Latest / Dangerous Laughter / Trump Lawfare Exposed: Alex Swoyer on Courts, Power & Political Revenge

Transcript

Trump Lawfare Exposed: Alex Swoyer on Courts, Power & Political Revenge · Dangerous Laughter

• 0:01
  Speaker A: Dangerous laughter.
• 0:04
  Speaker B: Laughter.
• 0:06
  Speaker A: Dangerous. Danger.
• 0:10
  Speaker C: Laughter.
• 0:12
  Speaker A: Dangerous laughter.
• 0:20
  Speaker D: Danger.
• 0:25
  Speaker B: Laughter. Sa.
• 1:07
  Speaker A: Day 8 the Emergency Destruct system is now activated. The option to override detonation procedure has now expired. The ship will automatically destruct.
• 1:25
  Speaker D: One minute. And we are back. Another episode of Dangerous Laughter. I have a treat for you today, but Miss America's in the house today, ladies and gentlemen. Just remember, our job here is to transform horror into humor. Today we're going to put on our legal eagle hats because today's Dangerous guest is Legally Blonde with the brain of Antonin Scalia. She's the Washington Times editor at large, host of the podcast Court Watch, which showcases high stakes legal battles. If you try to come at her, she will lawyer you to death. And you just might like it. She is elegant and brilliant, author of the book Lawless Lawfare Tipping the Scales of justice to Get Trump and Destroy maga. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the always charming Alex Sawyer. Alex is in the house, everybody.
• 2:29
  Speaker A: Am I gonna live up to that introduction? That was incredible.
• 2:33
  Speaker D: Hey, look, you know, someone's got to take over for Letterman, Colbert, because they couldn't do their job. So that's what we're here to do. So I'm loving the book, you know, and this is one of these things I, you know, full disclosure, Alex is my longtime sister from another. Mr. And I mean, the book is amazing. And the funny thing about this book is you could write a new addendum about this book every day.
• 2:56
  Speaker A: I mean, I mean, you're not joking. I mean, how many sequels could we do? We could do one about the follow up to all the lawfare that Trump faced. Now that we see what's happening, I mean, even with the whole Eugene Carroll stuff back in the news, we could do a whole book on the lawsuits facing this administration. I mean, that's been historic.
• 3:16
  Speaker D: Absolutely. Well, well, let's, let's unpack a little bit of that, set it up again, because we had this woman that no one wanted to date, E. Jean Carroll. What, what is the latest development with that? Just to, just to kick us off.
• 3:30
  Speaker A: So it appears that the Trump Justice Department is investigating whether or not Eugene Carroll perjured herself in her lawsuits against President Trump over defamation. If you all remember, I think it was back maybe in 2019 when President Trump was president and he was accused of raping Eugene Carroll, when she, I think she wrote it first in like an article. When she put it out there, he was asked about it and he denied it, which, you know, he was president. It was news. It was his job to react. But Nonetheless, she sued him for defamation. And, and to my surprise, having studied defamation in law school, it was entertained. The courts, of course, in New York entertained this. So did the juries. And it's been something that's been litigated on and off since really. It's been going on for years. So the Trump Justice Department is taking a look at whether she's perjured herself. There's also, it appears, some sort of investigation into who's been funding some of her litigation. AJ There's a, basically a political activist who, who has launched some of these lawsuits, helped her fund her attorney's fees, all of that. And it looks like maybe that's part of this investigation as well.
• 4:41
  Speaker D: And look, here's the thing. Law, I mean, law, there, there's always been, you know, Democrats, media, some lawyers, some dumpster divers that have gone after pretty much every Republican president in the last year, really, since Eisenhower. Eisenhower was kind of the last one they left alone. You know, he probably had something to do with winning World War II that kind of left him alone. But since the OG came down the golden escalator, this term lawfare is now part of our vernacular. Yes, this is, this is something that, you know, I mean, I'm sure it had probably, I mean, I didn't go to law school, but I was raised by a lawyer. And it's just something now that we, we use and it's kind of all understood what it is. I have never in my life seen a politician hunted in all the different ways that this man has been hunted. Now, lawfare is a big chunk of it, obviously. We've had assassination attempts. We've had rape allegations. We had Stormy Daniels nonsense. I mean, we've had every which way you could get the man, you know, crossfire, Hurricane, and on and on. I mean, so just for the people that don't know yet, what is Lawfare? Have Republicans ever used it themselves? And why will it, I guess, at least for the 21st century, because we're just going to trade blows here, I guess. Why is it going to be, why is it going to be with us from here on out? This word Lawfare.
• 6:21
  Speaker A: Yeah. So those are some things I touched on in my book. So, first of all, yes, like, Lawfare is basically using the courts to fight out political battles, something you usually would see on the campaign trail. You know, in America, we like to take our grievances to the ballot box, but lately it seems like everyone's bringing them into inside of a courtroom. And so one of the things we explore in lawless lawfare is this notion of, you know, using politics, political prosecutions, partisan law, lawsuits basically for political gain. And it's just when I've asked experts about this, AJ they say, you know, this is something that's existed, but the like, what we're seeing has exploded in the Trump era. It's just become, you know, like on steroids. And it seems like that's what Democrats thought was really their new, I guess you could say, tactic, going after this president, one of them so far, you know, there's been a lot of swings and misses. Obviously, I think the 2024 election is the best example of that. The results, the voters drastically pushed back on what they were seeing. I thought about calling the book overkill, because I think it didn't even Democrats were like, you know, how many prosecutions are we seeing? Georgia, New York? We had two from Jack Smith. And of course, you just mentioned the defamation lawsuits from E. Jean Carroll. And the list went on and on. The lawsuits at the Supreme Court trying to keep him off the ballot, citing the 14th Amendment, all of those. So that's really where the lawfare started. And it kind of escalated, unfortunately. And I'm not sure really if we can put the genie back in the bottle. One of the interviews I did for the book was Governor Ron Blevic. He talked about how he did time, he was since part pardoned. He. He referenced how he thought that that was one of the first political, I guess, prosecutions that he saw. Say I think it was Robert Mueller actually the under his leadership for him. So the same kind of people in charge using the same type of book. Yeah. And so, you know, his suggestion was maybe a presidential commission, a bipartisan one, to try to look at how to combat this political tit for tat that we're seeing spill into our justice system. But I'm not really sure if that's the answer. Part of me thinks maybe it's time for Republicans to step up and actually execute a judicial appointment, a judicial impeachment. We've talked about that with Judge Boasberg, but there's been some really activist judges that have played into this, and that's been problem.
