POPULARITY
Categories
4,845 episodes with justice department
435 episodes with justice department
254 episodes with justice department
97 episodes with justice department
96 episodes with justice department
98 episodes with justice department
58 episodes with justice department
89 episodes with justice department
99 episodes with justice department
60 episodes with justice department
54 episodes with justice department
39 episodes with justice department
58 episodes with justice department
81 episodes with justice department
33 episodes with justice department
28 episodes with justice department
74 episodes with justice department
43 episodes with justice department
37 episodes with justice department
81 episodes with justice department
39 episodes with justice department
55 episodes with justice department
24 episodes with justice department
76 episodes with justice department
38 episodes with justice department
87 episodes with justice department
43 episodes with justice department
29 episodes with justice department
37 episodes with justice department
33 episodes with justice department
31 episodes with justice department
42 episodes with justice department
29 episodes with justice department
27 episodes with justice department
53 episodes with justice department
34 episodes with justice department
36 episodes with justice department
28 episodes with justice department
48 episodes with justice department
61 episodes with justice department
31 episodes with justice department
57 episodes with justice department
39 episodes with justice department
24 episodes with justice department
51 episodes with justice department
55 episodes with justice department
64 episodes with justice department
27 episodes with justice department
21 episodes with justice department
25 episodes with justice department
42 episodes with justice department
26 episodes with justice department
17 episodes with justice department
39 episodes with justice department
Tuesday, November 5th, 2025Today, bomb threats rock New Jersey on election day as Trump whines about California mail ballots; FBI Director Kash Patel lashes out at the response to his use of a private jet to visit his girlfriend - and that he has a girlfriend; the Trump and Republican shutdown has threatened food, healthcare, and now heating; Trump's Justice Department is withholding transcripts of Lindsey Halligan's presentation to the grand jury in the Comey case; Feds say immigration enforcement might have to stop if judge intervenes at the Broadview facility in Chicago; local Colorado police are investigating a federal agent for excessive force; and Allison delivers your Good News.Thank You, CoyuchiGet 20% off your first order when you visit Coyuchi.com/dailybeansThank You, SmallsFor a limited time, get 60% off your first order, plus free shipping, when you head to Smalls.com/DAILYBEANS.Guest: Kat Abughazaleh Illinois 9th Congressional DistrictKat Abughazaleh - Kat For IllinoisSocials: Kat Abughazaleh (@kabughazaleh) - Instagram,@katmabu.bsky.social - Bluesky, @katmabu - TikTok, Kat Abughazaleh - YouTube, KatAbughazaleh - Twitch, @KatAbughazaleh - TwitterDana Goldberg Outrageous Tour - November 14th ChicagoStoriesNew Jersey bomb threats and Trump's warnings for California mark final day of voting | PBS NewsGovernment shutdown threatens to delay home heating aid for millions of low-income families | AP NewsICE Altercation With Protester in Colorado Prompts a Police Chief to Push Back | The New York TimesImmigration enforcement might have to stop if judge intervenes at Broadview facility, feds say | Chicago Sun-TimesFacing difficult questions about his use of an FBI jet, Kash Patel pitches weak defense | MSNBCGood TroubleICE Out San Diego 11/06/25 - More Info and RSVPThursday, November 06, 2025 @10:00 AMAt The Federal Building880 Front St, San Diego“This is more than a protest! It's a stand for dignity, justice, and the right of every family to live free from fear. Bring your friends, your signs, and your voice. Together, we can show that San Diego stands for community, not cages. For more information contact jlopez@calorganize.org”**Group Directory - The Visibility Brigade: Resistance is Possible**Vote Yes 836 - Oklahoma is gathering signatures**How to Organize a Bearing Witness Standout**Indiana teacher snitch portal - Eyes on Education**Find Your Representative | house.gov, Contacting U.S. SenatorsFrom The Good Newsnhmarf.orgMutual Aid HubThousands fill streets of downtown Lancaster for second 'No Kings' rally [update] | lancasteronline.comWarwick UnitedTin foil hat - WikipediaFoundry United Methodist ChurchDana Goldberg Outrageous Tour - November 14th Chicago(Patreon And Super)This is the video companion to The Daily Beans.You can watch it on Youtube here (Please do not share the link):youtu.be/hLbfqaVQuH8Please let us know what you think! - https://near.tl/sm/7WpMw3fFvOur Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - Donate, MSW Media, Blue Wave CA Victory Fund | ActBlue, 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. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - The 2025 Out100, 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.
The U.S. Department of Justice continues to take on big cases. Jesse Kelly reveals some of them and catches up with Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon. Jesse also speaks with Senator Eric Schmitt about a plan to take on ANTIFA and judicial activism. Plus, Frances Martel provides an update on Christian persecution in Nigeria. I'm Right with Jesse Kelly on The First TV Masa Chips: Visit https://MASAChips.com/JESSETV and use code JESSETV for 25% off your first order. Pure Talk: Go to https://www.puretalk.com/JESSETV and save 50% off your first month. Beam: Visit https://shopbeam.com/JESSEKELLY and use code JESSEKELLY to get our exclusive discount of up to 50% off.Follow The Jesse Kelly Show on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheJesseKellyShowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
As Politico reported: "More than 100 judges have ruled against the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy."The reporting also notes that those 100 judges "have now ruled at least 200 times that the Trump administration's effort to systematically detain immigrants facing possible deportation appeared to violate their rights or was flatly illegal". Glenn discusses why this massive legal rebuke matters.Follow Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Three years after Jeffrey Epstein's death inside the Metropolitan Correctional Center, the public was still left in the dark. The Department of Justice's Inspector General had yet to release a full report, and most of the internal findings remained sealed or redacted. The official story — suicide by hanging — was backed by the New York City Medical Examiner, but contradicted by independent forensic experts like Dr. Michael Baden, who found Epstein's neck injuries to be “more consistent with strangulation than hanging.” Meanwhile, crucial evidence went missing or malfunctioned: security cameras outside his cell failed, logs were falsified, and the two guards on duty admitted to sleeping and browsing the internet instead of checking on him. No clear timeline of his final hours has ever been publicly established. For a man under the government's watch in one of the most secure facilities in America, the lack of transparency was staggering — and it left even the most rational observers suspicious.By the third anniversary of his death, the unanswered questions had hardened into national cynicism. The phrase “Epstein didn't kill himself” became a cultural punchline, a shorthand for public mistrust of institutions. Federal officials insisted accountability had been taken — the guards were charged and later released after a plea deal, and the prison itself was slated for closure — yet the broader inquiry into systemic negligence vanished from public view. Victims received settlements, but no comprehensive investigation ever detailed who enabled Epstein's empire, who protected him, or what really happened inside that cell. The silence from the Justice Department only deepened the perception that some secrets were too big to expose.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
As Politico reported: "More than 100 judges have ruled against the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy."The reporting also notes that those 100 judges "have now ruled at least 200 times that the Trump administration's effort to systematically detain immigrants facing possible deportation appeared to violate their rights or was flatly illegal". Glenn discusses why this massive legal rebuke matters.Follow Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists Carol Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis talk about why the U.S. Justice Department's cases against Donald Trump for alleged interference in the 2020 election and his retention of government documents never made it before a jury. They find both FBI officials and government prosecutors were at times reluctant to pursue leads out of concern for preserving the department's commitment to fairness and independence from politics. Leonnig and Davis also detail many cases of Trump as president pressuring the DOJ to protect his friends and punish his perceived enemies. Their book is ‘Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department.' They spoke with Fresh Air's Dave Davies.Follow Fresh Air on instagram @nprfreshair, and subscribe to our weekly newsletter for gems from the Fresh Air archive, staff recommendations, and a peek behind the scenes. Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
The Department of Justice has been at the epicenter of both Trump's efforts to subvert the rule of law and the attempts to hold him accountable during his years out of the White House. Now two of the country's most prominent investigative journalists—Carol Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis—have authored an authoritative account of these tumultuous years at DOJ. Their book is Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department. Leonnig and Davis join Harry for an in-depth discussion: their first interview about their tour-de-force new volume, which is full of revelations about the existential battles within the Department, built on interviews with more than 250 people who witnessed them first hand. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
