Podcasts about Eastern District

A fight has broken out between Trump's DOJ and the Judges of the Eastern District of Virginia, who are refusing to accept any new court filing with fired US Attorney Lindsey Halligan's name on it. Meanwhile, Trump and his Attorney General are trying to exploit a loophole in the court order disqualifying Halligan to argue that she gets to stay in her job, although she was canned by Judge Currie. Popok explains the current hand to hand combat which Trump is sure to lose, and how the recent resignation of Alina Habba plays into it. Armra: Head to https://tryarmra.com/legalaf or enter promo code: LEGALAF to receive 15% off your first order! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast⁠ Legal AF: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af⁠ MissTrial: ⁠https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial⁠ The PoliticsGirl Podcast: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast⁠ Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan⁠ Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen⁠ The Weekend Show: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show⁠ Burn the Boats: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats⁠ Majority 54: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54⁠ Political Beatdown: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown⁠ On Democracy with FP Wellman: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman⁠ Uncovered: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Monday, December 8th, 2025Today, Brian Cole confessed to planting the pipe bombs the night before the insurrection and is a MAGA election denier; the developer of the ICE Block app is suing officials from DHS ICE DOJ and the White House; the DOJ is considering taking a third swipe at getting a grand jury to indict NYAG Letitia James; the Government Accountability Office is investigating Bill Pulte - the guy who made all the mortgage fraud referrals to DOJ; the Indiana House advances it's 9-0 map to the Senate; the DOJ has already started stonewalling judge Boasberg in his contempt proceedings against against government officials; Rep Adelita Grijalva was pepper sprayed by ICE after identifying herself as a Congresswoman; Kash Patel ordered a tactical SWAT guy to give his girlfriend's drunk pal a ride home; an internal BOP memo halts rape protections for trans inmates; the Department of Health and Human Services deadnamed an official on her portrait; a judge has ordered the unsealing of Epstein grand jury materials; and Allison and Dana deliver and your Good News.Guest: Joshua Aaron of ICEBlock apphttps://www.iceblock.apphttps://bsky.app/profile/joshua.stealingheather.comhttps://www.tixeconsulting.comGuest: Deirdre von DornumProminent federal criminal defense attorney - 23 years at Federal Defenders of New York - Attorney-in-Charge for the Eastern District; Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Specializing in complex federal cases, indigent defense, civil rights, and pro bono work.https://www.youtube.com/@MSWMediaPodsStoriesDrag queen Pattie Gonia completes 100-mile trek raising $1m to make outdoors more ‘equitable' | California | The GuardianRep. Adelita Grijalva says she was 'sprayed in the face' during ICE confrontation | NBC NewsIndiana House GOP advances 9-0 congressional map, sending contentious plan to state Senate | CBS NewsPipe bomb suspect confesses and has expressed support for Trump, sources say | MS NOWKash Patel ordered FBI detail to give girlfriend's pal a lift home: sources | MS NOWDOJ won't say what it advised Noem amid contempt inquiry over El Salvador deportations | ABC NewsHHS changed the name of transgender health leader on her official portrait | NPR NewsGovernment Accountability Office opens investigation into FHFA chief Bill Pulte | NBC NewsDOJ orders prison inspectors to stop considering LGBTQ safety standards | NPRJudge orders unsealing of grand jury transcripts from Epstein case in Florida | CBS NewsGood Troublehttps://near.tl/sm/ik-ZushRaEllen She/HerRhode Island continues to fight ICE. Ice vehicles are routinely spotted parked near or circling the courthouse. A WhatsApp text goes out to be present and witness/ hopefully prevent ice kidnappings. If you are a RI local, please sign up. If not, your community likely has something similar.Ice Watch RI WhatsApp channel:‎Follow the Alerta de Migra / ICE Watch RI channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBK6Y229759BqNu3p2mPROTECT YOURSELF AND YOUR COMMUNICATIONS WHEN USING WHATSAPP:https://securityinabox.org/en/tools/whatsappFront Line Defenders:https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/enJoin Dana and The Daily Beans and support on Giving Tuesdayhttp://onecau.se/_ekes71From The Good Newshttps://www.aafront.org/fbklivehttps://www.mprnews.org/story/2025/12/02/escalation-of-rhetoric-from-white-house-targeting-somalis-is-unhinged-says-somali-scholarhttps://www.summitdogrescue.org/meet-fressi--fresita.html→Please submit your own at https://DailyBeansPod.com - click on ‘Good News and Good Trouble'Our Donation Linkshttps://www.nationalsecuritylaw.org/donate, https://secure.actblue.com/donate/msw-bwc, http://WhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Dr. Allison Gill - https://muellershewrote.substack.com, https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrote.com, https://instagram.com/muellershewrote, https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote, https://www.youtube.com/@MSWMediaPodsDana Goldberg - https://bsky.app/profile/dgcomedy.bsky.social, https://twitter.com/DGComedy, https://www.instagram.com/dgcomedy, https://www.facebook.com/dgcomedy, https://danagoldberg.comMore from MSW Media - https://mswmedia.com/shows, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, https://muellershewrote.substack.comReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Jeremy Painkin, former president of the Allen Firefighters Association, was sentenced Wednesday to 13 months in federal prison for wire fraud, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Texas announced. In other news, Texas can use its newly-drawn congressional map in next year's elections, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday, reversing a lower court ruling and dealing a victory to President Donald Trump's hopes of keeping control of Congress in the midterm elections; The ramp connecting southbound Dallas North Tollway to southbound Interstate 35E in Dallas, near Oak Lawn, will be closed for routine maintenance, according to a traffic advisory from North Texas Tollway Authority. Nightly closures starting at 10 PM began Monday and will continue through Saturday. Additional closures are planned in the Celina and Prosper areas starting this evening for construction work that's part of the Dallas North Tollway Phase 4A project. All lanes of east- and westbound Frontier Parkway between north- and southbound Dallas Parkway will be closed overnight Thursday through Saturday from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. The closures are needed for deck work. An overnight closure is planned for east- and westbound Addison Airport Toll Tunnel for routine maintenance. The advisory said the AATT will be closed to traffic starting tonight from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.; And the Dallas Cowboys playoff hopes took a big hit last night after a 44-30 loss on the road at Detroit. According to the Athletic, the Cowboys now have less than a 10% chance of making the playoffs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureCalifornia is imploding, they want to retroactively tax billionaires, they are becoming desperate. Trump has brought fuel down below $2 in Co. Trump shows the country he has reversed everything that Biden has done. Trump lets the people know that Liberation day is coming, we will be liberated from the [CB]. The [DS] is panicking, Trump is dismantling the drug, human, child trafficking networks. Trump is exposing which countries are involved in manipulating the election. The [DS] is fighting back trying to remove the leaders of the agencies, this will fail. The [DS] will push for riots and war and Trump is already putting things into place to counter all of this. Liberation Day is approaching. Economy https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1995869912196161753?s=20   unveiled a retroactive billionaire tax targeting 2025 residency. The 5% levy applies even if the individual has already relocated, turning “temporary” fiscal policy into a weapon against those who stayed too long. While courts have sometimes upheld narrow retroactive taxes, justices from Scalia to O'Connor have warned against exactly this kind of “bait-and-switch” confiscation. As California's population and revenue base shrink, the state appears willing to gamble on a constitutionally dubious wealth grab to plug the holes. (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/_johnnymaga/status/1995607860026507467?s=20 Manufacturing Surveys Show Conflicting Signals: Growth or Contraction? Two closely watched surveys of U.S. manufacturing activity painted sharply divergent pictures in November, with one showing continued expansion and the other reporting accelerating contraction, highlighting deep uncertainty about the sector's health amid ongoing adjustment to the new rules of global trade. The S&P Global U.S. Manufacturing PMI registered 52.2 in November, marking the fourth consecutive month above the 50 threshold that separates expansion from contraction. However, the reading slipped from 52.5 in October. By contrast, the ISM Manufacturing PMI fell to 48.2, down from 48.7 in October and marking the ninth consecutive month of contraction. The divergence places the two surveys on opposite sides of the expansion-contraction divide, an unusual occurrence that suggests significantly different conditions across the manufacturing landscape.  https://twitter.com/ShadowofEzra/status/1995904464625000594?s=20   the national debt. He adds that in the future Americans will no longer have to pay income tax at all. https://twitter.com/WatcherGuru/status/1995906384764846376?s=20 Reminder, that the objective of the tariffs is not just using trade to secure peace. It's about freeing the American People from slavery via income tax. That's why Trump called it “Liberation Day” when he implemented the tariff economic plan. The goal is no income tax. Political/Rights https://twitter.com/LiberalsLeaving/status/1995524375534321766?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1995524375534321766%7Ctwgr%5E1abd29295b52f4bb4422e1469e33d198815032f8%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fellen-degeneres-planning-crawl-back-united-states-after%2F  OUTRAGE: New York Quietly Releases Nearly 7,000 Dangerous Illegal Migrants Including Rapists, Killers, Terrorists, and Repeat Offenders With Zero Notice to ICE   U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons has issued an explosive letter to New York Attorney General Letitia James, demanding immediate action after state and local officials quietly released nearly 7,000 criminal illegal aliens, including rapists, killers, gang members, and repeat violent offenders, without honoring ICE detainers and without a single notification to federal authorities. Since January 20, New York has released 6,947 criminal illegal aliens back onto the streets. These offenders are tied to: 29 homicides 2,509 assaults 199 burglaries 305 robberies 392 dangerous drug offenses 300 weapons offenses 207 sexual predatory offenses Worse, another 7,113 criminal aliens remain in New York custody today, all with active ICE detainers that state officials continue to ignore. These detainees include: 148 charged with homicide 717 charged with assault 134 charged with burglary 106 charged with robbery 235 dangerous drug offenses 152 weapons offenses 260 sexual predatory offenses Source: thegatewaypundit.com  https://twitter.com/DataRepublican/status/1995618958586904896?s=20 https://twitter.com/ColonelTowner/status/1995674641591873840?s=20   similar and blind sided the CIA and a few months later another one was exposed that wasn't on the completed list. They're paid out of proprietary companies that no one tracks. https://twitter.com/mattvanswol/status/1995652622112760293?s=20   invaders to slaughter our heroes, suck dry our hard-earned tax dollars, or snatch the benefits owed to AMERICANS. WE DON’T WANT THEM. NOT ONE. https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1995735514469527661?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/JoeLang51440671/status/1995662088337768634?s=20 Delegation of U.S. Representatives From Intelligence Committee Traveled to Honduras to “Observe” Election   , a delegation of U.S. Representatives traveled to Honduras to personally “participate in observation” of their elections to “underscore the United States' continued support for transparent, credible, and peaceful democratic processes in the region,” according to a press release from Representative Rick Crawford, the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. https://twitter.com/RepRickCrawford/status/1995625707318509587?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1995625707318509587%7Ctwgr%5Ecbef4e85d24884b779ca77c501bc569911e36442%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fdelegation-u-s-representatives-intelligence-committee-traveled-honduras%2F  Hemisphere neighborhood rests heavily on our key allies’ ability to instill trust in their commitment to democracy and the administering of free and fair elections. The people of Honduras made it very clear they wanted U.S. eyes on this election, and they showed up in droves at voting locations yesterday to peacefully exercise their right to determine the future of their country. Source: thegatewaypundit.com War/Peace Trump gives Maduro a week to leave Venezuela… and the latter requests a full pardon Trump gives Maduro a week to leave Venezuela… and the latter requests a full pardon   Maduro also expressed his willingness to leave his country on the condition that he and his family members receive a full legal pardon that includes lifting all US sanctions and ending the high-profile case he faces before the International Criminal Court. These developments come as Maduro appeared before a crowd near the presidential palace, affirming his “absolute loyalty” to the Venezuelan people, surrounded by senior officials in his government. Source:  iraqidinarchat.net  Trump's Latin American Allies Against Venezuela  alliances are shaping up in the Caribbean, with many countries abandoning Venezuela and supporting the United States. Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro is becoming increasingly isolated as regional governments shift away from Chavismo and move closer to Washington. Honduras and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, once reliable partners for Caracas, have both elected new governments that pledged to distance themselves from Maduro.  Honduras   Argentina, Ecuador, El Salvador, and Bolivia have also deteriorated as those countries shifted to the right. Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, both U.S. territories, have seen a renewed military buildup, with fighter jets and transport aircraft operating from Cold War-era facilities such as Roosevelt Roads and new activity at St. Croix's airport. Grenada is considering a U.S. request to host temporary radar equipment and personnel at Maurice Bishop International Airport. The government is still weighing technical and safety concerns, and the decision is complicated by the 1983 U.S. invasion and the airport's symbolic significance. Colombia remains the strongest partner, working closely with the United States on counter-narcotics, sanctions enforcement, and intelligence sharing, while also coordinating policy on the region's largest population of Venezuelan refugees. Paraguay and Uruguay consistently vote with Washington at the OAS to isolate Maduro and support democratic transition efforts. Ecuador works with the United States on organized crime, Venezuelan gang activity, and sanctions evasion, and has been publicly critical of the regime.  Maduro's remaining allies in the region are Cuba and Nicaragua, but neither is positioned to provide meaningful assistance. Cuba publicly supports Venezuela but is facing a severe economic crisis and avoids committing to any response if the United States takes military action  source: thegatewaypundit.com  https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1995595335771836726?s=20 https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1995682004151783727?s=20 New York Times Catches Washington Post Red-Handed Defaming Pete Hegseth as a ‘War Criminal' Regarding Previous Strike on Narcotrafficking Boats – Reveals Full Story Behind Attack  The narrative regarding Secretary of War Pete Hegseth ordering the killing of survivors in a boat attack in the Caribbean has officially been debunked by a highly unlikely source, which revealed the full story behind the attack. Source:thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/SeanParnellUSA/status/1995674824715501844?s=20 https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/1995883027881144762?s=20   countless “anonymous” leaks meant to undermine him and thwart President Trump and other Realists in the Administration. Bogus story after bogus story. It's the same tired playbook. And for their next act? —They want him tried for war crimes. Yep—war crimes. They intend to prosecute another political opponent. They have lost it. Congressional Democrats are fueled by a radicalized Leftist base and are hellbent on power. The rules don't matter to them. At all. Sound familiar? Russiagate, Dem censorship, Covid tyranny, Dem weaponization of DOJ TO MY FELLOW REPUBLICANS: Understand this reality and never bend the knee to this bullshit. Fight back. The liberal media will never love you. If Europe wants a war, we are ready to fight now, says Vladimir Putin   Putin Says ‘Ready For War’ Against Europe If Attacks On Russian Tankers, Energy Continue   Europe, which has been largely sidelined when it comes to the US peace plan version, Putin is angry. He denounced a recent series of drone strikes on oil and gas tankers carrying Russian energy exports acts of “piracy”. He also on Tuesday made clear that European demands related to Moscow are not at all acceptable, suggesting that they are by intention an effort to prod and anger Russia. He said that “Europe only proposes unacceptable demands,” according to Interfax. “They are on the side of war,” he said of the Europeans. “Russia has no intention of going to war with European countries. But if Europe wants war Russia is ready” – Putin has told journalists before meeting Witkoff and Kushner. https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1995873487806751007?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1995873487806751007%7Ctwgr%5Ebba698f8622537fd3d54c6bdae932a981c0c754e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fputin-threatens-ready-war-against-europe-if-attacks-russian-tankers-energy-continue *  Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/BRICSinfo/status/1995883653524848869?s=20 Trump's Push to End the Ukraine War Is Sowing Fresh Fear About NATO's Future This week will bring a split screen that will reinforce growing doubts in Europe about the American commitment to the alliance that has served as the bedrock of Western unity since the end of World War II. On one side, White House special envoy Steve Witkoff will be in Moscow for the latest round of peace talks with the Kremlin over the Ukraine war. Witkoff, who has yet to visit Ukraine, is making his sixth trip to Moscow this year. Source: wsj.com Medical/False Flags https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/1995856194779402737?s=20  . Why is this? False Alarms: Rethinking Breast Cancer Screening https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1995887210965729768?s=20 [DS] Agenda  https://twitter.com/SecDuffy/status/1995649610488914054?s=20   fix this or lose $30 million in federal funding  https://twitter.com/SecScottBessent/status/1995615377284628908?s=20 @POTUS @realDonaldTrump , we are acting fast to ensure Americans' taxes are not funding acts of global terror. We will share our findings as our investigation continues. “President Trump is Threatening to Kill Me!” – Dem Senator Mark Kelly Goes on Insane Rant During Presser on ‘Pentagon Intimidation' (VIDEO) Democrat Senator Mark Kelly claimed Trump threatened to kill him during a press conference on ‘Pentagon intimidation' on Monday. Mark Kelly is one of the ‘Seditious Six' Democrat lawmakers who urged members of the military to defy Trump's orders. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1995606715190890968?s=20   run a foreign influence operation targeting the very government his twin serves in. United24, created by Ukraine's Ministry of Digital Transformation using a USAID-funded infrastructure, appointed Scott Kelly, Senator Mark Kelly’s twin brother, as its ambassador to help raise money for the propaganda outlet. Since then it has raised $2.72 billion, much of it routed quietly via cryptocurrency. United24 produces coordinated messaging marketed as “fact-checking” and “anti-corruption efforts,” but in practice operates as a state propaganda engine shaping US public opinion and Congressional support for Ukraine's war. JUST IN: Schumer Claims Three of His New York Offices Received “MAGA” Bomb Threats (VIDEO)  Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Monday claimed three of his offices received “MAGA” bomb threats.   Schumer said he was informed that his offices received the threats from emails with the subject line ‘MAGA' from an email address claiming the ‘2020 election was rigged.' https://twitter.com/tararosenblum/status/1995601284892971273?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1995601284892971273%7Ctwgr%5Ec0381dd15615388f5e8a8ba9d4cced6b8217b451%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fschumer-claims-three-his-new-york-offices-received%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/TonySeruga/status/1995838817975370228?s=20   Scott Kelly (Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appointed Mark Kelly's twin brother, Scott Kelly as an ambassador for Ukraine’s official fundraising platform, UNITED24) to leak ‘stories’ to the media and undermine Secretary Hegseth. https://twitter.com/TonySeruga/status/1995847809627766919?s=20   Nuland, Samantha Power, Lisa Monaco, and Susan Rice. https://twitter.com/TonySeruga/status/1946588339488038984?s=20 minutes to the Obama's War Room residence, sight unseen. President Trump's Plan https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1995914978730144246?s=20  and will begin to stop moving federal funds into those states until they comply.” https:/twitter.com/amuse/status/1995847602743439722?s=20 Amuse: LAWFARE: Trump just removed another 8 pro-illegal immigration judges in Manhattan, 90 fired so far as he restores rule of law to the immigration courts. On December 1, the Trump administration dismissed eight immigration judges at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan for patterns of excessive asylum approvals, refusal to enforce statutory standards and unmanageable processing delays. This brings Trump's total removals to 90 judges nationwide. The administration says the effort is necessary to dismantle the pipeline of activist judges who reward illegal entry with near-automatic asylum approvals. Conservatives call it long-overdue accountability; opponents concede the judges had serious performance issues. https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1995586287064039445?s=20   witnessing a Judicial Insurrection. BREAKING: DOJ to Hit Comey, Letitia James with New Indictments As Soon as This Week The DOJ is seeking new indictments against James Comey and Letitia James after a Clinton judge dismissed both of their cases last week. A grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia indicted former FBI Director James Comey in September. He was indicted on two counts – false statements and obstruction of a congressional proceeding. New York Attorney General Letitia James was indicted by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia last month. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1995886116356968591?s=20   grip on power. Democrats tried to block all three from serving. When that failed, they turned to nonstop “anonymous sources,” fake jacket stories, bogus intelligence leaks, and now a desperate push to prosecute Hegseth for imaginary war crimes. Their radicalized base demands a new Russiagate every month, and congressional Democrats are delivering, rules be damned. This is the same machinery that fueled censorship, Covid authoritarianism, and DOJ abuse. The only response: refuse to bow. https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1995623545377096023?s=20    Trump is back to pushing for the Senate to terminate the filibuster.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

And a shorter summer associate program. ----- While most of us celebrated Thanksgiving, some of Trump's phony U.S. Attorneys were the real turkeys. First, a conservative leaning panel of the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the million dollar sanctions against Donald Trump and the parking garage lawyer he claims to have running the District of New Jersey. Then his Eastern District cosplaying prosecutor managed to lose not one, but two of the high profile revenge cases she brought. In other news, a major firm announced a new look summer associate program as it tries to deal with the law school recruiting free-for-all that everyone hates, yet no one seems able to do anything about.

And a shorter summer associate program. ----- While most of us celebrated Thanksgiving, some of Trump's phony U.S. Attorneys were the real turkeys. First, a conservative leaning panel of the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the million dollar sanctions against Donald Trump and the parking garage lawyer he claims to have running the District of New Jersey. Then his Eastern District cosplaying prosecutor managed to lose not one, but two of the high profile revenge cases she brought. In other news, a major firm announced a new look summer associate program as it tries to deal with the law school recruiting free-for-all that everyone hates, yet no one seems able to do anything about. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join us to celebrate the federal trial bench and to hear from Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo, of the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, as she describes her path from prosecuting street crime in the District of Columbia US Attorney's Office, to prosecuting hate crimes at the US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, to prosecuting war crimes and crimes against humanity at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague, to serving as Chief Hearing Officer at the New York Stock Exchange and General Counsel of New York City's Office of Administrative Trials and hearings, and more. Judge Kuo reflects on how each of these positions prepared her for the next, and her practical perspective on how every day can be a good day in court.

