Trump Wants to Jail Illinois Officials with Rick Wilson, Liz Oyer and Olivia Troye

Summary

The Jim Acosta Show: Episode Summary

Episode Title: Trump Wants to Jail Illinois Officials with Rick Wilson, Liz Oyer and Olivia Troye
Host: Jim Acosta
Date: October 8, 2025
Guests: Rick Wilson (The Lincoln Project), Liz Oyer (former DOJ Pardon Attorney), Olivia Troye (former White House official, national security analyst)
Main Theme: The episode explores the unfolding crisis as the Trump administration targets political opponents—specifically Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson—through threats of arrest and the deployment of National Guard troops, the invocation of the Insurrection Act, and the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey. The conversation assesses the authoritarian drift, institutional breakdowns, legal challenges, and the state of democracy in the face of executive overreach.

---

Overview of Episode’s Purpose

Jim Acosta and his guests dissect the latest actions of the Trump administration, including:

• The arraignment of former FBI Director James Comey.
• Trump’s calls to arrest Democratic state officials for resisting federal intervention.
• The increased likelihood of the Insurrection Act being invoked.
• The erosion of democratic norms and the rule of law.
• The legal and civic ramifications of these events.

Throughout the episode, Acosta urges listeners not to surrender to fear, lies, or authoritarian tactics—and to hold onto truth and hope.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Comey Arraignment & Legal Strategy

• Background: James Comey was arraigned in federal court, pled not guilty, and faces charges believed by all parties to be politically motivated and likely to be dismissed.
• Liz Oyer Analysis:
  • The prosecution against Comey is seen as “bananas, insane, unprecedented” and likely doomed by procedural and evidentiary failures (21:26-27:21).
  • “They clearly stretched and strained and bent over backwards to get the indictment in the first place. That is the lowest bar they have to cross … Everything else is uphill, higher bars that they have to meet…” (21:44)
  • Major issues: questionable appointment of lead prosecutor Lindsey Halligan, mass resignations/protests of career DOJ staff, and possible motions for dismissal on vindictive prosecution and improper appointment grounds (22:26-29:16).
• Trial Expectations:
  • The judge is pushing for a quick resolution, but procedural challenges could easily result in dismissal before trial (24:35-26:15).
  • The motivation for the case appears purely political and performative; the chances of conviction are slim.

2. The Insurrection Act, National Guard Deployments, and State Targeting

• Rick Wilson’s Context:
  • Trump’s calls for the arrest of Illinois officials over resistance to federal troop deployments is an unprecedented leap towards authoritarianism, recalling only the Civil War era (01:02-02:36).
  • “We are in a tough spot right now … We are teetering very much on that edge.” (02:23)
  • Deploying Texas National Guard to Illinois and the rhetoric equating Democratic leadership with ‘insurrection’ are historically and constitutionally dangerous.
• Historical Precedent:
  • The Insurrection Act was only invoked for desegregation or at a governor’s request; current use would break radical new ground (03:19-05:35).
• Political Dynamics:
  • Red state governors “begging Trump” to use their troops against blue states for political gain is a new and deeply troubling development (06:25).
  • “They are trying to score political points with Trump by offering up politically reliable troops for him to use against blue state governors and … blue state Americans.” (06:25)

3. Authoritarian Legal Theories and Executive Overreach

• Stephen Miller’s “Plenary Authority”:
  • Miller has pushed the view of “plenary authority”—the idea that the president’s power is total and unchecked—an extreme variant of the “unitary executive” theory (07:39-08:38).
  • “Plenary authority is something that cannot be doubted that the President may do it. So Miller using that particular word, I think that's a very deliberate choice.” (08:00)
• Erosion of Accountability:
  • Acosta and Wilson both underscore that Trump’s administration and legal surrogates now openly defy the separation of powers, seeking to operate without constraint (09:27-10:47).
  • “We're a country deliberately built in our political and legislative DNA to resist tyranny. It’d be easier if we didn’t have a Supreme Court that was like pro tyranny and a House … cheerleading the pro tyranny side…” (09:48)

4. Performative Politics and the DOJ’s “Informational Autocracy”

• Pam Bondi’s Role:
  • Bondi’s recent Senate performance is described as “so performative it blows the term out of the water” (12:14).
  • Wilson: “…if shamelessness were an Olympic sport, the attorney general just blew the landing door off…” (12:03)
  • Her continued role is chalked up to loyalty to Trump, not legal effectiveness; she’s “faking it for one guy” (13:21).
  • Bondi allegedly personally accepted a bribe from Trump to kill the Trump University case as Florida AG—illustrating the transactional nature of her politics and Trump’s motivations (14:43-15:27).

5. Violence and Suppression of Dissent

• Rev. David Black Incident:
  • Acosta highlights video of Pastor David Black—hit in the head with a pepper ball by ICE during a peaceful protest in Illinois (36:47-37:19).
  • Olivia Troye: “We’ve basically got Border Patrol and ICE behaving like paramilitary troops on the streets right now. That is what’s happening.” (37:48)
  • Such incidents show aggressive suppression and “informational autocracy,” where dissent is targeted physically and institutionally.
• Public Reaction:
  • Despite fear, the free press and demonstrators are still showing up to defend democracy (“democracy in action”), but the sense of danger is growing (32:49-33:33).

