The Sham of Bipartisanship

Republican Party. You know, Um, I do my best, as I tell all of you each and every week, to not watch the news over the weekend because I realize for myself and then I don't know about all of you, but I can ingest just as much from reading, um multiple newspaper vers just as much from being on social media than I can from actually sitting down and ingesting

just the same stories over and over again. And when I came across the fact that the Republican Party voted to censure both Adam Kissinger and and you know continue on with their fight against Liz Cheney and deciding to vote that January sixth, twenty twenty one was normal political discourse.

I wanted that that vote, that vote on gaslighting, essentially, to continue to gaslight the nation and tell us that what it was that we saw, what it was that we have experienced through playbacks, through the testimony of Capitol Police and DC Metropolitan Police, through the four hundred some odd people that have given testimony to the one six Commission, that we're all crazy, essentially, is what the Republican Party

decided to vote on. That don't believe your eyes, don't believe your own ears, don't believe anything other than the bullshit that we are willingly shoveling onto the American project, onto the project of democracy, and that you choose to censure the two Republicans who have enough goddamn sense to recognize that this country is in a free fall and that the oath that they took to uphold the Constitution to write the rule of law doesn't mean anything so

long as you're stepping outside of the Republican cult boundaries, and that you would rather censure people like the two Republicans that are sitting on the one Sex Commission, then the Marjorie Taylor Greens and the Laura Boubert's and the Matt Gateses, and so on and so forth, and so It brings me back to the end of the week when I went off on a thirst day on Instagram live being really pissed off at Joe Biden for his

comments at the breakfast. And let me remind you, Joe Biden gets up and you know, does what all of the presidents that have come before him do at this prayer breakfast and decides to applaud, gleefully applaud Mitch McConnell as his friend and as an honorable man that stands by his word. And you know, so many of us watch that, and we said, is this satire? Like? Is this deep sarcasm? Is this a preview of an snl skit? How could you possibly have been watching Mitch McConnell over

the last ten years. And the word honorable is the word that you choose to associate with his actions, with his obstructionism, with his gleeful delight in halting our democracy, with his gleeful delight in acting the Supreme Court, with folks that the American Bar Association have said are not are are not real lawyers, right and shouldn't be on the bench for life? Right? Not real lawyers, but aren't qualified?

Like when the American Bar Association says, hmm, these are really important jobs, these federal circuit courts and a federal appeals courts. And this thirty something year rold who's never been inside of a court room, who maybe graduated from Trump University, probably is not the best fit for this

lifetime appointment. And so given all of these things, and the president's reaction at the National Prayer Breakfast, you know, his smiles and his like belief that the Republican Party of the twentieth century somehow can be shaken out of its comma if in fact, you're just nice enough, if you're just you know, hold your arms out open enough, if you allow them to trample on you, if you allow them to disrespect you, you know enough, then maybe maybe right they will want to come to the table

and work with you. That's what we're going on. We're going on a battered spouse syndrome here where you you know, where you because of so much abuse, such so much consistent abuse, that you believe that you're actually the problem, not the aggressor, that if you just do things right, if you don't raise your voice, if you just cower, if you just shrink yourself a little bit, more then maybe maybe this person will love you, right like, because that is what I see when I listen to the

President of the United States and other Democrats want to talk about their friends from across the aisle, that they want to hold up legislation for its bipartisanism as opposed to really holding to the American people and showing them the truth of who this party is. It is a cult. It is a cult. And what I tweeted over the weekend that got, you know, a little bit of attention is that Donald Trump did not ruin the Republican Party. He revealed it. He revealed who the Republican Party is.

He allowed them. He celebrated them in taking off their hoods, in marching in plain sight and yelling to everybody that could hear that Jews will not replace us, right, that affirmative action is bullshit, that you know, white power is where it's at. He applauded those people. So he has allowed the Republican Party to be who it is. He did not. He did not ruin it, right like, Oh, where is the Republican Party that we all used to love.

