0:02

Hey there, hashtag sisters-in-law listeners.

0:04

This is Kimberly Atkins-Store. I've mentioned

0:07

my love of fashion here. And this week I

0:09

published a deep dive in Boston Globe

0:11

Opinion about environmental justice

0:13

in the fashion industry. You can hear

0:15

me talk about it on the Globe's Say More

0:17

podcast, where I discuss loving

0:20

fashion while still protecting the planet

0:22

and the people in it. Check out the episode

0:24

of Say More with Charlene Young wherever

0:27

you get your podcasts.

0:40

Welcome back to hashtag

0:43

sisters-in-law with Joanne Banks,

0:45

Barb McQuaid, Joyce Vance, and me,

0:47

Kimberly Atkins-Store. And

0:50

this week we are so thankful

0:52

to our wonderful listeners.

0:55

You know what? We wanted to spend the

0:57

whole hour answering your

1:00

questions. We say it's our favorite part of

1:02

the show, and it really,

1:04

really is. We have been compiling

1:08

some of the questions that you sent

1:10

us, and we're going to tackle them all

1:12

for the entire show. But

1:15

before we start, it's also important

1:17

to remember this is the season to

1:19

get your hashtag sisters-in-law

1:22

merch. We have hoodies for those

1:25

cold nights. We have t-shirts,

1:27

and we have a brand new

1:30

mug. It's a perfect stocking stuffer

1:33

or just something to have a little spice

1:36

tea by the fire. Just click

1:38

the link in the show notes or go to politicon.com

1:41

slash merch right now.

1:43

Before we get to all of your wonderful

1:45

questions,

1:48

we've had our turkey dinners. Everybody's

1:51

all satisfied, but this is actually

1:53

my favorite time. It's leftover

1:56

time. And so I want to know what

1:58

is your favorite

1:59

time of the week? is the best Thanksgiving

2:02

leftover meal to you. I'll start.

2:05

So it is, you take the dinner roll,

2:08

you split it in half and you toast that puppy.

2:11

And you do a layer, in this order,

2:14

a layer of cranberry sauce, very

2:16

thin. A layer of

2:18

dressing or stuffing, whatever you got. A

2:21

very thin slice of turkey.

2:24

I'm not the biggest turkey fan, but in this, I

2:26

like it. And then you put the

2:28

top of the roll on. You

2:30

have some gravy on the side, like an au

2:32

jus, and you dip and bite. What

2:36

do you call this concoction? Does this have a name? You

2:38

know, I'll call it the smoosh sandwich. You

2:40

just smoosh it and you dip it.

2:42

I'm very well maybe eating that, your

2:45

listeners, as you're listening to this

2:47

episode, because I love it so

2:49

much. Barb, what's your leftover pleasure?

2:53

Yeah, you know, I can't do that because I don't, I'm

2:55

like the kid in third grade who doesn't like their food to touch.

2:58

It's tall. You don't like my puppy. You don't like

3:00

that either. Yeah, I like all the taste, but I

3:02

like them all separately. Now, my leftover

3:05

manna is pie. I can

3:07

eat it for any meal. And it turns out

3:09

it's not just for breakfast anymore.

3:11

We are

3:13

big on pie at our house for Thanksgiving.

3:15

There was pumpkin, there was apple,

3:18

there was something called Michigan for

3:20

berry, which is awfully good. And

3:23

I've been eating that like it's going out of style, but

3:26

it is just delicious. So I could do pie.

3:29

Pie at Thanksgiving doesn't count for calories.

3:32

And so I just eat to my heart's content

3:34

until it's gone. That's scientifically proven.

3:37

What about you, Joe? So I'm not

3:39

a sandwich

3:39

fan, but I love all

3:42

the side

3:44

servings of anything. I love

3:46

the stuffing. I love the sweet

3:48

potatoes. I love cranberry

3:51

sauce. And in my family, no

3:53

meal is complete without a jello mold.

3:56

And I always make extras of those.

3:58

I make a lime. and pear and

4:01

cream cheese mold and a cranberry

4:03

mold. I also make cranberry chutney

4:05

because I love cranberries and you

4:07

can only really get them at this time of year. And

4:10

the only thing I would disagree with you Barb is

4:13

for me key lime tart is the

4:15

best dessert for Thanksgiving

4:18

or basically for any time that or lemon

4:20

meringue, but I make key lime tart. Joyce,

4:23

what about you? So, you

4:25

know, Julie, you actually inspired

4:27

me this year and I made a lemon sherry

4:30

jello mold, which was a big

4:32

favorite. I tested it in advance, made

4:35

another one on the big day. It

4:37

would have been really great as leftovers

4:40

except that there was nothing left. We

4:42

do Thanksgiving

4:44

with our two couple best friends and

4:46

extended family. This year we were actually

4:48

over 30 people. So

4:51

I am this morning in

4:53

hopes of having something that approaches leftovers,

4:56

making another turkey, little

4:58

bit more dressing, some more cranberry

5:01

sauce. And we are gonna do the whole thing over

5:04

again because you just can't have enough Thanksgiving.

5:07

Love it.

5:08

Oh my goodness, all that sounds so

5:10

good. My personal favorite pie is

5:12

the one that I make every year, which is sweet potato.

5:15

And so I have

5:16

a slice of that right after my

5:18

sandwich. And I am a happy

5:20

camper. So I'm

5:23

really hungry now.

5:24

And in that recipe, it sounds really

5:26

good. We had a kabucha squash

5:28

pie from our favorite bakery. Not

5:32

something I would have ever thought to make, stunningly

5:34

delicious. I'm gonna

5:35

try to recreate it next year.

5:38

So here's another recommendation, a Watergate

5:41

salad, but you freeze it

5:44

and then you can use it as a dessert. And there

5:46

is such a thing as a Watergate salad.

5:49

It's with pistachio pudding

5:52

mix and pineapple, and

5:55

some other stuff that I can't remember right now. It's

5:58

leaked. But I'm really... I

6:00

see all the water. I

6:04

was going to say, and then when you finish, you find

6:06

a bag of money. I

6:09

wish, yes. Hey

6:21

Barb, you know, I've been thinking about

6:23

bacon. Do you ever do that? You

6:26

know, sometimes when my mind drifts to

6:28

a faraway place, it

6:30

lands on bacon. I don't make a lot of

6:32

bacon, but I have been making bacon recently

6:35

because kids are home for

6:37

the Thanksgiving holidays. And

6:40

the best bacon out there, of course, is

6:42

Moink bacon. Let me tell

6:44

you about Moink, Kim. From small family

6:46

farms to your dining table, Moink,

6:49

also known as Moo Plus Oink,

6:52

get it, gives you access

6:54

to the freshest, sustainably sourced

6:56

meat and fish, all while supporting

6:59

American family farms. You can

7:01

help save the family farm and get

7:03

access to the highest quality meat on earth

7:06

when you join the Moink movement today.

7:09

Moink delivers grass-fed and grass-finished

7:12

beef and lamb, pastured pork

7:14

and chicken, and sustainable wild-caught

7:17

Alaskan salmon straight to your door. Moink

7:20

farmers farm like our grandparents'

7:22

generation did. And as a result,

7:25

Moink meat tastes like it should.

7:27

The Moink difference is a difference you

7:30

can literally taste. And you can

7:32

feel good knowing you're helping family farms

7:34

stay financially independent, too. You

7:37

are in charge of the meat delivered in every

7:39

box. You can pick ribeyes or

7:42

pork chops, juicy chicken breasts

7:44

or salmon fillets, and much, much more.