• 8:53
  Speaker D: Let me ask you about this because I, and I know the Governor Blago. I actually helped him on his journey with his book that he's working on now that I think Skyhorse is going to publish. It's going to be wild. I mean, he wants to do like a musical about him himself dancing through jail, which I'm all for. And he should be in it, here's the thing, and he knows this in Chicago has a long history of this right around this time where, you know, there was this accusation of horse trading on the Obama Senate seat with him and the setup that was done on him. There were other examples of this that just predated right before this. And, and I'm thinking, I'm talking about the Scooter Libby situation as well. Right. So you have a certain type of character that comes to Washington. It's almost like there's some machine of these, you know, white collar dorks that want power. Comey comes out of it, McCabe comes out of it, Fitzgerald, Mueller, they're all the same type of, A lot of them are former, you know, federal prosecutors. And if you talk to the rank and file FBI guys and I look, I've represented a lot of them as a publicist. Some legends like John Legato who took down the Philadelphia mob and then chased down, you know, 911 terrorists and stuff, or Zachariah Moussa and so on, they say that, look, when most people, and Bongino will tell you this too, most people, when they join the FBI, it's not to come to Washington and sit in some swampy cubicle behind the venetian blinds and plot like Mr. Burns on who you're going to get next. And really that in order to have lawfare, you need to have, contrary to what John Adams said about having a nation of laws and not men, you have these men that are using lawfare and most of them, they donate to Democrats. But Trump is such a different sort of unicorn where you have had your traditional, you know, old girls club, the Bush people, some Reagan people that did not throw in with him in 2015. And they, some of them still refused to. So they're more than willing, I guess. And you and I always joke about how the swamp always wins, but we, you know, there, there is a group of people where you can't really tell what jersey they're wearing. They're the Lakers or the Celtics or you don't know what the hell they are.
• 11:30
  Speaker A: And they're wearing a jersey with a dollar dollar signs. I think that's the team they're on. Right. I mean, I guess that might be the best way to explain what you and I joke about, about this swamp that we're in.
• 11:43
  Speaker D: Right. So who are. But these types of people, these are the people you're writing about, they all seem to have the same type of pedigree. What creates, I mean, you know, it could be a cash register like you said. But what creates the mindset that, you know, look, there's tons of podcasts that go down rabbit holes, and we're not here to do that today. But these are real people, you know, was it Rod Rosenberg? They're all the same type of guy. Rosenstein, Rosencrantz and Gilden Stern are dead. I don't know what the hell his name was, the guy that replaced Comey, briefly. You know, where do they come from? What is their purpose? What do you think they think they're doing?
• 12:25
  Speaker A: Yeah, so, you know, I am. I guess you could. You could talk about this reference in the legal realm, like we are. We could also talk about it with politicians, too. I would like to think that, you know, all of them get started in their career with good intentions. They come to Washington, they think they're going to make change that they think is needed for the country. But personally, I think they end up drunk on power. This is, I would say Washington, D.C. is the most powerful city in the world, to be honest. So they all come here, they get a little whiff of that, and they love it and they want to stay in power. They also see, as I mentioned, dollar signs. It pays off to stay in power. And it's almost like an old guard. They don't want to let anyone new in that could threaten that power and money train that they're on. There was a few things that you mentioned that I wanted to drop, I jotted down since I have a little bit of add, but I thought it was important to touch on some of the, like, playbook that they use is. It's just kind of, you can see it. It's the same thing over and over again. You mentioned Governor Blagojevich. One of the things he's still fighting over is trying to release more of the tapes from that phone call that was so controversial that he went to prison over. And the government has sealed those. I mean, you know, if you're a defendant, you should be able to present everything you can to free yourself or prove your innocence. That seems to be a running theme here. We know that. We saw that with January Sixers, if you recall. There was just the podium guy, Adam Johnson, I talked about, I talked to him recently. He's going to try to make a claim with the weaponization fund. He mentioned how there was video, he says, that shows him not having left the. The Capitol with the podium. He carried it around, but he didn't leave. He didn't leave with it, but he was accused of stealing. And so that was another Thing that he says, you know, he should have been able to use that or that shouldn't have been withheld from him, and that was a claim he's made. Also, you know, think about Trump with, like, the Eugene Carroll thing. We just mentioned at the top of the show that the, the political individual who's been helping Eugene Carroll fund this litigation, which I guess is now reportedly under investigation. You know, I don't think, if I remember right from my research from the book, I don't think President Trump's team, and they tried, was allowed to introduce that aspect in his, his trial, which is important. I mean, it would show the political nature of it, but I don't believe that was allowed. So it does seem like there's also, you know, these political actors that are, you know, masking themselves as being, you know, scales of justice. They have a similar playbook that if you look, there's, there's, there's similarities between some of these political prosecutions. And, you know, whenever you talk about people coming here and like, just what's, what is, how is their mind? What is in their mind? Like, why do they do what they do? I think of James Comey and I just, like, he is the embodiment of that. And it's like someone who, you know, if you're an FBI director, kind of like being a reporter, you want your name in the byline, you want it behind the scenes. You don't want to be the story, and he just wants to be the story. And I do think that that's kind of like a running theme, too, that once they reach a certain level of attention or power, they just become consumed with it and can't stay away. And then they end up getting themselves in more and more trouble.
• 15:49
  Speaker E: For sure.
• 15:50
  Speaker D: For sure. Mr. Seashell's walking on the beach there. Doesn't. Doesn't know what any of those numbers mean when they're next.
• 15:55
  Speaker A: I found it.
• 15:56
  Speaker D: AJ I mean, God, he's running around the bathrooms of Union Station with a Sharpie marker, writing all kinds of things, signing his name. Well, listen, we're going to take a break real quick. We're here with my, my good friend, my old friend, my lovely friend, Alex Sawyer. She's got a great book, Lawless Lawfare. This is dangerous. LAUGHTER we will be right back. In today's breaking news, the Curse of the Bearded lady by AJ Rice has already hit number one on Amazon new releases and it is only on pre sale.