In a huge blow to Donald Trump's attempt to seek revenge on people he perceives as his enemies, a federal judge has dismissed the criminal prosecutions Trump's Department of Justice brought against former FBI Director James Comey and current New York Attorney General Letitia James. Judge Currie ruled that Trump flunky Lindsey Halligan was illegally appointed as interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia U.S. Attorney's Office, and thus the indictments she obtained for Comey and James are null and void. Glenn discusses Judge Currie's new ruling and where these cases may go from here. To follow Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In a huge blow to Donald Trump's attempt to seek revenge on people he perceives as his enemies, a federal judge has dismissed the criminal prosecutions Trump's Department of Justice brought against former FBI Director James Comey and current New York Attorney General Letitia James. Judge Currie ruled that Trump flunky Lindsey Halligan was illegally appointed as interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia U.S. Attorney's Office, and thus the indictments she obtained for Comey and James are null and void. Glenn discusses Judge Currie's new ruling and where these cases may go from here. To follow Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Take back your personal data with Incogni! Use code CHAOS at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/chaos   Big Mazal Tov to Lindsey Halligan, who can stop pretending to be a federal prosecutor now. Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled that Halligan was never lawfully appointed as US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. And since Halligan was the only lawyer who presented the James Comey and Letitia James cases to the grand jury, those cases were dismissed. In a normal world, the Justice Department would just take the "L" and reindict. But nothing is normal in Pam Bondi's DOJ!   Links:   US v. Ghislaine Maxwell https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17318376/united-states-v-maxwell/?order_by=desc   As Trump's Inquisitors Face Scrutiny, a Divisive Figure Could Play a New Role https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/23/us/politics/trump-florida-cannon-grand-jury.html     Turning Point leader, former GOP Rep pleads guilty to attempted election fraud https://azmirror.com/briefs/turning-point-leader-former-gop-rep-pleads-guilty-to-attempted-election-fraud/   Abbott v. LULAC [SCOTUS docket] https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25a608.html   US v. Stewart https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.285023   Judge Thornhill Disqualification Petition https://www.courts.mo.gov/fv/c/Notice.PDF?courtCode=SC&di=214030   US v. Bolton https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17254525/united-states-v-bolton/?order_by=desc   US v. Comey https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136   US v. James https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71601419/united-states-v-james/?order_by=desc   Biden v. Byrne https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67990012/robert-hunter-biden-v-patrick-m-byrne/?order_by=desc   Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod  

This Day in Legal History: Free Speech at the MoviesOn this day in legal history, November 25, 1915, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, holding that motion pictures were not protected under the First Amendment. The case arose when Ohio enacted a law requiring films to be approved by a censorship board before public exhibition. Mutual Film Corporation challenged the statute, arguing it infringed upon free speech and press freedoms. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected that argument, declaring that movies were a business enterprise, not a medium of public expression deserving constitutional protection. The Court emphasized that films could be used for evil and lacked the inherent public value of newspapers or books.This ruling gave states and cities wide discretion to censor films, leading to the rise of local and state censorship boards that controlled what audiences could legally view. It also provided a legal foundation for the Motion Picture Production Code, or Hays Code, a system of industry self-censorship that dominated Hollywood for decades. For nearly 40 years, this decision limited the creative scope of filmmakers and allowed governments to suppress films based on moral, religious, or political grounds.It wasn't until Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson in 1952 that the Supreme Court reversed course, striking down New York's ban on a film deemed “sacrilegious” and recognizing movies as a significant medium for the communication of ideas. The reversal marked a turning point for First Amendment jurisprudence and artistic freedom. But on November 25, 1915, the legal system closed the door on film as protected speech—setting the stage for a long legal battle over cinema's place in American constitutional law.The U.S. Department of Justice's misconduct complaint against U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes was dismissed. The rare complaint accused Reyes of bias in her handling of a case challenging President Donald Trump's ban on transgender individuals serving in the military. Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan ruled in September that judicial misconduct proceedings were not the proper venue to raise such concerns, suggesting instead that the DOJ could have filed for Reyes' recusal if it believed she was unfit to preside.The complaint, filed in February before Reyes ruled on the case, alleged she had shown hostility during hearings by expressing disbelief, questioning a lawyer's religion, and engaging in behavior the DOJ claimed compromised the dignity of the courtroom. The Justice Department claimed her conduct showed potential bias. In March, Reyes blocked Trump's executive order, though her ruling is currently on hold pending appeal. The complaint was one of only two such filings by the DOJ amid broader tensions between Trump's administration and the judiciary. Neither Reyes nor the DOJ commented on the dismissal.US DOJ's misconduct complaint against judge in transgender military ban case gets tossed | ReutersA federal judge dismissed the criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James after finding that the prosecutor who brought the charges lacked lawful authority. The judge concluded that Lindsey Halligan, appointed by the Trump administration as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, was installed in violation of the Constitution's Appointments Clause and federal law governing interim U.S. attorney appointments. Because her appointment was invalid, every step she took—including securing indictments—was deemed an unlawful exercise of executive power and therefore had to be vacated. The judge rejected the Justice Department's argument that the attorney general could repeatedly make interim appointments without Senate confirmation, noting that doing so would sidestep the constitutionally required process. Attempts by Attorney General Pam Bondi to retroactively validate Halligan's actions—such as re-appointing her as a special attorney and “ratifying” the indictments—were also found ineffective.Under the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution and federal statute, U.S. Attorneys must be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. When a vacancy arises, the Attorney General may make an interim appointment, but that appointment is limited by law to 120 days. If a permanent U.S. Attorney is not confirmed within that time, the district court may appoint a replacement to serve until the vacancy is officially filled. This process is designed to ensure both accountability and separation of powers, preventing the executive branch from indefinitely bypassing Senate oversight by cycling through temporary appointments. Repeated or back-to-back interim appointments without Senate confirmation undermine this framework, raising constitutional concerns about legitimacy and legality.The cases were dismissed without prejudice, leaving the door open to new prosecutions, though the expired statute of limitations appears to bar refiling against Comey. Defense lawyers had additionally characterized the charges as politically driven, but the court did not need to reach those claims because the appointment defect alone required dismissal. The ruling underscores that prosecutions must be brought by properly appointed officials, and that structural constitutional violations invalidate downstream actions—even in high-profile or politically charged cases.US judge tosses cases against ex-FBI chief Comey, New York AG James | ReutersA federal judge has denied Arkansas health worker Joy Gray's request for immediate reinstatement after she was fired over social media comments made following the murder of conservative figure Charlie Kirk. Gray sought a preliminary injunction requiring the Arkansas Department of Health to rehire her, continue paying her, or provide a “name-clearing hearing” to protect her reputation. However, U.S. District Judge Lee P. Rudofsky ruled that Gray failed to demonstrate the kind of irreparable harm necessary to justify emergency relief, emphasizing that job loss—even from a government position—does not automatically meet that legal standard. He cited controlling precedent, noting Gray did not show she couldn't be adequately compensated by monetary damages if she ultimately wins her case.The judge also rejected her claim that the department's actions were currently chilling her speech, pointing out that the firing was a past event and not part of an ongoing restriction. Additionally, her request for a name-clearing hearing was unlikely to succeed, as the court found no stigmatizing statements in the department's response. Rudofsky was careful to clarify that this ruling does not determine the outcome of Gray's broader First Amendment retaliation claim, which may involve more complex legal questions as the case proceeds.State Worker Fired for Kirk Posts Can't Revive Job During Trial This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

November 25, 2025 ~ Law Professor at University of Michigan & Former U.S. Attorney of the Eastern District of Michigan Barb McQuade joins Chris, Lloyd, and Jamie to discuss the judge dismissing cases against James Comey. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

November 25, 2025 ~ Barb McQuade, Former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan and Professor at the University of Michigan Law School joins Kevin to talk about how James Comey's prosecutions have been dismissed Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

At 4 pm ET, Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett will sit down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Lawfare Contributor James Pearce to discuss a judge dismissing the indictments against both former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, ruling that Lindsey Halligan was not properly appointed to served as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.You can also watch the conversation on YouTube.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nicolle Wallace covers a judge's ruling that the interim US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, “has been unlawfully serving in that role…”. With the judge's rebuke against Halligan came the dismissals of the criminal cases against former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, which Comey says is nothing short of a win for the rule of law.Later, Lt. General Mark Hertling breaks down the Pentagon's investigation into Senator Mark Kelly, one of the six Democrats who Trump has accused of “sedition at the highest level,” due to his participation in a video reminding active servicemem bers to refuse illegal orders.For more, follow us on Instagram @deadlinewhTo listen to this show and other MS NOW podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts.   For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe [DS]/[CB] are moving forward with their tax plan world wide, this will destroy their [CB] system. You can now see the difference between the red states and blue states. The American replacement of foreign workers is now in progress. Trump reveals the economic plan to the people. Trump tested the [DS], they used lawfare and the activist judges to dismiss the cases of Comey and James. The prosecution is continues, appeals coming. Time to impeach the Judges. Trump is on the verge of making a peace deal with Russia and Ukraine and the [DS] is trying to stop him. Trump places a target on the Muslim Brotherhood, he will designate them as a terrorist group. The only way is the military, military tribunals. Economy https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1992258797830873248?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Tick, Tick , Tick: Study Shows California Losing A Taxpayer Every Minute  California is facing a perfect storm in finances, with a crippling deficit and a declining tax base. Now, a study of IRS data by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation found that California is losing a taxpayer roughly every minute, as states like Florida, Texas, and North Carolina attract new residents due to lower taxes and higher standards of living. In comparison, Florida gains a new taxpayer every 2 minutes and 9 seconds while Texas gains one every 2 minutes and 53 seconds. The result has been a bonanza for Florida, which is now collecting $4 billion more per year for its budget. The states losing taxpayers at the fastest rate are California, New York, and Illinois. Here is the rate of loss: California: every 1 minute and 44 secondsNew York: every 2 minutes and 23 secondsIllinois: every 6 minutes and 4 seconds.Massachusetts: every 11 minutes and 38 secondsNew Jersey: every 14 minutes and 14 seconds. Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1992969030186025199?s=20   considering allowing Nvidia, $NVDA, to sell advanced AI chips to China.    accurate. Now we can set our sights on the big picture. To that end, President Xi invited me to visit Beijing in April, which I accepted, and I reciprocated where he will be my guest for a State Visit in the U.S. later in the year. We agreed that it is important that we communicate often, which I look forward to doing. Thank you for your attention to this matter!   DONALD J. TRUMP PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/1992933719192277169?s=20 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1992651508744065266?s=20   other hand, 34% see gold prices falling below $4,000, with 26% anticipating a range of $3,500 to $4,000. Meanwhile, 39% of professional investors in the survey do not own any gold in their portfolios. Gold is also no longer “the most crowded” trade after topping that list for the first time in October. Wall Street is still  unconvinced about gold.    apply to, without avoidance, and the amounts payable to the USA will SKYROCKET, over and above the already historic levels of dollars received. These payments will be RECORD SETTING, and put our Nation on a new and unprecedented course. We are already the “hottest” Country anywhere in the World, but this Tariff POWER will bring America National Security and Wealth the likes of which has never been seen before. Those opposing us are serving hostile foreign interests that are not aligned with the success, safety and prosperity of the USA. They couldn't care less about us. I look so much forward to the United States Supreme Court's decision on this urgent and time sensitive matter so that we can continue, in an uninterrupted manner to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DJT https://twitter.com/589bull10000/status/1992941720628047931?s=20   Read what he actually said: – Importers burned through the “stock up” dodge – Now they're trapped— everything they buy gets hit – Tariff revenue is about to explode vertically – America becomes a trade-powered superstate – And anyone opposing it is “serving hostile foreign interests ” If SCOTUS blocks this, they're siding with the global parasites not the American people. This is the keystone to the entire monetary reset: • RLUSD as the digital dollar • XRP/XDC settling global flow • ISO 20022 rails snapping together • Ripple + BNY Mellon wiring the system • BRICS commodity shift accelerating • Iraq's IQD prepping for international use • Tariffs funding the transition away from income tax It's all connected and Trump knows exactly what he's doing. He's daring SCOTUS to kill the revenue engine powering America's comeback. Refunds? Please. That would nuke the entire global architecture being built right now. SCOTUS isn't suicidal. This is the moment the old system dies and the new one comes online. You're watching the reset happen in real time Political/Rights https://twitter.com/RobertMSterling/status/1992807431747891538?s=20 https://twitter.com/TriciaOhio/status/1992956196794343889?s=20   used their training and appropriate force. https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/1992972952313249990?s=20 https://twitter.com/Geiger_Capital/status/1992731012174954975?s=20   immigration.” The 1924 Act passed the House and Senate with overwhelming support. Democrats AND Republicans agreed. The bill introduced tight immigration quotas, new visa requirements, the Border Patrol, and outright banned immigrants from certain countries that we viewed as incompatible with our culture. It dramatically reduced the number of people coming into the country, and provided an opportunity for the recent “great wave” of immigrants to assimilate. By the 1940’s and 1950’s, American society thrived with a boomimg economy, rising middle class, common culture and limited immigration. The Act was in place until 1965. Since then, we have experienced decades of *historic* immigration, both legal and illegal. Today we have higher levels of foreign-born than the early 1900's by both raw number and percentage of population. This mass immigration has also included vastly different cultures than the mostly Europeans we accepted then. It's obvious that we once again need to make a national policy shift, and it should be bipartisan… It's time for another Immigration Act. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1992591518314668440?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1992794921569517639?s=20 DOGE  https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1992754205308944525?s=20 https://twitter.com/drawandstrike/status/1992765443052814719?s=20 based on recent reports, it’s true that DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) has been integrated into many federal agencies through embedded teams, staff, or operational units—often described as “DOGE offices” or equivalents—that continue its mission of efficiency, waste reduction, and oversight. This decentralization followed the quiet disbandment of DOGE as a standalone entity around November 2025, ahead of its original July 2026 expiration.  While sources vary on the exact scope (e.g., “all” vs. “many” agencies), the embedding is widespread and includes: Office of Personnel Management (OPM): Acts as a central hub for DOGE’s workforce reduction directives, with embedded staff handling HR overhauls and agency-wide efficiency mandates.  Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Institutionalizes DOGE’s tools for deregulation, AI audits, and budget cuts, with teams funded through agency IT modernization funds.  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): Former DOGE staffers in roles like chief technology officer, focusing on fraud detection and program streamlining.  State Department: Embedded personnel overseeing foreign assistance and efficiency reforms. Department of Education: DOGE teams with access to federal student loan data and other systems for waste elimination. Treasury Department (including IRS): Staff integrated for system access and financial oversight. Other agencies: Reports mention integration in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Naval Research, General Services Administration (GSA), Social Security Administration, and dozens more, with over 100 former DOGE staffers reassigned across the government. Some agencies were directed to establish minimum teams of four specialists (e.g., engineer, HR expert, lawyer, and lead) coordinating with a rebranded U.S. DOGE Service in the Executive Office of the President. This model makes DOGE’s influence more pervasive and harder to dismantle, as it’s no longer a single target but distributed “watchdogs” with data access and decision-making roles. Critics, including Democrats, have raised concerns about political influence from these embedded staffers. Overall, while not every minor agency may have a formal “DOGE office,” the embedding affects a broad swath of the federal government, with ongoing activities like contract terminations (e.g., $1.9 billion in recent cancellations). Geopolitical https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1992964442380779549?s=20 https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/1992964685071839677?s=20   Barbary Pirates were a raiding group of true pirates who captured American and European ships off of the North African coast, stole the ships and cargo, and enslaved or ransomed the crews. The pirates were generally under the control of the Ottoman Tripolitania, and many were true privateers: i.e., civilian ships and civilian crews causing great harm to American interests. So President Thomas Jefferson sent the Navy and the Marine Corps to North Africa to blow those private ships and crews the hell out of the water. Tommy J. didn't have Predator drones like Trump is using to blow narcoterrorists out of the water who are trying to slaughter hundreds of thousands of Americans with fentanyl, but Tommy did have some kick-ass Marines to blow pirates out of the water who were enslaving American citizens. Right on the shores of Tripoli. Hence the song. But Democrats are too stupid to know what that means. ‘Murica. Blowing up civilian ships since 1801, all to protect America. So how about it, you lobotomite Democrats? Were Tommy J.'s orders lawful or unlawful? We all know the answer, even though you won't admit it. Lawful. Just like Trump's lawful preservation of American lives from the scourge of fentanyl. Learn a little history, you Democrat goons. Now go write the Marines' Hymn 5,000 times on the blackboard until you learn your lesson.  War/Peace Europe’s Counter-Plan For Ukraine Peace Leaves Door Wide Open For NATO Admission  Even as the Trump White House is busy in Europe trying to get NATO and EU states on board its 28-point peace plan which controversially demands the Ukrainian side cede territory, the Europeans have leaked their own counter-plan which proposes much less in the way of compromise with Russia. The UK, France, and Germany have put forward their own counter-proposal, and the draft differs sharply from the US version. Like with prior proposed deals, it contains terms which Moscow is expected to flatly reject, mostly notably it does not provide guarantees that Ukraine will stay out of NATO, and also absent is the ceding of any territory. While Trump’s plan makes clear that Ukraine must renounce ever joining NATO, the European draft states that Ukraine's potential NATO membership “depends on the consensus of NATO members, which does not exist.” This intentionally ambiguous language of course leaves leaves the door wide open, dependent on when such consensus is reached. Source: zerohedge.com Iuliia Mendel, a former press secretary for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, called for Ukraine to take a proposed peace deal to end the war with Russia. https://twitter.com/IuliiaMendel/status/1992359920587456588?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1992359920587456588%7Ctwgr%5E9b767ce8c41408adb1f6ebbec3a08e6fcaf1888f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Ft%2Fassets%2Fhtml%2Ftweet-5.html1992359920587456588   Russian budget or support Ukraine enough to win, no direct dialogue with Moscow, and no meaningful leverage over either the Kremlin or Washington. Arguments that “Russia has gained so little land” sound almost childish when you consider the human cost. We have lost more people in three years than some European nations have as the whole population. My country is bleeding out. Many who reflexively oppose every peace proposal believe they are defending Ukraine. With all respect, that is the clearest proof they have no idea what is actually happening on the front lines and inside the country right now. War is not a Hollywood movie. I will never abandon the values that God and democracy both place at the very foundation of human existence: human life is the highest good, and people — living, breathing people — are the ones who must be saved. https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1992980022043213980?s=20  sided with Dems to oppose Trump’s tariffs, fought against nuking the filibuster, and is now attacking President Trump for working to end the Russia/Ukraine war. Medical/False Flags https://twitter.com/AGJamesUthmeier/status/1992956482351215039?s=20 https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1992706763112776014?s=20 [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1992835356798980492?s=20 https://twitter.com/Riley_Gaines_/status/1992677326249750743?s=20 https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1992755422542074095?s=20   identify the foreign intruders and bully them mercilessly until they shut up and leave us alone. We cannot talk about or fix any of our problems with a mob of foreigners constantly barging into the conversation. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1992780986891813024?s=20   couldn’t remember where the dead gum bathroom was. And he’s reviewed 8,000 files on pardons? Give me a freaking break!” “Almost a thousand NGOs working out of Afghanistan…they’ve told us that we’ve given them close to $5 billion and we’re still doing it because it goes to the NGOs!” “The Democrats fought that amendment that we added NGOs into the bill. Why? Because there’s a thousand NGOs and you know good and well that that money’s coming right back to Washington!” President Trump's Plan https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1992975955913036001?s=20  https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1992967800407589115?s=20 https://twitter.com/FBIDDBongino/status/1992469890679394430?s=20 https://twitter.com/ColonelTowner/status/1992776650157600796?s=20 https://twitter.com/realLizUSA/status/1992623917551538562?s=20 BREAKING: Clinton Judge Dismisses Comey, Letitia James Cases – Rules Lindsey Halligan Illegally Appointed A federal judge  dismissed the criminal cases against James Comey and Letitia James. The case was dismissed without prejudice. Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, a Clinton appointee ruled that US Attorney Lindsey Halligan was invalidly appointed: For the reasons set forth above, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The appointment of Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney violated 28 U.S.C. § 546 and the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 2. All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan's defective appointment, including securing and signing Mr. Comey's indictment, were unlawful exercises of executive power and are hereby set aside. 3. The Attorney General's attempts to ratify Ms. Halligan's actions were ineffective and are hereby set aside. 4. Mr. Comey's motion to dismiss the indictment (ECF No. 60) is granted in accordance with this order. 5. The indictment is dismissed without prejudice. 6. The power to appoint an interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 546 during the current vacancy lies with the district court until a U.S. Attorney is nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate under 28 U.S.C. § 541. Source: thegatewaypundit.com Comey’s indictment is “dismissed without prejudice.” A former DOJ official said that means the indictment could potentially be refiled. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/1993028886393958499?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1992711909184000022?s=20  now defend Big, Rich Insurance. The bill would halt Obamacare premium spikes, per MSNOW. The plan reportedly includes a DEPOSIT mechanism, putting money into a Health Savings Account, incentivizing lower-premium options. It would also end the premium hikes, end zero-premium subsidies, and STOP massive fraud known as “ghost beneficiaries.” Trump recently said: “I am calling today for insurance companies NOT to be paid. But for this massive amount of money be paid DIRECTLY to the people so they can buy their own healthcare!” “We will pay a lot of money to the people, and FORGET this Obamacare madness!” Klobuchar Delivers Insane Word Salad When Asked What Specific “Illegal” Orders Trump Issued the Military (VIDEO)  NBC's Kristen Welker actually pressed Democrat Senator Amy Klobuchar about the seditious Democrat lawmakers and their viral video urging the military to refuse President Trump's orders.   NBC's Kristen Welker on Sunday asked Klobuchar what specific “illegal acts” the seditious Democrats were referring to in the viral video. “I wonder, do you know what the specific, illegal acts are that your democratic colleagues were referring to there?” Kristen Welker asked Klobuchar. Klobuchar could not answer Welker. She delivered a word salad about the National Guard and a District Judge's order. “If their commander were to tell them, hey go out on the streets… and do this and that, that's not following the order that is in law,” Klobuchar said. Source: thegatewaypundit.com  WATCH: Sen. Elissa Slotkin Now Admits Trump NEVER Issued an Illegal Order – Compares Trump to Hitler, Cites Nuremberg while Defending Her Calls for Military Sedition The Democrats' orders to defy President Trump's lawful orders and their outrage over Trump's calls for accountability– and even the death penalty– are now blowing up in their faces after days of intended backlash against Trump.  Trump is being proven right to call for criminal charges and the death penalty, if a jury determines it appropriate, by their own statements! Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/TheNotoriousLMC/status/1992413372504301986?s=20 Sen Mark Kelly is being investigated for violations of the UCMJ after his video telling service members to disobey the duly elected Commander in Chief. https://twitter.com/DeptofWar/status/1992999267967905905?s=20   has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures. This matter will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality. Further official comments will be limited, to preserve the integrity of the proceedings. The Department of War reminds all individuals that military retirees remain subject to the UCMJ for applicable offenses, and federal laws such as 18 U.S.C. § 2387 prohibit actions intended to interfere with the loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline of the armed forces. Any violations will be addressed through appropriate legal channels. All servicemembers are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful. A servicemember's personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.   https://twitter.com/ShadowofEzra/status/1992766569265401863?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1992977389849035017?s=20 https://twitter.com/ScottJenningsKY/status/1992991385616601256?s=20   now have the Strongest Border EVER, Biggest Tax Cuts, the Best Economy, Highest Stock Market in USA History, and sooo much more. BUT, THE BEST IS YET TO COME! VOTE REPUBLICAN!!! (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

