0:00

MSW media.

0:06

Hi. I'm

0:09

Mojiello O'Oreal from the feminist Elie

0:11

pod, the only podcast that helps you navigate

0:13

the news in this post pro anti abortion

0:15

housekeeping. Each week with Cohost Marie

0:18

Khan and Liz Winston, we dissect

0:20

all the news from that sketchy intersection of

0:22

abortion and misogyny with providers and

0:24

activists working on the ground. The

0:26

cherry on top is we have amazing comedy

0:28

guests who help us laugh through the rage.

0:31

Feminous Elie kills live, drops Fridays

0:33

wherever you pod. Listen and subscribe

0:36

because when v s is popping, we pop

0:38

off. Hello.

0:56

Welcome to the Daily Means for Friday, January

0:58

twenty seventh twenty twenty three. Today,

1:01

five officers are indicted on felony

1:03

murder and kidnapping charges in the death

1:05

of Tyria Nichols. The Department of Justice

1:07

has seized the website of a notorious transnational

1:10

ransomware organization. The Trump

1:12

White House aid Ken Elie has

1:14

been spotted outside the Jack Smith Grand jury.

1:16

Bill Barr pressed Durham to

1:18

find flaws in the Russia investigation, and

1:21

the national archives asked former presidents

1:23

and vice presidents to search their properties for

1:25

classified documents. I'm your host,

1:27

Alison Gil. Hi,

1:31

everyone. So I know Dana was supposed

1:34

to be here today, but I had to record early today,

1:36

and Dana is with Hermandre. So

1:39

Dana will be back with us on Monday, and I apologize

1:41

for her being out she loves you and she misses

1:43

you. Also, I do

1:46

have a special guest, though

1:48

today I'm gonna be talking with former

1:50

federal and state prosecutor and

1:52

author of Hatchitman and the new book,

1:55

untouchable how powerful people

1:57

Get away with it. Elie Honig will join

1:59

me later in the show. And in

2:02

that vein, in the

2:04

Bill Bar vein, I'm gonna do

2:06

a deep dive into the latest New York

2:08

Times reporting from Charlie Savage,

2:10

Adam Goldman, and Katie Benner.

2:13

About and the Durham probe.

2:15

And y'all, it is exactly

2:18

what we thought and

2:20

worse. But

2:22

we do have a lot of other news to get to this

2:24

Friday. So I I

2:26

think I'm gonna save the good news until

2:28

Monday when Dana is back. So that we can

2:30

read it together. But I wanted

2:32

to get that out there. I wanted to get

2:35

the information to you and I wanted to

2:37

talk to Ellie today, and we also have

2:39

a lot of other news to get to. So let's hit the hot

2:41

notes. Hot notes.

2:45

Alright. For stop five officers have been

2:47

charged in the murder of Tyria Nichols. This

2:49

district attorney Mulroy in Memphis has

2:51

announced at a press conference that

2:53

the grand jury has charged the five officers

2:56

with second degree murder, aggravated

2:58

assault, aggravated kidnapping, misconduct

3:02

and official oppression. They

3:04

will release the body cam footage

3:06

today, Friday, after

3:08

six PM. Now,

3:10

when asked whether they thought it was a

3:12

good idea to release the footage on

3:14

a Friday night, given the likelihood

3:17

of protests, The authorities

3:19

and law enforcement said that the footage

3:21

is so bad. It is so

3:23

egregious. That

3:26

it doesn't matter what day or

3:28

time it's released. All

3:30

five officers are in custody, they'll

3:33

all face the same charges that

3:35

I just read to you as by

3:38

a grand jury. Department of Justice

3:40

is doing a civil rights investigation as well.

3:43

Speaking of Department of Justice, the

3:45

DOJ, the FBI, and International Law

3:47

Enforcement Partners, mounted a major

3:49

cyber crackdown against the notorious Russia

3:51

linked ransomware gang, the hive, on

3:53

Thursday, and they seized its website.

3:56

And dismantled much of its digital infrastructure.

3:59

Quote, the Federal Bureau of Investigation seized this

4:01

site as part of coordinated law enforcement action

4:03

taken against Hive ransomware. And

4:06

that is a note on Hive's site,

4:08

shown in English and Russian. Now

4:11

Hive ransomware actors have victimized

4:13

over thirteen hundred companies worldwide and

4:15

are believed to have received approximately a hundred

4:17

million dollars in ransom payments according to information

4:20

previously released by the FBI authorities

4:22

said Last night, quote, the justice

4:24

department dismantled an international ransomware

4:26

network responsible for extorting and attempting

4:28

to extort one and millions of dollars

4:30

from victims in the United States and around the

4:32

world that was merit garland. And they

4:34

were able to prevent a hundred and thirty million

4:37

dollars and ransom payments being

4:39

made by stealing the Hive's

4:41

keystrokes. It's it's very

4:43

cool. It was very aggressive, cyber

4:45

attack, on the hive,

4:47

so well done to the Department of Justice. Also,

4:50

Ken Elie, former

4:52

DHS guy he was seen test fine

4:54

before Jack Smith's Federal Grand jury in DC,

4:56

I will discuss that

4:58

and what Ken Cucinelli might be

5:00

telling the grand jury, and it's a lot.

5:02

We're gonna talk about that with Andy McCabe on Sunday's

5:05

episode of Jack. So listen

5:07

and subscribe to Jack wherever you get your

5:09

podcast. And yesterday, we

5:11

said that the national archives was weighing

5:13

asking former VPs and Presidents to

5:15

search their properties for classified documents

5:18

And today, we got the confirmation from

5:20

the Washington Post. The National Archives

5:22

sent a letter to representatives of

5:24

Living Former Presidents and Vice Presidents Thursday

5:26

asking them to review their personal records to verify

5:28

that no classified materials are outstanding.

5:31

That's according to a person familiar with the

5:33

correspondence who spoke on the condition of

5:35

anonymity. Also,

5:37

good news. The US economy grew by two point

5:39

one percent in twenty twenty two. That's of

5:41

six months of solid growth despite

5:44

quote, widespread concern, unquote,

5:46

that the country might be on the brink of

5:48

recession. So widespread

5:51

concern, widespread by the media,

5:53

making shit up? Maybe stop saying

5:55

there's a looming recession. Also,

5:58

Biden's approval rating remains high

6:00

despite the media trying to make the Biden

6:02

classified documents a thing.

6:04

Stop trying to make the Biden documents

6:06

happen. It's not going to happen.

6:09

Okay? It's not. We

6:11

found out yesterday that the two documents

6:13

found in the storage shed near

6:15

Mar a Lago are not being used in the criminal

6:18

probe. And I said they wouldn't because

6:20

Trump likely had no idea they were there.

6:23

The same goes for the Penn's documents, the Biden

6:25

documents, the list would be some weird

6:27

miracle. There's some sort of provable

6:29

crime that it was Biden

6:31

himself that stole those documents and

6:33

he's known exactly where they were the whole

6:35

time. Not gonna happen

6:37

probably and probably

6:39

didn't happen at all. So anyway,

6:42

that is the news, but Now I

6:44

want to get to this bombshell report that just

6:46

came out today. This Thursday, I

6:48

should say. This is from

6:50

Savage, Benner and Goldman at The

6:52

New York Times. Just gonna quote

6:54

here, egg Don by Trump, attorney

6:56

general Barr, set out in

6:58

twenty nineteen to dig into their shared

7:00

theory that the Russia investigation likely

7:02

stemmed from a conspiracy by intelligence

7:04

or law enforcement agencies to

7:06

lead the inquiry Barr appointed John

7:09

Durham. And later granted him

7:11

special counsel status to carry

7:13

on after Trump left office. But

7:15

after almost four years, far longer

7:17

than the Russia investigation itself,

7:19

Durham's work is coming to an end without uncovering

7:21

anything like the deep state plot, suspected

7:24

by Bill Barr and Trump, moreover,

7:26

A months long review by The New

7:28

York Times found that the main thrust

7:30

of the Durham inquiry was marked by some of the

7:32

very same flaws. Including a

7:34

strained justification for opening

7:36

it, and its role in fueling

7:38

partisan conspiracy theories that would never be

7:40

charged in court. That

7:42

Trump allies claim characterized the Russia

7:44

investigation. So everything that

7:47

they say the Russia investigation was

7:50

the Barr and Durham investigation is.

