Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Top Legal Experts REACT to January 6 Hearings and DOJ Efforts - Legal AF Midweek Full Episode

Episode Date: July 14, 2022

On this special midweek edition of LegalAF x MeidasTouch, the top-rated podcast covering law and politics, anchors Michael Popok and Karen Friedman Agnifilo are joined by their “podcaster in arms” Anthony Davis of Five Minute News and The Weekend Show who brings a unique international lens to view the Jan6 Hearings and its aftermath. Karen, Michael and Anthony look backward at the 7 days of Jan6 Hearings to date, and discuss what it means for the future of our democracy, history, and criminal justice system. Remember to subscribe to ALL the Meidas Media Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://pod.link/1510240831 Legal AF: https://pod.link/1580828595 The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://pod.link/1595408601 The Influence Continuum: https://pod.link/1603773245 Kremlin File: https://pod.link/1575837599 Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://pod.link/1530639447 The Weekend Show: https://pod.link/1612691018 The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560 Zoomed In: https://pod.link/1580828633 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the midweek edition of Legal AF with your co-host Michael Popock and Karen Friedman Agnifalo. And today on a special edition we're joined by a very amazing guest one that I've wanted to get on the show for a long time. Anthony Davis, who most people know as the host of the five-minute news and the weekend show. He's a British broadcaster journalist with more than 20 years of experience, a radio broadcaster for the BBC in the past. And in 2017, he relocated to the US, residing in Los Angeles, where he looked around and decided there was a lack of nonpartisan and world news coverage. And he decided to fill that gap with his partners.

And they came up with five minute news, which is now on the Midas Media Network. I've been on the show and I've been chomping at the bit to get Anthony on our show Karen so that we can get a a View to what's happening on Jan 6 the Jan 6 hearings From somebody who didn't grow up here who learned about our system in different ways than you and I did and has that unique Perspective to bring to this so Anthony welcome to legal AF Thank you Michael. Yeah, it's I do think perspective is important and I and has that unique perspective to bring to this. So Anthony, welcome to the legal AF. Thank you, Michael. Yeah, it's, I do think perspective is important.

And I also think that relocating is important. And I feel like if we get the chance in our lives to travel, then that's one thing. But to actually stop for more than six months, it took me about six months to kind of acclimatize to living in the US. And I really recommend it. If you've got the opportunity, just go somewhere else. And were you right from the get go, were you focused on our political system, our political

scheme as part of your world news coverage? Yeah, because when I was on the radio for years in London, and you know, when you start out on the radio, they put you on at night. So I used to like go on at midnight, and I would be on talking just doing a talk show for till like five o'clock in the morning. And invariably because of the time difference, I would get to cover US news. So whenever there was a state of the union address or any of these kind of major events, I would get to cover it.

And so consequently, you know, I started out really taking a great interest in the US. And I have family here, and I even have a distant relative who I never met who was killed in 9-11 in one of the towers whose name appears on the memorial. And so I do feel a great connection with the US. And I've always felt I used to be told off for like talking to strangers in shops and to people working in stores in London. They're like, why do you do that? Because no one talks to anybody in London, you know, and then when I came here, I've always been American. I've always had that ability to kind of chat to strangers. So I feel, you know, I feel

like I'm in the right place finally. Yeah, you feel like you're home and we feel like you're home. So let's, we are now at, and Karen and I did some, some coverage this morning for Midas Media Network of the seventh session, the seventh day of the Jan 6 hearings. And I mean, I, I thought Cassidy Hutchinson was below the dome off of the capital testimony, but today was just a, it was like a cornucopia of amazing facts that this committee has developed and the way they're doing it. So important to the continuation of our democracy and to the reinstallation of the guardrails around our democracy.

I'm severely pressure tested by Donald Trump. And some people are saying in some of the trolls that all of us get on Twitter saying, who cares? You're trying to distract from Biden as presidency. No, we're not. We're talking about a historic epic conspiracy and seditious conspiracy led for the first time

in US history by the US president to retain power. And of course, Congress and the special committee has a role in bringing that to light just like the Watergate committee and all the other committees have in the past. What happens from here, want to talk about as well in terms of has the weather changed because of the Cassidy Hutchinson because of the seven sessions as to the likelihood of the prosecution of Donald Trump. At the beginning, I thought it was going to be for the crimes outlined by Liz Cheney, the seven steps of the conspiracy. The more I listen and the more I understand, I think

that the clearest path to a successful prosecution against Donald Trump, maybe what happened on the ellipse in the days prior to it starting on the tweet on December 19th and knowing that there was an armed insurrection in front of him and actually creating it and then sending it off to do whatever they were going to do with members of Congress. So let me start with Anthony. What has been your takeaway from both the theater of it and the substance of it with seven sessions under our belt with the Jans

X committee? Well, my first feeling is, how did it come to this? Like, why do we need to get to a point where there would need to be public hearings or any hearing or any investigation? Because the system should have prevented all of this with the first impeachment, right, when he did the perfect phone call with Zelensky, and he got, you know, he got impeached by Congress and then it goes to the Senate, of course, they let him go because he's the supreme leader. That's the point at which this entire party should have ended. And we should never

have got to a point where this kind of partisan nature of American politics, it's like we are prepared to literally sell anything, sell our souls, sell our grandmothers, just to kind of maintain power. And it's a tragedy because, you know, democracy is fragile. And I just don't think because democracy is fragile. And I just don't think America needed to until this point consider that its democracy could actually be taken away by a solitary individual. I mean, this is the thing it really is down to one man. And if Donald Trump was a different kind of person,

if he had a moral compass or a conscience, if he wasn't mentally ill. And I need to be careful about saying how mentally ill he is because I don't want to use that in his defense. You know what I mean? Because he won't. Right. He won't. But, but plenty of, plenty of clinicians have diagnosed him from afar. And that is that he is the last person on the planet that should ever have been the president. And so that's why we've got this whole thing now. And it's rubbing off in other countries as well. He's tenure and his behavior and the laws that have been even abortion.