In this episode of Gangland Wire, host Gary Jenkins sits down with former FBI agent Séamus McElearney, author of Flipping Capo, for a deep dive into one of the most remarkable Mafia investigations and how he took down the DeCavalcante Family. McElearney recounts his unlikely path from the world of banking to the FBI, driven by a lifelong fascination with law enforcement. Despite being told he didn't have the “right background,” he pushed forward—eventually landing in New York's Organized Crime Squad C-10, where he investigated both the Bonanno and DeCavalcante crime families. He describes the rare and demanding experience of working two Mafia families at once, and the teamwork required to dismantle them from the inside out. As the conversation turns to his book, Flipping Capo, McElearney explains the years-long process of writing it and the rigorous FBI review needed to ensure no sensitive investigative techniques were revealed. He shares early memories of notorious boss Joe Massino, and the high-stakes surveillance and arrests that defined his career. A major focus of the episode is the arrest and flipping of Anthony Capo, a feared DeCavalcante soldier—and the first made member of that family ever to cooperate with the government. McElearney walks listeners through the tension of that operation, his calculated approach to treating Capo with respect, and the psychological tightrope that ultimately persuaded Capo to talk. That single decision triggered a domino effect of cooperation that helped bring down the New Jersey mob family many believe inspired The Sopranos. Gary and Séamus dive into the proffer process, cooperation agreements, and the behind-the-scenes strategies used to turn high-level mobsters. McElearney also draws comparisons between real mob figures and the fictional world of The Sopranos, revealing how much of the hit series was grounded in the actual cases he worked. The interview closes with McElearney's reflections on how organized crime continues to evolve. While today's mob may look different from the one he battled in the '90s, he stresses that the methods—and the money—still flow. His candid insights offer a rare look into the changing face of the American Mafia and the ongoing fight to contain it. Listen now on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or your favorite podcast app. 2:26 Seamus’ FBI Journey 6:26 Inside the DeCavalcante Family 9:05 The Process of Flipping 10:27 Comparing Families 12:30 The First Cooperation 17:43 The Proffer Process 25:03 Protecting Cooperators 27:44 The Murder of Joseph Canigliaro 29:42 Life on Trial 30:28 The Real Sopranos 39:43 Leading the Columbo Squad 44:15 Major Arrests and Cases 50:57 Final Thoughts and Stories Hit me up on Venmo for a cup of coffee or a shot and a beer @ganglandwire Click here to “buy me a cup of coffee” To go to the store or make a donation or rent Ballot Theft: Burglary, Murder, Coverup, click here To rent ‘Brothers against Brothers’ or ‘Gangland Wire,’ the documentaries click here.  To purchase one of my books, click here. Transcript [0:00]Well, hey, welcome all you wiretappers. Good to be back here in studio of Gangland Wire. This is Gary Jenkins, retired Kansas City Police Intelligence Unit detective. [0:07]Welcome to Gangland Wire [0:07]I have a former FBI agent as my guest today. And, you know, I love having these FBI agents on. I’ve had a lot of them on and I worked with a lot of the guys and they’re really good guy. Everyone I ever met and worked with was a really good guy. Now they got their deadhead just like we did. But these aggressive guys are the ones that write books and I’ve got one on today. Seamus McElherney. Welcome, Seamus. Thank you. It’s great to be here. All right. Well, an Irish name now working on the Italian mob, huh? How come you weren’t working on the Westie? So they were maybe gone by the time you came around. There’s no such thing. [0:47]Oh, yeah. You got your code. You Irish guys got your code, too. All right, Seamus, you got a book, Killing, or Killing, Flipping Capo. I want to see it back up over your shoulder there. Really interesting book, guys. He flipped a guy named Anthony Capo. And he really took down the real Sopranos, if you will. So Seamus, tell us a little about how you got started with the FBI, your early career. Okay. When I got out of school, I really didn’t know what to do. And I got into banking and I just decided that was really not for me. And I got lucky where I got to meet an FBI agent. and I was just so fascinated by the work. It seemed like every day was different. You know, one day you could meet a CEO and another day you could be doing surveillance. It just, the job just seemed really interesting. [1:38]Like fascinating to me. So I decided to try to become an agent. And I was constantly told, Shane, you should never become an agent. You didn’t have the background for it. And one, one, a motto in life to me is persistence beats resistance. And I was just determined to become an agent. And back then in the late 1990s, it was a long process and it took me close to two years to actually become an agent. And I was selected to go down to training and I was very fortunate to be selected to go down to training. Now it was your first office back up in New York and the, one of the organized crime squads, or did you go out into boonies and then come back? I actually was born and raised in New York, and I was fortunate to be selected to be sent back to New York. So my first squad, I was sent back to the city, back to 26 Federal Plaza, [2:26]Seamus’ FBI Journey [2:24]and I was assigned to a squad called C-10. And C-10 was an organized crime squad, which was responsible for the Bonanno family, and then later became the DeCavocanti family as well, which I can explain to you yeah yeah we’ll get we’ll get deep into that now now let’s let me ask you a little bit about the book tell the guys a little bit about the process of writing a book from your fbi experiences. [2:47]It’s a long process. First of all, I was contacted by someone who was interested [2:55]Writing a Book [2:53]in writing a book based upon my career. People had encouraged me to write a book because I had a very successful career. And when you work organized crime, it’s never just about you. It’s about the people that you work with, right? It’s definitely a team. It’s never just one person. I had great supervisors. I had great teammates. I had a great partner. And so I was approached to write a book. So then I had no idea. So there was an agent, a famous agent, an undercover agent named Jack Garcia. So I kind of really leaned on him to kind of learn how to write a book. And it’s a long process. You have to get an agent, the publisher, a co-author I had. And then when you finally have all that, and you do have the manuscript ready to be written, you have to send it down to the FBI. And that is a long process. The FBI, in this instance, probably took over a year for them to review the book because what they want to make sure is you’re not revealing any investigative techniques. Fortunately for me, a lot of the information that is in the book is public information because of all the trials that I did. Interesting. Yeah, it is. It is quite a I know it was quite a process. [4:00]Now, the banana squad, you work in a banana squad. You know, we know a little bit about the banana squad. [4:07]Was Joe Pacino the boss when you first came in? Yes, he was. And I actually had the pleasure of arresting Joe as well. Ah, interesting. I did a show on Joe. He’s a really interesting guy. I know my friend, who was at the banana squad, I think just before you were, and he talked a lot of, to me personally, he won’t go on the show, but he talked a lot about Joe Massino. He said, actually, saw him in the courtroom one time later on, he hadn’t seen him in several years. And, and Joe looked across the courtroom. He said, Doug, how are you doing? He said, Joe was that kind of guy. He was real personal. He was. [4:44]Yeah, so when I first got to the squad, the supervisor at the time was a gentleman named Jack Steubing, and he had the thought process to go after Joe and his money. So there was two accountants that were assigned to a squad at that time. It was Kimberly McCaffrey and Jeff Solette, and they were targeted to go after Joe and his money. And it was a very successful case. And when we arrested Joe, I think it was in January of 2003, I believe it was, I was assigned to be part of that arrest team. Interesting. You know, McCaffrey and Sled are going to be talking about that case out at the Mob Museum sometime in the near future. I can’t remember exactly when it is. And it was a hell of a case. I think it just happened, actually. Oh, did it? Okay. I actually just spoke to Jeff, so I think it just happened about a week or two ago. Okay. Yeah, I tried to get him to come on the show, and I think maybe he was committed to doing something else, and I didn’t keep after him. And I don’t like to pester people, you know. [5:44]And Fensell was the one that said, you got to get Jeff Sillett. You got to get Jeff Sillett. When I looked into that money angle of it, that was pretty interesting about how they were laundering their money through the parking lots and just millions. And when he gave up, like $10 million or something? I mean, it’s unbelievable. Yes. And that’s that’s one of the reasons why I wrote the book is because I don’t think the public or the press really put this together where that squad, C-10, is a very unique squad where we were dismantling the two families at the same time. Half the family was working the Bonanno family and half the family was working the Cavalcanti family. So it’s a very unique squad during that six or seven year time period where we were dismantling two families at the same time. [6:26]Inside the DeCavalcanti Family [6:26]Interesting and and that gets us into the dekavocante family i could always struggle with that name for some reason but that’s all right guys know i butcher these names all the time. [6:37]Forgive me guys anyhow so you ended up working on the dekavocante family down in new jersey now that you know that’s unusual how did that come about we got we got a new jersey branch of the fbi down there too, Yes, we do. So what happened was I went to training in February of 1998. The case actually starts in January of 1998, where an individual named Ralph Guarino was the mastermind behind this, but he had the idea of robbing the World Trade Center. So he had three people that actually tried to execute that plan. They did rob the World Trade Center, but when they came out, they took their mask off and they were identified by the cameras that were actually there. So those individuals were actually arrested pretty quickly. I think two were arrested that day. The third person, I think, fled to New Mexico and was found pretty quickly. Ralph was smart enough to know that he was going to be apprehended pretty quickly. So he reached out to an agent named George Hanna, a legendary agent within the office, and George was able to convince him to become a proactive witness, meaning he would make consensual recordings. That was in January of 1998. I think it was January 14th. [7:51]Approximately nine days later, there was a murder of an individual named Joseph Canigliaro. Who was a ruthless DeKalocanti associate assigned to a wheelchair. How he got in a wheelchair was back in the 70s, a DeKalocanti soldier and him went to go collect money from a loan shark victim. And the story goes that Jim Gallo, James Gallo, actually shot Joseph Canigliaro by accident and paralyzed him. No hard feelings. It was just the course of doing their business back then. But he was paralyzed from the 70s to the 90s. He was a ruthless individual. though. And the reason that they killed him is his crew around him had him killed. They actually killed him because he was such a ruthless person and who would extort people and just really was a bad person. There were stories that he would call people over to him in his wheelchair and shoot them. So a ruthless guy. And he was killed in, I think, January 23rd of 1998. [8:50]So that’s how this case starts. Ralph Guarino, as I said, became a proactive witness. When you have a proactive witness. You just don’t know where they’re going to go. What I mean by that is you would direct him through mob associates and many guys, and you’re trying to gather evidence on tape. [9:05]The Process of Flipping [9:06]Where Ralph Guarino led us was the Brooklyn faction of the DeCavalcanti family, namely Anthony Capo, Anthony Rotondo, Vincent Palermo. [9:17]Joseph Scalfani, a whole host of DeCavalcanti people that were located in Brooklyn. And that’s how we start to build this case. Now, granted, I was just in training at that time in February of 1998. I don’t get sent back to New York until May of 1998. And from May of 1998 until December of 1998, they put you through a rotation, meaning I go through the operations center, I go through surveillance, and then I finally get assigned to C-10 in December of 1998. At that point in time, Jeff and Kim are already on the squad, so they’re operating the case against Messino. I come to the squad, and the Decalvo Canty case has now started. So I’m assigned to the Decalvo Canty portion of the squad to work them. And as I said, that’s why we’re working two parallel cases at the time. One is against the Bananos, the other is against the Jersey family. And we operate, Ralph, proactively from January 1998 up until the first set of indictments, which was in December of 1999. So compare and contrast the Banano family structure and how they operated in [10:27]Comparing Families [10:24]a DeCavocante family structure and how they operate. Were they exactly the same or were there some differences? [10:31]They’re into the same types of the rackets that the Waldemar people are into, but I would say related to the Decalvo Canty family, since they’re based in Jersey, they really had a control of the unions out there. There was two unions that they basically controlled, Local 394, which was the labor union, and they also started their own union, which was the asbestos union, which was Local 1030. [10:53]And those were controlled by the Decalvo Canty family, so that was the bread and butter of the Decalvo Canty family. So, as I said, the first set, you know, we operated Ralph proactively for almost close to two years. And then in December of 1999, we executed our first set of arrests because there was whispers that Ralph, why wasn’t he arrested yet? Where he was the mastermind behind the World Trade Center being robbed, but he hasn’t been picked up yet. So there was whispers that he might be cooperating with the government. And for his safety, that’s why we took him off off the street and we executed our first round of arrest in December of 1999. [11:33]I’m a relatively new agent. I’d only been on the squad now for a year and we arrested 39 people that day. I get assigned to arrest Anthony Capo, who’s a soldier within the Decavacanti family based out of Staten Island. And I was really surprised by that because, as I said, I was just an agent for about a year. Usually when you’re a new agent, you’re assigned to the back, you know, like we are security. I was even surprised that I was going to be on a team. And I was fortunate enough to be the team leader, which is very surprising to me. And the case was out of the Southern District of New York. And in New York, just for the public, there is two districts. There’s a Southern District of New York and the Eastern District of New York. And the Eastern District of New York also had charges on Anthony Capo as well. So for my arrest team, I had members from the Eastern District of New York as well. There was a separate squad that was looking into Anthony Capo there. [12:30]The First Cooperation [12:27]So I got the ticket to arrest Anthony Capo in December of 1999. And that’s how this case starts. [12:33]Interesting. Now, nobody’s ever flipped out of the DeCavocante family before, I believe. It’s been a pretty tight family, really rigidly controlled by this Richie the Boot. I mean, he’s a fearsome, fearsome guy. I mean, you did not want to get crossways with him. And a smaller, tighter family, it seems to me like, than the New York families. That was right. Well, like up and up until that point, up until that point and unbeknownst to me that no made member in the DeKalbacanti family had ever cooperated with the government before. [13:08]So I had watched George Hanna, how he operated Ralph Guarino for those two years, and he always treated him with respect. And prior to going to arrest Anthony Capo, Anthony Capo had had a reputation of being an extremely violent person, hated by law enforcement and even hated by a lot of people within the mob. But I was going I wasn’t going to let that, you know, use that against him. I was going to treat him with respect regardless. Right. I didn’t know I didn’t know him. I never dealt with him before. And I would basically before I went to go arrest him, I was going to study everything about him, learn everything about him. And I was going to use the approach of treating him with respect and using some mind chess when I was going to arrest him. What I mean by that is I was going to learn everything charges about him, everything about his family. I wanted him to know that I knew him like the back of my hand from head to toe, the start of the book to the end of the book. [14:02]And when I went to arrest him, I remember when we went to his house, he wasn’t there. So all the planning that you do related to going into an arrest, the checks that you do, he’s at the house, you knock on his door, and guess what? He’s not there. So his wife basically tells us that he’s at his mom’s house. So then that throws all the planning out the window, and now we go to his mom’s house. And when I met him, you know, I saw that he had a relationship with his parents, which, you know, it gives me a different perspective from what I heard from him. Interesting. And that says something about him, that’s for sure. So everything that I heard of this violent person and hated person, the way he treated law enforcement, he wasn’t that way with me. [14:49]So when I get him in the car and I start to read him his rights and start to ask him questions, every question that I would ask him, I already had the answer to, like, your date of birth, social security number. And then he would invoke his right to counsel, and then you’re not allowed to ask him any more questions. So what I would do is I would let the mind game start then. And I would ask him, you know, tell him about the charges that he had at that point in time. He was only charged with a conspiracy to murder Charlie Maggiore, who was an acting panel boss of the Decalvo Canty family. At that time, that point in time, they had three panel bosses. It was Charlie Maggiore, Jimmy Palermo and Vincent Palermo. Vincent Palermo was known as the stronger personality and really known as the acting boss. And they wanted to kill Charlie Maggiore. So he was charged with that. conspiracy to murder. And he was also charged with, I believe, stock fraud or it was mail fraud that would lead to stock fraud. So when I would question him, I would tell him, since he already invoked his right to counsel, don’t say anything, just listen to me. For an example, I would say your plan was to murder Charles Majuri. Your plan was to ring his doorbell and shoot him right there with James Gallo, Joe Macella. But you guys didn’t do that because there was a cop on the block. So instead of just doing a ring and run, you guys were going to ring and shoot him, right? [16:17]And now you’ve got to think, I told him, don’t say anything. Just listen to what I just said, right? Because I can’t have him answer any questions. And this wasn’t a question. This was a statement. Yeah. So that gives him food for thought, because you got to think, how would I know that? He doesn’t know at that point in time, this is an indictment. How do I know that? He doesn’t know who the cooperator is. He doesn’t know who made a recording. So I’m just throwing this at him. And this is the first time he’s hearing this. So it’s got to make him think, like, what else does this agent know? And I did this with the other charges as well. And then I would just throw these little tidbits at him. And then I would speak to the driver. How are you doing this? just give him food for thought. And then we just developed a bond that day, just talking sports back and forth. He actually was a cowboy fan. I’m a Steeler fan. So we have that little intensity going back and forth about that. And then we just developed a bond that day. I think that was the first time that he had an interaction with law enforcement, where it was more of a respect thing, as opposed to someone yelling at him or being contentious with him. I don’t think he’s ever or experienced that before. [17:27]Also because of his delivery as well, right? You know, it works both ways where you can, he can have his delivery really angry and that could, you know, provoke law enforcement to be angry towards him too. [17:43]The Proffer Process [17:40]So I think that helped it that way that day. And then just throughout the whole day. And I think one of the things that I do talk about within the book is just explaining processes to people, which is generally, I haven’t seen that done in a book before about how pretrial works. So what is pretrial? How cooperation works? How trial works? So I think there’s a lot of tidbits within the book that kind of explain things like that. Even some crimes, too. Like everyone hears what loan sharking is. I go into detail as to what loan sharking is and how it really works, because it’s a very profitable way to make money. So we have our day together. And, you know, then I had to meet his stepfather. I think he had heard that I treated his stepfather with respect. And then approximately a week later, I get a call from his lawyer and I basically almost fell out of my chair when his lawyer said he wanted to cooperate. [18:37]I bet. And then, yeah. And, you know, keep in mind, I’ve only been on the job for a year and I immediately call the assistant who is a seasoned assistant. Maria Barton, what was her name? And she’s really concerned, like, what did I say? Right. So I told her in these situations, less is more. I just told her I was going to call you. That’s all I said. I didn’t say anything else. Didn’t promise anything at all. I said I was going to call you. So, you know, that started with the process and then you go through a proffer. So I explained what the proffer is and how that process works. Interesting. Yeah. A proffer, guys is is like a kind of agreement you know and you you have to be totally open and admit to every crime you ever did and and we’ll cover you but to a certain point the basis you’ll lie down the basics. [19:31]Right. So what, you know, what we kind of like call it is queen for a day, right? Where you come in, we can’t use your words against you unless you lie to us, right? If you were, if you were to lie to us and then go, go to trial and, you know, we could, if you were to take the stand, we could, we could use it against you. But as long as you come in and you tell us the truth and you tell us everything, all the crimes that you’ve done. And the beauty of the mob is when they do a crime, they never do a crime alone, right? They involve a lot of people within a crime. So that’s the beauty of that. So when we have our first proffer, you know, in time, you only have a short amount of time to actually speak about this because you can only be away from jail for a certain amount of time right before the bad guys start to realize that something might be up. Right. So he comes in. And even even before that, on his on his way back, when we’re taking him back to 26 Federal Plaza, one of the things that he tells us is and it makes sense when we went to his house, he wasn’t there. He was at his mom’s house in the car ride back. He throws a little shot at me and he goes, we knew you were coming. [20:33]Meaning that there was a leak. They got a leak. Yeah. Right. So then when we have the first proffer, he explains the leak to us. And it appears allegedly there was a court reporter within the Southern District that was feeding them information. So that’s not good. And then in the proffer, he tells us about two murders. So, and there might be the bodies, a body might be buried up in Phil Lamella, who was a DeCalvo County soldier, up in Marlboro, New York. So that’s the first thing that he tells us. So these are jewels to us, right? He tells us about a leak. He tells us about two murders. Bodies might be buried. So we have to huddle and we have to decide, is he telling us the truth or not? We all decide that he’s telling us the truth. The proper takes place with George Hanna, as I mentioned him before. Kenny McCabe, a legendary Southern District investigator, and me. And in these situations, again, I’m a new agent. Less is more. I don’t want to say something stupid. So I kind of keep my mouth shut, right? And just listen. So that went really well. And that kind of started this whole process. So now, as we said before, you have… No one cooperated in 100 plus years of this family. And now we have the first [21:49]A Spiral of Cooperation [21:48]made member to cooperate. And basically, Anthony starts a spiral effect of cooperation. [21:56]After he where he reported to in the family at that particular time, since he was such a violent person and hard to control within the family himself. Well, he reported to Vincent Palermo, who was the acting panel boss out of that panel that I talked about, but viewed as the acting boss because of his strong personality. So you have Anthony cooperating. He reports to the acting boss. So from our perspective, our perspective, that’s golden, right? Because now Vinny is going to have to make a decision. Is he going to cooperate or not? And then about three months later, guess what? Vinny decides to cooperate. So now we have a soldier and we have the acting boss who’s going to cooperate. So we go from no one in a hundred years to basically two people in three months. [22:45]Then we have an associate, Victor DiChiro, decides to cooperate. So we go and we arrest him. So now we have three people in four months. So we take all their information, and they have to plead guilty, and they get a cooperation agreement. I explain all that. And when you have a cooperation agreement, as I mentioned before, Anthony was initially arrested for conspiracy to murder, and I believe it was stock fraud. When he pleads guilty, he has to plead guilty to all his crimes that he committed throughout his entire life. Off the top of my head, I remember he pled guilty to two murders. [23:23]11 murder conspiracies, boatload of extortions, and basically every other crime you could think of. And then the same thing with Vinny and Victor. We take all their information, and then we have our next series of indictments. So the first series was 39 indictments. And then the second series of indictments is in October of 2000, October 19th, which we just we just passed the 25th anniversary of that. And that was known as the hierarchy arrest, where we arrested the official boss, John Riggi. We arrested the two other panel bosses, Charlie Maggiore and Jimmy Palermo. We arrested the consigliere, Steve Vitabli, a bunch of captains and soldiers. So that’s a significant arrest, right? So now, as you know, when you have an arrest, there’s trials, there’s plea negotiations. So now we arrested 39 people plus another 13. We’re already up to like 50 something like something people out of that arrest. We get a little shockwave in the sense is that there’s an associate named Frank Scarabino. Frank Scarabino comes forward one day and tells us that there’s a contract on Anthony Capo’s family and Anthony Capo. [24:43]And also, there’s a contract on law enforcement. They want to go back to the old Sicilian ways and basically send a message. So, you know, that’s basically a little bit of a jolt where now we have to try to move Capo’s family. [25:03]Protecting Cooperators [24:59]And Capo’s in prison. He’s defenseless. And I explain all that. People have this sense of you go into the witness security program, you get a whole new life and you’re off and having a great time. They don’t realize that there are prisons within the United States that you have to go to prison. So I can’t say where the prisons are, but I kind of explain that process of how the WITSEC program works, which is run by the marshals. So that’s in that’s in the book as well. Yeah, they have a whole prisons that are just for people in WITSEC. I heard about a guy that said he was in one out west somewhere. Yeah. So and, you know, for those prisons, it’s not like you have to prove yourself. They’re all doing the same time. So they’re basically just trying to do their time and try to get out and get into the next phase of the WoodSec program. So that was kind of a jolt, right? So now we have Frank Scarabino cooperate. So now we have another person. So it’s the list is just getting more and more now. You got to stop taking cooperators and start putting people in jail for the rest of their life, man. [26:03]So it got to after that, we had like two more people cooperate. So we went from having nobody to having seven people cooperate in this period. And it’s interesting. And I know we’re going to go back and forth, but we went from 100 years of having no one to having seven people during this three year period. And since that time period, no other members have cooperated since. So we’ve started the clock again. I think we’re at 25 years plus again since no one cooperated during that period. And I mentioned the murder that we started this case, Joseph Canigliaro. So he was the guy that was in the wheelchair. So as I said, they wanted to kill him because he just tortured his crew. We were able, one of the guys who was initially arrested as part of the December 1999 arrest, he sees everybody’s, he is deciding to cooperate with the government. So he decides to cooperate. His name is Tommy DeTora. So Tommy DeTora decides to cooperate. He’s out on bail. So since he’s out on bail, we decide, let’s make him make a consensual recording. And he makes one of the best consensual recordings the Bureau has ever made. He gets everyone involved in that murder together. [27:28]And they talk about the murder from A to Z. It’s a priceless consensual recording that we used at trial. And it just, you know, one of the things that does stick in my mind is the shooter was Marty Lewis, who got a life sentence. [27:44]The Murder of Joseph Canigliaro [27:45]Marty Lewis is describing when he shot him. And he’s like, I shot him like five or six times in his car. Right. And then Marty Lewis gets out of the car. Joseph Canigliaro drives away, gets to the top of the block in Brooklyn, puts a signal on, put a signal on. And drove the traffic laws, drives to Joseph Wrightson’s house. A guy who was part of the murder conspiracy honks his horn for Joseph Wrightson to come downstairs. So can you imagine Joseph Wrightson looking down the window seeing the guy that’s supposed to be dead right now and telling him to get in the car to go to the hospital with him? [28:32]Unfortunately, when they go to the hospital one of the things that does happen is joseph brightson has uh unfortunately an nyp detective cop who’s a cousin and involves him in this as well and the cop takes shells from the car and he becomes he gets locked up by us as well they all go to trial they get convicted and. [28:55]You know, we also arrested a Genevieve’s captain related to the leak. So in total, I think the numbers were 71 defendants were convicted, 11 murders were solved, seven trials transpired. You know, as everyone knows, you have the arrest, but then you have the trials, right? And I know that from December 2002 up until November of 2003 was the year that I was on trial. There was three trials that I had, and then there was another trial. There was two trials that one was a mistrial. Then we had another trial. So during that one year, we had a year of trials, and the biggest trial I had went on for two months. [29:42]Life on Trial [29:38]So I basically had a year of no life where it was just trials. And as you know yourself, when you have trial, it’s not just you just show up at trial. You have trial prep beforehand. And then when you’re actually on trial every day, it’s 20, it’s 24, seven, you have a trial, you have trial, then at night you have to prep a witness. So there’s just constant stuff throughout the day. Yeah, really? It’s a, it’s a long, boring process for you guys. [30:05]You know, these are like what we would say the real Sopranos, you know, the Sopranos, Tom Soprano, and that’s kind of based on this New Jersey family. I tell you, that Soprano, so much of it was ripped from real life. I don’t know. They interviewed you for details. They interviewed some agents and looked some court cases in order to write those scripts. I know that. And in particular, I think of the gay member that was killed. [30:28]The Real Sopranos [30:27]You know, you guys had that down there. So there’s a lot of references in your book or things in the book that the guys will say, oh, yeah, they did that in the Sopranos. Can you tell us about some of them? [30:37]Well, the thing that was great, especially for trial, is in March of 1999, the show starts in January of 1999. And we have a consensual recording in March where we have DeCavocanti members talking about the show and them saying, saying, this is you, this is you, and this is you, which was priceless for trial. Right. It’s like a jury’s going to hear that. And even during the trial, the judge had to give the jury instructions about the show to make sure that it wouldn’t sway their decision. Then if you watch the show, the first season, the official boss in the show dies of stomach cancer. In real life, that’s happened in real life. In June of 1997, Jake Amari was the acting boss of the Decaval Canty family. He dies of stomach cancer. So that’s a… [31:40]It’s a part of the show right there. Then I know everyone sees the strip club, right? Well, the acting boss, as I told you at the time, Vincent Palermo, he had a strip club in Queens, Wiggles. [31:53]So there’s a similarity there. Then they have the meat market that they go to, right, back and forth in the show. That’s a real meat market. I don’t want to say the name of the real meat market here, but there is a real type of meat market there. We discussed the union angle, the two unions that they have. So there’s so many scams related to the unions. There’s the no show job, right, where you don’t have to show up to work. There’s the no work job where you come, but you don’t have to do any work at all. [32:26]Back then, what it was called was they had union halls, right, where you actually had to show up early in the morning. There’d be a line of people, and you would show up. It was called the shape up. and you would wait online and hopefully that you would get work that day. Well, the DeCable Cante members, they wouldn’t show up early and wait online. They would show up whenever they want and they would cut the line and they would get work. So these were their types of unions that they had. Then, as you mentioned, there was the gay angle too. So on the DeCable Cante real side, there was a guy named John D’Amato. And John D’Amato basically made himself the acting boss when John Riggie went to jail in the early 1990s. John D’Amato was part, was very close to John Gotti. There was a murder. It’s probably the most indictable murder in mob history called the murder of Fred Weiss. John Gotti wanted Fred Weiss killed because John Gotti thought that Fred Weiss was cooperating with the government. all because Fred Weiss switched lawyers. [33:35]He was paranoid that Fred Weiss was cooperating. So it became a race to kill Fred Weiss. So you had two mob families trying to kill him, the Decalvo Canty family and the Gambino family. So in total, I think either 15 people at least have either pled guilty or have been convicted of that murder. That murder happened on 9-11-1989, a horrible day, right? So, where I’m going is that happened in 89. In 1990, 1991, John D’Amato becomes the acting boss of the family. So, now he’s the acting boss of the DeKalb Alcanti family. John D’Amato had a girlfriend. His girlfriend starts to tell Anthony Capo that John D’Amato is going to sex clubs with her and they’re having sex with men. So this is this is brought to Anthony Capo’s attention. And he has to tell his superiors that we have a gay acting boss representing our family. And in his eyes, this cannot happen. Right. So he brings it to Vincent Palermo, brings it to Rudy Ferron, and the superiors that this is what’s happening. And they decide that he has to be killed. Now, also what he was doing was, and you speak to Anthony Rotondo, who also cooperated with the government. [34:58]John DeMotta was also stealing money from the family. He was borrowing money from the other families, telling him that it was for the DeCalbacanti family, but it was really to cover his game of the gambling losses that he was incurring. So those are two things that he was doing. Right. He was he was if you ask Anthony Rotondo, he says he was killed because of the gambling that he was incurring the losses. And if he asks Anthony Capo, he was killed because it was looking bad for our family, for their family, that he was a gay acting boss. And at that time, it wasn’t acceptable. Times have changed. But back then, it wasn’t an acceptable thing. And that’s similar to the show. There’s a gay angle within the show as well. [35:41]The Gay Angle in the Mob [35:42]Interesting. It’s the real Sopranos. I remember I watched that show, even going back and watch some of them every once in a while. And I just think, wow, that’s real. So, so even though the director says no one was speaking to them, it’s kind of ironic that there are a lot of like similarities between the show and real life. Yeah. And especially down there in New Jersey and, and, and their connection to the Bonanno family or to a New York, the New York families. And then also, and then also within the show is, is, is the stock stood. There’s also stocks. Oh yeah, the stock fraud. Yeah. They did a boiler room or something. And they were pumping and dumping stocks and Tony was making money out of that. So, yeah, that’s I’d forget. And then from and in real life, Bill Abrama was like the wizard of Wall Street. [36:37]So interesting. Well, you’ve had quite, quite a career. What do you think about New York organized crime now that today, you know, we just had quack, quack, Ruggiero, Ruggiero’s son and some other guys that were connected to families indicted for gambling. He’s got my gambling fraud. I haven’t really studied it yet. It is like they had some rig gambling games, which is common. Like in Kansas city, when I was working this, they would have, they would bring in guys who would love to gamble and had money businessmen. And then they’d, they’d play them for sure. They would cheat them and take a bunch of money from them. This was much more sophisticated, but that’s a, that’s a story that’s been going on a long time. You think that Bob is on a comeback from that? Ha, ha, ha, ha. [37:24]The mob has been around for 125 years. They’re not going to go away. Okay. They get smarter and they adapt. And it’s like, I haven’t read the indictment from head to toe, but they’ve used some, you know, sophisticated investigative techniques just to kind of con people. So they’re getting better, right? So some of the techniques that they use when you hear, it’s like some of the things that I saw where the poker tables that they use, the tables that they use were able to see the card. So they use some pretty, you know, slick techniques, you know, and then like some of the glasses or the contact lenses. So, you know, they’re not going to go away. They’re just going to keep on trying to rebuild. That’s why you have to continue to put resources towards them. Yeah. I think what people don’t understand for these mob guys, it’s if they don’t get out and go into legitimate business selling real estate or something like that. It’s it’s a constant scam a constant hustle every day to figure out another way to make money because they don’t have a paycheck coming in and so they got to figure out a way to make money and they got to make it fast and they got to make it big and in a short period of time it’s just constant every day every time they walk by knew a drug addict one time as a professional burglar and he said every time he’s in recovery he said every time i’ll buy a pharmacy he said in my mind I’m figuring out how to take that pharmacy off. So that’s the way these mob guys are. [38:52]And sports betting has been a staple of theirs forever. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. And the apps are getting into them a little bit, but I see what’s going on now. Also, we had these players, Trailblazers coach and a couple, three players, are now helping people rig the bets. And you go to the apps, and you bet a bunch of money on some guy who’s going to have a bad day. And then he just doesn’t show up to work. You end up being the supervisor of the Columbo squad, I see. Same as after that DeCavoconte case, and you spent all that time, you ended up getting promoted to a supervisor and you must’ve been good because they kept you right there in New York and gave you another mob squad. I know one agent here in Kansas City that was promoted and he kept the one squad here, as they called it. [39:43]Leading the Columbo Squad [39:40]And that was really unusual. Usually it’d be somebody in from out of town. So that says something about you. So tell us about your experiences doing that. [39:48]Well, after we did this case, which was about six years, I was requested to go down to run the Columbo squad. And at that time, I think the Columbo squad had eight supervisors in eight years. I really thought I was too young to be a supervisor because I only had six years on. So I was basically voluntold, I would say, to go down there. And guys, that is young. I want to tell you something. I’ve seen a lot of different Bob squad supervisors come through here in Kansas City. And and they were all you know like 20 year agents 15 18 year agents that came from somewhere else so yeah so you know again I thought I was just way too young to be a supervisor as I said I was just on the job for about six years and I was voluntold to go down there yeah and I said if I’m going to go down there there’s a couple of things just based upon what I saw a I’m not a yes man and two the squad needs some sort of stability so I went down there and I was able to stay there I was there from actually December of 2004 all the way up until June of 2013. [40:51]So we at that time when I first got there we really didn’t have a lot of cases going trying to go on so I was able to change the tactics right because I think juries had changed at that point in time where instead of having a historical witness just go on to stand and tell things, now we had shows out there, right? You had NCIS where the whole DNA-type stuff came in, so I had to change our approach, and proactive witnesses making consensual recordings were the way to go. And I think during a seven-year time period, our squad. [41:24]Did an amazing job. Now it went from C10. I went, the squad went down to, it became C38. And we made probably 1,800 recordings in a seven and a half year time period. So, which is an amazing amount of recordings. So, a lot of transcriptions too. A lot of transcriptions. And I, you know, a three-hour tape could take you a day to listen to because you’re just trying to find that little piece of information. Yeah. Because a lot of it is just talk, right? Yeah. So I think our first big case was in June of 2008. And we took down the acting boss, a bunch of captains. And that’s when things really started to take off. We had a violent soldier cooperate named Joseph Compatiello. And, you know, we talk about proffers. His first proffer, he comes in and he basically tells us that there are three bodies buried right next to each other. So the layman would think, OK, they’re right next to each other. They weren’t right next to each other they were about 1.1 miles apart from each other. [42:28]And you could be in your your room there and we’re trying to find a body it’s really hard to find so we were actually able to find two of the bodies one of the bodies was a guy named while Bill Cattullo he was the under boss of the Colombo family we found him in Formingdale Long Island he was behind a berm we were out there for about eight days and each day you know I’m getting pressure from my superiors. We’re going to find something because there’s a lot of press out there. There was another victim named Cormone Gargano who was buried. He was killed in 1994 and buried out there. Unfortunately, there was a new building built. [43:06]And we could not find him there, but he was initially killed at a body shop in Brooklyn, and they buried him in Brooklyn, and then they decided to dig him up and bring him out to Long Island. So we went back to the body shop. What the Colombo family used to do, though, is they used to kill you, bury you, and put lime on top of the body. What lime does is it kills the smell, but preserves the body. Oh, I didn’t realize that. I thought it was supposed to deteriorate the body too. I think most people bought that. So good information. So, so when we found wall of bill, basically from his, from his hips up were intact. Oh, And when related to Cormier Gargano, because they had killed him in the body shop and then dug him up and brought him out to Long Island. We went back to the shop and figuring, let’s see if we can actually see if there’s any parts of him there. And there actually were. And we’re able to get DNA and tie it back and confirm it was him. [44:15]Major Arrests and Cases [44:12]So that’s how that dismantling of the Colombo family started. And then just to fast forward a little bit in January 2011, we have I spearhead the largest FBI mob arrest where we arrested 127 people that day across the states and also went to Italy, too, to take down people. [44:32]And after that, the Bureau decides to reduce the resources dedicated to organized crime. And I then get the Bonanno family back. So C-10 merges back into my squad. And then I have the Bananos, the Columbos, and the Decafacanthes as well. So now I have all three families back. And I basically run that for another two years. And I guess my last official act as a supervisor is related to Goodfellas, where Jimmy Burke had buried a body in his basement. We saw a 43-year-old cold case murder where he killed an individual named Paul Katz, buried him in his basement. And when he went away for the point shaving, the Boston College point shaving case, well, he killed him in 1969, buried him in his basement. Then he goes to jail in the 80s. He gets fearful that the cops that he had on his payroll back in the 60s were going to talk. So he decides to have our witness at the time, Gaspar Valenti, who came forward back in the 80s, moved the body with Vincent S. Our son so they move the body but again they’re not professional so pieces are going to be back there so in 2013 we go back and we dig and we actually find pieces of paul cats and we tie that to dna to his son to his son and we confirm that it was him. [45:57]So that was my last official act as a supervisor. Talk about art, art, imitating life again, you know, in the Goodfellas, they dug up a body. In the Sopranos, they dug up a body. I think I saw another show where they dug up a body. One of them, they were like, man, this smells. [46:13]I mean, can you imagine that going back and having to dig up a body? And then, you know, and, you know, they’re just wearing t-shirts and jeans and maybe leather gloves. And they’d have to deal with all that stuff and put it in some kind of a bag can take it somewhere else oh my god you know i have a question while bill cutello that this guy was part of the the hit team that took him out do you remember anything about right i’m trying to remember i’ve read this story once he was kind of like more of a peacemaker and and if i remember right you remember what the deal was with him well back like what happens is in the early 1990s there’s a colombo war right you have the persicos versus the arena faction and one thing about the Colombos and the Persicos, they never forget. So in the early 1990s, while Bill Cotullo was on the arena side, and as I said, there was a war where approximately 13 people were killed. In the late 1990s, Ali Persico was going to be going to jail, and while Bill Cotullo thought that Ali was going to go to jail and that he would take over the family, Ali didn’t want that to happen. So basically while Vilcunzulo thought he was getting the keys to the kingdom and they were going to kill him. [47:28]And what they did is they lured him to Dino Saraceno’s house in Brooklyn and Dino Calabro lured him into the basement and shot him in the back of the head. And we had all these guys then decide to cooperate. As I said, Joe Caves was the first person to cooperate. Dino Calabro cooperated. [47:48]Sebi Saraceno cooperated. So we had a whole host of people cooperate and we were able to dismantle the Colombo family. And I’ve been extremely blessed to be part of teams that have dismantled three families, Bananos, the Columbos, and the D. Calacanti family. So, you know, as I said, and it’s never just one person. It’s always teammates, partners, and also other supervisors that I’ve had. Yeah, interesting. Yeah, it does take a lot of people to take those down. When you’re writing books, you try to make sure everybody gets a little bit of credit. Yeah. And, you know, I think, you know, the thing that was that was, you know, crazy when related to the recovery of Wild Bill is we had our evidence response team out there. And, you know, the witness takes us out there to show us where he thinks the bodies are buried. And related to Wild Bill, it was in the back of a field. And he kept on saying it was behind a berm. So we took him back there and he showed us where he thought it was. So we had our evidence response team dig. And they basically dug us an Olympic-sized pool. [48:57]We could not find him. So there was two other sites that we were trying to look at because Richie Greaves was supposed to be next to the train tracks. And as I mentioned, Cormac Gargano was next to a building that had been replaced. So my squad, actually our squad, C-38, decides, Seamus, do you mind if we get some shovels? So I was like, sure. So there was, because we were just looking at each other at the time. So my team, Vincent D’Agostino, they’re pretty close by. He got some shovels and came back. And there was like six of us. And we just started digging ourselves. So we dug in one area, nothing. Then another agent basically said, let’s dig over here. [49:38]And sure enough, like talk about, you know, I always say hard work leads to good luck. We started digging and then we found the white stuff. We found the line and jackpot. It was while Bill, he was hogtied face down with his feet up. And as soon as I saw the white stuff and then I saw, you know, like his foot, then we stopped and I said, let me go get the professionals. I ran over, I drove over, and I got the team leader from ERT. She got in the car. And, you know, of course, she’s very excited. I was like, you know, we F.M. got him, you know. And so I drove her back over there. And that’s when you kind of contain the crime scene. And we were able to find him. But, you know, it was our squad that found him. And then, as I said before, then, you know, our squad decides to go back to the body shop. And we found remnants of Carmine Gargano there. So the squad just did an amazing job but really we basically found two bodies ourselves you know and i think in my career i’ve been extremely blessed to find five you know which is just crazy well that’s not something those accountants and lawyers and stuff were trained for you need to get those former cops out there on those shovels and digging for bodies. [50:57]Final Thoughts and Stories [50:57]Well interesting this this has really been fun seamus any any other stories you can think of You want to you want to just want to tell just busting to make sure people know that’s in this book. I tell you what, guys, this is an interesting book. It’s it’s, you know, as I said, those kinds of stories and the procedures and how FBI works. There’s there’s a lot of stories in there. I don’t want to give to give the book away. You know, there’s a lot of stories even. Yeah. You know, there’s an even during that year of trials. There’s plenty of stories there. There was a blackout that that year, too. So there’s a lot of stories related to that. You know, even even the trials, there’s a lot of things that came up at trial. So I don’t want to give to give those stories away. But I think it’s a good read. As I said, I think it’s one of the few books that actually explains things because, you know, I think the public hears these words, but they don’t know what these words mean. And I just think it’s important that they do know what it means, because there’s a lot of things that go on behind the scenes, especially with the jury. Right. You know, the jury only sees what they see. There’s a lot of things that go on when the jury leaves the room between the government, the judge and also the defense attorney. So I try to bring to shed some light related to that as well. [52:13]Interesting. Well, Seamus McElherney. And the book is Flipping Capo. That’s Anthony Capo. The first guy to be flipped in the Cavalcante family ever, which led to a cascade of other mob guys flipping, didn’t it? [52:32]Sure did. Just like in a Bonanno family, you know, they start flipping there. And it just, I didn’t know where it was ever going to end. Finally, it ended. [52:41]It sure did. Well, I have to say, it’s been great to meet you. I wish you continued success. And this has been a lot of fun. All right. Yeah, it’s been great to have you on Seamus. Thanks a lot. Don’t forget, I like to ride motorcycles. So when you’re out on the streets there and you’re a big F-150, watch out for those little motorcycles when you’re out. If you have a problem with PTSD and you’ve been in the service, be sure and go to the VA website. They’ll help with your drugs and alcohol problem if you’ve got that problem or gambling. If not, you can go to Anthony Ruggiano. He’s a counselor down in Florida. He’s got a hotline on his website. If you’ve got a problem with gambling, most states will have, if you have gambling, most states will have a hotline number to call. Just have to search around for it. You know, I’ve always got stuff to sell. I got my books. I got my movies. They’re all on Amazon. I got links down below in the show notes and just go to my Amazon sales page and you can figure out what to do. I really appreciate y’all tuning in and we’ll keep coming back and doing this. Thanks guys.