7:54

Interviews by the times with more than a dozen

7:56

current former federal officials and former

7:58

officials have revealed an array of previously reported

8:00

episodes that show how the Durham

8:02

inquiry became roiled by internal

8:04

dissent and ethics disputes as

8:07

it went unsuccessfully down one

8:09

path after another even as

8:11

Trump and Barr promoted a misleading

8:13

narrative of its progress. Misleading

8:16

narrative of its progress. Sounds

8:18

familiar. For example, Barr

8:20

and Durham never disclosed that their inquiry

8:22

expanded in twenty nineteen based

8:24

on a tip from Italian officials that

8:27

included a criminal investigation into

8:29

suspicious financial dealings with

8:31

Donald Trump. The

8:33

specifics of the tip and how they handled the

8:35

investigations remain unclear, but Durham

8:37

brought no charges. Durham

8:40

used Russian intelligence memos

8:42

suspected by other US officials for

8:44

containing Des information to gain

8:47

access to emails of George

8:49

Soros. Who was a favorite target

8:51

of the American right and Russian

8:53

state media. Durham used grand jury

8:55

powers to keep pursuing the emails even

8:57

after a judge twice rejected

8:59

his request for access. The

9:01

emails yielded no evidence that Durham

9:03

has cited in any case he

9:05

pursued. Next up, there

9:07

were deeper internal fractures on the Durham

9:09

team than previously known. The publicly

9:11

unexplained resignation of his

9:13

number two longtime aid Nora Danahi

9:15

was the culmination of actually a series of disputes

9:17

between them over prosecutorial ethics.

9:20

A year later, two more prosecutors

9:22

strongly objected to plans to indict

9:24

Sussman. Hillary Clinton's

9:26

lawyer based on evidence they warned was

9:28

too flimsy, and one left

9:30

the team in protest of Durham's

9:32

decision to proceed anyway. Sussman

9:35

was acquitted. Now as Durham works

9:37

on his final report, the interviews by

9:39

the Times provide new details of how he

9:41

and Barr sought to recast the scrutiny

9:44

of sixteen Trump campaign's myriad

9:46

of murky links to Russia as unjustified

9:49

and itself a crime. Now,

9:51

Barrin Durham and miss Danahe declined

9:53

to comment for this story. The current

9:55

and former officials who discussed the investigation

9:58

all spoke on the condition of anonymity

10:00

A month after Barr was confirmed

10:02

as attorney general, February twenty nineteen,

10:05

Mueller ended his Russia investigation. Did

10:07

he or did Barr? And turned in his report

10:09

without charging Trump associates with engaging

10:11

in criminal conspiracy with Moscow

10:14

over its interference in the election.

10:16

Trump would repeatedly portray the Mueller report

10:18

as having found no collusion. The

10:20

reality is more complex. In fact, the

10:22

report detailed numerous links between the Russian

10:24

government, the Trump campaign, and

10:26

established both how Moscow worked to help

10:28

mister Trump win and how his campaign

10:30

expected to benefit. That

10:33

spring Barr assigned Durham to scour

10:35

the oranges of the Russia

10:37

investigation for wrongdoing. Telling

10:39

Fox News, he wanted to know if officials abused

10:41

their power and put their thumb on the scale.

10:43

In deciding to pursue the Russia investigation.

10:46

A lot of the answers have been inadequate and

10:48

some of the explanations I've gotten don't hang

10:50

together. He added, lying,

10:53

While attorneys general overseeing politically

10:55

sensitive inquiries tend to keep their distance from

10:57

the investigators, Durham

11:00

and Barr hung out all the time.

11:02

Often weekly to

11:04

consult about the day to day work. They also

11:06

sometimes dine and sips scotch together.

11:08

The two share a world view they're both

11:10

Catholic conservatives and Republicans born two

11:12

months apart in nineteen fifty. As a

11:14

career federal prosecutor, Durham already

11:16

revered the office of attorney general,

11:19

and he was drawn in to mister

11:21

Barr's personal orbit. And

11:23

after that, Durham came to embrace that

11:25

particular attorney general's intense

11:27

feelings about the Russia investigation.

11:30

He was smitten. In May

11:32

twenty nineteen, soon after giving mister Durham

11:34

his assignment, Barrs summoned to the head

11:36

of the NSA, Paul Nakosoni

11:38

to his office. In front of

11:40

several aids, Barr demanded the

11:42

NSA cooperate with the Durham probe.

11:45

Referring to the CIA and British

11:47

spies, mister Barr also said he

11:49

suspected the NSA's quote unquote

11:51

friends had helped instigate the Russia

11:53

investigation by targeting Trump.

11:55

Aides briefed on that meeting told

11:57

the New York Times that. And

12:00

repeating a sexual vulgarity. He warned

12:02

that if NSA wronged him,

12:04

he would do. Basically, you fuck

12:06

us. We'll fuck you. Is what

12:08

they said. Now mister

12:10

Barr's insistence about what

12:12

he had surmised bewildered

12:14

intelligence officials, but

12:16

Durham spent his first months looking for any

12:18

evidence that the origin of the Russian investigation

12:20

involved an intelligence operation targeting

12:23

Trump. Durham's team spent long

12:25

hours coming through CIA's files, but they

12:27

found no way to support their

12:29

bullshit allegation. Barr

12:31

and Durham traveled abroad

12:33

together to press British and

12:35

Italian officials member when I said they

12:37

went to see the MiFID testimony

12:39

in Italy and they went

12:41

to Britain to try to talk to Christopher

12:44

Steele. Barr

12:46

and Durham did that. And

12:48

they they gleaned nothing. Both

12:51

allied governments denied they had done any such

12:53

thing. Top British intelligence officials

12:55

expressed indignation to their US counterparts

12:57

about the accusation. Now

12:59

Durham and Barr had not yet given

13:01

up. When a new problem arose

13:03

for them, In early December, Horowitz,

13:05

the DOJ IG released his

13:07

report. And the inspector

13:09

general did reveal errors and omissions in

13:11

the Carter Page five application

13:14

and determined that an FBI lawyer had doctored

13:16

an email, Klein Smith, in a

13:18

way that kept one of those problems from coming

13:20

to light, But the

13:22

broader findings, the full findings of

13:24

this report, contradicted

13:26

Trump's accusations and the

13:28

rationale for Durham's inquiry. Horowitz

13:31

found zero evidence that FBI actions

13:33

were politically motivated. He concluded that

13:35

the investigation's

13:36

basis, which was Alexander

13:38

Downer and Australian diplomat

13:40

tip that a Trump campaign adviser,

13:43

Papadopoulos, had seemed to disclose

13:45

advanced knowledge that Russia would release hacked

13:47

Democratic emails. That was

13:49

sufficient to open the investigation.

13:51

That is what the inspector general

13:53

found. The week before

13:55

Horowitz was gonna release that report, he

13:57

and his aides went to Durham's office

14:00

to go over the report. And

14:03

Durham actually tried to get Horowitz to

14:05

drop his finding that the diplomat

14:07

Alexander Downer's tip was sufficient

14:09

for the FBI to open its full

14:11

encounter intelligence investigation. Arguing

14:14

that it was enough at most for a preliminary

14:17

inquiry. But Horowitz

14:19

didn't change his mind. Durham said don't

14:21

print that. Horwood

14:23

said, I'm fucking printing that. Are you kidding?

14:26

In that weekend, Barr and Durham decided to

14:28

weigh in publicly to shape the narrative on

14:30

their own terms, kinda like what happened when

14:32

the Mueller report came out. Minutes

14:34

before the inspector general's report went

14:36

online, bar issued a statement contradicting

14:39

Horowitz's major finding declaring

14:41

that the FBI opened the investigation on

14:43

the thinnest of suspicions. That

14:45

in Barr's view were insufficient. He

14:48

would later tell Fox News the investigation began

14:51

without any basis at all. As

14:53

if Alexander Downers tipped never happen.