This is all come about because of Donald Trump being this empty vessel where all these other lawmakers have been able to manipulate him to do what it is that they want, whether it be the Federalist Society, coming in and choosing individuals for the Supreme Court, there's all these theories about what's really gone on behind this. And I see Trump as being the pinnacle, you know, or the nucleus of this disaster. But I also recognize that it takes an army of others to kind of facilitate all of this damage. And so the first impeachment is when he should have gone. The second impeachment, of course, was for the insurrection.

And they let him off on that one. So that's how I feel from a distance. It's like, where is the moral compass of the people who are elected representatives of the voters citizens of this country? Well, look at your home country. Two cabinet members resign and it brings down the entire government. And there goes Boris Johnson. And by contrast, as you've so eloquently outlined, look what it came to. And we still have a large percentage of Americans that think Trump did nothing wrong, but properly in a first amendment way advocate his position. I mean, they've completely tuned this on. I want to talk about,

what do we think the ultimate impact? There's a historical audience. There's a real-time voter audience. There's a DOJ audience. There's many, many reasons and accountability. You just have to do this as a civilized democracy. You have to put your leaders on trial when they do bad, bad things. Carol, what do you think?

You had an opinion in the very, very beginning, because you and I have been doing this for a while, about the show around the presentation, and that, you know, would they at the end, in the way they elected, to take advantage of the fact that the Republicans took what I referred to as, took the practice ball home, and it took the practice ball went home. And they thought, well, maybe that would scuttle the hearings. Instead, all it did was give them a free pass to present not the way Watergate was presented, not gavill to gavill with all live testimony and and a Q&A back and forth.

But in a presentation of evidence in a way that you and I and other lawyers would make an opening or a closing argument from the very beginning. How effective do you think that's been? And for you, what has been the most powerful moments in the seven sessions? Yeah, so I had my doubts in the beginning because this was scripted and it felt very produced. And so I was concerned it would lack a little bit of authenticity.

And I have to say, each one is better than the next. I think they are really doing a painstaking methodical, excellent job at going through detail by detail and presenting it in a way that people can understand. And there's many ways you could slice and dice this, you know, you could go in chronological order, you could, you know, take a day by day. But instead, they're doing it slightly differently. You know, they're focusing on, you know, things that kind of make sense to go together,

you know, like Trump's pressuring the states was one day, or Trump's pressuring the States was one day or Trump's pressuring DOJ was another day or pressuring Pence. They're grouping things in ways that I think has been extremely effective. And look, they've spoken to what over 1,000 people. And so to be able to take all that testimony, one of the things I love is when they show the videos and they show these 26 year old staffers just asking

questions of witnesses. I mean, they're really doing a phenomenal job of learning the facts, taking, getting the information, and then digesting it, presenting it in a way that tells a story. And so I do think they're doing a really effective job at telling a story that feels authentic. And it also feels really important from just a history, you know, kind of historical standpoint. You know, we all sort of watched TV on January 6th and we

all kind of knew what happened, but I don't think anyone appreciated just the coordinated effort of all the different things that go together that they've been presenting. My concerns are a couple, I have a couple concerns. Number one, I don't know how many people are actually really watching it. It's a huge time investment to watch it at the, at the, you know, there's these many hours and it's in the middle of the day, right? And so, know, there's these many hours and it's in the middle of the day, right? And so, and, and there's been seven hearings. And so it's been over 20 plus hours of, of these summary, you know, there's sort of these summary hearings.

So I worry a little bit that it's the choir, you know, they're preaching to the choir a little bit and we know what, we know one person is watching. Well, exactly we do. We know what I'm saying. Exactly because they're clearly getting under a skin. Um, and, and my hope is that the DOJ is watching well exactly we do. Donald Trump is watching exactly because they're clearly getting under a skin. And my hope is that the DOJ is watching because I think really what they're doing is they're creating a roadmap of, you know, of for the investigators for the

Department of Justice. I mean, this is a massive case. You know, when you think about it, they've interviewed over a thousand people themselves. And so for that, that could take years and years and years and years for any prosecution, you know, to go through that kind of level of investigation. And it's not like they're not busy bringing their 800 cases, you know, of seditious conspiracy and all the other things that they're bringing as well. So, you know, they're quite busy already on this.

