. I think we'll see Matt Gaetz go into Donald Trump's administration in some capacity that does not require Senate confirmation.
- [10:51]
Barb McQuaid
Oh, that's super interesting. Yeah, that. That is. Jill, do you have a thought?
- [10:55]
Jill Wine Banks
Well, the Only thing I have read is that he announced that he would not take the oath for the second.
- [11:02]
Joyce Vance
Well, yeah, he absolutely said he wouldn't take the oath. But, you know, if you notice, when he said that it was in connection with he wouldn't take the oath because he intended to serve as the next Attorney General, I think now that the Attorney General seat is not in play, you know, that's not worth the paper. It's.
- [11:19]
Jill Wine Banks
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I, I never believed it anyway, but I, that's. I missed that part about. In connection with serving.
- [11:28]
Barb McQuaid
Well, regardless of what has happened to Matt Gaetz and where he might end up, whether it's back in Congress or somewhere else in Trump's administration without confirmation, we do have a new nominee for Attorney General, and that's Pam Bondi. Jill, I want to ask you, just solely focusing on her professional experience, I'm not looking at maybe her political activity or any scandals or other things, but what do you think about her professional experience in terms of qualifications to be the Attorney General of the United States? You know, the only thing that is official in terms of qualifications is the Judiciary act of 1789 says that the Attorney General should be somebody who is, quote, learned in the law, and that's all that is required. What do you think about her professional experience?
- [12:16]
Jill Wine Banks
So, Barb, you're asking me to do something hard, which is to ignore the obvious political needs.
- [12:21]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, well, we'll come back to that.
- [12:23]
Jill Wine Banks
But ignoring that professionally, I have to say, she's a really good choice. She was the Attorney General of Florida for eight years. She served two terms, and that's all that you're allowed in Florida. So she ran a big office, which means she has management experience, she has legal experience, she has prosecution experience. I don't think there's anything that we can say against her professional qualifications.
- [12:50]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah.
- [12:51]
Joyce Vance
Oh, wait, yes, absolutely.
- [12:53]
Barb McQuaid
We can go ahead. Please do.
- [12:55]
Joyce Vance
I mean, you know, I'll just say Florida is obviously in my circuit in the 11th, but I've talked with folks over there, and I think the nicest thing that I've heard from somebody in Florida is that she surrounds herself with smart people. That's a really good trait to have as a leader. But she does not have a reputation as a legal scholar or as a tactical one. And there's some sense that she was more of a public spokesman in that regard than an Attorney General. And look, I know you want to talk about politics in a second, but let's talk about character. This is a woman who, before she was the Attorney General After Hurricane Katrina, she adopted a dog. And it turned out that that dog belonged to people who were Katrina victims and she refused to give them their dog back. She fought them in a court battle for 16 months over custody of the dog and was finally forced to return it. Y'all, that is not someone who has the character to be the Attorney General of the United States.
- [13:58]
Jill Wine Banks
That is for sure. And that was eight major concern I have about her. But Barbara limited me to her professional experience.
- [14:08]
Barb McQuaid
Yep.
- [14:08]
Joyce Vance
Well, I didn't talk about politics. I talked about professional temperament. So. Okay, we can talk about politics whenever Barb is ready. Yeah.
- [14:15]
Barb McQuaid
So I'll just say one more thing about her qualifications. She did serve as a line prosecutor for, I think about 10 years. And that usually to me says, you've got some chops. Right. You've got to try cases. Cases are staffed pretty thinly. You know, it's not like you're the fourth chair on a case like you are in court building a thick skin. So that says something to me. I agree with you that as an elected ag, it could be someone who's hands on and making very strong management decisions and leading a large office, or it could be that you hand off those duties to a deputy and you're more of the figurehead. I don't know what role she played there, but nonetheless, I will say that on paper, those are qualifications that make somebody a. An adequate candidate. Janet Reno, you know her, she had never served in the Department of Justice. She had been a prosecutor, and she had led a county office, the Miami Dade County. And now we've got Bondi, who is not only a county prosecutor, but was the head as the state ag. So I think on paper her qualifications are fine. But now let's talk about our concerns about, about number one, her integrity and number two, her loyalty to Donald Trump. Because both of those things concern me. So, Jill, what do we know about Bondi's integrity that perhaps concerns you?
- [15:29]
Jill Wine Banks
So I would put in the integrity category, keeping someone's dog when you, I mean, you know, Joyce and I would fight to the death to protect our dogs. And anybody who would do that is a monster. I'm sorry, there's just no getting around.
- [15:44]
Barb McQuaid
But this is my beloved pet. Of course she'd give it back.
- [15:47]
Joyce Vance
Right.
- [15:47]
Barb McQuaid
The idea, like, right.
- [15:48]
Joyce Vance
I. And they're Katrina victims. They've been through this traumatic hurricane and then you won't give them their dog. I mean, no, we're done right there.
- [15:58]
Jill Wine Banks
It's unbelievable. But then I would add, I mean, that's obviously an overwhelming character flaw. But in addition, there are some other things that would concern me about her integrity, and that is some of the arguments. And, you know, we've already said she was sort of a spokesman. And some of those arguments, I think were so ill founded that it makes me wonder about her integrity in bringing cases and making arguments that don't have really sound legal bases. So that would concern me about her integrity. And there was this investigation, I guess it never amounted to anything about her having received, I think it was $25,000 as a campaign contribution from Donald Trump's PAC when she was deciding whether to indict the Trump University, and which she ultimately decided not to. Now, she says that she wasn't aware of the contribution and that could be true. So, you know, we don't know because nothing ever came of it. But it's something that, again, makes me wonder. She should have given the money back if she didn't know about it. She should have given it back, and that would have made me feel better about her integrity.