6. Calls for Moral Courage and Civil Resistance

• Olivia Troye’s View:
  • There’s a desperate need for insiders to speak out. “We need those people who now feel like Trump’s out of control … to speak out. It seems to me, in this moment, because this is worse than last time.” (40:16)
  • With institutional checks eroded, only moral courage and public solidarity can resist further backsliding (40:28-41:42).
• Role of Faith Leaders:
  • Pope Leo’s recent call for the Catholic Church and its bishops to confront anti-immigrant cruelty underscores the need for trusted messengers to energize moral resistance (41:42-42:23).
  • “You can’t call yourself pro life if you think what they’re doing with the migrants in this country is okay.” (42:30)
• Acosta’s Closing Plea:
  • “Is there anybody with a soul left inside the Republican Party? … You can’t go around shooting pastors in the head with pepper balls. There has to be some line…” (43:30-end)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Wilson on Authoritarian Precedent:
  “The last time the US Government arrested civil officials of any kind was 1862, during the Civil War. … Now [Trump] wants to put him in jail. … We are teetering very much on that edge.” (01:25-02:23)

• On Trump’s Motives:
  “He’s telling us every day on the air, well, I could do it if I wanted to. And whenever he says that, folks, that’s a real tell.” (03:19)

• On Performative Loyalty:
  “She’s faking it for one guy. She’s trying to convince Trump I’m crazier, I’m meaner … and I can have [Fox News] repeating my insults … I get why she does it. She really wants to keep that gig.” (13:21-14:07)

• Troye on ICE’s Paramilitary Actions:
  “We’ve basically got Border Patrol and ICE behaving like paramilitary troops on the streets right now. That is what’s happening.” (37:48)

• Acosta’s Closing Statement:
  “Is there anybody with a soul left inside the Republican Party? … You can’t go around shooting pastors in the head with pepper balls … There has to be some line, isn’t there?” (43:30-end)

• Oyer on the Legal Case’s Fragility:
  “There is literally not a single lawyer in the Virginia office where Comey is indicted that is willing to work on this case with Lindsey Halligan … stunning because there are about 300 people that work in that office.” (22:50)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Comey Arraignment and Legal Weakness: 00:00–05:00, 21:26–29:16
• Trump’s Threats Against Illinois Officials & Guard Deployments: 01:02–06:22
• Historical/Legal Precedent—Insurrection Act: 03:19–05:35
• Plenary Authority & Executive Overreach: 07:37–09:27
• Pam Bondi’s Senate Performance: 11:35–15:27
• ICE Violence Against Protesters: 36:47–39:02
• Calls for Resistance & Moral Courage: 40:16–43:30
• Faith Leader Responses & The Pope: 41:42–42:30
• Closing Plea for Accountability: 43:30–end

---

Tone and Takeaway

Jim Acosta and his guests speak with urgency, outrage, and dark humor about the erosion of democratic norms and attempts to criminalize dissent. There’s a palpable sense of alarm over the normalization of political prosecutions, unchecked executive power, and violence against peaceful protest. Nonetheless, the hosts and guests urge vigilance, solidarity, and hope—as well as continued resistance through public protest, independent media, and moral leadership.

Final Words (Acosta, 43:30):
“Yes, it feels like everything’s going to holy hell in a handbasket. … But what Olivia just said a few moments ago is exactly right: we need to show up for one another in this moment.”

---

For those who missed this episode, it provides a sobering yet energizing look at the stakes of America’s ongoing constitutional crisis, the battles being waged in the courts and in the streets, and the necessity for moral and civic engagement against rising authoritarianism.

Transcript

[A]

Foreign. Welcome to the Jim Acosta show. And it's another day that ends in Y and Donald Trump's assault on American democracy. Case in point. Former FBI Director James Comey, as you saw in our live coverage earlier today, was arraigned in federal court. He was read as charges by a judge, and he pleaded not guilty. Meanwhile, Trump said he also wants to see Illinois Governor J.B. pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson also arrested because they oppose his deployment of the National Guard into their backyard. My big guest, Rick Wilson with the Lincoln Project, Lincoln Square. Rick, great to see you. I mean, it's kind of hard to figure out where to begin. I, to me, there's a lot going on, but the Comey arraignment, seeing the former FBI director in federal court, you know, having to go through this, and, and I think we all know this case is probably going to get thrown out. He's not going to be found guilty. But still, it is a sign of the times. And not a good one.

[B]

No, it is not a good one. And I think what we're watching ratchet up right now from this administration, from Trump himself, from Kristi Noem, from Stephen Miller, from Pete Hegseth, is this increasing, increasingly unsubtle approach to the Insurrection Act. And, and look, the last time this us, the US Government arrested civil officials in either a mayor or a member of Congress or, or an elected official of any kind was 1861, during the Civil War. 1862, excuse me, during the Civil War. And it was even then when, when Lincoln had suspended habeas corpus, it was done very rarely, very, very cautiously. It wasn't tweeted out at a billion miles an hour saying, yeah, this guy just disagrees with me. These were people who were in open rebellion against the United States of America who said, we want to destroy the United States of America and replace it with the Confederacy. So it was a mayor of Baltimore, in fact, that it got pinged in that one. But this is not that world. These are people who disagree with a domestic political policy of the president, and now he wants to put him in jail. Jim, I think we're, I think we're very close to the edge. I think we're teetering very much on that edge. I think Stephen Miller is doing everything he can to push us over. But I, we are, we are in a tough spot right now. And, and, and Americans who underestimated this for a long time, who undercounted this, he said, oh, he'd never do that. He'd never go that far. It would never get that crazy. I have news for y'.

[A]

All.

[B]

It's that crazy.

[A]

Yeah, no, and NBC is reporting, I mean, speaking of the Insurrection act, and I want to get your take on this. NBC is just reporting in the last several minutes that White House officials increasingly serious discussions in recent days about Trump invoking the Insurrection Act, a rarely used 19th century law. And I mean, you know, obviously this, this surrounds the, this deployment of the National Guard into Democratic cities and so on, but, you know, I've been saying on my show, Rick, you know, Trump and Stephen Miller are the last people who should be using the word insurrection. They are the insurrectionists. But I think this takes us to the edge you're talking about.