So this is kind of a beautiful roadmap that they've presented to the prosecution to say, these are the people you need to speak with. This is the evidence you need to get. This is the here, the non-hearsay evidence you're going to want to, you're going to want to get. And this is the evidence that supports these charges. And so I think that is my biggest takeaway is that they're really that they're really going to kind of do that work for the Justice Department. You know, but I was a little bit disappointed to hear, for example, that the Justice Department hasn't interviewed most of these witnesses. You know, and it makes me a little frustrated, like, what are they doing? You know, I hope that I hope they're going to continue. I hope they're going to start really moving forward

and moving forward quickly here. Because I think the evidence is there. I mean, sure, it has to stand up on cross examination and sure it has to be non-hearsate, has to be admissible, it has to be relevant, all those things. But I think they've done an excellent job at really kind of showing these are the places you're going to, these are the threads you're going to want to pull.

And this is where you're going to want to look. And I think they're going to, you know, look, there's never going to be a perfect case. You know, there's never going to be 100% proof direct evidence that, you know, you're not going to find an email. Well, where Donald Trump wrote to Mark Meadows or somebody else saying, I know that I lost this election, but let's just say it this way anyway. You know, it's never going to be the case. They're not going to have the direct evidence. So, but, you know, prosecutors do this all the time.

And there's no reason just because he's the president, former president of the United States that they have to be afraid to bring a tough case because I think you've got all the elements here and that's the thing that I think these hearings have done an excellent job at showing. Well, what was before I turned to Anthony? What was the most, if you can put your finger on one, what has been the most powerful person or bit of evidence that you've heard so far in the seven hearings. I thought, that's a great question.

I don't have a particular moment or a particular piece. I thought Cassidy Hutchinson was, that turned a corner, I think. But I also think the fact that they're putting all these Republicans, that almost every person who testifies if not everybody, is a Republican, I think it's just really, I think that's a really effective. That in and of itself has been effective. I think I really love the questioning that's been happening. And I was a little worried at first because they don't just ask questions. They kind of give testimony, too, in a way, right?

They give speeches, you know, the, you know, the various, whether it's Liz Cheney or whoever, you know, they give a lot of speeches. And at first, I was like, I didn't know how effective that would be. And I find those summary speeches quite effective. I don't know. To me, for whatever reason, Liz Cheney is the person that comes to mind as the person

who I think is really coming out as the most effective person in this. I know a lot of people love Jamie Raskin. I mean, there's different people who like different people, and I know these aren't even the witnesses, but, you know, to me, just her perspective and all of this and the things she's doing, and, you know, she makes sure that you know, like even today, she made sure that we all know that Donald Trump is intimidating a witness, a witness that you haven't heard from, and we refer this to the DOJ because we will go to any lengths that to protect these hearings.

And there's just, so she's just something about her that I just have to say, she is really impressing me in these hearings. She is just, she is making sure that, she's just, there's no bullshit with her in these hearings. And so there's something about that that I find Really powerful Let me let me turn to Anthony so Anthony you you've

Seen it either is seen it in real time or for the summer is I've been watching it real time. I've been choosing to watch the Fox News coverage Yeah, good and the reason for that is for obvious reasons. I want to see how they're dissecting it and translating it. They have a lawyer on Jonathan Turley. He watched him and he's running out of excuses for these. He taught me Khan Law from my bar review course.

Yeah. Well, he's obviously a part of his and guy. He's the chair of public interest law at George Washington University. I think that they get these people on who have these titles or they have these positions and it gives them credence. But at the end of the day, they're just Republican hacks. Right. He's always been.

Yeah, he's always been. Yeah, he's always been. They're using language that is legal speak that will confuse the viewers in a way to make it sound like the hearing doesn't really have a case, but they're kind of it's become indefensible now. And that's really what I thought was most interesting about this week's testimony. And, you know, I really feel like the chronology of this is really important. And might have just put a video out a few months ago called a coup in plain sight. There's a five-minute edited video, which was one of the best videos I think might have made, because it basically told us the story, you know, with a voiceover

of what was going on on the evening of the fifth and the morning of the sixth. And we could have not had the hearing and they could have just used the Midas touch video as evidence because it was certainly more digestible. It's five minutes and you know, sometimes that's all people have time for. But what it did was it told the story in this kind of chronological way. And I think that's the best thing about this hearing. In terms of star witnesses, I also was drawn to Cassidy Hutchinson in so many ways.

But I also am fascinated in the way that Donald Trump has kind of tried to brush off, you know, I don't know her, I don't even know who she was. She's nothing to do with me. I never met this woman. Then she's unstable. She's on. Well, that's not stable based on her handwriting.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. And then there's a fact that have you seen his signature? By the way, speaking of handwriting, that's a whole school. Yeah, he looks like a serial killer. There is a before before Anthony gives that I want to hear is complete. Thought there's a line that I heard from a Republican that fits in well with when Anthony said at the top of the show.

This Republican who went, he didn't want to be named, said, I'm not saying that Trump should be committed to a mental hospital. I'm just saying if he was in a mental hospital, he wouldn't be able to get out. Right. I mean, but this is what we're dealing with. And the more that they present, the more evidence that they present, it's clear that all of our worst fears about who this guy was are true. And that he really, he's a very miserable man.

