Transcript
A (0:00)
MSW Media.
B (0:05)
Hey, everybody, it's Ag. And welcome to Refried Beans, where we play an episode of the Daily Beans podcast from the same week either one, two or three years ago, so we can see how far we've come. So please enjoy this episode from days gone by and note the date in the intro.
C (0:22)
Refried beans.
B (0:23)
I like refried beans.
C (0:24)
That's why I want to try fried.
B (0:25)
Beans, because maybe they're just as good and we're wasting time whispering. Jelly beans, jelly beans, Jelly beans. Daily Beans. Hello and welcome to the Daily beans for Wednesday, November 29, 2023. Today, Hunter Biden agrees to appear before the House Oversight Committee, but only in public. The conservative Ohio Supreme Court dismisses challenges to the Republican gerrymandered Maps. The Trump appointed judge assigned to Elon Musk's lawsuit has recused himself from the case. Mike Pence told special counsel some harrowing details about January 6th. Senate Democrats meet with the IDF on Capitol Hill. And another resolution to expel George Santos is brought to the House floor. I'm your host, Alison Gill. Hi everybody. Happy Wednesday. Dana is still out. She's sick. Please, please send her the healing vibes and also baby pictures when you send us the good news. And I will send them all. I will forward them all to Dana. Send your baby pictures in. You can do that@dailybeanspod.com and click on Contact Today. Later in the show, I'm gonna be chatting with my friend Glenn Kirshner, former federal prosecutor, host of Justice Matters, incredible podcast and YouTube channel, and we're gonna talk about the trial schedule for Trump and his new piece that Glenn wrote for msnbc. Also, just a quick, I guess a quick, quick hit. The Trump appointed judge. You know, Elon Musk was judge shopping when he filed in Texas and he got a Trump appointee. But that Trump appointee named Pittman has recused and the new judge is an old G.W. bush guy. And he's terrible, too. I mean, he's been very anti labor, anti lgbtq. And there was a huge percentage of chance if, if you didn't get one, you would get the other. So that's why he filed in that jurisdiction. But anyway, we don't know why this judge recused Judge Pittman, but he has. If I find out why, I'll let you know. But that Musk lawsuit, the one against Media Matters, is ridiculous. I only hope it makes it to discovery so we can find out what goes on behind the scenes at Twitter with Elon Musk and how embarrassing that will be for him. But I don't know that it's going to make it past pretrial motions to dismiss. We'll see. All right, everybody, we have a lot of news to get to today. Let's hit the hot notes. Hot notes. All right. First up, from Katherine Falders at abc. Speaking with Special counsel Jack Smith's team earlier this year, former Vice President Mike Pence offered harrowing details about how in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, then President Donald Trump surrounded himself with crank attorneys and espoused un American legal theories and almost pushed the country toward a constitutional crisis. That's according to sources familiar with what Pence told investigators, which means Pence his team, the sources said Pence also told investigators he's sure that in the days before January 6, when a violent mob tried to stop Congress from certifying the election, that he informed Trump he hadn't seen evidence of significant election fraud. But Trump was unmoved, continuing to claim the election was stolen and acting recklessly. On that tragic day, Pence is the highest ranking current or former government official known to have spoken with special counsel's team investigating the efforts to overturn the election. What he allegedly told investigators, described exclusively to ABC News, sheds further light on the evidence that Smith's team has amassed as it prosecutes Trump for trying to unlawfully remain in power and erode public faith in democratic institutions. Pence could take the stand against Donald Trump should Smith's election interference case go to trial, which is currently slated to occur in March. We're going to talk more about that on the next episode of the Jock Podcast. There's a new piece out by Randall Eliasson about the only thing that could delay this trial, the March trial in the coup case. And we've talked about it on Jack already, those potential interlocutory appeals. So you definitely want to tune in this weekend. As described to ABC News, much of what the former vice president told Smith's investigations mirrored and at times restated verbatim comments that he's previously made publicly. Questions from Smith's team repeatedly focused on a book Pence published last year, with investigators apparently seeking to have Pence confirm under oath an array of post election stories and opinions he included in the book. But speaking with Smith's team behind closed doors, Pence offered previously undisclosed anecdotes and details showing how his longtime friendship with Trump unraveled in the final weeks of their time in the White House, including Pence's repeated warnings to Trump about then president's push to overturn the election results. Sources said that in at least one interview with Pence, Smith's investigators pressed the former VP on