Give me a fucking break. Everybody that came before Donald Trump was just a more polished version of him and the policies that they support, which isn't about equity, which isn't about justice, It is about white supremacy. You know, they are not. It is funny to me that these people who are like, oh, live and let live. Oh, I'm a libertarian. But you want to be able to dictate the terms of everyone else's life, right. You want to be able to tell trans kids that they can't

play in sports with their with their classmates. You want to tell women that they can't get an abortion. You want to tell black people that they can't vote. You want to tell young people like, oh, I'm sorry, you need a college education, so you need to strap yourself with six figures worth of debt. But we're not going to do anything to help you, right, We're just going

to allow you to be another cog in the machine. So, when you think about the policies that these people uplift, when you think about the things that they have said and done over the last ten plus years, Donald Trump did not ruin this party. He allowed them to become more of who they are. And so shame on us, right, Shame on us for continuing to assume that there are hearts underneath their coldness? Right that they have shared morals

and values with the rest of Americans because they do not. Right, they do not. And so it pisces me off when the president that I voted for to be a changing of the guard. Right, But again, who am I boo boo the fool to believe a man that spent forty years inside of this institution was going to be the one to shape the institution was going to be the

one to change it. No, Joe Biden came in as the great stabilizer, But in my assumption, he came in to stabilize what Donald Trump had turned over on its head, but with the clear understanding that the people that he used to work alongside of don't want to fuck with him. That these fucking you know, skin folk, right, these white folks that are along with him, that they are not his kinfolk. That they want to see you, they want to see you fail. And boy, if you drop dead,

they will dance upon your grave. How do you look out at a sea of Republican faces, those people that after you were lawfully certified as President of the United States, went back into a chamber that was filled with excrement and littered with trash and garbage that had been trashed by other Americans, and you look out that that sea of faces of Republican people who then decided to go back into that chamber and decertify your election, and you

want to call these people your friend. Wake the fuck up. It's a disgrace the way that Democrats are moving around, slouching around, begging for attention, begging for camaraderie, Like, get over it, already, shake it off. Stop worrying about how Republicans are going to react, because you know that it's going to be bad. You know that they are going to lie, You know that they are going to cheat

and steal. So if you know all of those things going into the fight, then throw every motherfucking punch that you can make them land. Make it hurt, because you're not gonna get another opportunity. So make them fear you instead of laughing at you the way that Mitch McConnell did when he has Joe Biden calling him his friend, and he looks up at him and ha ha ha, sure I'm your friend, you fucking idiot. Wake up, switching gears, folks.

I want to talk about this continued. I don't know what it is media frenzy around Joe Rogan and the fact that Joe Rogan is a racist piece of trash. And I know that we had Michael Harriet on from The Grio a week ago talking about the fact that, you know, Joe Rogan isn't a racist, He's this guy that is curious, but he gives platform to racists, right.

And the reality is is that there has been a clip somebody brilliantly put together a clip of all of the times that Joe Rogan felt it within his, within his jurisdiction right to be able to walk around using the word nigger and letting it roll off of his motherfucking tongue. Right that Spotify had to remove seventy of Joe Rogan shows where he is using the N word.

Seventy fucking shows and they think that that's acceptable, Right. You, ABC wants to remove Whoopie Goldberg for not knowing the nuances of race right in the early nineteen in the early twentieth century, when Nazis are reigning supreme and decided

that they were going to clean the German race. She was suspended for two weeks for that for the not knowing Joe Rogan knowingly use the word nigger compared black communities to Planet of the Fucking Apes on his show, laughing and joking, and Spotify thinks that it's enough to remove seventy shows. Go fuck yourself, right Like, give me

a fucking break. We have become a country that is just so comfortable with the demeaning and the degradation of Black people that you want to in during Black History Month, you think, right like, because these are the same fucking networks that want to uplift right like, go dig in the back of their closets, go hould out their latest black token and say, oh, look at us, We're not racist, and you want to lift up this month as as some type of what symbolism to black people across this country.

