B (2:57)

Yeah.

A (2:58)

And we'll know today because he's turning himself into ice this morning, Monday morning. And we'll know whether he's going to fight his deportation, at the very least to secure the Costa Rica deal without pleading guilty.

C (3:10)

Because it's available.

B (3:11)

Yeah.

A (3:12)

You know, like, you offered this to us. Why do we have to plead guilty to get it? That sounds punitive and violative.

B (3:19)

I also don't trust the government for him to plead guilty and them not to be like, no.

A (3:24)

Right.

B (3:24)

We're not sending. Yeah, Absolutely not.

A (3:26)

Fuck, no. So, again, you can sign up for my free coverage on substack@muellershiroke.com you'll get an alert with any updates about what's going on with Mr. Abrego's case. And Andy and I are going over his motion to dismiss for vindictive and selective prosecution on the latest Unjustified podcast. And as I said, Joyce Vance and I talk about the strength of that motion a little bit later in the show in the interview. But Andy and I also discussed the lowering of standards at the FBI and why St. Driz, Brian Driscoll, and Jensen were fired. We figured out why. And then, of course, Andy has been doing hits all over the place on the John Bolton raid. And so, of course, we'll talk about that. I bet John Bolton wished he would have testified at the first Trump impeachment. Now.

B (4:10)

I would think so. And it'd be nice that they had, because we would not be in this position. I don'. Think.

A (4:18)

People are like, would it have made a difference? We'll never know now. Nope, we'll never know now. He could have gone around. He could have gone to Mitch and said, yeah, you got to vote to convict and remove him. We got to make it so he can't run for office again or hold any office of public trust.

B (4:31)

All of I so much of this lies on Mitch McConnell.

A (4:34)

God, Supreme Court Mitch McConnell. Just the oligarchs, right? All right, we have a ton of news to get to, so let's hit the Hot notes. Hot notes. First up from the Times, the overwhelming majority of documents the Justice Department gave Congress in response to a subpoena for all the entire unredacted Epstein files. Says here into the for their investigation into the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. There it is again. You and I talked about using financier instead of child rapist. All of it. The majority of it has already been publicly released. It's already. We already have it all. Representative Robert Garcia of California, top Democrat on House Oversight, said that of the files that they received, about 3% contained new information. The remaining 97% of the pages had information previously released by DOJ, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, or Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. Now, among those files were videos from the Metropolitan Correctional center in New York from the night of Mr. Epstein's death, which we've seen. The edited version of Supreme Court filings from Gillain Maxwell, which we've already seen and read to you on the Unjustified podcast, is a long time. You know who. I don't need to tell you who Ghiain Maxwell is. A Justice Department Inspector general report on Mr. Epstein's death, which we've also told you all about. A memo from Pam Bondi to Kash Patel, which we've already seen. All that we have seen. It's like phase one. The phase one binder that Pam Bondi tried to pass off as some kind of meaningful release when she lured all the idiots, MAGA right wing reporters to the White House and gave them a binder.

B (6:10)

Yep.

A (6:11)

And they were like, yeah, we got a binder. And then they started reading like, we already know all this. Or when DOJ asked the courts for grand jury transcripts, which turns out to be 76 pages of everybody already knows with no survivor testimony anywhere. Now, Virginia Giuffri's family said in a statement of what's been handed over the content of these transcripts. And I think this is about the. The transcripts of the Maxwell a Todd Blanche meeting.

B (6:35)

Oh, yeah.

A (6:36)

She said the context is in direct contradiction of what felon Ghislaine Maxwell's conviction for child sex trafficking is during Dag Todd Blanche's bizarre interview. She's never challenged about her court proven lies providing her a platform to rewrite history.

B (6:51)

So gross, it's awful.

A (6:53)

Now here's what they haven't released yet, Dana. The proffer agreement between Ghislaine Maxwell and Todd Blanche. We haven't seen that. The agreement that allowed the Bureau of Prisons to waive her sex offender status that I broke the story on, allowing her to be transferred to Club Fed and eligible for work assignments outside the facility. And by the way, they haven't told me that she won't be doing that yet. Gotten a Twitter back and forth with her lawyer. They also haven't released the training videos instructing FBI personnel how to find and flag mentions of Donald Trump. And I'm Suing for those videos. You can support that lawsuit by donating to national securitylaw.org donate and they haven't released the Epstein files, which they have.

B (7:32)

I just want to say something, too. I know there's some people out there that are like, galen Maxwell was a victim herself of Jeffrey Epstein. All right? She's had an opportunity to change things, to change her future in the sense of, you know, us believing that she didn't have anything to, like, at some.

A (7:53)

Point, you become a perpetrator. Right.

B (7:55)

Okay. So thank you. I'm so, like, caught up with my words because I want to get this right, but she is literally digging her heels in with this. She could be a better person right now. She could turn these fucking people over, knowing that she destroyed so many people's lives and she hurt so many children. Instead, she's covering for a child rapist.

D (8:14)

Do you.

B (8:14)

Do you understand what I'm saying?

C (8:15)

I do, because there's a lot of.

A (8:17)

Like, serial killers out there who were molested as children. Do we let them go because they are victims?

B (8:22)

It's not even that. Some of these people are like, I am so sorry for what I did to these human beings. Gilly Maxwell has actually gone the other side. She's now never been like, I'm so sorry for what happened to them. Now she's protecting all of the people who did it. It's mind blowing to me. She's pure evil.

A (8:40)

She is. And.

C (8:41)

And it's not that she doesn't even.

A (8:42)

Have any remorse, which is what I just said. She doesn't even acknowledge that she did it. Yeah.

B (8:47)

Yep. All right, this next story. I really dislike a lot of people out there right now. This next story is from the Post. The Pentagon has for weeks been planning a military deployment to Chicago, where there's absolutely no fucking emergency. The planning, which has not been previously disclosed, involves several options, including mobilizing at least a few thousand members of the National Guard as soon as September to what is the third most populous city in the United States. The mission, if approved, would have parallels to the polarizing and legally contested operation that Trump ordered in Los Angeles in June, when he deployed 4,000 members of the California National Guard and 700 active duty Marines, despite the protests of state and local leaders. The use of thousands of active duty troops in Chicago also has been discussed. Now, Governor Pritzker, J.B. pritzker, and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, both Democrats, they hit back at Trump in Commons Friday, and they were very clear with the governor accusing Trump of attempting to create chaos. He said after using Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. as his testing ground for authoritarian, Trump is now openly flirting with the idea of taking over other states and cities. This is from Pritzker. He said Trump's goal is to incite fear in our communities and destabilize existing public safety efforts, all to create a justification to further abuse his power. There's no emergency in Chicago. The state is not asking for the National Guard to be deployed or any of this. And that is part of the fucking Constitution.

A (10:20)

Yeah, and that's the big giveaway that he's using this to create a justification to further abuse his power. Something we all were told we had, were wearing tinfoil hats for thinking months ago. Now a governor of a state is saying it as well. He wants to incite violence so he can justify grabbing emergency power for himself. Yep, that's the long and short of it.

C (10:42)

All right.

A (10:43)

From the Times. The Department of Homeland Security rebuffed a request for public records related to the National Guard deployment in Los Angeles, saying that the agency had not maintained text message data among top officials since early April. This reminds me of when they the. The January 6th text messages among the Secret Service just gone walkies, as Rachel Maddow would say. A July 23 letter from Homeland Security Department's public records office in denying the request from the nonprofit organization American Oversight said that, quote, text message Data generated after April 9th was no longer maintained. Not that it got accidentally erased from a software update that we conducted on January 5th.

