Transcript
A (0:00)
Msw media. Hello and welcome to the Daily beans for Tuesday, December 23, 2025. Today, Canadians leaked the 60 Minutes seacoat segment killed by Bari Weiss at CBS. And you can watch it in its entirety. Chuck Schumer has filed a resolution for the Senate to sue the Department of Justice over violations of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. New Gallup polling shows Trump has lost the majority of white people and men. Judge Crenshaw orders the government to reply to Abrego's motion for sanctions and his motion to dismiss the criminal case against him. Epstein survivors have signed a letter expressing their frustration with DOJ's December 19th release of the Epstein files. And Kash Patel is being driven around in a luxury BMW paid for by us. I'm your host, Alison Gill. Hey, everybody, Happy Tuesday. And the days are going to start getting longer from here on out, so that's nice. Later in the show, I'm going to be joined by by Alyssa Weeks from Pathways to Citizenship. That's a nonprofit that provides legal services and bond money and green card assistance for immigrants and their families, especially those wrongfully targeted by ICE and Customs and Border Protection. This is one of the nonprofits that I'm donating to. So we'll have a link in the show notes where you can match my donations if you'd like. Also in the Abrego case, after Kilmar Abrego's lawyers filed filed for sanctions over Todd Blanche's months and months of lies to the court under penalty of perjury over him not having any role, he claimed he'd had no role in charging Mr. Abrego, only to find out later that through discovery there actually is evidence that he played a role. They have filed the Abrego's lawyers filed that motion for sanctions. And now Judge Crenshaw is giving Donald Trump the Department of justice until see December 29th to reply to these accusations and then giving Mr. Abrego's lawyers until December 31st to respond to that. So we could have sanctions in the new year for Mr. Todd Blanche up to and including a referral to the bar association for up to and including disbarment. We'll see. We'll see. I'm not going to get my hopes up too high, but this case is moving forward. Also, there is some more polling out. Yesterday on the beans talk, I went over some bad polling numbers from an Atlas poll for Donald Trump. Now there's a new Gallup poll out. They put his approval rating, Donald Trump's approval rating, at 36%. And with 59% disapproving, 23 points underwater. Democrats are there. He's underwater by 90 points. 3% of Democrats approve of his job. 89% of Republicans approve of his job and independence. Only 25% approval rating. He's a negative 43. With independent voters, that's going to not go well for them in the midterms. In the age ranges, we have the 18 to 34 age range, they have a 25% approval rating of Trump. He's in 43 points underwater, 35 to 54. That's me and my friends, 36% approval rating. He's minus 23 and ages 55 and up, he has a 43% approval rating with with that age group. Now among those people with no college, he has a 37% approval rating. And with those with a college degree, same 37% approval rating, just more people with a college graduate degree disapprove of Donald Trump's job. The do the job that he's doing, 59% disapprove, whereas 55% disapprove that have no college. Now here's the part that kind of shocked me. He has a 42% approval rating with men, a 30% approval rating with women, he has a 46 approval. A 46% approval rating with white people, that's way down. I don't think I've ever seen him have a negative share of white people. He only has a 21% approval rating with non whites. So you can check out this poll. It's the new Gallup poll and that's also an A plus poll. So just wanted to get that information out there to you before we get into the news. So let's do that now. Let's hit the hot notes. Hot notes, notes. All right, first up from the Wall Street Journal, CBS News pulled a planned 60 minute segment on El Salvador maximum security prison seat coat where the Trump administration sent hundreds of Venezuelan migrants. A last minute decision that drew rebuke from one of its high profile correspondents. That's Sharon Alonsi. She said in a Sunday email to fellow correspondents including Leslie Stahl, Scott Pelley and Anderson Cooper that she learned Saturday that new CBS News editor in chief Bari Weiss spiked our story. That's what that's the quote from her email. She said the last minute change was in her view, a political decision rather than an editorial call. That's according to that email which was reviewed by the Wall Street Journal. Now Harry Dunn and I are going to go over the entire story on tomorrow's episode of cleanup on aisle 45. And also her email. I'll also read the email in its entirety on today's episode of the Beans Talk over at MSW Media YouTube channel. But what happened? Like, I'm recording a little bit late today because somebody sent me a link anonymously. They said, hey, check this out. I generally don't check out links sent to me by anonymous people without explanation. But then they explained where they got