Talking Feds – "Molly Mashup: 'They're Not Doing 15 Dimensional Chess'"

Host: Harry Litman | Guest: Molly Jong-Fast

Release Date: December 18, 2025

Episode Overview

In this lively "Molly Mashup" edition of Talking Feds, journalist and commentator Molly Jong-Fast joins legal analyst Harry Litman for a back-and-forth exchange on the latest legal and political tremors from the Trump 2.0 administration. The episode dissects the prospects for accountability in the wake of extraordinary White House misconduct, delves into reporting on high-level Trump aides, and unpacks the administration's culture of impunity. Both hosts challenge each other—Molly pushing for legal clarity and Harry probing political motives—shedding light on why so little may change even with ample evidence of wrongdoing.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Accountability for Trump Administration Officials

• Main Question: Will anyone in the current Trump administration ever be held accountable for illegal acts?
• Litman's Take:
  • Prosecutions are unlikely, despite the abundance of apparent crimes.

    "Plenty of ways. Plenty of possible crimes, plenty of investigations, and if I had to guess, very little will actually happen." — Harry Litman [03:48]

  • Hesitation from a future Democratic administration is probable; there’s institutional reluctance to pursue high-profile legal actions against predecessors.

    "You'll have a pretty strong vein of thought ... saying, what are you guys crazy? We just got here again. Do you want to actually ruin the whole deal? Let it go, let it go, let it go. This is now the stuff of history." — Harry Litman [03:20]

  • Statute of limitations (~5 years) leaves the window open, but accountability is still doubtful.
• Examples Discussed: The Mark Meadows case (“six different unindicted co-conspirators”) and the infamous "$50,000 in a kava bag" bribery scandal.

2. The $50,000 in a Kava Bag: What Really Happened?

• Situation Recap: A sting led to a Trump administration official walking out with $50,000 in a kava bag—a clear-cut bribery scenario.
  • Litman: The investigation was underway, but "when Trump comes in and it has all been scuttled." The Supreme Court's stance on bribery (favoring technical definitions) complicated things, but the real issue was political interference—not legal ambiguity.
  • Molly: Notes Biden officials were afraid to prosecute because "this Supreme Court has said that bribes are just tips." [04:56]
  • Litman:

    "They were letting it then proceed. What they're doing now got nothing to do with the Supreme Court. Got everything to do with FOD—Friend of Donald." [07:03]

3. Whipple’s Susie W. Interview: Competence, Crimes, and Calculated Candor

• Reporting: Vanity Fair published an extensive interview with Susie W., Trump’s chief of staff, raising questions about retaliation ("reprisal prosecutions") and her candid revelations.
  • Litman: There’s evidence of illegal activity, but “nothing close to a smoking gun. ... Reprisal prosecutions, for instance, are unlawful in a violation [of the] due process clause. You can't stick Trump with them, but that doesn't mean they weren't a crime." [07:33]
  • Molly: Argues against over-interpretation, suggesting the administration's moves aren't as orchestrated as they might appear:

    "They're not geniuses. They're not doing 15 dimensional chess. They're largely incompetent, and they've scared a lot of people into going along with them." [10:45]

  • Litman is struck by how Susie W. could get away with so much candor without repercussions, reflecting a shift in Trump’s tolerance for internal dissent.

4. Trump 2.0 vs. Trump 1.0: Response to Public Embarrassments

• Molly: Contrasts current with prior Trump approaches:

  "The whole hallmark of Trump 2.0 versus Trump 1.0 is... Everything is intentional. Nobody gets fired, they double down on things. And so when it blows up, it's gonna be 10 times more catastrophic because there's almost no release valve." [11:17]

  • The “circle the wagons” mentality—scandals are met with denials and loyalty tests, not firings.

5. Executive Privilege & Reprisal Prosecutions

• Litman: Explains that while reprisal prosecutions are illegal and a violation of constitutional norms, the current Supreme Court majority's view on executive privilege and presidential immunity means:

  "He can get away with anything because of the Supreme Court... In any world, even a very liberal administration world... there will never be any criminal repercussions." [13:00]

6. Pete Hegseth and War Crimes Liability

• Molly: Raises the question of Fox News personality (and administration figure) Pete Hegseth’s potential legal jeopardy after a controversial military strike.
• Litman: Lays out two possibilities:
  • If justified as "war-time," then "it's a war crime, and it's a textbook war crime."
  • If not, "it's a flat out homicide."

