← UnJustified
UnJustified
Down For Law
01:03:55
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has referred the Ukraine whistleblower and the Inspector General to the Department of Justice for prosecution. A top prosecutor has been removed from the John Brennan investigation in Miami after she suggested the case was going nowhere The Justice Department’s Weaponization Working group has released its first report which accuses the Biden administration of improperly prosecuting anti-abortion protestors. US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro has filed a Motion to Vacate the seditious conspiracy charges against the Oath Keepers “in the interest of justice.”
Loading summary
Transcript198 lines
- [00:01]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
Hi, I'm Frances Collier. And I'm Angela V. Shelton. And we're Frangela. You know what, you mean in your life. The Final Word podcast. Yes, you do. That's right. It is the final word on all things political and pop cultural, where we make real news, real funny, where we inspire you so you can resist. Subscribe and get a new episode of the Final Word podcast each week. It's the news we think you need to hear. That's right. We think you need to hear it.
- [00:28]
Allison Gill
Okay.
- [00:29]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
Yeah. It's what we say.
- [00:30]
Amanda Sturgill
So.
- [00:30]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
That's right. And because all we do is give. Every Thursday, you can listen to our hysterical podcast, idiot of the Week. We round up the stupid. Because you know what? Somebody has to.
- [00:40]
Allison Gill
Okay. All we do is give. MSW Media
- [00:51]
Andy McCabe
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has referred the Ukraine whistleblower and the Inspector General to the Department of Justice for prosecution.
- [01:01]
Allison Gill
A top prosecutor has been removed from the John Brennan investigation in Miami after she suggested the case was going nowhere.
- [01:08]
Andy McCabe
The Justice Department's Weaponization Working Group has released its first report, which accuses the Biden administration of improperly prosecuting anti abortion protesters.
- [01:19]
Allison Gill
And U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro has filed a motion to vacate the seditious conspiracy charges against the Oath Keepers and proud Boys, quote, in the interest of justice. This is unjustified. Hey, everybody. Welcome to episode 65 of unjustified. Ah, 65.
- [01:43]
Andy McCabe
Wow.
- [01:44]
Allison Gill
Wow. It's a lot. It's Sunday. We could be on episode 150 of the The Jack Podcast if it weren't for what happened last November. But now here we are. It's Sunday, April 19, 2026. I'm Alison Gill.
- [01:58]
Andy McCabe
And I'm Andy McCabe. And Allison. The chutzpah. The nerve. The nerve. What? What I ask you, what must it take to assemble a weaponization working group and then release a report about the weaponization of the Justice Department under President Biden while simultaneously weaponizing the Justice Department? I mean, it's. It's unbelievable, but it's hypocrisy to a new level.
- [02:27]
Allison Gill
Yeah. It's not only a retribution and revenge tour, it's digging out of everything that he was prosecuted for and anything that came close to it that they don't like. So it's like weaponization on top of weaponization.
- [02:40]
Andy McCabe
Yeah. And all this is all fueled by his sycophants unrelenting desire to please him, to attract positive attention from the Dear Leader. And they know the way to do that is to Throw raw meat at him in the shape of attacks on the Russia investigation, attacks on the election loss. I mean, just one after another. And this story we're going to get to later about Tulsi Gabbard is just like right in the hot zone there.
- [03:10]
Allison Gill
Now we're attacks on his impeachment. At least one of them.
- [03:13]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, yeah.
- [03:15]
Allison Gill
And pretty much every story we're covering today is going to be about Trump weaponizing the doj. Except one. John Eastman was disbarred in California. So we could talk about that for a quick minute. We kind of saw it coming again, how many years did it take? But oh, my gosh, California Supreme Court has yanked his law license. As you know, he was one of the architects of the plot to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. He had all of his emails that were his had to turn over for per the crime fraud exception over at. Was it Chapman University?
- [03:48]
Andy McCabe
That's right.
- [03:49]
Allison Gill
And where he was an employee. And he's been under investigation for several years. I remember going on to the California Bar's website and looking him up and there's a big yellow exclamation point that says this person has been indicted. He wasn't quite disbarred, but they really wanted to make sure everybody knows, probably don't hire this guy as your lawyer. But now he cannot be hired lawyer.
- [04:14]
Andy McCabe
Prominent speaker right. At the, at the rally on January 6 before the riot, the insurrection. Who'd have thought we'd be looking at John Eastman as the bearer of good news? But here we are. Here we are in 2026.
- [04:27]
Allison Gill
I, I think it's the California Supreme Court that gets the credit here and all of the, you know, the bar association lawyers and ethics and responsibilities folks who, who were reviewing his case. But he's been disbarred. So I'm. That I don't know. That pleases me. It was a nice bright spot in the news this week for sure, along with that ICE agent that was hit with a couple felonies. We're not going to cover that here on the show, but it was nice to see Minnesota and the Hennepin County District attorney step up and issue an arrest warrant on two felony charges for assault for this ICE officer. So it's going to be an important test case, too, if they want to see if they can bring charges. A state can bring charges against a federal agent because that's a pretty. That's an uphill climb, hugely.
- [05:13]
Andy McCabe
Yeah.
- [05:14]
Allison Gill
It might set the stage for future prosecutions, like, for example, for the killings of Alex Preddy and Renee Goode, but. So we'll keep an eye on that.
- [05:22]
Andy McCabe
But I think you could also see a prosecution out of the guy who chased the food delivery driver back to his house and then shot through the door, hitting his roommate essentially, and then lied about it, said he was beaten with a broom and a shovel or something like that, and was defending him. That one they seem to, however reluctantly, be actually drilling down on. They've looked at all this newly released video evidence and determined quite conclusively that the agent lied about the circumstances of that shooting. So stand by on what happens with that one.
- [05:56]
Allison Gill
Yeah. And in court and in pleadings. So that's, that's nice to see. And it's going to be, like I said, legally interesting to see if a state can hold federal agents responsible under their state laws. You'd think 10th Amendment would allow for that. But, you know, with the Supreme Court, who knows how any of that'll shake out? So, anyway, cover those on different podcasts today, I want to kick off with what I think is the top story, although the Tulsi Gabbard one is tied pretty high for first place. But this one's from cbs. The Justice Department on Tuesday asked a federal court to vacate the January 6th convictions against a dozen former members of the right wing Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, most of whom were convicted of seditious conspiracy, among other things, aiming to basically wipe away some of the final Capitol riot charges that are still standing.
- [06:55]
Andy McCabe
Hours after returning to office last year, President Trump issued pardons for almost everybody convicted in connection with the January 6 riot. But 14 people, including the 12 referenced by the Justice Department on Tuesday, instead had their sentences commuted to time served, which allowed them to leave prison while leaving their convictions in place. The 12 included Stuart Rhodes, who's the founder of the Oath Keepers and one of the higher profile January 6th defendants. At the time of his conviction, prosecutors said Rhodes and other members of his group began plotting to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power. And after Mr. Trump lost the 2020 election on the day of the riot, Rhodes, quote, coordinated activities as a group of Oath Keepers marched on the Capitol. The Justice Department said Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other charges.