personal notes he took after meetings with Trump and others, which investigators obtained from the National Archives. According to sources, one of Pence's notes, obtained by Jack Smith's team, shows that days before Pence was set to preside over Congress certifying the election results, he momentarily decided that he would skip the proceedings altogether, writing in the note that there were too many questions and it would otherwise be too hurtful to my friend, but he ultimately concluded he had a duty to show up. Yeah, after everybody and their fucking mother told him that he had to. And we're going to get to that. And by the way, that was me. That wasn't Katherine Falders in abc. That was me interjecting. Speaking with Smith's team, Pence insisted his loyalty to President Trump at the time never faltered. My only higher loyalty was to God and the Constitution. This is so coming from Pence's team. Sources said that investigators questioning became so granular at times that that they pressed Pence over the placement of a comma in the book. When recounting a phone call with Trump on Christmas Day 2020, Pence wrote in his book, you know, comma, I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome of the election on January 6th. But Pence told Smith's investigators that that comma should have never been put there. According to sources, Pence told Smith's investigators he actually meant to write in the book that he had admonished Trump, you know, I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome. Not, you know, I don't think I have the authority. Suggesting Trump was well aware of the limitations of Pence's authority days before January 6, a line that Smith includes in his indictment now. In April, ABC News reported that Pence had just testified before a federal grand jury in Washington. Two months later, in June, Pence launched a bid to challenge Trump as the Republican Party's next presidential candidate. His campaign lasted only four months, sources said. Pence acknowledged to Smith's team that even before election day on November 3, he was aware that the Trump Pence ticket was expected to take a big early lead in the polls, then would gradually fade as more mail in ballots were counted. We called it the Red Mirage. We reported on it forever. We told everybody, beware of the Red Mirage. It's going to look bad on election night. And, boy, it did. I was having flashbacks. I was having 2016 drama flashbacks on 2020 election night, we even did a live show. I was like, I don't think we're election. Live shows this particular cycle don't make any sense because we're not going to get the results for days anyway. Katherine Falders goes on to say, in the first few days after the election, Pence never saw any significant allegations of fraud, according to what he told Smith's team. But Trump still declared victory and claimed there was a major fraud in our nation. Within hours of the polls closing, though, Pence allegedly told investigators he believes Trump was speaking in very general terms, not about specific instances of fraud, but we have evidence that they were talking about saying that the election was stolen months before it even happened. At the same time, Trump privately instructed Pence to dig into any political fraud or irregularities in the election, telling Pence their campaign was going to fight in court and elsewhere. However, sources told ABC News, Pence said he grew concerned when within days of the election, Trump began ignoring the advice of credible, experienced attorneys inside the White House, instead relying on outsiders like Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who pushed notions of widespread election fraud and as Pence allegedly told Smith's team, quote, did a great disservice to the President and a great disservice to this country. There is no doubt that Trump knew what I thought of these attorneys, but he still listened to them. That's what Pence told Smith, the sources said. With pressure on Pence mounting, he concluded on Christmas Eve, just for a moment, that he would follow Trump's suggestion and let someone else preside over the proceedings on January 6th. That's that handwritten note saying, doing otherwise would be too hurtful to my friend Donald Trump. And this is a quote of the note, not feeling like I should attend electoral count. That's what he wrote in late December. Too many questions, too many doubts, too hurtful to my friend. Therefore, I'm not going to participate in the certification of election. Then sitting across the table from his son, a Marine, while on vacation in Colorado, Pence's son said to him, dad, you took the same oath I took. It was an oath to support and defend the Constitution. And that's when Pence decided he would be at the Capitol on January 6th. After all, this is Pence's team trying to make him sound like a hero. But he's such a non hero. What a bunch of unheroic bullshit. I mean, calling all your friends multiple times, including Dan Quayle, and practically begging him to find holes in the 12th Amendment until finally your fucking son has to tell you to put on your big boy pants and go count the ballots. It's just a frustrating and Andy and I are going to go over some of this and the legal implications on the next episode of the Jack