The Madoff team included many experienced attorneys, as well as many new lawyers. A new attorney can get lost in a case like Madoff. Our guest for this episode, Attorney Camille Bent, joined the Madoff team at Baker Hostetler immediately after her two-year clerkship with Bankruptcy Judge Pamela Pepper, who is now the Chief District Judge in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Camille describes how she and the firm navigated her career while working on this fascinating and at times all-consuming case, which is a story unto itself. This episode will be of special interest to younger lawyers and law firm management in processing pathways for advancement in firms for lawyers that are working on high-stakes cases in which there is global interest. Unsurprisingly, Camille underscores that she needed to be intentional about getting exposure to a range of cases and partners beyond those involved in the Madoff case.

A federal judge dismissed the criminal indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. The reason wasn’t about the merits of the charges but rather a procedural flaw: the prosecutor who brought the cases, Lindsey Halligan, was found to have been unlawfully appointed as interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Broeske & Musson' on all platforms: --- The ‘Broeske & Musson Podcast’ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever else you listen to podcasts. --- ‘Broeske & Musson' Weekdays 9-11 AM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Facebook | Podcast| X | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Two Texas men have been charged with plotting a violent takeover of a Haitian island, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Texas. Prosecutors say the men planned to kill the island's male residents and enslave women and children, while taking steps to prepare for an armed invasion. The charges include conspiracy to murder, maim or kidnap in a foreign country and production of child pornography. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed with the latest news from a leading Black-owned & controlled media company: https://aurn.com/newsletter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On November 21, 2025, WisconsinEye's Rewind Host and Wisconsin Public Radio Capitol Reporter Anya van Wagtendonk and WisPolitics.com Editor JR Ross reviewed this week in state politics. (Brought to you by the Wisconsin Realtors Association). On this week’s episode: Schimel for Eastern District of Wisconsin No gaming bill at Assembly No FoodShare bill at Assembly What happened at the legislature Wedding Barns Court Case […]

We'll review some of the week's big stories with journalist Mark Jacob and former US Attorney Jim Santelle, who probably has some thoughts on the new US Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Among the stories: The US Coast Guard changes its policy on swastikas. Add that to your list of “words we never thought we'd type in 2025… or ever.” At the end of the hour we play a week in review game. Mornings with Pat Kreitlow is powered by UpNorthNews, and it airs on several stations across the Civic Media radio network, Monday through Friday from 6-9 am. Subscribe to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! Get more from Pat and UpNorthNews on their website and follow them on X, Facebook, TikTok and Instagram. To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast lineup. Follow the show on Facebook, X, and YouTube. Guests: Dr. Kristin Lyerly, Jim Santelle, Mark Jacob

Nicolle Wallace on Lindsay Halligan, the Trump's handpicked U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, admitting a potentially huge procedural error in the government's case against former FBI Director James Comey.For more, follow us on Instagram @deadlinewhTo listen to this show and other MSNOW podcasts without ads, sign up for MSNOW Premium on Apple Podcasts.   For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This Day in Legal History: Ratification of the Bill of Rights by New JerseyOn November 20, 1789, New Jersey became the first state to ratify the Bill of Rights, a landmark moment in American constitutional history. Just months after the U.S. Constitution went into effect, debate over its lack of explicit protections for individual liberties sparked calls for amendments. Responding to this concern, James Madison introduced a series of proposed amendments in the First Congress in June 1789, aiming to ease Anti-Federalist fears and solidify support for the new federal government. Congress approved twelve amendments on September 25, 1789, and sent them to the states for ratification.New Jersey acted swiftly, ratifying eleven of the twelve proposed amendments less than two months later. The state rejected the first proposed amendment, which concerned congressional representation, and accepted the rest, including protections for freedom of speech, religion, the press, the right to bear arms, and safeguards against unreasonable searches and seizures. New Jersey's early endorsement gave momentum to the broader ratification effort, which required approval by three-fourths of the states.By December 15, 1791, ten of the amendments had been ratified by the necessary eleven states and became known as the Bill of Rights. These provisions would become foundational to American legal doctrine, judicial interpretation, and civil liberties jurisprudence. New Jersey's rapid ratification also signaled the willingness of smaller states to embrace a constitutional framework that better balanced federal power with individual protections.The ratification process itself reflected the structural legal mechanism required to alter the Constitution—Article V mandates both congressional proposal and state approval. This episode demonstrates how early American legal institutions navigated public pressure and political compromise to create durable legal norms. The Bill of Rights remains central to constitutional interpretation today, frequently invoked in court cases involving speech, privacy, and due process.A group of senior judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has recently influenced several rulings on politically sensitive cases, softening the conservative tone of one of the nation's most right-leaning appellate courts. These judges, many appointed decades ago by presidents like Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, were part of three-judge panels that struck down or allowed challenges to laws involving religion in schools, drag shows on campus, and firearm signage. However, these decisions are now set for reconsideration by the court's full active bench in January, as part of a growing trend of en banc rehearings.The Fifth Circuit includes 17 active judges and seven senior judges. While senior judges can still hear cases and author opinions, their influence is ultimately limited because active judges control en banc reviews, which can overturn panel rulings. Most of these upcoming en banc cases saw dissents from Trump-appointed judges at the panel level. Some senior judges, like Edith Brown Clement, are conservative and remain highly active, while others like James Dennis and Patrick Higginbotham are known for their moderate or liberal views and are key voices in current and upcoming decisions.Legal experts say senior judges' experience and moderation often make them more willing to adhere to precedent rather than pursue ideological shifts. Their dissents and opinions can also help signal to the U.S. Supreme Court that a case warrants review. With an increase in ideologically charged cases on topics like immigration and free speech, the Fifth Circuit's internal dynamics reflect a broader national tension between judicial restraint and a more activist, conservative legal agenda.Full Fifth Circuit Overrides Moderate Senior Judges' RulingsThe Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has asked a federal court to enforce a subpoena against the University of Pennsylvania as part of an ongoing investigation into alleged antisemitic harassment. The EEOC's request was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and stems from a charge initiated in December 2023 by Republican-appointed Chair Andrea Lucas. The agency is seeking documents and information identifying victims and witnesses to reported religious-based harassment affecting faculty and staff.The investigation centers on claims that the university failed to adequately respond to internal complaints of antisemitism. The EEOC under Lucas—particularly during and after the first Trump administration—has prioritized enforcement actions related to religious discrimination, with higher education institutions facing increased scrutiny. Penn has not yet issued a public response regarding the subpoena or the broader investigation.EEOC Seeks UPenn Information Disclosure in Antisemitism ProbeCryptocurrency exchange Kraken announced that it has confidentially filed for an initial public offering (IPO) in the United States. The move positions Kraken among several digital asset firms seeking to go public amid renewed investor interest in the crypto sector. Other companies like Circle and Gemini have also made progress toward U.S. listings this year.Kraken recently reported a $20 billion valuation in its latest fundraising round, marking a 33% increase over the past two months. While the company did not disclose specific details about the IPO structure or timeline, the filing indicates growing momentum for digital finance firms in public markets.Crypto exchange Kraken confidentially files for US IPO | ReutersThe U.S. government has loaned Constellation Energy $1 billion to restart a nuclear reactor at the former Three Mile Island site in Pennsylvania. The project, now called the Crane Clean Energy Center, involves reviving an 835-megawatt reactor that was shut down in 2019. Constellation entered a partnership with Microsoft in 2024 to help offset the tech company's energy use, especially for power-intensive data centers. The reactor's restart reflects rising energy demand tied to emerging technologies like artificial intelligence.The Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office (LPO) issued the loan to help lower financing costs and encourage private investment. Officials emphasized that nuclear energy offers stable, carbon-free baseload power critical for both grid reliability and climate goals. While Constellation is financially strong enough to obtain private funding, the administration said public support signals a national commitment to clean and dependable energy infrastructure.The plant still needs regulatory approvals, including from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Constellation has already begun hiring workers, inspecting systems, and ordering essential equipment. The company now expects the reactor to come online by 2027, a year ahead of the original timeline due to an accelerated grid connection review.US loans Constellation $1 billion for Three Mile Island reactor reboot | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

November 20, 2025 ~ Barb McQuade, law professor at the University of Michigan and former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, joins Chris, Lloyd, and Jamie to discuss the DOJ admitting not all jury members seeing the final indictment against James Comey, and what to expect from the Epstein files. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

November 18, 2025 ~ Matthew Schneider, former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, joins Chris, Lloyd, and Jamie to discuss major missteps made in the process to secure an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

After more than 40 days, Congress has passed legislation to end the government shutdown. The bill funds the government through Jan. 30. It also includes three full-year appropriations bills to fund the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Department of Agriculture through Sept. 30, 2026. Left only with time until the end of January to fund the government long-term, appropriators will have to come up with legislation soon to fund the agencies that did not get full-year appropriations.Attorneys for former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James will try to disqualify interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Lindsey Halligan on Thursday. The defense attorneys will argue that a U.S. attorney can only serve 120 days on a temporary basis before needing Senate confirmation. If the judge concludes that Halligan's appointment is invalid, the decision could be a fatal blow to the cases against both Comey and James.

