Latest / Before You Speak / Before You Speak | Episode 43 | Should the DOJ be Part of the Executive Branch?

Transcript

Before You Speak | Episode 43 | Should the DOJ be Part of the Executive Branch? · Before You Speak

• Elwyn: I don't know if people are fully aware just how norm based the independence of the Department of Justice is, right? It's completely reliant on norms. There's no law. That says that the attorney general is not the president's personal attorney and and doesn't do the bidding of the president. That's just a norm. Derek: What's up y'all? Welcome back to the Before You Speak podcast. I'm your host, Derek Peterson, and I'm processing the fire hose of my news feed with this guy. Elwyn: What's up everybody? I am Elwyn and the fire hose of my newsfeed is coming through with especially strong storms or hurricanes or not hurricanes or calving glaciers or catastrophic floods or it's climate change week in the fire hose of my newsfeed. Derek: That sounds you know, I was trying to explain this to my kids and I was like, they're like, Dad, do you think climate change is actually a thing? and I was like, Well, imagine if I parked our car in our ho in my garage and I just let it run and we all went to sleep, most of us are probably not waking up the next day. So There is a and if you have the entire human race all around the world doing the same thing and our atmosphere is you think about it like a giant house, then yeah, like we could be causing some problems. We could be do we could be doing something that's potentially going to ultimately end up killing us all. So yeah, it's crazy to see these videos. The Nepal videos are insane. what's going on. There's videos now of like flooding through Utah and the Grand Canyon. Texas is about to get hit again, which is a little odd for this time of year. For the these, you know, August, July or August, July, August, September. We don't historically get a shit ton of rain. So it's like interesting. I don't know. What's your do you believe in climate change, Elwyn? Elwyn: Yeah, yes. I've been convinced by the ninety nine percent of scientists who study this thing that all tell me this is real and the fact that it's hot as shit all the Derek: It was out it was Algor's the Elwyn: time here. And when it does rain, we get eight inches of rain in twelve minutes and you know, yeah, yeah, and when and when in Nepal giant glaciers break in half and cause unbelievable flooding because hey, it's warm and it it ice melts when it's warm. Yeah, you know, the the the best thing I I saw in climate change in like the last ten years was, you know, this guy Ronnie Chang from Jon Stewart. He did a thing, it was a while ago, and he holds up a graph of the global temperatures. And he's like, The temperatures are going up. If they were going down, we'd be the dumbasses and you'd be right, but they're going up. And he turns it upside down and he goes, even if you turn it upside down, they're still going up, up and he smashes the thing over his head. Like, just because it's cold in Cleveland in the winter doesn't mean that climate change is a hoax. You know, it so it's the kind of thing where I I don't I I it it appears that there are just some things that if they don't like smack humanity across the nose multiple times, there's just enough people who don't believe it to to ignore it and and allow it to become worse and worse. And this appears to be one of them. It's like, you know, AI, the dangers of AI. I'm pretty sure that's only gonna become widely accepted when some computer system ends humanity or you know, Climate change is is of course another one. You know, just these or like racism, right? If we're not really hurling racial slurs, racism must not be that it must not be there. It's like, no, guys, like this shit can be subtle and pervasive and take place over years and get worse and worse and worse. And if we don't pay attention to it before it's too late, then it's gonna be too late when we notice it. And I just climate change seems one of those to me. Derek: Yeah, it'll be the worst I told you so ever. It'll be like, Elwyn: Yeah. Derek: I told you so, and we're all fucking dead. So Elwyn: Yeah. Yeah, as we're being carried away by a flood and like fucking told you so Derek: We knew this was going to happen Well Elwyn: We need like a day, you know, there's that movie that came out where there's one day where everybody can have sex each year and there are other versions of it where like there's one day where you Derek: That's right. Elwyn: can go around around and commit every crime, you know, and it's like it's a freebie for that one day. We need like I need like a week of I told you so where I can just go around and be like, Fucking told you so. You know, Trump's a Trump's Derek: yeah. Elwyn: an idiot. I told you so, climate change is real, told you AI dangerous. hey, guess what? You know. Derek: Yeah. I mean really that's what this podcast is for, right? Is just receipts so we can look back and like have video evidence, to everybody we know some at some point to be Elwyn: Yeah. Derek: like, I mean, we've we've been talking about this forever. So Elwyn: I'm amazed how often we do a podcast. I'm gonna toot our own horn here. And like four days later, all of a sudden the same thing is in the news cycle. You know, like last week I I told Itamargan Ben Gaveer to shut the fuck up. And then he posted his horrible tweet that he put up of Palestinians going into a concentration camp and now everybody's screaming that Ben Gavir should shut up. Like, yeah. Derek: Yeah. Like nailed it. yeah, I mean there's a lot of there's a lot of that going