- [17:15]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah. How about you, Joyce? Both the integrity question and Bondi's loyalty to Donald Trump and her history with Donald Trump, what about that? Do you have any concerns there? I have some.
- [17:28]
Joyce Vance
You cannot be an election denier and be the Attorney General of the United States, and Bondi is an election denier. And, you know, there's something else troubling, and I don't know what the date of this was. I spent some time last night trying to chase down the video. But my impression is that this is something that happened on the campaign trail for 2024. Bondi is at a Trump rally. There's a man in the crowd who's holding up a sign that says, lock her up. You know, like, I mean, the crazy people, right? Bondi sort of points out into the audience, and she agrees. She repeats it, Lock her up. Look, this isn't what attorneys general do. It doesn't matter if they're Republicans or Democrats. Their commitment is to the facts and the law. Their oath is to the Constitution not to use the Justice Department as a political tool for a president to punish his enemies. I think she's not qualified on that basis. I worry that she's going to get confirmed nonetheless. But I hope that the Republicans in the Senate will do their damn job because they are the only firewall we have left on these nominations.
- [18:35]
Jill Wine Banks
And, you know, when we talk about loyalty, particularly in this administration, particularly in light of what we've read of Project 2025 and what we have heard from the President, Elect, we have to worry about whether that loyalty means that she will allow the Department of Justice to be the personal law firm of Donald Trump. And that makes it more serious a question than in past cases. I mean, we've had the brother of the president, Robert F. Kennedy was the Attorney general, and no one questioned that he was going to abuse the Department of Justice and use it for the political purposes of his brother. And so it's not just loyalty. It's that in this particular circumstance, loyalty becomes a questionable factor.
- [19:26]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah. So let me just say this. First, Joyce, I didn't think I could love you more, but I love the way you threw the phrase attorneys general in the middle of your sentence. Well done. Love that. I can't stand when someone says attorney general's. No, this is one of those few instances where we say attorneys general. Love it. But, yeah, I agree with you that I have some concerns. You know, one there is the accepting the $25,000 contribution from the Trump foundation four days before she declined to prosecute Trump University. You know, she denied wrongdoing. The Florida ethics panel cleared her, whatever that means. But I think that the Senate really needs to dig into that a little bit more. I want to know more about that, Joyce. The politics do trouble me, certainly. You know, Jeff Sessions campaigned for Donald Trump, but not in the way that Pam Bondi has with, you know, really being a Fox News personality promoting his agenda. And in particular, I also watched a video, Joyce, where someone in the crowd starts chanting, lock her up. And she says, lock her up. I love that. Lock her up.
- [20:39]
Joyce Vance
So I think it might be the same one that we both saw, because.
- [20:42]
Barb McQuaid
That'S the fall of so troubling. Because that is a real attack on the rule of law. Right. That's the idea that we're going to lock up Hillary Clinton because she is Donald Trump's political rival. Prosecutors have to rise above that. An attorney general has to rise above that and say there are politics and then there is the rule of law. And at the Department of Justice, politics may never play a role in who gets prosecuted. So I found that to be deeply disturbing. You know, she's been very conservative. She was part of the group of attorneys, Attorneys general there. I did. I did it again. Who brought challenges to the Affordable Care Act. She has been a, an opponent to marriage equality, same sex marriage. I suppose, you know, with a president like Donald Trump, that part is to be expected. But I think it's some of these other things that I worry about. Adequate independence. And, Jill, you know, you mentioned this Idea that John F. Kennedy appointed his brother to be the Attorney General, but that was pre Watergate. Jill, have you ever heard of Watergate? No, I haven't. I know you haven't.
- [21:51]
Jill Wine Banks
Yeah, I know you haven't.
- [21:53]
Barb McQuaid
But I just want to.
- [21:54]
Jill Wine Banks
It was hard to me.
- [21:55]
Barb McQuaid
I just want to raise this point, which is the post Watergate norms are all about independence between the White House and the Justice Department. That never used to be the case. We didn't worry about it. But after what we saw happen in Watergate, there have been these memos that go out every administration that limits communication between the Justice Department and the White House to avoid any sort of even appearance of partisan politics playing a role. Certainly the Justice Department will advance and work to fulfill and execute the President's priorities. And so if the President says, we want to focus on immigration enforcement or whatever it is, yes, they should do that. But it's this case by case. I want you to go after this person. I want you to not go after that person that we have worked very hard to avoid since the Watergate era. And I worry that we may see a crumbling of that norm with the appointment of Pam Bondi.
- [22:49]
Jill Wine Banks
And I worry greatly about it because it is a very emotional part of my life to think about that during Watergate, during the crime of Watergate, not during the trial. John Dean, the Counsel to the President, White House Counsel, was in direct communication with my former boss, Henry Peterson, the head of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, who was giving them all the information about the investigation. That is what led to changes in the rules of ethics and the line between the White House and the Department of Justice, a line which I think is absolutely essential. But let me just say something about the Attorney General, because you mentioned that she had defended something that we probably would not. We wouldn't agree with on LGBTQ and gay marriage, same sex marriage. When you are the Attorney General, part of your job is to defend state laws and state agencies, whether you agree with it or not. When I took the role, first as Solicitor General and then as Deputy Attorney General, I made it clear that if it came up and there was some restrictions put on abortion in Illinois, I would not argue that because I was firmly against it. And I knew that the Attorney General, because he was very strongly Catholic, was not a Matthew. I also told him I was going to do everything I could to change his mind on that issue, which I believe I did. But basically the Attorney General is elected to defend. And so I'm not going to blame her because it was a state law she was defending.