• 16:26
  Speaker E: You should be women. And yet your beards forbid me to interpret that you are so Someone once said comedy is the art of turning horror into humor. That's the essence of the curse of the bearded lady. Laughing in the face of madness before it devours us whole. The curse of a bitten lady.
• 17:04
  Speaker A: And now, please enjoy another elegant celebrity endorsement of dangerous laughter with A.J.
• 17:11
  Speaker C: rice.
• 17:12
  Speaker B: A.J. rice, it's Simon Kaguanjala here in Uganda. Just asking, why are you gay? Yes, we know you're hosting a podcast, but much of it, the content, the way you host, the way you talk, is gay in the first place. What is Dangerous Laughter? And how come your opinion is so gay? Do you know that no one wants to hear your gay opinion? And who cares what you think? You cannot host a show. A.J. rice, you are so gay, and your guests are gay. You dress like a gay boy band with different color suit jackets. Your audience cheers you on because they are gay. And perhaps you come off now as the gayest podcast host in the entire America. Dangerous Laughter to me sounds like a secret gay club. Do you perform natural obligations? We should be telling America to ignore your gay opinions because you are gay.
• 18:34
  Speaker A: This endorsement has been brought to you by collapsing standards everywhere. And now back to Dangerous Laughter.
• 18:42
  Speaker E: The management of this station are clueless. You're listening to Dangerous Laughter with AJ Rice on the Publius Media Network.
• 18:54
  Speaker D: We are back on Dangerous laughter. I am A.J. rice. I am with Alex Sawyer, author of Lawless Lawfare. Just remember, we are unfit for polite company. Although Alex is very polite. She's very. She's polite, but don't, you know, don't cross her.
• 19:08
  Speaker A: You know, it's funny, A.J. we still get invited to the parties. They haven't yet. To, like, not include us.
• 19:15
  Speaker D: That's true, that's true, that's true. It's like we're like the Catholic. The last Catholic gangster standing. You know, it's funny. There's this story that I always refer to of the dogs of Chernobyl. The dogs of Chernobyl. These are. These wild dogs are running around this radioactive territory in. In the Ukraine, and they've started to develop superpowers and immunities to all kinds of things. I mean, they. I don't know whether they can fly, but they can glow. And they are. They're basically superpowered dogs because they have radiation poisoning. Alex and I like to joke because we didn't just show up when Trump showed up. We've been here a while that we're some of the last dogs of Chernobyl here.
• 19:56
  Speaker F: That.
• 19:56
  Speaker D: That. That everyone has left. We are still here, and we have not been Totally, you know, infected by the vapors of the swamp and the establishment. And for some reason, people keep hiring us to do jobs, so, you know, we're more than happy to take their money. So we're. Look, we're back with. With Alex, Miss America here, and Chris, grab me this. This graphic here. I'm gonna pull up.
• 20:21
  Speaker A: He's holding the book there now.
• 20:22
  Speaker D: There is. He's holding it, baby. I'll give you that image when we're. When we're done here. I mean, you can't get a better endorsement than this. I mean, this is. This is massive.
• 20:31
  Speaker A: Right? You're right. And I am so grateful. I don't even know how this happened, to be honest with you. There was. I. I've been doing different events where I highlighted, um, some of the aspects in the. The Lawless law fair. One of them happened to be. I think it was. This is where I think he got the book. There was a pro life event down in Naples, Florida. I went to Ave Maria School of Law down in Naples. I know you're familiar with the area, AJ but it's a very conservative Catholic school. They had a. One of the alumni that I graduated with had a pro life event at the Ritz Carlton. I believe it was somewhere along the coast there, one of those venues. It was beautiful, and tons of people came, and it happened to bring in some of, like, the members of Mar a Lago. And I spoke specifically about. There's a little bit of the book about the prosecution from the Biden DOJ against, you know, pro life protesters, how we saw the use of the Face act against them. Justin, there was also the. The one. This is one of my favorite stories. The father in Pennsylvania who was protecting his son who was being attacked, yet he was the one that was prosecuted for violation of the Face act outside of an abortion clinic. The local police did away with the case, but of course not. The Biden doj, they raided this guy's house at gunpoint, you know, went after him. Mark, how is who I'm talking about. You can look him up. But anyways, so we were talking about this book at this event, and this woman walked up to me and she's like, you know, I'm going to Mar A Lago tomorrow, and I usually sometimes get to see the president, and I have a few things I'm going to drop off for him. I'd love to include one of your books. And so, you know, I think that she must have. She must have sent it there because it was his tweet was actually over. I believe it was like either New Year's Day or the holiday where he was down at Mar a Lago. So maybe that's how he got a glimpse of the book and read it. But, you know, it's such an honor that he did tweet that out and I did. Is a defense of him. It's a defense of all the litigation that came after him. And not just him, his supporters, you know, the pro lifers. There's also a couple Aja Texas that protested the Biden campaign bus. And the Democrats there went after them under the Ku Klux Klan act, trying to claim they violated, interfered with the right vote. They, you know, this little, this little couple in Texas had to spend $300,000 on legal fees. Isn't that terrible?
• 22:50
  Speaker D: Unbelievable. And that brings us to this weaponization fund that obviously the media Democrats are upset about. But a few, a few sort of linguini spine Republicans are a little upset about it too, including I think the Republican from the district that I am from, originally in Pennsylvania, I believe I work for the gentleman's brother who has since passed. So tell me about this thing though. Blagojevich, I guess is gonna try John Eastman. Some of these people are maybe Papadopoulos. There's people that are gonna try to get a little taste of this 1.8 billion dollar anti weaponization fund. And I guess the IRS is going to oversee this thing.
• 23:30
  Speaker B: So.