- [07:49]
Allison Gill
Yeah. Now also included are four Proud Boys who were convicted for their role in the January 6th attack. Ethan Nordine, one of the far right group's leaders, who was sentenced to 18 years in prison after being convicted of seditious conspiracy alongside Joseph Biggs and Zachary Ra, fourth proud boy whose conviction the Justice Department is trying to vacate. Dominic Pizzola became one of the more recognizable faces of the attempted insurrection after a video showed him smashing a Capitol window with the riot shield. He was convicted of assaulting or resisting officers, robbery involving government property, that shield obstruction, and other charges as well.
- [08:25]
Andy McCabe
The Justice Department said at the time that Nordine and Pozzola, quote, participated in every consequential breach at the Capitol, leading a group of proud boys onto the Capitol grounds, resulting in dismantling of barricades, the breaching of the Capitol building, and assaults on police and destruction of property. In three separate cases where the 12 rioters had appealed their convictions. The Justice Department on Tuesday asked for federal appeals panels to vacate lower court judgments with prejudice, meaning the cases could not be brought again.
- [08:59]
Allison Gill
Yeah, quote, here's a quote. In the executive branch's view, it is not in the interest of justice to continue to prosecute this case or the cases of other similarly situated defendants. That's what federal prosecutors in the U.S. attorney's office in D.C. wrote in a filing signed by Janine Pirro. Prosecutors wrote that the defendant's attorneys don't oppose the motions. Of course not. Of course. This is an un. It actually says at the top, Andy, unopposed motion to vacate. It's like, yeah, well, why would the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys oppose your motion to vacate? And. And, you know, we could talk about this in a second, but Judge Mehta is the Oath Keeper's judge and would have to, I think, approve this. Or actually, I think this is to the Appeals court in D.C. yeah, but, you know, I think what's interesting here is that to just say, well, I have prosecutorial discretion, and it's because I say so. There's no reason given that this was a miscarriage of justice. But as Jeanine Pirro put in the filing, sometimes the DOJ doesn't need any reason other than the broad prosecutorial discretion, which is what makes it so dangerous for, like, her to be in this position in the first place.
- [10:21]
Andy McCabe
Totally. Yeah. I mean, this is really harkens back to Michael Flynn and the complete flushing of his prosecution at the. At the demand of William Barr, who, you know, when. When Flynn tried to challenge his guilty plea and completely changed his. His response to the charges after he'd already been convicted, Barr orders the prosecutors to stop opposing his motions to have his. His guilty plea vacated, I think was the motion. And they, of course, refuse and resign in protest. At least one of them did. And then they went into court and said, okay, well, we're going to dismiss the case against him in the interest of justice, just like this, which provoked this massive review where they brought in retired Judge Gleason to write an amicus brief in support of the judges, you know, the judge maintaining the charges. And the basic question was the prosecutors have to petition. Now, this is at the trial court level, a little bit different, but they have to petition for, quote, leave of court in order to dismiss the charge. So what does that mean? Does that mean the judge has to approve of the dismissal of the charges, or is it more a formality that. That the prosecution gets to decide this and the judge doesn't really have any. Have any sway over it? And eventually, that's the way it went. I'm trying to remember exactly what the language was around that decision, but I think basically the problem was if the judge had maintained the case, there was basically no one there to prosecute it. Right.
- [11:54]
Allison Gill
But we were like, well, then you're just going to have to pardon him if that's what you want, Mr. President. But the case.
- [12:01]
Andy McCabe
And that's, of course, what they did.
- [12:03]
Allison Gill
But the thing that Gleason was arguing, that I could see being argued here as well, is that without the adversarial system of justice, without there be. That's kind of why a special master was brought in in the first place, was to be that adversarial voice, where one doesn't exist. Mean. Meaning, of course, there's no opposition to this motion to vacate because both the bad guys, the criminals, and the DOJ want to get rid of it. There's nobody to step in and take that adversarial voice. And robbing the people of the United States of that adversarial voice is why they ended up bringing Gleason in. But like you said, the Flynn case ended up being dismissed anyway.
- [12:41]
Andy McCabe
Gleason's argument was at least impartially that you had this. This. The court rule says the judge must grant leave for the dismissal, meaning he must approve of it. So that, by definition, gives the judge the ability to decide whether or not to grant such leave. But we'll see. Who knows? Maybe this. Maybe this crazy thing that we have here today sheds a little bit more light on whether how that works out.
- [13:07]
Allison Gill
Well, I think if I'm the Oath Keeper's lawyer, I say, well, you did it for Mike Flynn. You got to do it for me.
- [13:11]
Andy McCabe
Of course. Yeah.
- [13:12]
Allison Gill
Now, not included in this initial batch of motions Tuesday was Thomas Caldwell, who authorities said assisted the Oath Keepers. And Jeremy. Jeremy Bertino, a former Proud boy leader who pled guilty to seditious conspiracy charges against him in 2022. Caldwell, who was acquitted of seditious conspiracy but convicted on other counts, was separately pardoned fully by Trump in March of 2025. The Justice Department referred to the charges that it is seeking to drop as a quote, years long, Biden era, weaponized prosecution.
- [13:47]
Andy McCabe
H. Yeah, that's, that's outrageous what they're doing. Outrageous. I mean, it's, it was bad enough, the pardons were bad enough, but here it is like we're still, we're still dealing with the, with the fallout of maybe the worst use of presidential pardon certainly that I've ever seen in my life. And there have been some questionable ones pretty much every four years.
- [14:06]
Allison Gill
But, and that conviction was a, was a eloquent like work of art that almost fell apart. You'll remember. Yeah, you'll remember. Mike Sherwin, who was Trump's D.C. u.S. Attorney at the time, threw a whole bunch of shenanigans. She probably shouldn't have even been there in the first place. And you know, Biden's D.C. u.S. Attorney didn't even get there until, I think November because Senate Republicans were blocking all of his U.S. attorney nominations. So it took almost a year to seat the D.C. u.S. Attorney. But Mike Sherwin at the time went on 60 Minutes and said, oh, yeah, we're looking at seditious conspiracy charges for these oath keeper fellows. To which Judge Meadow called an emergency conference in his courtroom and said, stfu, sir, you may not say those things on television. You're jeopardizing this entire case. No more. And then when Merrick Garland got there, he referred Mike Sherwin for those statements to the Office of Professional Responsibility or something, some sort of in internal investigation in which he could be sanctioned or fired. But he quit before that could happen.
- [15:09]
Andy McCabe
Yeah.
- [15:10]
Allison Gill
And so to be able to bring, not only bring that seditious conspiracy charge back, but to get a conviction and then to get the judge to sign off on a domestic terror enhancement is pretty amazing.
- [15:24]
Andy McCabe
Amazing piece of work that they duplicated over two trials. So I'm trying to remember. Allison, what, where is Enrique Tarrio in all this?
- [15:34]
Allison Gill
He's one of the proud boys. That's. I think he may have been pardoned,
- [15:38]
Andy McCabe
but he, I thought he get, I thought he got commuted with the rest of them, but I don't see his name mentioned in the article. It doesn't. And the math doesn't add up. Maybe his case has not gotten to this point yet because it's separated into Three different appeals. So maybe he's got his own appeal going and the timing is just not brought the matter to this kind of move yet. We'll have to see what happens there. But what an insanity. I mean, every day it's a new aberration of the concept of justice. And this is, I think, the highlight of the week.
- [16:16]
Allison Gill
Yeah.