B (11:23)

Right.

A (11:23)

We just stopped. We just stopped maintaining it. We just don't do it anymore. They also gave a similar response on Thursday to a request for communications about the migrant detention camp in the Everglades, telling American Oversight it was unable to locate or identify any response records since the agency no longer has the capability to conduct a search of text messages. You can't. You are. You don't know how. Is that ridiculous? Under the Federal Records act, by the way, government agencies are required to preserve all documentation that officials and federal workers produce while executing their duties. And they have to make federal records available to the public under the Freedom of Information act, unless they fall under certain exemptions, like they are part of the executive office of the President, or they include private information or, you know, personally identifiable information, et cetera. You know, but they're just, we don't. We don't keep them anymore. We don't even know how to search for that.

B (12:17)

So insane. Sorry, everyone. Some of this is just nonsense, but we have to report it.

A (12:23)

I'm the transparency president. Full transparency.

B (12:28)

All Right. This one's from NBC. Japanese American groups criticized the construction of new immigrant detention center in Texas as a military base that was used during World War II to imprison people of Japanese descent. They were Japanese concentration camps on our American soil. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Detention center at Fort Bliss in El Paso, which opened this past weekend, will be able to hold as many as 5,000 detainees upon its completion in the coming months, making it the largest federal detention center in US History. Japanese Americans. Those advocates, however, say that the facility, which once imprisoned people considered, and I quote, enemy aliens. It's a chilling reminder of our dark past. And I quote, the use of national security rhetoric to justify mass incarceration today echoes the same logic that led to their forced removal and incarceration. This is from Ann Burroughs. She's the president and CEO of the Japanese American National Museum in Los Angeles. She said it's inconceivable that the United States is once again building concentration camps, denying the lessons learned 80 years ago.

A (13:31)

Geez.

B (13:32)

Yep.

A (13:32)

Largest in history. And this is why they want to remove everything from the Smithsonian and erase history. We never did anything bad.

B (13:41)

No, I know. No, this country's never done anything bad. Jesus Christ.

A (13:45)

Right? And this story comes from the Times. The White House has published its list of Smithsonian exhibits that it doesn't like programming and artwork that it considers objectionable. They did this on Thursday, one week after announcing that eight of the institutions museums must submit their current wall text and future exhibition plans for a comprehensive review. The list borrows heavily from a recent article in the Federalist that objected to portrayals at several museums. It argued that the National Museum of American History promoted homosexuality by hanging a pride flag, overemphasized Ben Franklin's relationship to slavery in its programming. I don't the fuck relationship to slavery. Own slaves.

B (14:26)

There. There you go.

A (14:27)

Okay. And supported. They support the Smithsonian. Get this. Supports open borders because they showed migrants watching fireworks through an opening in the U.S. mexico border wall.

B (14:38)

Fuck all of these people. I'm so angry today, you guys. I'm so over this bullshit now.

A (14:43)

If there were a video of them watching the fireworks and then tearing the wall down, sure, okay. I still would. I would go see that exhibit. But still, if anything, that exhibit shows that we don't have.

B (14:56)

They're literally respecting what I know.

A (14:59)

Anyway, other grievances were previously enumerated in an executive order that Trump authorized in March, which criticized the national mus of African American history and culture. There's going to be nothing left in that museum, by the way. No. For a 2020 worksheet that described aspects of whiteness as hard work, individualism, and the nuclear family. The White House list also featured complaints that were not part of the Federalist article or the president's executive order. So they're just going extra. Going the extra mile to whitewash history. Those include a stop motion animation at the national portrait gallery about Dr. Fauci and a series at the African American Museum that says it featured content from Hardcore Woke activist Ibram X Kendi.

B (15:41)

Oh, my God.

A (15:42)

Heart. Go.

B (15:44)

How did we get here? I'm sorry. I just. I'm so angry at the people who voted for this son of a. Either blindly not caring what it was going to do this country, or wanting this to happen. Like, fuck all of them. I'm. Yeah, I'm sorry. Not a happy camper this episode.

A (16:04)

People who just can bring themselves to vote for the smart black lady.

B (16:07)

Yeah, exactly. All right. I do have better news. A little bit better. This is from the Post. A federal judge in Miami gave the state of Florida 60 days to clear out the immigration detention facility called Alligator Alcatraz, handing environmentalists and the Miccosukee tribe of Indians a win after they clashed with Governor Ron DeSantis over the environmental impacts the makeshift site was having in the federal protected Everglades. The ruling late Thursday from U.S. district Judge Kathleen Williams takes a blow to what had become a marquee symbol of Trump's immigration policy. The state filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. court of Appeals for this 11th Circuit less than an hour after the judge issued her order. At a news conference in Panama City on Friday, DeSantis said Williams, and I quote, upset the apple cart with her ruling. So this is not going to deter us. This is what DeSantis says. We're going to continue working on the deportations, advancing that mission. We knew that this would be something that would likely happen.

A (17:06)

Okay, upset the apple cart.

B (17:08)

I know I can't with these people.

A (17:11)

The apple cart of internment, of fascism. That apple cart. And you knew something like this would happen, so you know it's wrong. So you went into it knowing that the courts would be like, this is not a good idea.

B (17:24)

Yep.

A (17:24)

It's against the law. I can't today.

B (17:33)

Both of us are having a hard time. Everyone.

A (17:35)

We're going to continue to work on the deportations. No, you're not. You're going to continue to stop bond hearings and detain people for years at a time so that you can make money off of them as you detain them.

B (17:45)

Yep.

A (17:45)

As your private prison. People keep donating money to keep re electing you. That's what you're going to do.

B (17:50)

You have a little bit of good news for me. I appreciate it. Now, please. Sure.

A (17:54)

You're like, stop. Okay, let's go. You're right. Let's, let's leave Florida for a minute, please. Forever. Forever.

B (18:01)

Floridians. I love you. Not happy with the Santa scale.

A (18:03)

Okay, keep going now. But we do have some good Florida news after this story.

B (18:07)

Oh, yes, we do. Because of the people.

A (18:09)

This is from the Chicago Sun Times. Pritzker announced this week that Illinois is launching the first of its kind resource guide and hotline to support LGBTQ + residents. And this is a legal hotline, a legal advice line. It's called Illinois Pride Connect. It's going to come online today and serve English and Spanish speakers. Callers can get advice on how to access health care, how to identify documents about housing, safety concerns, government benefits like Medicaid and snap. Legal stuff. And advocates fielding calls will offer advice and refer callers to legal partners if you need them. Quote for us to be able to go on offense and not be on defense is what I love about this state. That's what Pritzker said in a video. Together, we're fighting ignorance with information. We're fighting cruelty with compassion. The state has committed to fund the line through next summer, but partners plan to use private funding to keep it running after that. Julie justice, executive director of legal counsel for Health justice, said many of the calls received in the trial period were from residents in the southern part downstate looking for resources. Two advocates and an attorney from Justice's organization will staff the hotline. She said she hopes it can bring clarity to those confused about executive orders issued by Trump and a constantly shifting legal landscape. Quote, a particular goal is to build out and strengthen support, especially for folks in the downstate areas. I imagine volume will increase, but we're prepared. While the hotline is intended for Illinois residents, residents of other states can also call to get connected to resources. Quote if you're an LGBTQIA individual or a concerned family member or friend and you're facing legal issues that impact your health, safety or access to care, we're here to help. That's what the website says.

