B (6:33)

We figured it had to be really.

A (6:34)

One sided or maybe she gave false information to a grand jury. But I think we might find that out unless this case is just wholly dismissed because Lindsey Halligan isn't qualified and she's the only person who signed the indictment. But I would be interested to find out the abuses of the grand jury process and I would be interested in that discovery. Usually there's a little bit of discovery for those hearings and those are coming up in November and December, those hearings, by the way, we'll cover them here. And on Unjustified and the fourth motion to dismiss outrageous government conduct, which, I mean, I haven't seen one of those, but it sounds reasonable to me because this conduct is pretty outrageous. So those were the four mentioned. Like I said, that might not be all of them. The court set some dates for those motions and hearings. Like I said. Andy and I are going to go over those details on this weekend's Unjustified podcast. And Comey asked for a speedy trial and the judge set a trial date for January 5th. And then even the judge wanted it in December. But the government is arguing, oh, we have thousands of pages. We're just getting our hands around the evidence now. We have so much evidence in this case, we're just getting our hands around it now. Judge. And there's going to be a ton of classified documents. So we're going to have to go through a really protracted SEPA process. If you listened to the JAC podcast with me and Andy McCabe, you're very familiar with the SEPA process and how to use classified materials in court. But the judge was like, yeah, no sepa. It's going to be the fastest SEPA you've ever seen, even if we get there. And no, we're not going to waste time on this. Virginia doesn't play. Eastern District of Virginia. It's known as the rocket docket. And this judge is, is not playing. And Comey is like, I'm innocent. Give me a speedy trial. And then he said that in his video message, too. So again, we're going all of that on this weekend's unjustified, but no perp walk. And he pled not guilty on two of the counts, not three because that third count they couldn't get a grand jury to indict him on. Also later in the show today, I'm going to be talking with Congressman Dan Goldman about his letter to Kristi Noem demanding answers over DHS reinstating that ICE officer who slammed that woman to the ground at 26 Federal Plaza. And we're going to discuss the shutdown as well, plus the Comey indictment and also the corruption at Trump's Justice Department. But first, let's hit the hot notes.

B (8:54)

Hot notes.

A (8:57)

All right, first up from ABC7 in Los Angeles, a 29 year old man was arrested on suspicion of igniting a fire that eventually turned into the destructive Palisades fire, according to federal and local law enforcement. They announced that on Wednesday. Jonathan Rindernacht, a former resident of Palisades, was taken into custody Tuesday near his Florida home for destruction of property by means of fire, according to Acting U.S. attorney Bill Asale. Now, Bill Asale is also the guy who can't get any convictions against protesters supposedly assaulting ICE officers. He's lost many of those convictions, but that's the same U.S. attorney there in Los Angeles. Now, Rindernecht started the Lachman fire in the early morning hours of January 1st after working as an Uber driver the night before, Aseli said two of his passengers told law enforcement that he appeared agitated and angry that night. And after he dropped off a passenger in the Pacific Palisades, Aseli said Rindernecht parked his car and tried but failed to contact a former friend. Then he exited his car, walked up a trail, took iPhone videos from a nearby hilltop and listened to a, quote, rap song whose music video included objects being lit on fire. Now, after the Lachman Fire ignited, Rindernecht called 911 to report the fire, fled the scene in his car, but turned around when he saw fire engines approach the fire. That's what Aseli said. Quote, while the Lachman Fire burned, the defendant walked up the same trail from earlier that night to watch the fire and the firefighters. That's what Aseli said, adding Rindernacht recorded video on the scene using his iPhone. Quote Although firefighters suppressed the blaze, the fire continued to smolder and burn underground within the root structure of the dense vegetation. That's what Assaili said during a press conference Wednesday morning. He went on to say it smoldered underground for about a week until on January 7, heavy winds caused this underground fire to surface and spread above ground, causing what became known as the Palisades Fire, one of the most destructive fires in Los Angeles city history. Now, I didn't know y', all that a fire could kind of be dormant for seven days and then kick up again with the wind. That's terrifying. During an interview Jan. 24, Rinderknecht told investigators where the fire began, which was information that was not yet publicly available that he wouldn't have known if he hadn't witnessed it. And Rindernecht is expected to make an appearance in federal court in Orlando, Florida Wednesday. If convicted, he faces up to 20 years in prison. Seems like he should get more and next up from the Advocate, the group fighting to protect so called conversion therapy in the U.S. supreme Court case Chiles v. Salazar has actually been accused of misrepresenting its evidence by the very researchers they cite. The Alliance Defending Freedom, that's a conservative Christian legal advocacy group that has played a pivotal role in several court cases involving abortion access and LGBTQ rights, will argue before or the nation's highest court Tuesday that justices should strike down state laws that ban conversion therapy for minors. The group cites a 2016 study by Lisa diamond and Clifford Roesky, who have since condemned the ADF for profoundly misrepresenting their findings. Quote it's deceptive, roeski told the Guardian. Lawyers owe a duty of candor to the court. You can't offer false evidence and if you do so accidentally and find out that you did so accidentally, you have to correct that. They claim our work supports conversion therapy when our work clearly and specifically condemns conversion therapy. On the same page, they cite the ADF included in its arguments a section of the paper that states sexual orientation changes for many people. Respected researchers of LGBT issues have long observed that longitudinal population based studies show changes in the same sex attractions of some individuals over time. However, the ADF left out the part stating it is change that occurs outside the context of conversion therapy. The ADF failed to include any information from the paper that demonstrated conversion therapy is not only ineffective in changing sexual orientation, but psychologically damaging, often resulting in elevated rates of depression, anxiety and suicidality. Now that's what the thesis of the report says. That's the crux of the entire report. Conversion therapy, also referred to as reparative therapy, has been denounced by the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, World Psychiatric Association, American Medical association and every other major medical organization. The World Health Organization concludes that the practice, quote, lacks medical justification and represents a serious threat to the health and well being affected people, including significantly higher rates of depression, anxiety, self destructive behavior, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. The adf, which has been designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law center, has been involved in several Supreme Court cases, including Dobbs. Dobbs. That's the one that overturned the right to abortion nationally. It also represented website designer Lori Smith in the 2023 case 303 Creative Inc. V. Helenis and Baker Jack Phillips in the 2018 masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado case, which affirmed the right to discriminate against LGBTQ people on the basis of religion. Diamond and Roeski said they were never contacted by the ADF about their findings and they have since filed a brief with the court to correct the mischaracterizations of their research. Quote that's what's diabolical about ADF using us. They know they're misrepresenting my views. It also feels very hard to counter because it's not coming from facts or reason, it's coming from animus. That's what Dimon said, adding, quote this case could do some real harm to the very individuals we've spent our lives trying to protect. We'll keep you posted on that case. Next up from Politico the IRS said it was furloughing nearly half its workforce and shuttering most operations on Wednesday, but will continue to work to implement Trump's signature tax cuts. And I'm sure also to implement Trump going after left wing groups and nonprofits. Work on preparing for next year's tax filing season will also continue, but numerous operations will be halted, including taxpayer services like call site operations. The agency will also suspend non automated tax collections and most headquarters and administrative functions not related to the safety of life and protection of property during non filing season. That's according to the agency's latest contingency plan. The plan will idle tens of thousands of employees. While 53.6% of the total workforce will remain at work, the rest will be furloughed. That's 35,000 employees. The union that represents IRS workers condemned the move today due to the government shutdown. The American people lost access to many vital services provided by the IRS That's Doreen Greenwald, national president of the National Treasury Employees Union. Quote, expect increased wait times, backlogs and delays implementing tax law changes as the shutdown continues. Taxpayers around the country will now have a much harder time getting the assistance they need just as they get ready to file their extension returns that are due next week. When the government shut down last week, the agency exempted all of its employees from furlough for about five business days, saying it would stay open by using special funding it was given by Congress in 2020. We covered that here on the beans. But Wednesday morning, the agency said, quote, an IRS wide furlough began on October 8th for everyone except already identified accepted and exempt employees. That's according to a statement on the IRS's website. It goes on to say employees who are not exempt or accepted are furloughed and placed in a non pay and non duty status until further notice. The IRS's furloughed decision letter, which came a day after a White House memo, suggested furloughed federal employees might not get back pay. It includes a reminder that, quote, employees must be compensated on the earliest date possible after the lapse ends, regardless of scheduled pay dates, per a law that Trump himself passed in 2019. So they're sort of contradicting themselves. The Treasury Department didn't respond to requests for comment. The agency originally dodged the furloughs in part because it bore responsibility for implementing the administration's marquee tax cuts, including no tax on tips, overtime and Social Security, which Republicans are counting on for a boost in next year's midterm elections. Quote, we suspect people will be getting notified all day, said Daniel Sharpenberg, a union leader at the IRS. That's just 34,000 people out of a job and they can't get.