7:47

Plus, you can cancel any time.

7:50

I really like their chicken breasts and their

7:52

fishes. The salmon fillets are

7:54

so easy to cook and delicious. Shark

7:57

Tank host Kevin O'Leary called Moink's

7:59

Baking.

7:59

bacon, the best bacon he's ever tasted,

8:02

and Ring Doorbell founder,

8:04

Jamie Simenoff, jumped at the chance

8:06

to invest in Moint. Plus, they

8:08

guarantee you'll say something I love saying

8:11

and Barb hates, which is, oink,

8:14

oink, I'm just so happy I got Moint. You'll

8:16

love it like we do. It's the perfect

8:19

option for a family meal or a party.

8:21

So y'all, as soon as we finish taping

8:23

tonight, I'm making pasta carbonara because

8:26

like Barb, my kids are all starting to come

8:28

home, using Moink bacon

8:30

as the base for it. I've done it before. It's

8:33

always great. Keep American

8:35

farming going by signing up at moinkbox.com

8:38

slash sisters. Right now, listeners

8:41

of the show get

8:41

free ground beef for a year.

8:43

That's one year of the best ground

8:45

beef you'll ever taste, but only

8:47

for a limited time. It's spelled

8:50

M-O-I-N-K box

8:52

dot com slash sisters. That's

8:55

moinkbox.com slash sisters

8:57

and you can find the link in our show notes. I

9:00

don't normally eat bacon, but I

9:02

was at a buffet lunch

9:05

and they served a

9:07

candied peppered bacon,

9:10

which I just got the recipe for and

9:12

I can't wait to open my Moink bacon

9:14

to try it.

9:17

It was amazing. That's good.

9:30

Okay. So our first question

9:32

comes from AZ West fan

9:35

who asks, and AZ

9:37

West fan is a super fan and we appreciate

9:39

that. The question is, I've been

9:42

listening to your podcast since the very beginning,

9:44

seeing you in person. Thank you so much

9:46

for coming and I'm addicted, but

9:48

I'd like to hear how the four of you got together

9:51

to start the podcast. I vaguely remember

9:53

you talking about it at the beginning, but

9:55

could you give us a recap? It's

9:58

been a minute. Who wants

10:00

to start with that one? OK,

10:03

I'll go first and everybody

10:05

else give your memories. But

10:07

a couple of us had met

10:09

in the green room

10:10

and we just liked each other.

10:12

And we obviously had similar views,

10:15

not always agreeing, but always

10:17

being sort of in the ballpark. And

10:19

I think it was really fans who started

10:21

saying, you should really do something

10:24

together. And so

10:26

that's how it got started. And there

10:29

was even an original picture

10:32

of us side by side

10:34

that someone had drawn for us. And

10:36

it really inspired us to get going. Yeah,

10:39

it's the fans who came up with the hashtag

10:42

sisters in law. We didn't even come up with that. That

10:44

was very organic from MSNBC

10:47

viewers. And we thought it was

10:49

perfect. And we weren't

10:51

with that. It's interesting because I

10:53

had met Barb and Joyce in

10:57

the green rooms. And we had become

10:59

friendly. But I had never met

11:01

Jill Wine Banks in person until

11:04

we actually started the

11:06

podcast. And she was in D.C.

11:08

and we had lunch and I was starstruck. But

11:11

she is as

11:12

sweet and delightful as she comes

11:14

across every week. And we

11:17

were fast friends. And so it's

11:18

been great. You know, it's so funny. Barb and I

11:20

were U.S. attorneys together. And

11:23

there's this great picture. The one time

11:25

our class of U.S. attorneys met

11:27

Barack Obama, something like 93 or 94

11:30

of us, all at one time he spoke

11:33

to us. We didn't really meet him individually. But

11:35

he took a group photo. And Barb

11:37

has one arm of his around her. And

11:40

I'm on his other side. And

11:42

it's such a great photo. We were, I

11:44

think, the two shortest of the U.S. attorneys

11:46

or close to it. Yeah, I think that's how

11:48

we get plucked out to see. I mean,

11:50

it's true. The one time being short was an

11:53

advantage. But people chronically

11:55

confused. You know, we both have four kids. We're

11:57

both short. We have sort of short brown hair.

12:00

that's fantastically gorgeous. And

12:03

so I always look at that picture, which

12:05

is in my office, and it makes

12:07

me feel so lucky all these years

12:09

down the road that we're all still

12:11

working together. Yeah,

12:14

I have the same picture, Joyce, although I've cropped

12:16

out everybody else to make it look like it was just you, me,

12:18

and Barack. You're hanging out with

12:20

the president at one time. That's

12:22

the way to do it. So this is why we're so

12:24

thankful to our fans because they come up

12:26

with ideas like this, but it's also why

12:29

I'm so thankful for all of you because

12:32

the three of you enrich my life every

12:34

single week. You stimulate my

12:37

brain. You challenge me. And

12:39

I really love being with

12:41

you every week. Oh. So

12:44

our next question comes to us from Tish, who

12:47

asks, can you please explain

12:49

why the rules are different between

12:51

civil and criminal trials? Tish,

12:54

that's a great question. I'll start, but others might want

12:56

to chime in on this. I think part

12:58

of it is two very different interests

13:01

are at stake in a civil case. What's

13:03

at stake is usually money or an injunctive

13:05

order. What's at stake in a criminal

13:08

case is a person's liberty.

13:11

And so that brings with it a number of

13:13

constitutional protections, like

13:16

the right to confront witnesses against

13:18

you, the right to an attorney, the

13:22

right to a public trial, the right

13:24

against self-incrimination. And

13:26

those are there because we have

13:28

a system in the criminal justice system that

13:30

is adversarial and

13:33

it requires the prosecution to prove

13:35

the case. And we

13:38

have adopted as a matter of due process

13:40

that beyond a reasonable doubt standard. So

13:43

I think because they really are very different

13:45

things that are going on in a civil case versus a criminal

13:47

case, we have different rules

13:49

and different standards in those kinds of cases.

13:52

Others have thoughts? I

13:55

took the question more literally. I like your answer better than

13:57

mine, but I was just gonna comment that

13:59

there. actually a formal set of rules

14:02

and they're separate. There's federal rules of criminal

14:04

procedure for criminal cases,

14:07

federal rules of civil procedure for civil

14:09

cases. Most states replicate

14:11

that for state rules, which means for

14:13

our listeners, if you're ever interested

14:16

in looking at a rule in a case,

14:18

you can actually Google. You can go federal

14:21

rules of criminal procedure guilty pleas

14:23

and probably get more than you ever

14:25

wanted to know about how guilty plea procedure

14:27

works. It's a great tool. I'm

14:30

going to take a question from Rich in Oregon

14:33

because I hope he was at

14:36

our show in Oregon where we loved

14:38

the audience. He says in 2023

14:40

we could have

14:43

AI create an actual performance

14:46

of the trial. I assume he means

14:48

the Donald Trump trial that

14:50

won't be televised unless some miracle

14:53

happens. And he goes on

14:55

where simulations of the participants

14:58

spoken in their own voices could happen.

15:01

And he asked, do you think that's scary? And

15:03

I don't think it's scary as long

15:05

as it is clearly labeled as

15:08

a simulation, not as real.