How are the federal courts faring during these tumultuous times? I thought it would be worthwhile to discuss this important subject with a former federal judge: someone who understands the judicial role well but could speak more freely than a sitting judge, liberated from the strictures of the bench.Meet Judge Nancy Gertner (Ret.), who served as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts from 1994 until 2011. I knew that Judge Gertner would be a lively and insightful interviewee—based not only on her extensive commentary on recent events, reflected in media interviews and op-eds, but on my personal experience. During law school, I took a year-long course on federal sentencing with her, and she was one of my favorite professors.When I was her student, we disagreed on a lot: I was severely conservative back then, and Judge Gertner was, well, not. But I always appreciated and enjoyed hearing her views—so it was a pleasure hearing them once again, some 25 years later, in what turned out to be an excellent conversation.Show Notes:* Nancy Gertner, author website* Nancy Gertner bio, Harvard Law School* In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, AmazonPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fifth episode of this podcast, recorded on Monday, November 3.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.Many of my guests have been friends of mine for a long time—and that's the case for today's. I've known Judge Nancy Gertner for more than 25 years, dating back to when I took a full-year course on federal sentencing from her and the late Professor Dan Freed at Yale Law School. She was a great teacher, and although we didn't always agree—she was a professor who let students have their own opinions—I always admired her intellect and appreciated her insights.Judge Gertner is herself a graduate of Yale Law School—where she met, among other future luminaries, Bill and Hillary Clinton. After a fascinating career in private practice as a litigator and trial lawyer handling an incredibly diverse array of cases, Judge Gertner was appointed to serve as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts in 1994, by President Clinton. She retired from the bench in 2011, but she is definitely not retired: she writes opinion pieces for outlets such as The New York Times and The Boston Globe, litigates and consults on cases, and trains judges and litigators. She's also working on a book called Incomplete Sentences, telling the stories of the people she sentenced over 17 years on the bench. Her autobiography, In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, was published in 2011. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Judge Nancy Gertner.Judge, thank you so much for joining me.Nancy Gertner: Thank you for inviting me. This is wonderful.DL: So it's funny: I've been wanting to have you on this podcast in a sense before it existed, because you and I worked on a podcast pilot. It ended up not getting picked up, but perhaps they have some regrets over that, because legal issues have just blown up since then.NG: I remember that. I think it was just a question of scheduling, and it was before Trump, so we were talking about much more sophisticated, superficial things, as opposed to the rule of law and the demise of the Constitution.DL: And we will get to those topics. But to start off my podcast in the traditional way, let's go back to the beginning. I believe we are both native New Yorkers?NG: Yes, that's right. I was born on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, in an apartment that I think now is a tenement museum, and then we moved to Flushing, Queens, where I lived into my early 20s.DL: So it's interesting—I actually spent some time as a child in that area. What was your upbringing like? What did your parents do?NG: My father owned a linoleum store, or as we used to call it, “tile,” and my mother was a homemaker. My mother worked at home. We were lower class on the Lower East Side and maybe made it to lower-middle. My parents were very conservative, in the sense they didn't know exactly what to do with a girl who was a bit of a radical. Neither I nor my sister was precisely what they anticipated. So I got to Barnard for college only because my sister had a conniption fit when he wouldn't pay for college for her—she's my older sister—he was not about to pay for college. If we were boys, we would've had college paid for.In a sense, they skipped a generation. They were actually much more traditional than their peers were. My father was Orthodox when he grew up; my mother was somewhat Orthodox Jewish. My father couldn't speak English until the second grade. So they came from a very insular environment, and in one sense, he escaped that environment when he wanted to play ball on Saturdays. So that was actually the motivation for moving to Queens: to get away from the Lower East Side, where everyone would know that he wasn't in temple on Saturday. We used to have interesting discussions, where I'd say to him that my rebellion was a version of his: he didn't want to go to temple on Saturdays, and I was marching against the war. He didn't see the equivalence, but somehow I did.There's actually a funny story to tell about sort of exactly the distance between how I was raised and my life. After I graduated from Yale Law School, with all sorts of honors and stuff, and was on my way to clerk for a judge, my mother and I had this huge fight in the kitchen of our apartment. What was the fight about? Sadie wanted me to take the Triborough Bridge toll taker's test, “just in case.” “You never know,” she said. I couldn't persuade her that it really wasn't necessary. She passed away before I became a judge, and I told this story at my swearing-in, and I said that she just didn't understand. I said, “Now I have to talk to my mother for a minute; forgive me for a moment.” And I looked up at the rafters and I said, “Ma, at last: a government job!” So that is sort of the measure of where I started. My mother didn't finish high school, my father had maybe a semester of college—but that wasn't what girls did.DL: So were you then a first-generation professional or a first-generation college graduate?NG: Both—my sister and I were both, first-generation college graduates and first-generation professionals. When people talk about Jewish backgrounds, they're very different from one another, and since my grandparents came from Eastern European shtetls, it's not clear to me that they—except for one grandfather—were even literate. So it was a very different background.DL: You mentioned that you did go to Yale Law School, and of course we connected there years later, when I was your student. But what led you to go to law school in the first place? Clearly your parents were not encouraging your professional ambitions.NG: One is, I love to speak. My husband kids me now and says that I've never met a microphone I didn't like. I had thought for a moment of acting—musical comedy, in fact. But it was 1967, and the anti-war movement, a nascent women's movement, and the civil rights movement were all rising around me, and I wanted to be in the world. And the other thing was that I didn't want to do anything that women do. Actually, musical comedy was something that would've been okay and normal for women, but I didn't want to do anything that women typically do. So that was the choice of law. It was more like the choice of law professor than law, but that changed over time.DL: So did you go straight from Barnard to Yale Law School?NG: Well, I went from Barnard to Yale graduate school in political science because as I said, I've always had an academic and a practical side, and so I thought briefly that I wanted to get a Ph.D. I still do, actually—I'm going to work on that after these books are finished.DL: Did you then think that you wanted to be a law professor when you started at YLS? I guess by that point you already had a master's degree under your belt?NG: I thought I wanted to be a law professor, that's right. I did not think I wanted to practice law. Yale at that time, like most law schools, had no practical clinical courses. I don't think I ever set foot in a courtroom or a courthouse, except to demonstrate on the outside of it. And the only thing that started me in practice was that I thought I should do at least two or three years of practice before I went back into the academy, before I went back into the library. Twenty-four years later, I obviously made a different decision.DL: So you were at YLS during a very interesting time, and some of the law school's most famous alumni passed through its halls around that period. So tell us about some of the people you either met or overlapped with at YLS during your time there.NG: Hillary Clinton was one of my best friends. I knew Bill, but I didn't like him.DL: Hmmm….NG: She was one of my best friends. There were 20 women in my class, which was the class of ‘71. The year before, there had only been eight. I think we got up to 21—a rumor had it that it was up to 21 because men whose numbers were drafted couldn't go to school, and so suddenly they had to fill their class with this lesser entity known as women. It was still a very small number out of, I think, what was the size of the opening class… 165? Very small. So we knew each other very, very well. And Hillary and I were the only ones, I think, who had no boyfriends at the time, though that changed.DL: I think you may have either just missed or briefly overlapped with either Justice Thomas or Justice Alito?NG: They're younger than I am, so I think they came after.DL: And that would be also true of Justice Sotomayor then as well?NG: Absolutely. She became a friend because when I was on the bench, I actually sat with the Second Circuit, and we had great times together. But she was younger than I was, so I didn't know her in law school, and by the time she was in law school, there were more women. In the middle of, I guess, my first year at Yale Law School, was the first year that Yale College went coed. So it was, in my view, an enormously exciting time, because we felt like we were inventing law. We were inventing something entirely new. We had the first “women in the law” course, one of the first such courses in the country, and I think we were borderline obnoxious. It's a little bit like the debates today, which is that no one could speak right—you were correcting everyone with respect to the way they were describing women—but it was enormously creative and exciting.DL: So I'm gathering you enjoyed law school, then?NG: I loved law school. Still, when I was in law school, I still had my feet in graduate school, so I believe that I took law and sociology for three years, mostly. In other words, I was going through law school as if I were still in graduate school, and it was so bad that when I decided to go into practice—and this is an absolutely true story—I thought that dying intestate was a disease. We were taking the bar exam, and I did not know what they were talking about.DL: So tell us, then, what did lead you to shift gears? You mentioned you clerked, and you mentioned you wanted to practice for a few years—but you did practice for more than a few years.NG: Right. I talk to students about this all the time, about sort of the fortuities that you need to grab onto that you absolutely did not plan. So I wind up at a small civil-rights firm, Harvey Silverglate and Norman Zalkind's firm. I wind up in a small civil-rights firm because I couldn't get a job anywhere else in Boston. I was looking in Boston or San Francisco, and what other women my age were encountering, I encountered, which is literally people who told me that I would never succeed as a lawyer, certainly not as a litigator. So you have to understand, this is 1971. I should say, as a footnote, that I have a file of everyone who said that to me. People know that I have that file; it's called “Sexist Tidbits.” And so I used to decide whether I should recuse myself when someone in that file appeared before me, but I decided it was just too far.So it was a small civil-rights firm, and they were doing draft cases, they were doing civil-rights cases of all different kinds, and they were doing criminal cases. After a year, the partnership between Norman Zalkind and Harvey Silverglate broke up, and Harvey made me his partner, now an equal partner after a year of practice.Shortly after that, I got a case that changed my career in so many ways, which is I wound up representing Susan Saxe. Susan Saxe was one of five individuals who participated in robberies to get money for the anti-war movement. She was probably five years younger than I was. In the case of the robbery that she participated in, a police officer was killed. She was charged with felony murder. She went underground for five years; the other woman went underground for 20 years.Susan wanted me to represent her, not because she had any sense that I was any good—it's really quite wonderful—she wanted me to represent her because she figured her case was hopeless. And her case was hopeless because the three men involved in the robbery either fled or were immediately convicted, so her case seemed to be hopeless. And she was an extraordinarily principled woman: she said that in her last moment on the stage—she figured that she'd be convicted and get life—she wanted to be represented by a woman. And I was it. There was another woman in town who was a public defender, but I was literally the only private lawyer. I wrote about the case in my book, In Defense of Women, and to Harvey Silvergate's credit, even though the case was virtually no money, he said, “If you want to do it, do it.”Because I didn't know what I was doing—and I literally didn't know what I was doing—I researched every inch of everything in the case. So we had jury research and careful jury selection, hiring people to do jury selection. I challenged the felony-murder rule (this was now 1970). If there was any evidentiary issue, I would not only do the legal research, but talk to social psychologists about what made sense to do. To make a long story short, it took about two years to litigate the case, and it's all that I did.And the government's case was winding down, and it seemed to be not as strong as we thought it was—because, ironically, nobody noticed the woman in the bank. Nobody was noticing women in general; nobody was noticing women in the bank. So their case was much weaker than we thought, except there were two things, two letters that Susan had written: one to her father, and one to her rabbi. The one to her father said, “By the time you get this letter, you'll know what your little girl is doing.” The one to her rabbi said basically the same thing. In effect, these were confessions. Both had been turned over to the FBI.So the case is winding down, not very strong. These letters have not yet been introduced. Meanwhile, The Boston Globe is reporting that all these anti-war activists were coming into town, and Gertner, who no one ever heard of, was going to try the Vietnam War. The defense will be, “She robbed a bank to fight the Vietnam War.” She robbed a bank in order to get money to oppose the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War was illegitimate, etc. We were going to try the Vietnam War.There was no way in hell I was going to do that. But nobody had ever heard of me, so they believed anything. The government decided to rest before the letters came in, anticipating that our defense would be a collection of individuals who were going to challenge the Vietnam War. The day that the government rested without putting in those two letters, I rested my case, and the case went immediately to the jury. I'm told that I was so nervous when I said “the defense rests” that I sounded like Minnie Mouse.The upshot of that, however, was that the jury was 9-3 for acquittal on the first day, 10-2 for acquittal on the second day, and then 11-1 for acquittal—and there it stopped. It was a hung jury. But it essentially made my career. I had first the experience of pouring my heart into a case and saving someone's life, which was like nothing I'd ever felt before, which was better than the library. It also put my name out there. I was no longer, “Who is she?” I suddenly could take any kind of case I wanted to take. And so I was addicted to trials from then until the time I became a judge.DL: Fill us in on what happened later to your client, just her ultimate arc.NG: She wound up getting eight years in prison instead of life. She had already gotten eight years because of a prior robbery in Philadelphia, so there was no way that we were going to affect that. She had pleaded guilty to that. She went on to live a very principled life. She's actually quite religious. She works in the very sort of left Jewish groups. We are in touch—I'm in touch with almost everyone that I've ever known—because it had been a life-changing experience for me. We were four years apart. Her background, though she was more middle-class, was very similar to my own. Her mother used to call me at night about what Susan should wear. So our lives were very much intertwined. And so she was out of jail after eight years, and she has a family and is doing fine.DL: That's really a remarkable result, because people have to understand what defense lawyers are up against. It's often very challenging, and a victory is often a situation where your client doesn't serve life, for example, or doesn't, God forbid, get the death penalty. So it's really interesting that the Saxe case—as you talk about in your wonderful memoir—really did launch your career to the next level. And you wound up handling a number of other cases that you could say were adjacent or thematically related to Saxe's case. Maybe you can talk a little bit about some of those.NG: The women's movement was roaring at this time, and so a woman lawyer who was active and spoke out and talked about women's issues invariably got women's cases. So on the criminal side, I did one of the first, I think it was the first, battered woman syndrome case, as a defense to murder. On the civil side, I had a very robust employment-discrimination practice, dealing with sexual harassment, dealing with racial discrimination. I essentially did whatever I wanted to do. That's what my students don't always understand: I don't remember ever looking for a lucrative case. I would take what was interesting and fun to me, and money followed. I can't describe it any other way.These cases—you wound up getting paid, but I did what I thought was meaningful. But it wasn't just women's rights issues, and it wasn't just criminal defense. We represented white-collar criminal defendants. We represented Boston Mayor Kevin White's second-in-command, Ted Anzalone, also successfully. I did stockholder derivative suits, because someone referred them to me. To some degree the Saxe case, and maybe it was also the time—I did not understand the law to require specialization in the way that it does now. So I could do a felony-murder case on Monday and sue Mayor Lynch on Friday and sue Gulf Oil on Monday, and it wouldn't even occur to me that there was an issue. It was not the same kind of specialization, and I certainly wasn't about to specialize.DL: You anticipated my next comment, which is that when someone reads your memoir, they read about a career that's very hard to replicate in this day and age. For whatever reason, today people specialize. They specialize at earlier points in their careers. Clients want somebody who holds himself out as a specialist in white-collar crime, or a specialist in dealing with defendants who invoke battered woman syndrome, or what have you. And so I think your career… you kind of had a luxury, in a way.NG: I also think that the costs of entry were lower. It was Harvey Silverglate and me, and maybe four or five other lawyers. I was single until I was 39, so I had no family pressures to speak of. And I think that, yes, the profession was different. Now employment discrimination cases involve prodigious amounts of e-discovery. So even a little case has e-discovery, and that's partly because there's a generation—you're a part of it—that lived online. And so suddenly, what otherwise would have been discussions over the back fence are now text messages.So I do think it's different—although maybe this is a comment that only someone who is as old as I am can make—I wish that people would forget the money for a while. When I was on the bench, you'd get a pro se case that was incredibly interesting, challenging prison conditions or challenging some employment issue that had never been challenged before. It was pro se, and I would get on the phone and try to find someone to represent this person. And I can't tell you how difficult it was. These were not necessarily big cases. The big firms might want to get some publicity from it. But there was not a sense of individuals who were going to do it just, “Boy, I've never done a case like this—let me try—and boy, this is important to do.” Now, that may be different today in the Trump administration, because there's a huge number of lawyers that are doing immigration cases. But the day-to-day discrimination cases, even abortion cases, it was not the same kind of support.DL: I feel in some ways you were ahead of your time, because your career as a litigator played out in boutiques, and I feel that today, many lawyers who handle high-profile cases like yours work at large firms. Why did you not go to a large firm, either from YLS or if there were issues, for example, of discrimination, you must have had opportunities to lateral into such a firm later, if you had wanted to?NG: Well, certainly at the beginning nobody wanted me. It didn't matter how well I had done. Me and Ruth Ginsburg were on the streets looking for jobs. So that was one thing. I wound up, for the last four years of my practice before I became a judge, working in a firm called Dwyer Collora & Gertner. It was more of a boutique, white-collar firm. But I wasn't interested in the big firms because I didn't want anyone to tell me what to do. I didn't want anyone to say, “Don't write this op-ed because you'll piss off my clients.” I faced the same kind of issue when I left the bench. I could have an office, and sort of float into client conferences from time to time, but I did not want to be in a setting in which anyone told me what to do. It was true then; it certainly is true now.DL: So you did end up in another setting where, for the most part, you weren't told what to do: namely, you became a federal judge. And I suppose the First Circuit could from time to time tell you what to do, but….NG: But they were always wrong.DL: Yes, I do remember that when you were my professor, you would offer your thoughts on appellate rulings. But how did you—given the kind of career you had, especially—become a federal judge? Because let me be honest, I think that somebody with your type of engagement in hot-button issues today would have a challenging time. Republican senators would grandstand about you coming up with excuses for women murderers, or what have you. Did you have a rough confirmation process?NG: I did. So I'm up for the bench in 1993. This is under Bill Clinton, and I'm told—I never confirmed this—that when Senator Kennedy…. When I met Senator Kennedy, I thought I didn't have a prayer of becoming a judge. I put my name in because I knew the Clintons, and everybody I knew was getting a job in the government. I had not thought about being a judge. I had not prepared. I had not structured my career to be a judge. But everyone I knew was going into the government, and I thought if there ever was a time, this would be it. So I apply. Someday, someone should emboss my application, because the application was quite hysterical. I put in every article that I had written calling for access to reproductive technologies to gay people. It was something to behold.Kennedy was at the tail end of his career, and he was determined to put someone like me on the bench. I'm not sure that anyone else would have done that. I'm told (and this isn't confirmed) that when he talked to Bill and Hillary about me, they of course knew me—Hillary and I had been close friends—but they knew me to be that radical friend of theirs from Yale Law School. There had been 24 years in between, but still. And I'm told that what was said was, “She's terrific. But if there's a problem, she's yours.” But Kennedy was really determined.The week before my hearing before the Senate, I had gotten letters from everyone who had ever opposed me. Every prosecutor. I can't remember anyone who had said no. Bill Weld wrote a letter. Bob Mueller, who had opposed me in cases, wrote a letter. But as I think oftentimes happens with women, there was an article in The Boston Herald the day before my hearing, in which the writer compared me to Lorena Bobbitt. Your listeners may not know this, but he said, “Gertner will do to justice, with her gavel, what Lorena did to her husband, with a kitchen knife.” Do we have to explain that any more?DL: They can Google it or ask ChatGPT. I'm old enough to know about Lorena Bobbitt.NG: Right. So it's just at the tail edge of the presentation, that was always what the caricature would be. But Kennedy was masterful. There were numbers of us who were all up at the same time. Everyone else got through except me. I'm told that that article really was the basis for Senator Jesse Helms's opposition to me. And then Senator Kennedy called us one day and said, “Tomorrow you're going to read something, but don't worry, I'll take care of it.” And the Boston Globe headline says, “Kennedy Votes For Helms's School-Prayer Amendment.” And he called us and said, “We'll take care of it in committee.” And then we get a call from him—my husband took the call—Kennedy, affecting Helms's accent, said, ‘Senator, you've got your judge.' We didn't even understand what the hell he said, between his Boston accent and imitating Helms; we had no idea what he said. But that then was confirmed.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.So turning to your time as a judge, how would you describe that period, in a nutshell? The job did come with certain restrictions. Did you enjoy it, notwithstanding the restrictions?NG: I candidly was not sure that I would last beyond five years, for a couple of reasons. One was, I got on the bench in 1994, when the sentencing guidelines were mandatory, when what we taught you in my sentencing class was not happening, which is that judges would depart from the guidelines and the Sentencing Commission, when enough of us would depart, would begin to change the guidelines, and there'd be a feedback loop. There was no feedback loop. If you departed, you were reversed. And actually the genesis of the book I'm writing now came from this period. As far as I was concerned, I was being unfair. As I later said, my sentences were unfair, unjust, and disproportionate—and there was nothing I could do about it. So I was not sure that I was going to last beyond five years.In addition, there were some high-profile criminal trials going on with lawyers that I knew that I probably would've been a part of if I had been practicing. And I hungered to do that, to go back and be a litigator. The course at Yale Law School that you were a part of saved me. And it saved me because, certainly with respect to the sentencing, it turned what seemed like a formula into an intellectual discussion in which there was wiggle room and the ability to come up with other approaches. In other words, we were taught that this was a formula, and you don't depart from the formula, and that's it. The class came up with creative issues and creative understandings, which made an enormous difference to my judging.So I started to write; I started to write opinions. Even if the opinion says there's nothing I can do about it, I would write opinions in which I say, “I can't depart because of this woman's status as a single mother because the guidelines said only extraordinary family circumstances can justify a departure, and this wasn't extraordinary. That makes no sense.” And I began to write this in my opinions, I began to write this in scholarly writings, and that made all the difference in the world. And sometimes I was reversed, and sometimes I was not. But it enabled me to figure out how to push back against a system which I found to be palpably unfair. So I figured out how to be me in this job—and that was enormously helpful.DL: And I know how much and how deeply you cared about sentencing because of the class in which I actually wound up writing one of my two capstone papers at Yale.NG: To your listeners, I still have that paper.DL: You must be quite a pack rat!NG: I can change the grade at any time….DL: Well, I hope you've enjoyed your time today, Judge, and will keep the grade that way!But let me ask you: now that the guidelines are advisory, do you view that as a step forward from your time on the bench? Perhaps you would still be a judge if they were advisory? I don't know.NG: No, they became advisory in 2005, and I didn't leave until 2011. Yes, that was enormously helpful: you could choose what you thought was a fair sentence, so it's very advisory now. But I don't think I would've stayed longer, because of two reasons.By the time I hit 65, I wanted another act. I wanted another round. I thought I had done all that I could do as a judge, and I wanted to try something different. And Martha Minow of Harvard Law School made me an offer I couldn't refuse, which was to teach at Harvard. So that was one. It also, candidly, was that there was no longevity in my family, and so when I turned 65, I wasn't sure what was going to happen. So I did want to try something new. But I'm still here.DL: Yep—definitely, and very active. I always chuckle when I see “Ret.,” the abbreviation for “retired,” in your email signature, because you do not seem very retired to me. Tell us what you are up to today.NG: Well, first I have this book that I've been writing for several years, called Incomplete Sentences. And so what this book started to be about was the men and women that I sentenced, and how unfair it was, and what I thought we should have done. Then one day I got a message from a man by the name of Darryl Green, and it says, “Is this Nancy Gertner? If it is, I think about you all the time. I hope you're well. I'm well. I'm an iron worker. I have a family. I've written books. You probably don't remember me.” This was a Facebook message. I knew exactly who he was. He was a man who had faced the death penalty in my court, and I acquitted him. And he was then tried in state court, and acquitted again. So I knew exactly who he was, and I decided to write back.So I wrote back and said, “I know who you are. Do you want to meet?” That started a series of meetings that I've had with the men I've sentenced over the course of the 17-year career that I had as a judge. Why has it taken me this long to write? First, because these have been incredibly moving and difficult discussions. Second, because I wanted the book to be honest about what I knew about them and what a difference maybe this information would make. It is extremely difficult, David, to be honest about judging, particularly in these days when judges are parodied. So if I talk about how I wanted to exercise some leniency in a case, I understand that this can be parodied—and I don't want it to be, but I want to be honest.So for example, in one case, there would be cooperators in the case who'd get up and testify that the individual who was charged with only X amount of drugs was actually involved with much more than that. And you knew that if you believed the witness, the sentence would be doubled, even though you thought that didn't make any sense. This was really just mostly how long the cops were on the corner watching the drug deals. It didn't make the guy who was dealing drugs on a bicycle any more culpable than the guy who was doing massive quantities into the country.So I would struggle with, “Do I really believe this man, the witness who's upping the quantity?” And the kinds of exercises I would go through to make sure that I wasn't making a decision because I didn't like the implications of the decision and it was what I was really feeling. So it's not been easy to write, and it's taken me a very long time. The other side of the coin is they're also incredibly honest with me, and sometimes I don't want to know what they're saying. Not like a sociologist who could say, “Oh, that's an interesting fact, I'll put it in.” It's like, “Oh no, I don't want to know that.”DL: Wow. The book sounds amazing; I can't wait to read it. When is it estimated to come out?NG: Well, I'm finishing it probably at the end of this year. I've rewritten it about five times. And my hope would be sometime next year. So yeah, it was organic. It's what I wanted to write from the minute I left the bench. And it covers the guideline period when it was lunacy to follow the guidelines, to a period when it was much more flexible, but the guidelines still disfavored considering things like addiction and trauma and adverse childhood experiences, which really defined many of the people I was sentencing. So it's a cri de cœur, as they say, which has not been easy to write.DL: Speaking of cri de cœurs, and speaking of difficult things, it's difficult to write about judging, but I think we also have alluded already to how difficult it is to engage in judging in 2025. What general thoughts would you have about being a federal judge in 2025? I know you are no longer a federal judge. But if you were still on the bench or when you talk to your former colleagues, what is it like on the ground right now?NG: It's nothing like when I was a judge. In fact, the first thing that happened when I left the bench is I wrote an article in which I said—this is in 2011—that the only pressure I had felt in my 17 years on the bench was to duck, avoid, and evade, waiver, statute of limitations. Well, all of a sudden, you now have judges who at least since January are dealing with emergencies that they can't turn their eyes away from, judges issuing rulings at 1 a.m., judges writing 60-page decisions on an emergency basis, because what the president is doing is literally unprecedented. The courts are being asked to look at issues that have never been addressed before, because no one has ever tried to do the things that he's doing. And they have almost overwhelmingly met the moment. It doesn't matter whether you're ruling for the government or against the government; they are taking these challenges enormously seriously. They're putting in the time.I had two clerks, maybe some judges have three, but it's a prodigious amount of work. Whereas everyone complained about the Trump prosecutions proceeding so slowly, judges have been working expeditiously on these challenges, and under circumstances that I never faced, which is threats the likes of which I have never seen. One judge literally played for me the kinds of voice messages that he got after a decision that he issued. So they're doing it under circumstances that we never had to face. And it's not just the disgruntled public talking; it's also our fellow Yale Law alum, JD Vance, talking about rogue judges. That's a level of delegitimization that I just don't think anyone ever had to deal with before. So they're being challenged in ways that no other judges have, and they are being threatened in a way that no judges have.On the other hand, I wish I were on the bench.DL: Interesting, because I was going to ask you that. If you were to give lower-court judges a grade, to put you back in professor mode, on their performance since January 2025, what grade would you give the lower courts?NG: Oh, I would give them an A. I would give them an A. It doesn't matter which way they have come out: decision after decision has been thoughtful and careful. They put in the time. Again, this is not a commentary on what direction they have gone in, but it's a commentary on meeting the moment. And so now these are judges who are getting emergency orders, emergency cases, in the midst of an already busy docket. It has really been extraordinary. The district courts have; the courts of appeals have. I've left out another court….DL: We'll get to that in a minute. But I'm curious: you were on the District of Massachusetts, which has been a real center of activity because many groups file there. As we're recording this, there is the SNAP benefits, federal food assistance litigation playing out there [before Judge Indira Talwani, with another case before Chief Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island]. So it's really just ground zero for a lot of these challenges. But you alluded to the Supreme Court, and I was going to ask you—even before you did—what grade would you give them?NG: Failed. The debate about the shadow docket, which you write about and I write about, in which Justice Kavanaugh thinks, “we're doing fine making interim orders, and therefore it's okay that there's even a precedential value to our interim orders, and thank you very much district court judges for what you're doing, but we'll be the ones to resolve these issues”—I mean, they're resolving these issues in the most perfunctory manner possible.In the tariff case, for example, which is going to be argued on Wednesday, the Court has expedited briefing and expedited oral argument. They could do that with the emergency docket, but they are preferring to hide behind this very perfunctory decision making. I'm not sure why—maybe to keep their options open? Justice Barrett talks about how if it's going to be a hasty decision, you want to make sure that it's not written in stone. But of course then the cases dealing with independent commissions, in which you are allowing the government, allowing the president, to fire people on independent commissions—these cases are effectively overruling Humphrey's Executor, in the most ridiculous setting. So the Court is not meeting the moment. It was stunning that the Court decided in the birthright-citizenship case to be concerned about nationwide injunctions, when in fact nationwide injunctions had been challenged throughout the Biden administration, and they just decided not to address the issue then.Now, I have a lot to say about Justice Kavanaugh's dressing-down of Judge [William] Young [of the District of Massachusetts]….DL: Or Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Kavanaugh.NG: That's right, it was Justice Gorsuch. It was stunningly inappropriate, stunningly inappropriate, undermines the district courts that frankly are doing much better than the Supreme Court in meeting the moment. The whole concept of defying the Supreme Court—defying a Supreme Court order, a three-paragraph, shadow-docket order—is preposterous. So whereas the district courts and the courts of appeals are meeting the moment, I do not think the Supreme Court is. And that's not even going into the merits of the immunity decision, which I think has let loose a lawless presidency that is even more lawless than it might otherwise be. So yes, that failed.DL: I do want to highlight for my readers that in addition to your books and your speaking, you do write quite frequently on these issues in the popular press. I've seen your work in The New York Times and The Boston Globe. I know you're working on a longer essay about the rule of law in the age of Trump, so people should look out for that. Of all the things that you worry about right now when it comes to the rule of law, what worries you the most?NG: I worry that the president will ignore and disobey a Supreme Court order. I think a lot about the judges that are dealing with orders that the government is not obeying, and people are impatient that they're not immediately moving to contempt. And one gets the sense with the lower courts that they are inching up to the moment of contempt, but do not want to get there because it would be a stunning moment when you hold the government in contempt. I think the Supreme Court is doing the same thing. I initially believed that the Supreme Court was withholding an anti-Trump decision, frankly, for fear that he would not obey it, and they were waiting till it mattered. I now am no longer certain of that, because there have been rulings that made no sense as far as I'm concerned. But my point was that they, like the lower courts, were holding back rather than saying, “Government, you must do X,” for fear that the government would say, “Go pound sand.” And that's what I fear, because when that happens, it will be even more of a constitutional crisis than we're in now. It'll be a constitutional confrontation, the likes of which we haven't seen. So that's what I worry about.DL: Picking up on what you just said, here's something that I posed to one of my prior guests, Pam Karlan. Let's say you're right that the Supreme Court doesn't want to draw this line in the sand because of a fear that Trump, being Trump, will cross it. Why is that not prudential? Why is that not the right thing? And why is it not right for the Supreme Court to husband its political capital for the real moment?Say Trump—I know he said lately he's not going to—but say Trump attempts to run for a third term, and some case goes up to the Supreme Court on that basis, and the Court needs to be able to speak in a strong, unified, powerful voice. Or maybe it'll be a birthright-citizenship case, if he says, when they get to the merits of that, “Well, that's really nice that you think that there's such a thing as birthright citizenship, but I don't, and now stop me.” Why is it not wise for the Supreme Court to protect itself, until this moment when it needs to come forward and protect all of us?NG: First, the question is whether that is in fact what they are doing, and as I said, there were two schools of thought on this. One school of thought was that is what they were doing, and particularly doing it in an emergency, fuzzy, not really precedential way, until suddenly you're at the edge of the cliff, and you have to either say taking away birthright citizenship was unconstitutional, or tariffs, you can't do the tariffs the way you want to do the tariffs. I mean, they're husbanding—I like the way you put it, husbanding—their political capital, until that moment. I'm not sure that that's true. I think we'll know that if in fact the decisions that are coming down the pike, they actually decide against Trump—notably the tariff ones, notably birthright citizenship. I'm just not sure that that's true.And besides, David, there are some of these cases they did not have to take. The shadow docket was about where plaintiffs were saying it is an emergency to lay people off or fire people. Irreparable harm is on the plaintiff's side, whereas the government otherwise would just continue to do that which it has been doing. There's no harm to it continuing that. USAID—you don't have a right to dismantle the USAID. The harm is on the side of the dismantling, not having you do that which you have already done and could do through Congress, if you wanted to. They didn't have to take those cases. So your comment about husbanding political capital is a good comment, but those cases could have remained as they were in the district courts with whatever the courts of appeals did, and they could do what previous courts have done, which is wait for the issues to percolate longer.The big one for me, too, is the voting rights case. If they decide the voting rights case in January or February or March, if they rush it through, I will say then it's clear they're in the tank for Trump, because the only reason to get that decision out the door is for the 2026 election. So I want to believe that they are husbanding their political capital, but I'm not sure that if that's true, that we would've seen this pattern. But the proof will be with the voting rights case, with birthright citizenship, with the tariffs.DL: Well, it will be very interesting to see what happens in those cases. But let us now turn to my speed round. These are four questions that are the same for all my guests, and my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as an abstract system of governance.NG: The practice of law. I do some litigation; I'm in two cases. When I was a judge, I used to laugh at people who said incivility was the most significant problem in the law. I thought there were lots of other more significant problems. I've come now to see how incredibly nasty the practice of law is. So yes—and that is no fun.DL: My second question is, what would you be if you were not a lawyer/judge/retired judge?NG: Musical comedy star, clearly! No question about it.DL: There are some judges—Judge Fred Block in the Eastern District of New York, Judge Jed Rakoff in the Southern District of New York—who do these little musical stylings for their court shows. I don't know if you've ever tried that?NG: We used to do Shakespeare, Shakespeare readings, and I loved that. I am a ham—so absolutely musical comedy or theater.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?NG: Six to seven hours now, just because I'm old. Before that, four. Most of my life as a litigator, I never thought I needed sleep. You get into my age, you need sleep. And also you look like hell the next morning, so it's either getting sleep or a facelift.DL: And my last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?NG: You have to do what you love. You have to do what you love. The law takes time and is so all-encompassing that you have to do what you love. And I have done what I love from beginning to now, and I wouldn't have it any other way.DL: Well, I have loved catching up with you, Judge, and having you share your thoughts and your story with my listeners. Thank you so much for joining me.NG: You're very welcome, David. Take care.DL: Thanks so much to Judge Gertner for joining me. I look forward to reading her next book, Incomplete Sentences, when it comes out next year.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 26. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

