A (3:32)

We really do. Given all the news and given everything that's going on, I just am always reminded of Charlie Savage's quote about, it's the dance. We protested during the day and we danced at night. It was the dance we were protecting. It was the dance we were fighting for. And that, those kinds of things, comedy, art, celebration. And that was back during the AIDS crisis.

B (3:55)

So actually, I have an easier way for people because I know sometimes computers are hard. Go to danagoldberg.com go to my tour schedule. There's links there. You can also get tickets to the Dallas show. I'm going to be performing in Nashville. There's a bunch of shows going up. So the, the Villages in Florida. I know some of you live over there in Florida. Tickets are going to be up on my website, so keep checking back. You can also hit the button that says notify me. And then when tickets go on sale, you get an email back that says go get em. So go check out my schedule.

A (4:25)

Yes. And while you're there, peruse Dana's fantastic new redesigned site.

B (4:30)

Thank you very much.

A (4:31)

Which is really, really lovely. And then check out dailybeanspod.com we've redesigned over there, too.

B (4:37)

Yeah, it's beautiful. What do we got going on in.

A (4:38)

The news, though, man? First of all, they won't investigate the murders of Renee Good or Alex Preddy. But the FBI searched an election office in Georgia's Fulton county outside Atlanta Wednesday, pursuing Trump's false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. Now, Harry and I are going to go over this in more detail on cleanup on aisle 45 next Wednesday. But that's what they're spending your hard earned tax dollars on is to go and look at, like, how many times has election fraud been debunked? 63 times in court.

B (5:11)

Good Lord.

A (5:12)

Multiple times in hand recounts in Georgia. Like Rudy Giuliani owes Ruby Freeman and Shay Moss $158 million because of his election fraud. Lies. He's admitted they were lies. Lindsey Graham told a Fulton county grand jury if aliens told Trump that the election was stolen, he'd believe it. So, I mean, like, I, it's just so frustrating that, that they could be investigating the murders and they're not in Minneapolis, but instead they're doing this.

B (5:42)

Yeah. Well, let me counter that there's some good news. Two Democrats, and which blows my mind, won their special elections in Minnesota. With everything that's going on with ice, everything that's going on in the streets, people still got out and voted. They won their special elections in Minnesota last night. And returning the balance of the state House back to a tie, the Republicans have lost their majority. Shelley Buck ran unopposed, but Meg Luger Nicolay beat Republican Dan Walsh 96 to 4. Is that, is that a typo?

A (6:15)

No, no.

B (6:17)

96 to 4.

A (6:19)

96 to 4. He got 252 votes. Oh, the Republican, huh? Yeah. 96 to 4. That's a 20 point swing, by the way. That's a 20 point swing. The last person who won that election won it with like a 70%, 70, 76% or something. It's hugely democratic. But it's 96 to 4, not a typo. All right, later in the show, too, I'm going to talk with law professor Carolyn Shapiro. She penned an article in lawfare about how Minnesota and why Minnesota would be able to bring charges, state charges and maybe even DA local charges in Hennepin county against Jonathan Ross and the two anonymous murderers of Alex Preddy. And when she wrote that for Law Fair, you know, I reached out to my friends at Affair and I said I would love to speak with her and, and put me in touch with her and, and we had a really great conversation. We're going to have that conversation for you later in the show. But for now, we have a lot of news to get to. Let's hit the hot notes. Hot notes. All right, first up from the Times, a Preliminary review by U.S. customs and Border Protection's internal watchdog office found that Alex Preddy was shot by two federal officers after resisting arrest, but did not indicate that he brandished a weapon during the encounter. That's according to an email sent to Congress and reviewed by the Times. The review makes no mention of the Department of Homeland Security's earlier claim that Preddy, a US Citizen, wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement. Shortly after the shooting, Kristi Noem, the Homeland Security Secretary claimed that Preddy had brandished a gun. Officials had provided no evidence to back up that claim, which was contradicted by what we saw with our eyes in multiple videos.

B (8:02)

Yes, we did.

A (8:04)

The review was done by CBP's Office of Professional Responsibility, which normally conducts internal misconduct investigations following shootings and was distributed to members of Congress on Tuesday as required by law. It presents a detailed timeline of the events based on body camera footage, which we still haven't seen, and agency documentation. At approximately 9am on Saturday, a federal officer was confronted by two female civilians blowing whistles. Oh God no. The humanity.

B (8:32)

Uh huh.

A (8:33)

Although the officer ordered them to move out of the road, they did not move. The officer then pushed them both away. That's according to this report. And one of the women ran to Mr. Preddy after the officer attempted to move them out of the road and they did not move. The officer deployed pepper spray at them. According to the review, Preddy then resisted attempts by CBP officers to take him into custody, prompting a struggle. I don't see that. A Border Patrol agent multiple times yelled, he's got a gun. About five seconds later, a Border Patrol agent fired his Glock 19 and CBP officer also fired his Glock 47 at Mr. Preddy, according to the review. A New York Times analysis of the video footage from the scene found that the officers fired 10 shots, including six after Mr. Pratty was lying motionless on the ground. Motionless. Mr. Pratty had been disarmed before he was shot, the government review said. After the shooting, a Border Patrol agent advised he had possession of Preddy's firearm and subsequently cleared and secured Preddy's firearm in his vehicle. At about 9:02am CBP personnel cut Mr. Preddy's clothing and provided medical aid to him by placing chest seals on his wounds. About three minutes later, local emergency medical services arrived on the scene. Now that is contradicted, by the way, by witness testimony. In an interview with Anderson Cooper, the woman in pink. The woman in the pink coat said the officers were rolling him over and counting the bullet wounds.

B (10:04)

Jesus Christ.

A (10:05)

And the two federal agents involved in that fatal shooting have been placed on administrative leave. Dana. Administrative leave. That's according to a CBP spokesperson speaking to the Minnesota Star Tribune. They said that that's standard protocol. Earlier Wednesday, Trump said Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Fry was playing with fire over the city's policy of not enforcing federal immigration laws. The Minneapolis mayor emphasized the city's position in a statement after meeting with the White House border czar, Tom Homan. Just give him a kava bag with 50 grand in it.