[B]

Yeah, look, I mean, they're, they're actually experienced with insurrections as they planned and executed the January 6th insurrection, which was, which was definitionally an insurrection because its objective was to overthrow the legal government of the United States that had been elected in that November. So I, I think the problem we're watching right now is that Trump is telling us every day on the air, well, I could do it if I wanted to. And whenever he says that, folks, that's a real tell. Over the years, he said things like that I could pardon the January 6th insurrectionist. I could do it. I have the right to do it. It's very legal for me to do it. And he does it. He's talking about, he, I could pardon Ghislaine Maxwell and you know, that's got the White House internal folks freaking out, right? Anything. He could declare the Insurrection Act. He could put active duty military forces into the streets and active duty forces with rules of engagement for the first time in a state where we are not in this, in a civil war activity, for the first time into the streets. Now, look, the Insurrection act has been invoked two times and our living memory one, during the desegregation of the Arkansas schools. That was a brief deployment, mostly symbolic. It was not a long term, long haul thing. There were very strict rules of engagement. And once, at the request of the governor of California, during the LA riots in 92, my old boss, H.W. bush again deployed those forces. And they were deployed as logistical support for the California Guard and the California law enforcement and LA law enforcement. And it was on a super restricted set of rules of engagement. But when you hear the language of Trump, when you hear the language of Miller, when they're saying, these are terrorists, we must attack them, we're going to go full force, I think that that should be a huge red flag for Americans that should caution Americans at a level that, that is really dangerous for this, this republic right now.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, it's a bit of a disconnect. As dishonest as he is, he means what he says. And when he's forecasting this kind of stuff, you ought to believe, you ought to believe what he's saying. And J.B. pritzker, I mean, you know what? I don't know what the governor of Illinois or the mayor of Chicago can do. I mean, JB Pritzker put out a tweet saying, I will not back down. Trump is now calling for the arrest of elected representatives. Checking his power. What else is left on the path to full blown authoritarianism? I mean, I think he's well within his rights to say that sort of thing. But Rick, I mean, the thing that I keep coming back to, and I've talked about this on the show, is, you know, they're, they've deployed Texas National Guard members to Illinois, which sounds like something out of the Civil War. It sounds, it's, and I hate to use that kind of language, but can you imagine, like, what would Texas do? Or you're in Florida, Tallahassee.

[B]

What would they do if the Illinois.

[A]

National Guard came there?

[B]

I mean, I mean, Jim, you look at this and you have red state governors, you have Abbott and DeSantis and others begging Trump, like, use our troops. You take our troops to go and get those people you don't like. I think that is the most disturbing development in this country in our politics in a long time. They are trying to score political points with Trump by offering up politically reliable troops for him to use against blue state governors and blue state mayors and blue state Americans. And that idea seems to be predicated underneath it both. Well, we don't trust them to, to, to not follow orders, but we trust these guys from Texas to follow orders. Although I will say, given Pete Hexa's hissy fit last week about fitness standards in the military, those guys clearly won the battle of Whataburger, but not much else lately.

[A]

Yeah, the bat. Yeah, there's some of these ICE guys did not win the battle of the bulge, I'll just put it that way. But the other thing, Rick and I don't, you know, not to spring something on you and just, you know, figure out whether we can talk about it or not, but Stephen Miller made some mention of plenary authority that Trump.

[B]

Oh, yes, he did every authority.

[A]

You know, he made this comment on cable news and I'm. What in God's name Is he talking about. A lot of our subscribers and viewers are like, what is this? Yeah.

[B]

For your viewers who are not familiar with the unitary executive theory, because we're going in the hole now, folks. I'm sorry.

[A]

That's what we're doing.

[B]

I'm sorry. We're going in the hole. In the unitary executive theory, there is a belief that executive authority is what they call plenary, which means it is not restrained by law or by legislation or, or by, sorry, law or legislative intent or, or Congress. It is, it is universally powerful. Plenary authority is something that cannot be doubted that the President may do it. So Miller using that particular word, I think that's a very deliberate choice. I think it's a very deliberate setup so that he can start so that Trump will hear that word and say, wait, that means I can do whatever I want. I can shoot them in the leg.

[A]

Right.

[B]

All the things he was told by real lawyers and, and his, in his prior administration. No, boss, you can't do that. Now Miller is giving him candy Here, Donald, this is your, your, you know, the Supreme Court gave you get out of jail free card and now we're giving you superpowers to do whatever you want. It is, it is. Yeah. It is one of those phrases out of DC's sort of nightmare closet that, and by the way, the plenary authority normally means things like the President and only the President may appoint ambassadors. Right. Or the president and only the President may, may, you know, make certain decisions about, about appointments to jobs and in, in the government. Right, okay.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, but, but there's such a thing as separation of powers. I mean, I read the goddamn Federalist Papers, you know.

[B]

You know what, about three months ago I went back and I reread the Federalist Papers and to nerd out completely, the anti Federalist Papers because I wanted to get me some founder vibe going on and I did. And you know what? These guys, the most amazing through line of all that stuff.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Was the fear of tyranny.

[A]

That's right.

[B]

Was. That was the fear of kings and tyranny. And, and, and we, we're a country deliberately built in our political and legislative DNA to resist tyranny. And it, it'd be easier if we didn't have a Supreme Court that was like pro tyranny and a House Representatives that is cheerleading the pro tyranny side of this and a Senate that's sort of like, we'll just go along for the ride.

[A]

Yeah, I know. And don't get me started on that because I've had a problem with this Obamacare subsidies thing for about a week now that that's all they're going for. And I don't want to go down that road because I'm trying not to chase the bright, shiny.

[B]

Oh, believe me, I got, I got plenty of phone calls last week after I wrote a piece about that. Plenty of like, I can't believe you're attacking the, I'm like, I'm telling you what will work. And if you think arguing over the percentage cuts to ACA subsidies are going to move the great bulk of the American people. But the good news.

[A]

Important.

[B]

Yeah. Important news. Yeah. And by the way, that's a meritorious thing to argue for.

[A]

It's just not very much got to.

[B]

Argue for right now.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

But the good news is Trump is losing the shutdown fight.

[A]

He is.