- [24:39]
Barb McQuaid
Yep, that's a really good point. Well, why don't we leave it there? But it'll be interesting to see this, how this nomination plays through. I will say this. I don't think she is a perfect candidate. I think she's probably a pretty flawed candidate. But I'm really glad it's not going to be Matt Gaetz.
- [24:58]
Joyce Vance
You know, don't you worry about that. I mean, not to belabor the point, but I just have to say this. I feel like Matt Gaetz was a little bit of a lost leader. Right. Throw him out. Let everybody outrage.
- [25:08]
Jill Wine Banks
Absolutely. Wow.
- [25:09]
Joyce Vance
Pam Bondi computer. We have to resist that temptation.
- [25:13]
Barb McQuaid
You're right.
- [25:14]
Joyce Vance
We deserve a good, qualified and well ethic. Attorney General.
- [25:20]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, that's such a good point.
- [25:21]
Joyce Vance
Determine, Donald.
- [25:23]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, I mean, there's something, it's called the anchoring effect.
- [25:26]
Joyce Vance
Right.
- [25:27]
Barb McQuaid
You set this expectation and then it's very easy to exceed that expectation. So. Well, Matt Gates was bad, but I guess Jack the Ripper. We all good on Jack the Ripper? I think so. Let's all vote to confirm.
- [25:37]
Jill Wine Banks
It doesn't mean that I'm good on Kelsey Gabbard or that I'm good on Heth. I would say those are two that I just have to really say. I hope that the line hasn't been put so low by Matt Gaetz that they fly through.
- [25:53]
Joyce Vance
I mean, and look, Robert Kennedy, too. And this is the realistic challenge that the Senate faces. I mean, the president is the leader of your party. If you just refuse to confirm any of his nominees, you can piss him off. And with Donald Trump, that's a real risk. But these nominees are so just far out of bounds, so far beyond the norms, so far beyond what the American people are entitled to. It's going to be a real challenge for this Senate. And I fear that Republican senators who failed to impeach Donald Trump will not be up for the challenge. And we will all pay the price. There's a lot going on in the world these days, and it can feel especially stressful or hopeless when things are outside of our control. That's why we're all such big believers in the power of meditation with calm. Calm can help you restore your sense of balance and peace when you're surrounded by chaos. Since I've started using it, finding my center has been much easier. Challenges and stressors feel manageable instead of seeming like massive obstacles.
- [26:59]
Jill Wine Banks
I know, Joyce. I'm certainly one of those people who likes to be in control. And these days, I don't feel so in control so Calm is a really great answer. It is the number one app for sleep and meditation. It empowers you to calm your mind and change your life. Calm knows everyone faces unique challenges in their daily lives and mental health isn't about a one size fits all solution. That's why Calm offers a wide range of content to help you navigate life's ups and downs with programs like Meditations that are designed to help you work through anxiety and stress, boost your focus, build healthier habits, and take better care of your physical well being. Who doesn't need that?
- [27:42]
Barb McQuaid
There are also sleep stories, sleep meditations, and calming music that will help you drift off to restful sleep quickly and naturally. It's so relaxing. It's the perfect end to a stressful day. But when you're feeling overwhelmed, we recommend you try their grounding exercises too. These short, guided sessions use sensation, movement and breathwork to help you relax and reset. Calm even has powerful expert LED talks designed to help you handle grief, improve self esteem, care for relationships, and more.
- [28:14]
Joyce Vance
Calm puts the tools you need right in your pocket and can help you dedicate just a few minutes each day to live a happier, healthier life. I'm always finding new things. Last week I found some music that you can play that helps you fall asleep and really enjoyed that. So stress less, sleep more, and live better with Calm. For listeners of our show, Calm is offering an exclusive offer of 40% off a Calm premium subscription at calm.com sisters. Go to calm.com sisters for 40% off unlimited access to Calm's entire library. Again, that's calm.com sisters. You can also find the link in our show notes. So we all understand the risk in this new Trump administration. The adults have left the room, the traditional guardrails are finished and gone. But nature abhors a vacuum. And already we're seeing some signs of new guardrails, albeit a little bit further back from the road, that are possibly emerging. You know, I'm not sure I'd go so far as to suggest that I'm feeling optimistic. It's more like the suggestion that we have some grounds for hope. So I thought after the conversation about Pam Bondi that maybe we'd spend a little bit of time today exploring the possibility for these new guardrails in some unexpected places. In a Trump administration without traditional guardrails, where might new ones crop up? So, Barb, earlier this week you flagged the situation for us about what's going on in Oklahoma, where local officials stood up to a Bible thumpin school superintendent, can you tell us about what's going on there and what sort of potential that might signal for reestablishing guardrails?
- [30:04]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah. So this gave me a little bit of hope, you know, that there was this push to have Christian Bible lessons implemented into a school district, and there was a pushback from that, you know, in Oklahoma, which is a red state under the theory that there is a separation between church and state in this country and that the First Amendment has, you know, two key provisions, the free exercise of religion and the anti establishment clause. There is no established religion. And so I thought it was reassuring, I think, that this movement to push toward, you know, Christian Bible influence in our public schools was pushed back. That gives me a little bit of hope, but of course, it's not what's happening everywhere.