He's a disgusting human being who is a very miserable person who is, you know, he's only have a sued people if he doesn't like them, you know, he doesn't, he doesn't, he can't communicate. He just kind of throws lawyers at it. And this is really the first time in his life that he's having to be accountable. And these messages he's been putting out on truth social, which I've seen because people repost them on Twitter, which they probably shouldn't do. I proof that he is now running scared, and he is genuinely terrified. But I'm also interested in how he doesn't realize that the game is up. He's still peddling the game, the grift, and that's really the big issue here

is that even if you did get him on the stand and you asked him all these questions, he'd be like, and it's like, oh man, I mean, he's going to be the last man standing. And I just worry that nothing will come of this. I honestly believe that. Well, let's talk about, yeah, and I agree with you. Let's talk about the multiple audiences for this. Why? And I think we all agree, at least on this podcast, not the mightest media. You have to do this. Any civilized democracy, you know, constitutional republic has to hold its people accountable. And, and the JAN-6 committee is doing just that. And will history will look fondly back on the work that's been done by this committee and by the witnesses and even the Republicans, who although at the time, joked

about being on team crazy or team normal rather than invoking the 25th Amendment, walking away and not enabling him, at least now, even if it's patch up alone three days ago, even now are coming forward, maybe not courageously, but they are coming forward. I like Eric Hirschman a lot. I think his New York Brooklyn-E style of speaking about what he said to people like John Eastman, to Jeffrey Clark, to Sidney Powell, has been, for me, what are my favorite, whenever I hear Eric Hirschman's about to give some video clip, I'm on the edge of my seat

because he just tells it like it is. He basically said, you're all fucking crazy. And I don't want my favorite line for him was when he said the Johnny's man, I don't want to hear anything out of your mouth, except the words peaceful transition. Repeat it after me. Peaceful. And he made him say it. And the guy actually, the guy actually said it. He was in the room sort of like, you know, Zellig, he and

Chipelone, Chipelone, we're in the room for many of these things, you know, the night before the come to DC, it's going to be wild tweet goes out, that crazy meeting, the craziest meeting in the entire Trump presidency. Jim, you're asking, talked about, you know, they're there, you know, meadows is there for most of it. Cassidy Hutchinson is present for most of this. Chipaloney was present for most of the major events that matter that we keep talking about.

And so his testimony was powerful, but today to be able to get proud boys and oath keepers to turn, even when some of them are risking jeopardy because they're still being prosecuted or haven't been sentenced yet, and they came in and said, we got had. We were had by Trump.

To your point about, is anything gonna come of this? Okay. People who are watching or not watching who are gonna vote or not vote for Republicans or Trump have already made up their mind. If you're a thinking adult, you have to be persuaded by the evidence because it's just, as you said, it's just inexorable, the amount of evidence here,

you just can't explain it away. I was heartened, you know, polling, you always have to take with a grain of salt. I was hearted by a couple of things. The New York Times, at least, is reporting, or there was a poll that was done, I think a mom with Paul, just recently, is reporting, or there was a poll that was done. I think I'm on with Paul. Just recently, that basically Trump has lost the under 35 vote for the Republicans.

65% of those under 35 do not want to see him run again. They may not have it a position they want to take on Gen 6, but they don't want to see him run again. And that is a tremendous number to have walked away from Trump as he's, as you're saying, he's trying to be the last man standing and they're all leaving the party, leaving him alone. The second thing is Lisa Monaco. I mean, people, you know, sources close

to the Department of Justice have said that Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony has opened a lot of eyes at the Department of Justice. I can't believe it took this long. For them to see clearly a crime that may be easy to, easier to prosecute than any of this other conspiracy and spoke and wheel and hub and, you know, Trump always finds a way just to be outside of the communication related to it.

As much as we're piecing this together, because he's clever, you know, he's a very criminal, right? So he knows how not to leave a paper trail, whether it's tearing them up or putting down the toilet or eating them. You know, the guy knows how to avoid leaving evidence. So you're left with what I think Karen was commenting on. You're left with the Jan 6th getting to the water's edge, connecting, you know, you know, banan, flin, stone, Giuliani, Powell, Eastman, Clark, usually through meadows on all of these things, if not through banan, through stone, through those Giuliani we talked about. So you have all that, what you don't have is the thing the Karen said is you don't have the text or the tweet that says, you know, at the Willard hotel, all right, go, send the armed

armed masses to go. I think that might come though, you know, I actually think that I, you know, they talk about evidence that they haven't yet presented. If this is as well produced as it is, and it really is well produced, You save the money shot for the end, right? Episode seven, eight. Episode eight. Seven before the prequels. And so I honestly feel like there is going to be a moment at which it's like, wow, I mean, look, when he did the phone call with Zelenski, sorry, with Brad Raffensburg, I said, I just need you to find me one more vote. I mean, that

again is proof that the guy was trying to rig the election. Why not? Why not? That phone call. It's on tape. Well, let's have Karen talk about that. So we've got parallel to this in real life. We've got Fawney Willis's and it's really heating up special grand jury in Fulton County Atlanta, Georgia, we now have a sitting senator, former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who has to go into a grand jury and give a criminal grand jury and give testimony or take the Fifth Amendment. What do you think about that Karen? And where do you think, where do you think Fawni ends up or where the special grand jury ends up and they're recommending an indictment

yeah so you know that obviously this would be best prosecuted federally as one package including the georgia one however uh... the president can pardon a federal conviction so if he gets convicted federally if you get another republican president he could always get pardoned. So there is something beautiful about getting a state prosecution as well. And that to me is the clearest, most simple, you know, you've got the call on

tape. So, you know, it's really just pretty clear kind of what he did and what he was trying to do. But you need to show his intent because because a lot of these crimes and everyone kind of talks about the various, you know, you have to show that he knew that it was false or that he knew it was a lie, and that's why they're sort of taking all this, all this time to show that he did know. And, you know, even the Georgia case, you know, if he looks say he really did think that there were some missing votes. And so he was saying, find the votes that are legitimate, you know, that's why they still have to prove that he knew that it was false and that he was trying to interfere and that he had a corrupt mind, you know, that he had a nefarious purpose for his, for his intent.