B (18:06)

Well, some.

A (18:07)

I believe some furloughed employees can file for unemployment. I'm going to double check on that. I don't want to get that wrong, so don't quote me on that. And from Newsweek, and we usually don't use Newsweek as a source, but I spent a lot of time looking. They're the only one with this story. Alaska's city of Fairbanks Mayor David Pruse, a Republican, conceded to Mindy o', Neill, a Democrat, in the mayoral election Tuesday night. According to unofficial election night results made available by the city of Fairbanks, O' Neill got 54% of the vote and Pruse received about 45.7%. That's almost 10 points, y'.

B (18:44)

All.

A (18:45)

That's a major flip. The ballot in mayoral elections in Fairbanks doesn't list a party affiliation next to a candidate's name, but Republicans have held the role in Fairbanks for nearly a decade. Prusze, a conservative backed by local Republicans, was elected mayor in 2022. O', Neill, the presiding officer of the Fairbanks North Star Borough assembly, was endorsed by the Alaska Democratic Party. Democrats flipping the seat comes as the party hopes to compete in statewide contests for Senate and House in 2026. The state has only elected one Democratic senator since 1981 and only one Democratic House member since 1973. President Donald Trump easily won the state by double digits in 2016, 2020 and 2024. Now, Prusz blamed lower voter turnout and O' Neill having the support of the state Democratic Party for his defeat. Quote, it was a perfect storm for her to take the seat and she did that. So congratulations to Mindy o'. Neill. He said, yeah, a perfect storm. A perfect storm of everybody not wanting Republicans in office anymore. The results of the election will be certified and the new mayor will be sworn in later in October. Congratulations, Fairbanks. All right, everybody, it's time for some good trouble.

C (20:03)

What are you guys doing?

A (20:07)