- [30:52]
Joyce Vance
Yeah. So do you think it's possible that we could see something like this where local officials take it upon themselves to do the right thing? I'm intrigued because Jill had made that comment earlier about how, as the state's attorney general, you're obligated to argue in favor of state laws or work that counties are doing whether you agree or not. And here, you know, we don't know what the prevailing mood was in Oklahoma, but I suspect expect that there were some people who are religious in their personal lives who said, look, we can't force this on other people. This violates the First Amendment. Do you think that there's hope that we'll see more local officials doing that?
- [31:29]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, I don't know. And, you know, I worry about it a little bit just because it means that within a state, you're going to have this patchwork of some places where there is a separation of church and state and other places where, you know, everybody's forced to watch videos about the Bible and other kinds of things. The thing in Oklahoma was especially egregious because it was all about the state superintendent kind of promoting himself. He created a video of himself and required every district to show the video. You know, there was at the time some accusation that he was sort of campaigning to be Trump's Secretary of Education. Of course, that was foolish because as we know, someone who is an educator has no chance of being selected as the Secretary of Education. You have to apparently be involved.
- [32:17]
Joyce Vance
You have to have lied. Right. You have to have lied about your college degree to be the Secretary of.
- [32:22]
Barb McQuaid
Education and be involved instead in professional wrestling. So. So that was what happened there. And I think some of it may have just been, you know, personal distaste for the way this guy was trying to grandstand.
- [32:34]
Jill Wine Banks
Well, it's also the fact that he was going to buy the Trump Bible to put in schools. So it's not just a Bible, it's a Trump Bible that was Trump Bibles for everybody.
- [32:47]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, well, that's because it said you must, you must buy a Bible that includes the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. constitution. And the only Bibles that have those things because of our separation of church and state is in fact the Trump Bible.
- [32:59]
Jill Wine Banks
Right.
- [33:01]
Joyce Vance
Okay. Well, look, I hear your point that this might just be a one off, but I'm hopeful that there are more righteous local officials out there who will want to do the right thing. But you know, Jill, we're also seeing more generally in blue states, governors, attorneys general, that's, I think the third time we've done that in the show. Attorneys general working together and separately to take steps to protect not just their own citizens, but people in other states. We're seeing that happen on reproductive rights and a horde of other sorts of issues. Do you think that there is potential here for these elected state officials to become guardrails, Jill?
- [33:38]
Jill Wine Banks
I think that governors and attorneys general number four. And the funny thing is attorney's general.
- [33:46]
Joyce Vance
That'S the name of the episode. It's now attorneys general.
- [33:50]
Jill Wine Banks
Doesn't it come off your tongue naturally? I can't even imagine saying attorney generals.
- [33:54]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, yeah. But when I hear it, doesn't it make you crazy? It makes me cringe.
- [33:57]
Jill Wine Banks
It does, it does, it does. But anyway, I think there has been a lot of creativity from governors and attorneys general who have banded together from blue states. There is a Democratic Attorney General's association as well as an attorneys general association that have gotten together to try to predict what's going to happen next and what can they do to protect their citizens and citizens, as you said, from other states. There's an interesting statistic which is that there were 130 cases brought in the Trump administration in his first term. Just 130 in his first term with an 83% win brought by Democratic attorneys general. There were only 60 brought in Obama's two terms. So that's like half of what one term was. And they had only a 63% win rate. And Biden, I'm not sure what the number was, but they have a lower rate than the 83%. So the Democratic Attorneys General association has been doing a lot. Governors have spoken up. Newsom has called a special session to deal with climate change and reproductive rights. And Trump has now started threatening states voting rules as a result of all this, but he really can't because the president has nothing to do with state voting rules. That doesn't prevent him from challenging it and saying he will. New York's AG and governor have spoken up. Massachusetts, many have said they will not help with the mass deportation. Of course, Trump is threatening funding of those states that don't cooperate with him. So there is a risk from standing up to him and not doing it. But all these states are getting together. And besides, bringing lawsuits is not the only, only way that they can proceed. They can write letters to congressional leaders on various issues. They can issue comments on any kind of laws that are being proposed on rulemaking. They can file amicus briefs, or amicus, depending on how you want to say it, briefs, rather than filing their own cases. And my own governor is one of those who has said that he is going to protect travel to Illinois as well as climate issues, and he will do whatever he can to fight the deprivation of federal funding as a result of his actions. And Wes Moore and Barb, your governor, Gretchen Whitmer, have taken a more nuanced stand or weaker, depending on how you view it, saying, well, we're going to seek common ground as opposed to saying we're standing up to this. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro said the same thing. Governor Walz from Minnesota sort of took a stronger position than they did, but not as strong as, you know, others. But he did say he would defend against, you know, for gun restrictions, for abortion rights, for climate change, for labor rights. So I think the governors and the attorneys general are really prepared to take action and protect people coming into their state to exercise their rights. And it'll be interesting to see what happens. And I'm looking forward to. I wish we had the guardrails in the federal government, but I'm glad to know that this happens.
- [37:43]
Joyce Vance
Well, you know, Barb, that's a fair point. Are there any guardrails left inside of the federal government? And some people, some of our former colleagues and friends have suggested that there may be guardrails inside of the House, that people like the deputy attorney general nominee, Todd Blanch, or the nominee to be the paydeg Emile Bovey, both raised as prosecutors in that important cradle of the Southern District of New York and well aware of the expectations of their former colleagues, will be willing to implement Trump's policies, but not to do his bidding in an unethical fashion. I confess I'm not convinced. I mean, I am very worried that these folks would not be Trump's nominees unless he understood that they were willing to use the Justice Department as a political tool. But tell me what your read is on this situation. Do you think there's any reason for optimism?