B (19:52)

I am so grateful for him on a number of levels. I think he's a good guy. I know not everyone's a massive fan. I happen to believe his heart's in the right place. One of the billionaires in which it is. All right. This is from New 6 in Orlando. This is what I was talking about. Painted over, colored in, painted over again. What until recently was an approved and undisturbed rainbow crosswalk outside of the former Pulse nightclub is now black, white, and apparently under supervision. Florida Highway Patrol troopers stood and watched Sunday morning as people use chalk to color sidewalk next to the crosswalk at South Orange Avenue and West Esther Street. Robbie Dodd said even though he was told by the troopers to stay on the sidewalk, he still wanted to make a statement. He said, my friends died here. That's it. This is their memorial. Sorry, Ag. It's okay.

A (20:45)

I remember I saw you shortly after Pulse when you came to San Diego.

B (20:51)

Yeah. He said, this is theirs. They told me where I could color. They told me I could stay on the sidewalk without getting into any kind of trouble. And I'm staying on the sidewalk without getting. But I'm going to color. Florida State Rep. Whoo.

A (21:03)

Sorry, everyone.

B (21:04)

Florida State Rep. Anna Eskimani, she's a Democrat in Orlando, used social media to claim the troopers had been placed there to threaten people with arrest if they use chalk to color the crosswalk like they've been doing since Thursday when it was covered, when it got covered by state, painted over it during the night, in the middle of the night. They got rid of this and I quote, you would think our state has bigger problems to solve, but nope, this is what they've committed public dollars and time towards again, that's Eskimani. Orlando installed the crosswalk in 2017 after getting the okay from the Florida Department of Transportation. An online petition signed by more than 2,000 people called on the city to install the rainbow to honor both the memory of the victims and the struggle of their survivors of the Pulse shooting. FDOT arranged for the tribute to be painted black about two months after a directive from the Trump administration ordered the removal of so called distracting road art. Orlando Commissioner Patty Sheehan called the state's actions a slap in the face. She said, if they're so proud of painting over it, why did they do it in the middle of the night? We spoke with Chris Blem, who was also at Pulse, that site on Sunday, chalk in hand. Blem said, it's a protest at this point, and I quote, it's pointless. It's going to keep happening, he said, whether it's today, whether it's tomorrow, whether it's a week from now, people are still going to be out here making their voice heard. And that's exactly what's going to happen. The people are going to keep painting over it. I would guarantee if this move to arrests, people are going to get arrested. To keep painting chalk on this memorial for the 49 people who died at that mass shooting in Orlando.

A (22:38)

Reminds me of during Pride Month in Florida when the people got together and lit the bridge themselves because Ron DeSantis refused.

B (22:47)

Yeah.

A (22:49)

And that they're using resources to guard like twinks with chalk. I don't. I don't.

B (22:56)

Yep.

A (22:56)

I. It's so infuriating.

B (22:59)

Yeah.

A (23:00)

But I am so heartened by the response from the community.

B (23:04)

Me, too.

A (23:05)

So brilliant and beautiful and wonderful. Thank you for that. All right, everybody, it's time for a little good trouble.

D (23:11)

What are you guys doing?

A (23:14)

All right, everybody, you're good trouble today, should you choose to accept it. There is an IRS survey out there, Dana. They're trying to privatize Direct File. Direct File is a great free government run program that allows people, Americans, to file their taxes online for free. Now, to keep Direct File going, it costs money. Right. And the survey wants to know if you want the government to keep running it or if you want a private contractor, a private corporation to come and take it over. And what they've done is they've deceitfully worded this survey. They've said, if you did, the government runs it, it's 10 to $20 that it'll cost the taxpayers per tax return. And then they say, or would you prefer a private corporation to do it? But they don't tell you the cost. They don't tell you what it would cost to have a private corporation do it. Your taxpayer dollars are either going to go to the government to directly run it, which is way cheaper and way better, or it's going to go to a private company, probably a Trump donor or a Republican donor, to run it for you. This is the privatization of the irs. So we will have a link to that survey in the show notes. I filled it out myself. You don't have to give your email or anything like that, but let them know you want the government to run this. This is a government program and it should continue to be run by the government. Maybe not this government, but a government. All right, everybody, I'm really excited to bring you the discussion I had with Joyce Vance this weekend about justice, the presumption of regularity. Mr. Abrego, the immunity ruling and how that seems to be playing a role in a lot of the US Attorneys that have been unable to get federal grand juries to indict people like Sandwich Guy, for example. We're going to have all that discussion right after this break. Stick around. We'll be right back after these messages.

B (25:02)

We'll be right back.

C (25:04)

Hey.

A (25:05)

The end of the summer means back to school chaos. Jam packed schedules. Everyone has to go everywhere. Less time to cook. And instead of grabbing takeout, let Home Chef deliver fresh pre portioned ingredients and easy recipes right to your door. Dinner is solved with flavor, variety and convenience. Users of leading meal kits have rated Home Chef number one in quality, convenience, value, taste and recipe ease. And for a limited time, Home Chef is offering you 50% off and free shipping on your first box. Plus free dessert for life. Just go to home chef.com dailybeans so home chef makes dinner time easy with fresh ingredients. Chef designed recipes delivered straight to your door. No hassle. No more last minute grocery runs. No more having to park at the grocery store. No more stressful planning. They have over 30 options each week. Home Chef covers a variety of dietary needs and preferences. Whether you want a quick 30 minute meal, oven ready tray or pre portioned classics, they've got something for everyone. And it's economical too. Customers save an average of $86 a month on groceries. Home Chef turns weeknight cooking into something you can actually look forward to without sacrificing flavor, health or your time. And it saves so much food too because it's got the portions just right so you don't end up buying a bunch of food from the grocery store and having a bunch of it go bad. Now I recently had the Greek trout with roasted potatoes. It was phenomenal. Easy to make, completely delicious. The potatoes were nice. They had that little crisp on there. Good compliment to the trout. There was tzatziki sauce there which I love. It's like a cucumber yogurt sauce. It took it to the next level. I can't wait to have it again. So for a limited time, Home Chef is offering you 50% off and free shipping on your first box. Plus free dessert for life. Just go to homechef.comdailybeans that's homechef.com dailybeans for free. 50% off your first box and free dessert for life. Must be an active subscriber to receive free dessert.

D (26:50)

We're live.

C (26:51)

Hi everybody. Yes, we can talk about anything you like. Welcome to the Breakdown. Welcome to Molar tread dot com. Welcome to Joyce Vance and Civil Discourse. I'm so happy to have you here today. It's been a while since we've chatted, my friend.

D (27:06)

I can't even remember the last time we talked like this instead of on social media. And it's Such a good week for it because there's so much going on. And actually, I wanted to ask you about that because, you know. Well, you know, we've talked about it in the past. It's my theory that overwhelming people is a feature, not a bug, of Trumpism. Right. Shooting people with so much stuff every day so fast that nobody can keep up, and people end up giving up. And my question for you is you, as well as anybody that I know, does a great job of processing it all and staying on top of a wide stretch, a wide band of news. How do you do it without going nuts?

C (27:47)

I think it's a sickness, if I'm being honest. There's something about me. Ever since I was very young, I've always been very involved in injustice in general. If something wasn't fair, it really bothered me. And then given what happened to me in the Navy and my PTSD from military sexual trauma, what I've noticed is that one of, for me, at least, one of the best weapons against anxiety is knowledge. And I figured if I could learn everything that I could about what was going on with our government, that I would be less surprised by terrible things that might happen. It's kind of like how on July 4th, I'm not afraid of fireworks because I'm expecting them, because. But if they're happening on August 12th at 6:30pm it jolts me. It's also kind of the reason I like to rewatch shows that I've seen over and over again. Right now I'm rewatching the West Wing because I'm longing for functional government, I think. But to go through all of helps me with my anxiety. And then on the other side of that, the best way I learn things is by teaching them to other people. And so to share that news with everyone in a way that's digestible and in a way that. Well, with swearing and with the background of lived experience, because a lot of journalists are taught to leave their lived experience at the door, as are a lot of lawyers. I remember I spoke to a friend's class at Loyola, and they said, you're.