A federal judge came in “hot” off the bench and right at Trump's DOJ and Lindsey Halligan, excoriating them for “indicting first and investigating second” in the Former FBI Dir. James Comey criminal case, and ordering them to immediately turn over tens of thousands of documents and ALL the secret grand jury transcripts to the defense ASAP. Michael Popok examines Magistrate Judge Fitzpatrick, who used to be a Division Chief in Halligan's once proud Eastern District of Virginia US Attorney's Office, and he wasn't having it with the DOJ's footdragging and incompetence, given that we are only 60 days until the start of the trial! Learn more about the Popok Firm at https://thepopokfirm.com Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

November 6, 2025 ~ Barb McQuade, law professor at University of Michigan and former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, joins Chris and Jamie to discuss the Supreme Court hearing arguments on Wednesday regarding if the president holds the power to implement sweeping tariffs. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

November 4, 2025 ~ Matthew Schneider, former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, joins Chris and Jamie to discuss the Dearborn men conspiring a plan to commit a terrorist attack in Michigan over the Halloween weekend. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The psychopaths running the government are not going to let a crisis go to waste. They're taking advantage of the shutdown to cut SNAP benefits and fire civil servants — or they would if courts would let them. Plus, the Ninth Circuit and even the Supreme Court (GASP!) are putting the kibosh on Trump's plan to flood blue states with troops. And still, Lindsey Halligan, the wannabe US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, is finding new and creative ways to screw up the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey.   Links:   Massachusetts v. USDA [SNAP benefits] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71783393/commonwealth-of-massachusetts-v-united-states-department-of-agriculture/   AFGE-AFL CIO v. US [shutdown RIFs] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71502325/american-federation-of-government-employees-afl-cio-v-united-states   Drake v. UMG [trial docket] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69546009/graham-v-umg-recordings-inc   Oregon v. Trump [Ninth Circuit] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71554902/state-of-oregon-et-al-v-trump-et-al   SCOTUS Docket: Chicago Troop Deployment https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25a443.html   US v. Comey https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71459120/united-states-v-comey/?order_by=desc   US v. Ramirez [Essayli] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71166841/united-states-v-ramirez/?order_by=desc Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod  

Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.Yesterday, Southern California Edison (SCE), the utility whose power lines may have started the devastating Eaton Fire, announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program. Under the program, people affected by the fire can receive hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation, in a matter of months rather than years—but in exchange, they must give up their right to sue.It should come as no surprise that SCE, in designing the program, sought the help of Kenneth Feinberg. For more than 40 years, often in the wake of tragedy or disaster, Feinberg has helped mediate and resolve seemingly intractable crises. He's most well-known for how he and his colleague Camille Biros designed and administered the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. But he has worked on many other headline-making matters over the years, including the Agent Orange product liability litigation, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Trust, the multidistrict litigation involving Monsanto's Roundup weed killer—and now, of course, the Eaton Fire.How did Ken develop such a fascinating and unique practice? What is the most difficult aspect of administering these giant compensation funds? Do these funds represent the wave of the future, as an alternative to (increasingly expensive) litigation? Having just turned 80, does he have any plans to retire?Last week, I had the pleasure of interviewing Ken—the day after his 80th birthday—and we covered all these topics. The result is what I found to be one of the most moving conversations I've ever had on this podcast.Thanks to Ken Feinberg for joining me—and, of course, for his many years of service as America's go-to mediator in times of crisis.Show Notes:* Kenneth Feinberg bio, Wikipedia* Kenneth Feinberg profile, Chambers and Partners* L.A. Fire Victims Face a Choice, by Jill Cowan for The New York TimesPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fourth episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, October 24.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.I like to think that I've produced some good podcast episodes over the past three-plus years, but I feel that this latest one is a standout. I'm hard-pressed to think of an interview that was more emotionally affecting to me than what you're about to hear.Kenneth Feinberg is a leading figure in the world of mediation and alternative dispute resolution. He is most well-known for having served as special master of the U.S. government's September 11th Victim Compensation Fund—and for me, as someone who was in New York City on September 11, I found his discussion of that work profoundly moving. But he has handled many major matters over the years, such as the Agent Orange product liability litigation to the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund. And he's working right now on a matter that's in the headlines: the California wildfires. Ken has been hired by Southern California Edison to help design a compensation program for victims of the 2025 Eaton fire. Ken has written about his fascinating work in two books: What Is Life Worth?: The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11 and Who Gets What: Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Ken Feinberg.Ken, thank you so much for joining me.Ken Feinberg: Thank you very much; it's an honor to be here.DL: We are recording this shortly after your 80th birthday, so happy birthday!KF: Thank you very much.DL: Let's go back to your birth; let's start at the beginning. You grew up in Massachusetts, I believe.KF: That's right: Brockton, Massachusetts, about 20 miles south of Boston.DL: Your parents weren't lawyers. Tell us about what they did.KF: My parents were blue-collar workers from Massachusetts, second-generation immigrants. My father ran a wholesale tire distributorship, my mother was a bookkeeper, and we grew up in the 1940s and ‘50s, even the early ‘60s, in a town where there was great optimism, a very vibrant Jewish community, three different synagogues, a very optimistic time in American history—post-World War II, pre-Vietnam, and a time when communitarianism, working together to advance the collective good, was a prominent characteristic of Brockton, and most of the country, during the time that I was in elementary school and high school in Brockton.DL: Did the time in which you grow up shape or influence your decision to go into law?KF: Yes. More than law—the time growing up had a great impact on my decision to give back to the community from which I came. You've got to remember, when I was a teenager, the president of the United States was John F. Kennedy, and I'll never forget because it had a tremendous impact on me—President Kennedy reminding everybody that public service is a noble undertaking, government is not a dirty word, and especially his famous quote (or one of his many quotes), “Every individual can make a difference.” I never forgot that, and it had a personal impact on me and has had an impact on me throughout my life. [Ed. note: The quotation generally attributed to JFK is, “One person can make a difference, and everyone should try.” Whether he actually said these exact words is unclear, but it's certainly consistent with many other sentiments he expressed throughout his life.]DL: When you went to college at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, what did you study?KF: I studied history and political science. I was very interested in how individuals over the centuries change history, the theory of historians that great individuals articulate history and drive it in a certain direction—for good, like President Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, or for ill, like Adolf Hitler or Mussolini. And so it was history that I really delved into in my undergraduate years.DL: What led you then to turn to law school?KF: I always enjoyed acting on the stage—theater, comedies, musicals, dramas—and at the University of Massachusetts, I did quite a bit of that. In my senior year, I anticipated going to drama school at Yale, or some other academic master's program in theater. My father gave me very good advice. He said, “Ken, most actors end up waiting on restaurant tables in Manhattan, waiting for a big break that never comes. Why don't you turn your skills on the stage to a career in the courtroom, in litigation, talking to juries and convincing judges?” That was very sound advice from my father, and I ended up attending NYU Law School and having a career in the law.DL: Yes—and you recount that story in your book, and I just love that. It's really interesting to hear what parents think of our careers. But anyway, you did very well in law school, you were on the law review, and then your first job out of law school was something that we might expect out of someone who did well in law school.KF: Yes. I was a law clerk to the chief judge of New York State, Stanley Fuld, a very famous state jurist, and he had his chambers in New York City. For one week, every six or seven weeks, we would go to the state capitol in Albany to hear cases, and it was Judge Fuld who was my transition from law school to the practice of law.DL: I view clerking as a form of government service—and then you continued in service after that.KF: That's right. Remembering what my father had suggested, I then turned my attention to the courtroom and became an assistant United States attorney, a federal prosecutor, in New York City. I served as a prosecutor and as a trial lawyer for a little over three years. And then I had a wonderful opportunity to go to work for Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington and stayed with him for about five years.DL: You talk about this also in your books—you worked on a pretty diverse range of issues for the senator, right?KF: That's right. For the first three years I worked on his staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee, with some excellent colleagues—soon-to-be Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer was with me, noted litigator David Boies was in the office—and for the first three years, it was law-related issues. Then in 1978, Senator Kennedy asked me to be his chief of staff, and once I went over and became his chief of staff, the issues of course mushroomed. He was running for president, so there were issues of education, health, international relations—a wide diversity of issues, very broad-based.DL: I recall that you didn't love the chief of staff's duties.KF: No. Operations or administration was not my priority. I loved substance, issues—whatever the issues were, trying to work out legislative compromises, trying to give back something in the way of legislation to the people. And internal operations and administration, I quickly discovered, was not my forte. It was not something that excited me.DL: Although it's interesting: what you are most well-known for is overseeing and administering these large funds and compensating victims of these horrific tragedies, and there's a huge amount of administration involved in that.KF: Yes, but I'm a very good delegator. In fact, if you look at the track record of my career in designing and administering these programs—9/11 or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill or the Patriots' Day Marathon bombings in Boston—I was indeed fortunate in all of those matters to have at my side, for over 40 years, Camille Biros. She's not a lawyer, but she's the nation's expert on designing, administering, and operating these programs, and as you delve into what I've done and haven't done, her expertise has been invaluable.DL: I would call Camille your secret weapon, except she's not secret. She's been profiled in The New York Times, and she's a well-known figure in her own right.KF: That is correct. She was just in the last few months named one of the 50 Women Over 50 that have had such an impact in the country—that list by Forbes that comes out every year. She's prominently featured in that magazine.DL: Shifting back to your career, where did you go after your time in the Senate?KF: I opened up a Washington office for a prominent New York law firm, and for the next decade or more, that was the center of my professional activity.DL: So that was Kaye Scholer, now Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer. What led you to go from your career in the public sector, where you spent a number of your years right out of law school, into so-called Biglaw?KF: Practicality and financial considerations. I had worked for over a decade in public service. I now had a wife, I had three young children, and it was time to give them financial security. And “Biglaw,” as you put it—Biglaw in Washington was lucrative, and it was something that gave me a financial base from which I could try and expand my different interests professionally. And that was the reason that for about 12 years I was in private practice for a major firm, Kaye Scholer.DL: And then tell us what happened next.KF: A great lesson in not planning too far ahead. In 1984, I got a call from a former clerk of Judge Fuld whom I knew from the clerk network: Judge Jack Weinstein, a nationally recognized jurist from Brooklyn, the Eastern District, and a federal judge. He had on his docket the Vietnam veterans' Agent Orange class action.You may recall that there were about 250,000 Vietnam veterans who came home claiming illness or injury or death due to the herbicide Agent Orange, which had been dropped by the U.S. Air Force in Vietnam to burn the foliage and vegetation where the Viet Cong enemy might be hiding. Those Vietnam veterans came home suffering terrible diseases, including cancer and chloracne (a sort of acne on the skin), and they brought a lawsuit. Judge Weinstein had the case. Weinstein realized that if that case went to trial, it could be 10 years before there'd be a result, with appeals and all of that.So he appointed me as mediator, called the “special master,” whose job it was to try and settle the case, all as a mediator. Well, after eight weeks of trying, we were successful. There was a master settlement totaling about $250 million—at the time, one of the largest tort verdicts in history. And that one case, front-page news around the nation, set me on a different track. Instead of remaining a Washington lawyer involved in regulatory and legislative matters, I became a mediator, an individual retained by the courts or by the parties to help resolve a case. And that was the beginning. That one Agent Orange case transformed my entire professional career and moved me in a different direction completely.DL: So you knew the late Judge Weinstein through Fuld alumni circles. What background did you have in mediation already, before you handled this gigantic case?KF: None. I told Judge Weinstein, “Judge, I never took a course in mediation at law school (there wasn't one then), and I don't know anything about bringing the parties together, trying to get them to settle.” He said, “I know you. I know your background. I've followed your career. You worked for Senator Kennedy. You are the perfect person.” And until the day I die, I'm beholden to Judge Weinstein for having faith in me to take this on.DL: And over the years, you actually worked on a number of matters at the request of Judge Weinstein.KF: A dozen. I worked on tobacco cases, on asbestos cases, on drug and medical device cases. I even worked for Judge Weinstein mediating the closing of the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island. I handled a wide range of cases where he called on me to act as his court-appointed mediator to resolve cases on his docket.DL: You've carved out a very unique and fascinating niche within the law, and I'm guessing that most people who meet you nowadays know who you are. But say you're in a foreign country or something, and some total stranger is chatting with you and asks what you do for a living. What would you say?KF: I would say I'm a lawyer, and I specialize in dispute resolution. It might be mediation, it might be arbitration, or it might even be negotiation, where somebody asks me to negotiate on their behalf. So I just tell people there is a growing field of law in the United States called ADR—alternative dispute resolution—and that it is, as you say, David, my niche, my focus when called upon.DL: And I think it's fair to say that you're one of the founding people in this field or early pioneers—or I don't know how you would describe it.KF: I think that's right. When I began with Agent Orange, there was no mediation to speak of. It certainly wasn't institutionalized; it wasn't streamlined. Today, in 2025, the American Bar Association has a special section on alternative dispute resolution, it's taught in every law school in the United States, there are thousands of mediators and arbitrators, and it's become a major leg in law school of different disciplines and specialties.DL: One question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter you are most proud of?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the hardest matter you've ever had to deal with?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter that you're most well-known for?” And I feel in your case, the same matter is responsive to all three of those questions.KF: That's correct. The most difficult, the most challenging, the most rewarding matter, the one that's given me the most exposure, was the federal September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, when I was appointed by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft to implement, design, and administer a very unique federal law that had been enacted right after 9/11.DL: I got chills as you were just even stating that, very factually, because I was in New York on 9/11, and a lot of us remember the trauma and difficulty of that time. And you basically had to live with that and talk to hundreds, even thousands, of people—survivors, family members—for almost three years. And you did it pro bono. So let me ask you this: what were you thinking?KF: What triggered my interest was the law itself. Thirteen days after the attacks, Congress passed this law, unique in American history, setting up a no-fault administrator compensation system. Don't go to court. Those who volunteer—families of the dead, those who were physically injured at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon—you can voluntarily seek compensation from a taxpayer-funded law. Now, if you don't want it, you don't have to go. It's a voluntary program.The key will be whether the special master or the administrator will be able to convince people that it is a better avenue to pursue than a long, delayed, uncertain lawsuit. And based on my previous experience for the last 15 years, starting with Agent Orange and asbestos and these other tragedies, I volunteered. I went to Senator Kennedy and said, “What about this?” He said, “Leave it to me.” He called President Bush. He knew Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was his former colleague in the U.S. Senate, and he had great admiration for Senator Ashcroft. And so I was invited by the attorney general for an interview, and I told him I was interested. I told him I would only do it pro bono. You can't get paid for a job like this; it's patriotism. And he said, “Go for it.” And he turned out to be my biggest, strongest ally during the 33 months of the program.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.You talk about this in your books: you were recommended by a very prominent Democratic politician, and the administration at the time was Republican. George W. Bush was president, and John Ashcroft was the attorney general. Why wouldn't they have picked a Republican for this project?KF: Very good question. Senator Kennedy told both of them, “You better be careful here. This is a very, very uncertain program, with taxpayer money used to pay only certain victims. This could be a disaster. And you would be well-advised to pick someone who is not a prominent friend of yours, who is not perceived as just a Republican arm of the Justice Department or the White House. And I've got the perfect person. You couldn't pick a more opposite politician than my former chief of staff, Ken Feinberg. But look at what he's done.” And I think to Senator Kennedy's credit, and certainly to President Bush and to John Ashcroft's, they selected me.DL: As you would expect with a program of this size and complexity, there was controversy and certainly criticism over the years. But overall, looking back, I think people regard it widely as a huge success. Do you have a sense or an estimate of what percentage of people in the position to accept settlements through the program did that, rather than litigate? Because in accepting funds from the program, they did waive their right to bring all sorts of lawsuits.KF: That's correct. If you look at the statistics, if the statistics are a barometer of success, 5,300 applicants were eligible, because of death—about 2,950, somewhere in there—and the remaining claims were for physical injury. Of the 5,300, 97 percent voluntarily accepted the compensation. Only 94 people, 3 percent, opted out, and they all settled their cases five years later. There was never a trial on who was responsible in the law for 9/11. So if statistics are an indication—and I think they are a good indication—the program was a stunning success in accomplishing Congress's objective, which was diverting people voluntarily out of the court system.DL: Absolutely. And that's just a striking statistic. It was really successful in getting funds to families that needed it. They had lost breadwinners; they had lost loved ones. It was hugely successful, and it did not take a decade, as some of these cases involving just thousands of victims often do.I was struck by one thing you just said. You mentioned there was really no trial. And in reading your accounts of your work on this, it seemed almost like people viewed talking to you and your colleagues, Camille and others on this—I think they almost viewed that as their opportunity to be heard, since there wasn't a trial where they would get to testify.KF: That's correct. The primary reason for the success of the 9/11 Fund, and a valuable lesson for me thereafter, was this: give victims the opportunity to be heard, not only in public town-hall meetings where collectively people can vent, but in private, with doors closed. It's just the victim and Feinberg or his designee, Camille. We were the face of the government here. You can't get a meeting with the secretary of defense or the attorney general, the head of the Department of Justice. What you can get is an opportunity behind closed doors to express your anger, your frustration, your disappointment, your sense of uncertainty, with the government official responsible for cutting the checks. And that had an enormous difference in assuring the success of the program.DL: What would you say was the hardest aspect of your work on the Fund?KF: The hardest part of the 9/11 Fund, which I'll never recover from, was not calculating the value of a life. Judges and juries do that every day, David, in every court, in New Jersey and 49 other states. That is not a difficult assignment. What would the victim have earned over a work life? Add something for pain and suffering and emotional distress, and there's your check.The hardest part in any of these funds, starting with 9/11—the most difficult aspect, the challenge—is empathy, and your willingness to sit for over 900 separate hearings, me alone with family members or victims, to hear what they want to tell you, and to make that meeting, from their perspective, worthwhile and constructive. That's the hard part.DL: Did you find it sometimes difficult to remain emotionally composed? Or did you, after a while, develop a sort of thick skin?KF: You remain composed. You are a professional. You have a job to do, for the president of the United States. You can't start wailing and crying in the presence of somebody who was also wailing and crying, so you have to compose yourself. But I tell people who say, “Could I do what you did?” I say, “Sure. There are plenty of people in this country that can do what I did—if you can brace yourself for the emotional trauma that comes with meeting with victim after victim after victim and hearing their stories, which are...” You can't make them up. They're so heart-wrenching and so tragic.I'll give you one example. A lady came to see me, 26 years old, sobbing—one of hundreds of people I met with. “Mr. Feinberg, I lost my husband. He was a fireman at the World Trade Center. He died on 9/11. And he left me with our two children, six and four. Now, Mr. Feinberg, you've calculated and told me I'm going to receive $2.4 million, tax-free, from this 9/11 Fund. I want it in 30 days.”I said to Mrs. Jones, “This is public, taxpayer money. We have to go down to the U.S. Treasury. They've got to cut the checks; they've got to dot all the i's and cross all the t's. It may be 60 days or 90 days, but you'll get your money.”“No. Thirty days.”I said, “Mrs. Jones, why do you need the money in 30 days?”She said, “Why? I'll tell you why, Mr. Feinberg. I have terminal cancer. I have 10 weeks to live. My husband was going to survive me and take care of our two children. Now they're going to be orphans. I have got to get this money, find a guardian, make sure the money's safe, prepare for the kids' schooling. I don't have a lot of time. I need your help.”Well, we ran down to the U.S. Treasury and helped process the check in record time. We got her the money in 30 days—and eight weeks later, she died. Now when you hear story after story like this, you get some indication of the emotional pressure that builds and is debilitating, frankly. And we managed to get through it.DL: Wow. I got a little choked up just even hearing you tell that. Wow—I really don't know what to say.When you were working on the 9/11 Fund, did you have time for any other matters, or was this pretty much exclusively what you were working on for the 33 months?KF: Professionally, it was exclusive. Now what I did was, I stayed in my law firm, so I had a living. Other people in the firm were generating income for the firm; I wasn't on the dole. But it was exclusive. During the day, you are swamped with these individual requests, decisions that have to be made, checks that have to be cut. At night, I escaped: opera, orchestral concerts, chamber music, art museums—the height of civilization. During the day, in the depths of horror of civilization; at night, an escape, an opportunity to just enjoy the benefits of civilization. You better have a loving family, as I did, that stands behind you—because you never get over it, really.DL: That's such an important lesson, to actually have that time—because if you wanted to, you could have worked on this 24/7. But it is important to have some time to just clear your head or spend time with your family, especially just given what you were dealing with day-to-day.KF: That's right. And of course, during the day, we made a point of that as well. If we were holding hearings like the one I just explained, we'd take a one-hour break, go for a walk, go into Central Park or into downtown Washington, buy an ice cream cone, see the kids playing in playgrounds and laughing. You've got to let the steam out of the pressure cooker, or it'll kill you. And that was the most difficult part of the whole program. In all of these programs, that's the common denominator: emotional stress and unhappiness on the part of the victims.DL: One last question, before we turn to some other matters. There was also a very large logistical apparatus associated with this, right? For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers. It wasn't just you and Camille trying to deal with these thousands of survivors and claimants; you did have support.KF: That's right. Pricewaterhouse won the bid at the Justice Department. This is public: Pricewaterhouse, for something like around $100 million, put 450 people to work with us to help us process claims, appraise values, do the research. Pricewaterhouse was a tremendous ally and has gone on, since 9/11, to handle claims design and claims administration, as one of its many specialties. Emily Kent, Chuck Hacker, people like that we worked with for years, very much experts in these areas.DL: So after your work on the 9/11 Fund, you've worked on a number of these types of matters. Is there one that you would say ranks second in terms of complexity or difficulty or meaningfulness to you?KF: Yes. Deepwater Horizon in 2011, 2012—that oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico blew up and killed about, I don't know, 15 to 20 people in the explosion. But the real challenge in that program was how we received, in 16 months, about 1,250,000 claims for business interruption, business losses, property damage. We received over a million claims from 50 states. I think we got probably a dozen claims from New Jersey; I didn't know the oil had gotten to New Jersey. We received claims from 35 foreign countries. And the sheer volume of the disaster overwhelmed us. We had, at one point, something like 40,000 people—vendors—working for us. We had 35 offices throughout the Gulf of Mexico, from Galveston, Texas, all the way to Mobile Bay, Alabama. Nevertheless, in 16 months, on behalf of BP, Deepwater Horizon, we paid out all BP money, a little over $7 billion, to 550,000 eligible claimants. And that, I would say, other than 9/11, had the greatest impact and was the most satisfying.DL: You mentioned some claims coming from some pretty far-flung jurisdictions. In these programs, how much of a problem is fraud?KF: Not much. First of all, with death claims like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombings or the 20 first-graders who died in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, at the hands of a deranged gunmen—most of the time, in traumatic death and injury, you've got records. No one can beat the system; you have to have a death certificate. In 9/11, where are your military records, if you were at the Pentagon? Where are the airplane manifests? You've got to be on the manifest if you were flying on that plane.Now, the problem becomes more pronounced in something like BP, where you've got over a million claims, and you wonder, how many people can claim injury from this explosion? There we had an anti-fraud unit—Guidepost, Bart Schwartz's company—and they did a tremendous job of spot-checking claims. I think that out of over a million claims, there may have been 25,000 that were suspicious. And we sent those claims to the Justice Department, and they prosecuted a fair number of people. But it wasn't a huge problem. I think the fraud rate was something like 3 percent; that's nothing. So overall, we haven't found—and we have to be ever-vigilant, you're right—but we haven't found much in the way of fraud.DL: I'm glad to hear that, because it would really be very depressing to think that there were people trying to profiteer off these terrible disasters and tragedies. Speaking of continuing disasters and tragedies, turning to current events, you are now working with Southern California Edison in dealing with claims related to the Eaton Fire. And this is a pending matter, so of course you may have some limits in terms of what you can discuss, but what can you say in a general sense about this undertaking?KF: This is the Los Angeles wildfires that everybody knows about, from the last nine or ten months—the tremendous fire damage in Los Angeles. One of the fires, or one of the selected hubs of the fire, was the Eaton Fire. Southern California Edison, the utility involved in the litigation and finger-pointing, decided to set up, à la 9/11, a voluntary claims program. Not so much to deal with death—there were about 19 deaths, and a handful of physical injuries—but terrible fire damage, destroyed homes, damaged businesses, smoke and ash and soot, for miles in every direction. And the utility decided, its executive decided, “We want to do the right thing here. We may be held liable or we may not be held liable for the fire, but we think the right thing to do is nip in the bud this idea of extended litigation. Look at 9/11: only 94 people ended up suing. We want to set up a program.”They came to Camille and me. Over the last eight weeks, we've designed the program, and I think in the last week of October or the first week of November, you will see publicly, “Here is the protocol; here is the claim form. Please submit your claims, and we'll get them paid within 90 days.” And if history is an indicator, Camille and I think that the Eaton Fire Protocol will be a success, and the great bulk of the thousands of victims will voluntarily decide to come into the program. We'll see. [Ed. note: On Wednesday, a few days after Ken and I recorded this episode, Southern California Edison announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program.]DL: That raises a question that I'm curious about. How would you describe the relationship between the work that you and Camille and your colleagues do and the traditional work of the courts, in terms of in-the-trenches litigation? Because I do wonder whether the growth in your field is perhaps related to some developments in litigation, in terms of litigation becoming more expensive over the decades (in a way that far outstrips inflation), more complicated, or more protracted. How would you characterize that relationship?KF: I would say that the programs that we design and administer—like 9/11, like BP, plus the Eaton wildfires—are an exception to the rule. Nobody should think that these programs that we have worked on are the wave of the future. They are not the wave of the future; they are isolated, unique examples, where a company—or in 9/11, the U.S. government—decides, “We ought to set up a special program where the courts aren't involved, certainly not directly.” In 9/11, they were prohibited to be involved, by statute; in some of these other programs, like BP, the courts have a relationship, but they don't interfere with the day-to-day administration of the program.And I think the American people have a lot of faith in the litigation system that you correctly point out can be uncertain, very inefficient, and very costly. But the American people, since the founding of the country, think, “You pick your lawyer, I'll pick my lawyer, and we'll have a judge and jury decide.” That's the American rule of law; I don't think it's going to change. But occasionally there is a groundswell of public pressure to come up with a program, or there'll be a company—like the utility, like BP—that decides to have a program.And I'll give you one other example: the Catholic Church confronted thousands of claims of sexual abuse by priests. It came to us, and we set up a program—just like 9/11, just like BP—where we invited, voluntarily, any minor—any minor from decades ago, now an adult—who had been abused by the church to come into this voluntary program. We paid out, I think, $700 million to $800 million, to victims in dioceses around the country. So there's another example—Camille did most of that—but these programs are all relatively rare. There are thousands of litigations every day, and nothing's going to change that.DL: I had a guest on a few weeks ago, Chris Seeger of Seeger Weiss, who does a lot of work in the mass-tort space. It's interesting: I feel that that space has evolved, and maybe in some ways it's more efficient than it used to be. They have these multi-district litigation panels, they have these bellwether trials, and then things often get settled, once people have a sense of the values. That system and your approach seem to have some similarities, in the sense that you're not individually trying each one of these cases, and you're having somebody with liability come forward and voluntarily pay out money, after some kind of negotiation.KF: Well, there's certainly negotiation in what Chris Seeger does; I'm not sure we have much negotiation. We say, “Here's the amount under the administrative scheme.” It's like in workers' compensation: here's the amount. You don't have to take it. There's nothing to really talk about, unless you have new evidence that we're not aware of. And those programs, when we do design them, seem to work very efficiently.Again, if you ask Camille Biros what was the toughest part of valuing individual claims of sexual-abuse directed at minors, she would say, “These hearings: we gave every person who wanted an opportunity to be heard.” And when they come to see Camille, they don't come to talk about money; they want validation for what they went through. “Believe me, will you? Ken, Camille, believe me.” And when Camille says, “We do believe you,” they immediately, or almost immediately, accept the compensation and sign a release: “I will not sue the Catholic diocese.”DL: So you mentioned there isn't really much negotiation, but you did talk in the book about these sort of “appeals.” You had these two tracks, “Appeals A” and “Appeals B.” Can you talk about that? Did you ever revisit what you had set as the award for a particular victim's family, after hearing from them in person?KF: Sure. Now, remember, those appeals came back to us, not to a court; there's no court involvement. But in 9/11, in BP, if somebody said, “You made a mistake—you didn't account for these profits or this revenue, or you didn't take into account this contract that my dead firefighter husband had that would've given him a lot more money”—of course, we'll revisit that. We invited that. But that's an internal appeals process. The people who calculated the value of the claim are the same people that are going to be looking at revisiting the claim. But again, that's due process, and that's something that we thought was important.DL: You and Camille have been doing this really important work for decades. Since this is, of course, shortly after your 80th birthday, I should ask: do you have future plans? You're tackling some of the most complicated matters, headline-making matters. Would you ever want to retire at some point?KF: I have no intention of retiring. I do agree that when you reach a certain pinnacle in what you've done, you do slow down. We are much more selective in what we do. I used to have maybe 15 mediations going on at once; now, we have one or two matters, like the Los Angeles wildfires. As long as I'm capable, as long as Camille's willing, we'll continue to do it, but we'll be very careful about what we select to do. We don't travel much. The Los Angeles wildfires was largely Zooms, going back and forth. And we're not going to administer that program. We had administered 9/11 and BP; we're trying to move away from that. It's very time-consuming and stressful. So we've accomplished a great deal over the last 50 years—but as long as we can do it, we'll continue to do it.DL: Do you have any junior colleagues who would take over what you and Camille have built?KF: We don't have junior colleagues. There's just the two of us and Cindy Sanzotta, our receptionist. But it's an interesting question: “Who's after Feinberg? Who's next in doing this?” I think there are thousands of people in this country who could do what we do. It is not rocket science. It really isn't. I'll tell you what's difficult: the emotion. If somebody wants to do what we do, you better brace yourself for the emotion, the anger, the frustration, the finger pointing. It goes with the territory. And if you don't have the psychological ability to handle this type of stress, stay away. But I'm sure somebody will be there, and no one's irreplaceable.DL: Well, I know I personally could not handle it. I worked when I was at a law firm on civil litigation over insurance proceeds related to the World Trade Center, and that was a very draining case, and I was very glad to no longer be on it. So I could not do what you and Camille do. But let me ask you, to end this section on a positive note: what would you say is the most rewarding or meaningful or satisfying aspect of the work that you do on these programs?KF: Giving back to the community. Public service. Helping the community heal. Not so much the individuals; the individuals are part of the community. “Every individual can make a difference.” I remember that every day, what John F. Kennedy said: government service is a noble undertaking. So what's most rewarding for me is that although I'm a private practitioner—I am no longer in government service, since my days with Senator Kennedy—I'd like to think that I performed a valuable service for the community, the resilience of the community, the charity exhibited by the community. And that gives me a great sense of self-satisfaction.DL: You absolutely have. It's been amazing, and I'm so grateful for you taking the time to join me.So now, onto our speed round. These are four questions that are standardized. My first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law in a more abstract sense.KF: Uncertainty. What I don't like about the law is—and I guess maybe it's the flip side of the best way to get to a result—I don't like the uncertainty of the law. I don't like the fact that until the very end of the process, you don't know if your view and opinion will prevail. And I think losing control over your destiny in that regard is problematic.DL: My second question—and maybe we touched on this a little bit, when we talked about your father's opinions—what would you be if you were not a lawyer?KF: Probably an actor. As I say, I almost became an actor. And I still love theater and the movies and Broadway shows. If my father hadn't given me that advice, I was on the cusp of pursuing a career in the theater.DL: Have you dabbled in anything in your (probably limited) spare time—community theater, anything like that?KF: No, but I certainly have prioritized in my spare time classical music and the peace and optimism it brings to the listener. It's been an important part of my life.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?KF: Well, it varies from program to program. I'd like to get seven hours. That's what my doctors tell me: “Ken, very important—more important than pills and exercise and diet—is sleep. Your body needs a minimum of seven hours.” Well, for me, seven hours is rare—it's more like six or even five, and during 9/11 or during Eaton wildfires, it might be more like four or five. And that's not enough, and that is a problem.DL: My last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?KF: Yes, I'll give you some career and life advice. It's very simple: don't plan too far ahead. People have this view—you may think you know what you want to do with your career. You may think you know what life holds for you. You don't know. If I've learned anything over the last decades, life has a way of changing the best-laid plans. These 9/11 husbands and wives said goodbye to their children, “we'll see you for dinner,” a perfunctory wave—and they never saw them again. Dust, not even a body. And the idea I tell law students—who say, ”I'm going to be a corporate lawyer,” or “I'm going to be a litigator”—I tell them, “You have no idea what your legal career will look like. Look at Feinberg; he never planned on this. He never thought, in his wildest dreams, that this would be his chosen avenue of the law.”My advice: enjoy the moment. Do what you like now. Don't worry too much about what you'll be doing two years, five years, 10 years, a lifetime ahead of you. It doesn't work that way. Everybody gets thrown curveballs, and that's advice I give to everybody.DL: Well, you did not plan out your career, but it has turned out wonderfully, and the country is better for it. Thank you, Ken, both for your work on all these matters over the years and for joining me today.KF: A privilege and an honor. Thanks, David.DL: Thanks so much to Ken for joining me—and, of course, for his decades of work resolving some of the thorniest disputes in the country, which is truly a form of public service.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 12. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; (3) transcripts of podcast interviews; and (4) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.showThis week in the free episode: the indictment of John Bolton and how it's pretty different from the Comey indictment, plus Trump's apparent demand that the Justice Department pay him $230 million for the indignity of being prosecuted.Paying subscribers also get to hear a dive into two wild NBA-related indictments that came down this week in the Eastern District of New York. One indictment alleges that conspirators, including an NBA coach and members of four of New York's Italian mafia families, ran rigged poker games to fleece unsuspecting players out of millions of dollars. The other alleges a conspiracy to fraudulently bet on NBA games — or more specifically, on propositions about NBA games — through the use of inside information. Both of these cases have crazy factual details, and the NBA betting one also involves some interesting, novel legal issues.Also: an update on lawsuits over National Guard deployments (and some theories about why an unfavorable ruling for Gavin Newsom did not get a rehearing en banc), a look at the case demanding that Speaker Mike Johnson hurry up and seat the Democrat who won a special election in Arizona several weeks ago, and an update on Hunter Biden-related litigation.Visit serioustrouble.show to upgrade your subscription.