it and what it was, and I clicked on it. And it's the entire 60 minute segment that Bari Weiss tried to keep from us, the story that she spiked. It's a 14 minute segment with Sharon Alfonsi, who's the anchor of 60 Minutes, the person who sent out the email, the scathing email to her colleagues on Saturday about the story being killed by Bari Weiss and saying that she believes it was killed for political reasons. So apparently what happened was I just immediately uploaded it, put it out on my, put it out on my sub stack so it could be there, so it could be preserved from wherever it came from without really knowing where it came from. But then after some pretty easy sleuthing over on social media, found out that it aired on the global TV app in Canada. And someone in Canada named Jason Paris sat down and recorded the whole thing from the app that was playing on his TV in its entirety. And so he, he was sharing that around the Internet. And it's been making the rounds and now is available for everyone to watch. This is going to be what we refer to as the Streisand effect. More people are going to watch it now because of the media attention that it's gotten. Same with the, you know, with Jimmy Kimmel when he came back and did his opening monologue after having been removed from the air, what, 26 million people watched it. That's Bananas Pants. So you can watch it in its entirety if you want, pretty much anywhere on the Internet now. But you can find it@mellershirote.com it's free to watch. That's my substack. All right, next up, you recall I said that if the Department of Justice failed to follow the letter of the law in releasing the Epstein files, it would trigger a lawsuit? Well, Chuck Schumer has filed that resolution to initiate the lawsuit. And it says providing for authority to initiate litigation for actions by the president and the Department of Justice officials inconsistent with their duties under the laws of the United States. Whereas Public Law 11938, the Epstein files Transparency act, referred to in this resolution as the act, was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and with their vote, every United States Senator and 427 bipartisan House members sent a clear and simple message Release all the Epstein files. Whereas the act required the release of all records, documents, communications and investigation materials in a searchable and downloadable format by December 19th. Whereas the act provided for limited, narrowly tailored grounds for withholding or redacting information made public in compliance with the law. Whereas on December 19, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Justice Department would release an initial but not complete portion of the Epstein files, which would include several hundred thousand documents from its Epstein investigative files. Whereas the act provides no exception to meeting the December 19, 2025 release deadline. Whereas only 4,101 records made up of 9,675 pages were released by the Department of Justice on December 19, not several hundred thousand. Whereas the Department of Justice sought to inflate the total number of documents released. So I'm going to break in here in the middle of reading this resolution, Todd Blanche went on and said hundreds of thousands of documents were released. Multiple news outlets said huge tranche of documents released. Washington Post Tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of documents released. It was 9,675 pages, 4,101 documents. That's it. We know there's over 300,000 pages. If there are only 300,000 pages, this accounts for about 3% of the total Epstein files. All right back to the resolution. Whereas on the Department of Justice website the Department of Justice has also collected other Epstein material which has largely already been made public, including records previously produced under the Freedom of Information act, the July Maxwell interview, the Bureau of Prison footage of Epstein's jail cell on the night of his death, prior Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility and Office of Inspector General reports and statements and a link to the website of the Committee on Oversight of the House of Representatives. Whereas the released files were extensively redacted, not in compliance with the limited scope of the redactions under the actual Whereas, according to initial analysis, approximately half of the total release pages Featured redactions, including 20% completely or heavily redacted and a series of three consecutive documents totaling 255 pages entirely redacted without any explanation and whereas the release material erroneously released Epstein survivor information, while in other instances protecting Epstein co conspirators and enablers from disclosure. Now therefore, be it resolved that one, the Majority Leader of the Senate, that's John Thune Republican, shall initiate or intervene in one or more civil actions in the name of the Senate in a federal court of competent jurisdiction to seek appropriate relief regarding the failure of the Department of Justice to act in a manner consistent with public law. Number two, the majority