14:56

Now Trump also weighed

14:58

in telling reporters that details the

15:00

inspector general's report were far worse than

15:02

anything I would have ever imagined, adding, I

15:04

look forward to the Durham report, which is

15:06

coming out in the not too distant

15:08

future. It's got its own information,

15:10

which is this information plus

15:12

plus plus. The

15:14

Justice Department sent reporters a statement

15:16

from Durham that clashed with both the

15:18

justice department principles about not

15:20

discussing open investigations and

15:22

his personal reputation as a particularly

15:24

tight lipped person. He said he

15:27

disagreed with Horowitz's conclusions about

15:29

Russia, Durham did. Citing

15:31

his own access to more information and

15:34

evidence collected to date but

15:36

it's never released. As

15:38

Durham's inquiry proceeded, he never presented any of that

15:40

evidence contradicting Horowitz's

15:42

factual findings. About the basis

15:44

on which the FBI officials opened the

15:46

probe. And by summer twenty twenty, it

15:48

was clear the hunt for evidence supporting

15:50

Barr's hunch about intelligence abuses failed.

15:52

It totally fucking failed. But he

15:54

waited until after the twenty twenty election

15:56

to publicly concede that

15:59

there had turned out to be no sign of

16:01

foreign government activity, and the

16:03

CIA had stayed in its lane

16:06

after all. On one of

16:08

mister Barr and mister Durham's trips to Europe,

16:10

according to people familiar, Italian

16:13

officials. While denying any

16:15

role in setting off the Russian investigation,

16:18

Unexpectedly offered a potential

16:20

explosive tip linking Donald Trump

16:22

to certain suspected financial

16:24

crimes. Barr

16:26

and Durham decided the tip was too serious

16:29

and credible to ignore, a

16:31

tip about Trump financial crimes

16:33

from Italy. But rather than assign it

16:35

to another prosecutor, Barr had

16:37

Durham investigate the matter himself,

16:40

giving him criminal prosecution powers

16:42

for the first time. Even though the

16:44

possible wrongdoing by Trump did not

16:46

fall within his assignment to scrutinize

16:48

the origins of the Russia inquiry.

16:52

Durham never filed charges against

16:54

Trump, and it remains unclear

16:56

what level of an investigation it was, what

16:58

steps he took, what he learned. Whether

17:00

anyone at the White House ever found out.

17:02

The extraordinary fact that Durham opened a

17:04

criminal investigation that included scrutinizing Trump

17:07

has until now remained a secret.

17:10

But in October twenty

17:12

nineteen, a garbled echo

17:14

became public. The

17:16

Times reported that Durham's administrative

17:18

review of the Russia inquiry had evolved

17:20

to include a criminal investigation while

17:22

saying it was not clear of what the suspected

17:24

crime was. their own

17:26

sources. The criminal

17:29

investigation was into

17:31

Trump. That reminds me I need to

17:33

look for I need to look

17:35

for tweet because I said, wouldn't I I remember saying, wouldn't it

17:37

be funny if Durham found crimes against

17:40

Trump? I have to find that.

17:42

Turns out Beans

17:44

come true. The news reports however were

17:46

all framed around the erroneous assumption the

17:48

criminal investigation must mean Durham had found evidence

17:50

of potential crimes by officials

17:52

involved in the Russia inquiry, Barr, who weighed

17:54

in publicly about the German Korean regular

17:57

intervals, in ways that

17:59

advance a pro Trump narrative, chose

18:01

not to clarify what was really happening.

18:03

By the spring and summer

18:05

of twenty twenty, with Trump's reelection campaign

18:07

in full swing, Durham's

18:09

investigation's failure to deliver scalp in

18:12

time for the election, unquote, began

18:14

to erode Barr's relationship with Trump.

18:18

That's what Barr wrote in his memoir.

18:20

Trump was stoking belief among his

18:22

supporters that Durham might charge former

18:24

president Barack Obama and

18:26

Joe Biden That proved too much for

18:28

mister Barr, who in May twenty twenty,

18:30

clarified our concern of potential criminality is

18:32

not focused on them. Even so,

18:34

in Trump lashed out in a Fox

18:36

interview, asserting that Obama and Biden and top

18:38

FBI and intelligence officials have been caught in the

18:40

single biggest political crime in the

18:42

history of our country. And the

18:44

only thing stopping charges would be if Barr and

18:46

Durham wanted to be politically correct,

18:48

throwing them under the bus.

18:50

Against that backdrop, Barr and Durham did not

18:52

shut down their inquiry when the

18:54

search for intelligence abuses hit a dead end

18:56

dead end. When the inspector

18:58

general's inquiry complete, they turned to a

19:00

new rationale, a hunt for a basis to accuse

19:03

the Clinton campaign of

19:05

conspiring to defraud the government by

19:07

manufacturing the suspicions that the Trump

19:09

campaign colluded with Russia along

19:11

with scrutinizing what the FBI

19:13

and intelligence officials knew about the Clinton campaign

19:16

actions. Durham also developed an indirect

19:18

method to impute political bias, to law

19:20

enforcement officials, comparing

19:22

the justice department's aggressive response to

19:25

suspicious. Links between Trump and Russia

19:27

with its more cautious and skeptical

19:29

reaction to various Clinton related suspicions.

19:31

He examined an investigation into Clinton

19:34

Foundation finances in which the

19:36

FBI's repeated request for subpoena were

19:38

denied. He also scrutinized how

19:40

the FBI gave Clinton a defensive briefing about

19:42

suspicions that foreign governments might be trying to

19:44

influence her campaign, but did not

19:46

inform Trump about

19:48

suspicions that Russia might be conspiring

19:50

with people associated with his.

19:53

During the Russia investigation, the

19:55

FBI used claims from what turned out to

19:57

be a dubious source, the

19:59

steel dossier, in its

20:01

botched applications to

20:03

wiretap. Page. It says here a former

20:05

Trump campaign aid that was Carter Page.

20:07

The Durham investigation did the

20:09

same thing, but in a different

20:12

way. In Durham's case, these dubious sources were

20:14

memos. Its credibility, the intelligence

20:16

community doubted, written by Russian

20:18

intelligence analysts, discussing

20:20

purported conversations involving American victims

20:22

of Russian hacking. The memos

20:24

were part of a trove provided to the

20:27

CIA by a Dutch spy agency which

20:29

had infiltrated the servers of its Russian counterpart.

20:31

The memos were said to make demonstrably

20:34

inconsistent, inaccurate, or exaggerated claims,

20:36

and some US analysts believe

20:38

Russia may have deliberately ceded them with

20:40

this information. Mister

20:43

Durham wanted to use those

20:45

memos, which included descriptions of Americans

20:47

discussing a purported plan by Clinton

20:49

to attack Trump by linking him

20:51

to Russian hacking, and the release

20:53

of the twenty sixteen Democratic emails. To

20:56

pursue a theory, he wanted to use those

20:58

memos with the Russian Desert to

21:00

pursue a theory that the Clinton campaign conspired to

21:02

frame Trump. And in doing so, Durham

21:04

sought to use the memos as justification to

21:06

get access to the private communications of

21:08

an American citizen. One

21:11

purported hacking victim identified in the

21:13

memos was Leonard Bernardo, the

21:15

Executive Vice President of the Open Society

21:18

Foundations of Proteum accuracy organization, whose

21:20

Hungarian born founder, George

21:22

Soros, had been vilified by the far right.

21:24

In twenty seventeen, the post reported that

21:26

Russian memos included a claim Bernardo

21:28

and a Democratic member of congress,

21:31

Debbie Washroom and Schultz, had

21:33

discussed how the Rental inch, supposedly

21:35

promised to keep the investigation of

21:37

the Clinton emails from going too far.

21:40

But Bernardo and

21:42

Wasseramenshall said they had never even met

21:44

Let alone communicated about

21:47

Clinton's miscluten's emails. But Durham

21:49

set out to prove the memos described

21:51

a real conversation. He sent out a

21:53

prosecutor on his team, Andrew Duffel lipist, to ask

21:56

judge Beryl Howl, the chief judge of the Federal

21:58

District Court. In DC,

22:00

For an order allowing them to seize information about Bernardo's

22:02

emails, but Judge Hal decided that the Russian memo

22:04

was too weak a basis

22:06

to intrude on Bernardo's privacy.