- [16:17]
Andy McCabe
All right. Next up in weaponization news from CBS Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard asked the Justice Department to investigate two former government officials who played a central role in President Trump's first impeachment inquiry. The spokesman for Gabbard's office confirmed that she drafted criminal referrals for a whistleblower and. And a former intelligence community watchdog, but did not detail what specific crimes are alleged. Whether to pursue a criminal investigation following a referral is up to prosecutors at the Justice Department.
- [16:52]
Allison Gill
The referrals came after Gabard criticized how former intelligence community Inspector General Michael Atkinson handled the 2019 whistleblower complaint. She complained earlier this week about that, releasing a trove of documents linked to Atkinson. Now, Atkinson came up recently in. In some of my shows when I interviewed Bakaj, who's a lawyer for a different whistleblower who had a whistleblower complaint against Tulsi Gabbard. Remember when she.
- [17:20]
Andy McCabe
That's right.
- [17:21]
Allison Gill
When she hid a piece of intel from the nsa, instead of distributing it the way she's supposed to distribute it, she hid it so no eyes could get on it. And it was apparently a report of two foreign nationals discussing someone close to Trump about Iran. So, and she, that particular inspector general, held on to that. You have 21 days to transmit it to Congress. And Atkinson actually took a lot of heat for taking the whole three weeks to transmit the Ukraine whistleblower report to Congress.
- [17:53]
Andy McCabe
Right.
- [17:53]
Allison Gill
This whistleblower report was hidden for eight months by Tulsi Gappard and the inspector general. And now Biden's old inspector general was like, yeah, this is credible. It should be transmitted to Congress. But then swoop in came Tulsi, Gabbard's former aide, who started working at the Inspector general's office and was like, no, no, no, no, no, you're fired. And just sat on that report for eight months.
- [18:20]
Andy McCabe
Let's just hold on this for another six months.
- [18:23]
Allison Gill
So now she's referring Atkinson for a criminal probe and the whistleblower, who still to this day remains anonymous because of the incredible work at whistleblower aid.
- [18:34]
Andy McCabe
Right, Right.
- [18:35]
Allison Gill
The whistleblower, whose identity has not been formally disclosed, reported an urgent concern about Trump's request for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Vice President Joe Biden. The complaint also expressed concerns of how records of the phone call were handled and about the role Mr. Trump's then personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, in his US relationship with Ukraine. That role. And he was under investigation. But then no charges were brought.
- [19:03]
Andy McCabe
Quote, I have received information from multiple US Government officials that the president of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election, the whistleblower wrote. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the president's main domestic political rivals. Now, Mr. Trump was impeached in the House of representatives in late 2019, but was acquitted in the Senate vote, mostly along party lines in early 2020. He has long denied any wrongdoing, referring to his phone call with Zelensky as, quote, perfect.
- [19:41]
Allison Gill
Yep. Yep. Now, Gabbard alleged in a post on Twitter on Monday that, quote, deep state actors in the intel community, quote, concocted a false narrative that, that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach a duly elected president, real Donald Trump in 2019. She argued that the inspector general relied on secondhand evidence. Our friend Alex Vindeman was on the
- [20:06]
Andy McCabe
call
- [20:09]
Allison Gill
and they, and she, and you recall one of the lawyers edited that transcript and refused to take Vindman's edits and then stashed it in the nice, nice code word classified system so nobody could see it.
- [20:26]
Andy McCabe
Right.
- [20:26]
Allison Gill
The documents, however, do not provide any direct evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Atkinson was fired by Trump in 2020. In a statement after his removal, Atkinson said he faithfully discharged his duties as inspector general and spent his nearly two decade career serving without regard to partisan favor or political fear.
- [20:44]
Andy McCabe
The criminal referrals mark the latest effort by Gabbard and other administration officials to revisit political battles from Mr. Trump's first term. Last year, her office released files related to the intelligence community's review of Russian interference in the 2016 election, claiming that they showed a, quote, treasonous conspiracy by Biden era officials. Gabbard also said that she would forward those documents to the Justice Department for a criminal referral, though it isn't clear what criminal wrongdoing was alleged. Several figures from the Russian election interference saga, including former CIA Director John Brennan, have been subpoenaed as part of a probe by federal prosecutors in Florida. No charges have been filed. Thank goodness. I'm just saying as a newsreader that Last part I added, thank goodness. So this thing is so bat shit crazy. Like, I had to go on the nine o' Clock show last night on CNN and talk about this and the idea that you would refer a whistleblower for criminal prosecution for. First of all, she doesn't say in the referral what the crime allegedly is. And she was asked in an interview on News Nation the night before last and said, well, we don't really know. We're going to let DOJ figure that out.
- [22:02]
Allison Gill
That's not how a referral really know.
- [22:05]
Andy McCabe
If you don't know, then you don't have anything to refer.
- [22:07]
Allison Gill
Can you imagine if the January six Select Committee was like, we are real sure that any crimes were committed here, but we're going to make a criminal referral against President Trump anyway.
- [22:15]
Andy McCabe
I mean, the way this works is the head of an agency sends a, what they call, I think it's called an 811 referral or something like that, but sends a referral to doj and it says, you know, we've come across information that indicates that one of our employees may have mishandled classified information and we'd like you to look into it. So it's the facts that that narrative there mishandled classified information. That's the allegation. You're not citing the statute or anything. That doesn't matter. But you have to put some meat in the referral to at least give the DOJ predication to conduct an investigation. Not, not in Tulsi's world, in which
- [22:53]
Allison Gill
you don't need predication to open an investigation in this Department of Justice.
- [22:58]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, it's, it's insane. And whistleblowers have protection. These disclosures are protected. The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act 1998 actually added protections for whistleblowers specifically in the intel community, created a process by which they could submit classified information in their referrals.
- [23:18]
Allison Gill
So I wonder what Chuck Grassley thinks of this. He's very big about whistleblower protections. So this is gonna, I, I'd like to know if somebody who could ask Chuck Grassley what he thinks about this. But, yeah, as far as, as far as we know, this criminal referral, I'm using air quotes here, might just say, oh, we don't like these guys.
- [23:37]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, like what? Well, what she says in her, in the information she's released publicly is like, well, he only interviewed four people and those were, those people were all politically biased. Like, even if that's true, which I don't give her any benefit of the Doubt there. But even if it was, that's not a criminal allegation. It's not. Maybe you say, you look back on it now and you say, like, I think Atkinson should have done a better job because he's obligated to investigate to determine whether it's a matter of urgent concern. And if the allegation is credible, that's
- [24:09]
Allison Gill
what triggers the four people isn't a crime.
- [24:13]
Andy McCabe
Yeah. If you think he should have ordered eight interviewed eight, or instead of four or two instead of four, fine. Then you don't. Like, you think the guy wasn't good at his job. That doesn't make it a crime.
- [24:22]
Allison Gill
I mean, well, as Jeanine Pirro has said. She said, look, I don't need information to start an investigation. I just might think something smells fishy and I should be able to issue subpoenas.
- [24:36]
Andy McCabe
So has somebody got me another sidecar?
- [24:42]
Allison Gill
Thank you. Yeah. So that, you know, coupled. You hear that you're Tulsi Gabbard. You hear that you're like, well, Jeanine Perro doesn't need any predication to open a criminal investigation. So I'm going to make a referral on these two people that Trump really hates because my job's in jeopardy right now.
