Loading summary
Transcript39 lines
- [00:00]
A
Let me ask you something, Andrew. Were you a Hills person? Were you a real world person? A Hills person, you know, an apprentice person? Did you watch any of those shows?
- [00:12]
B
Zero.
- [00:17]
A
Hello, everyone and welcome to the Illegal news. I'm Sarah Longwell, publisher of the Bulwark and I am joined today by best selling author of Liars Kingdom, Andrew Weissman. My fave. What's going on, man?
- [00:29]
B
You know what? I think we should not even mention the book because I think people are going to be like, and I'm done. Yeah.
- [00:35]
A
And that's fair. It's fair.
- [00:37]
B
By the way, even I like having, you know, it's like it's, I'm done. It's like the book tour is, it was fun. It was great. I'm grateful. There's tons of news. I'm, I'm turning into Mary McCord. She's had a good effect on me.
- [00:51]
A
She, I, hey, Mary is sharp. She was on point. Big fan of hers. Okay, for the today's topic, topics, I want to start with Todd Blanch. Now, we talked about Todd Blanche last time and we were kind of speculating, but like he's coming up for confirmation and I, I really want to talk about this.
- [01:09]
B
So do I. I have, I have like a, to zzzz issues and topics and things to, to discuss and things that I hope the Senate asks him tons.
- [01:25]
A
Okay, well, I went from last week where you and I talked about this, like we, I learned and now I'm in my anger phase where I am like, are you kidding me? This guy. And also part of what has happened in the intervening time that we can get into is that many of the senators that we, I was, you know, last week, I was saying, I don't know, like, is Cassidy in a yolo period corn in, like we've got, they're all signaling that they're going to vote for him. So I, I think his confirmation is looking more and more likely. So we'll get into that. I also want to talk about Trump's ongoing election fraud claims, which he is currently doing about California. And then I want to talk about what DOJ is and isn't doing around their normal typical kind of election fraud because, hey, we're all worried about election fraud these days in different ways that's
- [02:15]
B
going to, that we don't have to leave a lot of time for that last topic. We can probably cover that very, very quickly.
- [02:24]
A
Well, then we do have a third topic, which I do want to do a little construction corner at the end where we get into the legality of all the stuff Trump is either building or is coming down. People who are not following this, it's a really fun DC Parlor game of like, is he building the arch? Is the pool getting filled? Is the name up or down on the Kennedy Center? Go look at the Kennedy center. See if the name is up there or not. And so, you know, he's just debasing everything in this city. So let's jump in. All right, we're going to start with Todd Blanche.
- [02:53]
B
Defiling. Yes.
- [02:54]
A
Defiling, yes. Speaking of things that make me blanch, we are recording this Tuesday, June 9th. Yesterday, Trump officially nominated Todd, Todd Blanche to be the country's next Attorney general. I. And so some of my additional questions that I thought of is. So I was thinking about, okay, just the timeline of nominations, because as I've been reading about this, I've been seeing that there are definitely some senators saying, well, we're going to move this really fast. And is there like a date by which it has to start and has to end? Or could this go on indefinitely?
- [03:31]
B
It could go on for a while, other than there's time periods for how long somebody can be in an acting position. In other words, you, you can't just get around all strictures by saying they're just going to be acting forever.
- [03:47]
A
Well, this Trump did this a bunch in the first term. And I was wondering this about Blanche. I was like, if they didn't have Trump formally nominated him, which means they think they have the votes, and I think partially they think they have the votes because people are like, I don't know, Todd Blanch, at least he's already been number two at doj. If we don't do him, we're getting Matt Gaetz back in the mix again.
- [04:08]
B
And so I love that as the Sarah way to get someone nominated is that you put somebody really awful in the wings to say, like, well, he's better than this person.
- [04:21]
A
It is despicable.
- [04:21]
B
But.
- [04:22]
A
But been going on for a long time, right. There's all this like, well, it could be worse for these people accommodating him. Yeah.