22:09

Mister Durham then personally appeared before her and urged her

22:11

to reconsider, but she ruled against him

22:14

again. And rather than dropping it,

22:16

Durham's side stepped judge Hell's ruling

22:18

by invoking grand jury power

22:20

to demand the documents and testimony directly

22:23

from Soros' foundation

22:25

and mister Bernardo about his

22:28

emails. It's unclear whether Durham served

22:30

them with a subpoena or instead

22:32

threatened to do so if they didn't

22:34

cooperate. Rather than fighting in court, the foundation of Bernardo

22:36

quietly complied. But

22:38

for mister Durham, the results appear to have been

22:40

another dead end. And a statement

22:43

provided two the times by the Soros

22:45

Foundation. Bernardo reiterated he never

22:47

met or corresponded with Wasserman Schultz

22:49

If such documentation exists, it is made up.

22:51

As the focus of the

22:53

Durham investigation shifted, cracks formed

22:56

inside the team. We

22:58

talked about Danaheem. As Danaheem,

23:00

longtime close colleague, increasingly

23:02

argued with Durham in front of other

23:04

prosecutors. Donna He had independent

23:06

standing as a respected prosecutor.

23:08

In two thousand eight, attorney general

23:11

Mckaysey assigned her to investigate whether

23:13

to charge senior Bush administration

23:15

official or officials with crimes

23:17

related to the scandal over the firing of

23:19

US attorneys. She decided in

23:21

twenty ten no charges were warranted. Now Dan,

23:23

he complained to Durham about how

23:25

Barr kept hinting darkly in

23:27

public about the direction of their

23:29

investigation. In April twenty twenty, for

23:31

example, he suggested to news officials would be

23:33

prosecuted, saying the evidence shows

23:35

that we are not dealing with just mistakes or

23:37

sloppiness. There's something far more

23:39

troubling here. Dana, he urged Durham

23:41

to ask Barr to adhere

23:43

to justice department policy and stop

23:45

talking about the investigation publicly,

23:47

but Durham was unwilling to

23:49

challenge Barr. And the strains grew when

23:51

Durham used Grand jury powers to go after

23:53

Sorrow's Bernardo's emails.

23:55

Dana, he opposed that tactic and

23:57

told colleagues that Durham had taken

23:59

that step without telling her. And

24:01

by summer of twenty twenty, with election

24:03

day approaching, Barr pressed Durham to

24:05

draft a potential interim report. On

24:07

the Clinton campaign, and the FBI gullibility

24:10

or willful blindness or whatever.

24:12

And on September tenth, twenty

24:15

twenty, Dana he discovered that other members of

24:17

the team had written draft reports that

24:19

Durham had not told her about.

24:21

Now, Dan and he

24:24

erupted according to people familiar. She told

24:26

Durham, no report should be issued

24:28

before the investigation was completed, especially not

24:30

right before an election. And

24:32

denounced the draft for taking disputed

24:34

information at face value. She sent

24:36

colleagues in memo detailing those concerns, and then

24:38

she resigned in protest. Two

24:40

people close to Barr said he pressed for

24:42

the draft to evaluate what a report on

24:44

preliminary findings would look like and what evidence

24:46

would need to be declassified. But they

24:49

insisted he intended any release to come

24:51

during the summer or after the November third

24:53

election, not soon before election day.

24:56

Elie any case, in late September twenty twenty, about

24:59

two weeks after Denny he

25:01

quit, someone leaked to a

25:03

Fox Business personality that Durham would not

25:05

issue an interim report disappointing

25:07

Trump supporters hoping for pre election

25:10

day bombshells. Stymied by their decision

25:12

not to issue an interim report,

25:14

John Ratcliffe, Trump's

25:16

national intelligence director another

25:18

way to inject some of same information into

25:20

the campaign. Over the objections of Gina

25:23

Haspull, CIA Director, Ratcliffe

25:25

declassified nearly a thousand pages of intelligence

25:28

material. Before the election for

25:30

Durham to use. Elie, notably

25:32

in that fight, Barr sided with Haskell

25:34

on one matter that it is said to be

25:37

particularly sensitive and it remained classified that

25:39

mister Ratcliffe also disclosed in a letter

25:41

to a senator that Russian intelligence

25:43

analysis claimed that on

25:45

July twenty six, twenty sixteen,

25:47

Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan

25:49

to stir up a scandal tying

25:51

Trump to Russia. That's that

25:54

Russian disinformation. Ratcliffe used

25:56

it as the DNI. The

25:58

letter acknowledged the Did

26:00

not know the accuracy of this allegation or

26:02

the extent to which the Russian intelligence

26:04

analysis may reflect exaggeration or

26:06

fabrication, but didn't mention that there were

26:09

any reasons that suspicions about the Trump

26:11

campaign were arising in that period, like

26:13

the diplomats tip. Mister

26:15

Trump's flattery of president

26:18

Putin, hiring of advisors with links to Russia,

26:20

financial ties to Russia, his call

26:22

for Russia to hack Clinton, etcetera.

26:24

This disclosure, by the way,

26:26

infuriated Dutch intelligence officials who had provided

26:28

the memos under the strictest confidence. Late

26:31

in the summer of twenty twenty one, Durham prepared

26:33

to indict Michael Sussman, and

26:35

we know a cybersecurity lawyer who represented

26:38

Democrats in their dealings with the FBI

26:40

about Russia's hacking. prosecutors

26:42

on Durham's team, Anthony Scarpelli,

26:44

Elie Nirapatel objected. Scarpelli

26:48

and Patel argued too derm that the

26:51

evidence was too thin to charge Sesmon, and

26:53

such a case would not usually be

26:55

prosecuted. Given the intense scrutiny

26:57

it would receive, they also warned that

26:59

an acquittal would undermine public faith their investigation.

27:02

One Durham did not change

27:04

course. Scarpelli quit

27:06

protest. Patel left soon after to

27:08

take a different job both declined to comment.

27:10

Egor Dan Schenkel was

27:14

also indicted.

27:16

He told the FBI

27:18

that dossier exaggerated the credibility

27:20

of gossip and speculation. Durham

27:23

charged him flying. Like I said, he was also acquitted.

27:26

Alongside assessment, those two failed cases

27:28

are likely to become Durbin's last courtroom

27:30

acts, bringing demonstrably weak

27:32

cases stood in contrast to how he once talked about

27:34

his process curtorial philosophy.

27:36

Delivering the closing arguments at the Dan

27:38

Schenkel trial, Durham defended his investigation

27:41

to the jury. Denying that his appointment by

27:43

Barr had been tainted by politics. He

27:45

asserted that Mueller had concluded there's

27:47

no evidence of collusion here or conspiracy.

27:50

A formulation that echoed Trump's distortion

27:52

of the Russia investigation and

27:54

added, is it the wrong question to

27:56

ask? Well, Elie, how did we

27:58

get this started? Respectfully, that's

28:01

not the case. And the judge interrupted

28:03

him and said, you should finish up,

28:05

mister Durham. So

28:08

a lot of bombshell reporting

28:10

in that

28:11

story. The

28:14

only crime.

28:15

The only legitimate crime

28:18

that Durham found was

28:20

one that Trump committed, and

28:22

he didn't even really investigate it.

28:25

And then he

28:27

lobbied the inspector general to

28:29

change his findings. Wow.

28:33

Alright. With that, Perfect pivot to

28:35

my interview with the author of the book

28:38

about Bill Barr called Hatch

28:40

It Man. National bestseller has

28:42

a new bookout called UnTouchable. It

28:44

is our friend, federal and

28:46

state prosecutor, Eli and I'll be right back

28:48

with that interview after this break.

28:50

Stay with us. After these

28:53

messages will be rad. Hi.

28:57

I'm Harry Lickman, host of the Talking

29:00

Fed's podcast a weekly round that brings together

29:02

prominent figures from government law and

29:04

journalism for a dynamic discussion

29:06

of the most important topics of

29:08

the day. Most news commentary

29:10

has delivered a ninety second sound

29:12

bites that just scratched the surface of a new

29:14

development, not talking

29:16

fans, Each Monday, I'm joined by

29:18

a slate of Fed's favorites and new

29:20

voices to break down the headlines and

29:22

give the insiders view of what's going

29:24

on in Washington and beyond. We

29:26

dig deep, but keep it fun. Plus

29:29

sidebars detailing important legal

29:31

concepts read by your favorite celebrities

29:33

such as Robert De Niro

29:35

explaining whether the president can pardon

29:38

himself. And Carol King explaining

29:40

whether members of congress can be

29:42

disqualified from higher office. And

29:45

music by Phillip Class. Fine

29:47

talking fans wherever you get your

29:49

podcast and don't

29:50

worry. As long as you need answers, the

29:53

feds will keep talking.