15:11

It has to be properly identified.

15:14

I wish there were cameras because nothing

15:17

will be as accurate

15:20

in reproducing the language

15:22

of the trial and the meaning

15:24

of the words and the performance

15:27

by the witnesses, their body language. That's

15:29

the best thing. But I do think it's important

15:32

for people to hear in a more

15:34

meaningful way than just reading

15:36

a transcript or hearing a reporter report.

15:39

Jill, can I ask you a question, a legal question?

15:42

Because I would be kind of creeped out if

15:44

I heard my voice being

15:47

simulated on AI and

15:49

broadcast in some way.

15:51

What about the right to one's own

15:54

likeness and publicity? You

15:57

know, does that come

15:59

privacy

15:59

rights in any way. Do those things come into

16:02

play? Maybe not. I mean, maybe it's just me kind

16:04

of creeped out by it, but is there a real

16:06

legal issue here? First of all, you're a member,

16:08

aren't you, of SAG or one of the unions?

16:11

I was, yes. You were. So you would

16:13

have been protected because the new contract

16:16

says something about AI

16:18

reproducing and what you have to get. I was

16:23

actually not a character, but

16:25

I was in a Michael

16:28

Moore movie, much to my shock

16:30

and surprise, without any permission. Wait,

16:32

I'm sorry. Wait,

16:33

do we have a new job? You were in

16:35

a Michael Moore movie? Were you

16:37

in Roger and me? Were you in me? No,

16:40

I was in Fahrenheit 9-11, and

16:42

I had no knowledge of this,

16:44

but I was sitting in the movie

16:45

theater. This was pre-COVID, where I actually went to

16:48

movies,

16:48

and all of a sudden, there I

16:50

was on screen, giving

16:53

some commentary. I don't remember

16:55

what the question was. I was shocked, and

16:57

I called my lawyer and said, can they do that? He

17:00

said, yeah, they can. They just took it from

17:02

MSNBC. I said, doesn't MSNBC have

17:04

some rights?

17:05

He said, no, they don't.

17:09

That was an actual real reproduction.

17:11

It was an actual filming

17:14

and was portrayed as me being me.

17:17

But it was still quite a surprise.

17:20

And yes, I think those questions have to be worked

17:22

out, whether anyone would object to

17:25

it. Maybe it's something, remember, at

17:27

least some of the participants want this to be

17:29

televised, so they might agree

17:32

to it. And there would be no harm in

17:34

someone reading without a visual

17:37

element the transcript of the other

17:39

people. So let's say that Jack Smith, who has opposed

17:42

the televising of the trial,

17:44

says, no, I don't want any of my people

17:47

to be shown. Well, then it could

17:49

be read. There's no question that

17:51

a transcript can be read. So

17:54

that might be a way around it. And that

17:57

is still better than having nothing.

18:00

Better is actually seeing it

18:02

live. That would be the best. But

18:04

I think it's a great idea to try something like

18:06

that to have people really see

18:09

it will miss body language. There's no question.

18:12

And it would have to be an accurate portrayal. So

18:14

that's one thing I would worry about. You know, what really

18:16

concerns me here though, is the risk of

18:19

deep fake. Can't you just see some

18:21

malicious actor coming up

18:23

with a deep fake, maybe of one of the trials

18:25

that's broad pastored or maybe of one that's not

18:28

foisting it off on people who maybe

18:30

aren't up to speed and what should be available

18:33

and trying to convince them that stuff happened

18:36

that doesn't, I mean, I think at some point there's

18:38

going to have to be some sort

18:40

of legislation about deep fakes. But

18:43

the problem is how do you identify

18:45

them? How do you regulate them on social media?

18:47

I think it's going to be a big problem. I

18:51

agree with you completely on that. And that's why

18:53

I started by saying it has to have

18:55

a constant film over it saying this

18:58

is a reproduction. This is

19:00

a simulation, whatever the proper, most

19:03

compelling words are to make sure that no

19:05

one thinks it's real. Yeah.

19:08

Did you folks see that, um, uh, meta,

19:10

you know, Facebook and Instagram

19:13

and threads, I guess, has, um,

19:15

announced a policy for this upcoming election

19:18

that, um, any

19:20

deep ads, political ads using

19:22

deep fakes have to be labeled so

19:25

that the public knows that it's a deep fake. So

19:28

maybe steps, but at the start enforcing

19:30

that will be tricky because bad

19:33

actors in this field aren't going to identify

19:35

it. And how are people going to know? So

19:37

we got a whole series of questions y'all

19:40

about judge Eileen Cannon and

19:42

whether recusal is a possibility at

19:44

this point. We got one question

19:46

from someone named Joyce. So I'll start

19:48

there. She asked, what would the

19:50

process be to replace judge Cannon

19:53

in Florida? And do you think that will

19:55

happen? There was also one from

19:57

Maria and Albuquerque, New Mexico. She

20:00

asked whether the 11th circuit could take

20:02

the trump case away from canon without

20:04

jack smith appealing it based on

20:07

her poor decisions And

20:09

then warm monkey asked is

20:11

there any legal path for jack smith

20:13

to get canon to step aside? So

20:16

what do y'all think what would you do if you were

20:18

litigating this case? I

20:20

don't think it's there yet, but you know, I she

20:22

has certainly made some decisions

20:24

that are concerning The the worst

20:26

one of course was last summer when she

20:29

allowed donald trump to file a separate lawsuit

20:31

to Challenge a search warrant. I mean that just

20:33

is not how it's done And the fact that

20:35

she entertained that lawsuit for as long as she did I

20:37

think is what caused everyone to be

20:40

very suspicious Of everything

20:42

she has done thereafter so far.

20:44

She hasn't done anything Awful,

20:47

she hasn't violated the law in any way I

20:49

think the one thing that she has done that has caused a

20:51

great deal of concern Is her

20:53

refusal to?

20:55

Accept jack smith's proposal

20:58

to ask donald trump to identify

21:00

which classified documents he's going to use at trial

21:03

By this december so that they can begin

21:06

their process of figuring out

21:08

how they're going to handle classified information in

21:10

the case Instead she said we

21:12

can talk about that in march. Um And

21:15

you know with a trial date in may Um

21:17

delaying that decision until march makes

21:20

it seem highly unlikely that that

21:22

may trial date will stick And so

21:24

I think people are already concerned

21:26

about her and now that we see

21:28

this order which is within her discretion

21:31

I think people are

21:32

Understandably on edge about

21:35

that, but I don't think she's done anything

21:37

yet That is you know in

21:39

violation of the law such that you

21:41

could get her recused Well,

21:43

what's the standard how would you get someone

21:45

ricky? I have a rare difference of opinion

21:48

with arb here This is I I don't remember

21:50

this happening for a long time. Um I

21:53

think so. There's a pragmatic

21:55

issue here. Let me just say this the government

21:58

wants to get this case to trial

21:59

changing judges right now

22:02

would involve delay. Maybe a lot

22:04

of it depending on the other judges trial

22:06

calendar. So I just think that we

22:08

are past the point where as a matter

22:10

of practicality, the government wants this.

22:13

But I think if they had done it early,

22:16

they might have had a shot at it. There's some interesting

22:19

case line, the 11th circuit, and

22:22

there are different ways to have

22:24

a judge refuse. If there's a clear conflict

22:26

of interest and the judge refuses to step

22:28

down, lawyers

22:29

can ask for the recusal. But

22:32

there's a case called Martin that comes

22:34

from a long line of cases when my office

22:36

was prosecuting folks involved

22:39

in the HealthSouth corporate scandal.