- [24:56]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, exactly. Well, let's remember that this is coming from the same Tulsi Gabbard who, according to the reporting of Maggie Haberman and others, was not even invited to the meeting where they discussed whether or not we should go to war with Iran. They didn't include the DNI in that meeting. Do you know why? Because they can't stand her and they have no respect for her. Trump already said what last year, talking about Iran. He said, I don't agree with anything she says. Like, this is someone who's so desperate to hang on to her job that she will do anything that she thinks Trump approves of, including showing up at an FBI criminal search warrant and of all places, Fulton County, Georgia, and hiding in the back of a truck so the press wouldn't get a picture of her, which they, of course did. She doesn't even hide well. I mean, it's a joke.
- [25:44]
Allison Gill
She's.
- [25:45]
Andy McCabe
She's an absolute disgrace. Yeah.
- [25:48]
Allison Gill
Yes, indeed. All right, I want to talk more about this weaponization report. Let's come out from the Weaponization Working Group. But we have to take a, a quick break, so everybody stick around. We'll be right back.
- [26:07]
Martin Sheen
Hello. Martin Sheen here. And it seems to me that no day of the week is without its endless barrage of bad news. Even on Sunday, For God's sake, let's change that. What do you say? Together, let's make Sunday immune to bad news. Available now every Sunday, Season three of the Martin Sheen Podcast with yours truly. Martin Sheen has begun. Yeah. Ten brand new episodes are already underway. So join me, Martin sheen, for a 20 minute journey as I share my personal stories, a bit of poetry, and insightful reflections that will encourage you to take a deep breath and enjoy a relaxing moment. Of course, it's important to know and understand what's happening in the world, but I also believe there's nothing wrong with taking a step back to find strength and clarity. And Lord knows we need that now more than ever. A moment of thoughtfulness and calm may be rare these days, but it doesn't have to be. So what do you say? You want to take back your Sundays? So do I. And guess what? I've already done it with the Martin Sheen Podcast, Season three. Available now. Don't mess with my Sunday. And thank you for listening.
- [27:22]
Allison Gill
All right, everybody, welcome back. Now that we've covered a few massive stories about Trump's weaponization of the Department of Justice, we have a report out from the Weaponization Work Group about Biden's Department of Justice, of course. Now this is from the Times. The Justice Department accused the Biden administration of unfairly prosecuting anti abortion activists, according to a report issued on Tuesday, part of a broader effort by President Trump to counter what he has claimed were anti conservative biases by federal law enforcement under his predecessor. The report is the first of several. Yeah, you know, that super liberal FBI. The report is the first of several expected to be released by the department's Weaponization Working Group, which promised to scrutinize a range of issues, including the criminal investigation into Trump and what he has cast as anti Christian and anti Catholic biases. Which is interesting given his feud with the Pope and very weak on crime.
- [28:21]
Andy McCabe
He's war at war with the Pope. And Biden's about the most Catholic president we've had since Kennedy. I think I went to Mass every weekend. He did. Biden was anti Catholic. I mean, like, really?
- [28:33]
Allison Gill
Yeah. But yeah, this is a. Trump is cast Biden as anti Christian, anti Catholic, so.
- [28:40]
Andy McCabe
And portrayed himself as apparently Dr. Jesus.
- [28:44]
Allison Gill
Yes. Our one of our episodes this past week was what was it? Dr. President McDonald. J. Christ was the name of the episode.
- [28:56]
Andy McCabe
Oh, good Lord. And I mean that literally. All right. The 37 page report featuring more than 800 additional pages. If the first 37 weren't enough for you, there's 800 more 837 additional pages of internal emails and other exhibits. It comes at a tenuous time in President Trump's relationship with the religious right. In recent days, Mr. Trump posted an image of himself as Jesus Christ and attacked Pope Leo, the leader of the Catholic Church, as, quote, weak on crime. And also, I think he added, not good on foreign policy, drawing objectively.
- [29:33]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
Funny.
- [29:34]
Andy McCabe
Thank God. I can't even get to the end of this sentence because, you know, that in his own mind, he really thinks that that's a problem for the Pope, that he's weak on crime. He has no idea. Like, the Pope doesn't do crime. Like, he's. That's not what he's there for. But. But the guy who's the president here, he doesn't know that.
- [29:54]
Allison Gill
I think I like Stephen Colbert's, like, I think it'd be pretty cool if the Pope did fight crime, but he's not firefighter.
- [30:01]
Andy McCabe
I'd go through a door with him. Right? Yeah. Slap a vest on that guy right there. All right. Shortly before the documents release, the Trump administration fired three career department lawyers who had worked on the cases at issue in the report. Of course they did. According to people familiar with the dismissals.
- [30:20]
Allison Gill
Yes, of course. Now, the acting Attorney general, Todd Blanch, took aim at the previous administration in announcing the release of the report. Quote, the weaponization that happened under the Biden administration will not happen again. Sorry. As we, as we restore integrity to our prosecution system, are hard to read. Stacy Young, a former civil rights lawyer at the department who now leads a nonprofit group of former department employees called Justice Connection, which is very cool. She denounced the firings. She described them as the latest in instance in which the Trump administration has subverted the mission and intent of the Justice Department even as it claimed to be ridding itself of political interference. Ms. Young criticized the department's leadership over what she called cruelty and hypocrisy in its insistence, quote, on zealous advocacy by career staff and advancing the president's priorities while shaming and firing those who did just that in the prior administration.
- [31:21]
Andy McCabe
The report centers on how the Biden administration enforced the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances act, which is also known as the Face act, against anti abortionist. I'm sorry, anti abortion activists. The law, enacted in 1994, makes it a crime to physically obstruct or use threats of force to intimidate or interfere with a person seeking reproductive health services or seeking to participate in a service at a house of worship. The Trump administration's review concluded that while The Justice Department did pursue cases against those who vandalized and threatened anti abortion counseling centers. It pursued more cases against those who campaigned against abortion and sought longer prison sentences against them.
- [32:08]
Allison Gill
That's because there were more cases and they did worse things like.
- [32:13]
Andy McCabe
And there's probably way more. Well, maybe not anymore, but there were more abortion centers than anti abortion counseling centers.
- [32:23]
Allison Gill
There's more cases. That's why. That's why there was more cases, Andy, is. Because there were more cases. And, you know, I think it's, it's. We'll talk in a second about how Trump has weaponized the Face act to go after journalists. But the longer prison sentences. Congress sets sentencing guidelines. Judges hand out sentences. Is this a weaponization report against judges and juries and the Congress as well? Yes, I guess. The Trump administration used the same law to charge more than 30 people over protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement in January at a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota. Among those, Don Lemon. Free Don Lemon, Georgia Fort was another. Both have denied wrongdoing. Lemon said he was there covering the event as a journalist, and he was. The Justice Department's efforts to end what it calls weaponization of law, which is in quotes, weaponization of law enforcement, have moved on multiple tracks, some faster than others. Appearing at a conservative political conference in March, Todd Blanche declared, quote, there is not a single man or woman left at the department who had anything to do with the investigations of Trump. He estimated that more than 200 people had been fired or resigned as a consequence. The Trump administration also fired FBI agents who knelt when confronted by racial justice protesters in 2020, agents who investigated corruption cases involving Trump allies and agents and prosecutors who investigated and prosecuted January 6th rioters. There's also been the Mar A Lago prosecutors and agents that have been fired. And, I mean, it's just the, you know, the weaponization is pretty off the charts, like.