29:56

Everybody welcome back, honored to be

29:58

joined today by my friend,

30:00

First of all, he penned the book hatchet Man, which

30:02

was a national bestseller. I know he's got a second

30:04

book coming out called Untouchable, how

30:07

powerful people Get away with it. Please

30:09

welcome former state and federal

30:11

prosecutor, Ellie Koenig. Hi, Ellie. AJ,

30:13

so good to be back with you. I have to say

30:15

before we begin, Can I take a moment

30:17

to recognize your fans?

30:19

Because you have this

30:21

rabid fan base and they mean that the best possible

30:23

sense that actually reminds me of you,

30:26

they are smart and they are passionate. And

30:28

yesterday, I was on a flight that was

30:30

about three hours. And I said, why don't I do one of

30:32

these? Ask me anything that people do on Twitter

30:34

sometimes. Right? And

30:36

so I was hilarious. I got questions about

30:38

everything from Philly Sports to Cooking to,

30:40

you know, actual issues. And someone

30:42

wrote in one of your fans, I wish I would had remembered the

30:44

Twitter name, but someone wrote what is the best

30:46

podcast for you to do and why is it

30:48

daily beans? So there

30:50

you go. That is

30:53

exactly your listeners in a nutshell. And I

30:55

said I said why daily

30:57

beads because Alison is so

30:59

sharp and interesting. But

31:01

I said, yep, there you go. There there is the listeners in a nutshell.

31:04

Awesome. That's so that's so cool. Yeah.

31:06

They are. They're super amazing, passionate,

31:08

smart. Active engaged

31:10

to people. So I really appreciate you being here

31:12

today to talk about this book. Thanks. Because you

31:14

and I, even that, you know, we're very good friends

31:16

with text back and forth all the time. You and I

31:18

don't always see eye to eye on what the Department of

31:20

Justice is doing, but I think it's

31:23

important that we talk about because

31:25

I have always acknowledged there is a two tier

31:27

system of justice. And powerful people tend to keep

31:29

getting away with things. And,

31:32

you know, after hatchet Man came out, which

31:34

is such an incredible book, and way

31:36

build bars on this whole rehab tool it has been

31:38

for a while. I know. Why will he

31:40

sit down with Bill Marlon, not you or not

31:43

me? Yeah. I know why. Yeah.

31:45

Because and I I tagged you

31:47

in that thing, and I'm Elie, had been sitting

31:49

in that interview seat. That would have gone a

31:51

lot differently. For sure.

31:53

But let's talk about this book. What first of all, what

31:55

prompted you direct? Because we were all waiting for

31:57

more another Bill Barr book to come out because he

31:59

just kept being super crappy. But tell me tell

32:01

us about this book. And why this was important

32:04

for you to write? This book

32:06

happened entirely organically, and I'll

32:08

tell you, I'll give you a little inside baseball in the

32:10

publishing industry here. Harper Collins is my publisher

32:12

for both books. The Bill Bar book did

32:14

did well enough that two weeks

32:16

after it published, my editor said to me, what do you

32:18

wanna do next? For

32:20

us. And I said, I kinda said

32:22

what I I don't know. I mean, that was my

32:24

big thing, what Bill Barr was doing the DOJ.

32:26

And he said, Okay. Well, let me ask

32:28

you this. What question do you get asked

32:31

the most often? And he goes, take a

32:33

couple days, get asked me, and I said,

32:35

I don't need a couple of days. I'll tell you right now, how the hell does he

32:37

get away with it now? The he

32:39

can vary, but the most common he

32:41

is Donald John Trump.

32:43

How the hell Donald Trump get away with

32:45

it? And so he said, there it is. I

32:47

love it. That's your next book. And so what

32:50

I do in this book is

32:52

I blend a couple different things. I

32:54

blame my own experience as a prosecutor. All

32:56

sorts of my prosecutor mob

32:58

stories in here, prosecuting the mob. I should

33:00

be clear. A lot of

33:02

Donald Trump focus, but also look at

33:04

Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby,

33:06

various prosecutions of CEOs,

33:08

Jeffrey Epstein figures prominently

33:10

into this book. Other the

33:13

historical look back at what happened in Nixon

33:15

and Clinton So I

33:17

blend a lot of things together to try

33:19

to give the people an

33:21

answer as to how and really if I

33:23

had to boil it down to how it's

33:25

really three factors coming together. One, we have a system

33:27

with laws and features that just

33:29

inherently favor favorable people. So

33:31

the system, so to speak, writ large,

33:34

Number two, your activist bosses,

33:36

and I mean mob bosses, but I also mean

33:38

other types of criminal bosses. And I include Donald

33:40

Trump very much in Elie. how

33:42

to exploit those vulnerabilities. And

33:44

number three, I'm quite critical in this book

33:46

of various prosecutors who I

33:49

think have not done an effective job or a prompt

33:51

enough job of addressing those Merrick Garland

33:53

being probably the number one

33:55

subject on that on that

33:57

last note. Mhmm. And

33:59

I think that a lot of us often talk

34:01

about that through line. Right? That historical

34:04

thread of, you know, we didn't

34:06

prosecute the confederates. We didn't prosecute

34:08

you know, we'd go all the way back to to then. We didn't prosecute

34:10

Nixon. We didn't prosecute war crimes

34:12

after Obama took off. We didn't prosecute

34:14

Russia. We didn't, you know,

34:16

and now we end up where we're

34:18

at. Yep. And, you know, I understand the

34:22

frustration of

34:26

decades of not holding rich people

34:28

accountable and powerful people

34:30

accountable -- Yeah. -- and how that can

34:32

spin into Elie it's going to

34:34

happen again And, you know, your argument, it is

34:36

happening again. And I'm on the side

34:38

of, well, let's wait and see because there

34:40

haven't been any declination

34:42

decisions yet. But we're still

34:44

here. So we actually, I think, agreed on this.

34:46

And I think you said something really

34:48

important. I hope that this

34:50

book can take that frustration that so many people feel that you

34:52

feel that I feel and turn at least

34:54

the frustration into some understanding.

34:56

How do we get here? How does

34:58

this happen? I actually agree

35:00

with you. I still think it's it's

35:02

certainly possible Merrick Garland indicts

35:04

Donald Trump either over Mar a Lago or January

35:06

six, although I think those possibilities are

35:08

becoming more remote, which we can discuss. I

35:10

think it's quite likely Elie

35:12

the Fulton DA will indict Donald Trump

35:15

and soon. And I say this in the book. I say by the

35:17

time you're holding this book in your hands, we

35:19

might well have seen an indictment of Donald

35:21

Trump. But I'm critical of

35:23

both of them in sort of

35:25

different respect. What's common is, I think both of them

35:28

have taken too long. We are two

35:30

plus years out now from January

35:32

sixth and from

35:34

the effort steal the election from that poll from Trump to

35:36

Ravensburger. And people say these things take time.

35:38

Investigations take time. I know. I know. I was

35:40

prosecuted for

35:42

fourteen years. There's no reason these investigations should have

35:44

taken two plus years. Now,

35:46

why do we care? Is it just that I'm impatient?

35:48

I am an impatient person, but

35:50

who cares? What

35:52

matters is because of this delay, both

35:54

of them, the Fulton County DA and

35:56

the United States Justice Department, have

35:59

made their own jobs more

36:01

difficult as a practical matter. And I know people say about the

36:04

evidence, this is strong. Maybe, I think it's

36:06

I think it's I make the case in here, I

36:08

have a sample indictment

36:10

of whatnot. What Donald Trump, what it should look like. But I think the passage of

36:12

time really matters because the far and I

36:14

know this is a prosecutor, the farther you get away

36:16

from the events immediate

36:18

and urgent they seem to a jury. More

36:20

to the

36:21

point, let's say

36:22

we get an indictment from either one of them

36:24

tomorrow. When does that case get

36:26

tried? You don't go right from indictment to trial.