All right. Our good trouble today comes from our good friend, Choice Vance, who writes on her substack civil discourse. The U.S. election Assistance Commission EAC was established in 2002 by the Help America Vote act, or HAVA. It's an independent bipartisan commission that offers assistance to states in administering elections. It's made up of four commissioners, two of whom at the moment are Obama appointees and two of whom are Trump appointees. Now they're the epicenter of a new effort to attack the freedom to vote. The EAC is considering adopting a requirement that voters show passport or other proof of citizenship when registering to vote. If that sounds familiar, it's because it echoes efforts by both President Trump and Congress to require proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. Earlier this year, the SAVE act, an anti voter bill that included a similar requirement, failed in Congress. Thanks to widespread public opposition, the courts blocked an executive order by the president that would have implemented similar policy. Now, anti voter advocates are trying to do what neither Congress nor the courts would permit and and implement the SAVE act through the eac. As we've discussed in the past. This is Joyce Vance speaking. Obtaining proof of citizenship can be expensive, like obtaining a passport, which is out of reach for many voters. And it can become complicated, especially for women who may have changed their name when they married, or students whose paperwork may be at home with their parents and not with them where they vote. States have effective processes for checking citizenship before people who registered a vote are added to the rolls, but if this measure is adopted, voters may have to register in person impacting registration drives and online or mail registration. Eligible voters will be excluded from participating in elections if this goes through. However, there are actions we can take right now to prevent this from happening. The EAC is accepting public comments on this issue. Anti voter advocates have flooded their website with one sided, misleading comments and we can fight back with comments of our own. So head to the link in the show notes and leave your comment on the proposed rule. We need thousands and thousands of you to do this. The comment period ends October 20th, so share this with all of your friends, grab your email list, your Christmas card, list of addresses, whatever it is, your biggest network of people, and send the link that we have in the show notes and ask people to comment on this. And thanks to Joyce Vance for posting. All right everybody, we'll be right back with Rep. Dan Goldman after this quick break. Stay with us after these messages. We'll be right back. As the season shifts, I've been leaning into comfort food. Mmm. Soups and stuff. And Home Chef makes that easy, delicious, warming meals that remind me to take care of myself. No stress, no mess. Just real food that makes every fall evening a little cozier. So users of leading meal kits have rated Home Chef 1 in Quality, Convenience, value, taste and recipe ease. And for a limited time, Home Chef has offering you 50% off and free shipping for your first box plus free dessert for life. Just go to homechef.com dailybeans so whatever your week looks like, mine's a mess. Home Chef fits in. It's amazing. Their meal kits are easy to cook without the stress of meal planning or going to the store. Classic recipes, oven ready trays, even microwave meals. I mean you can eat well no matter how much time you have. And I don't have a lot, so I love this so much. Home chef offers 30 options every week, including vegetarian and family friendly choices. The ingredients come pre portioned fresh and ready to go, which saves me time and space in the kitchen. Some weeks I pick quick meals for busy nights, other times I go for something fancier, but either way it's always delicious. Home Chef helps me eat better, save time and enjoy making dinner again. I've recently started trying out their heat and eat options. Yesterday I went with the oh my gosh. The French onion chicken pasta with Asiago and bacon. Oh my gosh. In just five minutes I was able to dig into a restaurant quality Meal. It was delicious and comfy and cozy. Super tasty, hassle free, unbelievably convenient. So for a limited time time, Home Chef is offering you 50 off and free shipping on your first box, plus free dessert for life. Just go to homechef.com dailybeans that's homechef.com dailybeans for 50% off your first box and free dessert for life. Must be an active subscriber to receive free dessert. Hey, everybody.

B (24:33)

Welcome back. I am honored today to be joined by the Congressman from the 10th district of New York. Please welcome Representative Dan Goldman. Hi, Representative Goldman.

A (24:42)

How are you?

C (24:43)

I'm all right, Allison. How are you? Good to see you.

B (24:45)

It's good to see you too, my friend. I'm glad to have you back here on the daily beans because we've got a lot going on and you are one of the brighter minds. One of my faves over there in Congress, and I wanted to speak to you about a couple of things that are going on. First of all, Comey, Jim Comey was arraigned in court this morning for the what I consider to be ridiculous criminal charges that were brought against him by Lindsey Halligan and only Lindsey Halligan, which might be important if we talk about the fact that she may be there without any authority and that the statute of limitations has expired. We'll get into that in a second. But he has pleaded not guilty and has said that they're gonna file a couple batches of motions to dismiss this case. Now, I know that you and I kind of were talking offline a little bit about the idea that there might be some sort of a perp walk or arrest that doesn't seem to have happened. So maybe there is at least one adult in the room. What are your thoughts on this? What I consider a vindictive and selective prosecution.

C (25:49)

Yeah, look, the most noteworthy thing that happened to my mind at the arraignment, which is a very perfunctory conference where pretty much every defendant goes in and enters a not guilty plea. You set a schedule. There are two things that were noteworthy to me. One is the Trial date is January 5th, which is pretty quick. And given what Jim Comey has said in the aftermath of his indictment, it does seem like if this does get to trial, he wants that trial to happen quickly. The other thing, and you mentioned it in terms of Lindsey Halligan, the insurance lawyer, who's now been placed into a position that she's wholly unqualified for solely to move forward with these political and partisan retributive indictments is that there was not a single line prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia that was willing to go to court and stand up for the United States in this case, and that they had to bring in two prosecutors from North Carolina because nobody in the Eastern District of Virginia was willing to put their name on this case. And it's just important to emphasize how unusual, absolutely extraordinary that is, because it just doesn't happen, but it is happening repeatedly with this Department of Justice. The fact that Lindsey Halligan actually presented the case to the grand jury, as is remarkable in and of itself, US Attorneys do not go to the grand jury. The fact that Emile Beauvais, when he was the acting deputy Attorney general, literally the number two person in the Department of Justice, with 115,000 employees, that he had to appear in court in the Southern District of New York on the Eric Adams case because no other career prosecutors would do that. This should show everyone how really over the edge this Department of Justice is and how much of a political and partisan arm it is for Donald Trump's revenge and retribution. And frankly, I'm sick and tired of hearing about the accusations that this all started under Joe Biden. There's no evidence of that. There's no evidence that Joe Biden ever spoke to Merrick Garland, much less Jack Smith, about any case, any individual case. And let's remember, the Department of Justice under Joe Biden charged his own son. So it's just absurd to try to compare the two. And I'm frankly just sick and tired of it.

A (28:47)

Yeah, us, too. And you're right, we've seen that everywhere.

B (28:50)

You mentioned the Eric Adams case. We've got the Comey case here with just how signing on. We had the Abrego Garcia detention hearing where a full U.S. attorney appeared at a detention hearing. I mean, it's just they're running out.

A (29:04)

Of people, I think, to do their dirty work for them.