• 23:30
  Speaker A: Okay, so this seems to be just to break it down for anyone that hasn't been following it closely. President Trump had sued over the, like, had sued the IRS over the leaking of the tax documents. Remember that? Yes, tax returns. And so part of the settlement was this fund that was supposed to be set up for those who have been dinged by this lawfare, as you will. And what we're seeing now is people like you mentioned John Eastman, who has basically just been vilified. I mean, California Bar association going after him, stripping him of his right to practice law. He is featured in the book. He talks about all the different lawsuits he's been facing. I mean, one is like, what's terrible about this is like some individual that just was upset about what John Eastman advised. The President launched a lawsuit against him, not even a lawyer, and just rambled on and on. I think it sued John Eastman plus Mark Zuckerberg, which if you remember 2020 election. They were not on the same team. So I'm not really sure how that goes. But, you know, the courts entertained it. He said, John Eastman told me, I think it cost him like 40 grand just to get rid of that lawsuit. It was terrible. So he's somebody who's talked about entertaining or analyzing how he could go about using the fund. I know Blagojevich has mentioned it. I talked to you just previously about Adam Johnson, the podium guy, who said, you know, he has. If he has thousands of articles out there about him, that he is a thief. And he's like, I didn't steal the podium. I carried it. There's pictures of me carrying it, but I didn't take it out of the capital. And. And so he says, you know, that he wants to file for 5 million because he spent a quarter of a million just on legal fees trying to defend himself. And he said he, you know, unlike a lot of those guys, if you remember, A.J. like, he said, I had enough money to hire a lawyer. There's so many guys who didn't. So they ended up doing so much time because they didn't have forces and
• 25:16
  Speaker D: all, some of the J6 people. And, and I saw that, you know, J.D. vance was pushing back on some of the complaints saying, you know, Hunter Biden wants to apply. Hunter Biden can also apply. So this isn't. This isn't just a Republican thing, obviously. And, you know, I guess there's all kinds of people that may try to apply. Oh, I got kicked off of Twitter. I got kicked off of Twitter.
• 25:42
  Speaker A: Why not? It can be case by case. And to your point, I'm not sure who yet who's overseeing it. There's supposed to be five individuals who from the doj, and I think Blanche is one of them. The question is, is, you know, are they going to be Trump DOJ people or careerists?
• 26:01
  Speaker D: Well, right. Well, we got some careerist people like this Brian Morrissey, pencil neck. He was a Treasury lawyer. He quit right. As the government settled his IRS suit. So there's people that are leaving because of this. I'm sure. You know, I'm sure they're all part of the middle management.
• 26:17
  Speaker A: I'm not losing sleep over that.
• 26:20
  Speaker D: No, no, not at all.
• 26:21
  Speaker B: Not at all.
• 26:21
  Speaker D: Now, one of the other. And look, I love. I. I love Eastman. We have full disclosure. Done some work with him over the years through the Federalist Society. Blagojevich. I know one of the people that gave you a blurb for your book is the current Attorney General of Texas, Ken Paxton. He loves the book, Lawless Lawfare, details the establishment's tactics in usurping the court system in an attempt to score political points. And he goes on from There, it's fantastic. Now he, this week or recently, I should say, he won a primary against John Cornyn and we've got a little, a little bit of his acceptance speech here. I'm going to hit it to the
• 27:02
  Speaker F: people in this room, to the people watching at home, and to the people of the great state of Texas tonight, we just made history. President Trump is the leader of our party and his endorsement in this most power is the most powerful force in politics. And I'm honored to have his support and I look forward to working with him in the Senate to deliver for Texas. Tonight. We just sent a Texas eyes message to Washington. I said it in March and I'll say it again now. Today, change was on the ballot and change won. Let me be clear, this is not just my win, this is your win. We just proved that this Senate seat doesn't belong to Washington, it belongs to you, the hard working men and women of this state.
• 28:06
  Speaker D: So, so he, look, he came and he didn't just win, he clobbered him. What is your take on what exactly happened there in Texas, A.J. you're from there originally.
• 28:16
  Speaker A: I could do a whole show on this. Okay. Like, okay, if we're going to start, let's start with just the lawfare aspect and then let's get into like where we are now. Okay. So one thing that people have tried to ding Paxton on is that he's faced know, an impeachment. Back in Texas. There was the FEC thing, I believe or sec it was, he was prosecuted there, had to withstand. They went after him and of course a Democrat county in Texas, there's been the allegations of his affair, divorce, all of that. Well, so he talked about it in the, in an interview with me for the book and he basically said, you know, it was, and if you're from Texas, you understand like me that there is the Bush guard, the Republican Party in Texas. You know, a lot of people think of it as like it's such a red state, like very pro Trump. It, it's a Bush state. It was, we're turning the page. And so what you saw is Ken Paxton basically a politician of the MAGA wing coming into to being right and like rising the ranks in Texas. And you had some of those Bush people who did not like that very much controlled the legislature and he's been having to fight that. So that's kind of how he presented what happened to him in terms of the, the litigation he's faced to me. And that's why it's featured in the book. And yes, he endorsed it. He's been. He's been very. He's one of those politicians. I hate to use the word politician, but he's somebody who you can. He's so transparent in terms of, like, asking questions. He gets back to you right away. His team is amazing, very thorough. I covered John Cornyn, you know, in the Senate, too, and I have to be honest, he was very approachable. He would talk, but it's the turning of the page. I really think it's symbolic. What's happened in Texas, you had the more establishment candidate, John Cornyn, and then the more MAGA candidate, Ken Paxton. And I was kind of surprised when President Trump seemed so at first that he was going to endorse Cornyn simply because Corn. Cornyn is the type that really walks that line. During the impeachment trials at the Capitol, you know, he could criticize President Trump without actually voting to convict him. So he always kind of, you know, tiptoed each side where Patson, if you remember, he was the first state attorney general that filed a lawsuit at the supreme court challenging the 2020 elections results in defense of President Trump at the time. So he's always kind of stood with the president. I think that also the energy on the ground was 100% with Paxton. So when people here in Washington, as you know, AJ Kept saying, oh, you have to elect Cornyn, otherwise this Texas is going to go blue. You know, it's all noise here. I don't. It's not accurate. It's not reflecting of what's going on in the ground. So I think President Trump probably thought he needed to switch horses because he wants to have a winning record.
• 31:05
  Speaker D: Yeah. And look, it's taken Trump, you know, over 10 years to magnify the RNC, Magafi, the House of Representatives, magnify the US Senate, and certain states were holding on for dear life. Texas, this might have been the final sort of last stand of the Alamo here for the. The Bush clan. I even think George P. George P. I think even tried to run for attorney general against Paxton not long ago.
• 31:30
  Speaker A: He did. And I think that's when a lot of this lawsuits and stuff was there was part of it.
• 31:35
  Speaker D: You know, he's got.