36:28

You're gonna have layer upon layer of appeals,

36:30

pre trial. I mean, twenty twenty four is

36:32

when you're gonna get a trial. Now,

36:35

Donald Trump's gonna be in the middle of primaries in

36:37

twenty twenty four. That's not a

36:39

legal protection for him, but it's gonna be that

36:41

much harder to stand up in front of

36:44

a jury and argue that he should be convicted and locked

36:46

up. And let's keep in mind, it's gotta

36:48

be unanimous. You get one Trump

36:50

supporter or sympathizer on a jury.

36:52

It's over. I believe. I know

36:54

jurors put it aside they're supposed to put it aside their

36:56

beliefs, but let's also be realistic

36:58

here. And even if you do get someone who's not

37:00

necessarily a Trump Worshiper,

37:02

you could well see a scenario where

37:04

a reasonable person says, I'm not a huge fan

37:06

of Trump's. I don't really care which Elie, you

37:08

know, care for him much. But I don't

37:10

like the idea of locking up a person who's a front runner of one

37:13

of the two major parties or president or

37:15

a former president. So I think they've

37:17

harmed themselves by the slow

37:20

myopic pace in particular

37:22

garland. Yeah. Well, I'm glad that you see

37:24

them the same because I I, you know, I

37:26

had noted a bit of

37:28

a difference on Twitter, the people who are upset with

37:30

the slow pace of Merrick Garland, but cheering

37:32

on Fannie Willis. Right. Right. They're

37:34

on the same timeline. When neither of them

37:36

haven't died, HIM AT THIS

37:38

POINT AS YOU AND I ARE SPEAKING

37:40

TODAY, NOT THAT THEY WON'T,

37:42

BUT THEY Elie THEN

37:44

GARDLAND appointed a special counsel. Well, Fannie Will has appointed a special purpose grand

37:46

jury. She didn't need to do that. She could go straight to a

37:48

regular grand jury on that reference burger phone

37:52

call alone. Fannie Willis didn't even a panel of grand jury twenty

37:54

twenty two. She had the Ravensburger

37:56

call as we all did before

37:58

January six, Elie calls

38:01

January second or third, and

38:03

it became public immediately. So look,

38:05

I I do think speed

38:07

matters, pace matters here, and

38:09

and is they're undermining their own efforts.

38:11

Yeah. And and the way that I saw

38:13

it after I spoke to you and a bunch of

38:15

other federal prosecutors

38:18

was my main complaint is where's the urgency? Where are you coming out

38:20

on a microphone and saying we need

38:22

more money? Right now, I am enlisting

38:26

ninety something -- Elie. US attorneys from around the country to help me

38:28

with this prosecution. And then we finally

38:30

got it in this latest budget reconciliation.

38:32

But, like, Where was

38:34

that feeling of urgency? This is

38:36

where the criticism falls on Marigolden more than

38:38

Fondi Willis. Fondi Willis is the head of a

38:40

small office. It seventy some

38:42

prosecutors. Donald Garland has

38:44

effectively unlimited infinite resources.

38:46

He has ten thousand plus federal

38:49

prosecutors in DOJ There's no reason budget or not. Merrick Garland, I

38:51

know it's a massive task. And I do give DOJ

38:54

credit, not perfectly, but they've done an

38:56

effective job of the

38:58

oathkeepers and the other people who storm the capital. They've

39:00

come under some criticism by judges in some

39:02

cases. But by and large, I think they've done a

39:04

good job. Merrick Garland

39:06

absolutely could have said to each of the ninety

39:08

four US attorney's offices

39:10

across the country, you each need to assign

39:12

me two lawyers. Or, you know, the bigger offices, you just have to give me two lawyers, smallers,

39:14

give me one. FBI, I need one from each

39:16

region after in a regional office.

39:18

I mean, there's no reason couldn't

39:20

have done that. And my bigger approach with Garland

39:22

is not even so much resource based

39:24

as focused based. Because Garland, he

39:26

said this. We start at the ground. We work

39:29

our way up. Sometimes, but you don't have

39:31

to do it that way. Hey, I don't know that there's

39:33

ever going to be a line from the

39:35

guys who smashed windows and

39:37

all that. Two, the real power

39:39

sources, b, he could have gone right to the

39:41

top and you know who did a good job of

39:43

that. The January sixth committee with much

39:46

less powerful investigative resources, why couldn't DOJ

39:48

have interviewed Cassidy Hutchinson in

39:52

April of twenty twenty one. They didn't even get to her till after DOJ got to

39:55

her in the summer of twenty twenty two. Why couldn't

39:57

they have talked to Mark Shore?

40:00

Why couldn't they have gone into

40:02

the, you know, Sarah Matthews? All these good faith White House

40:04

witnesses were utterly unapproached

40:08

by DOJ until a year

40:10

and a half in and after I think the January

40:12

sixth committee really forced their hand. And

40:14

so as I say in the

40:16

book, AJ, Garland could have gone for the jugular. on

40:18

every single capillary. Oh, that's

40:20

oh, I like that quote. One of

40:23

my little terms or phrases. Yeah.

40:25

And, you know, I keep bringing up points like, you

40:28

know, way back. Over a year ago, he brought

40:30

in Wyndham, then he brought in

40:32

another guy and I can't remember that guy's

40:34

name. But he's brought in other US

40:36

attorneys to help him. Yeah. I know some

40:38

of Elie. On

40:40

this case back in I know back in spring before the one

40:43

sixth committee, he had already gotten

40:45

and searched warrants and received emails

40:47

from, like, Kuklowski and

40:50

Clark and all that. Mhmm. Then they focused on Scott Perry, and then we're

40:52

able to see his phone, you know,

40:54

right around that time. They've been doing

40:56

work. Of course, we don't hear about

40:59

it as -- Yeah. -- as we hear about what's happening with

41:01

Fannie Willuses. But to to start everything,

41:03

and then answer me this because this

41:05

is one of the the sticking point that I

41:07

think is is kind of important about the

41:10

timing. Mhmm. It feels like and

41:12

I don't know this to be true, but it

41:14

feels like DOJ had to wait until the

41:16

committee was done. And had all

41:18

their evidence, not necessarily

41:20

because DOJ wanted the one

41:22

sixth committee to do their work for them.

41:24

But DOJ has to look for consistencies in that testimony. Yeah.

41:26

Otherwise, you end up with a with a, like, a

41:28

Durham Jim Baker thing where he

41:30

told the

41:32

inspector general Congress and the

41:34

grand jury Elie different things didn't lie, not a

41:36

one thousand one lie, but

41:38

inconsistent testimony that couldn't impeach the

41:40

witnesses so I feel like DOJ actually really did have to wait for

41:42

that committee to get done. And, of course, the committee was

41:44

stalled for four months because of

41:46

Republican shenanigans.

41:48

So I think there's a we the

41:50

fact remains, Ellie, that people

41:52

have been getting away with this.

41:55

With crimes for decades. And that is

41:58

why this book is so important

42:00

to understand how that keeps happening. Talk a

42:02

little bit about the

42:04

ways in which people like Trump and

42:06

others delay and obfuscate

42:08

and obstruct in order to push the

42:10

timeline out, which makes it worse for

42:12

Department of Justice. So here's something that I

42:14

I hope to do with this book, which is to go

42:16

beyond the obvious and give the real tactics that these

42:18

people use. I'll give you one example here,

42:21

Allison. So we all know that rich people buy

42:23

themselves mega dream teams of lawyers. Right? We

42:25

remember, oh, Jay, Jeffrey Epstein, I actually go into

42:27

this Elie. You know, he hired Tursuits

42:29

and ten star and all these other former federal

42:32

prosecutors. There's actually very good evidence in here

42:34

that the REIT people say why did

42:36

Alexander occur who was handling the

42:38

original Epstein investigation and

42:40

completely gave it away for an

42:42

absurd minor

42:44

state charge Why did he back down? I actually have a mask where I think is some pretty good

42:46

evidence in here that he was just afraid of these

42:48

lawyers. He was just spineless and

42:50

intimidated by these lawyers.