B (29:08)

Nobody wants to participate in a lot of this because they have to. You know, these lawyers, their licenses are on the line. They have to maintain candor with the court. We have seen time and again in the last six months, and, you know, the last nine months on the whole. But it's ramped up in the last six months that this administration and this Department of Justice has lost all presumption.

A (29:27)

Of regularity is what they call it with judges.

B (29:30)

And we've seen judges repeatedly remind lawyers from the Department of Justice that they're officers of the court and that they need to be careful about, you know, what they say in court. And so with the Department of Justice losing all credibility, we're seeing a lot more motions to dismiss on things like vindictive and selective prosecution. I know Comey has said in court, his lawyer has said in court that they're going to file one of those motions, and they're also going to file a motion challenging Lindsey Halligan's appointment because they kind of weaseled her in there. And there have been multiple US Attorneys that have been disqualified by judges, by federal judges for not being appointed properly. The problem with Lindsey Halligan is that she's the only one, like you said, that signed the Comey indictment. And so that might not.

A (30:19)

She might not have had the authority to do that.

B (30:21)

She would have to go back to a grand jury. But, oops, she can't, because the statute of limitations on Comey's Testimony expired on September 30th. So they might be out of luck there. And that's what leads. That's what this sort of slap dash kind of prosecution of your political enemies leads to.

C (30:42)

The fact pattern here is absolutely absurd. The career acting U.S. attorney refused to charge this case, and we now know why. The grand jury decided not to indict James Comey on one of the false statement counts that they were presented with. And let's just pause for a moment. It's called a no. True, Bill. It is so unusual. You know, the saying, of course, is you grand juries will indict. A ham sandwich, I guess it's a ham sandwich is easier to indict than Jim Comey because nine of the 23 grand jurors also voted against indicting him on the counts that he was indicted on. Now, remember, it is only the prosecutor that goes into the grand jury that can use hearsay evidence. You don't necessarily put witnesses on there. You just put an FBI agent who can summarize the evidence. There's no defense, there's no cross examination. And the standard is probable cause. It's not beyond a reasonable doubt. And the fact that one count was completely rejected and the other two were very divided, just goes to show that even the grand jury, which never, ever, you know, deals with the evidence being challenged, was highly skeptical of this case. And the reason, the additional reason, I mean, you mentioned the legitimacy of Lindsey Halligan's appointment, and Alina Haba was previously in New Jersey ruled to be improperly appointed. And then they tried to use some shenanigans to get her there again. And, you know, that's how they do it. But. But your point is valid. They can't go back to the grand jury, but I go back to this. What Pat Fitzgerald, Jim Comey's lawyer, said is outrageous government conduct and vindictive and selective prosecution. You have the President of the United States saying that he fired a U.S. attorney because he would not charge this case, then publicly tweeting a message to Pam Bondi, the Attorney General, that she must hire this insurance lawyer with no experience other than being, you know, Donald Trump's, some lawyer in Florida, so that the Department of Justice will charge Jim Comey, New York State Attorney General Letitia James, and Senator Adam Schiff. Five days later, with the statute of limitations running, Halligan is appointed, goes in and tries to get this case indicted. I cannot think of a stronger case, a stronger fact pattern to support a motion for vindictive and selective partisan political prosecution. And so it would seem to me that as much the argument is that if there is ever a case that should be dismissed on those grounds, it has to be this one.

A (34:03)

Yeah.

B (34:03)

I've also said the same about the Abrego Garcia case for vindictive and selective prosecution. I've said the same about your colleague, representative Lamonica McIver, about what happened to her. And there's another motion to dismiss that Comey's going to file that I wanted to ask you about because I'm not as familiar with this one, because normally the bulk of my experience comes from studying the Biden Department of Justice. So this is abuse of the grand jury. And from my understanding, and I've got a limited understanding because I'm not a lawyer, abuse of the grand jury can include abuse of the investigative power, improper purpose, harassment, prosecutorial misconduct, like knowingly presenting perjured testimony or false facts to the grand jury. And I have to wonder about that last one, because when you look at the indictment itself, the first account that got no true bill was obviously false because previous prosecutors looked at it and said, this is Russian disinformation. This is based on Russian disinformation and emails that went back and forth in.

A (35:11)

Arctic haze or whatever it is.

B (35:12)

But the second one, the words that they say that are the lie were from testimony from 2017. And Comey actually never said those words. It was the senators that were asking the questions that said those words. So maybe the lie could be, I stand by my testimony from 2017, when he said it in 2020, but none of it made any sense. And we couldn't even figure out really who person three was until I spoke to Andy McCabe and he said, it's not me. They haven't contacted me at all. And then ABC reported and confirmed that it's a guy named Daniel Richmond. So the whole thing is, you know, aside from all the other problems we've talked about, the whole thing is based on nothing. So I was curious as to what Lindsey Halligan could have possibly presented to the grand jury in order to get a true bill. Even on the low bar of probable cause. Have you seen a lot of these abuse of grand jury motions as grounds to dismiss? It's pretty new to me.

C (36:10)

No, it's very rare. The idea of filing that is really to get the grand jury transcript. And I would imagine part of it is going to be that there's a lot of exculpatory evidence. Right. I mean, John Durham looked at this and didn't charge. There's a declination memo. If it is Andy McCabe, you know, his, his own credibility was called into question. But more importantly, the fact pattern, it makes it, it factually impossible for the statement that Jim Comey testified to to be false. And then the Daniel Richmond. It's so vague that it's unclear. We all thought it was Andy McCabe, and it's so vague that it, you don't even realize that what you're being charged with. So, I mean, we can go on and on about all the problems with it. You don't have to take my word or your word. Right. The fact that John Durham refused to charge it when his entire purpose, dig into the original Russia investigation and charge as many people as he could. He ended up getting no convictions, I think, or maybe one, you know, false statements, small, somewhat tangential one. So the question, it's called Brady evidence.

A (37:43)

Right.