22:42

And one of the judges had repeatedly

22:44

sentenced in a way that didn't reflect the

22:46

conduct. And on, I forget now

22:48

the second or the third sentencing, the

22:51

panel actually reassigned the judge

22:53

at our request, refused the judge. And

22:56

they said, it just seems like

22:58

the judge can't set this aside at

23:00

this point. There's just too much water under

23:02

the dam. I think the government could

23:05

have made that argument with Judge Cannon. She

23:07

had this first outing where she was just

23:09

completely beyond the pale. The 11th

23:12

circuit bench slapped her as hard as

23:14

I have ever seen a panel slap a district

23:16

judge. You don't have jurisdiction. You were wrong

23:19

from the get go, they said. And

23:22

I think she's made these rulings,

23:25

none of which by themselves might

23:27

be objectionable enough to force

23:29

recusal. But over the course

23:31

of time, she has indulged Trump's

23:34

request for delay, entertained arguments

23:36

that she probably shouldn't have entertained.

23:39

And now she herself is the delay

23:41

mechanism on the classified documents

23:44

proceedings that have to happen before

23:46

this case can go to trial. And she's

23:49

still holding out that May trial date space

23:51

so nobody else can get

23:52

it. If for some reason this case

23:54

does go on appeal to the 11th circuit and

23:56

I was Jack Smith, I would carefully

23:59

delay the...

23:59

weigh the amount of delay that would be involved,

24:02

but I would probably just as rather

24:04

get her off the case if I had the opportunity.

24:08

So I agree with you Joyce on your

24:10

point, but I am concerned

24:13

about her being killing

24:15

the case by a thousand cuts. She

24:18

refused in the beginning to delay

24:20

the trial until after the November election,

24:23

but it sure looks to me like she's one

24:26

at a time doing something that

24:28

will delay it. And as you included,

24:31

and that prevents Bonnie

24:33

Willis from getting a earlier trial

24:36

date. The reason that she requested an

24:38

August 5th trial is because

24:40

she was counting on

24:43

the Florida case going forward and

24:45

her starting after it ended. And

24:48

if it gets delayed, it's going to hurt the August

24:50

trial date and push that back. So

24:54

I am concerned about death by

24:56

a thousand cuts. And here's the kicker, even if

24:58

it does go to trial, as the judge,

25:00

she makes all the calls about what evidence

25:02

is admissible. And if Trump is acquitted,

25:05

there's no appeal from an acquittal, right? So, you

25:08

know, I don't know, I don't know her. Maybe

25:10

these are just her honest calls that she's

25:12

making, but if she has her thumb

25:14

on the scales when it comes to evidence and

25:17

she makes all of the close calls against the government,

25:19

you can't get this in. You can't have

25:21

this witness, you can't offer this document.

25:23

Then she really could. It wouldn't

25:25

be death by a thousand cuts. It would just be death.

25:29

Yeah, I, for a while,

25:31

I was willing to give her some

25:34

benefit of doubt that

25:36

some of the rulings she was making was based on

25:38

her, I don't know, use it

25:40

in experience. And she's a new judge. I hate

25:42

to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, but there we are. I'm

25:45

wondering now if it's what you're talking about, Joyce.

25:48

I wonder if it's actually intentional.

25:50

Yeah. I mean, she was an appellate lawyer,

25:53

in the US Attorney's office in Miami.

25:55

That's one of the biggest districts in the country

25:57

that have a great appellate division. No.

25:59

Nobody gets in there without a lot of experience.

26:02

New judge, yes. New to appellate law,

26:05

not so much. Jill

26:13

you always seem so confident in your

26:15

foundational garments. What's your

26:19

secret? Classic. I

26:24

cannot believe you said that Barb, but

26:27

I am thankful for Honeylove

26:30

because there is nothing worse than suffering

26:32

from uncomfortable undergarments. Honeylove

26:35

has revolutionized the bra and shapewear

26:37

game. So say goodbye to uncomfortable

26:40

underwire thanks to their supportive

26:42

bonding and forget bulky heat

26:44

trapping fabrics. Their fabric

26:46

is so soft and their shapewear

26:48

uses targeted compression technology

26:51

so you won't feel like you're suffocating

26:53

in your

26:53

clothes.

26:54

You'll immediately feel and see

26:56

the difference. Plus for this month

26:59

only, Honeylove is giving up to 60%

27:03

off when you visit

27:05

honeylove.com slash

27:07

sisters and let them know we sent you

27:10

on the survey. Their best selling

27:12

crossover bra is so comfortable it's

27:14

sure to be your next go to. You'll

27:16

get all the support you want without underwire

27:19

and the mesh detailing is lovely.

27:22

And you'll love their V edition. It's

27:25

the ultimate t-shirt bra.

27:27

We know that no one, least

27:29

of all Barb, really wants to spend time thinking

27:31

about their underwear, but the beauty

27:33

of Honeylove is you won't think about it at

27:36

all. You'll barely feel it. It's

27:38

how sissy.

27:39

Honeylove is easy on, easy off,

27:42

and it makes you look good and feel good.

27:44

So you can even give the gift of comfort this

27:46

holiday season. Honeylove is the

27:48

perfect plus one. Save

27:51

up to 60% off site-wide at honeylove.com

27:54

slash sisters this month only.

27:57

Inventory is limited and the sale ends

27:59

soon.

27:59

So don't miss their best deals of

28:01

the year and remember you can find the

28:03

link in our show notes

28:14

Okay, our next question comes from

28:17

foreign

28:17

bacal I see what you did there The

28:20

question is what exactly is

28:22

an amicus brief and how

28:24

are they treated by the courts?

28:27

That is a great question So,

28:29

uh, an amicus brief is also known

28:32

as a friend of the court brief and that

28:34

sort of hints at what it is It allows

28:36

people who have some sort of interest

28:39

in a case being argued, but they're not

28:42

actually a party to the case

28:44

to file a brief with an

28:47

appellate court just giving

28:49

some information or facts

28:51

or law that can help the

28:54

Judges or justices make

28:56

the decision and learn about

28:59

maybe the history of the law

29:01

or the legislative history Help

29:04

them understand if it's

29:05

a highly technical case some of the scientific

29:08

issues

29:08

around it What the impact

29:10

of it might what the impact of a ruling

29:13

might be it's meant to sort of

29:15

help guide The judges

29:17

in making their decisions even though they themselves

29:21

Uh are not exactly a party

29:23

and those briefs can be filed on

29:25

behalf or uh in support Of

29:27

one party or another or they

29:29

can be filed in support of no

29:32

one and just saying hey Just we're

29:34

concerned

29:35

about these particular outcomes

29:37

with the uh outcome of this

29:39

case I find them as a reporter

29:42

extremely

29:42

helpful when i'm trying

29:44

to understand what a case is about

29:46

I often Sometimes especially if it's really

29:49

complicated i'll start with some of the amicus

29:52

briefs because they can explain

29:54

things sort of take a step back and

29:56

paint a broader picture about what is at stake

29:58

in a case before you look at the

30:00

merits briefs that really focus

30:03

in a laser way about which the particular

30:06

issues are in the case and they

30:07

can sometimes be harder to understand on first

30:10

glance but they're really important.