B (10:39)

That's right.

A (10:41)

And as we you may probably have seen by now, Rep. Ilhan Omar was sprayed with an unknown substance at a town hall meeting in north Minneapolis Tuesday night by a man who was quickly grabbed by security guards and later booked into Hennepin County Jail on suspicion of third degree assault.

B (10:55)

I saw that video and it looks to me, and this is, I'm giving her props. And I've met her. I've met repo are. She's, she's incredible. She's tiny. She went right at the guy. Like he came up and she went right at him. And of course, he was apprehended, but she was not afraid of him at all. It was wild. People have lost their damn minds. All right, Ag, thanks so much. Next, from Greg Sargent at tnr. The media verdict is in. President Trump has, and I quote, softened his stance on his paramilitary war on Minneapolis. He struck a cooperative tone in a call with Minnesota's Democratic governor, Tim Walls. The administration hopes to shift its strategy on its ICE raids. Trump is executing a pivot and is attempting to de escalate. Those are all quotes. You get the idea. Trump is chastened by the backlash. The ICE murders of Alex Preddy and Renee Goode, period. That's what happened. So he's now recalibrating the government's approach in an effort to appear to dial down the violent social conflict that's been unleash. So let's stipulate some threshold questions, and this is the article. Will any of this change how ICE is actually conducting its operations in American cities that fundamentally do not want ICE's presence among their populations? Is Trump reversing the underlying reality of these operations? That they have become akin to military occupations of enemy territory within the American nation? Will there be serious governmental efforts to investigate those shootings, mete out accountability for them, and address what went wrong? Well, to answer to those questions, it sure looks like a no, a no, and a no. The Wall Street Journal reports that some Trump aides have realized that this has become a political liability. That's what's happening. It's all become a political liability. So they're in discussions over how to continue deportations without clashing with protesters. Good fucking luck. They're also planning new steps to improve ice's image. Also good fucking luck. Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that Trump met with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for two hours amid and I quote, concern. They almost sound like Susan Collins. We're concerned about Kristi Noem. About the shootings. But Noem's job apparently is safe. She's not going anywhere right now. Trump has replaced the public face of Minneapolis occupation, as we know, removing Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bevino, who's swaggers around these scenes of occupation like a conquering general, with border czar Tom Homan, who swaggers around on Fox News like a conquering general. Now note the problem here. Trump does apparently want to minimize clashes between government security services and protesters, but he doesn't appear to want those heavily armed government militias to stop doing the things that are causing those clashes to happen in the first place. Then the author says what's going on here is this. Trump is looking to diffuse anger among congressional Democrats for purposes that don't portend a meaningful shift. An administration official gave away the game. And this was to Punchbowl News admitting that these and I quote, de escalatory measures are about placating Senate Democrats so that they don't seize this moment, like we've talked about this over and over over on the beans, to demand restrictions on ICE as part of a government funding package. Shut the fucking government down if they're not going to change this. The problem for the White House, this is from Punchbowl, is that if Democrats successfully renegotiate new measures, the House might have to pass a new package. The House already passed funding that included money for dhs, and Republicans doubt that's possible. So the show of de escalation is about making it easier for Senate Democrats to support appropriations bills that don't require another vote in the House. If anything here, this should stiffen the resolve of Senate Democrats, not weaken it to demand major restrictions on ICE at a minimum. Minimum. As Bill Kristol notes, Trump world is showing weakness. So it's time to increase the pressure or as we like to say, kick them while they're down. Now, the key point, however, is that all this is about avoiding an outcome where Congress seriously restricts dhs. The goal is not to change the overall approach. This is driven home by a new letter that Representative Jamie Raskin. And Jamie, as we know, is the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. He just sent that to Attorney General Pam Bondi sent a letter. The letter points out that the FBI does not appear to be investigating the shootings of Preddy or good as it typically does in such instances, like almost always. It also notes that the feds obstructed state investigations into both of those killings. In an interesting move, Raskin demands information documenting who made those decisions and how they were made. Bondi will throw this letter in the garbage. But it nonetheless opens a window on all the heinous wrongdoing that remains to be exposed about this entire affair. A Democratic controlled House can use subpoenas to investigate who ordered DOJ to refrain from seriously investigating these government killings and much more. Meanwhile, Raskin is openly inviting whistleblowers inside DOJ and DHS to approach House Democrats and disclose wrongdoing about the COVID up of the shootings and other use of force violations Going forward. We really know that Trump is changing course. If he allows a good faith investigation into the government's killing of US Citizens to proceed. That's the only thing, and that's not happening anytime soon. Still, Trump has visibly been caught off guard by what he's unleashed. And this is what, well, Stephen Miller, he senses that that was me adding, not the article. He senses that Democrats now have unexpected leverage over him, hence his efforts to placate them before they restrict dhs. He sees that the public has turned sharply against him over the occupations and the smearing of the victims. So he instructed Press Secretary Caroline Levitt to distance him from Stephen Miller's description of Preddy as a domestic terrorist. And he now has his aides leaking word of his pivot and de escalation. Now, Trump surely knows that DOJ cover up of these killings has created a wealth of new sordid revelations for investigative reporters and possibly a Democratic House to unearth. He now claims to want an honorable and honest investigation that he personally will be watching over. That's supposed to make us feel better? Get the fuck out of here. There won't be any such honorable investigation, says the author. Yet Trump, who is predisposed to smearing the victims himself but displays political canonists at unpredictable moments, clearly sees that the ethnonationalist ideologues around him that's Miller and Vance, by the way, who harbor malice toward allies of immigrants, grins and thus eagerly savage the death are taking this to a politically perilous place. And this is it. It's Miller and J.D. vance, which is wild that he's having a fourth child with a very lovely brown woman and no one seems to be talking about this.