leader of the Senate, John Thune, shall notify the Senate when the body initiates or intervenes in any civil action. So you got to sue them in federal court and you got to tell us when you do it. And three, the Office of Senate Legal Counsel or any other counsel designated at the direction of the majority Leader of the Senate shall represent the Senate in any civil action initiated or in which the Senate intervenes pursuant to this resolution. And any counsel so designated is authorized to designate funds for such representation. Approved by the majority leader of the Senate out of the miscellaneous line item appropriations. So it's paid for. You gotta represent. We have to have Senate legal counsel or someone that you, John Thune, appoint. You gotta sue them. You gotta do it in federal court in the proper jurisdiction, and you gotta tell us when. So this is a pretty. I mean, this is what was going to happen pursuant to the law if the Department of Justice failed to follow it, which they evidently did, clearly. And to have that official number, that there were only 4,100 documents released is just blows my mind. And by the way, the Epstein survivors have written and signed a statement about this, about the release that reads statement from survivors. The Epstein Files Transparency act imposed a Dec. 19 deadline for the U.S. department of justice to release its full records of the investigation on Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplices and enablers, with specific narrow exceptions such as survivor identities. This law, enacted by a nearly unanimous vote in the House and unanimously in the Senate and signed by the President, was clear. It afforded no permission for delayed disclosure. Instead, the public received a fraction of the files. And what we received was riddled with abnormal and extreme redactions with no explanation. At the same time, numerous victim identities were left unredacted, causing real and immediate harm. No financial documents were released. Grand jury minutes, though approved by a federal judge for release, were fully blacked out. Not the scattered redactions that might be expected to protect victim names, but 119 full pages blacked out. We are told that there are hundreds of thousands of pages of documents still unreleased. These are clear cut violations of an unambiguous law. Moreover, the partial release was done in a manner that made it difficult to or impossible for survivors to find materials that would be most relevant to our search for accountability. There's been no guidance for survivors on how to locate materials pertaining to our own cases, nor have we been provided with copies of our own files? Despite repeated requests, there's been no communication with survivors or our representatives as to what was withheld from the release, or why hundreds of thousands of documents and have not been disclosed by the legal deadline, or how DOJ will ensure that no more victim names are wrongly disclosed. While clearer communication would not change the fact that the law was broken, its absence suggests an ongoing intent to keep survivors and the public in the dark as much as possible and as long as possible. It is alarming that the United States doj, the very agency tasked with upholding the law, has violated the law both by withholding massive quantities of documents and and by failing to redact survivor identities as women who survived the crimes perpetrated by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. We call upon DOJ to explain to the public why they have missed a legal deadline and to explain to us or our representatives how we can privately obtain copies of all documents in DOJ possession that identify us by name. For documents that are publicly released, careful lawful redaction is essential. Transparency must focus on institutional failures, enablers, financial records and government conduct, not on further endangering survivors. Moreover, we call on Congress to stand up for the rule of law. We urge immediate congressional oversight, including hearings, formal demands for compliance, and legal action to ensure the Department of Justice fulfills its legal obligations. This is not a partisan issue. Just as the Epstein Files Transparency act was supported across party lines, we now ask elected officials from both parties to take decisive action to enforce the law, compel full compliance, and ensure meaningful transparency without further delay. Survivors deserve truth. Survivors whose identities are private deserve protection. The public deserves accountability, and the law must be enforced. And it's signed by multiple survivors, including Annie and Maria Farmer. Annie was the survivor that I interviewed on Midas Touch on Sunday. All right, we're going to shift gears and talk really quick about Kash Patel. This is from Ms. Now, apparently he's being driven around in a specially armored BMW that the FBI bought at his request. Patel had pressed the FBI for this high end vehicle for the purpose of being less conspicuous on his outings, according to four sources familiar with his transportation who requested anonymity. FBI