[B]

He's getting his ass hand. My son wrote a piece for Lincoln Square yesterday. Andrew Wilson wrote a piece yesterday about this. Just knocking the numbers. Just walk through the numbers. They are losing the shutdown fight. The Republicans know it. Y, Mike Johnson knows it. They're, they've got a pair of twos here and they're trying to bluff.

[A]

That's. It's absolutely true. And, and speaking of the maximalist or plenary view of the executive and so on, there was Pam Bondi' performance in the, in the Senate yesterday where she, you know, I, I, and I keep using this joke and nobody seems to laugh at us. I'll try it on you. She reminds me of Ricky Bobby's girlfriend in Talladega Nights.

[B]

Absolutely.

[A]

I'm a racer's wife. I don't work. That's what she sounds like to me. But not to be totally juvenile about this, actually.

[B]

Walker, Texas Ranger. That's right.

[A]

Anyway, but to, to, to, to top that, Rick has topped that because we should show Rick's substack article on Pam Bondi's f. Oh, Pam. If shamelessness were an Olympic sport, the attorney general just blew the landing door off early and flashed her tits at the judges, hoping. I can't read anymore. It's too bad.

[B]

I know, I know.

[A]

But it was, the point you're making is that this was so performative.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

It kind of blows the term performative.

[B]

Out of the water.

[A]

Like, it just doesn't.

[B]

This was a show to keep her job.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

She has been on thin ice with Trump because he's, she's not moving on a lot of these prosecutions.

[A]

And that.

[B]

And that there is a perception in the White House which I am told is a correct perception that her own people, even her own folks, told her, you bring Comey to trial, you're going to lose.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And she didn't want to lose. She didn't want to have Trump lose. So that performance was about saving her job. It was also about this thing that kind of fits into the whole informational autocracy frame that we're in right now, which is she wanted to show that the White House has no deference for the legislative branch, that the administration has no deference for congressional power at all, that she could go in and insult senators, basically the middle finger to all these, these Democratic senators. And she came in with her little burn book of, you know, canned insults against them. And I don't know that they were quite ready for it, but they should have been.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And, and I, I don't think they quite understood you. Stop calling her general when she's insulting you and, and lying about you, and you start calling her Pam or Ms. Or whatever, and reframe the insult comedy she's trying to do and, and make it obvious to people what she's trying to do, because it was meant to. As I wrote in the article, she's faking it for one guy. She's trying to convince Trump I'm crazier, I'm meaner, I can be a, I can get the, the Fox News conveyor belt running of shit, and I can have them, you know, repeating my insults to these guys, and it'll be good for us and good for you. I get why she does it. She really wants to keep that gig.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

But she's terrible at this work. She's really, she's really been very, very ineffective in Trump's eyes. I was told this from somebody pretty good in the Trump orbit, that he has this love hate relationship with her. I mean, this person said to me, he loves her because he thinks she's hot.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

He hates her because he thought she would go and burn people down faster and.

[A]

Yeah, well, and, you know, as, as, as a, an astute observer of Florida politics, I mean, she's been that kind of person for him in Florida.

[B]

I mean, you know, look, I've known Pam for 25 years, and, you know, when Pam was in the cabinet as Attorney General, she was one of those people who was like, how is Jeb gonna vote? How is Governor Scott gonna vote in the cabinet? That's how I'm gonna vote. And so when Trump bribed her with $25,000, she dropped the Trump University case in Florida. And by the Politics all the time. If you're going to take a bribe, it should have a B in front of the aliens instead of an M in front of the aliens. And it should never be anything less than an, than a million. If you're gonna take a bribe, take a bribe. $25,000. That's chump change in politics today. But he bribed her and she works cheap.

[A]

And you shouldn't take it in a cava bag either, apparently.

[B]

But you know, that was one of the great parts of yesterday.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Is, is that we will know, folks. And, and I know there's a lot of people that are very depressed about where we're at, folks. We are going to eventually know all these things.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And, and the funniest part about her driving this crazy train to indict Jim Comey for supposedly lying to Congress. I can tell you there were three or four moments yesterday where I can absolutely tell you she was lying to Congress.

[A]

Absolutely. No question about it.

[B]

100 tell you that. Especially her insane overreaction to Sheldon Whitehouse when he asked her, does the FBI do you. Have you seen the pictures that the FBI is alleged to have about Donald Trump with little girls that a witness has told us that Epstein showed them. And her reaction, you could see there was about a four beat reaction there where her face didn't move for a second because she knew how bad that question was because slow computer in her.

[A]

Brain was trying to.

[B]

Oh, you could hear the gears. I could, I could tell you I've seen guilt in people's eyes before. She has seen whatever is, whatever is being described or something worse. And so she goes off and insults him about Reed Hoffman and all this other garbage. And, and we're going to know all these things eventually, folks.

[A]

Yeah, well, and by the way, the.

[B]

Five year, the five year statue of limitations they used on Comey, Trump's gonna be dead by that time, y'.

[A]

All. He's gonna have to pardon everybody on the way out is my guess. But I mean, you know when she kept repeating that line, oh, if only you loved your state as much as you hate Donald Trump. I, I wish somebody had fired back and maybe I missed this, you know, or as much as you have contempt, whereas the President has contempt for the other branches of government. And that was what was evident throughout that whole thing. And it just, it says to me that they don't see themselves as accountable to the people at all.

[B]

And they're not at all.

[A]

And this all flows from the top. Donald Trump, he, he thinks he's just going to skate on out of here without any accountability.

[B]

And Donald Trump is convinced that the Supreme Court's get out of jail free card and his pardon power will be sufficient.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

You know, I got to tell you, I think the worst case scenario for, for Bondi, Patel, Bongino, all the COVID up Blanche, all the, the people who are running the COVID up on Epstein, but also for Christy Noem and Tom Homan and, and Bavino and all these people running the ICE raids. There's a world where Donald Trump, because he is not healthy, just falls over dead one day before they get pardoned. And I promise you, J.D. vance has absolutely no level of risk tolerance comparable to Donald Trump. He will let them all hang. He will let them all dangle.