A (17:59)

No, no. But you know, this is what I talked about pretty much for the entire beans and beans talk episodes yesterday was we've got them up against the wall. Now is the time to try to claw back that slush fund that funds ICE even during a shutdown. It's time to make those demands for those restrictions. I talked about the five demands that Senator Chris Murphy said the caucus is, you know, sort of circling around and to to learn to have an administration official just say, oh yeah, we only fired Bavino and put in Tom Homan because we're trying to make it so Democrats don't try to restrict ICE at all. So next up from the Post A circuit court judge in rural Tazewell county has ruled against the redistricting effort started by Virginia Democrats, declaring Tuesday that the process they use to create a proposed constitutional amendment is invalid. Now. Democrats immediately pledged to appeal and said they expect a referendum on the matter to go ahead this spring as planned. Quote, nothing that happened today will dissuade us from continuing to move forward and put this matter directly to the voters. That's what the Democratic leadership of the state Senate and House of Delegates said in a joint statement. With controlling majorities in the General Assembly, Democrats have pushed through a proposed amendment that would give lawmakers power to draw new congressional maps in time for this fall's midterm elections. If passed by voters in a referendum scheduled for April 21, Democrats could create maps that give their party a 10 to 1 advantage in the state's congressional delegation rather than the current 6 to 5 Democratic advantage now. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee the DCCC Executive Director Julie Merz called Tuesday's ruling a rogue decision and a disappointing but temporary setback that will be overturned. In his decision, Circuit Judge Jack Hurley Jr. Wrote that his ruling prohibits the proposed amendment from being submitted to the voters for their consideration. He ruled against the amendment on three of the four grounds that Republicans raised, although Hurley rejected an argument that Democrats had improperly convened a special legislative session last October to take up the matter. He did agree with Republicans that the rules of the special session, which had actually been called earlier to take up budget matters, did not allow for introducing unrelated subject of redistricting without support from a two thirds supermajority, which didn't happen. Quote this blatant abuse of power by a majority ignores their own rules and resolutions, thereby trampling any and all procedural rights of the minority, he said. The judge also ruled that the legislature's initial vote on the proposed constitutional amendment was invalid because it took place while last fall's House of Delegates elections were already underway. A state law requires that a proposed constitutional amendment be passed by General assembly twice, once before a House of Delegates election and again after before it can be put to voters on a statewide referendum. Last year's special session took place less than four weeks before the Nov. 4 election, but early voting had been Underway since mid September. Democrats argue that those votes were cast early before the actual election. But the judge rejected that idea. Judge Hurley also ruled that the process violated a state law requiring any proposed constitutional amendment be posted at county courthouses 90 days before an election. Democrats had argued that this was an archaic provision that was removed from the state constitution in 1971 and that the requirement had been overlooked in state code and was not in force. But Hurley took aim at legislative efforts underway to negate the lawsuit. Democrats have been advancing a bill that would invalidate the 90 day requirement retroactively to 1971 and would require any lawsuit challenging redistricting to be heard in Richmond City Circuit Court, not here in the rural court where Hurley sits. Hurley ruled that those efforts violate the state constitution. Who appointed?

B (21:49)

Seriously? It doesn't say in this article, does it?

A (21:52)

Judge Hurley. I haven't seen it yet.

B (21:54)

Maybe I'll look it up while you're. Yeah.

A (21:56)

Judge Jack S. Hurley, Jr. But yeah, I was like, who appointed this guy? I haven't said that yet. Now, the Senate debated its version of that bill to retroactively take that thing out going back to 1971. They did that on Tuesday with Senator Mark D. Obenshain, a Republican from Rockingham, arguing that the effort to retroactively change state code will make it comply with actions already taken. Says that that's a clear admission that this is a violation of the law of the Commonwealth of Virginia. But it's not. It's just an old law that's not in force on the books. It's already been removed from the Constitution, you dick bags. Okay. But Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovel, Democrat from Fairfax, said the language requiring court clerks to put proposed amendments up 90 days before an election was an overlooked artifact of a time when people rode horses to the county courthouse to the latest news.

B (22:48)

Oh my God. That's funny.

A (22:50)

With no evidence that clerks in every county have complied with the outdated provision in the years since it was removed from the state constitution, every Amendment passed since 1971 could be challenged in court unless the language is altered retroactively. So he's like, we've done this. We haven't posted it on the courthouse steps in. Since 19. Since we rode horses. And so does that mean all of the amendments to our constitution since 1971 are invalid anyway? That's a great question. He and the other Democratic leaders said in their statement that Republicans who are abusing the legal process and attempt to sow confusion and block Virginians from voting were prepared for the next step and voters, not politicians, will have the final say. So I hope this ruling is overturned. Did you find who appointed?

B (23:37)

I did. He was appointed by Bob McDonnell, who is a. Who was a Republican governor in 2012. Okay.

A (23:44)

Sounds like a peach.

B (23:46)

Yep, sure does. All right, Allison, this one's from the Guardian. A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that a five year old Minnesota boy, that sweet boy with a spider man backpack and those cute little hat, and his father cannot be immediately deported. One week after their arrest sparked international outrage, a Texas based judge issued an order saying that Liam Ramos, that sweet preschooler, and his father, Adrian Canejo areas cannot be removed or transferred out of the judicial district where they are being held while the litigation challenging their detention proceeds. Liam's arrest seven days prior. It went viral, became a symbol of the Trump administration's relentless crackdown on immigrant communities in the Minneapolis region. Attorneys for the family has said the father and son have an active asylum case and had entered the US at an authorized port of entry. Legally. Legally, yeah. Officials at Liam school district spoke out about his arrest last week, saying the boy and his father were detained as they returned home from school. The Department of Homeland Security defended the arrest, arguing that U.S. immigration and Customs Enforcement was conducting a targeted operation to detain the boy's father. The father and son were quickly transferred out of Minnesota last week and taken to the Dilley Immigration Processing center in Texas. As we know, it's a facility that holds families with children and it has been subject of lot of protests and complaints about conditions. Fred Beery, a judge of the Western District of Texas wrote in an order that any possible or anticipated removal or transfer of the father and his child is immediately stayed until further order from this court. The government shall not transfer all capitals them out of the district during the pendency of this litigation and until further order of this court. Liam is one of four students enrolled in the school district of Columbia Heights, Minneapolis suburb who have been detained by federal immigration agents this month. Four of those kids. This is from school officials. That's what they said last week.

A (25:49)

Wow. I'm so happy that they're being. They sent them down to Dilly. Dilly is the one where, you know, they put kids in cages.