- [38:34]
Barb McQuaid
I'm not sure. I guess I would proceed with caution here. You know, Trump himself is so willing to just bust through any norms and guardrails that you have to wonder about anyone who associates with him. But I think it is also fair to see these two lawyers in the light of the legal tradition in this country that every defendant is entitled to a defense, no matter how despicable they may be. John Adams represented the perpetrators of the Boston Massacre and the British soldiers who were involved in that. He also represented the enslaved members of the the ship who overtook and created mutiny on the Amistad. You know, and so at the time, people would say, how can you defend those despicable people? And I think that it's because everybody involved is entitled to a criminal defense. You know, united. Joyce and Jill have dealt with criminal defense attorneys who represent, you know, child rapists, people who commit the worst crimes in the world. And they will tell you that my job is not to say, this is a good person. My job is to make sure that this person gets the benefit of the Constitution, of their legal rights, to make sure every statute is followed. And I am there to safeguard the process. And so that gives me a little bit of hope that perhaps, you know, I know they were assistant U.S. attorneys, and their colleagues speak highly of them, that they are there because they care about the process. Now, Donald Trump probably thinks that they're going to be loyal to him, but my hope is that they take seriously their oath to uphold the Constitution.
- [40:27]
Joyce Vance
Yeah. You know, I side with you on this notion of never being critical of people, of lawyers, because of who they've taken on as clients. I think that everybody, even the most heinous criminals, are entitled to defenses. So it's not their representation of Donald Trump that concerns me. It's that knowing what the playing field looks like, knowing that Trump has made it clear that he intends to use the Justice Department for his political benefit, that they would go ahead and sign on for the job anyhow. And so, you know, the question is, are these people who really intend to insert their bodies between Donald Trump and the Constitution and do the right thing? You know, I hope that that's the case, but I'm not persuaded.
- [41:09]
Jill Wine Banks
I would be really worried, Joyce, except I'm going to take the word of Mimi Roca, our friend, the district attorney in Westchester, and she knows Todd Blanche personally from having worked with him in the Southern District, and she thinks that he will do the ethical right thing. I assume he will withdraw from the defense of Donald Trump if he is sworn in, because there would be a clear conflict of interest where he.
- [41:41]
Joyce Vance
Well, I mean, there won't be any more need. Right. One of the first things he might have to do as the deputy attorney general is to oversee the dismissal of cases where he has represented Trump, and the pay dag won't be able to stand in for him. So, I mean, it is a. It's a complicated situation. Like you say, Jill, Mimi worked with Todd. I think she actually supervised him. Barbs and my former colleague Preet Bharara promoted him, I think, not once, but twice. So, look, my hope here is that Blanche and Bovey and others will understand that the eyes of the people who raised them as prosecutors are on them, and that will become a form of a guardrail. But I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. I know, though, that there's something else that you wanted to talk about, Jill, as. As did I, and that's whether or not there might be one other guardrail. I mean, in the days after the election, I saw people saying that they were weary. Don't ask me to do anything else. I'm not going to go out and protest. You know, these folks said they were saying that protesting and other acts of civil disobedience weren't worth it. And I've got to say that really cut me to the core, because I do believe in acts of protest, both these big, large ones like the Women's March and small acts of protest. I believe in the First Amendment right of gathering in public to express our collective views. And I think we've seen signs in Europe and other democracies on the verge of failure that getting people out on the streets can be a real catalyst for change. So tell me what your read is on the situation. Is the public the ultimate guardrail in the new Trump era? And do you think American citizens can succeed in being an effective guardrail even after they return Trump to office?
- [43:25]
Jill Wine Banks
So let me start with putting this in some historical context, because I grew up in an age of a lot of civil disobedience and civil unrest. The Vietnam War, the Civil rights movement, the Saturday Night Massacre. And now all of this was before social media and right wing media. So it may not work, but, boy, it sure worked back then. And I do believe because of that experience that it is possible for the people to be the guardrail in the Watergate. Case it was stacks of mail, nowadays it would be large protests and emails. I think that it can work, but it can only work if the facts are accepted. In the era of Watergate, there was no debate about what was true. Nowadays there is. And what all three of us think is true is not necessarily accepted as the facts by a lot of people. And so public pressure hasn't materialized to the extent that I would like to see it. And so I'm with you in saying to those people who are saying, I'm tired, I'm done. And in fact, I was sort of, you know, the day after the election, I was in that category. I'm done. I am not doing anything anymore. I am done, done, done. I can't keep fighting this fight. And then I started reading stuff and I even did an episode of Just the Facts about how I came to say, no, I have to stay with us, otherwise they win. And so I am hoping that the public pressure will materialize and that it will again work and that at least it will keep in control. Maybe not President Trump as 47, but that it will make the people right under him take note and try to limit the damage. This time of year, I like to reflect on what I'm grateful for, like family, friends and my health. Another thing I sisters. Oh God, how did I forget that you are so right. Thank you sisters. I am very grateful for all of you. I am also very grateful for the fact that I can help my skin stay healthy and resilient. Doesn't rate as high as my sisters in law, but it is a high, high thing. In fact, as I get older, I am very thankful to today's sponsor, One Skin. Their scientifically proven skincare routine has made a noticeable difference in how my skin looks and feels. Their OS01 peptide works at the cellular level to switch off the dysfunctional cells that cause your skin to become dry, dull and age faster than it needs to.