- [33:59]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, yeah, it is. And it's, you know, the, the end result is grinding up of people and their careers and their livelihood and their reputations, which apparently Todd Blanche thinks it's okay to, like, literally stand in front of a conference and beat his chest over and, like, brag about it. Throw the number out there. Over 200 people. Like, how. Oh, my, you know, so dignified. Such a great representative of the Department of Justice. Yeah.
- [34:32]
Allison Gill
I would expect nothing less from. From Mr. Blanche.
- [34:35]
Andy McCabe
Yep. For sure.
- [34:38]
Allison Gill
I do want to talk more about these firings and some additional firings down in Florida, but we have to take a quick break. Stick around. We'll be right back.
- [34:52]
Amanda Sturgill
It's no surprise that newsmakers try to manipulate the audience. They want you to believe that they are the one holding the line, and they'll use any trick they can to get you there.
- [35:00]
Allison Gill
But don't let them fool you.
- [35:02]
Amanda Sturgill
Get Unspun I'm Amanda Sturgel. I've been a reporter, and today I teach future reporters to cut the spin and think critically about what newsmakers say. My podcast, Unspun, shows you how to know when you're being manipulated by the news, learn to spot the tricks, and how to make up your own mind about what's true. So if you're tired of being fooled by the news, subscribe to UNSPUN today. Unspun because you deserve the truth.
- [35:34]
Andy McCabe
Welcome back. Okay, some more in depth reporting on the firings inside the Justice Department from Carol Lennig at msnow. At least four Justice Department prosecutors have recently been fired as part of the Trump administration's plan to publicly accuse the Biden administration of unfairly targeting anti abortion protesters for their religious beliefs, according to two people familiar with the firings and a Justice Department spokesperson. A DOJ spokesperson confirmed the firings on Monday when Ms. NOW asked them about them. The firings include that of a veteran Civil Rights Division prosecutor gentleman named Sanjay Patel, who led the team enforcing the FACE act and whom Trump aides had put on administrative leave in March amid the investigation of the medical clinic cases, according to two people familiar with the Removals
- [36:27]
Allison Gill
now, quote, doj has terminated the employment of personnel responsible for weaponizing the FACE act who still remained at the department. That's what a spokesperson told Carol Lennig over at Ms. Now. The firings, two people said, were coordinated with the Tuesday release of the report so the Justice Department could boast of firing people involved in alleged weaponization. That's what the Weaponization Working Group does, is it goes after, it goes after prosecutors for bogus things like we were talking about in the last segment there. Internal news of the firing spread inside the Justice Department and shook many employees already traumatized by the forced resignations and departures of hundreds of prosecutors whom Trump political appointees have pushed out of office in, in various ways. So much so that when we get to our Hit me in the head with a bat segment later in the show, these individual DOJ lawyers that are left are taking on hundreds and hundreds of cases because of the increase in immigration habeas petitions that are being filed. We've got people asking to be held in contempt so they can get some sleep. We have people resigning left and right because they can't take the pressure. We've got people at the Justice Department putting ads on Craigslist, Craigslist and posts on Twitter saying, hey, we really could use some lawyers. They've eliminated the one year of of experience necessary to, to become a Department of justice attorney. I mean, like, they're desperate to get more.
- [37:55]
Andy McCabe
Are you down for law? Down DFL Got your, got your, got your test results and your one year of experience. Do you down to prosecute dtp Slide into my dms. Oh, my God. What has.
- [38:14]
Allison Gill
Yeah,
- [38:16]
Andy McCabe
some resigned rather than to comply with orders to prosecute Trump, targeted critics, or other political tasks that the prosecutors believed were unethical and lacking in evidence. Some were terminated without cause, like the wide swath of prosecutors who sought to charge January 6th protesters who plotted violence and attacked law enforcement officers, or who investigated Donald Trump's mishandling and retention of classified documents after he left the White House in 2021.
- [38:45]
Allison Gill
There it is. And, and get this, Andy. And I'm gonna have to read this story because of things, so we'll talk about it in a second. But this is a related story from abc. A top career prosecutor in Miami has been removed from overseeing the Justice Department's investigation into former CIA chief John Brennan after she allegedly expressed doubts about the viability of the probe. That's according to two sources familiar with the matter, which confirmed it to ABC News. Attorneys for several subjects involved in the probe were informed Friday that Maria Medettis Long would no longer be handling the case. Moving forward, sources said. Do I. Am I pronouncing that correctly?
- [39:25]
Andy McCabe
I do not know.
- [39:27]
Allison Gill
Okay. Maria Medettis Long. The news, according to sources, took some attorneys by surprise, as there were additional interviews scheduled in the coming days as the department moves closer toward deciding whether to bring charges against Brennan. News of Long's departure was first reported by cnn. An attorney for Brennan did not immediately respond to ABC News's request for comment, and a DOJ spokesperson also didn't respond immediately. The investigation is believed to center around congressional testimony from Brennan about his role in crafting the 2017 assessment by the intelligence community that detailed Russia's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election to the benefit of President Donald Trump. Trump has long singled out Brennan, a vocal critic, as among those he believes was involved in illegally conspiring to accuse him of colluding with Russia, resulting in the special counsel probe that casts a cloud over much of Trump's first term in office. Brennan has denied wrongdoing and said he continues to stand by the 2017 IC assessment that's the intelligence community assessment that determined Russia's interference in the 2016 election was aimed at denigrating Hillary Clinton to the benefit of Trump's candidacy. A separate bipartisan report from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence affirmed those findings in a 2017 assessment. It was a five volume report led by Republicans in Congress. Now the probe of Brennan is part of a larger investigation being run out of the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of Florida. That Quinones guy, right. That sources say is examining whether former officials engaged in a grand conspiracy to violate Trump's rights dating back to his 2016 campaign for presidency. 2016, you say? Why wouldn't the statute of limitations have expired? Not somehow. If you rope the Mar A Lago raid into it and connect it somehow to what happened in 2016, even though it was all different people in fantasy
- [41:18]
Andy McCabe
land, nothing goes away.
- [41:20]
Allison Gill
And to call it a conspiracy so that you can go back to 2016 and tie it all in as a grand conspiracy, I just can't believe that a long time career prosecutor would say like you don't have a case here. Scores of subpoenas have been issued by the office in recent months to former officials previously involved in the Russia investigation, including Andrew McCabe, though the effort has yet to result in any criminal charges or any other allegations of wrongdoing. And some credible sources are reporting that this was a really pretty amazing career prosecutor that has now since been let go apparently because she alleged there's no viable case against Brennan and the 40 some others. I mean I remember there being a lawsuit for a grand conspiracy filed in the, in the Southern District of Florida, or was it the Middle District of Florida? Judge Middlebrook's Southern District of Florida. You were included in that lawsuit. Hillary Clinton, the Orbis guys, Christopher Steele, what's his name, from the oppo research firm, the Hillary Clinton campaign, like Pete struck everybody and gang's all there. Middlebrooks was like this is hilarious. Hahaha. Dismissed. And he tried to bring it back and he's like no, he was filing it in that district in hopes to get Eileen Cannon. And now as Bloomberg Law is reporting, apparently somebody who used to clerk for Eileen Cannon that was working at Main justice has been sent down to Quinones's office at the U.S. attorney to assist with this case. So it sounds like if, if you are a good, smart career prosecutor, you're out. If you're not willing to bring this to a grand jury, you're out.