- [04:27]
B
You know, my view on The Matt Gates vs. Pam Bondi was I am not so sure that Matt Gates would have been worse from a perception of Matt Gates had no credibility with so many people and they were both going to do Trump's bidding. But I was thinking in terms of public efficacy, it was would have been useful to have somebody who actually started in a hole. I mean, Pam Bondi got herself there. But, you know, Matt Gaetz had the Advantage for people who thought that Trump was going to be, you know, abusing the Department of Justice of being having very little credibility, including, you know, members of Congress. I, I think, okay, I think we need to really get into substance about Todd Blanche, because the idea that, that he would have a shot at being confirmed is remarkable to me. And I think I divide this into two buckets. There's the outrageous, bordering on. And then spilling over to illegal things that he has done, either personally or has approved of as the number two or some. The number two who was then charged with being on top of certain things. And that's sort of one bucket that I will call this sort of unethical, immoral, illegal bucket. Then there's a separate bucket, which is the incompetent bucket. And by the way, in the Venn diagram, there is overlap of this. So the slush fund is the most obvious example, because let's just get real. This is something that he is, like, approving and devising, and then it falls flat on his face. And I thought, well, isn't Trump going to hold him responsible? Like, I mean, this is something he wanted. And now it's not happening. And he's getting called on the carpet on Friday. The Department of Justice has to explain to a judge in writing why this wasn't a fraud on the court. And to me that it's like, why wouldn't you want somebody who's like, for all of the problems Bill Barr had? Bill Barr was super smart and competent, and in some ways, as you say, that makes it worse because he's more effective. But you do have with Todd Blanche, two ways to sort of attack his nomination. There's the bucket one, which is, you know, the traditional way. But the other is, it's a, it's a little like Kash Patel, which is for somebody with, with experience as a former prosecutor, he has done things over and over and over again that are incompetent. So I gave this slush fund as an example. But not to get too in the weeds, but in the Southern Poverty Loss center case, he went on Fox News and said something that was just totally flat out wrong. The Southern Poverty Law center files a motion in court that says this is a lie. And then Todd Blanche has to go back on Fox News and just say, did I say that? No, no, no. It is true. I've never contested that. The Southern Poverty Law center, in fact, gave us information from their informant program which obviously was being given to them so they could combat these groups. It was antithetical and is antithetical to the whole theory of the DOJ case. So there's like just a complete, it's both outrageous that the Southern Poverty Law center got indicted for what it did, but then there's also his incompetence in terms of saying something that is completely, factually baseless and then having to retract it. And that, by the way, is what the judge said. The judge is like, well, I'm not going to order them to retract it because they retracted it.
- [08:27]
A
Well, this is the guy who was Trump's personal lawyer during the Stormy Daniels case. Just to give you. I was, because I was refreshing my memory on all the stuff that he did.
- [08:40]
B
Sir, how did that case turn out? I mean, Todd, Todd won that case, right?
- [08:44]
A
That was the, no, that was the one case Trump on. The one case they got Trump on was that case.
- [08:49]
B
So again, to be, just to be fair, you can be an excellent defense lawyer and lose the case. You can be a terrible prosecutor and win a case. I mean, facts and law matter. But that case was actually what we call in the business, like when you're a prosecutor or a defense lawyer, you know, when something, they call it a triable case. And it's, it's a triable case, meaning that that is one where depending on the jury, but a good lawyer really has a lively prospect to win. As a defense lawyer. That was a triable case. Now, I thought Emile Beauvais, for whatever issues you have with him, and I have a ton, I thought did a really excellent job in court. Susan Necklace was one of the defense lawyers who was essentially brought in to do the cross examination of Stormy Daniels. They assumed they wanted a woman to do the court cross of a woman. And she is a extremely well known, reputable defense lawyer in New York. And I think the biggest mistake that Trump made was not using her more. But I think it's because she's independent and she's a woman. And so she had a very narrow role. And then Todd Blanch, I honestly can tell you, when I, because I watched some of the trial live, I was really surprised. I, I thought he would be better. He just doesn't have, and you can see it actually when he's on these shows, he doesn't have any presence. He seems unsure of himself. He doesn't make the best arguments. He lost a ton of credibility with the court, which was not true, by the way, of the other two defense lawyers here. I'm not just saying, oh, I'm not painting with a broad brush saying, oh, all defense lawyers are doing. The two of them, I think did a really good job, whatever issues with them. And so Todd was part of the losing team on that case, and I don't think did a particularly good job on that case. And yet here he is.