He's pressing him, didn't he? You also threatened him. He said it was like, no one's going to like you if you don't. Yeah. So I think there's enough to bring the case. I mean, the thing that really made me sad today was, you know, these poor guys who, you know, one of them, Mr. Errors, I think was his name, was, you know, he's being prosecuted. He was like, you know, he's not an oath keeper or any of these other things. He just hears his president that he follows who says, you know, he's being prosecuted. He was like, you know, he's not an oath keeper

or any of these other things. He just hears his president that he follows who says, come on January 6th, he finds gets a ride the next day, he goes, and then he's listening and he says, come to the Capitol. You know, his president tells him to go to the Capitol so he goes to the Capitol and he's convicted. He's being prosecuted.

And I'm like, to me, that was sort of outrageous that, you know The real guy who's who's doing this? I don't understand why he's why everyone's walking away from him You know what and and so I think Fanny Willis has a great case that she can bring is it perfect? No, but as I said there is no perfect case, you know and prosecutors do that all the time You know they they bring cases that aren't perfect. And, but it's a pretty great case and there's a lot of really good evidence. I think Fawni has less baggage in making her prosecutor discretion decision than Marik

Garland has. Marik Garland, a appointed by a Democratic president, has the weight of history on his shoulders about being the first attorney general to prosecute a former president for a crime. And that will go down in the annals of history. It should. I don't want to set up the punchline by anybody taking away from my question. I don't think he should.

He should. He should. But it is a different set. It's a different matrix that he should, he should. But it is a different set, it's a different matrix that he has to go through. And not that Biden's involved with that decision, but that that Garland has to go through in his, and his cabinet, Fawney Willis, she's a free agent.

She's in a state where a crime probably was an election crime was probably committed not just by Trump, but by a combination of Trump, Meadows, Lindsey Graham, and others who were all involved in that, in that pressuring. I mean, Raffinsberger and his CEO who testified powerfully in front of this committee three or four sessions ago. I think that, you know, the takeaway on that was, was tremendous. So go funny, because I think, that, you know, the takeaway on that was tremendous. So go funny, because I think, as you said, it's gonna take Garland a long time in his DOJ

to reproduce and replicate the evidence that's been, now, let me clear up something. Let me ask you, the Karen something, in Anthony too. I don't think they have to re-interview these people. If they have, if these files are turned over to them, you know what these witnesses are going to say. You may have asked another question or you might have gone down another line of inquiry, but you've got hours upon hours for every one of these thousand people that's going to be delivered to you with a ribbon

by the Gen 6 committee when this is all done. Why can't they just, yeah, there's a couple more they'd like to talk to, but why can't they just take that and move forward with their decision to indict? I mean, there's, you know, you would never do that. You want to interview witnesses yourself. You want to test them yourself. You want to test their credibility yourself. You want to cross-examine them. And, you know, also, it's a, you, you got to make proof of a case beyond a reasonable doubt. And so, every prosecutor, they, I mean, maybe they don't have to interview all thousand people because there are people who are not relevant. But the certainly the people who they've determined are the pieces of the puzzle towards prosecution, they'll use this testimony to sort of decide and create that roadmap and decide who to talk to and how to

approach them and whether it's through subpoena or some other way, perhaps you compel testimony and you immunize certain people. And so they'll use the information that was gleaned from these interviews to make those decisions, but they're going to want to interview pretty, they're going to want to interview and test the witnesses themselves when they do this investigation and see if it holds up and that this is actually direct evidence that's admissible. You know, just one thing I wanted to mention and get your thoughts on was, you know, in the beginning and the first few hearings, the charges that people were mostly talking about

were these conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding. And that's where you had to prove this sort of he knew and his intent. But the more that we get into his the the later hearings, the more I think that seditious conspiracy and incitement to insurrection is on the table. And there, even if he thought he won, even if he thought the election was, you know, somehow he won. You can't point an angry mob locked and loaded, that you summon, that you know our arm, that you know our violent, that they're chanting my, you know, hang my pants and you're saying he deserves it. You know, you can't. That's like pointing a weapon and shooting that weapon at the Capitol. You know, a lot to do that. We always thought that. You've used that phrase before. Now we have actual evidence that he was told that they were armed and dangerous, did

nothing to harm them. In fact, wanted them armed and dangerous and attending the rally. And knowing that, which is how you described it, pointed it in the direction. That's a crime. I agree with you. That is where I think Lisa Monaco and the Department of Justice based on Cassidy Hutchinson is now focused at least based on the reporting that's out there. You know, the funny thing is you know what they might do, depending on what the evidence is from today, they could just get them on witness intimidation. Like they might just pick an easy small thing.