B (25:57)

I know.

A (25:58)

That's the Tom. That's the. The house that Tom Homan built under the Obama administration.

B (26:02)

Oh, got it.

A (26:05)

This judge, Judge Byery, is a Clinton appointee. I googled for you. Well, because you googled the other judges.

B (26:12)

Thank you very much.

A (26:13)

So I'm just, I'm glad that they're. Have you seen. People, like right wing people are like, it's, it's B.S. we didn't arrest the kid. They did. They haven't. He's in detention. He's at Dilly with his father. They're trying to send him out of the country.

B (26:26)

Disgusting.

A (26:27)

Just unbelievable.

B (26:27)

Disgusting.

A (26:28)

So I'm glad that, I'm glad that judge blocked it. All right, everybody, we're going to be right back with law professor Carolyn Shapiro about the likelihood or what it looks like for Minnesota State or the D A to to prosecute Hennepin County D A to prosecute these murders of Renee Good and Alex Preddy right after this break. Stick around. We'll be right back after these messages.

B (26:49)

We'll be right back.

A (26:52)

Hey, everybody. Have you ever stood in the wine aisle just totally blanking while the clock ticks and your patience disappears? Same. So between work and this podcast, I don't have time for that kind of decision fatigue. But Naked Wines is my shortcut. The shipment shows up at my door. Suddenly I have quality bottles ready for dinner guests or host gifts. It's incredible. I love it. Naked Wines is a wine club that directly connects you to the world's best independent winemakers. So you get world class wine delivered straight to your door. Let's thank Naked Wines for supporting our show. Use our code Daily Beans for the code and password@nakedwines.com and you'll get $100 off your first order. That's six bottles of wine for just $39. Naked wines just fits my lifestyle because hosting is my love language. I have great bottles from Naked Wines. Having those on the at, like at the ready just makes everything easier. Now, a friend of mine loves white wine and I'm more of a red person. So we split a box and everybody wins. Naked Wines has been around for over 15 years and they back over 90 independent winemakers around the world, which I really respect. Plus, you can rate what you try, so each shipment gets smarter and more tailored over time. And we recently opened a bottle of Nova Catamatra Finger Lakes Riesling. It's a Riesling from 2022 and it's straight from a New York specialist. It tasted like ripe melon and juicy white peaches. It was delicious. Perfect, light, crisp, and one we will definitely be having again. So now's the time to join the Naked Wines community. Head to nakedwines.com dailybeans then click Enter voucher and put in my code. DailyBeans all one word for the code and the password and you'll get six bottles of wine for just 39.99 with shipping included. That's a hundred doll bottles@nakedwines.com daily beans and use the code and password daily beans for six bottles of wine for $39.99.

B (28:38)

I'm Brian Caram, and I've spent decades covering politics. Now I'm taking you behind the scenes, one interview at a time.

A (28:46)

Join us as each week Brian confronts the issues that matter, posing the questions you wish you could ask. No filter, no agenda, just the truth.

B (28:55)

We're not here for sound bites. We we're here for substance. Join me, Brian Caram, every week as we cut through the noise and get straight to it. This is just ask the Question where curiosity will lead us to the facts. Subscribe now on your favorite podcast platform.

A (29:12)

And remember, when you want answers, all.

B (29:15)

You have to do is just ask the question.

A (29:25)

Hey, everybody. Welcome back. I am really honored today to be joined by the former Illinois Solicitor General and law professor at Chicago College of Law. She wrote a piece for Lawfare recently about potential prosecutions. Well, this was back after the murder of Renee Goode, and she talked about the potential prosecutions and some of the barriers that might be put up to that and also some of the myths, you know, busting some of the myths surrounding things that maybe J.D. vance has said about, you know, absolute immunity. And she wrote this for lawfare. Please welcome Professor Carolyn Shapiro. Hi, how are you?

C (30:02)

I'm good. Thank you so much for having me.

A (30:04)

I am so, so glad you're here. I always encourage people to speak to experts, and a lot of folks are asking me, how possibly can Minnesota prosecute or even investigate without the evidence that's being held back from DHS and the FBI in the Renee Goode case? But I kind of wanted to start first with busting some myths surrounding this. People saying that Minnesota doesn't have jurisdiction or that this officer has. Or these officers now, I should say, have some sort of absolute immunity. Can you address that as you did in the Lawfare article?

C (30:42)

Yeah. So that's just not true. There has never been such a thing as absolute immunity in the context of people acting on the street, government agents acting on the street. There are varieties of partial immunity. Many of your listeners may be familiar with the concept of qualified immunity, which applies to many government agents when they're sued for money damages. But absolute immunity just does. Does not exist in this context at all. Alongside that, there's no question that Minnesota has jurisdiction. Minnesota has jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute crimes that occur within the state that is basic federalism 101. That's part of the idea of our having these dual sovereigns, the federal government and the state, is that they each have their own interests, they each have their own jurisdiction. There may be overlap, There may be times when there's tension, there may be times when one does in fact, preempt the other, and I'll talk about that in a moment. But they don't just completely federal. The existence of the federal government and the fact that the actor here was a federal agent in Renee Good case and in Alex Prain's case, several federal agents, doesn't change the fact that it happened within Minnesota, that the victims were Minnesota residents, and that Minnesota has a legitimate sovereign interest in enforcing its own law. So that's the baseline. The Supreme Court a few years ago said, addressed this in the context of double jeopardy. The question there was, well, if you've been prosecuted for a crime, normally if, say, the state prosecutes you for the crime for a crime and you are convicted or acquitted, either way, you can't be prosecuted for the same conduct. Again, that's what the protection against double jeopardy is. But a few years ago, the Supreme Court reiterated it wasn't really new law, but it reiterated that if a state prosecutes you and regardless of the outcome, the federal government can then prosecute you for the same conduct or vice versa, because they each have their own individualized sovereign interests. And we've seen this happen.

A (33:05)

We saw this when you bring up the example of Derek Chauvin.

C (33:10)

Exactly.