42:52

Everyone knows

42:54

that though. Here's what's a

42:56

little more subtle. A very common tactic that powerful CEOs,

43:00

corporations, Donald Trump, mob bosses

43:02

use, is

43:04

You pay for other people's lawyers too. Why do

43:06

you do that? Because it keeps them from cooperating?

43:08

I start that chapter with a story about a

43:10

mob case I did. We arrested twenty

43:14

four, I think it was, Gambino family members. And we desperately wanted to

43:16

flip one of them, but I know that in the mob

43:18

cases, the boss always pays for everyone's

43:22

lawyers the lawyers and pays for them, picks the lawyers as important, to keep

43:24

them from flipping. Now we had one guy

43:26

who wanted to flip, but he couldn't do

43:28

it. There was lawyer because he knew he would

43:31

they would tell on him. So he sent

43:33

his girlfriend on a secret mission

43:35

who found the FBI agent said he wants

43:37

to flip, but we don't know what to

43:39

do. And I talk in the book about all the legal. We

43:42

something called Shadow Council, which

43:44

I won't give it away, but we have to go through this

43:46

wild legal process to basically

43:48

break Elie guy free, and he did end

43:50

up cooperating. You want another example, that

43:52

Cassidy Hutchinson. Cassidy, I was just

43:54

gonna say, Pasadena, paid for

43:56

by the SafeAmerica the

43:58

latest round of Jack Smith's subpoenas

44:00

asked specifically about legal

44:02

fees being paid for by not just the same

44:04

artifact. Yep. But the

44:06

non existent election defense fund that raised two hundred and fifty

44:08

million dollars. Right. So Stefan

44:10

Pasadena was the lawyer for Cassidy Hutchinson,

44:12

not only was she

44:14

unable to felt unable to

44:16

come clean Elie under him, she

44:18

lied under him, at his according

44:20

to her, at his urging. And that will to the point

44:22

you were making before, e g, That

44:24

compromises her as a witness because she

44:26

the first time she was ever asked by the committee, did you

44:28

know anything about Trump wanting to go to the Capitol or

44:30

getting into a scrape with secret service? She said

44:32

no. And she later admitted

44:34

that was a lie, but she lied because

44:36

the pressure she felt from this lawyer being

44:38

in the room, which I completely understand. I've

44:40

seen it a thousand times. And here's the

44:43

kicker AG, DOJ is just fine with

44:45

all of this. I did some research. So up

44:47

until the year two

44:50

thousand eight, DOJ policy. And by the way, I should say,

44:52

incorporate type investigations, sometimes people

44:54

want their lawyers paid for. Right? It's

44:56

expensive. If

44:58

you are an assistant at a major bank

45:00

that's getting investigated. You would like

45:02

usually your lawyer to be paid for it, not

45:04

selected necessarily, but paid for it.

45:06

DOJ was fine with this.

45:08

Excuse me. DOJ, up until two thousand

45:10

eight, said in a

45:12

corporate or large scale

45:14

organizational investigation, if the

45:16

corporation or the bosses are paying for lawyers, for

45:18

others, you work to count that as a point

45:20

against the corporation. A point

45:22

against cooperation. In two thousand eight, though, this

45:24

is one of these things that happened in government and nobody notices. They issued DOJ issued a

45:26

simple memo that said, change in policy

45:30

folks, that's fine. We don't hold it against them anymore. And the reason

45:32

is hilarious. It's like Elie

45:34

believe the corporations share our

45:36

commitment to

45:38

transparency. It's like, oh, really? DOJ, you really think,

45:40

you know, Enron shares your commitment

45:42

to to transparency. But the

45:44

point is DOJ has subtotally,

45:46

change their policy, and you know what? That's been DOJ policy for

45:49

fifteen years now under both Democratic

45:51

and Republican administrations, and they have not

45:53

changed it back. Yeah.

45:56

Yeah. And and, you know, releasing the Cassidy Hutchison transcript from the

45:58

January six committee where she says, I lied.

46:00

I lied. I lied. If she says

46:03

it five times, the it's devastating.

46:05

If you think that's not gonna come up against her in

46:08

court, you're you're absolutely out of your

46:10

mind. You're on. just

46:12

say, I wrote a piece about this saying, I find

46:14

Cassidy Hutchinson to be highly credible.

46:16

And I've seen witnesses do exactly what she

46:18

Elie. Feel like they couldn't give this

46:20

one piece of really damning information. But you can bet that when

46:22

if and when there's ever a day when she's on

46:24

the stand, the first thing the defense lawyer

46:26

is gonna do is stand up from the

46:29

jury go I lied, I lied, I lied, I

46:31

lied. Those were your words. And she

46:33

goes, yeah, you lied. You committed perjury.

46:36

Didn't. She didn't. I'm not perjury. She wasn't

46:38

under oath. But you, you know, you you lied to congress. That's still Okay.

46:40

Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And and and one other

46:42

thing I wanna ask you about that this is the one

46:44

that I've been

46:46

harping about for a while

46:48

now is the sweetheart deal that

46:50

Weiselberg got from the Manhattan District

46:52

Attorney's Office. Because I don't everyone's like,

46:54

well, he's gonna do this and he's gonna do that.

46:56

And I'm like, he had

46:58

him dead to rights. He had the Oregon dead to

47:00

rights, and he should have Trump dead to rights. You

47:02

don't need to make a deal with anybody

47:04

for anything. Everyone should

47:06

have gotten the maximum sentence here.

47:08

There's no need to give him a hundred

47:10

days for his testimony

47:12

in the Trump Organization trial. He the Trump Organization

47:14

tried would have been convicted without his

47:16

BS testimony. I don't

47:19

understand this sweetheart deal that he got.

47:21

It reminded me of the Akosta Epstein

47:23

deal. I'm very critical of Xivance in this

47:26

book. Not only did Xivance

47:28

botch a fairly straightforward fraud case

47:30

against the Trump kids, and Don

47:32

Junior where they lied about a a real

47:34

estate development after Elie the way

47:36

taking a large donation from the Trump

47:38

lawyers, which he then tried to give back, and then he took

47:40

another, you know, home mass also critical

47:42

of Xivans for his Trump investigations. What

47:44

they tried to do with Weiselberg? He had

47:46

the right idea, but he botched it. Yes.

47:48

Weiselberg is the perfect guy you wanna

47:51

try to flip. Yes, you pressure him. But then when he

47:53

doesn't flip, you don't go, okay, which you're just

47:55

kidding, we're gonna give you a sweetheart deal. The

47:57

deal is you only get the deal if

47:59

you flip and they gave

48:01

him this Hap asked, well, you can

48:03

testify against the corporation, which as you

48:05

know, was probably not even helpful to

48:07

their Elie, but Elie

48:10

was probably better for the defense, but not against any individual.

48:12

I don't even know what that is. There's not even a

48:14

word for that. And it's half ass

48:16

cooperation, which does

48:18

not work. And so I think

48:20

the Manhattan DA, Cylance in

48:22

particular, has really as

48:24

as long as he bought the Harvey Weinstein case, by

48:26

the way, as well, the original Harvey Weinstein case

48:28

he had already once seen dead the rights, gave him a pass only couple

48:30

years later after media attention did he

48:33

say, oh, actually, I reconsider. So I

48:35

Elie think he look,

48:38

I think he was quite inept, and I think he was very much afraid

48:40

to tangle with powerful people.

48:42

According to Pomerantz and

48:46

done, Vance was -- Yeah. -- cool indicting like,

48:48

let me let me take it. And now

48:50

now, Alvin Braxton, hey, Pomerantz, don't

48:52

put out your book yet. You could damage

48:56

this now. Again, revitalized investigation

48:58

that I'm doing. And then but then

49:00

we have the whole I mean, in that

49:02

in that Trump org, indictment,

49:06

the word federal tax with

49:08

federal was mentioned, like, fifteen, twenty

49:10

five times, I think. Yeah. And and

49:12

we had, unfortunately,

49:14

a Trump commissioner of the IRS until just this last

49:16

November that may have been preventing any

49:18

prosecutions from happening. So

49:20

it's it's It's powerful

49:22

people, putting other powerful people in

49:24

positions to prevent them from

49:26

being prosecuted. Yes.