That's what they would end up doing. Let me hear that. Let me hear from you. Isn't that what happened with Nixon, you know, fundamentally, it's like fundamentally? It's like, you don't go for the crime itself. It's trying to cover up the crime. And I feel like, I mean, all of this, just hearing you as lawyers go, you know, well, is that a crime? And how do they prove that to crime? It's like, are you kidding me?

Like, this is like, because Dillion crimes here. Hey, man, maybe it would be easier to prove what's not a crime. And I kind of feel like we've, this is maybe my perspective coming from Europe where we have this European Court of Human Rights and it's all about doing the right thing. Doing the right thing is baked into our unwritten constitution. A lot of people don't understand how Britain has a constitution, but it's unwritten. And people are like, well, how do you, how do you

make that work? It's like it just does. And it's because our country is so old. And it's, it has evolved. And, you know, as a country evolves, it's laws and a feeling about living in that country and how you behave is baked into the very fabrica of the culture. And America is a very young country and it doesn't have that. So it relies on case law and it relies on these moments to rewrite history, I guess. And so I understand why the committee is doing this. They want to bake this into the history books, right? They want to put this on record. But for me, as a someone with a moral compass, it doesn't, I just cannot see how we're having to do

all of this stuff and bring in all of these witnesses and make all these people have to regurgitate. I mean, Michael Follon, I think his name was, who's the hipster policeman. I think he gave the most incredible testimony. He was like on the first edition because he voted for Donald Trump. He was a guy who, you know, he looked like a Trump supporter. You know, he had his beard and his tattoos and he was like ready for Trump. And then he sees the light once he realizes what's going on. And then he gets tazered with his own weapon and ends up suffering major injuries and trauma and gives the most compelling testimony. These are the people, you know,

for me, that's where it could have stopped. I didn't need to hear from White House insiders just hearing from him was enough for me. And I think I've said this before, but it's like to me, there are two crimes here. There is the there is the distraction, which is the riot. That was distracting from what was going on with the state legislators and with, you know, getting Mike Pence to kind of do his bit, which he didn't do. And he's hailed as a hero when all he did was his job, you know. bit which he didn't do and he's hailed as a hero when all he did was his job, you know. And so I feel like mixing both of them in because I don't think most people know what an insurrection really is. It's not a word that you would use in the kind of common vernacular. And consequently,

I see the insurrection as that kind of overturning of the election, which was Trump and it was banning and it was all of those people involved. The guy who ran over stock, you know, like this, all this kind of, you know, Michael Flynn over stock guy over stock guy, but then you've got this misdirection. You've got this riot. You know, like let's, it's, it's, it's classic criminality created distraction over here while we do the serious business over here. And so I see it as two very different things. And I feel like throwing it all into one. Kind of, as Karen was saying, it's like you're blaming these rioters who are just doing what they're told for the bigger business, which is the

fact that Trump's trying to overturn the election. I see it a little bit differently, but not much. I think we'll end up in the same place. I am buying in, and I think Liz Cheney did a good job in the very first session and giving the architecture for how they were going to present. I do see the increasing, if you were to map this, chart this, the increasing frustration of Trump in trying all of these strategies and none of them working, you know, let's try the lawsuits and you go O and 63. Let's, you know, surrounded by these crazy lawyers

who no one's ever heard of and most of them are now disbard or soon to be disbard, that doesn't work. Let's pressure the state electors and the legislators there. We've got some, we've got some people that like us in there. Let's get, let's make presentations there through the same people, through Giuliani, through Powell, Lin Wood. We don't talk about him anymore. And that fails because they have a backbone

and they have a moral compass, as you like to say, Anthony. That doesn't work. And then let's pressure the Department of Justice and let's, in the last hours in gasp of the presidency. Let's replace the acting attorney general with the guy five down five floors below. Is it environmental guy? Yeah. The environmental guy who patched up a lot. He said that what are you? What do you do? Yeah. Go back to doing that. Not this. And then they were going to make they were going to make crazy Sydney Powell, some special special counsels. Yeah, whatever it is. And so all this is failing. And he's running

out of time. Eventually he's going to be the ex president. And he's clinging to that power. And the last thing between December the 18th, the Willard Hotel, battle stations with the two groups of crazies there, you know, Stone and Flynn in general in one room, and Giuliani and Bannon, and the others in the other room, with Meadows sort of at the top as the point guard coordinating all those things. That's not working. And so he wants to use, this is it, man. It is now, you know, just flame throwing, carpet bobbing the Capitol in a last ditch, literally last ditch effort to use pitchforks and torches to overturn the democracy. So I didn't see it as two different events. I just saw it as the desperation, the desperate act of a man whose power by dint of the clock was going to expire any moment.

And this was the last thing bonfire. Well, it was him finding out that Pence wasn't going to play his games. Absolutely. So that's when he rewrote the speech to kind of incite this violence because it was up to us. You say it was like the 11th hour. And you know, he didn't care for these people. He didn't care that they were armed. He didn't care that they were going to, people were going to die.

I got bad news for these people. And then I want to talk about the 187 minutes that Karen's talked about in prior podcast, because I think that Lord knows what was going on for those 187 minutes. But I have enough elbow interaction with Trump having grown up in this area in New York, having known about the Trump organization from the very beginning. He's probably the only person in America that lost money running a casino and his families. He would not allow, I hate to burst their bubble. The people that are his supporters, he wouldn't have allowed to shine his shoes or open his limousine door at any point in his career.