A (29:37)

Not a lawyer, but if you had.

C (29:38)

Any advice, what would it be? And I said, I know that Aristotle said that law is reason free from passion, but I say bring your passion. I say bring your lived experiences to the door because they really inform how you practice law. And so that's probably the main reason I do it, is because I learn by teaching, and it helps alleviate my anxiety. And then in return, people can get their news without the added anxiety and fear and argument and stress that comes along with so much of the media these days trying to get clicks and eyes by using fear or sensational headlines or, you know, things like that. So that's.

A (30:21)

That.

C (30:22)

That's the long and short of it. Long story short, too late. That's. That's how that happens.

D (30:26)

But it's great because it feels to me like what you're describing is a functional democracy where people share their knowledge and their expertise, expertise with their fellow citizens. Not in a way where you're preaching, but this is very much, you know, the public marketplace of the 1700s and the 1800s being realized in the era that we live in. I think that's just a fascinating answer. Thanks for sharing that.

C (30:50)

Yeah, thank you. Thanks for asking. And I think one of the things I really wanted to talk to you about, because, like you said, we talk on social media, we text back and forth behind the curtain. But we wanted to come do this live on substack, have this discussion, because there are a lot of things that are going on right now that are echoes of things that you and I discussed six years ago. I remember when you wrote and I posted about this recently, a Time magazine article about the death of Jeffrey Epstein, and you had quoted something I tweeted about whether the Department of Justice aided in or turned a blind eye to the death of Jeffrey Epstein. The problem is nobody trusts the Department of Justice. And you said after that, if no one trusts that the Department of Justice is doing justice, that's a big problem for us. And we're seeing it again now on steroids in this second Trump administration. And every time I read a court filing from a judge, like Judge Sinis, for example, who is presiding over the Kilmar Abrego case, every time I see a judge, and there have been many recently talking about the diminishment of the presumption of regularity with the Department of Justice. I think of you and I think of that piece that you wrote, because the Department of Justice has long enjoyed, because of the reservoir of trust that's built up over the last 80 years, has long enjoyed deference by the court. The court generally believes what the Department of Justice is telling it when it argues in front of a judge. But now the judges are saying that that presumption of regularity is gone, it's wiped out, because there have been so many misrepresentations, what some people might call lies to the court by the Department of Justice. And we saw that in a lot of these ice, deportation, alien Enemies act cases in particular, especially when the Supreme Court over the dissent of, I believe, Justice Sotomayor, who said, I can't believe we're giving equitable jurisdiction to someone with unclean hands. So could you talk a little bit about the presumption of regularity where we're at? Is it completely depleted, what it takes to get it back? And also sort of what Justice Sotomayor was getting at with unclean hands, because the Trump administration had defied a court order twice at that point in one of the deportation cases, but still granted equitable jurisdiction to the government when it came to the court to ask for relief.

D (33:38)

Yeah, I mean, so that was about two semesters of law school worth of questions. Just to be clear about where we are, let me start with the equity question, because it's an interesting one. You know, there is separate equity jurisdiction under the law. It used to be in many places that there were separate equity courts and law courts, because there are different sorts of claims and different remedies. And one of the rules when you seek an equitable remedy to this day is that you must have clean hands, you must not be in court because you've engaged in misconduct. And that is, I think I'm going to just make an understatement here. A slight problem for the Trump administration, because their hands seem to be increasingly unclean, which is the point that you're making about the presumption of regularity. And look, those of you who are lawyers who've interacted with the government, I think will. Will feel this in. In your bones. But as a federal prosecutor, every day when you go into court, you are counted on the presumption of regularity. This notion that the courts understand that the government behaves itself, does things the right way for the right reason, and unless a defendant comes forward with evidence, it's not enough for them to say, judge, we think what the government did here was wrong. The judge is going to say, well, what's your evidence, Mr. Smith? And unless M. Mr. Smith has some pretty convincing evidence, the judge is going to discount that and apply the presumption of regularity. So, for instance, if you cut a subpoena to a grand jury witness and they come in and testify, and the defendant says, well, we think that witness was coerced and, you know, forced to do it, unless they've got something to back that up, the presumption of regularity comes into effect. I think in some courtrooms, no more a number of judges, particularly in the deportation cases, but also in some of these other Cases where Trump has been trying to assume more and more of the power of government for himself in violation of the Constitution. We're seeing judges who are questioning the government's motives, and that's really unheard of. And, you know, the last thing I want to say is you used the phrase reservoir of trust, and I think you're laughing because I'm sure we've discussed this in the past. Right. That came from, of all people, Jim Comey, who, when he was the deputy Attorney general and even after, when he would come talk to new U.S. attorneys, would impress upon people the importance of maintaining the public's confidence in the Justice Department. And he would liken it to a reservoir or a balloon that takes a lot of time to fill drip by drip, with water. And with just one pinprick, with just one small sort of intrusion into the integrity of the structure, all of that public confidence leaks out. And he would talk about how important that reservoir of trust is, which makes me just immeasurably sad these days.

C (36:42)

Yeah, same. And I think to maybe explain at least the example I use to explain the idea of unclean hands, the most clear one from memory, there's been a bunch of. Recently, obviously, particularly with Mr. Abrego. We can talk about that in a moment. But one of the clearest examples of that is after Trump was indicted for retaining classified or national defense information, the documents at Mar a Lago, he sued to get them back, and he came to the court with unclean hands. And the best kind of analogy I could think of was I had, a long time ago, I saw an episode of the World's Dumbest Criminals or something like that, where a drug dealer had made a drug deal with a customer, and he gave the drugs to the customer, and then the customer ran away. And then the drug dealer found a police officer and said, hey, I need you to help me get my drugs back from this man. And the cop was like, I can't. No, I can't help you do that.

A (37:53)

Because you've broken the law.

C (37:55)

So that's kind of what I.

D (37:57)

We used to call that when I was a prosecutor. We would call that if stupid was a crime, it would be so much easier.

C (38:06)

And so that's what I think of when I think of this, and when we see what's going on and we'll give you a little update in Mr. Abrego's case. But they wrongfully and erroneously shipped him off to El Salvador, which was actually a country that a judge put an order in, saying he could not be deported. You can deport him anywhere else but El Salvador. And rather than acknowledge their mistake, which they have now, by the way, and which one of the whistleblowers also has written about Mr. Orez Reveni, who was eventually fired for saying so to the court, for telling the truth to the court, because in the presumption of regularity, you would just go to the court and say, yeah, we accidentally sent him, bring him back and we'll continue our deportation process like we did before. We erroneously sent him to the wrong country. And so with that, you know, with those unclean hands, they actually got a decision from the Supreme Court in another case, in another deportation case that allowed them to send people to South Sudan, for example, which they didn't decide on the merits, but they lifted the block, the Supreme Court lifted the block that was in place that prevented them from being sent to South Sudan. And so now here we are in the Abrego case, and I'm really interested to get your thoughts on this. They offered him a deportation to Costa Rica and got a letter that said, you will have refugee status, you will not be imprisoned. You will be free to live a life. And we have a letter saying as much. But then when they found out that he wouldn't accept the deal, meaning he would have had to have pled guilty to both charges against him, they said, you have until Monday or this deal is gone forever. And once he was released, they said, if you don't accept this guilty plea deal, we're actually gonna send you to Uganda, which is, you know, multiple times worse for Mr. Abrego and for anybody. Because our own State Department has a level three travel advisory against going to Uganda. If you don't take this deal, if you don't plead guilty to these two paper thin crimes based on triple hearsay, we will deport you to Uganda instead of Costa Rica. And so now I'm wondering what you think the best case scenario might be for Mr. Garcia, because he is deportable. But I think that they've just given him a tool to fight that deportation and perhaps even seek asylum, because they are violating, I think, his 8th Amendment rights and his 5th Amendment due process rights, because he was just availing himself of his release on bond under the Bail Reform Act. And that is what upset the Department of Justice.