[A]

I think that's, you know what, and I think that's a very strong possibility. And that's when it's going to be let's make a deal time with a president. J.D. vance, if that were to come to pass, I totally agree with you because he, I've thought about this, that J.D. vance may come in and say, well, that shit show is over. That didn't go over well. I want to try to run for reelection. I might try to become a different kind of person.

[B]

And that means, and Vance. Right. Vance is an authoritarian in a different flavor than Trump, but he would understand politically. And I think he's already sort of hinting about this around some edges. He could get away with a lot of that authoritarian shit if he walked back 15% of the Trump craziness. If he walked back maybe 20% of the Trump craziness. He, he would get grace from a lot of Republicans who are right now, like, what are we going to do? He would get grace even from some Democrats and media folks who would say, okay, it's not quite the same, it's not great, but it's also not the apocalypse and, but pardoning these people for covering up Epstein. And Jim, I don't know, you've probably been seeing this as well. You got Laura Loomer out there tweeting the tweets that look pretty panicked. Yes, please don't pardon Ghislaine Maxwell. It would be the end. It would be the end. I don't know about you, but I think that, I think that the pardon's probably already in the bag.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I think they probably already made the promise when Blanche went down to Tallahassee to see her when she was in prison here.

[A]

Still, I think it's done. Yeah, I think it's done. And, and that was what was revealed in that comment that he made the other that was, that was super sketchy and it sounded like, yeah, I mean, this is already fait accompli. Rick, great to see you, my man. I know, I heard you're working on a book. Am I allowed to say? I shouldn't say.

[B]

We'll talk more about it soon. But yes, I am working on a book and it's due on November, November 1st. So that is why I am in the hole lately.

[A]

I'll let you go back to the hole, but great stuff, Rick, as always. Thanks a lot. Really appreciate it. So joining me is, is Liz Oyer. Liz lawyer is also standing by. I want to bring her in. And I believe my friend Olivia Troy, who was there outside the courthouse earlier this morning, she's going to be able to join us in just a few moments. But Liz, great to see you. The former pardon attorney at the Department of Justice. Liz, I mean, I, I wanted to reach out to you and sorry for the last minute request, but it popped in my head. I really should find out, like, what people are thinking inside the doj, what you're thinking. This was a staggering, I mean, this, this sort of like knocked me back a little bit to see what was taking place. And we didn't see James Comey going and out. I think they wisely moved him in and out a side door, back entrance or something. But just the thought of him being in the courtroom and that's, and having that play out, it really, in a, in a day and age when everything is stunning, that was especially staggering to me.

[C]

Yeah, there are so many really just bananas things about this, Jim. I'm kind of at a loss for words. Like the words that describe what the Justice Department is doing right now are bonkers, bananas, insane, unprecedented. But this prosecution of Jim Comey, it seems like it really has the potential to turn out to be a disaster for doj. And there are a bunch of different reasons why. One is that they clearly stretched and strained and bent over backwards to get the indictment in the first place. That is the lowest bar they have to cross, just getting an indictment. Everything else is uphill, higher bars that they have to meet from there. And it's going to be really interesting to see if they can do it. This prosecutor who's the lead prosecutor who got the indictment, Lindsey Halligan, there's some big questions about whether she was even legally appointed. So one of the first things that Comey's lawyers are going to do is they're going to file a motion to dismiss the indictment, arguing that she was not even legally the U.S. attorney. And that's an argument that really seems to have some merit here. That would be a huge embarrassment if the case were dismissed on that ground. It would mean that they have blown the statute of limitations. There's a five year statute of limitations to bring these charges. They got it at the very last minute, the indictment right under the wire for the statute of limitations. So if they lose that motion to dismiss because Lindsey Halligan, this sort of sham prosecutor, was illegally appointed, they cannot bring these charges again. They're done. So that's one argument that they're going to make. Lindsey Halligan, by all accounts, really struggled to get through the presentation of evidence to the grand jury. I was not in the courtroom today, but it sounds like she just sat quietly and now deferred to another lawyer who's helping her. One thing that's so remarkable, Jim, is they had to bring in two lawyers from the Justice Department from an office in North Carolina to help Lindsey Halligan, because there is literally not a single lawyer in the Virginia office where Comey is indicted that is willing to work on this case with Lindsey Halligan, which is stunning because there are about 300 people that work in that office. So it's this very experienced, inexperienced prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, running the show, and then these two folks that she shipped in from another state to help her with this case. There's another motion that Comey's lawyers indicated that they're going to file today, which also has the potential to result in dismissal of the charges before they even get to a jury. And that's a motion for a vindictive prosecution, alleging that the prosecution was retaliatory against him. And, you know, Trump has kind of made the case for that. He's laid it all out. He's made a public record that is very strong to suggest that there were illegitimate motivations for bringing these charges in the first place. And the fact that he then went on to have to fire the prosecutor who was originally in charge of investigating, who said that he didn't think there was a basis to bring charges and then replace him with Lindsay Halligan suggests that there really is something to that argument. So the first thing that we're going to see is these motions filed to dismiss the case before it even gets to a jury.

[A]

And. And were you surprised, Liz, that that the judge in the case set a trial date so soon? I mean, it's what, January 5th or something like that? We were talking to Glenn Kirschner about this he was in the courtroom for the proceeding, came out and, and he said that that surprised him a little bit. It sounds as though the judges kind of got a no nonsense approach to all of this, which may, you know, come into play with what you were just saying a few moments ago. If some of these, some of these motions sound pretty good to him for throwing the case out, maybe he'll just do that. We won't get to a trial date, but this may move fairly quickly if it even gets to a trial.