30:12

Kim, I don't have anything to add because that

30:14

was an excellent answer but I do have a question

30:16

about what you just said.

30:19

Is it amicus or amicus?

30:21

Because I've heard both, right?

30:24

The Dalia Laker podcast is

30:26

called Amicus and she is certainly

30:28

a student of the court. I on the other hand

30:30

also have always said amicus. What about

30:32

the rest of you? Amicus.

30:36

I'm not sure how I've always said it now that

30:38

calls about that. I think I say

30:41

amicus. There

30:43

we go.

30:46

Tomato, tomato, amicus, amicus.

30:49

Right. Well that brings us to our next question

30:52

from Riley who asks, why

30:54

are so many legal terms in Latin?

30:57

Do you think you'll see a switch to English?

30:59

I love this question, Riley. The

31:02

answer is that we draw

31:05

a lot of our legal doctrine

31:07

from England which drew its legal

31:09

doctrine from Rome, the Roman

31:12

Empire where they used a lot of these words. You

31:14

may have heard the phrase pro se

31:16

which means on one's own behalf or

31:19

de novo which means from the new.

31:22

There's one called, I love learning about in law school,

31:24

race ipsa luquiter which means

31:26

the thing speaks for itself. My

31:29

personal favorite, Riley, you might want to tuck away

31:31

for the right moment which is bubelum

31:34

sturkus which is Latin for BS.

31:36

I'm going to start using that. Say

31:39

that again, Barb. I don't know that one. Bubelum

31:43

sturkus. Keep that one

31:45

in your pocket. Yeah, you never know. You might

31:47

need that. My favorite is query, clausum,

31:49

frigate. Something

31:52

I've never used in the practice of law. It

31:54

has something to do with real estate.

31:56

That sounds good. Sounds

32:00

like a curse.

32:01

Since

32:04

law school, all of the ones that start

32:06

with raise, R-E-S, raise

32:08

judicata, raise the solo quarter, it

32:10

makes me think of running because

32:13

that's what every law school name

32:15

there is. Oh yeah, the raise judicata, yeah.

32:18

Yeah. They're mere little foot

32:20

races after. Let me say, Riley,

32:23

to give you some hope, that there

32:25

is a movement for plain English for lawyers. And

32:27

in fact, I think most good lawyers really

32:29

try to avoid some of these terms. When

32:32

good writing is writing that is meant

32:35

to be understood. And if you sprinkle in

32:37

a lot of Latin, it makes it difficult for

32:39

people to understand. So I think plain

32:42

English is where legal writing

32:44

is headed. Certainly true

32:46

in a trial court where you

32:48

have a jury who needs to understand you.

32:51

And certainly true in doing commentary

32:53

on TV where you want the audience to understand

32:56

what you're talking about, is to avoid

32:58

using those or to define them immediately.

33:02

One of my favorite questions from today

33:04

is from

33:05

Kelly. And

33:07

it's something that I didn't actually

33:08

know the answer to, so I had to do

33:10

some research. And the question is, if

33:12

George Santos is expelled or

33:15

resigns from the House for Representatives,

33:17

does he retain perks such as a

33:20

pension? I thought that was a great

33:22

question. And not only

33:24

does he not, he actually

33:27

won't get a pension even if

33:29

he isn't expelled because he has said

33:31

he's not running for reelection. And in

33:34

order to get a pension, you have to have

33:36

served for five years. And

33:38

after a two year term, he will not make

33:41

five years. So good news,

33:43

George Santos does not get a pension.

33:46

So next comes from Liz

33:48

in Haverhill, Massachusetts, hometown

33:50

for my college roommate. I don't

33:52

think Liz is related. But the

33:55

question is, when the prosecution

33:57

calls a witness who has a plea deal,

33:59

Is the jury informed of that deal? Barb,

34:02

what was was your practice in this

34:04

regard? Oh, absolutely. That's giggly

34:06

material right there. And

34:09

you know a smart prosecutor will

34:11

front that out right on direct examination.

34:14

I'm not going to let the defense

34:16

cross examine the witness about their plea deal.

34:19

I'm going to go through every painful

34:21

detail of their conduct the deal

34:23

they got from the government just how good it

34:25

is so that I can make them say

34:27

and what happens to you if you lie

34:29

while

34:29

you're testifying today and they

34:32

will say I lose that deal and you'll

34:34

put me in jail for the maximum amount of

34:36

time possible. I always found

34:38

that to be a very constructive exercise

34:40

in

34:40

front of a jury.

34:41

Our next question comes

34:43

from Annabelle in Newport who asks What

34:48

do you think the quick settlement

34:50

in the Cassie versus Diddy

34:53

case will mean for

34:55

the Me Too Movement?

34:57

I think that's an interesting question Since

34:59

it's settled in one day Do you

35:02

think that that impact is going to be different

35:04

than in the other cases like Weinstein

35:07

and R. Kelly that went to trial? You

35:10

know, it's such an interesting question. You're right

35:13

and the Me Too movement has come a long

35:15

way That instead of fighting

35:17

it the way early defendants

35:21

of Me Too accusations fought

35:23

it and lost. This is a recognition

35:26

that he was going to probably

35:28

lose and so I don't think

35:30

that the early settlement is

35:33

going to hurt the Me Too movement at all.

35:35

In fact, it may be a guide to

35:37

future miscreants who do

35:40

this kind of conduct that they better

35:43

settle quickly

35:45

Better yet, they should settle before the case

35:47

is filed and their reputation is already at

35:50

least put into question We

35:53

don't know of course what the evidence would

35:55

have showed because it didn't go to trial

35:58

But I think it's probably a good thing for

36:00

the Me Too movement, I'm watching for the first

36:02

time, I'm catching up, binge watching the

36:05

morning show. And watching it

36:07

is the most uncomfortable, horrible thing

36:10

because it reminds me of how true every

36:14

part of its sexism and Me Tooism

36:17

is

36:18

back then and still today.

36:20

So I think this

36:22

is just another reminder that Me Too is

36:24

alive and well and that

36:27

it shouldn't happen and that defendants should

36:30

recognize their culpability and

36:32

agree to settle.

36:34

I hope you're right Jill. I mean, one

36:36

concern that I have, I hope it's received

36:38

in the way that you described it, Jill, because

36:41

the concern that I have is that

36:44

I think some people will see the quick settlement

36:46

and claim that, oh, see, it was just

36:49

a money grab. If it was really

36:51

bad, she wouldn't have taken this. That is not

36:53

how the law works. That is not how civil

36:55

lawsuits work. Certainly not one

36:57

that was brought under this New York law that we've

36:59

talked about that gave, that opened

37:02

up the statute of limitations for one year

37:04

for people who have experienced

37:07

sexual abuse in the past to

37:09

bring a case. This

37:12

was a lifeline as we've explained in

37:14

other episodes. And it was,

37:16

I cannot express how extraordinarily

37:19

brave and difficult it is

37:21

for one woman

37:23

to bring a lawsuit like this

37:26

against one of the most powerful

37:27

men in the music industry.

37:30

And I worry, A, the fact

37:32

that we have this very quick settlement, which I'm glad for

37:35

her, I'm glad that she does not have

37:36

to go through months and months of a trial and it will probably

37:38

be horrifically traumatizing.

37:42

But A, that takes it out of the headlines.

37:44

So did you want be talked about

37:46

for weeks and months the way Bill Cosby

37:49

or

37:50

Weinstein or your other people were

37:53

talked about? And

37:55

there's also a saying, there's still

37:57

people to this day within

37:59

community. of color defending R. Kelly.