A (33:10)

He was prosecuted both federally and in Minnesota. And I think a lot of the questions surrounding this that I'm getting at least are, well, Derek Chauvin was a Minnesotan. He wasn't a federal agent. And so I think folks were worried that that might make some sort of a difference. And you do talk a little bit about something called supremacy Clause immunity in the article. And I was wondering if you could tell us a little bit about that, because that seems to me to be the major difference between the, you know, the Chauvin case and the Jonathan Ross case.

C (33:49)

Yeah, no, that's absolutely correct. It is different. It is not the same thing as what happened in the Chauvin case, but the reason to mention it is simply to point out that there is an understanding within the law and understanding that this Supreme Court has relatively recently pointed out that there are these separate interests that the state has and the federal government has now. But having said that, you are, of course correct. It is different because Derek Chauvin was a Minnesotan. And because here the potential defendants are federal agents, although I believe Jonathan Ross actually lives in Minnesota. But I don't know. We don't know anything about the other agents who might be involved. And here what comes into play is the Supremacy Clause. The Supremacy Clause is the part of the Constitution that says essentially or has been understand, to mean essentially that when there is a conflict between state and federal law, federal law, preemption, state law. So if there's a federal. A state statute, for example, that is just flatly inconsistent with some kind of federal statute, that statute is not enforceable. That state statute is not enforceable pursuant to the Supremacy Clause. In this context, the question is whether the federal agent was in fact doing something authorized by federal law in fulfilling his duties and doing so in a way that was necessary and proper, or sometimes the language is reasonable. So that is a form of immunity. I don't want to suggest that there's no questions of immunity. Of course there are. And we don't know yet how those might be adjudicated, although the state would have some quite strong arguments, I think. But it's not absolute. It's a fact, specific inquiry into exactly what the specific agents were doing, under what circumstances, what the authorization that they were acting under was, et cetera. So that's the kind of immunity that we're talking about here.

A (36:08)

Understood. And so we know Minnesota has jurisdiction. We know they have the ability, the BCA and, well, we can say the Attorney General, Keith Ellison, or the Hennepin County District Attorney, Moriarty, they've just recently filed and received a restraining order, a temporary restraining order from a judge. This was after the Preddy murder. And this is, you know, they said, first of all, it was unprecedented what DHS did on to the crime scene or, you know, neglected to do at the crime scene. And so we are asking the court, believe it or not, to please tell the government not to tamper with or destroy and preserve all the evidence. Does that. You know, first I want to talk about how hard it must be to prosecute a case like this if you don't. If you can't get the evidence from the FBI or now the dhs, I guess, is conducting their own investigation into the Preddy situation. But talk a little bit about how important that evidence is that they seem to be blocked from getting. But then, even if, you know, if and when they have that hearing, I think it's supposed to be sometime later this week for that temporary restraining order and that preservation of evidence order, what is the next step to actually go in. And once it's preserved, what's the next step to go in and actually get it? Can you have a. I've never seen this. You know, I host a Show with Andy McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI, is in law enforcement for 20 years. Like, I've never seen anyone have to get a warrant to get evidence from us. It's never happened in his tenure. But is that something they're setting up for, is to preserve the evidence so that they can at some point get a hold of it?

C (37:51)

Well, I think that's one of the things they want to preserve. That option like Andy McCabe, who's more experienced at the federal law enforcement level than me. I don't know what that looks like exactly. There's a lot of creative lawyering going on in general right now, a lot of unprecedented motions being filed, cases being brought. So I can't say precisely what will happen. But I could say one thing that could happen is even if this administration resists turning over such evidence, if they preserve it, a future administration could turn it over. There's no statute of limitations in Minnesota for crimes that lead to somebody's death. So that's one possibility. Obviously, the Minnesota prosecutors, I would presume, don't want to wait that long if they think that they have a case.

A (38:43)

Right. Or you could be concerned about the handling of the evidence. Has it been tainted? Has the chain of custody been maintained? Are they, Kash Patel burning it as we speak? Who knows? With this administration, it's everything. Like you said, there's so many novels, court filings and lawyering that's happening right now because I read almost every other day from Steve Vladek where he says we just don't have any case law for this yet, or there's very little case law.

C (39:11)

Well, that's right. So I don't know what it would look like if the state goes into court, they've got this TRO now. There's going to be a preliminary injunction hearing. They win the preliminary injunction. Let's suppose that that stands. There's going to be all kinds of questions then about whether they can. Whether and under what circumstances they can get the evidence, if the evidence even exists. Because one of the complaints that Minnesota had about the Alex about both crime scenes is that ordinary practices of preserving evidence just were not followed. And so the scenes weren't secured. And so there's some evidence that just might not exist, that would ordinarily exist at the scene of some of a shooting. But all of that said, I don't Think we know how hard it would be to prosecute these cases, in part because we haven't seen cases like this before. But one of the things we do have is the videos. And Moriarty and Ellison have asked people to share all of the videos that they've been taking. And again, just to go back to George Floyd, that case would not have been prosecuted, I don't think, had there not been video. But there's all kinds of video here, right? There's video from numerous angles. There's video from ring doorbells. There's video that people are taking with their phones. This is really valuable evidence. And it might not be all of the evidence that a prosecutor would ideally want, but it's what they're gonna have, and it may well be enough to prosecute and convict people of these agents of these crimes.

B (40:58)

Yeah.

A (40:58)

And in the Preddy case, we have several witnesses who've already filed sworn affidavits on docket, which was an interesting filing. Everyone was like, yeah, but is this a lawsuit? What's this part of? And I'm like, I think it's just a notice to the court that we have these affidavits maybe relevant to the, you know, the TRO or the preliminary injunction case here or there. I, you know, it was just, again, like you said, very creative lawyering going on. But they do have several witnesses, eyewitnesses to both of these incidents.