- [46:26]
Joyce Vance
To celebrate the holidays, One Skin has introduced their limited edition holiday bundle featuring Travel sizes of OS01 face, OS01 eye, and OS01 body in a chic leatherette bag. You know, I look forward to the holiday offerings every year. I happen to have been able to get a sneak peek at this one and it's fabulous. It's the perfect gift, but you'll definitely want to keep one for yourself and take advantage of this exclusive bundle while it lasts. As one of our listeners, you'll get 15% off using code Sisters when you check out at Oneskin Code, don't wait. Invest in your skin's long term health this holiday season because healthy skin is an incredible gift.
- [47:07]
Jill Wine Banks
I never get tired of the compliments I've gotten since I started using Oneskin. It's such a confidence booster and I think I know why I keep getting them. Whether I'm out in the wind or warming up next to the heater. I use OneSkin's OS01 face topical supplement to fight back against dryness. Now my skin is ready for anything the elements throw at me. I especially love that One Skin's regimen works fast and the formula feels amazing when you apply them. They're so refreshing. When anyone asks if I love One Skin as much as I've said on this show, I say absolutely. And I'm certain that you'll be a big fan too.
- [47:46]
Barb McQuaid
One Skin is the world's first skin longevity company. Oneskin addresses skin health at the molecular level, targeting the root causes of aging so your skin behaves, feels and appears younger. It's time to get started with your new face, eye and body routine at discounted rates today. Get 15% off with the code sisters at OneSkin co. That's 15% off OneSkin co with Code Sisters. After you purchase, they'll ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you we only have one body and one skin only. You can choose to make it better age healthy with One Skin. You can find the link in the show notes.
- [48:38]
Jill Wine Banks
10 days ago, district Attorney Bragg and defense lawyers for Trump agreed to request a delay in all proceedings in the New York election interference case, which is how I call it, although the press always calls it the hush money case. That trial resulted, of course, in Trump being convicted of 34 crimes and he was awaiting sentencing. And a decision from Judge Mershon about what impact, if any, the SCOTUS immunity decision had on the admissibility of evidence presented at the trial. So whether he might warrant a new trial because evidence had come in that shouldn't have. But now the defense, led by Trump's defense lawyers Todd Blanch and Emile Bove, who Trump of course, plans, as we've just been talking, to nominate to be at the top of DOJ leadership, have requested a total dismissal of that case. The DA opposes that. Joyce, what's the argument presented by Trump's lawyer And what's the DA's position?
- [49:34]
Joyce Vance
Yeah, so the DA's position is that they're entitled to the benefit of their conviction. But Trump has made this really it's actually legally interesting. It's sort of a hybrid argument, saying that because some of the evidence that the district attorney used to convict him is covered by the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision, that the conviction has to be tossed out. So they're talking about conversations that Trump had in the Oval Office with Hope Hicks that then became evidence in the case, and they're saying that that tainted the conviction. Judge Mershon will have an interesting, I think, decision in front of him, because even if he finds that that evidence should not have been used, and that's frankly not clear cut, by the way, but even if he were to make that finding, there might be an argument that it was harmless air, that it didn't impact the jury's verdict because they had plenty of other evidence to consider. So, in essence, for now, we're just in wait and see mode to see how the judge wants to call this one.
- [50:34]
Jill Wine Banks
And, Barb, just today, Judge Manan issued an order that delayed the scheduled sentencing, which was scheduled for next week, but he didn't delay it indefinitely. It's only one page, but I'd like you to talk about what we learned from it and what's going to happen in the future. What's the briefing schedule? And will there be a sentencing before January 20, or is it going to wait till 2029?
- [51:00]
Barb McQuaid
No, interestingly, he wants to issue his decision on presidential immunity first, and he wants to review the party's filings on this. So I think it suggests that, and he set a pretty aggressive briefing schedule that he wants the parties to respond within a week and then Trump's team to submit their paperwork by December 9th. So it sounds like he's actually moving pretty quickly. He's got until January 20th, when Trump is sworn in, to kind of figure out what he wants to do here. So I agree with Joyce that it seems like he wants to make this decision about whether there is some evidence that came into the trial, might fall into this category of immune conduct, and then have a decision whether that taints the whole jury's verdict or is really a harmless part of their verdict, and then move on from there. Now, maybe it's his intention to say, I grant the motion for new trial, you know, that this case was improper, but he's, he's moving forward. And so I guess I'm not sure how he might decide the case, but he, he has made no indication that the case should be stopped simply because Donald Trump has been elected president.
- [52:07]
Jill Wine Banks
So a couple things. One is, I want to make clear that there are two different things going on here. One is A new trial because of evidence coming in that shouldn't have come in, and the other is to dismiss the case forever and always. Okay, so let's talk about another state's case, which is in Georgia. And it's been a long time since we've heard much about the election interference case in Georgia that was brought by DA Fani Willis against Trump in 1818 co defendants. Some of those have pleaded guilty. And I'm saying pleaded, even though I personally would say pled.
- [52:43]
Barb McQuaid
I will die on the pleading.
- [52:46]
Jill Wine Banks
I. It's. I would say pled, but I'm giving up on that anyway. I always said pled. Pledder pleaded guilty. And others have raised legal issues, notably about recusing Willis because of her relationship to the lead prosecutor. She hired the trial court judge McAfee said that she could stay on condition that the lead prosecutor resign. The lead prosecutor resigned, and she stayed. That ruling was scheduled for oral argument in a Georgia court of appeals on December 5, but it was unceremoniously canceled with no reason stated. So let's talk about that. Joyce, why. Why do you think it was delayed? What's going on?