38:01

And I also think, and we've talked

38:03

about this before, whether it's

38:07

black women who have gone missing or something

38:09

else, I think that there is a lack

38:12

of, there's a hesitancy

38:14

to believe women of color when

38:16

they talked about Me Too. And

38:19

her

38:20

coming out, Cassie coming out,

38:22

making these allegations, doing it by herself, not having

38:24

that support. I hope that it doesn't have a chilling

38:27

effect, no matter what, to other people

38:30

and allow them to get away with this. We don't

38:32

know the evidence because it's settled. The

38:35

accusations were not, they were horrific.

38:37

Some of them were backed up by witnesses who spoke publicly.

38:40

And I just hope that this

38:43

opens up Me Too to everyone

38:45

in a way that I don't think it's always been

38:47

open.

38:48

Can I just add to that something that

38:50

I learned when I was on the sexual

38:54

assault in the Pentagon committee,

38:57

which we learned, which is how devastating

38:59

it is to go public, how

39:01

horrible it is to relive the

39:05

events that you have to then tell police

39:07

about, have to tell a court about.

39:10

It's really, really hard. So to stress

39:13

what you said, I'm happy that she doesn't

39:16

have to relive that by

39:19

being called upon to testify to the details

39:21

of it. And I hope that if

39:23

it happens to any other woman, that

39:27

they will find some support group

39:29

and get rape crisis counseling

39:32

or sexual assault, it doesn't have to be rape,

39:35

and get the help that they need to deal with

39:37

it and to decide whether they want to go public

39:39

with the accusation or whether they

39:42

want to move on. And in

39:45

the early days of Me Too, before

39:47

Me Too started, women sort

39:49

of buried it and moved on. We

39:51

didn't go public with things that happened

39:53

to us or that we knew about. Because

39:56

we were career oriented, I'm not

39:58

saying it was right.

39:59

It did happen and I'm glad that

40:02

the movement has started to make

40:04

us go public. You know, Kim, I love what you

40:06

said. It's really making me think about this.

40:09

If we say, and we do as part of the Me

40:11

Too movement, that we believe women, then

40:13

we believe all women, right? We

40:15

don't just believe women who look

40:18

like they fit society's expectations

40:20

for who deserves to be believed. I

40:23

think it's something important, a place where we all

40:25

may have some work and personal growth

40:27

to do. Joyce,

40:37

I know the environment is so important

40:40

to you. What's one little thing

40:42

that we can do to help

40:44

if it's important to us too?

40:47

Yeah, you know, we recycle everything

40:49

we can in our house. My husband is sort

40:51

of fanatic about it in a good way.

40:54

The extra for us has been learning

40:56

about real paper.

40:58

You can join us in using a sustainable

41:00

solution for toilet paper that works better

41:02

than the original to help save the planet.

41:06

For us, the best example

41:08

is real toilet paper. Using

41:10

real paper doesn't feel like you're sacrificing

41:12

something to help the earth. In fact,

41:15

it feels like an upgrade. Real

41:17

is made from 100% bamboo. It

41:21

grows faster, it regenerates completely,

41:23

and it's a great alternative to

41:25

deforestation.

41:26

And that's something I and anyone

41:29

who has planted bamboo knows

41:31

how quick it grows. My

41:33

mom would plant it one day and then it

41:35

was eight feet high. And that means

41:37

we don't have to cut down any trees

41:40

to make high quality toilet paper.

41:43

I love bamboo in my garden, and it actually

41:45

grows in the north where I am. But

41:48

even better than all that, real is also

41:51

partnered with one tree planted.

41:53

So with every box of real that you buy, they

41:56

are funding reforestation efforts across

41:58

the country. So unlike the

42:00

other toilet paper that cuts down trees,

42:03

Reel is helping to actively plant

42:05

them. It's a great way to help the

42:07

planet and upgrade your paper products.

42:10

We'll never go back to our old paper. And

42:13

if you prefer to shop in person, here's

42:15

the good news. Reel is available

42:17

in most Target stores and on target.com.

42:21

Target carries a convenient 12-pack

42:23

box, the perfect size to try

42:25

out your new favorite tree-free

42:28

paper. This is great news for my mother,

42:31

for whom a product does not exist unless

42:33

it is available at Target. I'll tell her about

42:35

something, can I get that at Target? No, yeah, I've

42:37

lost interest. If you're looking for

42:40

Reel in a Target, it should be

42:42

easy to spot. It's the only option

42:44

where you'll find 100% recyclable

42:46

plastic-free packaging.

42:49

Check the Target app today for an additional

42:52

discount to save on your purchase. Make

42:54

a better choice for your home by switching

42:56

to Reel. Reel is paper

42:58

for the planet. That's R-E-E-L.

43:02

You can find the link in our show notes.

43:13

All right, our next question comes to us from Robert,

43:16

who asks, can you update

43:18

us on the conviction of Paul Pelosi's

43:21

attacker?

43:22

When will it go to sentencing? Do you think he'll

43:24

get the maximum? So of course, the

43:26

attacker of Paul Pelosi, the husband

43:29

of Nancy Pelosi, was

43:31

recently convicted. He

43:33

was convicted in federal court for

43:36

two charges. One was attempting to

43:39

kidnap a federal official,

43:42

Nancy Pelosi, and assaulting

43:44

the immediate family member of a

43:46

federal official. So the maximum punishment

43:49

there, Robert, is life

43:51

in prison for the attempted

43:54

kidnapping. And I don't know whether

43:56

he'll get that much. You know, typically what happens

43:58

is... The person

44:01

is sentenced about three months after

44:03

the conviction occurs.

44:06

And oftentimes people ask, why does it take so long?

44:09

And that's because there's a probation department

44:11

at the court that goes back and studies

44:13

everything about the offender to help

44:16

the judge fashion an appropriate sentence. They

44:18

look at the person's background, their schooling,

44:21

their employment history, addiction,

44:26

employment, whether they were ever beaten

44:29

as a child, all kinds of things like that. And

44:32

then there's a whole scoring system that takes

44:34

place under the federal sentencing guidelines. And

44:37

the prosecution and the defense have some input into

44:39

that, and ultimately they advocate

44:41

for that at the sentencing hearing. So it's

44:44

rare that the statutory maximum

44:46

gets imposed, but they'll

44:49

come up with that sentencing guidelines range, and

44:51

then the judge will be permitted to decide whether

44:54

to impose either within, above, or

44:56

below that range. And so we

44:58

can expect to see three months from now, I guess that

45:00

would be maybe February sometime when

45:03

there will be a sentencing hearing for that offender. Before

45:06

we run out of time, I want to take a question

45:09

from Oren. Are we stuck

45:11

with the Electoral College? What are the

45:13

ways of bringing about a popular vote in

45:15

elections? And the answer

45:18

is one of two things. We can either have

45:21

a constitutional amendment, which

45:23

probably is not realistic, or

45:26

every state could pass the national popular

45:29

vote interstate compact. My

45:31

state, Illinois, has voted for that. And

45:33

under that method, whoever

45:36

wins the national popular vote,

45:39

the state agrees they will cast

45:41

their Electoral College votes for the

45:44

candidate who won nationally. And

45:46

that would solve our problem of having small

45:49

states control the outcome without

45:52

enough population to justify it.