We are always asking ourselves, asking others, or others are asking us: what can I do to fight FOR democracy and fight AGAINST Trump's autocracy, dictatorship, and authoritarianism? Glenn sat down with Miles Taylor to discuss a new approach: DEFIANCE.org. Miles has set the standard for standing up to Trump's lawlessness, his threats, and his despicable and insatiable appetite for revenge. Miles decided to create DEFIANCE.org, described as follows: “WHAT CAN I DO?”"We built a club to answer that question. Each month, we give you options to fight back — peacefully, lawfully, and defiantly — against Trump's authoritarian takeover. You choose what missions to support. Then we take action together."DEFIANCE.org is described as: "A CLUB FOR COURAGEOUS AMERICANS"Link to website: https://www.defiance.org/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
-- On the Show: -- Aaron Parnas, lawyer-turned-TikTok creator and Substack writer, joins David for a Substack Live to discuss Election Day 2025 -- Donald Trump faces a devastating political collapse as Zohran Mamdani, Abigail Spanberger, and Mikie Sherrill each surge toward major election victories that reject his agenda -- Donald Trump threatens to withhold federal funds from New York City if Zohran Mamdani wins the mayoral race, saying the city will collapse under his leadership -- Donald Trump faces outrage as millions lose food assistance under his administration's government shutdown -- CBS edits out major moments from Donald Trump's 60 Minutes interview, including remarks about his payout from the network and his pardon of a convicted billionaire -- A Justice Department official confirms that anyone other than Donald Trump would have been jailed for mishandling classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago -- Polls show a collapse in Donald Trump's support as 61% of voters say he worsened the economy and independents abandon him in record numbers -- Mainstream media finally notices Donald Trump's recurring swollen eye, sparking public questions about his health and the White House's silence -- On the Bonus Show: Dick Cheney dies at 84, Dilbert creator enlists Trump's help for cancer treatment, Nancy Pelosi plans to retire from politics, and much more...
In their new book, Pulitzer Prize–winning journalists Carol Leonnig and Aaron Davis offer an investigation into the unraveling of the U.S. Justice Department. They reveal how, under Donald Trump, the nation’s top law enforcement agency was transformed from an institution built to protect the rule of law into one pressured to protect the president. They joined Geoff Bennett to discuss "Injustice." PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy
Three years after Jeffrey Epstein's death inside the Metropolitan Correctional Center, the public was still left in the dark. The Department of Justice's Inspector General had yet to release a full report, and most of the internal findings remained sealed or redacted. The official story — suicide by hanging — was backed by the New York City Medical Examiner, but contradicted by independent forensic experts like Dr. Michael Baden, who found Epstein's neck injuries to be “more consistent with strangulation than hanging.” Meanwhile, crucial evidence went missing or malfunctioned: security cameras outside his cell failed, logs were falsified, and the two guards on duty admitted to sleeping and browsing the internet instead of checking on him. No clear timeline of his final hours has ever been publicly established. For a man under the government's watch in one of the most secure facilities in America, the lack of transparency was staggering — and it left even the most rational observers suspicious.By the third anniversary of his death, the unanswered questions had hardened into national cynicism. The phrase “Epstein didn't kill himself” became a cultural punchline, a shorthand for public mistrust of institutions. Federal officials insisted accountability had been taken — the guards were charged and later released after a plea deal, and the prison itself was slated for closure — yet the broader inquiry into systemic negligence vanished from public view. Victims received settlements, but no comprehensive investigation ever detailed who enabled Epstein's empire, who protected him, or what really happened inside that cell. The silence from the Justice Department only deepened the perception that some secrets were too big to expose.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
We are always asking ourselves, asking others, or others are asking us: what can I do to fight FOR democracy and fight AGAINST Trump's autocracy, dictatorship, and authoritarianism? Glenn sat down with Miles Taylor to discuss a new approach: DEFIANCE.org. Miles has set the standard for standing up to Trump's lawlessness, his threats, and his despicable and insatiable appetite for revenge. Miles decided to create DEFIANCE.org, described as follows: “WHAT CAN I DO?”"We built a club to answer that question. Each month, we give you options to fight back — peacefully, lawfully, and defiantly — against Trump's authoritarian takeover. You choose what missions to support. Then we take action together."DEFIANCE.org is described as: "A CLUB FOR COURAGEOUS AMERICANS"Link to website: https://www.defiance.org/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
From Trump ordering unlawful military strikes on boats in international waters - murdering dozens of human beings, to Trump saying he can order soldiers into the street of US cities and even the courts can't stop him, Trump behavior vis-a-vis the military is getting more dangerous and lawless by the day. Two members of the Illinois National Guard have spoke out publicly, announcing that they would not obey unlawful order from Trump to deploy to the streets to Chicago. Glenn discusses these and other military-related developments with law professor and military law expert Dan Maurer. Follow Dan on Substack: https://dmaurer.substack.com/Follow Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.comHow this content was madeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
When You Come at the King: Inside DOJ's Pursuit of the President, from Nixon to Trump by Elie Honig https://www.amazon.com/When-You-Come-King-President/dp/0063447363 "[A] deeply researched, keenly analytical, and frequently provocative chronicle of this singular judicial entity. . . . A senior legal analyst for CNN and former assistant U.S. attorney, Honig is well-suited to the task of providing a historical overview of the special counsel's function with the ever-evolving context of politics, partisanship and political skepticism." —Booklist (STARRED review) "A fascinating, fast-paced insider's account....[a] riveting, deeply reported book.” —Anderson Cooper “Every page hums with gripping anecdotes and breaking news journalism." —Douglas Brinkley Imagine you've been put in charge of investigating your own boss—who also happens to be the most powerful person on the planet. You might unearth information that will be politically, professionally, and personally devastating to your subject, and you alone hold the power to indict and potentially imprison him. At the same time, the boss can fire you and end the case—and might even turn the tables and launch an inquiry aimed at you. As the lone-wolf assassin Omar put it in The Wire: “You come at the king, you best not miss.” That's the crucible for any Special Counsel. For decades, the Department of Justice has appointed outside prosecutors to handle our highest-stakes cases. But do these independent investigations lead to just results? In When You Come at the King, CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig delivers a fast-paced, insider's account of the most important Justice Department investigations of the past fifty years, based on dozens of on-record interviews with firsthand participants. A Watergate prosecutor reveals she hid copies of key documents at home to guard against potential destruction of evidence by the president's allies. A member of the Iran–Contra prosecution team explains why they made a shocking election-eve revelation. A defense lawyer for Donald Trump details his private meeting with Jack Smith just days before Trump was indicted. From Ken Starr's investigation of Bill Clinton to modern cases involving Patrick Fitzgerald, Robert Mueller, Jack Smith, and more, Honig charts how the Special Counsel system developed and evolved over time. We know the maxim that a nation can be measured by how it treats its weakest members. This book explores an inverse corollary: A nation reveals much about itself by how it holds accountable its most powerful leaders when they've done wrong. Now, with the future of Special Counsels in doubt, When You Come at the King addresses the most important question of all: Can the system evolve to better serve the call for justice?About the author Elie Honig is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst. He previously worked for 14 years as a federal and state prosecutor. Honig provides on-air commentary and analysis for CNN on news relating to the U. S. Department of Justice, major criminal trials, the Supreme Court, Congressional and grand jury investigations, national security, policing, and other legal issues. In 2022, Honig was nominated for an Emmy Award by the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences in the category "Outstanding News Analysis: Editorial & Opinion." Honig is the national bestselling author of two prior books published by HarperCollins: "Hatchet Man: How Bill Barr Broke the Prosecutor's Code and Corrupted the Justice Department" (2021) and "Untouchable: How Powerful People Get Away With It" (2023). His third book, "When You Come at the King: Inside DOJ's Pursuit of the President, from Nixon to Trump," publishes in September 2025. Honig writes a weekly column on legal news for New York magazine and CAFE. He hosts the popular true-crime podcast, "Up Against the Mob," and a weekly legal podcast, "The Counsel," both productions of Vox Media. Honig graduated from Rutgers College (where he ...