- [53:25]
Joyce Vance
Well, look, we don't know the answer for sure because the court didn't see fit to tell us. And that in and of itself own is sort of the suggestion that this isn't on the up and up. But I suspect what we're seeing here is part of this same phenomenon of Trump walking away from these cases without any accountability in a way that no other defendant in the criminal justice system would be able to by virtue of his reelection. Georgia is politically a very conservative state. I think that, you know, these judges know sort of where their bread is buttered, and we will see this entire case unravel. They will perhaps ultimately end up ruling that Fani Willis can't proceed, it will be reassigned. And that would probably be a death knell for the case, and we may even see some sort of erosion on these folks who have already pled guilty. I'm just not optimistic about the outcome in Georgia.
- [54:21]
Jill Wine Banks
So, yeah. Do you think that the people who have pled guilty would get off if this gets thrown out at some point, or do you think that this decision, this order to cancel the hearing, could just be that they're going to decide the case on the briefs submitted, not needing oral argument?
- [54:46]
Joyce Vance
You know, they might do that, but I still don't take that as a good sign or a healthy sign. In the normal course of business, these convictions should stick. There's no reason for them not to. The Fact that Donald Trump has presidential immunity or quasi presidential immunity, because this is a state case, shouldn't impact any other defendants. But, you know, this is the Trump era that we're living in.
- [55:08]
Jill Wine Banks
So, Barb, do you agree what happens to the co defendants who are still awaiting trial or to those who pled guilty?
- [55:14]
Barb McQuaid
Yeah, that is such an interesting situation. Right. So, you know, at the moment, the issue is whether there is this conflict with Fani Willis that would require her recusal. I mean, for what? Keep in mind that that issue has absolutely nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of any of these defendants. It has nothing to do with their fair trial. It is an absolute side issue. I view it as something that is an ethical issue between Willis and her voters, not having anything to do with whether this. I don't see how it could taint this case in any way. But nonetheless, that's an issue going forward. The other issue, Donald Trump is going to become president soon, and that means, likely for four years, he cannot be put on trial. But that is not true with regard to these other defendants. And in fact, because the public has a right to a speedy trial, just as does a defendant, it seems to me that we ought to be going forward with those cases against all of those people. And that, as Joy says, these convictions for the people who've entered guilty pleas, you see what I did there? I avoided, plead, pleaded, or pled that they should stick. They. They entered guilty pleas because they are guilty. And the idea that somehow Fani Willis was having a personal relationship with a co prosecutor is completely irrelevant from all of that. In fact, when you enter a guilty plea, you typically waive your rights to appeal issues other than actual innocence. And so I think that those should stick and we should be plunging ahead with the cases against the other defendants. Well, now comes the part of the show that really is our favorite, the part where we answer your questions. If you have a question for us, please email us at Sisters in law@politicon.com or tag us on social media using hashtag sistersinlaw. We are all now on threads and Blue sky, which is Blue Sky. Yeah, I love it. And it's been growing by the millions, so I hope to see all of you on Blue sky as well. If we don't get to your question during the show, please keep an eye on our feeds throughout the week. We will answer as many of your questions as we can. So our first question comes to us from Ken in New Westminster, Canada. Ken asks, did the founders make an error by not separating The Executive, the president, from the head of state. Jill, what do you think about that?
- [57:47]
Jill Wine Banks
So I'm so glad that we got a question from Canada about our Constitution. And so thank you for asking that question from Canada. And I don't think so. Our Constitution, including the separation of the executive from all the other departments where there should be checks and balances, but leaving the head of state and the head of the executive branch in one person has worked for over 236 years. So it's only now where you have a completely unplanned for, in the time of our founders, a criminal in office, that this is not working. And I don't know that it would work any better if it was a separated job anyway. And there are other things in the Constitution that I would change first, which is like I would add some penalty to violating the emoluments clause and I would do away with the Electoral College. But in terms of making our government more like Britain, I don't think so.
- [58:51]
Barb McQuaid
All right. Well, there you go. Thank you, Canada, for asking about our Constitution. I find that our neighbors to the north know so much more about us than we know about them. It embarrasses me. But Canada is a wonderful country. Living in Michigan, I get a chance to travel there from time to time. And I am a fan. All right, next question comes to us from Rank Edson, 24. Frank Edson, 24, who asks who decides the cases the Attorney General and the DoJ prosecute. Joyce, that sounds like something in your wheelhouse. Yeah.
- [59:24]
Joyce Vance
So, you know, this is a great question. It's something I talk with my law students about a lot, because prosecutors. Now we're not talking about the Attorney General and the deputy attorney General. We're talking about line prosecutors across the country. They have enormous discretion that they exercise to determine which cases do and don't get prosecuted. The rule inside of the Justice Department is pretty straightforward. Prosecutors are forbidden to indict a case unless they believe they have sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction and to sustain it on trial. In other words, they have to believe that both the law and the facts are on their side. And more or less, their decision is the last word. You know, sometimes a supervisor might look over their shoulder and say, I think the evidence is a little bit better or a little bit worse than you do. Please reassess. But Washington isn't dipping down into the U.S. attorney's office in Birmingham and telling the line folks what cases to bring or not, what attorneys general do get to do. I think that's six attorneys General for the show. What they do get to do is that they can set priorities. So, for instance, when Eric Holder was the attorney general, the top priority for prosecution was national security, foreign terrorism cases. Because there were problems across the country, we focused on those heavily. Attorneys general will set different priorities. Violent crime is usually up there. Civil rights, for my way of thinking, is not as high of a priority as it should be in many administrations. But, you know, attorneys general say, I want to make. That was eight. I want to make sure that line. Prosecutors are giving these very important cases across the country a good, hard look, and sometimes that might be as a new crime emerges, as with sex trafficking or online fraud. Nonetheless, the important thing here is that who the prosecutors are in any given office has a real impact on what cases get done.