Don't worry about the systemic racism. Don't worry about the incarcol rate. Don't worry about you know, black women going into hospital and dying while giving birth. Don't worry about any of that. Don't worry about, you know, the socioeconomic indicators. Don't worry about the fact that you're more likely to die of COVID. Don't worry about any of those things. It's Black History Month, right, and we're gonna remove seventy

seventy shows. And when Joe Rogan goes off and decides to use the word fucking nigger like it is some type of what, right, sprinkle graffiti? What that you get to sprinkle on top of everything? And then you want to look me in my face and tell me that that man is not a racist. I don't know anybody, but I don't know anybody that is not black that uses the the N word like that, right, Give me a break, because you know, good god damn well that if it was any other fucking community, that that son

of a bitch would have been pulled. So bravo to the Neil Youngs and the Joni Mitchell's and the dr Aris of the world that are deciding to pull their catalogs from Spotify, that are actually taking a stand because it's not gonna be little old podcasts like me that only have you know, but this much impact. No, if you want to hurt these people, right, you gotta go for the money. You gotta go for big name stars that people are following and that it's the only place

that they can go. And so you gotta go after the fucking tailors, Swifts and the Drakes and the Rihannas and those people, and tell the poliar fucking catalogs. You gotta wage campaigns in that way so that anybody that is associated right can make it very clear that unless you get rid of Joe Rogan, unless you pull him right. And I don't mean pull him for two weeks, I mean pull him because before I just said, oh, I had no idea that Joe Rogan was walking around using

the N word like it was no thing. When I said, oh, he doesn't need to be you know, pulled or suspended, but there does need to be some type of fucking warning before and after and probably in the middle of his three hour shows right, a disclaimer around COVID. I didn't realize that the man was just an outright racist. So when you know more, you do better. Right, you know better, you do better. Joe Rogan wants to come out and offer some type of apology like he didn't

know the fuck out of here. You know what pisses me off is just how good right right wing white people are at putting on the water works, at apologizing for shit that they know good goddamn well that they knew right was bad. They just you know, we're hoping that they would not get caught. We're hoping that they would not get any pushback or any backlash. But we know that the communities that they can degradate, right, we know the communities that you can fucking disrespect and a

nobody give a shit. And black people are that community. Right. Meanwhile, other things folks have said, Oh and he loves to use the word faggot as well. Right, So you are spreading misinformation during a global health pandemic purposefully, you are dropping racial epithaphs, you are dropping homophobic epithaphs, like what else?

What else does Spotify overlooking for their golden boy. So if you are supporting Joe Rogan, if you are celebrating him, then know what you are celebrating, Know what you are ingesting, right, Because you cannot marry, ate and shit and come out

smelling like roses. That is not how it works. So for all the people that want to say, well, I'm a Republican and I don't believe in this current iteration of the Republican Party, but I'm a Republican, then you're a racist you're a misogynist, you're an insurrectionist, right, because we're not going to part and parcel these things. Right when your parents said to you at a very young age, right, birds of a feather flock together, you lie down with dogs,

you get up with fleas. This is what the fuck they were talking about. So there is no way to just casually disassociate yourself and say, oh, I'm only in it for the entertainment, or I'm only in it for this,

when this is a bunch of hate speech folks. Coming up next is my conversation, as always, my Monday Morning conversation with the fabulous Glenn Cursh and we will go through all of what has been going on with the one six commission, Who is the latest person in the Donald Trump circle to plead the fifth over one hundred times, and whether or not we are getting closer right to being able to see the top level people who perpetuated the violence, who paid for the violence, who had the bullhorns,

who organized these thousands of people to wage an assault on our capitol building. Not political fucking discourse, because I don't know what kind of discourse you are having when you are using flagpoles to beat police officers. I don't know what kind of fucking discourse that looks like when you were defecating in the halls of our democracy. I don't know what kind of fucking discourse it looks like when you have the QAnon shaman walking around with a

podium that he stole. If that's your fucking discourse, then don't be coming to my table, right, don't be looking for any type of collaboration around any legislation because I don't give a fuck, right, and you clearly do not. Bi Partisanism is a sham, right when the other party is a cult. It is a sham that makes people feel good that what government is working for you when