C (37:44)

You have to present exculpatory evidence to the defendant. Now, you don't necessarily. There's no statute that says you have to do that for the grand jury, which is part of the reason that Senator Blumenthal and I are working on a bill that would require that, among other things, to prevent these political prosecutions. But it is an abuse of the criminal justice system. And that's what I think is so important. Yes, the grand jury is part of that. And that's the sort of legal mechanism to get there. But think about this, because we've now seen it several times, but this one is so beyond the pale and it's so out in the open. The one thing Pam Bondi did say yesterday that I agree with is Donald Trump is very transparent. He is very open with his political partisan intentions to get revenge and retribution and to use the criminal justice system to do that. And that undermines not only this case, but it undermines every single investigation and prosecution that the Department of Justice brings. And that is when our rule of law collapses. And if we cannot trust the rule of law, then we can't trust contracts that we enter into and that the entire foundation of our government, of our economy, of our society crumbles because the enforcement and the equal and uniform enforcement of our laws is what makes us a democracy, and it makes our system work. And so I can't underscore enough that, yes, it is egregious abuse of the process for Jim Comey, but it has a massive, massive trickle down and spillover effect.

B (39:54)

Yeah, well, it makes it harder to prosecute actual crime that we need to have prosecuted to keep Americans safe. I think that there's, you know, when you lose presumption of regularity, you don't have a lot of people willing to do the work.

A (40:07)

Everybody's quit or you fired everyone.

B (40:10)

You run into a problem where you.

A (40:11)

You make America less safe.

C (40:13)

Well, but the problem is, and you're right, you know, we've seen lower court judges starting to question the credibility of the Department of Justice. And the presumption of regularity is an important presumption, which is to say that there is a, the courts usually take the position that they expect there's a presumption there, there's an expectation that a government action is done for the proper purpose and that there's a burden on the other party to show that it was actually not. But if you don't have that presumption and you go in there almost with a presumption of irregularity, that's devastating to any government case. The problem here is the lower courts have been doing a very thorough job of diving into the law of issuing orders on all of these different executive actions. But the Supreme Court has increasingly shown that it is also just a partisan arm of Donald Trump's government. By really deceptively and sneakily allowing Donald Trump's executive actions to continue temporarily, without any explanation, without any briefing, without any legal analysis, but allows normally you would stop, you would keep the status quo until you can get to the actual substance and merits of a case case, they're doing the opposite. And so a lot of these lawless actions will be completed by the time that the Supreme Court actually addresses the merits. And you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. And they, of course, know that. And so while that presumption of irregularity may exist in some lower Courts. We have not seen that from the Supreme Court.

B (42:11)

Yeah, you're very, very right about that. This presumption of irregularity.

A (42:16)

I love that I'm stealing it.

B (42:19)

It's also come into play with the mass deportation effort and these masked, unmarked cars, masked agents, helicopters repelling all this violent mass deportation effort. We have seen so many times where this Department of Justice wants to prosecute people for assaulting ICE officers or Border Patrol officers and having these cases tossed out, not getting past a grand jury, reduced to misdemeanor, or dismissed altogether. We recently had a judge dismiss with prejudice because the government wanted to dismiss without. And so that's also very embarrassing. And that's happening in multiple jurisdictions, Los Angeles, D.C. we're seeing it probably gonna ramp up in Chicago and Portland sometime soon. But to talk a little bit about what's going on with ice, you and I believe Brad Lander have penned a letter about this particular ICE officer at 26 Federal Plaza. That's the 10th floor of the courthouse where they do immigration hearings. And we all saw it with our own eyes because of amazing journalists on the ground with their cameras rolling of this ICE agent who took a mother and slammed her down.

A (43:31)

I could hear her head hit the floor.

B (43:33)

It echoed through the hallway. And that went viral. And it was so bad that I believe her name's Tricia McLaughlin. DHS flack actually came out and said, this is unacceptable. That's not how our ICE officers should be. I was thinking in my head, I'm like, that's exactly how they are, and that's exactly how you want them to be. And she actually took them off duty. And we learned that two, two and.

A (43:57)

A half days later, that he had.

B (43:59)

Been reinstated to duty. So talk a little bit about this letter and the importance of understanding what happened in that case and why that officer, that ICE agent was put, was returned to duty after that egregious violation. And this is not an isolated incident either. This is just one that went viral that Trisha McLaughlin managed to address or.

A (44:23)

At least try to address.

B (44:24)

So can you talk about that for a minute?

C (44:26)

Yeah. I mean, her statement or the statement from the Department of Homeland Security, and it goes up to the secretary, Kristi Noemi, is that the conduct was unacceptable and beneath the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security. So that begs the question. He was, I guess, temporarily suspended and then reinstated without any explanation, unclear whether there was an investigation, unclear what the grounds were for reinstating him, but I guess it is okay to reinstate and continue to employ agents. Whose conduct the agency acknowledges to be unacceptable and beneath the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security. We wrote a letter to Secretary Noem immediately after we learned this, and we had also written a letter referring this case to the Department of Justice, because, as you point out with, for example, the Lamonica McIver case, where she was arrested, and it's unclear that she even touched an ICE officer, yet that was sufficient for an arrest. And here you have an ICE officer throwing down a distraught woman and wife in front of her two young children. They came to my office right after this, and I actually felt the massive bump on the back of her head. And then she went to the hospital, traumatized the kids, traumatized. And it would be one thing, I think, if there was resistance, if you are actually arresting convicted criminals with a record, who you're trying to deport, and those are the people that the Trump administration promised to go after, and that those are the people that I and many of my Democratic colleagues would agree should be deported. But 70% of those who are immigration, who are arrested and detained on immigration grounds in New York, have no criminal record. And so we are seeing the mass militarization and weaponization of our immigration and enforcement apparatus that is going after as many brown people as they possibly can simply for being brown. And they effectively acknowledge that in that Los Angeles case and scooping up US Citizens, there's a big Puerto Rican population here in New York, which are obviously US Citizens. They're just grabbing them. They're taking people out of courtrooms who have ongoing asylum claims or other claims for lawful immigration. Asylum is a lawful pathway to immigrate here. They are here legally, and they are being yanked out of these courtrooms, arrested, detained, and they're being detained on that 10th floor in conditions that the government, the Department of Justice, conceded violated the law. And then ultimately a court entered a preliminary injunction determining that they are violating the law. And so it is a massive dragnet and draconian system that is going after innocent people, trying to scare, intimidate, and terrorize them. Many of these agents also have masks on just to ratchet up the fear. And it's not just destroying so many of our immigrant communities. I talk to people all over the city who are horrified about what is going on, and there are many people who would agree we should deport those who have committed crimes. You get an opportunity to come here, to immigrate, to chase the American dream. If you violate that opportunity, then you should not have it anymore. But that's not what's happening here. And when we see the militarization and the National Guard and the military going into our cities for no reason, I mean, totally protectual, but just to terrorize and scare individuals and essentially is part of this authoritarian takeover that Donald Trump is doing. We're in a very, very different place than we've been in the 250 year history of our country.