46:02

I just gave a great gift to a friend

46:05

whose house I was staying at. It's

46:07

the Aura Frame. Have you tried them,

46:09

Joyce? You know, I have. And

46:11

I'm going to stock up for Christmas, Jill, because

46:14

we've got four kids. We have a lot of friends

46:16

with big families. And when you've

46:18

got that large family, you want to show

46:20

off everything. Cute baby pictures,

46:23

first drawings, their first everything,

46:25

especially the grandma and grandpa.

46:28

Aura Frames, you can show off whatever pictures

46:30

you want whenever you want. In

46:33

other words, you can put them up so

46:35

easily and simply and enjoy them after

46:38

that. These photos really lift

46:40

me up. They bring me back to the moment. Every

46:42

time I look at them, we've got a revolving

46:44

frame that is sitting in our

46:46

kitchen right now. And sometimes

46:49

an old memory comes up and it just makes

46:51

you smile. Yeah,

46:53

I love it. You know, you can upload

46:55

lots of pictures. It's a rotating digital

46:57

thing. And I've been using seasonal pictures.

47:00

So around Halloween time, I had a whole bunch of old

47:02

Halloween pictures with our kids in costumes and

47:04

stuff. And this month I've been doing Thanksgiving era

47:06

pictures. You know, I just searched my phone for

47:09

November pictures. So it's kind of seasonal,

47:11

but it's really fun. But the real thing you can do,

47:13

Joyce, if you want to show off,

47:16

is to make sure your kids don't

47:18

forget to feature you. You know, they

47:20

don't put pictures of me up. So same

47:23

number. I can't do that. Right.

47:25

And I'm getting them or a friend preloaded

47:28

with pictures of great family memories

47:30

like me, my husband,

47:32

grandma and grandpa, you know, all that stuff.

47:35

So we're able to share all these photos

47:37

all the time. It's so much better, though,

47:39

and more meaningful when they don't just disappear

47:42

into a text chain. And

47:43

we have so many of them. It's time

47:46

that we got a chance to look at all these beautiful

47:48

pictures that we take and then sometimes forget

47:50

in an instant. Yeah,

47:51

Barb, that's a great tip. You

47:54

know, I personally am one of those people

47:56

that will take a thousand pictures with my phone

47:59

and then like.

47:59

forget about them. So Aura is

48:02

great because it makes it so easy to

48:04

actually upload those pictures

48:06

to a frame. And then you're

48:08

actually seeing them instead of just

48:11

letting them sit in

48:13

the cloud and nobody sees them. And Wirecutter

48:16

actually listed Aura frames as the best

48:19

digital photo frame. And it's easy

48:21

to

48:21

see why. It really takes no time to

48:24

set up. It's super easy to

48:26

send any photo or video straight

48:28

from

48:28

your phone. And it's also great

48:31

that grandma or grandpa can

48:33

swipe the top of the frame and

48:35

find the perfect photo they want up

48:38

to that day.

48:41

As I said, I gave one as a gift and

48:43

my friend really loved it as much as I did.

48:46

It's perfect for this holiday season. And

48:48

from now through Black Friday and Cyber

48:51

Monday, visit AuraFrames.com

48:55

and get $40 off

48:57

their bestselling Carver mat

48:59

frame with the code SISTERS.

49:02

This is their best deal of the year. So

49:04

get yours now. That's A-U-R-A

49:08

frames.com with

49:10

the code SISTERS. Terms

49:13

and conditions apply. And don't forget,

49:15

you can also find the link in our show

49:17

notes. Y'all, I just realized

49:20

what I'm going to do with the 5 million photos

49:22

I have of all of our pets. I'm

49:24

going to do Aura pets. I'm going to spend

49:26

all day Friday when I'm watching football doing

49:29

it. Oh, that's a great idea.

49:39

Our last question is one that a lot

49:41

of people asked in different ways, and it's

49:43

an important one. Jen started

49:46

this off by asking, why did Colorado

49:48

reject the move to keep Trump off

49:50

the presidential ballot? Is there hope in

49:53

other states? And there were some similar

49:55

questions. Instagolly asked, respecting

49:58

the 14th Amendment decision in

49:59

Colorado do you think the district

50:02

court deliberately punted to get the case

50:04

to the appellate level show ask

50:06

asked Colorado found that

50:08

Donald Trump engaged in the January

50:11

6th insurrection. Does this help other

50:13

cases? What do y'all think there are a lot

50:15

of important questions tied up here? Well,

50:18

I can take show ask a question because that

50:20

one's The easiest

50:23

one I think and and that

50:25

is it doesn't really affect other cases

50:28

So, you know the judge made this finding

50:30

I'm sure that will be appealed We'll see but for

50:32

example, this does not have any binding

50:35

effect on the election

50:37

interference case That Jack Smith is bringing

50:39

that's before Judge Chutkin the jury

50:42

in that case will decide All

50:46

of the issues in that case from a clean slate and

50:48

of course Donald Trump is not charged specifically

50:50

there with engaging in insurrection though he

50:53

is charged with Exploiting the

50:55

attack to try to pressure

50:57

lawmakers to vote against certifying

50:59

the election same thing in Georgia You

51:02

know, there will be no binding effect

51:04

of this case on the Georgia Rico case

51:06

any question there has to be found fresh and

51:09

separately and that's because a defendant has due

51:11

process rights and the right to confront

51:13

accusers etc in the trial,

51:15

so It will only Have

51:18

a binding effect if anywhere in

51:20

Colorado, Barb I was gonna just ask

51:22

this, you know, how there are 14th

51:24

Amendment cases going on in other states

51:28

Do you think it'll influence those other states?

51:31

That's an interesting question. You mean the judge is just looking

51:33

at I guess it's persuasive authority It

51:35

isn't binding authority because

51:38

none of those courts are above any

51:40

other but you know to the extent you're looking

51:42

for Authority

51:45

on these things you could say well, you know I read

51:47

the reasoning of this judge in Colorado and sounds

51:50

you know I know she looked at lots of different sources and

51:52

her conclusion makes some sense. So I think it could

51:54

I think it could have some Persuasive

51:56

effect I suppose on other cases where this

51:58

very issue is being decided Yeah, or you could end up

52:01

with a split and then it would go up on

52:03

appeal, right? Once you had a split in decisions

52:05

from different Places it could end up in the

52:07

Supreme Court pretty quickly.

52:09

Yeah, I think it's going to the Supreme Court anyway I

52:11

do too

52:12

two of the issues that she ruled on

52:14

was one did Trump engage in

52:16

an insurrection and she found yes No-brainer,

52:19

of course He did and the other one is

52:21

is he disqualified under the 14th Amendment

52:23

and she ruled no Because he

52:25

is not an officer of the United States

52:28

under the constitutional language And

52:29

that's the one that I'm concerned about. I

52:32

was already concerned

52:33

when some well-respected legal scholars

52:36

Started chiming in and saying yeah,

52:39

I think he engaged in an insurrection But I don't think that

52:41

the 14th Amendment applies to him Just as I

52:43

said before a ruling by the Supreme Court

52:46

Saying that a president is not subject to

52:48

the fourth amendment

52:49

14th Amendment's disqualification clause.