on. And speaking of shutting up, dude, how you feeling about good old Lake America? How you feeling about dude, everybody knows. Elwyn: I don't I don't know what you're I I don't know what you're talking about. Lake what? Derek: Everybody knows where Lake America is. I wouldn't just no, just Elwyn: Is it some place in like North Texas? Some like shitty little lake. Derek: no, just don't look on map quest. You'll never find it. Elwyn: I o I've been using MapQuest since ninety two. Printing that Derek: Mm. Elwyn: shit out on paper, turn by turn directions. Is there something better? Is this like if Blackberry made a comeback? Derek: No, there isn't. Keep keep yes, keep living in that world. That's exactly no. it's interesting to see like, you know, we we talk about this often with the news cycle and the the blitzing the media and the shit that people pick up on. And, you know, like every time this kind of stuff comes to the surface, I always immediately start looking at the other news to see what else is going on and You know, the economic conditions are continually getting worse. The the the treasury bonds, like like everything right now is red flagging the economy, like we are in a lot of shit at the moment. and you know, and all because of a war and all because of tariffs. You know, we're we've picked a bunch of fights with people. And you know, I'm gonna go on a little tangent here because I There is, we've done an episode on the manosphere. We've done we've talked about a lot of this stuff in general. And a lot of people misconstrue what actual strength is. Because like strength is not using your leverage to get what you want all of the time. Because as soon as you use leverage in any situation, you have now pissed the other side off. And if you cannot follow through with that leverage, and continually use it, then you're toast. And the person on the other side of that is going to be continually trying to figure out how to get back at you. And there is something to be said for you know collaboration and care and love and being able to serve both sides and find a middle ground on things. And I'm so sick of this like strength is just taking what you want all the time. Because I don't actually believe that at all. I think true strength is actually somebody that has the emotional maturity to see through the situation and find a winning solution for everybody. Find a way to mark a middle ground. And so that because you're not just thinking about what's happening right in that situation at the moment. You're also thinking about what's going to happen years from now and how a deal that you make and a relationship that you build. could impact the future of everything that's going on. And yeah, I I all of this is a weakness. Everything that's going on, all of the impulsive reactions of pulling us in and out of bullshit and, you know, wars, tariffs, all of this stuff, all this does is weaken the US. There is no strength involved in using our leverage because now we've used all of our leverage and it's gone. and the world is starting to reorient. as a big fuck you to the US and yeah, the we're we're not gonna feel it as much right in this moment because people are readjusting still, but our kids are gonna spend their lifetimes probably cleaning a lot of this shit up if there is shit Elwyn: Well, Derek: to clean up. Elwyn: yeah, I mean I think the Lake Ontario, Lake America thing, you know, I think your larger point is correct. I don't think that the that the Lake thing applies to it because I think it's just trolling and it's just stupid. And if all these companies and I think tr yeah, and Trump means it as that. And Derek: No, I I think it's a distraction. I mean I think I think it was just something Elwyn: if if Apple and Google want to spend, I don't know, what, a million bucks, whatever costs them to change it in their maps, and they'll change it back when there's a democratic president and undoes all that shit. Okay. But I think your larger point is Not just correct, but it it's it reflects on us as a country, right? Like and I think that's what supporters of Trump just kinda don't get and and are not listening to. You know, that people in other countries, citizens in other countries, are now more and more like, Yeah, whatever, America, like cool. You make cool shit and I can buy cheap clothes there and that's nice, and it's a nice place to come visit, and the World Cup was cool. But we don't trust you and we don't respect you. and the leaders are like, Yeah, we definitely don't trust you because every four years you might elect a a a madman. You did it with the same guy twice, right? We had four years of crazy, then Biden won, and maybe the rest of the world took a breath and was like, All right, we're back to you know, a traditional American politician. We know how back channeling is gonna work, we know what the coded messages are, we know all this stuff. We've been doing it for Let's say since the end of World War II, we've been doing for 80 years. And then four years later, we elect another guy who's just just trying to blow the whole thing up again. And I think that takes decades to recover from because it's not the 2028 election that is any sort of signal anymore to the rest of the world that there's sanity. Right. It shows that there's sanity for a couple of years, right? Four at the most until Everybody gets to hold their breath for another election and maybe some sane guy gets or gal gets re-elected. And now you've got eight years. And now maybe there's some sort of institutional credibility that starts to come back. but I think that's you know, my take on