From Trump ordering unlawful military strikes on boats in international waters - murdering dozens of human beings, to Trump saying he can order soldiers into the street of US cities and even the courts can't stop him, Trump behavior vis-a-vis the military is getting more dangerous and lawless by the day. Two members of the Illinois National Guard have spoke out publicly, announcing that they would not obey unlawful order from Trump to deploy to the streets to Chicago. Glenn discusses these and other military-related developments with law professor and military law expert Dan Maurer. Follow Dan on Substack: https://dmaurer.substack.com/Follow Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.comHow this content was madeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Today's West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy Podcast for our especially special Daily Special, River City Hash Mondays is now available on the Spreaker Player!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, Trump's Justice Department admitted to lying to a federal appeals court about deploying US troops on American soil in Portland.Then, on the rest of the menu, the top Trump-appointed drug regulator at the FDA resigned after federal officials probe ‘serious concerns' about his conduct; somebody should sue CBS and 60 Minutes for deceptively editing Trump losing his cool over his cryptocurrency pardon he claims he knows nothing about; and, Trump's classified docs scandal was 'far worse' than reported.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where NATO member Romania signed an agreement with German defense company Rheinmetall to build a gunpowder factory in central Romania; and, Trump's efforts to help the US coal industry at home are being undermined by falling sales abroad amid his trade war with China.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!The Netroots Radio Live PlayerKeep Your Resistance Radio Beaming 24/7/365!"I was never a spy. I was with the OSS organization. We had a number of women, but we were all office help." -- Julia ChildBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/west-coast-cookbook-speakeasy--2802999/support.
Jim Comey alleges that the single FBI agent's testimony to the grand jury in his case was tainted by privileged information, and asks the court for the grand jury transcripts. Comey has also filed a bill of particulars asking the government to clarify the charges, and has filed a motion to dismiss under the Bronston literal truth doctrine.Two assistant US attorneys have been placed on administrative leave for referencing the January 6th attack on the Capitol and Donald Trump's Social post that led Taylor Taranto to President Obama's neighborhood with weapons.Three words in Letitia James' mortgage contract could tank Lindsey Halligan's entire case.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.
Sam Bankman-Fried BioSnap a weekly updated Biography.Sam Bankman-Fried has been back at the center of crypto headlines over the past few days, sparking fresh controversy and chatter far beyond the courtroom. On his X account, Sam has published a new statement—alongside a longer 14 to 15-page document—boldly claiming that FTX was never actually insolvent. He insists the real issue was a liquidity crunch triggered by a classic bank run, not fraud or financial mismanagement. According to Sam, when FTX collapsed in November 2022, the exchange held $25 billion in assets against $8 billion in withdrawal demands, and if the panic had been weathered, customers and creditors could have been made whole. He blames his legal and bankruptcy teams led by John J. Ray III for forcing FTX into Chapter 11, mishandling and prematurely liquidating assets, and burning as much as $138 billion in value through discounted sales and legal fees. The estate's actions, he says, decimated the business and have been misrepresented to the public. Coinpaper notes that Sam repeats claims he was barred from fully presenting in court, arguing his prosecution ignored these key points.This narrative is not just coming from Sam directly—his mother, Barbara Fried, a Stanford Law professor, has gone public as well, circulating a 64-page “liquidity crisis” manifesto and attacking the trial judge and the Department of Justice for bias, all in a sprawling PR-and-legal campaign ahead of his upcoming November 4 appeal. CoinEdition frames this as a well-coordinated push to rebrand Sam from a disgraced CEO to a misunderstood financial whiz, with his family's media offensive suggesting the collapse was engineered by external parties for profit and reputational damage control.This new round of public statements and legal maneuvering comes on the eve of the Second Circuit appeal, which has attracted extensive media coverage, live podcast panels, and debate across both mainstream financial outlets and crypto Twitter. The move has reignited polarizing community debates—on X, critics and blockchain sleuths like ZachXBT are already blasting Sam for repeating what they see as discredited excuses and shifting central blame onto others. According to AInvest, the FTX bankruptcy estate continues to dispute Sam's calculations, pointing out that even after repayment efforts, many creditors are dealing with substantial losses, and that the physical value of repayments—despite some headlines citing “120% returns”—depends on semantics and market valuation.Headlines this weekend revolve around themes of “Was FTX Ever Insolvent?”, “SBF's PR Blitz Before His Make-or-Break Appeal,” and “$138 Billion Lost: SBF Blames Lawyers, Not Fraud.” Nothing in recent filings or public records supports his assertion that customer funds could have been entirely restored, and the bankruptcy court, along with the Justice Department, maintains its view that FTX's undoing was the result of secret backdoor maneuvering, extensive fraud, and reckless self-dealing—a view that led directly to Sam's 25-year prison sentence. For now he remains in prison, with his mother and legal team orchestrating this last-ditch campaign, and the crypto world watching what happens in court on November 4. The social and biographical impact of these latest events could be significant if the appeal gains traction, but as of now, even as Sam dominates headlines and drives debate, the legal establishment isn't budging.Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOtaThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
Kate Shaw is a Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, where she teaches and writes about the presidency, the law of democracy, the Supreme Court, and reproductive rights and justice. Her scholarly writing has appeared, among other places, in the Harvard Law Review, the Columbia Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, and the Northwestern University Law Review, and her popular writing has appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Atlantic. She co-hosts the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny and is a Contributing Opinion Writer with the New York Times. Kate helps unpack the legal developments involving National Guard troop deployment; Trump's weaponization of the Justice Department; the James Comey, Tish James and John Bolton indictments; the government shutdown and funding of SNAP benefits; and more. Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel
October 31st, 2025, 4pm: Years after the investigation into Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, a veteran FBI official was pushed out for his involvement in that investigation. Nicolle Wallace, along with a panel of intelligence and political experts discuss the latest purge in the Justice Department. Plus, new reporting reveals that Jeffrey Epstein was investigated for money laundering and a judge blocks the Trump administration from suspending SNAP benefits amid the government shutdown.For more, follow us on Instagram @deadlinewhTo listen to this show and other MSNBC podcasts 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.