D (40:55)

So it's very complicated when you get to the point of applying legal doctrine. For instance, as I was discussing, clean hands only applies when you're in equity jurisdiction. There's a lot of argument about whether the eighth Amendment would apply to deportation proceedings, which are detention, not incarceration. But, you know, the laws about parsing those technical legal lines. That I think is what we'll see happening with Abrego Garcia's case as it moves forward. You know, the fascinating thing here is that the Trump administration, when it returned him to this country from Sea Cot prison, said it was doing that so he could face serious criminal charges because it was essential that he do that. Well, what are they going to do now? Just deport him without facing those charges? Which, of course, two judges have now weighed in and said that the government's evidence is on the sketchy side in those cases. The government is facing a moment if it gets in front of the wrong judge, where it will have a real potential in court crisis where the judge calls it out for lying and double dealing. And, you know, the real problem in that situation is the problem that we've been facing here all along, this sort of question of what will Donald Trump's administration do if it gets an adverse court order that it doesn't want to follow? Will it flagrantly violate it? Up until now, what they've done is they've found technical reasons not to comply. For instance, in the dep. Well, the judge's order didn't apply because we'd already left U.S. airspace. Everybody knows that. That's still pardoned my French, but technical legal term, bullshit. But nonetheless, they made that argument. What happens when they just say, well, we didn't want to comply with the judge's order, so we didn't. And we're very close to sort of a species of that moment here where the government has said he has to face trial. Well, what are they going to say now? Abrego Garcia has filed a motion, and I think it's a strong motion arguing that the prosecution is selective and or vindictive and due to be dismissed. That's a motion that in my experience, just never works. You have to argue that you were selected because prosecutors have animus towards you and it's vindictive retaliation for exercise of your rights. And prosecutors don't typically engage in that kind of behavior. So those motions are rarely successful. Hunter Biden had a motion like that that failed in this case. Abrego Garcia's lawyers have, I think it's a 20 page, 20, 30 page motion. They've put a great deal of detail and they've explained why this is the unusual case where those motions should be successful. And so then the question becomes, well, what happens if a judge dismisses the criminal case? The government would be entitled to appeal that because it's, you know, there's no double jeopardy. You're not in a courtroom with the jury. So double jeopardy jeopardy is not attached. Presumably, the government appeals if it thinks it has a righteous case. Maybe here it just says, well, okay, we tried, we lost. We're going to deport him now. And as you point out, he is deportable. What prevents his return to El Salvador? His country of origin is an immigration judge's order. You know, immigration judges, as people have learned, are not Article 3 judges. They are Article 2 judges. They work for the president. They are executive branch employees. Trump has fired a lot of immigration judges, and presumably they would exert control or at least attempt to over the judge in this case. Maybe the judge will just say, well, there's no more reason for this order and he can be returned to El Salvador, which of course, would have horrifying consequences for him at this point. So I think we're in this real gutted out moment where we're going to learn just how bad is this administration, how dirty are they willing to get their hands to complete the metaphor?

C (45:01)

Yeah. But I do like the argument that I assume the immigration lawyers will make. And in a supplemental to that criminal motion to dismiss on vindictive and selective, the lawyers for Mr. Abrego have said that he is considering filing that emergency motion in his civil case because there's two cases here. But I think they may have a good argument to say, hey, Costa Rica is available. Why not Costa Rica if we're going to pick.

D (45:30)

That's such a showing of weakness from the Trump administration right here. If you'll just go away and stop causing trouble for us, we'll let you live a lovely life in this beautiful country. And, I mean, in many ways, given what he's been through, that must have been a very tempting offer to take his wife and his kids there and be done with all of this. And so that shows, I think, a certain strength of character on his part. His lawyers would not have made that decision for him. They would have very clearly laid out the options it would have to be his decision to reject a plea deal like that. So it's, I think, a very interesting dynamic that this situation has not beaten him down. Apparently he's got, you know, steel in that spine.

C (46:17)

Yeah. And, and something else. In a footnote in the supplemented motion to dismiss for vindictive and selective prosecution, the lawyer for Mr. Abrego, Shawn Hecker, who's a fantastic attorney, points out that the government lied about something else during a hearing with Judge Sinis, where Judge Sinise was talking about his possible release and what to do, what protections he might need if he is released from prison. And she asked the government point blank, what are your intentions for deportation? And they had an expert come in and testify, their one witness in this hearing. And that that expert said, we do not decide where someone is going to be deported until they are back in ICE detention. And this was really frustrating to the judge. Like, you guys aren't talking about this. You don't have a plan for what third country you might deport him to. Then they said, no, all we know is that we may deport him to a third country or we may try to overturn that order from a judge in 2019, preventing him from being deported to El Salvador. But we just don't have that information. And we can't until the line ICE officer takes him back into custody after he's released from prison. And here in this case, they had made the decision Costa Rica or Uganda before he reports to ICE on Monday morning. So that is also pointed out, and this is in the vindictive and selective prosecution motion.

D (47:48)

Look, it's worth saying that everybody in that courtroom knew that that testimony was, if not over the line, on perjury, then right on top of it. Because this notion that there's not government wide planning is again, just incredible silliness, particularly in high profile, difficult, complicated cases. You know, you cannot put a deportation order in place overnight in some situations. And so there is planning that goes into it on a preliminary basis. Look, you know, whether or not Judge Sinis is going to want to have some of these witnesses back in front of her to have that out. I don't know if she wants that fight or not. I wish she would have it, though.

C (48:33)

Yeah, no, I do too. She seems to me like the kind of person who might have it, because I think she's had it judicially up to here, if that makes sense.

D (48:41)

I can't tell you how much judges dislike it when lawyers lie to them. Thank goodness I've never been in that position, but I've been in the uncomfortable position in court a couple of times where a lawyer has lied to a judge and the judge proceeds to disassemble them in open court. It's never fun, it's never good. You know, it's hard to believe that it's the Justice Department that's on the verge of receiving this treatment from federal judges. And I think the danger point for this administration and this Justice Department is that they're now starting to see judges who would. I mean, judges aren't political. You know, I get so tired of this junk about they're a Trump appointee, they're a Biden appointee. Judges by and large are real good at setting aside politics when they take the bench, but they are human beings and they do have innate leans. And so the fact that in this case involving Alina Halba, the New Jersey Attorney general, Trump's former criminal defense lawyer, who is, you know, now the, I've lost track of whether she's the interim or the acting U.S. attorney in New Jersey and a Federalist Society judge, a conservative, right leaning judge, rules that her appointment was irregular and the administration has done things that are unprecedented to keep her in the position and that she's not the lawful U.S. attorney in that district. I mean, that is serious stuff when you start to lose your own people.