He's a silver spoon kid who's been living off a daddy's money. He took daddy's $100 million and made it into $50 million. And then, which is hard to to do and then inflated his Own ego and his licensing and all of that. He's never built a darn thing except for one that he built with daddy's money and connections The Hyatt in New York everything else He elites isn't he he is the elite that he claimed in his campaign. He was a middling He was a middling. He was a middling real estate developer of no

real account that would you would not put in the top, you know, every year, there's a huge real estate conference, Rembe in New York. He could barely be in that room because he wasn't really a developer. If it wasn't for the apprentice, keeping him as a some sort of pseudo celebrity, the way the Kardashians are, the way the Hilton sisters are, he wouldn't even have been president of the United States. So these people that have transformed their blue collar, you know, right wing, primarily not college educated because that's his largest supporter, 50-year-old white guy, he would never have let that person within 10 feet of him at any other point in his queer

step 20 ran for president. I think we're going to find more out about that, because I think eventually, if he ever did take the stand, I mean, I want to see him in Guantanamo Bay, but I mean, if he ever did take the stand, and he was asked questions about his base and his supporters, I think he might accidentally start insulting them. And because often that's what these people do, you know, they just like it all spews out and he will literally throw anybody to the lion. So all of these people that have been, because this is just a fundraising thing, isn't it? This whole movement is to make money. He's making money now. He's selling merchandise, Kimberley's now selling stuff online.

She's got this new alternative to Zoom that she's set up, you know, that the family are now that they've come up with. It's called like Meet With Me or something. And I'm like, they are just gouging that these poor people that don't have any money, I mean, I wouldn't mind, but these people that they're stealing from are not rich. He's going to grift $100 million a year for the foreseeable future. Unless he's, like you said, less he's 11 worth or in Quenton, about that. Karen, what were you going to say when we interrupted? No, no, I just, my only concern is, you know, is there's this whole, it's not only an American problem, you know, this bright wing white supremacy kind of nationalist movement that you see in

Europe, you see in America, you know, there's an underlying issue that is still, even if you prosecute Trump, is still an issue that just, issue that just has to be dealt with and addressed because it's scary. I mean, it's amazing when you heard today, one of the gentlemen who testified saying caused him to leave was the fact that they were denying the Holocaust. And that was even too much for him. And you just think back to how did the Holocaust happen? And where were, like how did anyone let that happen? It's because there were so many people that were the fuel to the fire of the one person who did all the bad things. And that's sort of where we are, or where we're headed

with Donald Trump. But Florida is going to teach both sides of the Holocaust. Well, yeah, but you know, no, but speaking of Florida, you know, you prosecute Trump, you've got Ron DeSantis could be, you know, all I'm saying is is this this partly what's scary about this hearing is not just Donald Trump. It's it's it's a whole aspect of a certain type of belief system in America that's a little scary, you know, that this is here. Yeah, but it's always, unfortunately, pre-social media historically has always been there.

20% of America, I'm just using this as my own popo-pokki in prediction, for popo-pokki in statistic. 20% of America has always had off-kilter views. It's just that they haven't been amplified and personified in a president like in Donald Trump, but that we saw the beginning. But now they can, but they control the Supreme Court too now. But well, what are right? But we saw the beginnings of this with the tea, even before the Tea Party movement. You go back to Lee Atwater and what they did because the Republican Party generally is a narrow-based party and they

can't win unless they make abortion, gay marriage, gay's in the military, wedge issues front and center. They can't win otherwise. But look, I'm not, you have to know your history. Your history is prologue. I've seen the videos of the American Nazi party holding a rally in Madison Square Garden in the 1940s. You know, it's not that long ago and there is a group out there whether they're QAnon, whether they're John Birch, whether they're anything the Southern poverty unit is following is, is, is there? And they all kind of coalesced behind this president.

And the Republicans went along with it in this unholy alliance in order, as Anthony said, to get power in a naked fashion. And yeah, because they have the able to have the votes do that. And they never have the votes. If you don't have the votes, because, you know, if you poll America, America is quite a progressive country full of progressive people. And, you know, people don't want abortion band and people don't. And, and so when you've got this kind of minority rule, which is both in the Supreme Court

but also in the Republican party. That is a recipe for the civil war that I've been talking about. And I can't imagine what the alternative is because we look at this hearing as being something that is the right thing to do at the right time and the right people are in charge. But if you watch Fox News on Newsmax or any of these other networks and see how it's being portrayed, it's a bipartisan hearing. And yet, even the left-leaning media is not reporting it as bipartisan when it is because they're denying these two Republicans and calling them rhinos, but you can call them rhinos or they like, or you like, they're still Republicans. And so we, I think we are in danger.