- [61:24]
Barb McQuaid
Very good. All right, Our last question comes to us from Linda in Sarasota, Florida, and she asks, is it a requirement that all nominees pass the FBI's background check to lead departments that require them to have access to classified information? Yes. So, Linda, I'll tell you it's interesting. It is not a legal requirement, but it is a norm that all presidential appointees go through a background investigation process. And so you probably have read recently that Donald Trump is proposing either bypassing the FBI background investigation or farming it out to a private company to do it. I think it's a terrible idea because it is so important that we have clearances. Joyce and I certainly went through that process when we were appointed US Attorney. It is a very burdensome process. There's some concern it slows down the appointment process. There's some concern that it could even reveal, quote, embarrassing personal information. Why, yes, it could. And that's the reason that we want to have these background investigations, because what we don't want is somebody, you know. The questions are, does you know this person live beyond their means? That could suggest that you are taking money that doesn't belong to you or that you're receiving money from some somebody who's exercising undue influence. If you have something for which you could be blackmailed, you might be susceptible to sharing classified secrets in exchange for silence. If they know about, you know, an addiction or an extramarital affair or any kind of thing that could be embarrassing to somebody. So all of these things, you know, foreign context, foreign business interests, hidden business interests, all of these things are really important. And so. But it is just a norm. There have been MOUs in place since the Eisenhower administration where this has been done. And this is one of the things that Donald Trump is looking at to streamline the process. And I would urge caution on this. Write your senators and tell them how much you, how important you think this is because this information also then gets shared with the Senate when they do their confirmation process. So if there is no background investigation, then there is no report for the senators to look at when they are undertaking their confirmation process. So really important part of the equation here and one I hope sticks around because I think we need it to ensure that our officials are working for us and not for themselves or for some foreign adversary.
- [63:55]
Jill Wine Banks
And Barbara, if I can add, it's not just when you're nominated to be the U.S. attorney. As a grade 11 attorney coming into the Department of Justice, I went through a security clearance and it's outrageous that someone at that level would have to go through a security clearance and that the head of any department wouldn't have to. So, you know, I went through it then and then I went through another security clearance when I was going to the Pentagon because there I was going to definitely have high level confidential information. But for that to happen and not really be a mandated required thing is it's outrageous. And in a normal world where the Senate exercised its advise and consent role, they would not consent to the appointment of anybody who hadn't gone through that. Acknowledging that the president can override decision, as he did with his son in law, about not getting cleared.
- [65:00]
Barb McQuaid
Well, thank you for listening to Sisters in Law with Joyce Vance, Jill Wine Banks and me, Barb McQuaid. Kim will be back to join us next week. Follow SistersinLaw on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen. And please give us a five star review. It really helps others find the show. And please show some love to this week's sponsors, Thrive Cosmetics, Calm and One Skin. Their links are in the show notes. Please support them because they make this podcast possible. See you next week with another episode. Hashtag SistersInLaw.
- [65:32]
Joyce Vance
Yeah, you know, so I'm actually having like a day where I've been running around like crazy, working all day and I get a text message reminding me that today is Bella, my German shepherd. It's Bella's day at the spa. And I'm thinking something is wrong with this picture, right? I'm running like I didn't even get to eat lunch. Bella is at the spa with cucumbers on her eyes or something. So I've decided that I'm going to creep down to the kitchen on Thanksgiving after the day is done with Bella and instead of us going our separate ways, I think we'll share a little bit of pie together.
- [66:04]
Jill Wine Banks
So what is happening at a dog spa? I need to know this. Brisby's never been to a spa. Am I a bad mother?
- [66:10]
Joyce Vance
I signed her up for a bath. I mean, I didn't realize that there is more to it than that, but this is like a great place. They've been texting me saying Bella's having a great time playing with the other dogs.
- [66:20]
Jill Wine Banks
Oh my God.
- [66:20]
Joyce Vance
So I'm just thinking Thanksgiving is going to be my special day. I've been working and running around like a crazy person. That's going to be my day.
- [66:28]
D
When you think about businesses that are selling through the roof, Allbirds or Skims, sure you think about a great product, a cool brand and brilliant marketing. But an often overlooked secret is actually the businesses behind the business making, selling and for the shoppers, buying simple. For millions of businesses, that business is Shopify. Nobody does selling better than Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. And the not so secret secret with shop pay that boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning way less carts going abandoned and way more sales going. So if you're into growing your business, your commerce platform better be ready to sell wherever your customers are scrolling or scrolling on the web, in your store, in their feed, and everywhere in between. Businesses that sell more sell on Shopify. Upgrade your business and get the same checkout skims uses. Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com audioboom all lowercase go to shopify.com audioboom to upgrade your selling today. Shopify.com audioboom.
- [67:40]
E
Black Friday is coming. And for the adults in your life who love the coolest toys, well, there's something for them this year too. Bartisian is the premier craft cocktail maker that automatically makes more than 60 seasonal and classic cocktails each in under 30 seconds at the push of a button. And right now, Bartisian is having a huge sight wide sale. You can get $100 off any cocktail maker or cocktail maker bundle when you spend $400 or more. So if the cocktail lover in your life has been good this year or the right kind of bad, get them Bartesian at the push of a button, make bar quality Cosmopolitans, Martinis, Manhattans and more all in just 30 seconds. All for 100 off Amazon. Toys aren't just for kids. Get 100 off a cocktail maker when you spend 400 through Cyber Monday. Visit bartesian.com cocktail that's B A R T E S I A N dot com cocktail.