C (50:11)

Agreed. All right, we have a few more minutes left. And something else I wanted to discuss with you because you're a former U.S. attorney, there are several U.S. attorneys now, including one in Los Angeles and the U.S. attorney, Judge Jeanine Pirro in the District of Columbia, who are failing to return true bills from federal grand juries. And I thinking of this, and this is mostly protesters. They're trying to indict people who are assaulting ICE officers. And they've come out with these numbers that ICE assault officers on, assaults on officers are up 412% or whatever. And that's because there were eight, eight.

A (50:51)

Over a four year period.

C (50:52)

And now there's like 26. Right. Like it's very low. But they're using percentages to show the increase. And so they're trying to. Now, as a U.S. attorney, there's like a pretty high success rate of getting a true bill return from a federal grand jury. If you're presenting a case to a federal grand jury, the standard is not.

D (51:13)

I believe it was 100% during my eight years in office. You know, here's the thing. If you're a United States attorney, if you're a federal prosecutor, there's no reason to bring marginal cases. Right? You have a full plate. You've got at least four or five times as many cases as you can indict. There's no reason to bring the ones that are terrible. Right. We used to sort of, you would open a file and make the barking dog noise and just say, this case is not a case that the government can win. There's no point in expending the people's resources on it. And that's a good reason to not do a case. We decline cases for weak or inadequate evidence, just like we decline cases when they're better done by our partners in the state system, just like we declined them when there's no federal offense evidence. And so, you know, this old tired saw that prosecutors can indict a ham sandwich. I mean, it is true if you had, you know, bad motives, the standard is low. It's just probable cause. But prosecutors are taught and the federal principles of prosecution instructions that we should only indict when we expect that we can obtain a conviction at trial. That means having evidence that proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and also sustain that conviction, which means no legal issues that will interfere in the appellate process. So it's in reality a much higher burden than it is on paper. And now we've got prosecutors who, you know, can't indict a ham sandwich, but apparently are going to try to indict a Subway sandwich.

C (52:46)

Yeah, that's one of the people who they have. I believe they have 30 days to return an indictment to get a true bill from a federal grant. Yeah, it's been 10 days since Sandwich guy threw the sandwich. I'm with sandwich guy personally. But we also have over in LA, I think that that US attorney failed, out of 38 times going to a federal grand jury, only got five true bills back and then two.

D (53:15)

So I want to caution you there and say I'm not certain that we know precise numbers because grand jury proceedings are very secret. But he was overheard on the phone and there has been reporting that in a number of cases where they were trying to indict protesters, that the grand jury declined to indict those cases and that on at least a couple of them they went back a second time and that the grand jury again declined.

A (53:45)

Right.

C (53:45)

And I'm sorry, I got those numbers from a Washington Post report and they said the same thing. They said they threw the same caution out there. And then over in D.C. we had Ms. Reed, who they went to two grand juries for, couldn't return an indictment. And that was for the same thing. Sandwich guy, they want to charge him with, which is an enhanced felony assault that requires bodily injury or bodily harm.

A (54:11)

To the victim.

C (54:12)

Him and the judge was even like, I'm paraphrasing here, but if this seems like misdemeanor simple assault, which would you not bring to a federal grand jury? But they are having a very hard time returning these true bills. And what's really, really interesting to me is that was One of Trump's arguments in his immunity case, he said, if you don't give me immunity, there will be rogue prosecutors with nothing stopping them from indicting people. And that's when Justice Sotomayor pointed out that there are many, many things, guardrails against rogue prosecutions, including federal grand juries, pretrial motions, trial, a petit jury of the appeals process, et cetera, et cetera. It's due process. Right. Which was highly exploited by the Trump camp. But I kept thinking about that, and this is that in action. This is what Justice Sotomayor was talking about against combating rogue prosecutions for political purposes. We have things like federal grand juries, and these federal grand juries are simply just not returning a lot of these true bills for this particular administration.

D (55:22)

You know, I'm so glad you wanted to end on this point, because I think it's a tremendously important one. In fact, I've been writing about, you know, I just finished my first book, which still, it feels like a strange thing to say, but one of the arguments I make in the book is that Trump has not broken the rule of law. He wants us to think that he's broken it. He wants us to think that he's the guy who's running the show. But the reality is these very measured guardrails, the ones that you just identified, grand jury pretrial motions, judges, Pettit juries, the trial juries, and then the appellate process, those all prevent prosecutors from running amok in revenge cases. Now, look, this is the Trump administration. I think we would be foolish if we did not expect them to fight dirty. But increasingly, we're seeing that all of those guardrails are being enhanced. And so to your point, how unusual it is for a grand jury not to indict, which I think sort of takes us back to where we started with the presumption of regularity. And it suggests to me that grand juries are no longer affording the government a presumption of regularity, that instead they are scrutinizing indictments and cases that the government wants to bring in new ways. Because grand juries, I think, always assume, or at least in my experience they assume, that if I brought a case to them and played out the evidence for them, and of course, would always encourage them to be full participants and to ask questions. It was my job to advise them about the law. They were free to ask witnesses questions about the facts. You know, the government wants them to be comfortable with a case before it asks them to indict. And if the government is asking grand juries to indict in a combative mode. Well, that tells us a lot about the fact that not only has Trump not broken the criminal justice system or the rule of law, our justice system more broadly than just in the criminal sense, I think it suggests that Americans are not going to take any of this lying down, have no intention of succumbing to a dictator, and we will find ways to revitalize our democracy and fight back.

C (57:33)

Yeah, I think we're already finding those ways here in California with our redistricting effort to combat what's happening in Texas. But, yeah, you make a wonderful point. We still have these guardrails. We saw them come into play in the Durham special counsel investigation with Ross Rackham, the mayor of New Jersey, who was wrongfully arrested. He's suing now. They dropped the charges. We may see it with Lamonica McIver, the representative from New Jersey, who has filed a motion for a vindictive and selective prosecution. We may see it with Mr. Abrego and we might see it with sandwich guy as well. I'm predicting they won't be able to get that felony charge against him, but if they do, I don't think it's going to get very far in court. So I love that we're ending on that bit of an up note because the reservoir is empty and the presumption of regularity may be gone, but we still have guardrails against rogue prosecutions, which we need now more than ever.

D (58:25)

I think that's a great place to start. Y' all go out and fight, right? We have a republic to keep.

C (58:30)

Thank you and thanks again for joining me, Joyce. Everybody, if you have a chance, if you have not subscribed to Joyce's substack or my substack, you can do so. It's free to join and we hope that you stick around and come back. And, Joyce, I would love to have you come on the Daily Beans and talk about your upcoming book, because I can't wait to dig into that.

A (58:52)

That as well.

D (58:54)

Well, you know, it's. It's a moment, right, when a former federal prosecutor has to write a book about keeping democracy. That's not something that I saw myself doing 10 years ago, and I think it just speaks to where we are in this moment.

C (59:06)

I agree.

D (59:07)

Thank you so much to come on. Anytime.

C (59:10)

Of course.

B (59:10)

We'll text.

C (59:11)

And thanks to everybody for coming on and joining us. We'll see you next time.

D (59:15)

Thanks for being with us, y'.

B (59:16)

All.