49:28

So that's a great point. Do wanna

49:30

pick up. So I I disagree a little bit on SciVAN. I I believe, you know,

49:32

the line in Facebook where the Zuckerberg character

49:35

goes, if you would invent Facebook.

49:37

You would have invented Facebook, right, to to

49:39

the Winklevoss twins. My

49:42

statement to side of answers, if you wanted to indict

49:44

Donald Trump, you would have indicted Donald Trump. You had

49:46

years to do it. He passed it off

49:48

to Alvin Bragg, you know, Alpen's a

49:50

friend of mine, you know,

49:52

disclosure. And clearly, he and Pomerantz disagree.

49:54

What's in what's really interesting though, and this is actually

49:56

timely for the book. The DA, you're right,

49:58

is now, well, we we're reopening this, reopening

50:00

that. They're looking back at the Hushman

50:02

payments to Stormy Daniels again. And I

50:04

have original reporting first time in this book

50:07

about what happened in SDNY? Why

50:09

did they not prosecute

50:12

Trump? Obviously, while he was president, we know the answer, but why not

50:14

after? And I have reporting in this book,

50:16

which is the first time ever, and I

50:18

will tell you I have this

50:20

story from every perspective you could want it. And what

50:22

III don't wanna totally spoil it,

50:24

but I will say this. A,

50:28

DOJ, the main, you know, suits down at DOJ,

50:31

stepped on the SDNY in

50:33

its Michael Cohen prosecution

50:35

because the SDNY had an

50:37

indictment of Michael Cohen that also gave chapter

50:40

and verse on Donald Trump. And DOJ main

50:42

boss has said, no, no, no. You need to

50:44

take all that Trump stuff out of there. And

50:46

as a result, There was a

50:48

fight, but ultimately we had SDNY as

50:50

much as we're headstrong. We're not in our guests. And if

50:52

DOJ overruled us, they

50:54

overruled us, that Michael Cohen indictment, which became an

50:56

information, was essentially sanitized.

50:58

Trump sanitized. They basically had to take

51:00

out all the Trump stuff. And then

51:03

In January twenty twenty one, when Trump left

51:05

office, I report for the first time in

51:07

this book, that Trump excuse me,

51:09

the SDMI met Do we charge them

51:11

now? And the answer they came up with? And

51:14

I detail how they got there and I don't necessarily agree

51:16

with it is no. Not worth it.

51:18

Evidence isn't good enough. Charges and serious

51:20

enough Elie various various reasons. But

51:22

what's interesting is I also know that all

51:24

the actual SDNY prosecutors on the case

51:26

felt that the evidence against Trump was somewhere

51:28

between close but enough to

51:30

charge to overwhelming. Mhmm.

51:32

Yeah. And and I don't

51:35

think the new US attorney for SDNY

51:37

got there until the end of twenty

51:39

twenty one. Howard Bauchner: Right. So early

51:41

on this was Audrey Strauss who was filling in from the prior

51:43

administration. And I actually tried to figure out if the new

51:45

US attorney, Damian Williams, who got there in

51:47

October twenty twenty one, has

51:50

reconsidered that I did not find any evidence that he has. I asked them for

51:52

comment. They didn't give me any comments. So I

51:54

don't know whether he has or not, but I've

51:56

seen no indication that he

51:58

has reconsidered. Yeah.

52:00

And and just a quick little note for everybody listening. With regard

52:02

to the hush money payment, a lot of people are

52:04

worried about the statute of limitations, but

52:07

Cuomo told the statute of

52:09

limitations during COVID, which means if

52:11

the actual final payment was made to Cohen

52:13

in that August twenty

52:16

seventeen check, Estache to limitations doesn't toll on that hush money

52:18

payment until this May.

52:20

So it's gonna be

52:22

a drag. There is a

52:24

payment that I think was connected to this.

52:26

There is a check dated late

52:28

twenty eighteen. So if you

52:30

if that was, in fact, it's one of these Michael Cohen, you know, I forget who signed it

52:32

or whatever, but it was one of these hush checks.

52:34

If that's in play, then you can extend it

52:36

to the end of plus five years twenty twenty

52:40

three. Yep. Alright. Yeah. To to basically a year from

52:42

May. Right? So we'll see

52:44

we'll see what happens in that case

52:47

and I I really recommend everybody pick up

52:50

this book. It's available now for preorder. It comes out

52:52

Tuesday. It's called yeah.

52:55

It it's it's it's gone untouchable, how powerful

52:58

people get away with it.

53:00

And it's it's a really great explainer. There's

53:02

breaking news in it, and

53:04

we look forward to hearing you hearing it and seeing you all over

53:06

on hits on the cable news very

53:08

soon. So thank you very much.

53:10

Tell everybody where they can find and

53:12

follow you. Thanks, AG.

53:14

Well, look, I am the only Ellie Elie. There

53:16

is not some other Ellie Honeig. So ELIEH0NIG.

53:19

I'm on Twitter. I'm on Instagram. Which

53:21

is fun. I'm in into Instagram now, much to the chagrin

53:23

of my children. And

53:26

I'm on in, and be doing a

53:28

little bit of they they they let you do a

53:30

tour. They let you hit a few two other TV

53:32

spots if you have a book. So I'll be

53:34

popping up on MSNBC a couple

53:36

times. And wait for people to read

53:38

this. This is a good book for rebels who

53:40

wanna know why they should be

53:42

rebelling. Great. Thank you so much for your

53:44

time. Elie Koenig.

53:46

Thanks. Alright, everybody. Like I said, we will save the good news

53:48

until Dana gets back on Monday. I

53:50

hope everyone has a great weekend. I

53:53

will be traveling. I will be unable to do a bonus episode

53:55

this week, I think, for the beans.

53:57

But I'm gonna do my best.

53:59

It might be late. I will

54:01

do my I So we'll we shall see.

54:03

There will be a new episode of

54:05

Jack on Sunday. And

54:09

I believe we're going

54:11

to have an Andrew only cleanup

54:13

on IL-forty five bonus for

54:15

you as well. So we're doing our best to get all the content to you. Thank

54:17

you for being patrons. We appreciate, and thank you for everybody for

54:20

listening. I will be back in your ears Monday with

54:22

Dana until then, please take care of yourself, take care of

54:24

each other care the planet, take care

54:26

every month of health, vote blue over

54:27

q, and bring someone with you. I've been

54:29

a g, and then's the beans. The

54:32

daily beans is written executive produced by

54:34

Alison Gill with additional research and reporting

54:36

by Dana Goldberg and Amy Carreiro. Sound

54:38

design and editing is by

54:40

Desiree McFarlane, With art and web design by Joel Reeder with Moxie Design

54:42

Studios, music for The Daily Beans is written and

54:44

performed by They Might Be Giants, and the show is a

54:46

proud member of the MSW

54:48

Media Network a collection of

54:50

creator owned podcasts dedicated to

54:52

news politics and justice. For more

54:54

information, please visit MSW media

54:56

dot com. MSW

55:00

media.

55:04

Hi. I'm leadership expert and consultant Elizabeth Cronos McLaughlin here

55:07

for the Gaia Leadership Project.

55:09

We're proud to announce our

55:11

brand new leadership course reinvention

55:14

twenty twenty three, leadership, and life.

55:16

We know the past few years

55:18

have been a lot. If you're feeling burnt

55:20

out and in need of a change,

55:22

we've got you covered. Our reinvention twenty twenty three

55:24

leadership and life program is designed

55:26

to help leaders like yourself, trans

55:30

form and heal from burnout, and reinvigorate leaders

55:32

and organizers just like you. This

55:34

program is a unique combination of

55:38

leadership training, personal development and self care strategies that

55:40

will help you become a more effective and fulfilled

55:42

leader. Through a combination of

55:44

online training, coaching, and group support,

55:48

you'll learn the latest leadership strategies and techniques while also

55:50

exploring your own personal values and goals.

55:52

Space is limited and the program starts

55:55

on February sixth. So sign up today

55:57

at gya leadership project dot com

56:00

slash reinvention dash twenty

56:03

twenty three. That's Gaia Leadership Project dot

56:06

com slash reinvention dash

56:08

twenty twenty three. Hope to see

56:10

you there.