- [43:12]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, I mean again, I don't, I'm not Commenting on this case. As you know, we've covered this before. I kind of have to stay out of this. But I will say that I think we have a couple of, like, little positive notes here. Not, not just in this story that you just read, but in other, other stories. I mean, like, look at the one. Look at the prosecutors, I think, here in D.C. who have said there's no case to bring against Joe Biden and his administration's use of the aut. Like, there are still some legitimate prosecutors, experienced people who are there to do the work properly, standing up periodically and saying, there's no case. We're not going to do this. There's nothing to investigate here. There's no case here now.
- [43:59]
Allison Gill
And we only hear about it when they're fired for saying they're fired.
- [44:02]
Andy McCabe
Right. They get fired for it, they lose assignments for it, whatever. They fall on the disfavored list, and they'll get pushed out sooner or later. But there are still at least some people around who are not going to compromise to please the Dear Leader. So that's a good sign.
- [44:18]
Allison Gill
I think that's a really good sign. And I imagine there were more good people than not in the Justice Department before Trump took office. So if you're going to empty everybody out of the Justice Department who refuses to bring terrible charges, kind of like John Hirschman said in that Oval Office meeting, you're going to be presiding over a graveyard, whoever is the new attorney
- [44:39]
Andy McCabe
general, a graveyard populated by people like Jeanine Pirro.
- [44:43]
Allison Gill
Right.
- [44:44]
Andy McCabe
You know, so that's not going anywhere. But anyway.
- [44:48]
Allison Gill
Yeah. All right. I mentioned. Hit me in the head with a bat. We have a pretty good one this week. We're going to talk about that and take listener questions after this break. Stick around. We'll be right back.
- [45:05]
Amanda Sturgill
It's no surprise that newsmakers try to manipulate the audience. They want you to believe that they are the one holding the line, and they'll use any trick they can to get you there.
- [45:14]
Allison Gill
But don't let them fool you.
- [45:15]
Amanda Sturgill
Get unspun. I'm Amanda Sturgill. I've been a reporter, and today I teach future reporters to cut the spin and think critically about what newsmakers say. My podcast, unspun, shows you how to know when you're being manipulated by the news. Learn to spot the tricks and how to make up your own mind about what's true. Spread. So if you're tired of being fooled by the news, subscribe to Unspun today. Unspun because you deserve the truth.
- [45:47]
Andy McCabe
Welcome back. Okay, time for hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Where we talk about the Justice Department's ongoing plan to completely destroy its credibility with the courts by, you know, damaging its own presumption of regularity. Okay, so this week's installment comes from Judge Troy Nunley in the Eastern District of California.
- [46:15]
Allison Gill
That's a great name. Like, I want to go. Like, that's Nunley your business.
- [46:22]
Andy McCabe
To be clear, despite what I just said, he didn't actually send this case to us. It didn't. Didn't come to us, like, from him. He was like, hey, this would be great. When I'll send my transcript over to.
- [46:32]
Allison Gill
Oh, that would be cool.
- [46:33]
Andy McCabe
That would be cool.
- [46:33]
Allison Gill
If we get judges to start. Hey, judges. I bet we've got a few judges, federal judges, who listen to the Unjustified podcast. If you've got a great example, if you've got a great submission for hit me in the head with a bat, feel free to send it our way. There's a link in the show notes.
- [46:46]
Andy McCabe
Heck yeah. Heck yeah, there's a link for that, you know, but other than that, you know, we. We find these little nuggets out there doing what we do during the week. But nevertheless, here's Judge Troy Nunley from the Eastern District of California. Quote, the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, and only those relevant to the issue currently before the court are reiterated here. On March 16, 2026, petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the lawfulness of his detention. This is obviously somebody who got picked up in an ICE raid, probably illegally, and is and is stuck in some sort of jail. Ish condition. On April 3, 2026, the court granted the petition ordering the petitioner's immediate release and directed respondents to file a notice certifying compliance by April 6, 2026. Respondents did not file a notice of compliance or seek an extension of time to do so.
- [47:44]
Allison Gill
All right, so April 3rd was the granting of the petition. Release him April 6th. They didn't hear back. On April 7th, the court ordered the respondents to show cause in writing as to why the respondents counsel should not be sanctioned in the amount of $250 for failure to follow this court's order in a timely file or timely file notice. The court noted this is not Respondents counsel's first failure to follow this court's orders. That same day, the petitioner filed a motion for return of his identification documents, noting that without his documents, he had difficulty traveling back from Bakersfield to his home in Utah upon his release, and he is likely to be rearrested by law enforcement or the department of homeland security if he's traveling without his documents. The court granted the petitioner's motion, ordered the respondents to return the petitioner's documents and possessions, including his passport and driver's license, and directed respondents to file a status update with the court by the end of the day on April 10th. They gave him three days again, and respondents again did not timely file a status update or seek an extension for time to do so.
- [48:44]
Andy McCabe
Respondents counsel describes that he has been assigned over 300 immigration habeas cases in the last three months, and as a result, dozens of responses and, quote, collateral responses are due daily. Oh, poor you. Respondents counsel contends juggling the tasks and deadlines can best be described as a triage, wherein getting petitioners released from custody is the absolute priority. Apparently not in this case. Ensuring a response to maintain the government's position in each case is the next priority. And, quote, court orders are also a high priority. So that's good to know. Respondents counsel concedes he has certainly missed a few deadlines, but argues each time was inadvertent.
- [49:30]
Allison Gill
Oh, oh, if it was inadvertent, then it's totally fine.
- [49:33]
Andy McCabe
I think at some point, when you're missing so many deadlines that you are, quote, unquote, certainly missing deadlines, it's no longer inadvertent. It's just wildly reckless and irresponsible at that point.
- [49:46]
Allison Gill
Yeah. The judge here. Nunley. Nunley business. Says the court is not persuaded that sanctions should not be issued. The court issued a clear and unambiguous directive requiring respondents counsel to certify petitioners released from custody. Respondents counsel failed to do so within the time required. Moreover, while the question of sanctions was pending before this court, Respondents counsel again failed to timely file a status report as ordered in the same case. While the court recognizes that mistakes can occur, repeated violations of court orders cannot be excused as mere oversight. Such conduct wastes judicial resources, delays proceedings, and undermines the orderly administration of justice. An attorney's duty to the court includes diligence, responsiveness, and strict adherence to court directives. Respondents counsel has fallen short of these standards. Accordingly, the court finds sanctions are warranted. So we've got contempt sanctions. It's $250 fine. It's largely symbolic, but they're starting to add up now. Well, you know, we had that one guy get fined, I think, $500 a day in Minneapolis until he complied with the court orders. So I think we're gonna start seeing this more and more. But, Andy, the fact that one guy's got 300 cases in a normal functioning government, it would be like if all of a sudden, because you've gutted the Department of Veterans affairs, that a doctor goes from having 12 patients at a time to 100 patients at a time.
- [51:17]
Andy McCabe
Exactly.
- [51:17]
Allison Gill
And you just simply can't let that happen.
- [51:21]
Andy McCabe
And let's not forget that this is a problem 100% of the government's making.