A (59:18)

Okay, so have you ever walked in the store and you stare at the giant wall of wines and you don't know what to grab. And so you're like, well, that label's cool. And you just grab that and then you taste it and it's not really your bag. Yeah, me too. That was me. But Naked Wines has changed how I shop. Naked Wines is a service that directly connects you to the world's finest independent winemaker so you can get award winning wine delivered straight to your door. Please join us in thanking Naked Wines for supporting our show by going to nakedwines.com dailybeans and use our code dailybeans beans for the code and the password. And you'll get their incredible deal of six bottles for just $39.99. The last time I had friends over, I opened Mike Patterson Barrel Fermented Sauv Blanc. It's a 2022. It's from Naked Wines and I could tell from my guest's reaction it was a hit. They described the taste as fresh and smooth. They all kept reaching for that particular bottle. It was creamy. Perfect companion to our charcuterie board. For me, there's nothing better than watching my friends enjoy themselves. And Naked Wines makes it easier. Easy. I love that I can set out bottles that people are excited to try without worrying about price or quality. My friends rave.

C (60:21)

I get to feel thoughtful, like, I get to feel like the thoughtful host.

A (60:24)

Who always brings something special to the table. Now Naked Wines funds over 90 independent winemakers. It's been around for 15 years. They cut out the retail middleman, which means I get incredible wine at 60% off store prices. It's the simplest way I've found to make hosting feel effortless. I love this so much. So now is the time to join the Naked Wines community. Head to nakedwines.com dailybeans click enter voucher and put in my code. Daily Beans. All one word for the code and the password and you'll get six bottles of wine for just $39.99 with shipping included. That's $100 off your first six bottles@nakedwines.com Daily beans. Use a code and password. Daily beans for six bottles of wine for $39.99. You'll be glad you did. Everybody, welcome back. It's time for the good news.

C (61:07)

Who likes good news?

A (61:25)

Good news. Good news. Oh, my gosh. I can already see the photo of these dogs and I'm dying.

B (61:30)

Oh, the babies.

A (61:31)

Please, everyone, send your good news to us. We need it this week. We're gonna need it this week. Send it to us@dailymeanspod.com and click on contact. And good news can be anything from something tiny. That's awesome that happened to you in the since you've been born.

B (61:46)

It can be, it can be a.

A (61:47)

Shout out to a loved one or yourself. We love self shout outs, a small business in your area. Maybe there's a great nonprofit doing some incredible work or a group of amazing people in your community that are, you know, participating in some activism to push back against the fascism. Anything like that. Maybe a shout out to a government program. Sing the praises of a government program that's helped you or a loved one. We love to hear about that as well. And to get your submission right on the air, you just got to pay your pod pet tariff, which really just means you can attach a photo of anything, honestly. But you can include your pet. We can guess the breeds of your shelter pup. You can send an adoptable pet in your area. If you don't have a pet, you can send a random animal photo from the Internet. We're doing bird watching, which can be a bird, or you and your family and friends flipping the bird to Trump or musk. I walked in and out of the VA today, by the way, to get another scan and some more testing done and I proudly flipped off the Orange Menace photos and test displayed there alongside Doug Collins and Couch. So we love those kinds of photos. And, and really any photo happy place, maybe your garden, maybe some flowers that you, that you've planted. Anything really at all. Send it to us dailybeanspod.com click on Contact. I can't wait to get to this picture. Kathy D. Pronoun. She and her the Department of Labor is proposing a rule that would strip away minimum wage and overtime protections from home health aides and in home caregivers. God damn it. The black lady was going to give us money for in home health care and expand Medicaid to cover it. The public comment period is open until September 2nd. Y' all know what to do. We will have a link in the show. Notes for podpet Tariff. I'm attaching a picture of our three pups, Lorelei, Liesel and Carly. Great names. Their breed is pretty easy to guess. Yes, yes. These are baby little tiny miniature schnauzers. They're so cute living on the schnauzer farm. And your cabinets, by the way, Kathy. Exact same cabinets I have. I'm wondering if your upper cabinets have that scalloped thing that goes across the opening where the window is. I have the same Handles, same wood, same drawers that are kind of impossible.

C (63:51)

To open and close because they're from 1959. But I love these puppers.

A (63:56)

And thank you for that extra little bit of good trouble.

B (63:59)

All right, this is from anonymous pronoun, she and her hello Beans Queens, recent but faithful listener. I keep recommending the daily beans to friends, colleagues, and just today to my esthetician. First, I wanted to say to Ag that I was also a delulu teen in love with Robert Smith. I mean, he did look right at me at the concert back in the 90s. You must count for something, right?

A (64:20)

Totally.

D (64:21)

Yeah.

B (64:21)

It's been a crappy summer here with the general fuckery. My husband being laid off while I was on week three of my new job, canceling our summer plans and first college Bill due all at once. But things are looking up. College bill is sorted, husband has interviews, and my job is really good. Oh, and last but not least, I get to see Nine Inch Nails this week. Yeah, yeah. For my pod pet tax, you get a picture of Robert from last tour, my baby girl Bee being her usual little weirdo, and a picture of my favorite hummingbird. All of them are very fast and some don't even land for a meal.

A (64:58)

Except for Robert Smith.

B (65:00)

Right? But this plump little lady just likes to hang out and chill.

A (65:04)

Nice.

B (65:04)

She must be middle aged and has no fucks left to give, but maybe I'm projecting. Keep up the good work. And I can't wait to hear about Dana's Cheers tour.

A (65:12)

I wonder if the hummingbird is bird watching too. Oh my gosh.

B (65:16)

So good.

A (65:17)

Yeah, you're right there in the front row, my friend. Holy hell, man. I remember a couple years back, we went to see the Cure at the Hollywood Bowl. The opening band, Dana, was called the Infinite Sad. And I was like, you guys just got together with the goal of opening for the Cure. I feel it in my bones, the infinite sad. And here's the best part about the Hollywood Bowl. If you want one wine, you can have a teeny tiny glass of wine or you can buy a bottle of wine. But if you buy the bottle of wine, they pour the entire bottle in a big clear, sippy cup with a straw. So my bestie and I, sitting at the bowl watching the Cure suck it on a giant big gulp of amazing. It's a good show. If you guys have never seen the Cure, get out and make it happen. Is it me?

B (66:06)

It's you.

A (66:06)

It's my. You're in Chuck from Chuck Pronouns. He and him. Hi, friends. Longtime listener from way Back when we thought Mueller was maybe gonna help. Somehow, though, I pop in and out of regular listening as my tolerance for how hard the world is has limits. I feel you, Chuck. Anyway, I wanted to write and thank you for all the work you do and how you help us stay equipped with the information we need and the courage to keep going. I also wanted to offer some good news for the roundup. I'm pediatric ER nurse in a big city hospital. Chuck, thank you for what you you do. And we are the safety net institution for the most vulnerable in our area. We are a huge provider of LGBT health care in our area, especially for our youth who have unsupportive families and often nowhere else to go. When the news came through about all the changes for LGBT health care, we were a little nervous that hospital administration would cut back on our services for the LGBT youth. But I shouldn't have worried, though. A course of complying with all laws. Admin has come out strongly in support of our LGBT patients, joined a lawsuit to fight this in the courts, and is using every available tool to ensure our kids get the therapy and medicine they need. I'm so proud of our doctors, nurses, child life specialists, techs, paramedics, everyone who has come together to say, not here, of course it's not perfect, and so many people are still suffering. Just know there are so many of us who will never stop helping, no matter what it costs us. It's what I tell my new nurses, the EMTs, the new doctors, the police, the firefighters that come through our department on their various rotations. It's really quite simple. Soon you will be asked to do something you know is wrong and that will hurt someone. You'll have a choice. If policy or leadership says to do something bad. Just don't play dumb, forget how and keep loving recklessly.

B (67:51)

I love that. I feel like there are too many police officers out there looking way too joyful. Not military, not just police officers looking way too joyful about these unconstitutional acts that they're committing.

A (68:04)

Way too joyful. I love it. Play dumb.

C (68:06)

I'm sorry.