directors protected by a security detail have traditionally been driven around in a suburban, whether it's for meetings, evening events, or their daily commute. FBI spokesperson Ben Williamson confirmed the FBI purchased the BMW X5s, I think is what it's called for the Director's use saying the Bureau planned to acquire updated vehicles and this choice was less expensive than others. It considered Were you looking for a Bentley? He declined to provide documents showing the cost of the new vehicle or buttressing his contention that it would save money compared with the existing government fleet already available for FBI use. Quote Government agencies, including the FBI, routinely evaluate, replace and update vehicle fleets based on usage, security needs or budgetary decisions. The specific decisions referenced in this article were evaluated partly as a way to save taxpayer money, partly by picking cheaper selections or making cost structures more efficient. Wow. Okay. The government has a contract with BMW for the armored luxury SUVs. Specifically, the state Department uses them to protect diplomats and other officials in high risk environments around the world. Mississippi now has also learned, according to four people, that Patel earlier this year pressed the FBI to purchase a new, more modern FBI jet for him and his use, but the proposal was abandoned over cost estimates that were between 90 and $115 million. The BMW is the latest example of what many current and former officials see as the FBI director's questionable use of the public's dollars. Patel has also come under fire for taking personal trips, as we know, on the FBI's Gulfstream jet, which he says he is required to do pursuant to government policy. Stacy Young, former DOJ official who founded Justice Connection, a network of former DOJ employees, says the BMW request is another example of Patel putting his public image ahead of concern for taxpayer resources. Calling it an embarrassment, she referred to a complaint from a recent report based on anonymous accounts from more than 20 former and current FBI and law enforcement personnel arriving on the scene in Utah after the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Patel would not get off the plane until agents brought him a medium sized FBI ray jacket to wear for the cameras outside. He needs a field jacket that fits just right, a Punisher Inspired Challenge coin and a new fleet of foreign cars to drive around in. Patel has disputed this criticism that he's squandering resources. He says it's nonsense, defending the use of the jet and calling himself a steward of the taxpayer dollars. Wow. I remember when I bought a customer service award for call center employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs. I had a $20 maximum, so I ended up spending $19 on a trophy from an estate sale like a bowling trophy that I turned into a customer service award. Anyway, Patel is the first director to have used this specialized foreign branded vehicle, law enforcement personnel told Ms. Now the government has a contract with GM to provide a fleet of Suburbans, a type of large sport utility vehicle which can be upgraded as needed to include security features such as armored plating or run flat tires and ballistic Glass. Patel's security details still occasionally transports him in a Suburban, often during workday hours, they said Patel has argued that he needs to move around in a more covert manner, which the BMW allows. A person close to Patel, speaking on the condition of anonymity to provide details, said it would have cost the government $480,000 to purchase a new armored Suburban, part of an upgrade Patel was considering and. And that was more than twice the cost of the BMW. But the person didn't explain why a new vehicle was needed at all. Asked about the alleged cost savings, Democratic congressional aide said, they don't go out and buy a new one for a fleet refresh. They contract with General Motors for 20 of them at a discount. FBI spokesman Williamson disputed this, but didn't provide specifics. Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee recently opened an investigation into Patel's use of government resources. I'm sure they'll add this. According to the company's website, BMW markets its specially armored X5 as uniquely equipped to shield passengers from a range of threats. It offers protection not just against attacks with blunt instruments and handguns, but also against the world's most widely used firearm, the AK47. It also says that it reinforces the car's compartment with steel armor to prevent gunfire from piercing vulnerable areas, including where body panels join. Critics and former FBI officials say Patel's use of FBI resources and his request for a new jet are inappropriate. Previous directors often traveled in Suburbans without armor reinforcements, according to former FBI officials, because agents considered the risk of them being gunned down in Washington and its suburbs very low. As for Patel's failed request for a more modern jet, accounts differ on his reasoning. Two people familiar with the matter said he wanted a more