The media supports this. You know, the media is a right leaning, you know, conservative leaning even CNN and all of these networks. They are, they need the fight. It's all about money. It comes down to money. And so they'll say anything to facilitate their business. Well, on your point, I was just talking to a friend of mine who is a moderate Republican about all of a sudden spontaneously in the last week is story after story, including in the mainstream media about Biden being too old for the position. It's not, it started with Fox and Newsmax and Tucker Carlson. Now it's the New York Times. And now it's all the, they've all been co-opted or because, like you said, they're all about

the ratings. They're all about if it bleeds, it leads. So let's take out Biden. It's either that or there's Democrats that are fearful that we're going to lose big time, not just the midterms, but beyond and want to see him be a Lyndon Johnson and not run for a second term. But there was a price to this. Isn't there? There is a cost to hate speech and saying, even saying Biden's old and he's seen all and all this stuff, there is a price. It affects people. And I fear that we're seeing mass shootings and we'll see an increasing number of mass shootings because

it's almost like these far right or even just even right of center. They've still got weapons locked up at home. You know, there's 7 million AR-15 style rifles in circulation. I really fear that all of this misinformation on all channels, and I hate watching CNN because it's too over dramatized for a European like me where it's like, you know, the news should be just the facts. And it isn't. It's like, this is going to happen. And we're all going to die. And I'm like, ah, and so I genuinely think that America has become its own worst enemy. And it's got this kind of American exceptionalism, which says, you know, yes, we're mass shooting. And yes, our education is terrible. And yes, we've got no healthcare system, but we are the

greatest country in the world. And that repeating this rhetoric of being the greatest country in the world does not serve us in any way. I mean, America is 15th in terms of economic stability out of the top 40 countries, right? It's 27th in global social mobility. It's 21st out of 40 countries in social inequality within the economic system. It's 45th in the world in terms of press freedom. I mean, I have numbers in my head. You know, it's 24th in reading. It's 39th in math.

It's 24th in science. I mean, America is really on its knees in so many ways. And it be number number one in podcasts. Well, it's number one in incarceration. You know, I mean, it is, it is number one in something. Yeah. And that's the tragedy.

So I think like in terms of read, just stopping, resetting, nothing is going to change because Karen's right, everything goes back to racism. You know, it goes back to slave owners and landowners and the Wild West. And I just fear that the people that are watching this hearing who are on the right, whether they're on the far right or the, you know, they're, they just see this as being like Democrat stuff in the same way they see this as being like Democrat stuff. In the same way, they see climate change as being Democrat stuff. Well, whilst the city is burning around them.

Yeah. Yeah. I learned something today. I want Anthony Davis on the show more often. I like unshackled Anthony. Not the nonpartisan five minute news guy. I like the guy with opinions and well, spout alph and. I was going to say those to be able to rally statistics like that. That's a that's a that's talent. That's a

skill. He's a pie is a pilot. Well, and you know, something that my favorite statistic out of all of those was the the U.N. development programs, human development index. They said America was 17th in the world for quality of life. And I think that quality of life is actually a really good metric with which to measure ourselves. Now I moved from England because I knew that here in the US I would have a better quality of life. But I chose to live in California, which is in itself a bubble and the sun shines all the time and people are kind of fake nice to each other. And I would rather someone was fake nice than really nasty. So, you know, my perspective

is one of quality of life. And I just cannot see how any of Trump supporters, their quality of life is no better now than it was before he got elected. Yeah. Karen, final word. You love that. By the way, I have the final words. By the way, before I say a final word, do you know a fun fact? Here we've got Anthony talking about all these incredible statistics and looking really impressive, and I'm about to give a fun fact. Do you know what Roger Stone's tattoo is?

Oh, God. No. I've seen it in that documentary about Roger Stone's tattoo is. Oh God. No. I've seen it in that documentary about Roger Stone, and I can't remember who it is, but it's disgusting. He's got the face of Richard Nixon. That's right. It's tattooed to his back. But it's his whole back. And he's got like big musk, because he's a bodybuilder. So he's got these weird elderly muscular shoulders with Nixon's face on it. Um, my, just my, my final, my, my final thought is, first of all, uh, Anthony, thank you so

much for joining us today. It was really fun. Uh, I hope we can do this again. And I think your perspective is an important one that people need to hear more often. I mean, we do, we live in this bubble that's United States and, you know, we think that we're the center of the world. And Hollywood perpetuates that, the media perpetuates that and everything else. And, you know, just having a perspective of countries that are much older than we are and who've been through it all and who've seen it all and who can sometimes be more civilized, but sometimes not. We could learn a lot from those perspectives. So the fact that you get up every day and you take the time to share those perspectives

that are different and but really important and really, really much needed is just very appreciated, appreciated and I appreciate you very much and I really enjoyed chatting with you today. Oh, so well put. So well put. I would just say finally, I love America as much as I love the UK and I think to critique your own country or the country that you've relocated to is because you love it. It's not because you hate it. It's not because you're trying to bring it down. And you moved. You moved what? A month after Donald

Trump, like, took, like, you know, you moved. You don't even know the, like, really good America. Like Obama America, like, that was a dream, you know, you love it. But it was, but it was a dream for you, maybe in people like you, but far, maybe a third or maybe more than a third, it was the worst, you know, to have this black guy in the white house just was like they could not comprehend it. I that's what I've had to learn because I too thought it was, you know, Obama was just like, was a Lissia. And actually for many, many people, we really need to get under

their skin. Why did they find that so offensive? And these are the lessons that I think we need to learn here. Yeah, and we're going to have you back to do that. We've reached the end of the midweek edition of Legal AF with Michael Popak and Karen Friedman Agnifalo and our special guest and our brother in podcasting. Anthony Davis, five minute news, and the weekend show, you can catch it all

on the Midas Media Network. Thanks again.