A (68:07)

I had no idea. I couldn't do no harm to this patient. Oops. Fantastic. Keep loving recklessly. So well put. I need that on a bumper sticker for my pop, that tariff. This is Eleanor, my munchkin cat with her tiny little leggers. Normal cats look so weird to me now. Normal is in quotes, by the way. So have you ever seen one of these shorty cats?

B (68:29)

No. Corgi cat.

A (68:31)

It's a. Look at the tiny legs.

B (68:35)

It's a chocolate cat.

A (68:37)

Chuck, I don't know what big city you're in, but let us know. And when I'm in town, I'm gonna. I'm gonna buy you a beer, my friend.

B (68:43)

All right, we've got Abby pronoun. She and her hello beans, queens and fellow Leguminati. I'd like to tell you about my friend Joy. If you look up the words joy, kindness, compassion in the dictionary, you'll see a picture of her. She has dedicated her life to spreading joy and happiness children through her books and puppeteering. Joy reads her books and puts on puppet shows at schools, libraries, and most importantly, at children's detention centers.

A (69:06)

Centers.

B (69:07)

She also teaches kids how to make their puppets and put on shows. Joy's an amazing woman and she reminds me that there are kind people out there working hard to make the world a better place. So please read about all the great work she's done and is continuing to do on her website. It's Joy Saxton. S-A x t o-n.com for my pod pet tariff, I've attached two photos I took of the storm chasing tour I went on in June of this year.

A (69:33)

You can go on storm chasing.

B (69:35)

I know. I just heard what I said out loud and now I'm going to look it up.

A (69:40)

Now we have to go see the otters.

B (69:43)

Yep.

A (69:44)

See the cabbaras and chase a storm.

B (69:46)

Chase a tornado. One is a glorious post storm sunset in Blackhawk, South Dakota. And the other is a twisted northwest of Bismarck, North Dakota, South Dakota and North Dakota.

A (69:56)

Oh, a twister. A twister.

B (69:58)

It was most exhilarating and exhausting trip of my life. I met great people, ate great food and saw the most amazing scenery. Keep up the great work and thanks for letting me share this photo though of this act. Actual storms, amazing.

A (70:13)

So one is like black and scary. The other is pink and purple and lovely. Both probably very dangerous. But just what an incredible juxtaposition. These two photos, I would print these up and hang them next to each other.

B (70:28)

Absolutely.

A (70:29)

To sort of artistically depict the different kinds of storms that come into our lives. Wonderful, amazing, beautiful storms. Like you, Dana. Like me. And then, you know, the other kind. Abby, thank you for that. That's wonderful. All right, so joysaxton.com for all the great puppeteering work. That's so cool. Next up from Allie Pronoun. She and her. I was at a loss as to what to do. I wrote voter postcards, I wrote letters, I called my reps till I'm blue in the face. And I went to every rally and protest I could. But I needed more. I'm a creative and I wanted a way to reach people somehow creative, creatively. Upon researching guerrilla tactics and protest art, I discovered Chilean arpeiras, a form, I hope I'm saying that right. A form of protest art made during the Pinochet regime in Chile. It inspired me to start creating little works of protest art, or resistance art, if you will, to leave in the wild, so maybe people wouldn't feel so alone. On the backs of some of these little creations, I leave the names and any little bits of info I can find find of people taken by the Gestapo, formerly known as ice. In others I leave websites or podcasts like the Daily Beans that I think may help others find truth and connection. The art itself is mixed media collage butterflies with acrylic and handmade paper and embroidery.

B (71:44)

Wow.

A (71:46)

I remember hand making paper in art class. Did you ever do that?

B (71:50)

I don't think so. This is extraordinary.

A (71:53)

I hope they bring joy and hope and maybe even change a heart or too. And inspire others to get creative with their good trouble. Oh, look at this beautiful butterfly watercolor on handmade paper that says if we fall silent, we fall extraordinary. Oh, these are beautiful.

B (72:09)

Yeah, they really are.

A (72:11)

I love this so much. Thank you so much.

B (72:12)

Kyranny thrives on apathy.

A (72:15)

Yeah, it does. It eats it for lunch.

B (72:17)

Yeah, it does. Thank you so much for sharing that with us. This is from Kristen Pronouns, she and her. My good news is that I made it through the first week of school in the spring. I decided to save money and buy seeds for my patio with absolutely no planning beyond that. I bought a random packet of mixed seeds. These bloomed. They have brought me so much joy and leads me to ask, do you have the power to name that flower?

A (72:41)

Oh, well, they look like daisies to me.

B (72:45)

They definitely look like daisies to me. And they're beautiful.

A (72:47)

They're gorgeous. They're like fancy daisies.

B (72:50)

Yeah. Oh, maybe they're. Oh, I guess they're different. I just scrolled down. We were wrong.

A (72:55)

Mexican Sunflower, Black Eyed Susan and Garden Cosmic. Oh, I need to get that sounds like a fun project. Just get a random packet of seeds.

B (73:04)

Just throw them in. Sorry, G. I just scrolled down to the picture. Oh, my heart exploded. It just healed a little bit of what I went through with the hot notes. So. Anonymous, whoever you are, I love you.

A (73:18)

She's talking about this picture in the next. Oh my goodness. Anyway, Kristin, thank you for your beautiful flowers. I'm very bad at naming her flowers somehow. Turtles. Yep. Flowers. No, I.

B (73:29)

Right.

A (73:30)

Maybe it's a. A cure fan thing. I don't know. All right, so this last one is from anonymous. Pronouns he and him. You asked for something good that happened to us no matter how long ago. Well, about 14 years ago, I passed by a pretty woman in the grocery store and said, excuse me. And she replied with, oh, you're fine. I've lived off of that for the past 14 years. That's all I have to say. Keep doing what you do do for tax. I found a picture of a baby otter hugging its mama.

B (73:57)

I mean, this is so sweet. Otters are so fascinating to me because the mama holds it on its chest and floats with the baby otter on it for months.

A (74:09)

Yeah. Till the baby swims. And then they hold hands.

B (74:13)

Oh, my God. I love them so much.

A (74:15)

That mama otter looks just like the mama otter in Emmett Otter's Jug band Christmas. I'm very.

B (74:20)

You go.

A (74:21)

I'm. I have to tell you. Thank you all so very much. I really needed this good news today.

C (74:27)

It was a. It was a.

A (74:28)

A shitstorm of news this weekend, and I'm glad we could bring it to you as. As gently as possible, but with the appropriate swearing. But thank you so much for this. Please send all of your good news to us. We love it so very much. Again, no matter how long ago it happened to you, send it to us dailybeanspod.com click on contact. Do you have any final thoughts today, my friend?

B (74:48)

Not for today. I barely got through this episode.

D (74:51)

I know.

A (74:53)

There was a couple good news stories, though, so that was helpful. All right, everybody, we'll be back in your ears tomorrow. Make sure to check out the latest episode of Unjustified. It's out now. There's something that absolutely is heartbreaking for Andy McCabe, and he shares it with us. And I think you should give it a listen if you have a chance. It's free. So put on your headphones, go for a walk, take some pictures of nature, tell us about your wonderful walk, send it into the good news, and we'll see you tomorrow. Until then, please take care of yourselves, take care of each other, take care of the planet, take care of your mental health, and take care of your family. I've been ag.

B (75:25)

I've been dg.

A (75:26)

And them's the beans. The Daily Beans is written and executive produced by Allison Gill with additional research and reporting by Dana Goldberg. Sound design and editing is by Desiree McFarlane with art and web design by Joel Reeder 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 msw media.com msw media.