your larger point. I everything you said is correct. I mean, ask the Tate brothers how good their show of strength is as th they're in prison, you know. Derek: Yeah. Which is also hilarious because the reports coming out about they owned nothing that they actually showed off. All of their showcases and mansions and cars were all rented and bullshit. But I I mean the broader point the that I was making there well though is just that my newsfeed is full of map quest right now as being like people talking about this and it's just it's taking away from so much other stuff going on, including, you know. Epstein files updates and the economy. And then, you know, there's a bunch of other shit in the news. the weather is bananas, and we're gonna talk a little bit more about the the US mail in mail in ballots in just a second. But you know, like there's this, there's a lot of important shit going on still, and we're we're building up to the midterms, and they always find a way to get us to talk about other shit. Elwyn: But it's not the the MapQuest angle to this, you know, where just in case people don't know, MapQuest has not changed the name to Lake America in their system. Yeah, on on the surface as in a vacuum, it's like, God damn it, why am I reading a bunch of articles like this? But it does continue to show the the thirst for sanity, right? Where like everybody looks at It's one thing when he re when he signs an executive order, it's called like America. You know, they have to like announce to him what the executive order is. The whole ceremony is ridiculous. Everybody knows it's ridiculous. The whole everybody knows it's ridiculous. And Google Maps and Apple Maps. And everybody's like, God, this is ridiculous. And then MapQuest comes out and everyone's like, Yes! MapQuest, and it's it's not that the news story is super important, but it just continues to show the thirst that people have for. Company or person who will stand up to the obviously ridiculous. Derek: Yeah, fair point. and I mean that's we're seeing people get championed all along the way now. Like almost every I mean I think Gavin Newsom was the first person to really kind of match the energy of the Republican Party last year with his, you know, tweets and him going after Trump and mimicking basically the voice, which was hilarious. And now we're starting I mean that we're starting to see a lot of people particularly in politics, start to really stand up to this stuff. So I my hope is that it continues and that we see a bunch of change with these midterms, which ultimately could look very different. And it's starting with this. And so I wanted to read this article and get your reaction real quick. so this this was posted, I believe yesterday. The US Postal Service is poised to launch a hasty hastily built error ridden computer system that could jeopardize the process of mail voting relied upon by one third of all voters, according to a whistleblower statement released Tuesday by Senator Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal in an effort to it the effort is part of an implicate imp implementation of President's Trump executive order limiting male voting and has been temporarily halted by a federal judge The ruling is being appealed by the administration and the directive ul may ultimately end up back before the US Supreme Court. So what are your thoughts on this at the moment? Elwyn: Well there's no question this is going to the Supreme Court, right? There's there's simply no doubt at all. And you know, I'm gonna I'm gonna make the mistake of just going in with some faith because like one of the things that's key and I'll get to the I know. Derek: It is a mistake. You're I know exactly what you're about to do and it is a mistake. Elwyn: So one of the the principles that the Supreme Court is supposed to go by, and I wanna say this because so that people know how bad it is if the Supreme Court does the wrong thing. it's called the Purcell principle. And basically Purcell's the name of a case. We've talked about this once or twice before. It basically says that if something is too happens that's too close to an election, it should not happen because the cost of it fucking up an election is too great. States need time. To be able to run an orderly election. Usually this comes with like redistricting or who's on a ballot and who's not. Well, we are now say September 2nd. We're two months in a day, two months and two days from election, but we are way closer than that to when matt vo to when mail ballots have to start going out. California mails a ballot to every citizen. Michigan had like one third of citizens of Michigan residents vote by mail. Utah, all of them vote by mail. Donald Trump votes by mail. You know, so we're very, very close to a credible the argument is already credible that the states would make that the cost of compliance here is too great. so, you know, that's a pretty down the middle argument that it should work. But like the whistleblower that came out that the that that article you just read is pulling from and and likely about, one of the things they said is that. The way the system works right now, like one of the bugs in it is if they get a batch of let's say 10,000 ballots received and the barcode on one of those scans incorrectly, then all 10,000 don't get counted. Right. Now, this is like we hear all the Yeah, well, we hear Derek: First year we're gonna have legitimate mail fraud or voting fraud. Elwyn: all the time, right? Like If one illegal immigrant, if one undocumented citizen votes, the whole thing is is shot. We have to prevent even one illegal vote from