A (49:10)

Yeah.

B (49:10)

And a lot of us are concerned about dictators. Never stop at the one group that they use to have pretext to create a secret police. And so a lot of us are very concerned that this will expand. We've already seen executive orders declaring domestic left wing terror groups with transgender ideology or antifa ideology. And a lot of folks are afraid that ice carrying out these operations and the National Guard going into our cities to I guess practice war as hegseth. And Donald Trump said to the generals.

A (49:47)

The other day that this is just.

B (49:49)

Pretext to make it look like there are problems on the ground. They foment the violence. They release the smoke bombs and the flashbang grenades to make it look like a war zone.

A (49:59)

Otherwise.

B (50:00)

That's not what's happening on the ground, as we know. And we're all very concerned that that'll be a pretext to grab more executive power, either through the Insurrection act or martial law, and maybe to even interfere in our free and fair elections through intimidation. What can we do and what can Congress do to prepare for that if that's the way that this is going? Or am I talk me off the ledge, one of the two.

C (50:29)

No, no, you are. I think you're spot on. And I think that's very clear where this is going. You have Stephen Miller referencing this notion of plenary authority of the federal government, which just basically means that was frightening. The government can literally just do whatever it wants. I mean, that's ultimately what he's trying to say before somehow his feed got frozen. But I agree with you. I think that's exactly where this is going. And you hit the nail on the head. And this is the Republican movie. I saw it in the first impeachment investigation in 2019. They create the problem and then they claim there's such a big problem that they need to solve it with these exaggerated, excessive actions. The investigation we did in 2019 relied on Republican witnesses, career government employees who were working for the Trump administration. There was not a, single, quote, Democratic witness in that entire investigation. And the fact pattern was developed through the witnesses, not through any anyone else. Yet the Republicans beat this mantra of, oh, it's a partisan Investigation. It's a partisan investigation. They created the partisanship, or the. At least the accusation of partisanship, and then they relied on that to say that's why they're voting against it. This is exactly what's happening with our National Guard, our military is. There is no justification in any way, shape or form. First of all, it is illegal for the military to go into our cities to be a domestic law enforcement agency. That is the stuff of authoritarian states, of autocracies, of dictatorships. That is not democracy. That is the opposite of democracy, and that's why it's illegal. But they are trying to drum up this fever and this pretextual allegations of, you know, mass chaos in these cities so that they can then come in and make it look like a war zone. And it's. I mean, it's the cynical is the nicest way to put it. But I agree with you. I think they're laying the foundation to. To use the Insurrection act, to use martial law, to use whatever means necessary to usurp total control. And that's part of the reason they're going after judges. That's part of the reason why they continue to push the envelope in defying court orders is that is our backbone. The judiciary is our backbone. And at some point, if the Supreme Court doesn't stand up for our Constitution, we are not going to have a Constitution.

B (53:25)

Yeah, well, they weren't bought and paid for to stand up for our Constitution. I don't think.

A (53:30)

Representative, I have kept you over time.

B (53:33)

Before I let you go, though, I do want to get your thoughts on whether or not Adelita Grijalvo will be sworn in from Arizona 7th and that discharge petition might go forward for release of the Epstein files. I think the fact that Mike Johnson is sending everybody home and not working in the middle of a government shutdown, people are not getting paid.

A (53:54)

We could talk for hours about the.

B (53:55)

Ramifications of a Republican Trump shutdown of the government, but I think part of.

A (54:02)

This has to do with the fact.

B (54:02)

That he doesn't want to swear in Grijalva from Arizona 7th. Do you have any idea about when that might take place?

C (54:09)

Well, whenever we're back in session, it has to take place. What we have asked for is to use the recent precedent of two Florida members of Congress who were sworn in when we were not officially in session. It's called a pro forma session. They were sworn in, I think, back in April under those circumstances. And Adelita Grihal was in D.C. on the 29th and 30th ready to be sworn in. And I think that, you know, this is now the second time that Mike Johnson has shut down Congress in order to avoid dealing with a discharge petition. Adelita Grijalva will sign the discharge petition. She will be the final signature that is needed for that discharge petition to come to the House floor and we will vote on it. And why it's so important, I think just bears a moment of explanation. The discharge petition relates to all of the records subject to redactions for victims information, personal identification information, things that should not be published. But it includes videotapes, it includes recordings, it includes photographs, and it includes witness interface. Those are where the accomplices names or likeness would be included. And the reason they're trying to prevent this is that the resolution that the Republicans passed and are trying to use as a full investigation of the Oversight Committee does not include any of those materials. And so the COVID up is now a little bit more sophisticated. Rather than just not release anything, they are trying to bamboozle the American people into thinking they are releasing everything, when in reality they are holding back the most critical evidence. And that's why they're resisting this discharge petition, because the discharge petition and that bill that Thomas Massie has introduced will ultimately require them to turn over the potentially incriminating and inculpatory evidence related to accomplices, including, including, based on reporting, Donald Trump.