In an episode that is more befitting of George Orwell's 1984 than an American government in 2025, the Trump administration has retaliated against two federal prosecutors at the the DC US Attorney's Office for putting truthful, relevant, and necessary information into a court filing.The prosecutors filed a Sentencing Memorandum, as is usual in every case in which a defendant has been convicted. The sentencing memo read in part: "the defendant, Taylor Franklin Taranto, perpetrated a hoax on June 28, 2023, by falsely claiming that he would cause a car bomb to drive into the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The next day, he drove to a residential neighborhood in Washington, D.C., causing a substantial disruption to the residents and regional law enforcement. When the police responded to the scene of a potential car bomb near a restricted area that was protected heavily by the United States Secret Service, Taranto tried to flee and left his van behind. After securing Taranto's van and executing a lawful search of the vehicle, police found a CZ Scorpion, an M&P pistol, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition in his backpack, which he left in the van. Taranto unlawfully carried the pistols and unlawfully possessed the ammunition.The next day, on June 29, 2023, then-former President Donald Trump published on a social media platform the purported address of former President Barack Obama. Taranto re-posted the address on the same platform and thereafter started livestreaming from his van on his YouTube channel. Taranto broadcast footage of himself as he drove through the Kalorama neighborhood in Washington, D.C., claiming he was searching for 'tunnels' he believed would provide him access to the private residences of certain high-profile individuals, including former President Obama. He parked his van, walked away from it, and approached a restricted area protected by the United States Secret Service. He walked through the nearby woods and stated, 'Gotta get the shot, stop at nothing to get the shot.' After noticing the presence of the Secret Service he said, 'If I were them, I'd be watching this, watching my every move.' He also said, 'So yeah, more than likely, these guys also all hang for treason' and 'I control the block, we've got 'em surrounded.' When Secret Service agents approached him, Taranto fled, but he was apprehended and placed under arrest."The sentencing memo also stated: "On January 6, 2021, thousands of people comprising a mob of rioters attacked the U.S. Capitol while a joint session of Congress met to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election. Taranto was accused of participating in the riot in D.C., by entering the U.S. Capitol Building. After the riot, Taranto returned to his home in the State of Washington, where he promoted conspiracy theories about the events of January 6, 2021."Apparently because the prosecutors put truthful and accurate references to January 6 and Donald Trump into the sentencing memo, within two hours of filing the memo the prosecutors had their government cell phones seized, they were locked out of their government computers, and they were removed from the US Attorney's Office.This represents unlawful retaliation against these prosecutors for providing truthful, accurate, and necessary information to the sentencing judge.In this episode of "The Prosecutors' Verdict" Kevin Flynn and I talk about this legal developments and the horrific precedent it sets for the independence of the Department of Justice and the practice of the law in our nation's courts.To find Kevin on Substack: https://kfflynn.substack.com/To find Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.com/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Hi. On today's episode, Daniel Gordh joins Katy, Cody, and Jonathan to talk about the Justice Department's attempted intimidation of ICE protesters, the shakeup in deportation leadership, the looming cuts to SNAP benefits, and Israel's massacre in Gaza during the "ceasefire".As always, we recorded right before that big thing that happened.Check out Daniel's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@manboyniceHate ads? Check out our PATREON: https://patreon.com/somemorenewsMERCH: https://shop.somemorenews.comTreat yourself to gear that looks good, feels good, and doesn't break the bank with Fabletics. Go to https://fabletics.com/SMN to sign up as a VIP and get 80% off everything.F*%k your khakis and get The Perfect Jean 15% off with the code Morenews15 at https://theperfectjean.nyc/Morenews15 #theperfectjeanpodFor a limited time, get 40% off your first Hungryroot box PLUS get a free item in every box for life. Go to https://hungryroot.com/smn and use code smn.Sign up for your $1/month trial and start selling today at https://shopify.com/morenewsPluto TV. Stream now. Pay never.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Scum politicians only lie. PLUS, Shaun asks Kaelan Deese, Justice Department reporter for the Washington Examiner, which is the bigger scandal - Biden's dementia or his weaponization of the DOJ against Republicans with Operation Arctic Frost? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In an episode that is more befitting of George Orwell's 1984 than an American government in 2025, the Trump administration has retaliated against two federal prosecutors at the the DC US Attorney's Office for putting truthful, relevant, and necessary information into a court filing.The prosecutors filed a Sentencing Memorandum, as is usual in every case in which a defendant has been convicted. The sentencing memo read in part: "the defendant, Taylor Franklin Taranto, perpetrated a hoax on June 28, 2023, by falsely claiming that he would cause a car bomb to drive into the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The next day, he drove to a residential neighborhood in Washington, D.C., causing a substantial disruption to the residents and regional law enforcement. When the police responded to the scene of a potential car bomb near a restricted area that was protected heavily by the United States Secret Service, Taranto tried to flee and left his van behind. After securing Taranto's van and executing a lawful search of the vehicle, police found a CZ Scorpion, an M&P pistol, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition in his backpack, which he left in the van. Taranto unlawfully carried the pistols and unlawfully possessed the ammunition.The next day, on June 29, 2023, then-former President Donald Trump published on a social media platform the purported address of former President Barack Obama. Taranto re-posted the address on the same platform and thereafter started livestreaming from his van on his YouTube channel. Taranto broadcast footage of himself as he drove through the Kalorama neighborhood in Washington, D.C., claiming he was searching for 'tunnels' he believed would provide him access to the private residences of certain high-profile individuals, including former President Obama. He parked his van, walked away from it, and approached a restricted area protected by the United States Secret Service. He walked through the nearby woods and stated, 'Gotta get the shot, stop at nothing to get the shot.' After noticing the presence of the Secret Service he said, 'If I were them, I'd be watching this, watching my every move.' He also said, 'So yeah, more than likely, these guys also all hang for treason' and 'I control the block, we've got 'em surrounded.' When Secret Service agents approached him, Taranto fled, but he was apprehended and placed under arrest."The sentencing memo also stated: "On January 6, 2021, thousands of people comprising a mob of rioters attacked the U.S. Capitol while a joint session of Congress met to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election. Taranto was accused of participating in the riot in D.C., by entering the U.S. Capitol Building. After the riot, Taranto returned to his home in the State of Washington, where he promoted conspiracy theories about the events of January 6, 2021."Apparently because the prosecutors put truthful and accurate references to January 6 and Donald Trump into the sentencing memo, within two hours of filing the memo the prosecutors had their government cell phones seized, they were locked out of their government computers, and they were removed from the US Attorney's Office.This represents unlawful retaliation against these prosecutors for providing truthful, accurate, and necessary information to the sentencing judge.In this episode of "The Prosecutors' Verdict" Kevin Flynn and I talk about this legal developments and the horrific precedent it sets for the independence of the Department of Justice and the practice of the law in our nation's courts.To find Kevin on Substack: https://kfflynn.substack.com/To find Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.com/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
AP correspondent Ben Thomas reports, sources tell AP that the Justice Department is investigating fraud allegations in the Black Lives Matter movement.