you know, good goddamn while it isn't so. Glenn and I will run through the latest with Trump's legal woes and really have a conversation about how much time the Justice Department has left do you know, do its job and go after accountability and responsibility right, And let me tell you the answer that Glenn gives coming up next

will surprise everyone. Folks. You know that I am always so grateful whenever we have the opportunity weekly to sit down with our friend MSNBC Legal analysts and the host of Justice Matters Glenn Kirshner, to talk about the latest in legal news surrounding the Department of Justice the Trump investigations. Because there are many, Glenn, we have yet another Trump confidante, you know, who is attached to the Department of Justice, another I want to say, Trump lawyer, even though were

supposed to work for the Department of Justice. Jeffrey Clark is yet another bunch of the stooges that has pled the Fifth over a hundred times. I mean this on its face, Glenn, I'm not pleading the Fifth right, because I don't have anything to hide. If everybody we bring in to have these conversations to be questioned in Trump's orbit are pleading the Fifth, we know that there's a

there there right. You're only legally entitled to plead the Fifth if your truthful testimony would incriminate you would make it seem like you committed a crime. So now let me be clear. I don't mock and deride the Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination the way Trump does, saying only mobsters, you know, invoke the Fifth because it's there for a reason, right, It's a wall between the government and the people so that the law enforcement authorities can't

beat a confession out of you. So it serves a hugely important purpose. So I embrace even treasonous lawyer Jeffrey Clark's right to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination. You called him a Trump confidant. I would also add

a Trump co conspirator. You know, I've assessed criminal evidence all my life, and you know what we learned about Jeffrey Clark is when Donald Trump said, I don't care if there is fraud in the election, just say there is, and in ferentially, just use the Department of Justice to weaponize what I'm trying to do. And Jeffrey Clark did it. He joined that conspiracy. He took Donald Trump up on it.

He went back to the Department of Justice, and he authored letters to the battleground states saying, the Department of Justice is investigating the election fraud. No it wasn't. And by the way, state election officials, here is how you can corruptly deny Joe Biden is win. Jeffrey Clark is a co conspirator just as sure as I'm sitting here. So he has a Fifth Amendment right to invoke and he invoked it a hundred times in front of the House Select Committee. So now the question becomes where does

the House Select Committee go from here? And really they can only do well three things. One, in theory, they could go into court and challenge his invocation of his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination, just like remember they went in the court and challenge Don McGann's claim of executive privilege, and McGann ran out the clock for two years and was never compelled to testify by a court. So that's not an effective approach, one because it takes

too long, and two because Congress would lose. Why would Congress lose because Jeffrey Clark has an actual right against self incrimination because he's done crime. So the only other two approaches is one they can just accept the Fifth Amendment right invocation, move on to the next witness and not deal with Jeffrey Clark again. Or two they can consider granting him immunity. Immunity is an important tool because what it does is it extinguishes a witnesses Fifth Amendment

right against self incrimination. Why because once you immunize the witness, that is a guarantee that your testimony cannot be used against you. It can't possibly incriminate you because we are guaranteeing it will never be used against you in any setting. And the reason we do that for some people who have committed crimes is because we need to work our

way up the criminal ladder. Because if Jeffrey Clark has stuff that is deeply damaging and incriminating about Donald Trump, who doesn't have that kind of stuff in government, but you know, then maybe you grant him immunity and Congress sort of gives him a pass, or at least says, your testimony can't be held against you. And sometimes the enemy of my enemy is my friend. So I take that path. But here is the danger. The danger one that doesn't mean he still has to tell the truth.

Of course, if he lies to Congress, he could be charged with perjury or technically what we call a false official statement under one thousand and one the Federal Code section. But let's assume he does tell the truth and he starts incriminating Trump left and right. If the Department of Justice tries to indict Jeffrey Clark, which I hope and believe they will at some point, it makes a prosecution of Jeffrey Clark. A successful prosecution of Jeffrey Clark more difficult.