- [10:57]
A
And I'll. Sorry, but I'll throw a couple other things at you, which is he's also the guy. Because my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, is that for the number. If you're the number two at doj, everything goes through you. Right? So he's the guy who has been like. He's the guy who was like, yay, slush fund. He was the guy who was like, let's go after Letitia James. Let's go after James Comey. Like, he's. And. And by lets, I mean he's basically the guy who says, oh, you want your vindictive prosecutions? I will do your vindictive prosecutions. He's also the one who went after the senators for saying that they didn't have to follow war crimes. Like, the number of things he's. He should be. This is why I'm all RIP about this now, is this guy should be unconfirmable. There shouldn't even be a debate. And the idea that you're comparing him. So that's why. Actually, why I started with the question of couldn't they just do the indefinite acting? Because they did that a lot in the first term when they knew they had unconfirmable people. Although the bar has been lowered considerably now for what the senators will confirm.
- [11:58]
B
Exactly.
- [11:59]
A
And so. But in the first term, so they just had actings all over the place. And I'm. I guess I'm surprised they're going to try to confirm him, but I guess it's because they think they have the votes.
- [12:07]
B
Right? I mean, so I think that's. I think we should deal with what is like the world that we have, which is they're moving forward and trying to confirm him. And yes, he could stay there as acting for quite some time. And there's all these rules about the amount of time and when Congress sits and et cetera. But like, here it is, it's going to come up for a vote and here's a guy and I can add to your list, which is. So first, just to make sure we're super correct, it's the six members of Congress who they sought to indict, and the grand jurors said no. So what does that tell you about his judgment and what he was doing? And what's the crime? There was no crime whatsoever. They couldn't even meet the probable cause standard. And so those were members of the House and the Senate. There is reporting that with respect to the initial indictment of Letitia James and James Comey, that Todd Blanche was not in favor of it. But this is one where even if that is true, you know, the facts at the end of the day are against him because he then sought and approved going forward against Letitia James, not after the case was dismissed, going against her two more times. And the grand jurors, by all accounts, said no to that. And then, of course, he oversaw the 8647 indictment of James Comey. So, you know, whatever his. Oh, I, you know, because I'm sure he's going to betray himself into the. At his confirmation hearing, as I'm the voice of reason and you need me to try and sway people. It's like, really? Because six members of Congress would say, really, you were the voice of reason. James Comey on 8647. That's the voice of reason. Add in Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve, all of the Republican senators who are up in arms about that. Who do you think was the deputy attorney general that when that was going on, you didn't see him saying, no, no, no, we're not going to do this. That's when we're in a remarkable case. A federal judge quashed, that is said that the. The subpoenas to the Federal Reserve are unenforceable because they're in such bad faith. Do you know when that happens, Sarah?
- [14:21]
A
Tell me.
- [14:22]
B
Never.
- [14:25]
A
It. Never.
- [14:26]
B
I mean, this. This is one where it's so hard to understand this. I was in the department for 21 years. You know, there are people who worked under Republican and Democratic administrations. None of us ever have a situation where you issue a grand jury subpoena and the court says, I'm. I'm quashing it because it's done in bad faith. The. The standard is so low that that is a way of saying, do you have a valid purpose? And in doing your investigation? And of course, in any administration but this one, the answer is yes. You know why? Because there's so much crime out there and there's so much that you want to look at when the legal standards so infinitesimally low. The idea that this is the deputy attorney general over that case and you have somebody who's just willing to say, you know what, if the president wants it, I'm going to do it. There's like zero, zero independence. Okay. In addition, you have Todd Blanche has filed a brief saying that ethics associations and bar associations should not have any oversight ability.
- [15:38]
A
Oh, right. That's right.