This Day in Legal History: Nevada Admitted as 36th StateOn October 31, 1864, Nevada was officially admitted as the 36th state of the United States, a move driven as much by wartime politics as by the territory's readiness for statehood. With President Abraham Lincoln seeking re-election and needing support for the proposed 13th Amendment to abolish slavery, the Republican-controlled Congress saw strategic value in adding another loyal Union state. Although Nevada's population was below the threshold typically required for statehood, its vast mineral wealth and political alignment with the Union helped accelerate the process. To meet the tight timeline ahead of the 1864 election, Nevada's leaders moved quickly to draft a state constitution.Facing logistical challenges in sending the document from Carson City to Washington, D.C., Nevada officials made the unprecedented decision to transmit the entire text—over 16,000 words—via telegraph. The transmission took over 12 hours and cost more than $4,000, making it the longest and most expensive telegram ever sent at the time. The decision proved effective: the telegram reached the capital in time, and Congress formally approved Nevada's admission on the same day.The speed and cost of Nevada's telegraphic constitution became a symbol of the urgency and improvisation of Civil War-era governance. The state's motto, “Battle Born,” reflects both its literal birth during the Civil War and the political battle over slavery and Union preservation. Nevada's admission also helped secure support for Lincoln's re-election and for the 13th Amendment, which passed Congress in January 1865.In a recently disclosed legal filing, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sought taxpayer information on over 1.28 million individuals from the IRS, though only about 47,000 records matched. The request, part of a broader effort to access data on individuals under final removal orders, was submitted under a carve-out in Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, which permits limited disclosures during criminal investigations. The IRS initially rejected ICE's requests citing legal constraints, but a memorandum of understanding in April allowed for limited data sharing. A subsequent refined request from ICE in June targeted a smaller group of 1.27 million, but again, only a small percentage matched IRS records, and many failed to meet legal standards for processing.The case arose from a lawsuit filed by taxpayer advocacy groups and unions, which argue that these disclosures violate the Tax Reform Act, the Privacy Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction to halt further sharing. Internal emails reveal IRS officials were concerned about the unprecedented scale and legality of the request, and officials emphasized the need to keep the data sharing confidential. The IRS typically handles about 30,000 such data requests a year, each requiring detailed justification and high-level agency approval. Critics warn that this massive data handover poses urgent threats to taxpayer privacy and due process rights.ICE Sought Records on 1.3 Million Taxpayers, Filing Shows (1)U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols praised two federal prosecutors, Samuel White and Carlos Valdivia, for their handling of a case against Taylor Taranto, despite both being suspended by the Justice Department the day before. The suspension followed their reference to January 6 rioters as “a mob of rioters” and mention of Donald Trump allegedly sharing Barack Obama's address in a sentencing memo. Judge Nichols commended their work as professional and exemplary, stating they upheld the highest prosecutorial standards.Taranto was sentenced to 21 months in prison for firearm and hoax-related charges after being arrested near Obama's D.C. residence in 2023. However, he will not serve additional time due to pretrial detention. Though originally charged for participating in the Capitol riot, those charges were dropped under President Trump's mass clemency order for January 6 defendants issued at the start of his second term. Taranto's defense claimed his statements about explosives were meant as “dark humor” and that he hadn't committed any violence.After White and Valdivia's suspension, a revised sentencing memo—stripped of January 6 and Trump references—was filed by two replacement prosecutors, including a senior DOJ official. The incident reflects broader tensions under the Trump administration, which has repeatedly moved to minimize references to Capitol riot violence and penalize prosecutors involved in politically sensitive cases.US judge praises prosecutors who were suspended after referring to January 6 ‘mob' | ReutersA federal judge allowed the Trump administration to move forward with firing nearly all remaining employees of the Department of Justice's Community Relations Service (CRS), an agency established in the 1960s to mediate racial and ethnic conflicts. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, while denying a temporary restraining order sought by civil rights groups, noted that the plaintiffs failed to show immediate, irreparable harm. However, she also stated that the groups are likely to succeed in proving that the executive branch cannot lawfully dissolve a congressionally created agency.The lawsuit, brought by 11 organizations including the NAACP and the Ethical Society of Police, challenges the Justice Department's recent “reduction in force” that would leave just one CRS employee. The move follows a pattern under the Trump administration, which has rejected all new requests for CRS services and proposed no funding for the agency in its budget. Plaintiffs argue that a termination notice stating the layoffs aim to “effectuate the dissolution” of CRS confirms unlawful intent.Although Talwani's ruling allows the firings to proceed, she emphasized that the final outcome may favor the plaintiffs as the case continues. The layoffs coincide with a government shutdown that began October 1, meaning the employees would have been furloughed regardless. The DOJ claims it is merely reorganizing, not eliminating, the agency, though it concedes that only Congress has the authority to formally abolish it.Judge allows Trump administration to fire most of DOJ race-relations agency's employees | ReutersHagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, a prominent plaintiffs' law firm, is under scrutiny in two high-profile class actions, facing judicial criticism and potential sanctions. In Seattle, a federal judge sanctioned the firm for over $223,000 after finding it misled the court and opposing counsel about its client's withdrawal from an antitrust case against Apple and Amazon. The judge said Hagens Berman failed to disclose that their client, who later disappeared from proceedings, had expressed his intent to exit the case months earlier. The firm argues it acted ethically under client confidentiality rules and has asked the judge to revise her dismissal ruling.In a separate matter in Philadelphia, the firm faces possible new sanctions in long-running litigation over thalidomide-related birth defect claims. A special master found misconduct, including altering an expert report and advancing claims lacking legal merit. While Hagens Berman disputes the findings, calling them outside the master's authority and biased, U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond upheld the report. The firm has now requested that Diamond recuse himself, citing an appearance of bias due to his close coordination with the special master.In both cases, Hagens Berman maintains its actions were in good faith and within legal and ethical bounds, while critics and courts point to patterns of misrepresentation and overreach.Law firm Hagens Berman battles sanctions in Apple, thalidomide cases | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Camille Saint-Saëns.Camille Saint-Saëns was a French composer, organist, conductor, and pianist whose long career spanned the Romantic era and touched the early 20th century. Born in Paris in 1835, he was a child prodigy who began composing at the age of three and gave his first public performance at ten. Saint-Saëns was celebrated for his extraordinary versatility, writing symphonies, concertos, operas, chamber music, and choral works. Though deeply rooted in classical forms, he was an early supporter of contemporary composers like Liszt and Wagner, even as he remained skeptical of more radical modernism. His music often combined technical brilliance with elegance, and his clear, structured style made him a bridge between tradition and innovation. He was also a prolific writer and amateur astronomer, and his intellectual breadth sometimes earned him criticism from those who found his music too refined or academic. Still, Saint-Saëns maintained influence across Europe, and his works remain staples of the concert repertoire.This week's closing theme is Saint-Saëns' Danse Macabre. Originally a song for voice and piano based on a poem by Henri Cazalis, Saint-Saëns later reworked Danse Macabre into a tone poem for orchestra. It depicts Death summoning the dead from their graves at midnight on Halloween for a wild, skeletal waltz. A solo violin—tuned unconventionally to evoke a harsh, eerie sound—plays Death's dance theme, while xylophone rattles mimic clacking bones. The piece was controversial at its premiere in 1875 but quickly became a concert favorite, especially around Halloween. With its vivid orchestration and playful macabre imagery, Danse Macabre is one of classical music's most iconic musical depictions of the supernatural, perfectly capturing the spirit of the season.Without further ado, Saint-Saëns Danse Macabre—enjoy! 