• 31:36
  Speaker A: If you look at the years, it kind of correlates. But to your point, I mean, there's still some states that are resisting. Like, think about some of the ones. South Carolina, Alabama, they're not going ahead and moving forward with redistricting after the president has pushed forward with that. There still seems to be Some old guard out there. But, yeah, I think that's really what you saw with Texas. There's all this noise. Oh, it can go blue. You know, this is.
• 31:58
  Speaker D: They play that game every time. Every time Ted Cruz. Every time Ted Cruz, we're George Soros money. We're going to flip Texas blue. It's a fantasy. It's like Paul Bunyan's tall tales. They try it every time. They don't realize the Hispanics in Texas know how to say George Washington in Spanish. And they don't. They just escape some dump. They certainly don't want Texas to become one. You know, I think about how Trump has slowly turned some of these states. And, you know, you got Vivec running in Ohio. The first person who sort of rejected Trumpism was John Tasek. He's the sitting governor of Ohio. Ohio was hosting the, the convention in 2016, and he didn't even go right. So these types of characters had to be scalped one at a time. And it, you can see, ladies and gentlemen, this takes a long time. I know we all want to be instantly gratified, why isn't this moving faster, you know, with anything. Right. The Iran war or Trumpism, whatever it is. Right. You know, hurry up, get D Day over with. But, you know, you have an entrenched power, and in a lot of ways, in a lot of ways, Reagan had to deal with some of this himself. You know, the Eisenhower and Nixon and Ford people were around a long time. He had to cut a deal with the Bush people to kind of bring the establishment over. I mean, they called him the California Mafia, him and him and me said Schultz and, you know, Cap and all the rest of them. So. But here's the thing about all of it I find interesting. You have these people like Cornyn losing their primary. People like Cassidy. Yeah.
• 33:36
  Speaker A: You just mentioned as right.
• 33:38
  Speaker D: And Louisiana losing primary. And I may not get another opportunity to, to just tell this story. And I'm going to take a quick break. But I just want to remind, because Corn is not going to be around any, you know, he's not going to be here to me to kick around anymore. Cordon was in charge once upon a time of the nrsc, which is the National Senatorial Campaign Committee. And he, this is his judgment. He chose back in 2010, I believe, to endorse Charlie Crist, who was the sitting governor of Florida for, for a Senate seat, a Senate primary in Florida instead of, ladies and gentlemen, your current secretary of State.
• 34:18
  Speaker A: I remember your, your years are right because I was in law school at the time down there. And yes, Marco Rubio was extremely popular.
• 34:27
  Speaker D: So, Cassidy, you know, nice. Nice knowing you, Cornyn. Going on the ash heap of history. None of you will be remembered. Donald Trump, on the other hand, picking a bunch of winners. We're going to take a break. We're going to come back on the Other side with Alex Sawyer. Her new book, Lawless Law Fair. Look out, everyone. We'll be right back.
• 34:46
  Speaker C: I'm spiritually aligned with revolution. I don't see color unless it's white. Then I see genocide. The Black Lives Matter support group rejected me again, even though I wrote an apology letter to Harriet Tubman. They said my white privilege energy was too aggressive. Can you believe that? Every day I wake up and hate that I was born in America. I even moved to Venezuela for two weeks. But Uber Eats didn't work, so I moved back. And now I just sit and meditate on my colonizer shame. I breathe through my white shame. I meditate on how to destroy capitalism while I order everything on Amazon Prime. I have no brain of my own now and believe everything the fake news media feeds me. I am the Woking dead.
• 35:41
  Speaker E: Stay locked in with the man who slayed the Woking dead. This is dangerous Laughter with AJ Rice on the Publius Media Network. You should be women. And yet your beards forbid me to interpret that you are so. Someone once said comedy is the art of turning horror into humor. That's the essence of the curse. Hearse of the bearded lady laughing in the face of madness before it devours us whole. Nothing in living memory has been funnier or more horrifying than a movement convinced there are 72 genders. Boys have a penis. Girls have a vagina. The curse of the bearded lady. The curse of the bearded lady. The Trans Mafia has whipped America's sanity. It's Monty Python by way of Mengele. Absurd theater with real victims. I'm not here to conduct a medical examination of the Trans Mafia. This is a cultural autopsy. If Billy Shakespeare could write tragedies, histories and comedies, why can't I? The radicals refuse to surrender their gender mats. Stranglehold on America's vital institutions. This book will show how we got here, how we fight back, and how the Democratic Party's obsession with mainstreaming the bearded lady will doom it to political extinction.
• 37:19
  Speaker A: Oh, what happened? I mean, when I.
• 37:21
  Speaker C: As I watched it, I thought, oh, my God, he's having a stroke.
• 37:25
  Speaker A: And it scared me to death. Wow, I'm laughing. I know I shouldn't laugh, but like you know, Dr. Jill. Dr. Jill and her expertise there.
• 37:35
  Speaker D: Absolutely, Absolutely. We don't know what kind of doctor she is. Still. Whoopi Goldberg is still trying to figure that out on the View as well.
• 37:42
  Speaker A: I don't think she has an MD I think she has a BS behind her name, AJ that's right.
• 37:48
  Speaker D: That's right. That's right. Exactly. I'm with you. So, so, so here's, here's what's going on, ladies and gentlemen. We are here with Alex Sawyer. We're talking about her book, Lawless Lawfare. This is dangerous. Laughter. I am A.J. rice. So Dr. Jill, the diaper changer. And you know, Alex and I know a little bit about changing diapers, but not adults. And so she's on cbs and, you know, she's breathlessly saying, I've never seen Joe like this. I've never seen him like this since. She never saw him like this when he was in the basement, when he was falling off bikes, when he needed flash paper on the floor so he could find his way, little arrows of flash, little flashing on the floor to find his way around the debate stages. She's never seen it. And, you know, she's obviously when he
• 38:35
  Speaker A: needed his little auto pen either. Right?
• 38:38
  Speaker D: That's right. She's referencing the, the debate where Trump, you know, did the final Mortal Kombat decapitation. So. Which brings me to this news story that the Biden team is suing the, the DOJ over these audio to keep these audio recordings secret. Can you explain to the audience what exactly they're doing and why?
• 39:02
  Speaker A: Yes. Okay, so this one is, I just, I, I don't mean to be dismissive of her comment.
• 39:10
  Speaker D: This is dangerous. Laughter. You could say whatever the hell you want on here.