[C]

Yeah. So Comey's case is in the Eastern District of Virginia, which is the D.C. suburbs, Northern Virginia, and that, that court is known as the rocket docket. So they like to move things quickly. And this judge actually wanted to move the case even quicker. It sounds like he thought this could be wrapped up before the end of the calendar year. He said on the record that he does not view this as a very complicated case. The lawyers actually asked for a little bit more time because Comey's lawyers want to file these pretrial motions. If they were just going straight to trial with no motions to dismiss, it could probably happen even faster. But they've indicated that they want to try to get the case through. Thrown out first. The lawyers for the United States, for the government asked for even more time. They wanted a further delay to bring the case to trial. And the judge said no to that because he doesn't think it's a very complicated case. So the January trial date, you know, that won't even happen if the case is dismissed before then. But, but if it does, it'll be very interesting to see whether the government can meet the much higher bar for proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

[A]

Yeah. And I mean, the Lindsay Halligan factor in all of this is, is really kind of amazing to me that, I mean, I guess she was in the courtroom this morning. Glenn was saying she was in the courtroom, but she didn't do very much. They had to bring in two assistant U.S. attorneys, I believe, from North Carolina, which says to me that, I mean, do they not have the prosecutors there in house, or is that office just been so blown apart with turmoil and the previous U.S. attorney leaving in protest, or I guess he was fired because he protested that they had to go out, out of the state. I mean, that's kind of unusual. And, and the reason why I think that this is important is, I mean, you were saying it's a rocket docket kind of district, but the U.S. attorney's office in the Eastern District of Virginia is highly important. It Used to be highly important in the war on terrorism, as you may remember. And it was the, the venue for where you saw a lot of the cases, like the American Taliban, a lot of terrorism cases came through there. So it makes me wonder, like what the state of affairs are inside that very important U.S. attorney's office. Not to go too far off on a tangent, but I think that's important.

[C]

Yeah, no, undoubtedly that's important in this moment. That is one of the most coveted U.S. attorney's offices in the country to work in. It attracts very highly skilled, smart, highly credentialed prosecutors, people who are very experienced in prosecuting sophisticated, complex cases. So these are not people who shy away from a challenge. They are people who are realistic in their approaches to cases. And the U.S. attorney who was previously in charge of that office, who came up through the ranks there, said that there was no there there, this wasn't a case that could hold up in court. And he ended up getting fired over that. Subsequently, a couple of other career lawyers, we've learned, have also been fired because they were not supportive of bringing the charges. And now we're in a situation where they've imported prosecutors from North Carolina to help this very unqualified sham U.S. attorney, Lindsey Halligan, to make this case. And it really has the potential to blow up in their faces if they cannot do it. And the bar for proving this case is pretty high, Jim. I mean, it's not as simple as proving that James Comey said something that literally was untrue. They have to show that he knowingly made a false statement. So that's, that's a burden that they have to meet. It can't be some minor discrepancy. It can't be that he misunderstood something or misremembered something. They have to show that he knowingly and intentionally deceived Congress, and they have to show that the misstatement was material. So it actually has to have been a statement that was capable of influencing the decision making body, which in this case was Congress. So he has to have said something that was important enough that it had a potential to influence some action by Congress, which I think means they're going to need to find a member of Congress who's going to testify that they were actually misled and deceived by James Comey's testimony, which will be very interesting to see how that plays out in a courtroom.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, and the other potential witnesses in all of this, I, I would assume for the defense. And James Comey has a very talented defense Attorney and Patrick Fitzgerald, very respected attorney, is whether you want to bring in Pam Bondi or whether you want to call Donald Trump to the stand, because a part of their arguments are that this is a politicized prosecution and that these orders, you know, came from the top, came from Donald Trump, and not because of the, the evidence or the facts in the case and so on. I mean, I, I would think that that potentially could happen. I don't know.

[B]

What do you think?

[C]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So we, we know from what's been reported, we haven't actually seen this memo, but that there is a memo somewhere out there that career prosecutors wrote. And I believe this previous U.S. attorney signed off on to the leadership of the Justice Department, saying, we don't think there's a basis to bring these charges. So I am certain that Comey's lawyers will request that that memo is turned over to them as what we call Brady material. Brady is a law essentially, that says that material that is exculpatory to the defense, that shows that somebody is not guilty, has to be turned over to the defense if it's in the possession of the government. DOJ will argue that that material is privileged, that it's covered by privileges, and they don't have to turn it over. Comey's lawyers will argue that that is evidence that shows that he's not guilty because a lot of prosecutors in the building believed that there was no basis to bring these charges. And it'll be interesting to see how the judge resolves that dispute. But I think that just the fact that we know that there's a whole contingent of experienced prosecutors who believe that this case cannot hold water is. Really suggests that the government is going to have a hard time making their case in front of a jury if it, if it gets there.

[A]

If it gets there. That's. It's a big if right now. Well, Liz, I, I appreciate you coming on last minute so much. Thank you for doing it and always appreciate your expertise where I'm highly addicted to your Instagram account. I, I know I've said this before. I'll say it again. You are a must follow on Instagram because the way you just very methodically lay out the facts is so helpful in this day and age with all the hyperbole flying around, including from yours truly. But you, you deal in facts, which is so great. So really appreciate it. Thanks so much.

[C]

Appreciate it.

[A]

Good to see you. Thanks. All right, And I'm. This is a fast paced show today, folks, because, you know, let's face it, I did two hours of live programming earlier today. So let's bring in Olivia Troy, my partner in crime, but not real crime, Donald Trump and Pam. Bonnie just, I'm speaking in a colloquial sense.

[D]

Yeah, be careful. I'll get charged tomorrow or something, and we won't even know what I did.

[A]

Exactly. But I had to get, I wanted to turn back to you, Olivia, to get your thoughts. I mean, you had some time to decompress and think about what we saw today. We were following you outside the courthouse today, and I mean, it was, it was a hot mess, no question about it. But I was just talking to Liz lawyer about this, and she, I mean, it sounded like she has some doubts as to whether this is even going to go to trial. And maybe this whole thing was just staged to please Donald Trump. I, I mean, I don't know. Maybe that's just what it was.