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
Today's West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy Podcast for our especially special Daily Special, Blue Moon Spirits Fridays, is now available on the Spreaker Player!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, Trump is spiraling out of control and calling for the nuclear option to deal with his Big Beautiful government shutdown.Then, on the rest of the menu, Whisky Pete Hegseth ordered the military to detail dozens of JAG attorneys to the Justice Department to act as special assistant US attorneys; a judge ripped apart the Trump administration's argument against her ruling this week by quoting their top goon's own words directly from a Fox News interview; and, drugmakers recalled a blood pressure medicine tainted with a cancer-causing chemical over a month ago, but Trump's FDA is only letting us know now.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where Radio Free Asia says it is halting its news operations due to funding troubles caused by Trump's shutdown; and, Trump is limiting refugee admissions to the worst Boers in the world.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!The Netroots Radio Live PlayerKeep Your Resistance Radio Beaming 24/7/365!“Structural linguistics is a bitterly divided and unhappy profession, and a large number of its practitioners spend many nights drowning their sorrows in Ouisghian Zodahs.” ― Douglas Adams "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe"Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/west-coast-cookbook-speakeasy--2802999/support.
We've had so much news to cover that we haven't gotten to as many listener questions as we would like.So we have gathered some of your most frequent and most pertinent questions for this Q&A bonus episode.F.B.I. Plans to Lower Recruiting Standards, Alarming Agents - The New York TimesDo 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.
Tonight on The Last Word: MSNBC reports two federal prosecutors were placed on administrative leave at the direction of the Trump White House. Also, polls show a tightening race for New Jersey governor. Plus, the government shutdown threatens food assistance for 42 million Americans. And four Senate Republicans join Democrats to block Donald Trump's tariffs on Canada. Ken Dilanian, Rep. Mikie Sherrill, Rep. Jim McGovern, and Rep. Brendan Boyle join Lawrence O'Donnell. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
The last 24 hours have seen three important developments, both legal and political, that spell real trouble for Donald Trump and his administration.First: the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the lower court opinion in which two Trump-appointed judges decided Trump should be able to militarize the streets of Portland, Oregon. The appeals court will now sit in judgement en banc (full court) and hopefully put a more permanent stop to Trump's attempts to send troops into Portland based on Trump's "assertions that are untethered to the facts," as the trial court judge found.Second: As NPR reported, "Senate Republicans deal Trump a rare rebuke on trade with vote against Brazil tariffs."And Third: a federal judge in California ruled that the US Attorney for the Middle District of California was appointed unlawfully by Trump. This ruling has important implications for the prosecutions of James Comey and Letitia James, and may result in those cases being dismissed.For Glenn's Substack: hhtps://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Vice-President Kamala Harris breaks silence on the real cost of Trump winning, Biden's shocking debate day call, why skipping Joe Rogan was a big mistake, election loss lessons, and…will she run again in 2028? Kamala Harris made history as the first female Vice President of the United States and first Black woman and South Asian American in the role. Before becoming VP, Kamala led the largest state Justice Department in the U.S and became only the second Black woman ever elected to the U.S. Senate. In September 2025, she released her bestselling book '107 Days: A Memoir of a Campaign That Made History'. She explains: ◼️The moment she lost the 2024 election and went into shock ◼️Why Biden's team sabotaged her behind the scenes ◼️The real reason Biden didn't want to debate Trump ◼️The 200K votes they desperately needed but couldn't find ◼️How America is at breaking point and the destruction Trump is causing [00:00] Intro [02:22] How Are You Feeling? [03:36] Will It Get Worse Before It Gets Better? [06:44] We Spoke to Your Husband [07:42] Why Do You Want to Protect People? [08:43] Kamala's Law Career [09:19] The Worst Thing You Faced in Your Career [11:06] Managing Stress and Responsibility [12:45] Kamala at 25 vs. Kamala Today [15:10] When Did You Decide to Run for President? [16:35] Does Impostor Syndrome Ever Go Away? [21:11] Experiencing Prejudice [25:37] How Do You Earn Respect as a Leader? [27:57] Why Kamala Dropped Out of the 2019 Race [30:47] The VP and Presidential Interview Process [33:53] Staff Suppressed My Accomplishments [37:36] Frustration Over Lack of Recognition [38:24] Kamala's Relationship With Biden [45:13] Biden Was Talked Into the Debate [49:14] What It Was Like Debating Trump [54:26] Trump Targets the Weak [01:00:37] Ads [01:01:39] Podcasting Power & Not Going on Joe Rogan [01:07:09] What Would Make You Run for President Again? [01:09:41] Why It's Difficult to Run for President [01:12:03] Kamala Was in a State of Shock [01:17:18] What Democrats Must Do to Win Back the People [01:19:36] Is the Left Against Entrepreneurship? [01:24:04] Have You Changed Since the Election? [01:25:20] Ads [01:27:25] Kamala on Being More Unfiltered [01:29:39] No Regrets About Running [01:31:56] Support From My Partner [01:39:20] Did You Experience Depression? [01:40:42] The Passing of Kamala's Mother [01:42:40] Would Your Mom Be Proud? Follow Kamala: Instagram - https://bit.ly/4of8PVL Facebook - https://bit.ly/43zlMBg X - https://bit.ly/47M5qaS Threads - https://bit.ly/4qzUjJI YouTube - https://bit.ly/3X6gR76 TikTok - https://bit.ly/4hufIja You can purchase Kamala Harris's new book, ‘107 Days', here: https://bit.ly/436Bnbj The Diary Of A CEO: ◼️Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/ ◼️Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://smarturl.it/DOACbook ◼️The 1% Diary is back - limited time only: https://bit.ly/3YFbJbt ◼️The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards (Second Edition): https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb ◼️Get email updates - https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt ◼️Follow Steven - https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb Sponsors: Fiverr - https://fiverr.com/diary and get 10% off your first order when you use code DIARY Justworks - http://Justworks.com Bon Charge - http://boncharge.com/diary?rfsn=8189247.228c0cb with code DIARY for 25% off
Nikita Biryukov, reporter who covers state government and politics for the New Jersey Monitor, talks about the latest in New Jersey elections news, including early voting turnout, how Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump are weighing in on the gubernatorial race and Justice Department election monitoring for Passaic County.