happening. This isn't exactly the same thing. It's just a mirror image. Right? This is the same guy who's saying that even one vote, one fraudulent vote, is worth, you know, draconian changes and and representative total fraud and total distrust in the system. Now you have a system that he's allowing to be put in place. Which will throw out 10,000 legitimate votes for one barcode, not even fraudulent vote for one misread barcode. Right? The the stakes here are becoming very high. And it's good that this is news because I think sunlight, the more sunlight is on this stuff, the better. I'm glad that whistleblower came out. But there's no question, we've talked for a while. Like mail is the number one way that they're gonna try and fuck with this election. Mail is how they're gonna. Try and fuck with elections, what they're doing. you know, if if I the hope, my hope is that everybody who hears this is like, I'm not voting by mail. I'm driving in, I'm going early voting, right? And, you know, there's still gonna be people who can't and they're gonna have to cross their fingers. But also the people who can't are a little bit more likely to vote Republican, so this might not work out. but at this point, the only The only sure thing that I think people can do is vote in person. Check your voter registration, especially in Texas, right? One point two million people removed from the voter rolls. So you have to check your registration. and yeah, go go vote in person. Derek: Yeah. The that's a huge deal. but yeah, you know, like if there's one rotten apple, you should just burn the orchard down, bro. That's how this this all Elwyn: Yeah, obviously. Derek: this is all goes, you know? They're all bad then. but the it we're seeing this in Texas too, and this is something that we started talking about a while ago was just the ways in which they are going to try and f look, it is evidently clear that everything that they're doing is wildly unpopular. There's very little that's going on. With our government now that most people, even like my Republican friends, have turned a corner for most for the most part. I don't know that they would disavow the party, but they're not happy with what's going on. So in the midst of a wildly unpopular political party, I mean, I guess the whole party is not looked at favorably. I mean, you can even see that with how Texas is pulling with Paxton and Cal Rico Tal Rico, but granted. Paxton is a specific kind of piece of shit. But the in all of this, you know, we've seen Texas purge a bunch of voter registrations based off of things that they thought like were inaccuracies is what they called them. Which, you know, I I have a feeling that if you look at who got purged from that data, I wish we had a list of all of that because I'm gonna guess their last names were like Ramirez. Elwyn: Peterson. Derek: Yeah. I I'm gonna say Ramirez and Gonzalez and probably probably not Peterson, to be honest. I actually Elwyn: Syed. Derek: Sayed, yeah. We're gonna the the vo conveniently they're they're they're didn't match their location or something on their ID was wrong. So but we we know in a wildly unpopular system that the only way to win is to cheat. And we saw it with the redistricting. That was the first the them starting that when it was completely uncalled for to be basically just for forthright. Yeah, we we're gonna try to gain more extra seats and we're just gonna do this whenever we're gonna gerrymander whenever we want. so it's not shocking and I don't think we should take this, these kind of threats lightly because like this is it. I mean, this is what we've been talking about for the last two weeks. If we don't have the power to elect officials and get rid of officials that we're not happy with, we we've essentially lost the United States, you know, like the oligarchy wins, and we will become a Russia or China over the next, you know, however many years. So I mean, these elections are critically important for all of them. Like ever I think every election that's going on is really important right now because the state of affairs and making sure that they are conducted right, that every vote counts. I mean, this shit matters more than ever, because they're trying to kill it. And furthermore, once we're through this, we've got to codify and make every law pass every law that we can so this shit doesn't happen again. Elwyn: Yep. Yeah. You know, I was listening to John Stewart's interview with John Fetterman, which he he made that interview like a month ago. I finally got around to listening to it to it this week. And there were two Derek: About time, bro. Elwyn: things that's that stuck struck me. One, John Fetterman is no longer fit for public office, right? You and and I'm not like I'm not saying that in a like fuck this guy, I don't like him. He's it's well known, he has had at least one stroke. you know, and it I don't I'm not going so far as to say if you have a stroke you can't serve, but like it is a serious medical condition that needs to be watched. And you know, it's clear in how he speaks. It's the first long form form interview that I've heard with him, I think ever. Right. And it's clear not just that he struggles to find words, which okay, I don't necessarily have an issue with that. But yeah, right. Derek: I hope not, 'cause your co host has the same problem sometimes. Elwyn: But but when Jon Stewart would try to add nuance into a di into the debate, you could see over the course of a couple hour conversation that Fetterman he he couldn't do it. He he his brain was no longer functioning at a level high enough to have a nuanced conversation about