• 39:13
  Speaker A: It's just totally like, you know, I don't call people liars, but it's just, I mean, like, it doesn't add up. So, for example, do you remember the Robert her, the special counsel who was investigating Biden's potential use or collection of classified documents that he kept in his garage right next to the Corvette or whatever? Yeah, yeah. The notion was, is that he disclosed some of this classified information to his ghostwriter that was investigated, Robert Her. Okay. Robert her, during his hearing, if you remember, in the report, came out and said basically that, you know, he, Biden is like an old man, a sympathetic old man who has memory problems that a jury would never convict. So part of the memory problems, I think it was either in his testimony or in the actual report. Somehow it came out that he had Trouble even remembering his son, Bose. I think the day that when he died, it just was. It begged the question of why are we not looking into the President's mental health? And it follows all of his gaffes that have continuously happened. And so, you know, the fact that she says she's never seen him like this or was so surprised, it just, that doesn't add up, given what we already heard from Robert, her and what the American public saw and anyone paying any attention knew. So, you know, like, for example, that debate in July when what she was being asked about, if you followed closely enough, you know, you weren't really surprised by it. You talk about that. We're used to changing diapers, you and I, with our toddlers. Well, I don't know about you, but I know pretty confident yours and my toddlers can pretty much communicate better than Joe Biden was able to do the majority of the time. So, you know, that's what's going on, is he's trying to sue the DOJ to basically keep tapes and transcripts of what he discussed with his ghostwriter, all of that under seal. He doesn't want that out there.
• 41:07
  Speaker D: Right. Because it's evidentiary and it will. Hey, look, so it's, it's 70 hours of him mumbling about his Cream of Wheat and his Fruit Loops, and one wants to know where, you know, the, the, the, the chair lift is to get him upstairs and, And God knows what else. 70 hours of this stuff. Because this.
• 41:27
  Speaker A: Yeah. It would be, it would be completely damning. And to your point, you know, we know that there's some investigations. People are looking at the use of the auto pin. If you have those tapes out there, the transcripts too, and you see how damaging, I mean, that would go to his competency and the use of that. So, you know, I think. And that's, of course, unprecedented areas of law to explore, but it would give those critics of his ammunition. So he's fighting to keep that, you know, under wraps.
• 41:54
  Speaker D: Yeah. I mean, Trump has, you know, he's, he's dunking on people and he's trolling people, and he's basically saying that if this guy was shot and all these other people were running the government, and if we got 70 hours of him drooling on himself with an extension cord plugged into his head, you know, could that, could that, could. You could retroactively go back and say some of the stuff he did,
• 42:16
  Speaker B: you
• 42:16
  Speaker D: know, is null and void. Right.
• 42:18
  Speaker A: I mean, I guess we've never truly try. You know, I don't again, like, this is an area, what we've entered with this, like, realm of law fair you've talked about about is that there's just unprecedented, unprecedented nature of some of these, this litigation. Like, for example, when I covered them, trying to kick Trump off the ballot in some states, like Colorado, that was unprecedented. So the use of challenging the auto pin. And one of the reasons is it was so much seldom used with presidents that they didn't use it for what Biden seemed to have used it, you know, routinely. So, you know, an area that would have to be explored and we would see. And of course, I talk about this in the book, but it would depend on what jurisdiction you're in. I think if a judge would actually entertain the legal questions presented, some of them be like, oh, no, I'm, you know, appointed by a Democrat.
• 43:05
  Speaker D: Yeah, throw it out. But you could, you know, we could do what they do, and we could venue shop for that. Now, speaking of autopsies, and not autopsies of the cadaver former president, but the Democrats, they've got this guy in charge that no one's ever heard of. They couldn't, couldn't pick them out of a Where's Waldo book. This Jabroni, what's his name, Ken Martin or something. So they did. They did, yeah. They do an autopsy report on what went wrong in 2024 now, I guess the 70 hours of Biden mumbling and Kamala's, you know, how to lose a billion dollars in 100 days. Did they address any of this?
• 43:40
  Speaker A: 107. 107.
• 43:42
  Speaker D: All right, I'm rounding down. Go ahead.
• 43:45
  Speaker A: Okay. One of my favorite things about this is Ken Martin said that he didn't want to put that autopsy out there, if you remember, because it wasn't ready for prime time. Well, Ken Martin is not ready for prime time. Okay. So here's a couple of things that are missing from the autopsy, A.J. the fact that they, like, handpicked Kamala Harris to replace Joe Biden. The talk about Joe Biden leaving and suspending his campaign, not even really addressed. Okay. Like, the number one issue, even when you talk to Democrats, they're like, yeah, like, it would have been better to have an open primary. I think that they felt like, you know, Kamala was crowned the successor, and that just didn't sit well with their voters. And I don't think it would sit well. It wouldn't sit well with the Republican Party either. There's already been people talking about how wanting to have, like, a open primary and have, like, A robust debate ahead of 2028. I think that's great. That's healthy. Gaza, the word Gaza and Israel missing from the report. I mean, remember October 7th. That was during the campaign. Like, so problematic. They just, it looks like they wanted to bury their heads in the sand. Not to mention, okay, this is like one of those things that kind of gets some coverage but not enough. Is Ken Martin, under his leadership, the DNC is not doing well. Fund fundraising compared to Republicans. I think it was like looking at filings, like February, it was like they brought in 10 million or so. Republicans had 18. You look at cash on hand. RNC is like over $100 million. I think DNC is looking at like 15 or so. Something in that ballpark, AJ and they also have so much debt, millions of debt. I think it's almost like their debt outweighs the cash on hand, whereas the RNC has no debt. It kind of goes to show you how, you know, how when you look at blue cities, how they're run, red cities, that same with the RNC and dnc. Good comparison.
• 45:32
  Speaker D: So there's no, there's no juice. There's no leadership. There's no bench. There's no, there's no energy. The money's not flowing. The autopsy, you know, just showed us, I guess, all the different airline bottles that Kamala has in her suit jackets. And, you know, I think back to 06, when Pelosi took over. The first time they had. Rahm Emanuel was in charge, they had some juice. The Tea Party took over in 2010. They had some juice. You'd think at this point they would have a little more inertia, a little more energy, people willing to open up their. Their pocketbook. But I guess the stuff they double down on, like open borders and the 72 genders is still carrying over.