You've heard of the Chicago 7? Now there's a Chicago 6 as Trump's Justice Department trumps up a case against local activists. Ben riffs. Heidi Henry returns to give a perspective on how ICE's invasion is playing in her neck of the woods—LaSalle County. Also, Trump's impact on farmers. The difference between corporate and family farmers. A word of warning to Dems—every step to the center is a step to the right. Heidi is one of the founders of Illinois Valley Indivisible, a horse trainer, a Heartland Mama and a proud leftie.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
What most people don't realize is that the Miami Herald didn't “expose” Jeffrey Epstein's sweetheart deal — three of his victims and their lawyers did. Long before the headlines, those women and attorneys Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards had been fighting for nearly a decade to uncover how then–U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta secretly gave Epstein and his network immunity from prosecution. Acosta's office violated the Crime Victims Rights Act by hiding the non-prosecution agreement and misleading the victims into thinking the federal case was still alive. The Justice Department fought the victims at every turn, denying them information and arguing they had no rights, but Cassell and Edwards refused to quit. Their persistence forced the truth out: Epstein's elite legal team dictated the deal, silenced victims, and helped him serve just 13 cushy months while his crimes went largely untouched.The case exposed far more than Epstein's depravity — it revealed a justice system built to serve power, not people. Poor, vulnerable girls were targeted, dismissed, and smeared while prosecutors and billionaires protected one another. The same biases that fail defendants crushed the victims too, showing how easily money warps the law. But despite every obstacle, those women and their lawyers won a ruling confirming the government's illegal concealment, proving that even against billionaires and corrupt officials, truth can still claw its way to the surface. Their courage didn't just expose Epstein — it ripped the mask off the system that shielded him.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
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
The last 24 hours have seen three important developments, both legal and political, that spell real trouble for Donald Trump and his administration.First: the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the lower court opinion in which two Trump-appointed judges decided Trump should be able to militarize the streets of Portland, Oregon. The appeals court will now sit in judgement en banc (full court) and hopefully put a more permanent stop to Trump's attempts to send troops into Portland based on Trump's "assertions that are untethered to the facts," as the trial court judge found.Second: As NPR reported, "Senate Republicans deal Trump a rare rebuke on trade with vote against Brazil tariffs."And Third: a federal judge in California ruled that the US Attorney for the Middle District of California was appointed unlawfully by Trump. This ruling has important implications for the prosecutions of James Comey and Letitia James, and may result in those cases being dismissed.For Glenn's Substack: hhtps://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Three years after Jeffrey Epstein's death inside the Metropolitan Correctional Center, the public was still left in the dark. The Department of Justice's Inspector General had yet to release a full report, and most of the internal findings remained sealed or redacted. The official story — suicide by hanging — was backed by the New York City Medical Examiner, but contradicted by independent forensic experts like Dr. Michael Baden, who found Epstein's neck injuries to be “more consistent with strangulation than hanging.” Meanwhile, crucial evidence went missing or malfunctioned: security cameras outside his cell failed, logs were falsified, and the two guards on duty admitted to sleeping and browsing the internet instead of checking on him. No clear timeline of his final hours has ever been publicly established. For a man under the government's watch in one of the most secure facilities in America, the lack of transparency was staggering — and it left even the most rational observers suspicious.By the third anniversary of his death, the unanswered questions had hardened into national cynicism. The phrase “Epstein didn't kill himself” became a cultural punchline, a shorthand for public mistrust of institutions. Federal officials insisted accountability had been taken — the guards were charged and later released after a plea deal, and the prison itself was slated for closure — yet the broader inquiry into systemic negligence vanished from public view. Victims received settlements, but no comprehensive investigation ever detailed who enabled Epstein's empire, who protected him, or what really happened inside that cell. The silence from the Justice Department only deepened the perception that some secrets were too big to expose.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Three years after Jeffrey Epstein's death inside the Metropolitan Correctional Center, the public was still left in the dark. The Department of Justice's Inspector General had yet to release a full report, and most of the internal findings remained sealed or redacted. The official story — suicide by hanging — was backed by the New York City Medical Examiner, but contradicted by independent forensic experts like Dr. Michael Baden, who found Epstein's neck injuries to be “more consistent with strangulation than hanging.” Meanwhile, crucial evidence went missing or malfunctioned: security cameras outside his cell failed, logs were falsified, and the two guards on duty admitted to sleeping and browsing the internet instead of checking on him. No clear timeline of his final hours has ever been publicly established. For a man under the government's watch in one of the most secure facilities in America, the lack of transparency was staggering — and it left even the most rational observers suspicious.By the third anniversary of his death, the unanswered questions had hardened into national cynicism. The phrase “Epstein didn't kill himself” became a cultural punchline, a shorthand for public mistrust of institutions. Federal officials insisted accountability had been taken — the guards were charged and later released after a plea deal, and the prison itself was slated for closure — yet the broader inquiry into systemic negligence vanished from public view. Victims received settlements, but no comprehensive investigation ever detailed who enabled Epstein's empire, who protected him, or what really happened inside that cell. The silence from the Justice Department only deepened the perception that some secrets were too big to expose.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Federal judges and the federal courts are clearly getting fed up with the Trump Administration's continued abusive conduct in relation to its immigration enforcement practices. A federal judge in Chicago, Judge Sara Ellis, just ordered the Border Patrol commander-at-large Gregory Bovino to appear in her courtroom DAILY for the next week, after he was caught on video casually lobbing a tear gas canister into a crowd of protestors that posed no imminent threat to officers. But even more important than today's ruling, was the fact that Judge Ellis citied as evidence videos that had been sent to her by members of the public documenting abusive acts by federal officers. This is an important reminder of the power the people have to record, document, and turn over to the authorities, including the courts, these powerful images. For Glenn's Substack: hhtps://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Hostin joins executive producer Brian Teta to discuss President Trump's efforts to nullify Biden's autopen pardons, and her prediction for the outcome of the DOJ's investigation. Then, she shares why she is loving her empty-nester era, she weighs in on Michelle Obama's recent reflections on self-worth and provides an update on her latest book draft! Learn how to help the victims of Hurricane Melissa here: https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/hurricane-melissa-how-to-help/story?id=126940730 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Are the U.S. airstrikes on alleged drug traffickers aboard vessels in the Caribbean and the Pacific legal? Law professor and legal analyst Barb McQuade joins Preet to discuss in this excerpt from the Insider podcast. In the full episode, Preet and Barb break down President Trump's lawsuit against the Justice Department and an appellate court's decision to overturn an order blocking the Trump administration from deploying National Guard in Portland, Oregon. Joyce will be back next week. 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