52:51

I think would

52:52

be horrific and the

52:54

more Things that the

52:56

Supreme Court could point to including this lower

52:58

court and say oh well this judge seems reasonable and this analysis

53:01

seems unreasonable the greater

53:03

the Likelihood

53:06

that the Supreme Court could rule in that way and that's

53:08

why I don't like these challenges I mean, I know

53:10

people have the right to bring them but

53:13

I worry that a decision by the

53:15

Supreme Court will not that essentially

53:18

could be seen as Defending

53:20

this election will not be as accepted

53:23

as a resounding defeat in

53:26

the ballot box that's done by the people

53:29

and it's so yeah,

53:31

this is giving me a lot of Agita so Kim

53:33

the Political aspect of it

53:36

and being defeated at the ballot box is

53:39

a legitimate concern But

53:41

I am not concerned that the Supreme

53:43

Court even this Supreme Court or

53:46

maybe especially the Supreme Court Which is

53:48

so tied to the

53:50

founders intentions And

53:52

there's no way that this court is going

53:54

to find that number one

53:56

the

53:57

people who wrote the 14th

53:59

Amendment

54:00

meant to say, well, Jefferson Davis

54:02

could run for president. He can't run for

54:04

Senate. That seems really absurd

54:07

to

54:07

me. I mean, doesn't it sound silly?

54:09

He can

54:09

run for some lower off. When you put it that way,

54:12

Jim, it just can't be. And

54:14

I think that the arguments that are being made, things

54:17

like the word support

54:19

the Constitution, an oath to support the Constitution

54:22

is used. And there is a different presidential

54:25

oath, which says protect and defend

54:27

the Constitution.

54:29

It doesn't say support. Well, that's

54:31

a difference without distinction to me.

54:33

The defend and protect

54:35

seems to be a higher order of responsibility

54:38

than just supporting the Constitution.

54:42

And so again, I don't think that they will play semantics

54:45

with something so important. And

54:47

I think, you know, this is one time when I

54:48

think the meaning of the words

54:51

should govern,

54:52

and that in the same way

54:54

that courts could say, well, you aren't

54:56

really 35. We see your birth certificate

54:59

and you aren't 35, so you can't run. It's

55:02

self-executing. And I think this is, but

55:04

particularly with the strength

55:06

of having had a trial and

55:08

a presentation of all the facts and

55:10

a decision by this judge that

55:13

the facts showed that he had

55:15

engaged in insurrection. And

55:18

remember, when it goes to the Supreme Court, they're going to take

55:20

her findings of facts much

55:22

more strongly than her findings

55:25

on law. They, to use a legal

55:27

term, they'll look at the law, de novo. And

55:30

we've already explained what that is, if you were listening earlier

55:32

in the show. But they

55:35

will take her findings of fact

55:37

based on her being the trier of fact.

55:40

So I'm not so concerned about it.

55:43

It doesn't mean I'm not, you know, don't have some second

55:45

thoughts, but I really think it's going to go to

55:47

the Supreme Court, whether there's a split. And

55:50

I think we should also point out that there

55:52

is a special law in Colorado

55:54

that allows a lawsuit to be

55:56

brought. So again, to the thing that this

55:58

isn't binding elsewhere.

55:59

It's a different law that allowed this

56:02

suit to be brought than exists in other

56:04

states All right Your lips to Sam

56:06

Alito's ears

56:07

if I was the Supreme Court and I really

56:09

wanted to play the field here I might

56:11

hear this case but not resolve

56:13

it before the election so that it

56:15

would only apply going forward

56:18

that might let them I

56:22

mean it just occurred to me they could do

56:24

that but Kim huge kudos to you here

56:27

I did not take this officer of

56:29

you know pull or whatever it is public officer

56:32

argument seriously until you fly

56:35

a bit several weeks ago I had

56:37

been paying attention ever since she

56:39

flagged it. That was a great catch on

56:41

your part. I'm scared Joyce I'm

56:44

scared. I was have the engaging insurrection

56:46

was the harder question Me too and not

56:48

the whether he was an officer of the United States

56:50

So I agree, but it's also remember

56:53

it says civil or military officer.

56:56

He is the commander in chief

56:58

How could he not be

56:59

a military officer? I just

57:01

think that the fact that he is the

57:04

president he is an officer and

57:06

he refers to himself as an officer So

57:09

I'm hopeful well, you know a judge in Colorado

57:12

bless her heart didn't see it that way But

57:14

to go full circle from where we started.

57:16

I mean, this is why I'm so grateful I have the

57:19

chance to get together with y'all On

57:21

Friday afternoons and talk about this stuff

57:23

because Kim I was smarter and better

57:26

prepared because of you The rest of

57:28

y'all are consistently making me think

57:31

more deeply than I might be inclined to on

57:33

my own Love y'all happy Thanksgiving

57:36

Enjoy, so I know when you say bless your

57:39

heart. I know what that means it means Mm-hmm

57:45

Thankful to have all of you sisters in my

57:47

life in all our listeners thankful for

57:49

all of you Agree happy

57:51

Thanksgiving to everyone to

57:54

you three and to all of our listeners

57:57

Thank you for listening to hashtag

57:59

sisters

57:59

Law with Jill Winebanks, Barb McQuaid,

58:02

Joyce Vance, and me, Kimberly Atkins-Store.

58:05

And thank you all so much again

58:07

for sending us such

58:08

great questions. We clearly have the best,

58:11

most whip-smart listeners, and we're

58:13

so thankful for all of

58:15

you. We wish we could have answered every

58:17

single question you sent us, but as

58:19

always, keep an eye on our Twitter

58:22

feeds and our X-Feeds

58:24

and our threads,

58:25

and we'll try to answer as many as

58:27

we can there. And remember, you

58:29

can send in your questions for next week by

58:32

emailing sistersinlawatpoliticon.com

58:34

or X-ing them or threading

58:37

them and using the hashtag sistersinlaw

58:40

or tagging

58:41

one of us. And show some

58:43

love for this week's sponsors, Moink,

58:45

Honeylove, Real Paper,

58:47

and Aura Frames. You can find their

58:49

links in the show notes. Please support

58:52

them because they support us, and

58:54

that's why we can bring this podcast to you each

58:56

week. And if you're listening, I

58:58

know you've already done this, but if not, what are

59:00

you waiting for? Follow hashtag

59:03

sistersinlaw on Apple Podcasts or

59:05

wherever you listen, and give us a five-star

59:07

review because it helps those who haven't

59:10

found us yet. Yes, there are still some. It

59:12

helps them find us. Enjoy your leftovers

59:14

and see you next week

59:15

for another episode. Hashtag

59:17

sistersinlaw.

59:20

I can't stop thinking about bacon

59:22

now, but I can't be eating bacon

59:24

right after the big old meal that

59:27

I just ate on Thursday. What's wrong with

59:29

me? You can always eat bacon,

59:31

always. Just wait till Saturday.

59:35

Oh my goodness, I just feel awful.

59:37

Thank goodness that none of this food has calories.

59:41

I'm sending you all the recipe for

59:44

candied peppered bacon. That

59:46

sounds...

59:46

I want to make it now. Thank

59:49

you. I'll send it to you right now. Wait, I have an idea. Is

59:51

there such a thing as bacon pie? Oh my

59:53

gosh. I think it's called just meringue.

59:55

Well, there's bacon on donuts. Have you ever had

59:58

that? It's delicious. We get these donuts...

59:59

They have like maple, sugar, frosting,

1:00:02

and bacon, and they are really good. I

1:00:04

don't even like donuts, but I like the bacon

1:00:06

donuts.

1:00:08

Bacon for dessert sounds excellent.