Podcast. All right, next up from local NBC 4 New state legislative maps, heavily criticized by redistricting advocates as unduly favoring Republican legislators, will remain in Place until 2030, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Monday evening, and a dismissal of legal challenges to the redistricting plans. The the court pointed to the commission's bipartisan approval of the maps as evidence that conditions have changed from when the complaints were first filed in 2021. The Ohio Redistricting Commission, a seven member body currently controlled by Republicans, unanimously adopted new maps in September that voting rights advocates and Democrats have argued favor Republicans more than the maps the court previously ruled unconstitutional. The commission's new plan gives Republicans 23 likely Senate seats out of 33 and 61 likely House seats out of 99. The two Democratic members of the commission voting to adopt the plans in late September under looming election deadlines differs from the five previous plans adopted along party lines that the court ruled unduly favored Republicans. The partisan makeup of the state is about 54% Republicans, about 46% Democrat, far more evenly split than the new maps that give Republicans 70% control of the Senate and 62% control in the House. The bipartisan adoption of the September 2023 plan is a changed circumstance that makes it appropriate to relinquish our continuing jurisdiction over these cases. That's what the decision said. The League of Women Voters challenged legislative maps drafted in 2021 under state constitutional provision requiring the commission to draw maps representing the partisan preferences of the state. After several rejected maps and missed deadlines, a federal court ordered the use of maps rendered unconstitutional in the 2022 election with the mandate that the redistricting commission draw new maps for 2024. In her dissent, Justice Jennifer Brunner, joined by the court's two other Democrats, argued the process by which the maps were adopted is irrelevant to the court's duty to review their constitutionality, siding with Republican commission members request to dismiss the case and empowers politicians to draw maps that forward partisan goals. Just because you got this bipartisan commission, we should look at the map, not who says it's okay, is what she's saying. When fairness of a legislative district maps is in contention, the last thing we should do is essentially bless a unanimous deal between the state's major political parties and permit it to go constitutionally unchecked with candidate filing deadlines fast approaching. Brunner argued the court has paved the way for the maps to move forward without proper review. It will also decrease public trust in the judiciary's ability to be independent from outside political forces. 100% Ohio. They are just trying to take every single voting right you have. All right, let's head up to the Hill. This is from Thorp and Leibowitz at NBC. A group of Senate Democrats met with senior level Israel Defense Force officials on Monday evening in the Capitol to discuss the Israel, Hamas, Hamas war and concerns about a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. At least 10 senators attended the meeting, which Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii, described as extremely frank. Quote, we just want to be assured that they're abiding by American values as they try to dismantle Hamas. And we've all conveyed that collectively and clearly. That's what Shatz told reporters. I do believe they heard us, but obviously we have a long way to go. The meeting was not classified, but senators kept the details of the discussions private. The IDF officials did not comment when reporters approached them after the meeting. Senator Tammy Duckworth arranged the meeting, which lasted about two hours and came as A growing number of Senate Democrats have raised concerns over the civilian casualties and property destruction in Gaza as a result of Israel's military campaign against Hamas. Senator Bernie Sanders said it was informative and important to hear the Israeli military perspective, but he reiterated his belief there should be conditions on any aid the US Approves for Israel. I think the idea of Simply giving Israel $14 billion without any conditions would be counterproductive, he said. I think the American people are very, very concerned about the number of women and children who have been killed so far. Sanders has previously called for conditioning aid to Israel on a series of factors, including to end the indiscriminate bombing, a freeze on settlement expansion, and a commitment to broad peace talks for a two state solution. Next up from cnn, Democratic Representative Robert Garcia of California has put forward a resolution to expel indicted Representative George Santos in the wake of the damning House Ethics Committee investigation into the New York Republican. The resolution from Garcia is privileged, which will require GOP leadership to take up the matter within two legislative days, though it could potentially be preempted if leadership calls up another expulsion resolution first before Thanksgiving. House GOP Rep. Michael Guest, a Republican from Mississippi and the Ethics Committee chair, introduced his own resolution to expel Santos. Santos has survived previous attempts to oust him from the House, but there's a growing momentum for this latest effort following the ethics investigation, a number of Republicans who previously didn't back expulsion indicated they would now vote in favor of it's still not yet clear whether there would be enough votes to expel him. Expulsion is exceedingly rare and requires 2/3 majority vote in the House to succeed. The renewed push to expel Santos presents a leadership test for House Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican from Louisiana. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota said Tuesday that Johnson has not yet decided how he will handle efforts to expel Santos this week. Emmer indicated Johnson will make a decision later in the day on the path forward. Emmer dismissed the effort from Garcia to force their hand by offering his own privileged resolution to get rid of Santos, saying they don't care what Democrats do. He also insisted they will not whip the vote if it comes to the floor following the release of the ethics report. A spokesperson for the speaker said the report had very troubling findings that Johnson urged lawmakers, including Santos, to consider the best interest of the institution as this matter is addressed. Further. In its report, the Ethics Committee said it uncovered additional uncharged and unlawful conduct by Santos that went beyond the criminal allegations already pending against him and would immediately refer the allegations to the Justice Department for further investigation so that vote could come up as soon as Thursday. I think they want to give him enough time to resign if that's what he decides to do. I know Mike Johnson. When he gave his remarks down in Sarasota, he said that he was trying to avoid an expulsion vote, which made it sound like to me the gist there was that he was trying to get him to resign. We'll see what happens. And Hunter Biden's lawyer, Abby Lowell, sent a letter to the House Republicans and the chair of the Oversight Committee, Jim Comer, in response to their subpoena stating Hunter Biden will be happy to testify publicly in front of the full committee any day in December. Pick a day. But the GOP rejected that offer because they want a behind closed doors deposition on December 13, Taylor Swift's birthday, and will only agree to a private deposition. Now Raskin's statement on the House GOP and Hunter Biden says Let me get this straight. After wailing and moaning for 10 months about Hunter Biden and alluding to some vast unproven family conspiracy, after sending Hunter Biden a subpoena to appear and testify, Chairman Comer and the Oversight Republicans now reject his offer to appear before the full committee and the eyes of the world and to answer any questions they pose. What an epic humiliation for our colleagues and what a Frank confession that they are simply not interested in the facts and have no confidence in their own case or the ability of their own members to pursue it. After the miserable failure of their impeachment hearing in September, Chairman Comer has now apparently decided to avoid all committee hearings where the public can actually see for itself the logical, rhetorical and factual contortions they have tied themselves up in. The evidence has shown time and again, President Biden has committed no wrongdoing, much less an impeachable offense. Chairman Comer's insistence that Hunter Biden's interview should happen behind closed doors proves it once again. What the Republicans fear most is sunlight and the truth. That's Jamie Raskin. Now, normally I would defend behind closed doors depots like I did when the January 6th committee had their behind closed doors interviews, but not here. And here's why I'm all for rule of law when it's being done for the right reasons. The purpose of the closed door depots for the January 6 committee was to ensure the protection of the ongoing criminal investigations and to protect the integrity of the work of the January 6th committee. And if people didn't want to, if they had recalcitrant witnesses, those people just sued or didn't show up. Nobody was like, you know, trying to, trying to battle this. And if they were, they did it in court, right, Like Jim Jordan, for example. But in this case, Republicans only like the closed door depositions. Not to preserve the rule of law, not to preserve the integrity of investigations, but so that they can cherry pick out of context answers and obfuscate the truth. If the GOP refuses the public testimony offer, Hunter Biden should do what Republicans always do, sue to block the subpoena, keep appealing at the maximum number of days. If you have 60 days to file your appeal, 30 days to file your appeal, 12 days. Do it on day 12, day 30, day 60, whatever that maximum is. And then by the time it's adjudicated, there'll be a new Congress and the subpoenas will be moot. Like I said, I'm usually all for the rule of law, but not with lawless Republicans. All right, those are the hot notes, everybody. We have the amazing, incredible host of Justice Matters, former federal prosecutor, my good friend Glenn Kirschner right after this break. Stick around. We'll be right back after these messages. We'll be right back.