A (56:41)

Yeah.

B (56:42)

And at the very basic level, it gets everybody in the House on the record for how they want to proceed and whether or not they want to release the Epstein files or continue to cover up up for these monsters. So I look forward to it. I think there's going to be a press conference later today. Yesterday, as you're listening to this with the Epstein survivors about the discharge petition, I'm going to be watching that with your colleague Ro Khanna and a couple of other Republican representatives. So I really appreciate your time.

A (57:07)

I hope that we get to have.

B (57:08)

You back on again as we proceed toward, toward the midterm elections because these are important ones and we have to.

A (57:15)

Make sure that our right to vote.

B (57:17)

And our access to the ballot is protected.

C (57:20)

Absolutely. Agreed. Great to be with you as always.

B (57:23)

Great to be with you, too. We're going to take a quick break, everybody, and then we'll be right back with the good news.

A (57:27)

Stick around. We'll be right back, everybody. Welcome back. It's time for the good news.

B (57:31)

Who likes good news?

A (57:33)

Everyone.

C (57:34)

Then good news, everyone.

A (57:49)

Good news. All right, everybody, thank you so much for listening to the Daily Beans today.

B (57:53)

And thanks to Rep. Dan Goldman.

A (57:54)

It was great to speak with him. And we want your good news. So any tiny little thing or huge thing that's happened to you, anything in between, whether it was yesterday, 10 minutes ago, or whether it was a decade ago, which feels like a week ago, but no matter when, no matter what, we want to hear from you. So please send us your good news. You can also send a shout out to a loved one, maybe your spouse, a partner, maybe a small business in your area you want to shout out that could use a boost or a non profit that you work for or support or you think needs to have a light shown. On what, on the good work that they're doing. We'd love to hear about them. We would also love to hear shout outs to government programs that have helped you or a loved one. And really, I mean any good news at all. Send your street jokes too. We could all use a laugh. So send in your jokes. And all you got to do to get your stuff read on the air is pay your POD pet tariff, which as you know by now means just attach a photo of anything. We accept your pet photo. We will try to guess the breeds in your shelter pup if you would like us to, or whatever animal you send us, however you want to do it. If you don't have a pet, maybe an adoptable pet in your area, we can help find him a home. I know we've had found like several successful homes for animals and if we helped you get a pet, write in, let us know. Tell us the good news, tell us how it's going. Also you can attach a photo of a random animal on the Internet if you don't have any of that. And of course photos of your happy place, maybe stuff that you're making or creating, maybe a nice sunset, maybe some great signs you've seen at a rally, maybe a group that you hosted, writing postcards or a sign making party. Anything at all. Any picture will do. Send it to us dailybeanspot.com and click on click on click on Contact. I forgot. I was like where was I for a second. Anyway, sorry about that. First up from Anonymous, no pronouns. Hey Beans Queens, thank you for being my primary news outlet each morning. And the cursing is much appreciated. I want to give a shout out to my local Democratic Party and the work that it's doing to educate Texans on the 17 constitutional amendments on the ballot this year.

C (59:53)

Whoa.

A (59:54)

They have held two presentations already and they're planning to give two more over the next couple of weeks after attending a zoom presentation. I wanted to help get the word out on what each proposition means so the Texans know what they're voting for. Some of the propositions are reasonable, like Prop 7, which wants to give tax breaks to spouses of veterans who died due to their service. Several of them, however, clearly serve a right wing agenda. I'm particularly worried about Prop 12, which seeks to give more power to the governor to make decisions about judicial conduct and take power from the state bar. Or Prop 15, which wants to add that parents are the primary decision makers for their children in the Texas Constitution. Sounds good in theory, but it would cause legal problems for teachers and nurses who are mandatory reporters for abuse. Early voting begins October 20th and I just want to get the word out to any Texans who listen to your program. Here's an article from the Texas Tribune that explains all of the propositions. We'll have a link in the show. Notes for you for my BODPED tariff, I've included a photo of Shiloh, my Texas dog who hates the heat. Here she is pouting about how it's still in the 90s. Oh, she's beautiful. Yeah, thank you for that. So many propositions in Texas. I've got my Look, I've got my Prop 50 ballot right here.

B (61:09)

I'm about to fill it out and I'm going to drop it in a.

A (61:11)