- [15:39]
B
Attorneys. I mean, isn't that just like how that is contrary, by the way, to a congressional statute that says that DOJ attorneys are. Are subject to state bar associations? So he is saying that should be set aside. So I would think that any responsible senator should care about that. He is somebody who oversaw in, in detail, according to a federal decision, the Abrego Garcia criminal case that was thrown out by a federal judge as being brought vindictively. And Todd Blanche's name is brought up, I think 30 times. 3, 0 by the judge in that opinion, talking about how it was directed from the deputy Attorney general's office. In other words, he can't say he doesn't have his fingerprints on it or it's Pam Bondi. He, according to this judge and he held a hearing on this is all over that. Another case that was thrown out for vindictive prosecution. And then something that I think we just because there's so many outrages, I think we keep on forgetting. Can we just go back to Minnesota? So two people were shot and killed. There was somebody else who was shot but not killed. Knock on wood. Yes. So Alex Preddy and Renee Good were shot. Not only is our Department of Justice not looking into and. And, and having an independent DOJ investigation of whether those were good shoots or not. And by the way, that's not saying they're bad shoots. That's just like that is the norm, which is to have an independent investigation to determine whether there's an issue which any good law enforcement agency is supposed to do and should do and you want them to do. But not only they didn't is that that's sort of, as Mary would say, thing one, thing two is that the state is being denied access to the federal government's proof so that they cannot do an independent investigation. And they're. They're going forward as best they can. But you have the Department of Justice saying hands off. And we're not just clear the status and saying we want your evidence and taking it from you. They just want access to see it. They're not taking the federal government still has it. They just want to know what that evidence is so they can do their own investigation again. Sarah, do you know when that happens all the time? That is what. That is what DOJ does. Why would you obstruct the state from doing an independent investigation? And so there are so many things that are on Todd Blanche's list of things that are outrageous. And to me, the biggest issue is, can the Democrats and any sort of sentient, caring Republican senator get their act together to ask good, tough, consistent questions where they don't just try and have little sound bites and allow Todd Blanche to sort of run out the clock of his five minutes so that we really get tough, consistent questioning that's thought through so that if he doesn't answer one senator's question, the next person picks it up.
- [19:22]
A
Yeah. I have watched these hearings over the years with enormous frustration at the speeches people give instead of just saying. So you went to see Ghislaine Maxwell. What happened in that meeting? Because she walked out with a sweetheart deal. And I want to know why.
- [19:39]
B
A puppy. A puppy. We talked about a puppy in a camp.
- [19:43]
A
And then. Can I just. This is my own particular hobby horse right now, which is, you know, I've been watching the Graham Platner stuff play out in Maine, and I have my feelings about Platner and how he was vetted and whatever, but I'm also in, like, Susan Collins is gonna, what, confirm this guy who oversaw the unbelievably cat like, terrible release of the Epstein files, Like, the horrible way it was released with the victim's names in it. All of the things that we just mentioned, like, gave Ghislaine Maxwell, who is a sex. A child sex trafficker, a sweetheart deal, like a convicted one. She's been convicted. And like, I don't know, guys, I. And now they're what, they're all lying about the election. Todd Blanche, what? He's been pardoning people, like, the corruption of the pardon process. Right. He approves a lot of the pardons. Like, I guess I just continue to be like, no, we have to stop all this, and Susan Collins is going to rubber stamp this guy.
- [20:45]
B
And also, if you're so one. This is like, you know, it's handing. Like. I mean, again, this is outside of my lane, but you're handing so many political attack lines to Susan Collins that are legit and real to bring up so that it's like, that I am not. Susan Collins carries a lot of weight, whatever his flaws are. And just remember, ICE was. It's not like ICE was only operating in Minnesota. It was operating in Maine to, you know, the. The. And terrorizing huge parts of that community. And so there should be a way to galvanize people and to really make Todd Blanche the albatross that is around the necks of the senators for whom this to make the vote costly. Because it is one that, that that's, to me, is the only way to sort of, if they're not going to just do the right thing, to take their oaths seriously. It's how do you make this and this really is now, my question to you is, like, how do you make this costly enough for the the Susan Collins, John Cornine? It's it doesn't work because he's, he's out anyway.
- [22:11]
A
No. For Tillis, for Cassidy, you know, for these guys, like, they should be in YOLO mode. They should be, you know, trying to stop Trump because Trump used his every he threw everything he had at them. But there's such I mean, this is the saddest thing that I have seen in my lifetime.