very, very serious issues. Right. And that that really struck me. Like he had one thing he was gonna say, and you know He couldn't even sort of massage that one thing over and over again. It just kind of came back to the same thing over and over for him, kind of in the same almost in the same words. And so that struck me. The second thing that struck me was his definition of a constitutional crisis. They were talking about Trump and you know, this administration, all that stuff. And because Fetterman has praised Trump in this second in this second administration. And Fetterman said, Well, you know, well, what's what's a constitutional crisis? A constitutional crisis occurs when, you know, court orders are disobeyed, are flaunted. And Stewart was like, Well, they've done that, right? They did that with the TikTok law. They've done that with the Epstein case. They've done that with any number of immigration deportations where they're flying people out in the middle of the night in defiance of a court order. They've done it dozens, if not hundreds of times, right? But More more than that, I thought that was just an ex i incredibly narrow definition of constitutional crisis. Like we're only in a constitutional crisis if a court order is disobeyed, right? The corruption of a Supreme Court, of multiple Supreme Court justices is not a constitutional crisis. The selling of access to our president is not a constitutional crisis. The the inability of Congress to pass any laws, we have the least productive Congress in history. They're just simply not doing anything. Is that not a constitutional crisis, right? There's ten constitutional crises that I can think of right now because the people in government are n either not doing anything or they're completely corrupt and doing criminal things, right? Is is the failure of the Department of Justice to release all of the Epstein files, despite a law saying that they must release all of the Epstein files. and the failure of Congress to hold any of them in contempt and to seek to enforce that, is that not a constitutional crisis? What about the appointing of a the president's personal lawyer as the attorney general? All of these things to me, if we don't do anything about them, are a constitutional crisis. And you can argue whether or not the thing is the constitutional crisis or the failure to act in response to the thing, but either way, you know, we have a whole host of crises. that undermine our constitution. And that to me is a constitutional crisis. And I just I remember listening to that being like, is that it? Like that's that's a twenty year old view, right? That I think has been we really need to discard that if anyone still holds that, watching what's gone on in the last two years. Derek: It God damn it, where's Mitch McConnell when we need him? We're in a constitutional crisis. Elwyn: He's by the pool with Bernie. But Susan Collins Derek: So Elwyn: is very concerned, I'm sure, and Chuck Schumer is sharpening his pen for a lovely letter. Derek: It was I can't wait to read that one. It's gonna be good. Chuck, go get Go get Really dig your teeth in on this one. You can even use a cuss word if you want. Elwyn: Yeah. Derek: no, but like in this series that we're talking about right now, you know, we're talking about codifying norms. and I think one of the things that is the most outlandish, like if you went back, you know, 15 years in time. And you you were telling, you know, a lawyer about what's going on, like somebody that worked at the DOJ right now, and you're explaining what's going on, like I I feel like their reaction would be like, no fucking way. Like the the the president's personal attorney, there's no way that people are allowing that through Congress. There's no way that this shit's going to like going to like get passed. And so We've landed ourselves in another situation where basically the president has made these, you know, claims that everybody was just weaponizing the government against him for years, which then justifies all of his supporters to be be like, well, we're gonna allow him to basically hire hire his personal attorneys to run the Department of Justice and the FBI, and then we're Now just going to go after all of the people that President Trump says he doesn't like. And we've seen this repeatedly over and over again, from you know, like the Comey bullshit to the guy that they're trying to they tried to prosecute for the for running a razor blade through the reflecting pool. This Elwyn: World's best razor blade. Derek: is the world world's strongest razor blade and fastest man in water, I guess. It's like that that that TV show The Boys, the guy that's really fast. He just made it through there really quickly with the it was him, I swear. But you know, like we laugh about this, but this is this is real. I mean this this is the Victor Orbon playbook. This is this is literally how you you destroy a democracy, is you you get you You get the laws on your side, you get the media on your side, and then you s you make people question elections and make them believe that you know, none of it's all of it needs to be questioned. There's nothing right that's happening, and you're the only person that can solve these problems. And if you buy enough of the media and get enough of the algorithms, you know, you can do that. And that's essentially what they did. They got the most popular young people algorithm through TikTok, which was again, should have. That never should have been sold for the price it was sold at and to the people it was sold to. So like that was completely against the law and should have been