Why because he has been forced to tell a story that would otherwise incriminate himself. All of that information goes out into the public square, and it could seep back into the trial if the Department of Justice indicts him and tries him for his crimes. That's precisely what happened to Oliver North. He committed a bunch of crimes during the Irankantra affair. He was granted immunity and forced to testify before Congress. He was then indicted, prosecuted, and convicted

of three federal felonies. But his conviction got busted. It got reversed on appeal because the appellate court said, feels like some of that immunized testimony he was forced to give seeped its way into the trial, so it wasn't a righteous conviction, and he never did go back to trial. He wasn't retried, so he ultimately got away with those crimes at the end of the day. So that's the danger of granting a guy like Jeffrey Clark immunity. Let

me ask a couple of questions here for clarification. So we have Jeffrey Clark, who I'm assuming that the letters that he wrote were on Department of Justice letterhead, I'm assuming that the emails that he sent were from his Department of Justice account. Is that not enough to hold over Jeffrey Clark's head and say here is one, crime number one, crime number two, crime number three, without providing these criminals with immunity and saying here's what you're facing,

because on its face, here's what you're facing. Because we have the evidence. You are facing an obstruction charge, you are facing the trees in charge. You were facing this like, why do we keep Glenn using the friggin carrot with these people instead of the stick when we know we have evidence that they committed crimes. Congress can't flip witnesses. Only the Department of Justice can flip witnesses, right, Because Congress doesn't have a stick. Congress can't say, listen, we've

got you dead to rights, and you're exactly right. He's committed tons of crimes by misusing the Department of Justice in all sorts of ways. So we have the evidence of crime, but Congress can't grant him immunity from prosecution. They can only immunize him and say none of these statements that you make when you testify after we've granted you immunity can be used against you if the OJ

decides to prosecute you. But the Department of Justice is the only one who can actually flip somebody and say, we're either going to charge you with these ten crimes that you've obviously committed obviously, and you're going to go to trial, or you can flip. Maybe we'll let you plead to one or two. Maybe we'll give you a reduced sentence at the end of the day, or maybe we'll grant you immunity altogether. If we don't feel it's

important enough to hold you accountable. That wouldn't be my approach. Because anytime you have a high DOJ official trying to overthrow our democracy, like Jeffrey Clark did, he has to be held accountable criminally, he has to be But only DJ can flip him and make him a cooperating witness

and deal with his criminal exposure. The Congress can't do that. Glenn, let me ask you this too, because all right, if he has information, is it is it within the purview of Congress to say, you know what or the Department. Let me go to the Department of Justice, because Congress,

like you're saying, doesn't have a stick here. So if the Department of Justice decided that they were going to begin an investigation into Jeffrey Clark, couldn't they say that, I want to hear what you know before we're going to be granting you immunity. I want to know if it's solid enough or before, like, is that the process before you say to something, Yeah, before you say to somebody, hey,

here's immunity. I need to know what cards you're holding and how those cards are going to actually hold up. We wouldn't blind As prosecutors, we would never blindly grant someone immunity without knowing what information that person could provide. Those are called debriefing sessions. We give people a basically,

we call it a queen for a day letter. It's a debriefing agreement that says you have a free pass, you have free reign to sit down with us, tell us everything you know, and none of that can never be used against you. We're going to give you this temporary immunity for a day, so then we can determine if you're telling us the truth. If you've got the goods.

Because once we have those preliminary debriefing sessions, Danielle, the next thing we do is we go out and we investigate it like all get out, to see if what the cooperating witness or the aspiring cooperating witness, what he's telling us is truthful or is a bunch of nonsense. I've had so many aspiring cooperators come in, sit down, debriefing and give me a whole bunch of nonsense, false information. So that's the kind of person I would never do business with. I'm not going to offer him a plea

and cooperation deal. I'm not going to try to flip him because he is not a reliable, trustworthy, truthful witness. So yes, we do have these preliminary debriefing sessions. We give them temporary immunity queen for a day letter, and then we assess what they have, and then we decide, Okay, is it in the interests of the American people to give this guy a plea in cooperation deal. We have been on the hunt now for the big fish, for one of them. Right the committee, the Congressional Committee, has