Rachel Maddow explains that while much of Donald Trump's abuse of power is typical of authoritarians, Trump has a new tool that no authoritarian before him has had: extremely advanced spyware. Trump is already deploying this new weapon through ICE, which intends to use this surveillance technology against immigrants but also against Americans who protest against ICE, and anyone they might snare with an extremely loose definition of "anti-fascist."Rachel Maddow considers reasons why protesting against authoritarians is important, from feeling empowered to ensuring that important rights don't atrophy or get taken away when they're not in use. But another important use for protest is to send a message to the people and entities that would capitulate and become accomplices in the authoritarian's abuses.Marc Elias, attorney and founder of Democracy Docket, talks with Rachel Maddow about the fight he expects Donald Trump to put up as Trump's unpopularity makes a clean election victory less likely. Even as Trump will abuse the power and credibility of the Justice Department to serve his ends, his past bad faith in making bogus election fraud accusations gives his legal opponents an advantage. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
A.M. Edition for Oct. 28. According to people familiar with the matter, Amazon plans to cut roughly 10% of its corporate workforce, as it seeks to slim down, conserve cash and further employ AI. Plus, WSJ's Jon Emont explains how a slew of billion-dollar deals is reshaping the once-dormant Western rare-earths industry. And, a Republican-led committee recommends that the Justice Department investigate former President Joe Biden's executive actions, particularly his clemency decisions. Caitlin McCabe hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has put a temporary pause on Donald Trump's ability to send National Guard troops into the streets of Portland, Oregon. The court issued the stay or pause while it decides if the full appeals court (sitting en banc) will review a lower court ruling allowing Trump to militarize the streets of Portland.The incessant back and forth between and among the trial courts, the appeals courts, and the Supreme Court - is enough to make folks throw up their hands at the complete injustice of it all. Glenn discusses how the endless legal back and forth regarding Trump's abuse of presidential power and his determination to weaponize the streets of America is beginning to feel like the highest stakes and most dangerous game of tennis imaginable. For Glenn's Substack: hhtps://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
This week, we're talking: some big considerations following last week's hypnosis episode, Halloween, money shame, soft-pitching “The Cancelistas,” speaking on panels, smoked fish, Ralph Lauren Christmas, the continued government shutdown, SNAP benefits, the White House Ballroom renovation, $230 Million from the Justice Department, Kristi Noem's private jet, being a Patriot for Gymnastics, and the Louvre burglary. Check out the JVN Patreon for a BTS vlog and post-show debrief of The Drowsy Chaperone at Carnegie Hall starring JVN, Laverne Cox, Dylan Mulvaney, Betty Who, Alex Newell, Peppermint, and many many more! www.patreon.com/jvn Follow us on Instagram @gettingbetterwithjvn Jonathan on Instagram @jvn and senior producer Chris @amomentlikechris New video episodes Getting Better on YouTube every Wednesday. Senior Producer, Chris McClure Producer, Editor & Engineer is Nathanael McClure Production support from Chad Hall Our theme music is also composed by Nathanael McClure. Curious about bringing your brand to life on the show? Email podcastadsales@sonymusic.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
It’s a big week for international trade as the presidents of the U.S. and China prepare to meet. Bloomberg reports that the two sides have agreed to a framework trade deal. Meanwhile, Trump took punitive tariff measures against Canada over an Ontario government ad that criticized his tariff policy. The Wall Street Journal reports. More than 170 U.S. citizens have been swept up in Trump’s immigration crackdown. ProPublica’s Nicole Foy describes some of the violent encounters between ICE agents and citizens. Former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James are fighting criminal cases brought against them by Trump’s Justice Department. Jeremy Roebuck, DJ reporter at the Washington Post, joins to discuss why the prosecutor might pose a problem for both cases. Plus, Hurricane Melissa is barreling toward Jamaica and could cause catastrophic damage, two high-profile California Democrats hinted at their political futures, and authorities in Paris arrested two suspects in the Louvre heist. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.
New York Attorney General Letitia James was arraigned in her bank fraud case. Donald Trump had directed his unqualified US Attorney, Lindsey Halligan, to bring those charges against James. Glenn attended the hearing in federal court in Norfolk, Virginia. He gives 2 reports from the courthouse - one before and also one after the arraignment hearing.For Glenn's Substack: hhtps://glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Every day brings a new constitutional crisis. Donald Trump isn't just breaking norms... he's weaponizing the entire justice system against anyone who dare cross him. We're joined by former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman to cut through the chaos and explain what the hell is happening. Trump promised that he would bring "retribution" to his second term - turns he wasn't lying. So far he's gone after James Comey, Letitia James, John Bolton. Harry breaks down why these prosecutions represent "rock bottom, ninth circle of hell" for the Justice Department—and why they're likely unconstitutional. Harry also discusses Trump sending the National Guard into (Democratic-led) cities despite their objections. Is that legal? Some courts say yes, some say no. Now it's at the Supreme Court, which has already enabled Trump's overreach at every turn. Harry tells us why this is the single most dangerous thing happening right now. We also delve into the complexities of Louisiana v. Callais, the Voting Rights Act case before the Supreme Court which could eliminate Section II and allow for the elimination of majority-minority districts (we'll explain this!), likely imperiling 15 House seats now held by Democrats. Plus, it turns out that it's easier than anyone thought to demolish the East Wing of the White House! At least we're getting a new ballroom.... Harry walks us through why this unprecedented destruction is probably illegal, but so outrageous that no legal framework even exists to stop it. LISTEN to Harry's podcast, Talking Feds: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/talking-feds/id1456045551 READ Harry's Substack: https://harrylitman.substack.com/ USE Promo Code FRANKEN for 10% off of your first Graza olive oil order! https://partners.graza.co/FRANKEN
Jim Comey and his legal team have filed their motions to dismiss his charges on selective and vindictive prosecution grounds, and Comey and Letitia James have filed motions to disqualify Lindsey Halligan.Marco Rubio gave El Salvador US government cooperators in exchange for use of their CECOT Prison.Jack Smith goes to paper in a letter to Chuck Grassley and Jim Jordan about potential Congressional testimony, and the Republican mischaracterization of his work.Trump is seeking $230M from his allies in the Justice Department as compensation for the criminal cases against him.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.
President Trump demolishes the White House's East Wing to make room for his ostentatious 90,000 square foot ballroom. Jon, Dan, and Alex Wagner — host of Crooked Media's newest podcast “Runaway Country” — react to the the demolition and the latest news, including Trump's demand that the Justice Department pay him $230 million in taxpayer money, his pardon of a crypto CEO convicted of failing to report terrorist organizations who used his platform to launder money, and the latest from 2025's most important elections in New York, New Jersey, and Virginia. Then, Tommy is joined by the Pipeline Fund's Denise Feriozzi to talk about building a deeper Democratic bench and why it's so important for people to run for local office.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@crooked.com and include the name of the podcast. Get tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