- [51:27]
Allison Gill
Right.
- [51:28]
Andy McCabe
You can't. It's a. It's a. It's a massive, kind of complicated pipeline. Right. With the immigration process with all kinds of bends and kinks and turns in it. And so you can't just send thousands of newly minted agents out onto the street and tell them to pick up 3,000 people a day and start shoving all that volume into the pipeline and expect that the system isn't going to completely break down at some point. And here. What bothers me, and this is my only. This would be my only critique to Judge Nunley when he is listing, like, what happens, the negative things that happen as a result of repeated violations of court orders, wasting judicial resources, delaying proceedings, undermining orderly administration, justice, yada, yada. Nowhere in there does he say, and you're continuing to violate the rights and ruin the lives of the people that you have wrongfully detained. Like, that's the point here. Like, this guy, he gets let out and he can't get home because he doesn't have his driver's license, his passport, which, by the way, he needs to keep from getting locked up again. Yeah. This is. The government created this problem, and they failed to put the staff and the resources behind it to run it at the level that they have chosen to run it. So it's just going to be chaos and confusion as a result.
- [52:53]
Allison Gill
Yeah. And it's. As a former government employee, it's so weird and counterintuitive to allow such a insane workload on individual government employees. Like, it just. It just. It literally blows my mind. And. And Todd Blanche doesn't care. Pam Bondi. They don't care. They're trying to dismantle the Department of Justice. So when you're. When your goal is to cause this kind of chaos and disrupt the system and dismantle justice, they're reaching their goal.
- [53:31]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, for sure. Every day a little bit closer. So.
- [53:34]
Allison Gill
Yeah. All right. So thank you very much. For hitting me in the head with bat today. Again, if you've got anything that you want to draw our attention to, if you're a judge and you feel like you could really use to be hit the head with a bat, send it to us. There's a link in the show notes, and that's also where we get listener questions. And we have a couple today, right, Andy?
- [53:53]
Andy McCabe
We do. This first one is just kind of funny. It's a very quick answer for the question that comes at the end, but it's from Laura. She starts out, hello, Andy. Thank you for the beautiful job that you and Allison do every week in breaking down all things justice to make the topic more palatable, I recently watched you in String Theory. What? Your enthusiasm for the guitar really comes out. By the way, the MSW Nation really stepped up here. The downloads for String Theory last weekend were off the charts. I mean, it was amazing. My. My partners are ecstatic, so thank you for that.
- [54:25]
Allison Gill
Incredible.
- [54:26]
Andy McCabe
Laura goes on to say, would you please consider playing one of your guitars during an upcoming happy hour and crooning for us. Laura, I am so sorry, but the answer is a resounding no. I feel like I really don't want to go viral in that way. I'm kind of shy when it comes to playing the guitar.
- [54:46]
Allison Gill
And you're in a documentary.
- [54:48]
Andy McCabe
I know, but I'm just. I don't play in it. I just kind of talk.
- [54:53]
Allison Gill
Yeah,
- [54:55]
Andy McCabe
I was. That was my. That was my role in being in it. I was like, no, I am absolutely not playing a guitar in your documentary. So, anyways, you should.
- [55:05]
Allison Gill
You should talk to somebody about this shyness, see if you can overcome it.
- [55:10]
Andy McCabe
I'm such a shy person. I guess only in that one way. But anyway, everybody's got to keep something to themselves. But thank you, Laura, and thank you, everybody for the support. It was amazing. There's a lot of people that wrote in making comments about the doc, and it was great. So thanks for that.
- [55:30]
Allison Gill
Amazing.
- [55:31]
Andy McCabe
All right, let's get back to business here. This one comes from someone who did not want to share their name. They said, thanks so much for everything that you all have done. I am much better informed because of the hard work that you do. Recently, I've seen news about ICE officers getting challenge coins for participants participating in the Minneapolis Operation Metro surge. With this and Cash Patel's personalized challenge coin, this has been a norm. Is this an. Has this been a normal part of government? It says government agents, but I think they mean, like, what government agents do. Do agents Collect these coins for the jobs they do.
- [56:07]
Allison Gill
So you know about a million challenge coins from working in the government?
- [56:11]
Andy McCabe
Yeah, usually it's like the unit that you're assigned to the squad you're on. Maybe the field office that you work out of has a challenge co. And it's very common in law enforcement and military circles to, like, when you meet someone, you exchange challenge coins. And over the course of your career, you accumulate a lot of them. Sometimes, like, they'll produce a challenge coin for, like, a specific event that you worked or an operation or something. The idea that you've got guys walking around brandishing coins, happy about having participated in terrorizing a city, killing two innocent citizens, and locking up a bunch of people is kind of amazing to me. It's a bad look for an organization that really doesn't need another bad look right now. But it is. It is kind of. It's a law enforcement and military cultural thing, right? Yeah.
- [57:06]
Allison Gill
I'm sure the secret service had challenge coins, but. Or the secret police, probably the Gestapo had some challenge coins. But, like, here's the thing. I've got a ton of them. But again, Andy, like you said, it's for doing cool stuff or for being part of a unit. So it's. While I'm in total agreement with you, while it's not. Well, it's unsurprising because it's very common in military and law enforcement circles. It's gross in this particular case, but I remember when I went to the Pentagon, as with my job when I was working at the va, we got to go see, like, kind of really cool inner spaces in the Pentagon, and we went to the army secretary's office, and on the desk of the army secretary, big wooden desk under a giant, big piece of glass. Hundreds of challenge. Oh, yeah, From.
- [57:57]
Andy McCabe
I've definitely seen that before. I remember meeting with the guy, the commander of Northcom out in Colorado, and same thing. Every table in his massive office had the glass, and under the glass was just. It was just chock a block with.
- [58:12]
Allison Gill
I've seen guys that do, like, floors. Like, you know how you see, like, the clear floors? Acrylic floors. Yeah, like rocks or stones or pennies or whatever. I've seen entire, like, floors of challenge coins.
- [58:28]
Andy McCabe
It's crazy.
- [58:30]
Allison Gill
So, yeah, like, I've got. I traded. I've traded coins with Harry Dunn, Sergeant Canal. I've traded coins with, like, a. You know, a bunch of people. Of course, our. Our coins were Mueller. She wrote coins. You know, like what. But we had them at work, too. But yeah, this is. This. This is gross bad.
- [58:47]
Andy McCabe
Look, and it's the challenge. The history is you're in the bar, you see someone, you. You challenge them to see if they have their coin with them, the coin of their unit that they're assigned to. And if they can't produce it, then they have to buy your drink. Yep. And if they can produce it, you have to buy theirs. That's. That's the challenge part.
- [59:05]
Allison Gill
Part. Aha. That's why it's called a challenge coin.
- [59:08]
Andy McCabe
There you go.
- [59:09]
Allison Gill
You're challenging someone for a drink. Interesting.
- [59:12]
Andy McCabe
Yeah. Okay, so last question. This one comes to us from Sarin, and Sarin says, are there laws that individual states can pass that would give those states the ability to block any potential raid and theft of voter rolls or ballots by the government?
- [59:29]
Allison Gill
So.