• 46:15
  Speaker A: Yeah, I don't know. I mean, it's like they don't recognize. They don't want to recognize the same. The mistakes they continually make. One of the thing was, is that they wrote on that the culture issue, the transgender identity. Right. Like, that is just such a damage to the Democratic Party. The thought that people want to pay for transgender surgeries for prisoners. I mean, that's one aspect protecting biological girls. I mean, like, for example, we're talking about a civil rights group that needs protection in girls sports versus a special interest group. They're taking the side of the special interest. It's just, it's. It's one of those things that didn't play well. I think that maybe some of the culture stuff was addressed, like, not necessarily a deep dive, but saying that, that they should have made their case against President Trump better. I mean, no shit. Like, you don't have to be some expert to know that when they talk,
• 47:04
  Speaker D: you should believe them. And we had two years here of Trump being back. And I mean, it looks to me they stand for Luigi shooting health care execs turning around planes filled with MS.13 coming to a cul de sac near you. They stand for burning Tesla dealerships. They stand for, you know, the trans musicals being funded by usaid. These are the things that have gotten them upset that they've actually shown a little bit of energy on.
• 47:30
  Speaker B: Right.
• 47:31
  Speaker D: And these are things that the independence can't stand.
• 47:34
  Speaker A: No, it's so out of touch. They want to take a stand to allow for the gender mutilation of children and pouring puberty blockers and everything into elementary school age kids.
• 47:46
  Speaker B: Right.
• 47:47
  Speaker A: I mean, they want to send drag queens in to do story hour. Some of these. You know, there was just the most recent Supreme Court case where you have Montgomery County, Maryland, trying to do LGBTQ readings to elementary school age and preschool age, having this. There's one pride puppy book where you had to pick out different vocabulary words and look at the picture, and it was like, drag queen leather underwear. I mean, who. You and I both have toddlers. They don't need that.
• 48:15
  Speaker C: That's.
• 48:15
  Speaker D: Yeah. My next book comes out, you know, soon, this summer, and it's called the Curse of the Bearded lady. And it, it chronicles the madness of the 72 genders. Democrats. Ken Martin lift up his skirt and there's 72 genders under there. So. So they got no money, they got no juice. They're, I guess they're banking on Gavin. We've sent people like my girlfriend Jasmine Crockett to the ash heap. Which brings me then back to the legal discussion here that involves the Supreme Court. So there's, and I know, you know, some of our friends on the right, you know, I don't know where they've, they've stuck their head, but it appears that a perfect storm is forming where Trump may actually gain seats. Now, I can't handicap that, but if you've got no energy, no money on the left, you got independents and libertarians. Although, you know, affordability and the Iran war could be problematic.
• 49:10
  Speaker A: I agree with you there. The gas prices, I mean, that's what people are talking about, you know.
• 49:15
  Speaker D: But tell, tell, tell the audience about the, the Louisiana versus the Calais decision and how that could, that could help The Republican Party even more in the midterms.
• 49:27
  Speaker A: So this decision is probably the biggest of the Supreme Court term. There's been a lot of focus on President Trump trying to end birthright citizenship, and the justice is weighing that. But this decision basically did away with, I won't say it did totally away with, but gutted parts of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. And basically, this was, you know, supposed to make it so representation was based on race, that minorities had representation in Congress. And so what you would have is now in present day, these Democrats would use that Voting Rights act, that section, to bring these kind of challenges to redistricting efforts. And so they would say, oh, you know, the way that these lines were drawn was done in a racist manner. Well, the way that lawsuit started in Louisiana was it was non black, it was non minority voters, white voters, who brought forward this. This challenge to what was now a new map that would have two minority districts. And one of them, if you look, was like, stretched all the way across the state. And they were like, this is just, you know, this is racism of itself. It's using race, and it's unlawful to do so in the same Supreme Court that's recognized that with affirmative action, has recognized that with map drawing, and basically said that if states can point to other reasons for how they draw their district lines, for example, trying to protect incumbents for partisan reasons, the court isn't entertaining partisan gerrymandering challenges, then it's lawful. So that's why you have a lot of states now using that decision and going back and revisiting their. Their maps. And there's been pushes to do that in South Carolina, Alabama. They've kind of been running into hurdles there. You've had Florida looking at doing it. It's been kind of a domino effect now, which might be able to help them net some seats. In your intro, I am worried about gas prices. I think Republicans need to do something about that. That's really like one of those home kitchen table issues that people are talking about ahead of the midterms, and it's not playing well for them historically, you know, the president in charge, the party in charge, doesn't usually retain seats with a midterm. So they do have an uphill battle. And I just filled up in D.C. and it was like six something, 679. Okay. It's insane.
• 51:37
  Speaker D: And it's just amazing because we're not even, you know, the Straits of Hormuz, the gays of Hormuz. We're not even using the oil that goes through there. We have our own oil. We just confiscated a bunch of Venezuelan oil as well. But look, these are where it's a, you know, look, oil prices, it's global, there's market forces, and you do need to get some of that under control. I think they're going to, to attempt to do that here as we go down the stretch towards the midterms. And, you know, I, I, I, I think about, you know, the south could possibly add, I've seen numbers from 10 to 14 seats because of this Calais decision. I, and I think about how a lot of what we're, we're talking about here is punishment from a time when the Democrats controlled the south, you know, the Bull Connor era of the south, you know, and, and, and even further back into, you know, Reconstruction after the Civil War. And I look at, you know, certain districts, like the last king of Clyburn, I call him there, North Charleston, Jim Clyburn's district, where he's got this little dollop in North Charleston, you know, which is his district. And there's no other Democrats elected statewide there, and there's no other members of the Congressional, their, their delegation. And I have heard the argument that it's best to just push, push all the Democrats into one spot, you know, dig a moat, build a wall, you know, flush the toilet and leave them there. Rather than breaking up that blueberry and trying to redistribute it. Are you weakening other districts around Clyburn's district versus just saying, all right, well, that one's shot. Let's just get the bulldozers out and put them in there.
• 53:24
  Speaker A: Yeah, I think that's an interesting theory. It's an interesting question. Like, if you do, if you disperse it enough, does it dilute the vote? I don't know. It kind of reminds you also of what I think. We're going to be in this, like, five fight again come 20, 30 with the census. If you think about how many people are moving from places like New York and California to places like New York or to Florida and Texas, it's going to put us in a whole new ball game there, too.