been playing around with the little fish. They have done over four hundred interviews on the Department of Justice has been playing with the little fish. They have locked up a couple of folks. Is Jeffrey Clark. Let me continue with our hook into the big into the big fish. Is he who Glenn we've been waiting for. I don't

even think we need him, Danielle. One of the decisions you make when you're assessing a guy like Jeffrey Clark and deciding do I want to do business with him as a cooperator or do I just want to prosecute him as part of the conspiracy to or throw our government, is do we need his testimony or do we simply want his testimony. So, for example, if there were meetings in the Oval office where Jeffrey Clark and Donald Trump were talking, and that's when Donald Trump was enlisting his

co conspirators, and Jeffrey Clark said, I'm your man. If there's another witness to that, we don't need Jeffrey Clark. We use the other witness, and we indict Jeffrey Clark. Right, you only bring a cooperator on board if you need the cooperator, not just if you want the cooperator to build a perfect case. But let me hasten to add I was on joy read on the read out with

the Senator Claire McCaskill, and we discussed this. The federal government is notorious for trying to investigate things exhaustively and too perfection before they will ever deign to bring and bring a charge. There's a reason some federal prosecutors run around boasting about how they never lost the case. It's because they never brought a difficult case. They investigate it to perfection forever, sometimes putting public safety at risk. And

if it's strong enough, what do they do. They wrap it all up with a pre indictment guilty plea and there's never a trial. If they don't think it's the perfect case, what do they do? They don't ask the grand jury to indict it. That's how they have one hundred percent win record. They don't have one hundred percent win record, and not all federal prosecutors operate that way. I didn't. But here's the thing that is DJ's standard

operating procedure. This is not a standard criminal case, and they are badly miscalculating because society is at risk and democracy hangs in the balance, So you can't you can't investigate this thing to perfection. You start to arrest the people for whom you have probable cause, you indict them, you flip them, then you do a suit preceding indictment based on the information they've provided. Then you flip that person, then you do a superseding indictment. This is law enforcement

one O one. Right, DJ is not doing it. I understand they're trying to build the perfect beast a case that is unlosable. There is no case that is unlosable, and democracy is suffering in the meantime, so DJ needs to move out. So, Glenn, how faithful are you these days? Real question? How faithful are you that the Department of Justice is going to provide justice to the American people, whether or not this is going to be a slam dunk. Like nothing in life is guaranteed, right, Like there is

no one hundred percent there is no slam dunk. So why you would go why you would even go in to the potential trial of Donald Trump and company with that attitude, I don't know. Rather than saying it is this perception that the American people need to see in order to restore their faith, and that is even more important, right, I mean, I want a conviction. You want a conviction. But to me, even going after a conviction would help to restore the faith that has been eroded over the

last four years. So how faithful are you in this moment that we're going to get there? Well, let me back my way into an answer to that question, because I am entirely confident that if the Department of Justice fails to prosecute Trump and company, there will be a

second coup attempt, and it will likely be successful. I am entirely confident if DJ fails to prosecute Donald Trump, when Donald Trump runs for reelection in twenty twenty four, Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice will be his shadow running mate. And I've said this before. He might as well drag a cardboard cutout up on the stage when he's giving his campaign hate rallies, a cardboard cutout of Merrick Garland, drape his arm around him and say,

that's my man. He has vouched for me, Ladies and gentlemen, he has. The Department of Justice and Merrick Garland have promised you that over the four years of my prior presidency, I committed no crime. I did nothing wrong. Why did they vouch for how did they vouch for me? Me? And you know, if I committed a crime, they would have been I am absolutely confident if we don't indict him,

we're done as a republic period now. To answer your question, I still because the OJ was my professional home for so long, and because I know so many of the good people who are there, who many of whom are frustrated on the inside. I can't conceive of a Department of Justice that does that, that just gives Trump and all of his co conspirators of past. I can't conceive of that. So I still have faith that they will