C (41:27)

Yes, absolutely. So there are people who can come into court and testify, this is what I saw, and then this is the video. And some people can come into court and say, this is the video that I took on my phone, and here's the context in which I was here, and here's what I saw happen before the video, and here's what I saw happen after the video. All of that is evidence, and all of that is evidence that prosecutors can use. I don't know how valuable forensic evidence is. Or in a case like these, where we have these videos, where there isn't necessarily a question of precisely who fired the shots. Like in the Renee Goode context, for example. We know who fired the shots. We know what happened. There are questions about precisely what her car was doing. Right where her car was moving. Is it plausible that her. That Jonathan Ross felt threatened, that she was trying to hit him with her car? Well, the more videos we see from the more angles we see, the easier it is to, at least from the prosecutor's perspective, tell a story consistent with all of the evidence that, no, he would not have been reasonable in concluding that he was in danger now, they may not prevail at a trial. Juries, as a general matter, are pretty sympathetic to law enforcement. When law enforcement says, I had to make a split second decision, I was feared for my life. So, you know, I don't want to suggest that any of these videos mean that there's a slam dunk conviction in any of these cases, but I don't think the lack of some of the ordinary forensic evidence should mean that the cases just can't be brought. I just, I don't think that's true at all.

A (43:18)

Yeah, I mean, generally when we see, like, forensic evidence, it's used to identify or tie the person to the scene or, you know, things like the things that we already know to be true. So that's interesting, but I am curious, though, about the veracity of evidence from civilians and their phones. You know, I know a lot of times for, for evidence that, you know, the police won't accept, you know, what I've taken on my phone, but if they come in and get it on their cameras, then it's a different story. Or I know that there's certain chain of custody stuff and, you know, all sorts of things that like the FBI should be doing with their team at Quantico to analyze the, the evidence. But I'm wondering if that would be, you know, something brought up in court about the, the veracity or validity of the evidence of, from, you know, people's phones taken by civilians. And I, you know, I, I bring that up also in light of the obvious impact that that video had in the Derek Chauvin case. Right. So. Right. What about that? Is there any sort of kind of defense that these officers might use against this evidence or to try to keep video evidence out because it was taken by civilians and not law enforcement?

C (44:33)

I'm sure that there will be lots of fights about precisely what evidence will be admissible, and there'll be lots of fights about how much weight juries can give that evidence. But there's no question that it's evidence. If all you had was a video that somebody posted online anonymously without any way of show of establishing who did it and where it came from, there would be more evidentiary problems than if you have the person who said, I took this with my phone at this time, here's why I was there, here's what I was doing, because they can verify that it is what it appears to be. Whereas if it's some anonymous thing that gets posted that nobody knows where it came from. Well, you know, nowadays there could be AI, there could have been all kinds of contextual factors that can't be examined in that situation, but we just don't have that here. What we have here are videos that we know where they came from. We can authenticate them. And that's what I would expect will happen, that people will be asking, yeah.

A (45:44)

One of them was taken by Jonathan Ross himself.

C (45:46)

Exactly.

A (45:47)

We do also have DHS confirming that they have body cam footage of the Preddy murder. And so what would be interesting that would have to be handed over, like if. If they didn't have that already, that would have to be handed over, I believe, in discovery, as would all the evidence that dhs and if FBI has any. I know they were iced out of this investigation too, at least the second one, but I guess maybe they didn't help them cover it up well enough. The FBI screwed up in the, in the Renee Good case by opening a civil rights investigation, which was quickly closed. And so they. Maybe that's why they iced the FBI out of the Preddy investigation. But regardless, I would think that if Minnesota, Because Minnesota can't bring a case unless, you know, I'm sure it's kind of like the rules of federal criminal procedure, where you gotta be. You gotta know that you have. That you can sustain and maintain and obtain a conviction beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law. I'm sure they have some sort of similar level to bring charges. They have to believe they can win the case. And if they do have that evidence and that there's still evidence that has not been handed over, maybe that's what helps this, this preservation order helps, is if that evidence gets handed over, it would, I would assume it would have to come out in discovery.

C (47:00)

Well, there's not necessarily going to be discovery if it's a criminal case. The rules of discovery are different in the context of criminal case. So I'm not sure it will come out. I am sure that the state, whether the Hennepin county prosecutor or the attorney general, will try to get a federal court to order the federal government to provide that video. But again, that goes back to what we were saying earlier, that there isn't really a lot of precedent to know exactly what that will look like and how a court might rule on it.

A (47:35)

Well, we had really long litigations about, during the Trump criminal investigations where, you know, Donald Trump was very, very wanted to be very litigious over what was being handed over in discovery, what evidence was being handed over in discovery.

C (47:49)

Yeah, the, the prosecutor has obligations, constitutional obligations to hand things over to the defendant, but it doesn't work the other way.

A (47:58)

I see, but that's also important for a civil case. We know that Renee Goode has hired the same law firm to help Renee Goode's family. Her partner and her family have hired the same law firm that George Floyd used for their 20 something million dollars civil suit that they were able to win successfully. So there, I imagine there will also be probably civil cases in these cases as well as criminal cases. If they have the evidence to bring.

C (48:24)

Them there almost certainly will be. What? What exactly those cases will be is a whole other question. There's a couple of different potential options. But yes, in the civil case, they will have a right to seek that kind of discovery. And even in the criminal case, if the discovery isn't presented, if the federal government doesn't provide the body cam footage, if I were the prosecutor in the state, I would want to argue that that fact alone, it should be used as an inference against the defendants. Right. If that footage was good for them, surely the federal government would provide it. Now if I were representing the agents, I would argue that that's not a fair inference because they don't control it. It's the blast of, you know, it's the federal government that has it. Those are the types of arguments that we're likely to see playing out in the court. But those are arguments that will be, will undoubtedly be made on both sides.

A (49:35)

Well, I look forward to your analysis of them once they are made. Professor Carolyn Shapiro Former Illinois Solicitor General Professor, Chicago Kent College of Law Amazing. Thank you so much for joining us today.

C (49:46)

Thank you so much for having me.