[D]

I mean, it might have been considering that he basically, you know, told the entire world what he wanted to tell Pam Bondi, probably in a private message, that they needed to get on it and start doing these things. So, I mean, it could have been a thing where she's checking the box. We don't know. But, you know, to me, and it's not like this. I mean, it doesn't matter that it was staged because of the, what the, the wreckage that it's leaving behind.

[C]

Right.

[D]

And the impact to Comey and his family. And just watching his wife and daughter walk out of the courthouse. They were holding hands and watching some Jan Sixers and some trolls trolled them as they were walking off and posted footage. I mean, there are, there are layers to this. Right. And, you know, but, you know, standing there, I have to say it was democracy in action. Just watching a free press still, still in existence for now that we were and independent media like us sitting there covering it and watching people show up with their signs and saying, no, we're going to take a stand, we don't agree with this. And talking to other people who are walking up and saying, do you know how it's going? How is the family? What's happening? So I think it's important to show up to these things and stand by each other. I think that's what we did today.

[A]

Absolutely. I really take that away as well, that there are still a lot of people who care about this country, this democracy, the rule of law. I mean, we kept our new producer, Sam, kept showing the, the, the, the shot of the lady justice over the courthouse doors and, and she's, you Know, lady justice is supposed to be blind. And when you're watching this process, you know, and as I was watching, I was thinking to myself, that's all warp now. Under Donald Trump, that's the, you know, the scales of justice are not equal anymore. Under Donald Trump, if you are one of his perceived political enemies, he will put his thumb on the scales of justice. He will send out a true social post to Pam Bonding. Forget a direct message or a text, he'll just put out a true social post. Go get that person. And just today, Olivia, he was on Truth Social saying that he thinks J.B. pritzker and Brandon Johnson, the governor and Mayor of Chicago, Governor of Illinois, Mayor of Chicago, should be arrested for standing in his way on the National Guard in Illinois. I mean, it's totally nuts. He's totally out of control. Yeah.

[D]

And is this how he communicates now with his cabinet and law enforcement agencies? I mean, I'm wondering if that's how it is. You know, back in the first Trump administration, we knew we had to watch Twitter, that it was called at the time, to figure out what we were going to work on that day. And so I'm trying to figure out, is Kash Patel sitting there taking notes every time you mention something? I mean, is this is how they're running the show here? Is that what. What's happening? Because it seems like that. So I don't know. I don't know what this means for J.B. pritzker. I mean, we're certainly seeing what's happening in Chicago, which is awful and just horrific in terms of what's happening there in terms of immigration. But, you know, it's just, you know, it is. It's just a good reminder of what we're up against right now with another Trump presidency. Right. And then just watching the rule of law sort of bend in many ways in the Department of Justice sort of online and watching, you know, I just can't get Pam Bondi's performance yesterday out of my mind, because I just think that that was one not only just a lack of complete decorum, but also it was also, to me, reflecting on and watching her, just a sign that, like, they don't care and they don't see any accountability coming their way right now.

[A]

Exactly.

[D]

That's what it displayed. Right. Is just how they view things right now in terms of her being the Attorney General. And she can pretty much dodge any question, say whatever she wants, throw it back at, behave the way that she is. And what's going to happen.

[A]

That's Right. No, that's. They're acting as though they. They believe they are not accountable any longer to the American people. And I just. Just a case in point. You mentioned Chicago and immigration. I want to mention something very disturbing. Some disturbing video emerged today, and I want to show this to our viewers. This is. Is outside an ICE detention facility in Illinois. Watch what happens here. You can see right here, a gentleman was hit with a pepper ball in the head. That was an ICE agent apparently, on the roof, fired a pepper ball, and it hits this. This man in the head. Apparently, this happened last month. This is Reverend David Black.

[D]

Yes, this is.

[A]

According to Mediaite and other reports, he is among the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against ICE that accuses agents of using violent force on peaceful protesters. The ACLU filed their lawsuit this week accusing ICE of escalating violence against protesters outside the ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois. And video from the protest, of course, we should mention, happened last month, but the video is just emerging, shows that that projectile hitting him in the head, and it was a pastor. It was a Pastor Olivia, peacefully standing.

[D]

There, by the way. Like, if you watch the footage, I mean, from what we can tell, he was peacefully standing there. Yeah, I watched that video with horror. And when you combine that with the images of the photos that are circulating right now with the ICE agent pointing the gun at someone, when you put that against the backdrop of people rappelling onto buildings, I mean, we've basically got Border Patrol and ICE behaving like paramilitary troops on the streets right now. That is what's happening.

[A]

It looks like Putin's secret police. Go ahead. Yeah.

[D]

Yeah. And I think it's, you know, it's definitely fear and intimidation and power of full. Full exercise of. Of them. But I. I also think that this is incredibly damaging to what's happening here in terms of trust in law enforcement across our communities. Because who feels safe right now if you see that happening right. In a moment where you're actually. When you're going to actually need law enforcement. I'm a person that comes from Homeland Security. I obviously support law enforcement. But watching these images, that is what is really bothering me is just sort of we are chipping away at this right now and the dynamics between residents and cities. And I can't even imagine the trauma of the people in that building. That's the other piece of it. Right. And how. I mean, I'm thinking about these kids. I mean, these are kids living in America right now who have been put through this trauma of getting what taken out of their. Their Homes. There's reporting that they were, you know, they had zip ties on them in.

[C]

The middle of the night.

[D]

I mean. Yeah, this is almost like war zones, except worse in some ways, Right?

[B]

That's right, yeah.

[A]

Yeah, absolutely. And Trump talks about law and order. Law and order. I mean, what took place down at the Alexandria, Virginia, courthouse earlier today, does that sound like law and order? This video that we just showed out of. Out of the suburbs of Chicago, Pastor getting hit in the head with a pepper ball, does that sound. Does that look like law and order to anybody? It looks like Donald Trump thinks he's the law at this moment, seems to me.

[D]

Yeah. And I think this is an operation that is out of control here, and I think we're going to see them continue to push the boundaries of it.