modern airplane and found the existing director's jet to be dated. The person close to Patel said the director was trying to save money. Save money by buying this new stuff, quote, because the existing leasing structure of the plane was expensive. And the thought was that getting out of the lease and purchasing a different one would save millions in the long haul. Okay. But, quote, when the numbers came back, the plan was scrapped, the person said, adding that the cost was around $60 million. Hmm. That's not. It was 90 to 115. Okay. Patel then ordered the communications equipment in the existing Gulfstream jet to be upgraded, according to two sources familiar. The two sources said Patel argued he needed more reliable Internet on his plane so multiple people could post simultaneously on social media. Oh, my God. But a person close to the director said he ordered the upgrade for a different reason it wasn't for social media. He rarely, if ever post on social media. It was because we had multiple secure comms calls, both scheduled and unscheduled, that were dropping on official travel and we needed to fix it. Sure, sure. The person gave an example of one of those drop calls. Quote, there was one with the attorney General in the spring during an active shooter situation where we couldn't connect on a flight back from a field office visit. The former FBI officials who traveled with previous directors told Ms. Now that this explanation does not square with their experience on the director's jet. They say the jet is equipped with a communication station directly behind the cockpit specifically for potential national security crises or emergencies. The director asked to confer with the White House or other senior administration officials. The official said that a technical aid was positioned there to connect such emergency secure calls. But those calls are exceedingly rare, as few as a handful in the course over a year, and they never experienced connection problems that weren't quickly resolved. They said. The Internet connection on the jet, however, could be bulky and unreliable on occasion. Just such a waste of money. And he was complaining about Chris Ray using the FBI jet just like once or twice. Unbelievable. He used it 18 times so far and he's only been there for not even a year. All right, everybody, stay with us for my interview with Alyssa Weeks. From Pathways to Citizenship. This is one of the nonprofits I'm donating my veterans disability benefits to. So stick around. Be right back after these messages. We'll be right back. This season I am trimming the budget where it actually counts, starting with wireless. Mint mobile is offering 50% off all their unlimited plans right now. So you can pick a 3, 6 or 12 month unlimited premium wireless plan for just $15 a month. It is the best deal they run all year and it's an easy way to stop overpaying for wireless. Give that expensive phone bill the Scrooge treatment and put the extra money toward holidays instead. So let's thank Mint Mobile for supporting this episode. Make the switch@mintmobile.com DailyBeans Mint Mobile's best deal of the year. It's happening right now. You can choose a 3, 6 or 12 month unlimited plan for $15 a month. Every plan includes high speed data plus unlimited talk and text on the nation's largest 5G network. So you're not trading price for performance. Bring your current phone, keep your current phone number, keep your contacts and you're all set. No contracts, no nonsense. We're one of our producers made the switch to Mint mobile. He had an unlocked Android phone lying around and decided to test it out. A couple days later, his SIM card showed up. He popped it in. Took less than 10 minutes to set up. He got to keep a number. He synced his contacts, and now he's saving a ton compared to the old provider. The best part? He says the coverage is just as strong. It's amazing. And the speeds are just as fast. So turn your expensive wireless present into a huge wireless savings future by switching to Mint Mobile. Shop Mint unlimited plans@mintmobile.com DailyBeans that's mintmobile.com DailyBeans Limited time offer upfront payment for $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for 12 month plan required $15 a month equivalent taxes and fees extras initial plan term only. More than 35 gigabytes may slow when the network is busy. Capable device required. Availability, speed and coverage varies. See mintmobile.com for details. Hey, everybody. Welcome back. As many of you know, I recently donated my annual VAC veterans benefits for my disability to multiple organizations that help immigrants and the LGBTQ community. And today we're going to talk to a Department of justice accredited representative, one of two legal representatives at a nonprofit called Pathways to Citizenship here in California that helps with immigration, family based and humanitarian citizenship, all sorts of different cases. And we're going to discuss not only how they are funded, generally what this money can do for them, and how you, the listeners, can help match my donation. So please welcome Alyssa Weeks. Hi, Alyssa. How are you? Hi.