• 53:48
  Speaker D: Yeah. Here's the other thing that I find interesting. Everyone should have left the media, they're screaming about this. If you look at New England, ladies and gentlemen, I think there's one elected Republican in all of New England in the House of Representatives, and I think they're in western New Hampshire. You look at the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where Trump gets 40, 46% of the vote. I mean, he was on the ballot three times. They don't have one federally represented member of Congress in all of Massachusetts. And Trump wins about almost half the state. So spare me if, you know, you want to tell Alabama what to do or Florida what to do or Texas what to do. I mean, really, Because. Yeah, because New England's been getting shafted now for a long time. A long time. Yeah, go ahead.
• 54:42
  Speaker A: Well, I was going to say, you know, to your point. Yeah. And a lot of it has to do with them wanting to control money, control groups, those that are advocating for certain policies. I know you know about this with the work you've done with your, your books, but it's all, it's all a game. It's all a game for control, for money, for finances. And I think it does need to be broken up. I'm worried about when I mentioned the 2030 census. I'm worried about what's going to happen to my beloved state of Texas. And also, I spent a lot of time down in Florida. You know, a lot of people say, you can come here, welcome to the south, but don't bring your politics.
• 55:18
  Speaker D: Yeah, yeah. I mean, look, you know, half of Manhattan, I mean, they, they left during COVID but they also left when Mom Donnie showed up. You know, I mean, I, I, I have property in Florida and I hear that when I'm there, I'm, I'm on the East Coast. And you know, they, they, it's one thing when there's, you know, chaos going on and you run towards desantis and he protects you from totalitarianism, but once you start to get sort of fat and happy there in Florida, and, you know, a lot of the Midwest goes to the west coast, so Naples and Sarasota, Fort Myers, whatever. And then a lot of, you know, Boston to D.C. they, they hang on the, on the east coast. It, you know, we'll see. We will see. I mean, Desantis, I mean, they've got all kinds of maps that they might want to, they might want to draw. And, and, you know, we'll, we'll handle that. We'll have you back talking about that. Let me ask you one last thing before we go. There are some people in, across the world and in the UK they are what we would call royal watchers. Now, our lovely guest today, my dear friend Alex Sawyer, is a court watcher. She has a podcast. She's watching what goes on. You may know because, because, you know, some of my relationships that I was trained by Laura Ingram, which means I spent some time with Clarence Thomas because she clerked for him. I also am partially responsible, and I asked Ingram if I could say this for Alito's presence on the Supreme Court, because Laura and I led a full frontal Yorktown attack on making sure Bush's cleaning lady, Harriet Myers, the cleaning lady, didn't make it on the Supreme Court. I mean, Carl Rove stuck his big bony finger right in Laura's chest and he was, he was pissed. Old turd blossom. He didn't like it. Now, what is going on here? Do you see a situation where one of them may leave Thomas or Alito before the Senate flips next year?
• 57:23
  Speaker A: I think that's a very interesting question. So I was, I'm actually was supposed to interview Senator Chuck Grassley last week. They had to move it. And so I'm hoping I get to talk to him sometime this summer about what the committee's doing to prepare if there is a vacancy. I think if there is going to be one of them stepping down, we would hear that come July. AJ because the Supreme Court wraps up its term during June, they would then probably announce their vacancy in July and then give the Republicans time to fill that before the next start of the term, which would be October, also, ironically, ahead of the midterms. But, you know, I you if it's going to happen, it would happen now because of the election, the midterm election. But I'm really getting the vibes from people that they're not going anywhere. So, you know, I'm not really planning on covering a vacancy. I'm ready for one if there is, but I have no necessarily plan in action at this time. You know, I think they both are needed on the Supreme Court. This really is Thomas's court. And Justice Alito is one of those voices on the bench during oral arguments that can help counter the noise coming from Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson from the liberal wing of the court. And so, you know, I don't, I think that they're great. They need to stay as long as they can. The question is if they want to take time and they've done their civil service and want to enjoy retirement, we'll see. I'm sure that one of the questions is, is the Senate really up for is it going to be that close in terms of control? Maybe Republicans feel like they can hold on to the Senate. And so it could be that Alito and Thomas aren't necessarily looking at it like they have to leave this this summer.
• 58:57
  Speaker D: And look, no, no guarantee Fetterman wouldn't vote for somebody, you know, no guarantee. You know, and it's funny, you know, you mentioned Justice Jackson, the great Broadway star, you know, the star of Tony and Tina's Wedding or the Disney Little Mermaid coming to Broadway. I guess she's going to be in. But look, this is why we have you on. Alex has got sources. She's got spies. You know, she's got. She's got people everywhere, you know, listening to the court. She's on it herself. And this book, ladies and gentlemen, you know, I know you could rewrite it every day of the week with what goes on, but you got to go out. You got to get Lawless Lawfare by my dear friend Alex Sawyer. Girl, I. It's been a long time coming, right? I finally got to interview you, right?
• 59:41
  Speaker A: Thank you, A.J. i love it.
• 59:43
  Speaker D: Of course, of course. And look, we love having you. Definitely want to turn you loose, get back to kicking some ass there on. On Capitol Hill and at the Supreme Court. And, you know, we'd love to have you back at a later date.
• 59:55
  Speaker A: I gotta go drain the swamp.
• 59:57
  Speaker D: Gotta do it, girl. And look, we're the dogs of Chernobyl, right? So, ladies and gentlemen, Alex Sawyer. Go get that book. You got to pay for that Bezos wedding. So head on over to Amazon and buy two copies. Do you. Do you do the. Do you have an audiobook where you voiced it?
• 1:00:13
  Speaker A: So I did not voice it, but there is an audiobook. Why did I not voice it? Because I have been told. I sound like. I don't. Nails on a chalkboard. I just. Maybe the next I told Anthony, I was like, find somebody with a sexy voice. That's all I want.
• 1:00:29
  Speaker D: No, I don't think so. All the straight men in the audience just said they just gotta let down because it's not your voice. They were looking for the dulcet tones of the Texas. The Texas Alex there. I mean, I'm telling you right now. So look, you gotta go get this book. I appreciate you coming on. Get out there. Kick some ass. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Dangerous laughter. I am AJ Rice. I will catch you on the flip side.
• 1:00:54
  Speaker A: Dangerous left laughter.