- [59:30]
Andy McCabe
Good question. I'm not so sure about. It'd be hard for me to say what individual. What laws individual states need. But I do believe that states can absolutely push back on the government, the federal government's efforts to take these materials. So if the federal government comes rolling in with a search warrant, I think if the state has the wherewithal and the courage to refuse to comply and goes immediately to federal court to challenge the warrant, I think that that's a potential path of getting in front of a judge and making the argument that this is improper and the government has overreached into what is a state function which is running the elections.
- [60:23]
Allison Gill
Yeah. And it's going to be interesting to see how it plays out in Georgia now. You know, with Harmeet Dhillon filing lawsuits to get voter rolls. She's 0 for 5, by the way, in the 31, the 31 cases she's filed, Mark Elias has won every single one of those. So. But then she turns to a warrant signed by a magistrate judge under false pretenses. And we didn't get to hear from that in the Georgia case. We didn't get to hear testimony from that particular affiant who wrote the declaration to get the. The warrant signed. The FBI agent didn't have to testify. And it's gonna. It's an uphill battle because of. And we just came, you know, just came right out of the hit me in the head with a bat segment. The presumption of regularity granted the Department of Justice by the court saying, well, if the Department of Justice said there was a predicate to open an investigation and there was a warrant signed by a magistrate judge, they're going to have a hard time, I think in Georgia getting their ballots back from the federal government because, you know, the burden is on Georgia to prove that this is malicious and, you know, part of a, an attempt to interfere in elections. So, but like we've been watching this play out, right? First of all, they filed their TUI requests and those were denied. And after those were denied, they filed their lawsuit. And after that was turned down, then, then they filed a different lawsuit and now they're to try to get that information from, from the Department of Justice who went out. And you know, they, by the way, Hermeet Dylan said we're not giving you that because it's privileged, but there's interviews of her out there giving the privileged information on the timeline of events, waiving the privilege. But then the court said, no, they don't really have to hand this over, but maybe there's another way you can get at it. It's an uphill battle. But ultimately one of these cases is going to get to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court is going to decide, have to decide if the Constitution draws a large line between state run elections and the executive branch. Just much like Chief Judge Pryor in the 11th Circuit did in the Mark Meadows case. Remember when Mark Meadows wanted to move his Fulton county case to federal court and the judge said, well, not only is this only for current officers, that kind of protection to move stuff to federal court, but you don't have a job overseeing elections as the chief of staff, the president, nobody in the executive branch has a job. But Donald Trump is arguing that his constitutional duty to see that the laws are faithfully executed somehow gives him control over elections. And the Supreme Court at some point is going to have to decide that regardless of whether a state passes a law to stop them from doing this. But I will tell you this, Sarin, I spoke to Jocelyn Benson last February and Adam Schiff came out and said it again Today on Scott McFarland show that they have been tabletop secretaries of state, Democratic secretaries of state and election officials have been tabletopping scenarios in which the DoD or the DHS or ICE comes in and tries to confiscate voting rolls and ballots and tabulator machines. They've been tabletopping what to do for a while now. So they're, they're preparing.
- [63:54]
Andy McCabe
Yeah. I mean, look, I don't mean to suggest that there's an easy legal path for them to do that, but they have to be aggressive and they got to be courageous and willing to lean forward and oppose it in every way. They can rush into court court filing for restraining orders and and injunctions immediately. Because I agree with you, once you lose custody of those things, very hard to get it back. And every time another state or another county goes that way, you're really starting to establish something of a precedent. So it's important. So important. I mean. I mean, huge props to Mark Elias and all the lawyers like him who see the importance of, like, fighting every one of these battles all across the. All across the scope of the war.
- [64:43]
Allison Gill
Before we get out of here, Andy, I just got a text message from our friend Brian Greer, who used to do our. Oh, yeah, was it sipa?
- [64:51]
Andy McCabe
King of sipa.
- [64:53]
Allison Gill
Yeah. Former chief of Staff to general Counsel at the CIA. Right.
- [64:58]
Andy McCabe
Yep.
- [64:59]
Allison Gill
He says he sent me a post that he just put up on social media that said, because the screenwriters like to constantly fuck with us, I give you the new prosecutor in the Brennan Russia conspiracy case. Quote. Delorens previously served as a law clerk for U.S. district Judge Eileen Cannon in Florida when she presided over the prosecution of Trump during the Biden administration for hands handling of classified information. Cannon dismissed the case after ruling that the appointment of special counsel leading the probe was unconstitutional. So this is Brian Greer's way of saying, hi, everyone,
- [65:32]
Andy McCabe
and.
- [65:32]
Allison Gill
And, boy, do we miss having a SEPA section that we get to talk about.
- [65:36]
Andy McCabe
We're gonna come up with some SIPA stories just to get Brian in here. For sure. For sure.
- [65:42]
Allison Gill
All right. Yeah. And, you know, back to the other thing. I totally agree with you, Andy. I wasn't suggesting that. You were suggesting.
- [65:49]
Andy McCabe
It was. Oh, of course.
- [65:50]
Allison Gill
Fully like the way Fulton county is handling this, I think is important, and I think there's some shenanigans going on in Maricopa county as well. And. And I think Chris Mays and Secretary of State and Adrian Fontes need to of it. Like you said, very, very important. Thank you for your questions. Again, there's a link in the show notes to submit your questions or judges, if. Judges. If you're listening and you have a hit me in the head with a bat example you'd like to send in, you can use that link as well.
- [66:17]
Andy McCabe
That's right.
- [66:17]
Allison Gill
We love to hear from you and of course, we'll keep you anonymous.
- [66:20]
Andy McCabe
Of course. Of course we will.
- [66:22]
Allison Gill
Of course. All right, everybody, That's. That's the show for the week. We kept it around an hour this time. I'm pretty proud of that.
- [66:29]
Andy McCabe
Nice.
- [66:30]
Allison Gill
Doesn't always work out that way, but do you have any. Anything else you wanted to talk about
- [66:34]
Andy McCabe
before we get out? I'm not gonna break the time. Limit either. But yeah, anxious to be back here. Going through it all again next week. So see you then.
- [66:42]
Allison Gill
Yeah, we'll see you next week. I'm Alison Gill.
- [66:44]
Andy McCabe
I'm Andy McCabe.
- [66:46]
Allison Gill
Unjustified is written and executive produced by Allison Gill with additional research and analysis by Andrew McCabe. Sound design and editing is by Molly Hockey with art and web design by Joelle Reader at Moxie Design Studios. The theme music for Unjustified is written, performed by Ben Folds and the show is a proud member of the MSW Media Network, a collection of creator owned independent podcasts dedicated to news, politics and justice. For more information, Please visit msw media.com.
- [67:14]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
Hi, I'm Frances Collier. And I'm Angela V. Shelton. And we're Frangela. You know what you need in your life? The Final Word podcast. Yes, you do. That's right. It is the final word on all things political and pop cultural, where we make real news, real funny, where we inspire you so you can resist. Subscribe and get a new episode of the Final Word podcast each week. It's the news we think you need to hear. That's right. We think you need to hear it.
- [67:42]
Allison Gill
Okay. Yeah.
- [67:43]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
It's what we say.
- [67:43]
Allison Gill
So.
- [67:44]
Frangela (Frances Collier and Angela V. Shelton)
That's right. And because all we do is give. Every Thursday, you can listen to our hysterical podcast, Idiot of the Week. We round up the stupid. Because you know what? Somebody has to.
- [67:54]
Allison Gill
Okay. All we do is give.