get there. They will get there. They'll take too long, they will be too timid, ultimately potentially in their charging decisions, because they may forego inditing some members of Congress who have criminal exposure because they don't want to be perceived as too political or reaching too far, you know. But but I believe they will get there, because I can't conceive of living in a country where we give Trump and his co conspirators a pass. Tell me, Glenn, what

is too late at this point? Right? I honestly I want to know, and I know that that seems like, you know, a trick question. But you know, we are a handful of months away from midterm elections, right, like we are two years right or a year and a

half away from the president. What is too late? I would say the midterms are too late, particularly if the Republicans take the House, because then they can't directly impact the charging decisions of the Department of Justice because it's still a democratic administration and Department of Justice headed up by an appointee who was appointed by a Democrat president. But what they can do is they can throw so much sand into the works by issuing frivolous subpoenas, by

holding bogus oversight hearings, and trying to defund. You want to talk about defund the police, They're going to defund the Department of Justice, right, or at least try to. They will use Congress's inherent power of contempt, as new Gang Ridge promised to lock up members of the January sixth Committee. I guess both the Democrats and the Republicans, so they will make they will make the Department of

Justice's work nearly impossible. So I think too late is if the mid terms hit, and certainly if the Republicans take control of the House. That's probably too late for our democracy. Wow, Glenn, So we have a countdown clock, I mean all another one in all honesty, because I think that you, you know, are a one hundred percent right. First of all, we continue to talk as if the first coup didn't it wasn't successful, and I believe that

it was. I believe that it was to send a warning, right, But there has been no really leveled accountability that we have seen. And all these people have to do is just protect themselves right the next time the next time around, um and ensure that you know the ways that people are looking at the conversations that they're having. Just cover your tracks more because you did this out and the open.

Imagine if they had covered their attracts just a little bit, right, And so for me, it's I don't think that again people realize how consequential the next couple of months are not only for this administration, but for our democracy and our faith and institution because I see it crumbling before our eyes. And I know that the Department of Justice is supposed to be this separate, non political entity, but

that was disrupted four or five years ago. So you know, last question for you you know today is if we were to have some force, I mean, if we were to like, what would be the next step. If folks realize that the alarm bells are going off, we have eight months left, what would be the next step to take the next step has the only next step is for the Department of Justice to start indicting the high

government officials that we know committed crimes. We have so much evidence beyond probable cause, which is the standard to arrest and indict someone. And yet these high government officials are prancing around the footloose and fancy free. They are, you know, they're raising money. And we learned about Trump giving a million dollars to Meadows Pack, which feels like a bribe. Hey, just keep quiet. We have Donald Trump holding his hate rallies, dangling pardons, basically recruiting his next

foot soldiers for the Second Insurrection. So the only next step to disrupt what's going on and to change the narrative is to indict the government officials and others, right the Bannons. I still believe Bannon will be indicted for the seditious conspiracy, not just for contempt of Congress, but indict the middle level and then the upper echelon and the command structure of the insurrection. Not to change the narrative.

You indict them because you have enough evidence to indict them, but it will have the fringe benefit of changing the narrative, because what I can almost guarantee, Danielle is once the bigger fish start getting indicted for, among other things, spouting off the big lie and then acting in furtherance of the big lie, the other idiots are going to shut up. They're gonna shut up because all of a sudden it will hit home to them, Oh my god, they are consequences,

and then they'll all start to shut down. It will change the narrative in a way that at least will give our democracy some hope of beginning to recover and repair and rebuild. But if we don't do it, we're done. It is that stark, and that's simple. This is where we are. This is where we are. We have a handful of months left. Glenn, as always, thank you so much for taking the time to join woke a f and breakdown, essentially our breakdown. I will say thown, Bawn

appreciate you. That is it for me today, dear friends on woke A f I wish for you all a joyful week, a RESTful week as we tackle some of the biggest headlines and talk to some of the most incredible change makers. As always, power to the people and to all the people power, get woke and stay woke as fuck.