A (49:48)

Everybody stick around. We'll be right back with the good news. One in five Americans has learn a new language on their bucket list. And I get why it stays in the bucket list. The intention is real. But a lot of apps feel like you're doing a chore or playing a game and neither one helps when you're face to face with a real person. Babbel is different because it prioritizes results. It makes grammar feel less intimidating, but it keeps the focus on usable language. Babel is all about small wins that add up and you can actually track your progress as you go. That's motivating because you can see the difference over time, not just hope that it's working. It also walks you through real life conversation in a way that builds confidence gradually without the pressure to be flawless. And that's the part that makes it stick. I mean, I remember taking language German back in high school and they're teaching us phrases like the dog jumps out of the police car. Stuff you will never use. But Babble is so different from that it's amazing. I've used it as a self improvement tool and for travel prep and it's helped me feel more capable in everyday interactions. I'm talking about ordering food, asking questions, making polite comments and not freezing mid sentence. Those moments matter. Babbel also goes beyond lessons. They have a large collection of podcasts where Babel experts share language tips and cultural contexts, which makes learning feel more connected to real Life. So if 2026 is your year to finally check off learning a new language, Babel is the way to go. And here's a special It's a limited time deal for our listeners right now you get up to 55% off your Babel subscription at babel.com dailybeans get up to 55% off at babel.com dailybeans spelled b a b b e l.com dailybeans rules and restrictions apply.

C (51:31)

It's no surprise that newsmakers try to manipulate the audience. They want you to believe that they are the one holding the line, and they'll use any trick they can to get you there. But don't let them fool you. Get Unspun I'm Amanda Sturgel. I've been a reporter and today I teach future reporters to cut the spin and think critically about what newsmakers say. My podcast, Unspun, shows you how to know when you're being manipulated by the news, learn to spot the tricks, and how to make up your own mind about what's true. So if you're tired of being fooled by by the news, subscribe to Unspun today. Unspun because you deserve the truth.

A (52:10)

All right everybody, welcome back. It's time for the good news. Good news everyone.

B (52:15)

Then good news, everyone.

A (52:30)

Good news. And if you have any good news or good trouble suggestions, anything at all, your good news can be big. It can be small. It can be from last week or last year or 20 years ago. It can be a great story that you like to share when you're, you know, sitting around the campfire talking to friends. It can be your favorite comedian, a funny joke, maybe some misheard song lyrics, anything that'll put a tiny little bit of a smile on our faces. We like to microdose that. Hope you can give us a shout out to your spouse or a loved one or a friend or yourself even. We love self shout outs. Tell us why you're awesome.

B (53:02)

Yes we do.

A (53:03)

You can send that to us at Business, small business in your area that could use a boost or that's doing some great stuff. Maybe a non profit. You'd like us to know about a government program that's helped you or a loved one. Send it all to us dailybeanspod.com and click on contact. And all you got to do to get your stuff right on the air is pay your POD pet tariff, which these days means just attach a photo of anything. It can be anything. Anything. As long as it's not AI. Please don't send us any AI sloth.

B (53:27)

Please, please, please.

A (53:29)

You can send us your pet. We can try to guess the breeds of your shelter pup. You can send us an adoptable pet in your area. You can send us a random animal off the Internet right now. Goats. 24 hour goats goats, goats, goats, goats, goats. Send us all of your photos. It can be family pictures, pictures of rallies, favorite signs you've seen at protests, what you're growing in your garden or what you're making or creating. We have so many great makers and creators who listen to this program. Anything at all. Send it to us dailybeanspod.com click on Contact. First up is your Good Trouble and your Good Trouble today. Listeners have highlighted this group before and it is one of our favorites. It's Visibility Brigade. You've probably seen or participated in a Visibility brigade on an overpass near you. In addition to their overpass actions, they put together Operation Fortify to help local restaurants and businesses be prepared for ice. Quote the whole purpose behind Operation Fortify is to get employers to know their legal rights when it comes to ICE raids and to create a plan to protect themselves and their employees. This is something you can share by visiting restaurants and businesses in your area or anytime you're out to eat. Most employees have no clue about these rights and will be extremely appreciative when you share it with them and it will be truly meaningful for you to help in this way. Operation Fortify contains best practices scripts, printable resources, and we'll have a link in the show Notes. It's important that restaurants and businesses be aware and be prepared before ICE comes to your area. So again, Operation Fortify materials found in the link in the show notes. Visibilitybrigade.com you'll see a link. Thank you so much Visibility Brigade.

B (55:10)

This is awesome. I love our good news segments. They make me so happy. All right, this is from Anonymous Pronouns she and her hello Daily Grind gals. First, thank you so much for keeping us informed and as sane as we can in this crazy time. Especially for giving us the tools to have informed conversations and fingers crossed, changed some hearts and minds. I was listening today's episode and heard Ag talk about Minneapolis sharing its tactics and strategies with other cities that need it. I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, I have a family member who is an ICE agent and who is being deployed to Memphis for two weeks starting this Saturday. They were told that they had to go to Minneapolis or Memphis and they picked Memphis. I'm very concerned this craziness is coming there next. I'm hopeful the legume in Natty can connect. If it comes to it. Some of the same tactics and peaceful resistance strategies can be used in Memphis in the coming weeks. I apologize that this isn't good news, but for my POD pet tariff, I've included the opposite of nude goats and given the weather around, a lot of the country have instead included goats and coats. I don't, I don't have any personal pictures, but I was able to find a ton of adorable goats and coats on Instagram. Credit for submitted image is farm for animal sanctuary. Farm. Oh, that's cute. Animal sanctuary to everyone everywhere. Stay strong in the pod. The beans are counting on you. This goat is ridiculous.

A (56:37)

Oh, the goat and jammies. I love the goats and coats. Thank you, Anonymous. Thank you so much for that. All right, next up from Karen. I'm a grandma from South Dakota, home state of the Wicked witch of the Midwest. Joined a popup protest on Saturday in 5 degree temperatures and it was a good turning out for short notice and frigid temps. Attached are our blanks. They look like little Scotties. Kenna. And our blank. Haley's butt. Thanks for your great work. Look at the. Oh, what's that? Is that a. That second dog, the butt. Oh my gosh. So cute.

B (57:17)

It looks like a corgi. It looks like a corgi cocker butt. Like a corgi cocker spaniel butt.

A (57:23)

Yeah. So let's see. We've got a. Oh, a Wheaton Scotty. Very cute. And a corgi butt.

B (57:29)

There you go.

A (57:29)

Corgi butts. Best butts in the dog business.