Portland Trail Blazers head coach and basketball Hall of Famer Chauncey Billups, Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier and former NBA journeyman Damon Jones are among 34 people indicted in connection with two separate federal gambling investigations announced by the Eastern District of New York on Thursday. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Will Jim Comey succeed in seeking dismissal of his criminal charges? In an excerpt from this week's Insider episode, Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance discuss the former FBI Director's motion to dismiss his indictment citing the unlawful appointment of Lindsey Halligan as the Eastern District of Virginia's interim U.S. Attorney.  In the full episode, Preet and Joyce analyze Comey's other motion to dismiss on the basis of selective and vindictive prosecution. They also share their reactions to the indictment of former Trump National Security Adviser John Bolton.  CAFE Insiders click HERE to listen to the full analysis.  Not an Insider? Now more than ever, it's critical to stay tuned. To join a community of reasoned voices in unreasonable times, become an Insider today. You'll get access to full episodes of the podcast and other exclusive content. Head to cafe.com/insider or staytuned.substack.com/subscribe.  Subscribe to our YouTube channel. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE and Vox Media Podcast Network.  Executive Producer: Tamara Sepper; Supervising Producer: Jake Kaplan; Associate Producer: Claudia Hernández; Audio Producer: Matthew Billy; Deputy Editor: Celine Rohr; CAFE Team: David Tatasciore, Nat Weiner, Jennifer Indig, and Liana Greenway. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Former FBI Director James Comey court arraignment on perjury charges was such a disaster for Trump and his Insta-Prosecutor US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Lindsey Halligan, that the proceeding left her, according to witnesses, “rocking back and forth in her chair and nodding”; as 2 North Carolina prosecutors had to be imported in at the last minute to handle the arraignment when NO career prosecutor in Halligan's own office would help her! Michael Popok puts on his court clothes to dissect what just happened, including Trump chickening out on “perp walking” Comey, and how the judge setting a trial less than 3 MONTHS from now works to Comey's advantage. Mack Weldon: Go to https://MackWeldon.com and get 20% off your first order of $125 or more with promo code LEGALAF Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of Gangland Wire, retired Kansas City Police Intelligence Detective Gary Jenkins pulls back the curtain on one of the FBI's most troubling scandals—the case of Joe Stabile, a corrupt FBI agent whose fall from grace revealed just how deep organized crime's influence could run. The story begins in November 1978, when Stabile pled guilty to corruption charges. But as Gary explains, that plea was only the tip of the iceberg. Behind it lay years of whispered rumors, shady deals, and quiet payoffs—stories that painted Stabile not as a straight-arrow G-man, but as a hustler working both sides of the law. Drawing on conversations with retired FBI agents who once worked alongside Stabile, Gary explores the tangled web of mob connections and compromised investigations. Listeners will hear how mobsters slipped him bribes to make gambling cases disappear, and how his background as a New York City cop may have set the stage for the choices that pulled him deeper into the mob's orbit. The episode also highlights the work of honest agents, such as Tony Villano, who began piecing together the truth about Stabile's corruption. Through case files, informant accounts, and law enforcement interviews, Gary demonstrates how the FBI struggled with a culture of silence that often protected its own—even when integrity was at stake. As the story unfolds, the lines between right and wrong blur, exposing systemic cracks inside federal law enforcement during a time when the Bureau was shifting its focus and fighting for credibility. Gary closes with reflections on the lasting impact of the Stabile case: what it meant for the FBI's war on organized crime, and how Stabile himself may have continued to live in the shadows after his conviction—a man caught between two worlds, crime and law enforcement, never fully belonging to either. This is a must-listen for true crime fans, Mafia historians, and anyone fascinated by how organized crime once ruled the Jersey Shore. Listen now on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or your favorite podcast app. Hit me up on Venmo for a cup of coffee or a shot and a beer @ganglandwire Click here to "buy me a cup of coffee" To go to the store or make a donation or rent Ballot Theft: Burglary, Murder, Coverup, click here To rent 'Brothers against Brothers' or 'Gangland Wire,' the documentaries click here.  To purchase one of my books, click here. 0:06 Introduction to Joe Stabile 1:19 The Corruption Unveiled 3:14 Breakfast with Retired Agents 5:59 The Connection to Organized Crime 9:06 Investigating Stabile's Allegations 14:18 The Gambler's Payoff 20:19 Confronting Stabile 21:39 The Aftermath of the Indictment 23:35 Stabile's New Life 25:39 Reflections on Undercover Operations [0:00] Well, hey, all you wiretappers, Gary Jenkins, retired Kansas City Police Intelligence [0:04] Unit detective back here in the studio of Gangland Wire. I welcome each and every one of you. I've got a story that it's really interesting how I found out about this. That's part of the story. Let's go back. Here's what I'm talking about. A corrupt FBI agent named Joe Stabile. That's S-T-A-B-I-L-E. November 1978. [0:26] It was a Monday and FBI agent Joe Stabile was pleading guilty in federal court to corruption charges. Now, you don't hear about this very much. I know a couple of three here in Kansas City over the years that got popped for doing something. A couple of them were involved in a stolen party or a stolen property ring. A couple of others were one of them was just running his mouth too much and he was drinking too much. I don't think they actually end up charging him anything, but he did run his run his mouth way too much. Joseph Beal only admitted in this guilty plea that he lied about some money transactions, but that's just a tip of the iceberg in this, folks. [1:03] The U.S. attorney for the Eastern District was sitting in the spectators that day,

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, the Trump peace plan for Gaza has two phases, which is genius. Phase one, to be implemented immediately through early next week, involves Israel ending its siege on Gaza and withdrawing to an intermediary line covering 52% of the territory, in exchange for the release of all 48 hostages (20 believed alive) and the freeing of nearly 2,000 terrorists and criminals from Israeli prisons, including 250 severe offenders and mass murderers. Phase two is the dirty work, it  requires disarming, dispersing, and removing Hamas from Gaza, with governance and demilitarization details still being worked out; failure to execute it voids the agreement.  There's not another person who could have even brought the situation to this point besides Trump, with pressure applied on Hamas via demands to Qatar, and Turkey to force or expel Hamas leaders in their countries, contrary to media reports. Later, Sen Lindsey Graham calls in explain that that true peace in the Middle East extends beyond hostage releases. We must address threats from Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis. Graham warns that Iran's theocratic regime, driven by religious extremism aiming to destroy Israel and expel the U.S., must be neutralized to prevent regeneration of proxies. Also, NY AG Letitia James has been indicted by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia on charges of bank fraud and making false claims to a financial institution. Afterward, Democrats, led by Hakeem Jeffries, ruined the U.S. healthcare system through Obamacare, which is a flawed, expensive money pit that no Republicans supported. Democrats are using the continuing resolution (CR) as a ploy to blame Republicans and Trump for the government shutdown, while pretending to defend the broken system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On Wednesday's Mark Levin Show, the insurrection act has been used at least 20 times starting in 1808. President Trump has to use it because we have Democrats who refuse to follow the law. Right now, we have a Democrat party usurping the Constitution. Governors and cities are not in charge of immigration. They don't have the power to prevent ICE from doing their job. Also, former FBI Director James Comey is a serial liar, leaker, and scoundrel who absconded with government documents, interfered in the 2016 election more than foreign powers, and brought disrepute to the FBI. Comey belongs in court and is lucky to avoid charges for other unethical acts.  The democrat talking point is that acting US attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia prosecuting the Comey case has no prosecutorial experience. But in 1961, President John Kennedy nominated his 35-year-old brother, Robert, to be attorney general.  RFK had no state or federal courtroom experience of any kind. The Democrat controlled Senate confirmed him. Later, Trump announces that “Israel and Hamas have both signed off on the first Phase of our Peace Plan. This means that ALL of the Hostages will be released very soon, and Israel will withdraw their Troops to an agreed upon line as the first steps toward a Strong, Durable, and Everlasting Peace. All Parties will be treated fairly!” The broad parameters of the deal sound very good.  Rep Mike Lawler calls in to discuss the first phase of the Gaza peace plan. Trump has worked tirelessly to get the hostages home, but Hamas cannot remain in power. Lawler also discusses his confrontation with Rep Hakeem Jeffries over the government shutdown. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In stunning and breaking news, Trump has the NY Attorney General Leitia James— who successfully had Trump and his family declared fraudsters by a NY judge — indicted and framed on mortgage fraud charges, using his hand picked prosecutor Lindsey Halligan. Michael Popok pulls all the information together, including the refusal of the career prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia US Attorney office to indict AG James, and Letitia declaring to the world that she is ferocious and will not back down to Trump no matter what. Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Wednesday, October 8th, 2025Today, Jim Comey will be arraigned in the Eastern District of Virginia; members of Congress will hold a press conference with Epstein survivors about the discharge petition to release the Epstein Files; furloughed workers are being told they may not receive backpay; the Supreme Court shoots down a Republican challenge to Washington State's Climate Commitment Act; Pritzker and Newsom threaten to withdraw from the National Governor's Association; CIA Deputy Director Michael Ellis replaces the agency's general counsel with himself; Pam Bondi refuses to answer key questions in a Senate Judiciary hearing; Texas AG Ken Paxton continues his genocidal rhetoric against trans people; ICE bought vehicles with fake cell sites to spy on protestors; Roy Cooper shattered fundraising records in the first quarter for his Senate run; blue states should come together to declare an emergency; Jimmy Kimmel is more popular than Donald Trump; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, SmallsFor a limited time, get 60% off your first order, plus free shipping, when you head to Smalls.com/DAILYBEANS.Guest: Alder Dina Nina Martinez-Rutherford Alder Dina Nina Martinez- Rutherford District 15 (WI) Running for WI State Assembly District 76votedinanina.comDinaNina.com@dinaninaxo - Bluesky, DinaNinaXO (facebook)DinaNinaXO (IG)Alder Dina Nina Martinez- Rutherford (she/her) - cityofmadison.comDinaNinaforMadison (IG)Dina Nina For Madison (facebook) StoriesFurloughed workers not guaranteed back pay after shutdown, OMB claims | The Washington PostICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones | TechCrunchC.I.A. Deputy Director Has Replaced Agency's Top Legal Official With Himself | The New York TimesBlue states should come together to declare an emergency. Here's how | Opinion | The GuardianRoy Cooper raises $14.5 million last quarter, shattering records | POLITICOJimmy Kimmel more popular than Trump after show suspension, poll finds | The GuardianGood TroubleKeep calling Mike Johnson's office to have Adelita Grajava sworn in. She is the 218th signature. And right now the people of Arizona 7th are being re-taxed without representation because he won't swear her in. His number is 202-225-2000 or 202-225-2777  -  Especially if you're in Arizona's 7th district.**Vote Yes 836 - Oklahoma**OCTOBER 18 - NoKings.org**Yes On Prop 50 | Special Election Phone Banks - mobilize.us**How to Organize a Bearing Witness Standout**Fire Kilmeade - foxfeedback@foxnews.com, Requests - Fox News**Indiana teacher snitch portal - Eyes on Education**Find Your Representative | house.gov, Contacting U.S. SenatorsFrom The Good NewsAdopt Magnolia - Potential adopters email StrotmanHousehold@gmail.comAurora Animal ShelterReduce stress and boost happiness with 4 daily gratitude practices | CNNWordPress Accessibility Day 2025Adopt-A-Pet(Mark your calendar for November 14th, 2025 - Chicago, Illinois - Dana)Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comMore from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia finds no probable cause to indict the New York Attorney General Leticia James for mortgage fraud.Subpoenas have been issued in a criminal investigation against the Fulton County DA Fani Willis.The state agency tasked with appointing a new prosecutor to take over Fulton County DA Fani Willis' case against Trump and others in Georgia has asked the judge for an extension. They were originally given 14 days. Court battles continue over National Guard troops being sent to Portland and Chicago. Plus, Rudy news!Thank you, CB Distillery!Use promo code CLEANUP at CBDistillery.com for 25% off your purchase.Specific product availability depends on individual state regulations.Thank you, Mint Mobile.Get this new customer offer and your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just $15 a month at  MINTMOBILE.com/CLEANUP Allison Gillhttps://muellershewrote.substack.com/https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrote.comHarry DunnHarry Dunn | Substack@libradunn1.bsky.social on BlueskyWant to support this podcast and get it ad-free and early?Go to: https://www.patreon.com/aisle45podTell us about yourself and what you like about the show - http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=short Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In Mary and Andrew's estimation, there is no effort from the Trump administration to say things softly, the quiet part is very much out loud. They begin with the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey by Trump's newly installed U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, noting how much these targeted charges upend the tradition of a separation between the White House and the Justice Department. The next stop is Portland Oregon, where the president announced his intent to deploy troops to the city in a Saturday Truth Social post, calling it “war ravaged”. Oregon immediately sued to stop the national guard deployment, so Mary and Andrew catch listeners up on where this stands and what to expect. And last, they turn to Trump's domestic terror memorandum, announcing his intent to investigate left-leaning groups he suggests may be funding political violence. Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Department of Justice installed one of Trump's personal lawyers, Lindsay Halligan as the US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, and, four days later, she obtained a two-count indictment against former FBI Director Jim Comey for lying to Congress and Obstruction. The Trump Administration continues to imperil criminal cases with extrajudicial statements as a federal judge finds multiple Department of Justice employees may have violated local rules guaranteeing Luigi Mangione's right to fair trial.Attorney General Pam Bondi's chief of staff Chad Mizelle and Jim Comey's son in law Troy Edwards have both resigned their positions at DOJ.Trump's Justice Department shut down an investigation into the Border Czar Tom Homan for accepting a $50,000 cash bribe in exchange for government contracts. Plus listener questions…Do you have questions for the pod?  Follow AG Substack|MuellershewroteBlueSky|@muellershewroteAndrew McCabe isn't on social media, but you can buy his book The ThreatThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and TrumpWe would like to know more about our listeners. Please participate in this brief surveyListener Survey and CommentsThis Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at the Justice Enforcers level and above:https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr when you subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3YNpW3P Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

On Friday's Mark Levin Show, there are a growing number of young people who do have hatred for Israel in colleges and universities, yet Megyn Kelly says “everyone under 30 is against Israel.” That's an absurd, disgusting statement. Antisemitism is prevalent among Generation Z, fueled by influencers like Tucker Carlson who perpetuate tropes about Jewish control over politics and media.  Also, President Trump's second term has been marked by a persistent campaign of domestic terrorism from the left, driven by inflammatory rhetoric from Democrats and progressives. There's been Molotov cocktail attacks on Tesla dealerships amid, riots and ambushes targeting ICE facilities, and an armed intrusion at a Border Patrol annex in McAllen, Texas, just to name a few.  Later, as some former federal prosecutors label the case against James Comey as weak, the real issue is the Biden-appointed judge in Alexandria's Eastern District of Virginia, where juries have shifted toward more Democratic and bureaucratic leanings over time. Afterward, the Trump administration has appealed to the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of an executive order aiming to end birthright citizenship, which is a mistaken interpretation of the 14th Amendment with no basis in the Constitution or statutes.  Finally, Trump has a fantastic tough stance against Democrats threatening a government shutdown over demands for $1.5 trillion in new spending, including funds for illegal immigrants' healthcare. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia has indicted former FBI Director James Comey on charges of making a false statement to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. In this recording from a Substack livestream, Preet and Joyce Vance, former U.S. Attorney and co-host of the Insider podcast, share their reactions to the Comey indictment and the danger of politicizing law enforcement, describing it as a moment that has “crossed the Rubicon.” They break down the lead-up to the charges, the merits of the case and the strength of the evidence, the reactions from Comey and from Trump's supporters, and how the case is likely to unfold. Join the CAFE Insider community to stay informed without hysteria, fear-mongering, or rage-baiting. Head to cafe.com/insider to sign up. Thank you for supporting our work. You can now watch this episode! Head to CAFE's Youtube channel and subscribe. Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on BlueSky, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 833-997-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Friday, September 26th, 2025Today, Trump's US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia has secured an indictment against Jim Comey for false statements and obstruction of justice; Hegseth summons top generals and admirals to an urgent in-person meeting on the eve of a looming shutdown with no explanation given; the White House is scrambling to quash the Epstein files discharge petition; porn addict and supreme bigot Ryan Walters is resigning as Oklahoma school superintendent, the Justice Department pushes for an investigation into the Soros Foundation; the White House tells government agencies to prepare for mass layoffs in the event of a government shut down; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, HelixSleep25% Off Sitewide, when you go to HelixSleep.com/dailybeansThank You, Naked WinesTo get 6 bottles of wine for $39.99, head to nakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.Thank You, Fast Growing TreesGet 15% off your first purchase.  FastGrowingTrees.com/dailybeansGuest: John FugelsangTell Me Everything - John Fugelsang, The John Fugelsang PodcastJohn Fugelsang - Substack@johnfugelsang.bsky.social - Bluesky, @JohnFugelsang -TwitterSeparation of Church and Hate by John Fugelsang - OUT NOW!Stream John Fugelsang in Conversation with Cristela Alonzo: Separation of Church and Hate | 92nd Street Y, New YorkJohn Fugelsang - “Separation of Church and Hate” | The Daily Show StoriesHegseth orders rare, urgent meeting of hundreds of generals, admirals | The Washington PostWhite House begins plan for mass firings if there's a government shutdown | The Washington PostTop GOP and White House allies working behind the scenes to prevent Epstein vote on House floor | CNN PoliticsRyan Walters resigns as Oklahoma's top public schools official to lead conservative educators' group | AP News Good TroubleOCTOBER 18 - NoKings.org, Leave some notes around town to spread the word.**California needs your help | Proposition 50 Vote YES !! Yes On Prop 50 | Special Election Phone Banks - mobilize.us**Help ensure safety of public servants. Hold RFK Jr accountable by signing the letter: savehhs.org, @firedbutfighting.bsky.social on Bluesky**SIGN THE STATEMENT OF SOLIDARITY for the FEMA Katrina Declaration.**How to Organize a Bearing Witness Standout**Fire Kilmeade - foxfeedback@foxnews.com, Submit a request – Fox News**Indiana teacher snitch portal - Eyes on Education**Find Your Representative | house.gov, Contacting U.S. SenatorsFrom The Good Newsnokings.org#DouglassWeekARLINGTON TOWN DAY 2025Mass Die-In at the Michigan Capitol | SWIM Member WebsiteWE DO NOT CARE | WDNC(Mark your calendar for November 14th, 2025 - Chicago, Illinois - Dana)Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comMore from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing!  patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Thursday, September 25th, 2025Today, Jimmy Kimmel returns to air with a fantastic monologue worthy of the moment; the US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia is going to try to get a grand jury to indict jim Comey despite investigators saying there's no probable cause; Adelita Grijalva wins the special election in Arizona - 7 to fill her late father's seat and she is the final signature needed on the discharge petition to release the Epstein files; a judge warned that the DOJ may have violated Luigi Mangione's right to a fair trial; a federal judge said Trump violated the law when he fired all those inspectors general but stopped short of reinstating them; a sniper opened fire on a Dallas ICE facility killing one detainee and wounding two, turning the gun on himself; the Trump administration is rehiring hundreds of federal employees fired by DOGE; Reality Winner speaks out in her new memoir I Am Not Your Enemy; a big ol' bronze statue of Trump and Epstein holding hands has been removed from the National Mall. Dana is out and about.Thank You, Mint MobileMake the switch! MINTMOBILE.com/DAILYBEANSThank You, Naked WinesTo get 6 bottles of wine for $39.99, head to nakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.Guest: Reality WinnerI Am Not Your Enemy: A Memoir by Reality Winner | Spiegel & GrauReazlepuff - BlueSky, @reazlepuff - Instagram StoriesDemocrat Adelita Grijalva wins special election for her late father's House seat in Arizona | NBC NewsNewly appointed US attorney will attempt to charge James Comey despite prosecutors finding no probable cause: Sources | ABC NewsSniper opens fire on Dallas ICE facility, killing 1 detainee, wounding 2: DHS | ABC NewsLuigi Mangione case: Trump DOJ 'may have violated' fair trial rule, judge warns | All Rise NewsJudge won't reinstate 8 government watchdogs fired by Trump | CBS NewsTrump administration rehires hundreds of federal employees laid off by DOGE | CNN PoliticsA Statue of Trump and Epstein Holding Hands Is Removed From the National Mall | The New York TimesGood TroubleThe US DOE has released the details of its Patriotic Education Program. States have a choice to opt in, but they're basically dangling the grant money like a carrot on a stick. Teach history our way, or else.Partners of the curriculum include Prager U and Turning Point USA, which push a glossy whitewashed narrative of slavery, rather than the brutal honesty students need.There is a comment period open until October 17th. So please lend your voice against extreme RW ideology creeping into our public schools.|Accessing the comment portal has a few steps and a long link, so here's a FB post from Mrs. Frazzled that lays it out with some screenshots to help.https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14JbkUitj1D/Comment here:Proposed Priority and Definitions—Secretary's Supplemental Priority and Definitions on Promoting Patriotic Education **California needs your help | Proposition 50 Vote YES !! Yes On Prop 50 | Special Election Phone Banks - mobilize.us**Help ensure safety of public servants. Hold RFK Jr accountable by signing the letter: savehhs.org, @firedbutfighting.bsky.social on Bluesky**SIGN THE STATEMENT OF SOLIDARITY for the FEMA Katrina Declaration.**How to Organize a Bearing Witness Standout**Fire Kilmeade - foxfeedback@foxnews.com, Submit a request – Fox News**Indiana teacher snitch portal - Eyes on Education**Find Your Representative | house.gov, Contacting U.S. SenatorsFrom The Good Newshttps://www.facebook.com/share/p/14JbkUitj1D/Proposed Priority and Definitions—Secretary's Supplemental Priority and Definitions on Promoting Patriotic EducationThe Art of Anger - Fresno, CAMelissa Knight, Knight Vision Consulting & CoachingRYSE HawaiiOur Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comMore from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Former Special Counsel in the Trump investigations, Jack Smith, speaks at length about the weaponization of the department of justice at an event at George Mason University.Trump Administration officials push to fire the US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia over his refusal to indict NYAG Tish James and former FBI Director Jim Comey.A trial jury finds a Los Angeles protestor not guilty of assaulting a Border Patrol Agent; and another assault case is dismissed in the District of Columbia.The Department of Justice quietly deletes a study on the politics of domestic violence amid calls from Todd Blanche to investigate Trump protestors. Plus listener questions…Do you have questions for the pod? Follow AG Substack|MuellershewroteBlueSky|@muellershewroteAndrew McCabe isn't on social media, but you can buy his book The ThreatThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and TrumpWe would like to know more about our listeners. Please participate in this brief surveyListener Survey and CommentsThis Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at the Justice Enforcers level and above:https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr when you subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3YNpW3P Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.