  "I don't think he can stand behind different immunity doctrines." [14:25]

  • Historical precedent: Lieutenant Calley and the My Lai Massacre (Vietnam)—suggesting criminal liability is possible, though prosecutions remain unlikely.

7. Why Are Problematic Figures Retained? (Hegseth, RFK Jr.)

• Molly: Analogy to RFK Jr.—“needlessly problematic” figures are kept in the fold because firing anyone would acknowledge error and expose vulnerabilities.

  "If you start firing people, you open the door to having been wrong. And that is why Mike Waltz from the National Security guy ended up getting moved and not fired." [17:50]

8. Trump's "War on Universities": Legal Limits and Coercion

• Molly: Brings up potential illegal quid pro quos in the administration’s coerced university compacts, threats to foreign students and funding.
• Litman: Notes it’s coercive and “bogus,” but legally complicated; many of the threatened actions are “potentially lawful” or at least difficult to contest in court, especially with the Supreme Court’s deference.

  "In so much in Trumpland, the real sufferers here are not the university, it's the American people." [19:54]

9. Rob Reiner Stabbing: Trump’s Response and Political Fallout

• Litman: Expresses shock at Trump’s tweet blaming “Trump Derangement Syndrome” after Rob Reiner's stabbing.

  "Even for him, is my question." [21:20]

• Molly: Notes Trump’s pattern of attacking Hollywood insiders, but points out how these outbursts weaken him politically, as even Republican allies break ranks.

  "Every time Trump offers the chance for Republicans to break with him, it diminishes his power. So if he had just said nothing, he would have been 10 times better off than what he did say, which was this just disgusting tweet." [22:44]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Litman on Accountability:

  "If I had to guess, very little will actually happen... And that's all the Trump administration, they are—no, they were nowhere near saying, oh, we'll just, we'll have some trouble in the courts. Maybe we should let him go with the $50,000 in the bag." [03:48, 05:49]

• Jong-Fast on Trumpworld:

  "They're not geniuses. They're not doing 15 dimensional chess. They're largely incompetent, and they've scared a lot of people into going along with them." [10:45]

• Litman on Pete Hegseth and War Crimes:

  "If it's a war crime, it's a so called extrajudicial killing. If we're not at war, it's a flat-out homicide. So there's jeopardy there." [14:19]

• Molly on Bad Leadership:

  "These are both terrible people for the job. But again, if you start firing people, you open the door to having been wrong." [17:50]

• Litman summing up institutional reluctance:

  "In any world, even a very liberal administration world... there will never be any criminal repercussions." [13:00]

Selected Timestamps for Important Segments

• [02:08] – Accountability for Trump administration officials
• [04:43] – $50,000 kava bag/bribery investigation
• [07:15] – Susie W. interview analysis, evidence of "reprisal prosecutions"
• [10:48] – Molly: "They're not doing 15 dimensional chess"
• [11:17] – Trump 2.0 approach to staff scandal management
• [13:00] – Executive privilege shields from prosecution
• [14:00] – Pete Hegseth and war crimes/homicide exposure
• [17:50] – Keeping problematic figures for loyalty, not results
• [18:42] – Trump’s war on universities and coercion/legality
• [21:22] – Rob Reiner’s stabbing and Trump’s problematic response

Summary

This episode offers a trenchant, skeptical look at the prospects for justice and consequence in a second Trump term. Harry Litman and Molly Jong-Fast dissect the flawed incentives and protections that insulate powerful figures—painting a Trump White House both more brazen and less competent than ever. The episode’s refrain: Nearly everyone on the inside knows the rules seem broken, but between political cowardice, Supreme Court-enabled impunity, and a culture that equates firing with failure, accountability remains out of reach. For both legal junkies and political observers, it's an essential listen for understanding why so much wrongdoing yields so little effect at the highest levels of American power.