[A]

Yeah. And, Olivia, I mean, because you've been inside, I know it's been several years since you were in the first administration, I have to think that there are officials, and I know there are a lot of true believers in there now, and a lot of nuts like Laura Loomer influencing what's happening inside going on behind closed doors. I have to think there are some people in there who are mortified or horrified who want to speak out, and I. I think there needs to be a message sent to them, like, okay, maybe they're not watching this, hopefully, maybe one or two are, I don't know. But they. We need those people who now feel like Trump's out of control, and maybe they should have thought this a long time ago. We need some insiders to speak out. It seems to me, in this moment, because this is worse than last time.

[D]

It is. And we knew that they would be emboldened and they would feel like they have every part of every separate branch of the US Government in their favor, I think is what they see. And so there really are no checks and balances right now in the eyes of the Trump administration. And I think there is. I think there's actually a moral obligation to say something, and it's interesting. I'm just wondering what the conversations internally must be like, especially when he's floating things like the Insurrection act, which was a big debate when I was there back in 2020, about what they hit Trump wanting to use it. I know this is something that he's wanted to do for a long time, and I'm wondering who is pushing back on him. You know, I know that General Kellogg, I mean, he's still there, and I hope that he's playing that role right now, and I hope that he's kind of trying to bring some common sense to the table and saying, you know, is, is this really what you want for the country? Because I know that there are some people in there that. That really do. This is what they want.

[A]

Stephen Miller. This is what he wants. No question.

[D]

This is their deterrence policy. That's how they view it. Right. And so I think that that is concerning. But, you know, I also. I think the other side of this, I would say, is that I think that people are watching this, and there is starting to build momentum on a reaction.

[A]

Right.

[D]

We saw the Pope. We saw Pope Leo address the Council of Bishops. I was really. I was paying close attention to that because there was a whole delegation that went from El Paso, which is my hometown on the border, and there was a bishop there who brought letters from immigrants on the border, telling their stories and showed them to the Pope and say, this is the reality of what we're seeing here in our cities. And people are scared. People are terrified to leave their homes to do their jobs. And I think Pope Leo's message was like, the church has to stand up and do something. And he has now said, the bishops and priests across the Catholic Church need to be talking about this, and this is not okay.

[A]

Yeah.

[D]

And I think that's important because I think that message needs to go into communities across, you know, from. From messengers, trusted messengers.

[A]

No question about it. Yeah. And. And Pope Leo, you know, the American Pope from Chicago said just recently, you can't call yourself pro life if you think what they're doing with the migrants in this country is okay. If you're. If you're treating migrants in an inhumane fashion, how is that pro life? I mean, that's. That's from Pope Leo, some. Something that we should all be reflecting on. But, Olivia, I. I'm not going to hold you up, because you were out there all morning for us. Amazing job. Just want to say again, amazing, amazing job out there. And it felt like such a huge moment. So I was so glad that you were there.

[D]

Yeah. I thought it was important to be there. And, you know, we don't know. We don't know what comes next. We don't know who comes next in this list, as we're seeing. So will be there for the next one. And I think it's important to show up for each other.

[A]

Absolutely. That's what we got to do right now. Show up. All right, Olivia, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Good to see you.

[D]

Take care.

[A]

We'll do it again soon. Okay. Take Care. All right, folks, I'm not, I'm going to keep this brief because we did a lot of coverage earlier this morning, doing a lot this afternoon. My thanks to Rick Wilson, my thanks to Liz Oyer. I think what Olivia just said there a few moments ago is exactly right on the money, and that is we need to show up for one another in this moment. And yes, it feels like everything's going to holy hell in a handbasket. And it feels like that to me, too. When you see a pastor in Chicago getting pelted in the head with a pepper bullet, I'm astonished. I just don't know. I just don't know what it's going to take to get the attention of Republicans in Congress, of the base of the Republican Party. Aren't there, aren't there some people left in the Republican Party who are outraged by this? Isn't there, isn't there some sense of shame left in the Republican Party? I know there are. I, I know there are folks who say that they, they believe in the holy Scripture, they believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ. There is a man right there who lives out the gospel himself as, as his profession. This is what he does on a daily basis. And he's getting hit in the head with a pepper bullet that was fired at him by these masked thugs at ice. And I just wonder, is there anybody with a soul left inside the Republican Party? Is there anybody left with an ounce of shame left in the Republican Party? Can they possibly go down to the White House and say, you can't shoot pastors with pepper balls when they're, all they're doing is, is exercising their, their freedom of speech, their freedom of religion. You know, they may scoff at the idea of freedom of speech, but I thought people inside the Republican Party believed in freedom of religion, freedom of religion. A pastor right there was just trying to express his right to freedom of religion in America. He believes that migrants should be treated humanely in this country and not treated like animals that have to be hunted down, which is what Stephen Miller and Donald Trump think. This is somebody who thinks that migrants should be treated like human beings because they are human beings beings. And he was exercising that right of freedom of speech, freedom of religion. And so the question has to be asked, who is left with a soul? Who is left with a sense of shame? Who is left with a spine? Will they March down to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and say, for Pete's sake, we can't go around shooting pastors in the head with, with pepper balls? There has to be some line, isn't there? Is there a line left anymore? Is anybody going to say that I noticed Marjorie Taylor Greene lately has been bucking her party on Obamacare, bucking her party on Jeffrey Epstein. I mean, I don't agree with Marjorie Taylor Greene on just about anything, but at least she's showing some, some spine, some backbone in all of this and bucking her party. Is there anybody else in the, in the grand old party, the party of Lincoln? Anyone? My thanks again to Rick, to Liz, Olivia, thanks to all of you for watching. Thanks again for, for those who tuned in to our special live coverage earlier in the day of the Comey arraignment. We saw some big numbers people watching that and we're so, so grateful for that. We're going to keep it coming in the meantime. Still reporting from Washington, I'm Jim Acosta. Have a good evening. We'll see you next time. SA Sam.