Dropbox because, I mean, I know I live within 50 miles of a sorting facility here in California, but our Attorney General has warned us that if you live more than 50 miles away from a sorting facility, your ballot won't be postmarked the day you send it. Or at least it might not. So I'm just going to drop mine in a Dropbox, recommend everybody do the same. Thank you so much for that. Next up from Anonymous Pronoun she and her on Monday, October 6th at the historic Courthouse Plaza in Tucson, I attended with my friend who is a disabled veteran, an ACLU event supporting federal workers. Many good speeches from unions, teachers and advocates for justice. We spotted Adelita Grijalva arriving, waved and cheered as she came over to us and we hugged her and told her how much everyone supports her and how much disdain we have for the lying gop. She gave a great speech. It was really and uplifting time. We all matter. We attend events whenever we can and meet amazing people. We're both 72 and protesting is in our DNA. Love to all. What a fabulous picture. You. You guys look amazing and thanks for being out there. Not everybody can, so thanks for speaking for those who can't. That's just beautiful. I love Tucson. I did the tour to Tucson a couple times. I just absolutely love that city. You know. I mean I grew up well. I spent third grade through college in the Phoenix area in Arizona, so went to Tucson quite a bit with friends, particularly my wildcat friends. Next up from Brandy Pronouns she and her hello beans Queens. I guess this is a self shout out and a community shout out. After the election I knew my mental health would take a nosedive. So in order to protect my well being I knew I needed to make a plan. Step one Set a massive goal that will keep me busy and pull me away from the news and create the escape I need. Step 2 Get active and make friends in my community. Step 3 Learn more about how local government works and see how I can plug in to make a difference. Turns out this plan has worked well so far. It's an excellent plan. Brandy in order to implement step one, I decided to read 52 books this year. That was an intense goal because of my dyslexia and I never thought I'd be able to complete it, but it would keep me busy. Turns out once I started, I couldn't stop. I'm on my 54th book of the year and my stack of must read books has actually only grown. Shout out to the Magical fairy, AKA Librarians. The magical fairies. Excuse me, librarians who provide and procure all the word tacos and access to Libby. Step 2 Start joining the inevitable protests and bring the kids. This would require bravery on multiple levels. I have a talent of getting lost, which brings me anxiety. Keeping our children safe while educating them during this hellscape also increases my anxiety. However, it must be done. I started joining protests in D.C. and bringing the kids right away. I wanted them to see the passion to right injustices and witness the history that we're living. Well, one protest led to another and another and another. Until I saw a protest in our own town of La Plata, Maryland. Since then, that has become our main protest location. Protesting has turned into so much more than what I had initially thought. We found the beautiful community within the protest. Kind, intelligent, spectacular humans come out in solidarity for each other. We chat about the craziness of this administration, but we also talk about books, podcasts, and plants. We dance on the sidewalks to salsa and social justice music. We share numbers and make plans to get together and introduce people who are at opposite ends of the protest line who have to meet. In all the hubbub, I met a fellow Leguminati, Jerry. Hi Jerry. I refer to him as My protest buddy who also really loves native plants. I have made several other friends at the protests. Rebecca is a fascinating woman who used to teach science and loves all the plants. She insist we come over and use her pool this summer and our kids finally learned how to swim in her oasis. She also has introduced me to several groups involved in my local government and I'm glad she has taken me under her wing. I can tell she sees things in me that I hope are actually there. Ashley and I hit it off immediately. She's such a spitfire who loves people so well and can see situations so clearly. She has also introduced me to like minded souls within our community which has helped tremendously with step three. While making all of these connections, I kept saying I would really like to make a difference in the community and maybe even run for something, but I need to know more. I need to be educated on how things currently work and understand what those who have come before me have already done and are currently doing. I want to know how I can best plug in and where I can do the most good. While in a new book club meeting, Ashley introduced me what's up? No rules Book club. What?

C (65:55)

What?

A (65:56)

I finally said it enough and to the right people. And that led to Citizens Academy. Citizens Academy is an 11 week course that the Charles county government provides for citizens to gain better understanding of how the local government works. We're in our fourth week and it's such a breath of fresh air to be surrounded by over 30 other spectacular human beings who just want to learn so they can better serve the community. This is a horrendous timeline. It truly is. The kind people within our communities who keep us going. The people who share the local town hall updates and commissioner meeting notes. The ones who share their passion for native plants and spicy novels. The ones providing safe places within their small businesses. The ones running local farmers markets and ensuring WIC access. The ones who will stand shoulder to shoulder with you in the middle of a shit storm, look you in the eyes and reassure you that we're all in this together and we will make it to brighter days. These are my people and we will create a kinder, more beautiful world despite or in spite of the forces against us. That's so beautifully written, Brandy. For podpet tax tariff, I'm submitting a watercolor painting I did for a friend. She used to work with river otters and this was one of her friends. Oh my gosh. That is really, really beautiful. Thank you Brandy. Thank you for that submission. That painting is so good. I like how you get the little watercolor behind the signature, too. All right, next up from Anonymous, no pronouns. Dear Magic Beans Queens, Erin in the Morning wrote about a new poll showing that thanks in large part to the wild disinformation spread about trans people, only 31% of parents accept their transgender children. So for today's good news, I want to acknowledge my mom. My mom was raised and is still a very active Catholic. She grew up in a conservative Midwest family and certainly did not grow up around any queer people. When I came out to her as trans, her first reaction was fear. She was afraid I would regret my decision, that I would be socially rejected, and that she would lose her relationship with me. When I transitioned, I decided to hold a ceremony in a church recognizing this life change. I invited 60 of my closest friends and family. I was rebaptized, and we all went downstairs for a celebratory potluck afterwards. It was amazing. In preparation for the ceremony, though, I had to meet with the pastor every week for two months to not only plan what the ceremony would look like, but to also talk about this life change for me spiritually. Naturally, the difficult topic of my mom's reaction came up, but I'll never forget what the pastor said. The pastor acknowledged my mom's struggle, but said to me, your mom allows her love to lead her understanding. I think about that statement just about every single day. I use it as my own North Star. When there's something or someone, I struggle to understand. I wonder what this world would be like if we all allowed our love to lead our understanding like my mom. Today, my mom is my best friend. She understands now that what I did not only save my life, but it allows me to live it fully and authentically. I call her every morning to check in on her, a practice we started during COVID Usually these conversations turn to politics, and she listens with deep compassion when I talk about how scared I am for my life and my future in a country that, for whatever reason, has decided to take out its gross dysfunction on people like me who are just trying to get through the day. This morning I said to her, it must be hard for you to hear about all these efforts to hurt trans people. And she responded, nothing hurts a parent more than to not be able to protect their child. What if everyone asked themselves the simple question, how can I allow my love to lead my understanding? Thanks to you both, Alison and Dana, for continuing to give us virtual hugs. Believe it or not, it makes a difference. Thanks to your listeners for submissions affirming our right to exist and thrive and be loved. You make me feel seen and most especially thank to my mom, excuse me for doing the work to love me just the way that I am. I love you mom. Thank you. Anonymous thank you so much everybody. Please feel free to share your good news with us dailybeanspod.com and click on contact. Thanks to everybody who sent their good news in today. I really appreciate it and 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 and them is the Beans.

B (70:43)

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 Giants 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.