B (57:33)

They are. Oh my God, look at this picture. This is from Coco. No pronouns given. I too, love goats. Here's a photo of Dexter, Nigerian dwarf goat. And just for good measure, a photo of Joey in her mama wallaby pouch. Feel better?

A (57:47)

Yes, a little bit.

B (57:48)

Yo.

A (57:49)

Thank you. Look at them babies.

B (57:51)

So cute. All right, another short one. This is from Erica. Pronouns. She and her. I wanted to show you what I've been working on since I retired last June. The striped fat cat was a Christmas gift to my 7 year old grandson who named him Henry in honor of my newest black kitten. The second picked is Henry before I performed surgery to fix him because my grandson carries him everywhere. This is the kid who prefers Roblox and sons of the 4 is video games. Henry gets to help. This is so cute.

A (58:21)

Oh my gosh, I love that.

B (58:23)

Yeah.

A (58:26)

Yeah. What happened to his eye though?

B (58:28)

I know right?

A (58:29)

Adore some next thing he's seen some really he's got stories. All right, next up from Kelsey pronoun she and her hi beans queens. My name is Kelsey and I'm a pharmacy technician from Baton Rouge, Louisiana. And I would like to shout out all of the pharmacy technicians out there. You're here. Thank you to our pharmacy technicians here in Louisiana. I've had a lot of Hispanic and Latino only Spanish speaking customers. Even if I have to use my phone translator, I try to do all that I can for them. Sometimes that even means writing what the meds are, what they're for in Spanish on the bottle. Sometimes taking a few minutes to show them how to access a discount card to save them on their medication. That can be extremely helpful. With so much hatred right now in the world, no one can tell us who and who not to take care of. Hear, hear. I love that. I've also recently joined a program with my job to learn Spanish in the pharmacy. We don't ask country of origin, ethnicity, party affiliation or citizenship status. It's simply how may we help you? So shout out to all the pharmacy techs. I've attached a picture of my nephew Cannon who was born three months early weighing one pound and 15 ounces. He was in the NICU for three months. He is now nine pounds and getting bigger every day. My goodness, that is a survivor. That is a champ. Kelsey, look at Kelsey.

B (59:51)

Look at this little miracle. Oh, the hat and the mittens. They can't.

A (59:56)

I want them.

B (59:57)

I want them. Oh, they're gonna do something good in this world. They have to. You don't go through all that that you know what I mean? All right. This is from Joel. Pronouns he and him. Hello my beans queens. I feel like we're best friends since I listen to you daily. I've been following since the kitchen table days and have contributed a few good news stories in the past. I'm still cracking up that you referred to my 70 plus year old father as a hottie. I established a scholarship in his honor of my dad. With the money saved for my student loan forgiveness I submitted this is good News by the way, back in 2024. Thank you. Anyway, I'm with Indivisible Guilford county in Greensboro, North, North Dakota. Nope, nope, nope. That's North Carolina. Dana. Like many groups across the country following the re election of President Shitler, we had a huge increase in members in the last year. In December, a phenomenal group of artists, musicians, painters and other creatives came together to host a silent auction in support of our cause. Thanks to their talent and generosity, we raised an incredible $5,000. I was deeply moved by the creativity and commitment to community. It was a powerful reminder that everyone has a role to play in this movement. Even if you're not leading chance at a rally or walking the halls of Congress, there's a space for every kind of talent in the fight to reclaim our democracy. I was lucky enough to purchase a few pieces, including the attached paintings of Stephen Colbert and Jasmine Crockett. They now adorn my coffee bar. So I get daily dose of inspiration from two truly remarkable people. Check out these posts here and we'll give you a link in the show notes. These are great paintings. All of the artists, by the way, can be found on a post here and we're going to give you a link to that in the show notes so you too can get your paintings of Jasmine Crockett and Stephen Colbert.

A (61:41)

There's they are. Look, there's the actual auction. Yeah, you can see all those incredible paintings. Joel, thank you so much. I don't recall, I don't remember referring to your 70 year old father as a hottie. You'll have to. You have to.

B (61:56)

It could have been me.

A (61:58)

You have to refresh my memory on that. By the way, if you're a new listener to the Daily Beans, the Kitchen Table days refers to my very first podcast starting in 2017, at my kitchen table with a $25 microphone or something. It was like a $49.99 some cheap ass microphone in my kitchen. At my kitchen table with like a $14 4 channel mixer. Like we sat there and you could hear the refrigerator going in the background. It was. It was the sound whisper. You can still hear them there. It's called Mueller. She wrote. You can still hear those first episodes. That's what they mean by the kitchen table days. That means they've been listening for eight years.

B (62:40)

Wow, I love that.

A (62:42)

So thanks again, Joel. And yeah, send me a photo of your dad. All right, thank you all so much for the good news. Please send it to us dailybeanspod.com click on Contact. Follow Dana on Instagram. Go check out that amazing video with Jane Fonda. It's so funny. It's at dgcot DJ Comedy. And you can also get tickets and.

B (63:03)

Follow Allison while you're there. Yep. Oh yeah. And you can get tickets. Go to my website, danagoldberg.com hit the tour. You're going to see where I'm going to be at. Lots of HRC Gallas, lots of nonprofits, but also some comedy shows. And that one on March 4 at the Sabon in Los Angeles is going to be a big one.

A (63:19)

Yeah, man. That's going to be an incredible show for Lambda. That's amazing. Tig Notaro is like one of my comedy heroes.

B (63:26)

The Tig was at the filming for those videos the other day. She's amazing and so is. Yeah, they're awesome.

A (63:33)

All right, everybody, we'll be back in your ears tomorrow. Until then, please take care of yourselves, take care of each other, take care of the planet, take care of your mental health and take care of your family. I've been ag.

B (63:41)

I've been dg.

A (63:43)

And them's the Beans. The Daily Beans is written and executive produced by Allison Gill with additional research and reporting by Dana Goldberg. Sound design and editing is by Desiree McFarlane with art and web design by Joelle Reader with Moxie Design Studios. Music for the Daily Beans is written and performed by they Might Be Giant Dance and the show is a proud member of the MSW Media Network, a collection of creator owned podcasts dedicated to news, politics and justice. For more information, please Visit mswmedia.com msw media.