broken up by our government. but unfortunately our government works for the president, or our our justice system works for the president. So all you have to do is pay him off and you're good. so and we we're seeing this across the board. And this shit's gotta end. This is this has gotta be the first, like, you know. Codifying elections, making sure that we can always vote people in and out, priority number one. Priority number two is is this exact thing, like enforcement. There, we need to know that there is a separation between the our political parties and what justice looks like, because everybody needs to be equally prosecuted for doing bad shit. Elwyn: Yeah, I mean I think like codifying elections, not federally, right? Like, nope, we do not want Derek: Yeah and Elwyn: federal elections, right? Protecting the security of elections by protecting how the US Postal Service, that's kind of what we hit on last week. But Derek: Yeah. Elwyn: the the DOJ stuff, you know, I d I don't I don't know if people are fully aware just how norm based the independence of the Department of Justice is, right? It's completely reliant on norms. There's no law. That says that the attorney general is not the president's personal attorney and and doesn't do the bidding of the president. That's just a norm. That's all. Right? It's it's always been the case that president appoints president gets elected, appoints an attorney general, and, you know, at some point along the line says, These are the the things that I really want my DOJ to focus on. I want my DOJ to focus on Medicare fraud. I want my DOJ to focus on. terrorism prosecutions or mafia prosecutions or whatever. They they run on a thing they want to fix and then they, you know, appoint an attorney general and say, hey, I'd really like you to focus on this. And then historically, in a norm-based world, the DOJ goes about and investigates independently and chooses finds criminals and chooses which laws to prosecute them with and prosecutes them. And they never speak directly to the president. Right? I don't know if you remember when Bill Clinton was when he was president towards the end of his administration, he was in an airplane in Las Vegas or Reno, and his attorney general, Loretta Lynch, I think, was on another airplane at the same airport. And they she got off her plane and got onto his plane and they had like a thirty minute meeting. This was a multi day scandal. Multi-day scandal that the president met with his attorney general, right? Because that never happened. There would be like White House counsel standing in the way to make sure everything was kept clean, right? For all the lawfare complaints that people have about Biden, Biden's DOJ investigated Hunter Biden and prosecuted him and convicted him, right? They investigated the president's son. Right, while the president was there, you know, and and Joe Biden allowed it and he said, I'm not getting involved with this. This isn't my thing. But that is not a law. Right. There's nothing it it's just the amount of times that Donald Trump has has the amount of swings he's taken at our system simply by doing something that nobody else did before because they didn't want to, saying, I don't trust our elections in twenty sixteen, right before the election, like I'll only trust it if I win. You know, will you concede? Just there was nothing stopping any of the other presidents for two hundred and forty-two years from saying that. Any other candidate at all, right? Of course they could all say that. All it took to break the system was one guy to be like, Fuck it, nah. I don't if I don't win, I don't trust it. That's all it took, right? And that's all it's taking with the DOJ is for a president to be like, you know what? I want my personal attorney there so that he can go after the very people I want, so that he can prosecute. My political opponents, and Todd Blanche is out there saying, like, yeah, I don't believe that the that the attorney general is not the president's personal attorney. You know, the president should have a role in this. So yeah, as as a norm that needs to be codified, the independence of the Department of Justice now seems to have skyrocketed up to the top of the list because we just took it for granted. You know, Biden's DOJ also prosecuted, I think, I forgot his name, some senator from New Jersey. In a bribery case, a Democratic senator from New Jersey, you know, the guy's walking around Derek: Mm. Elwyn: with like suitcases full of gold bars, literally, you know. Derek: Mm-hmm. That's right, I remember that. Elwyn: so you know, it it has worked in the past, but the thing with all these norms is that they work until someone chooses to not care about them. And now someone's not caring about them. And if we don't respond as a country, then we're foolish. Derek: Yeah. What if let me ask you, kind of going back to the election thing, because what happens in Texas, like or your feelings about some of this stuff? Let's say, you know, the per there's a purge of, you know, voter registrations by Republicans, you know, before the election with enough time to basically make it impossible for those people to re-register. And now, you know, the result of that is that Ken Paxton wins, Greg Abbott wins again, and we're sitting here, you know, twiddling our thumbs because we're just like, we got fucked. Like is would your take still be that federal federal you know reach into state elections should not happen, or is would you would you change your tune on that? Elwyn: No, the the constitution is crystal clear. The the time, manner, and place of elections are set by the states. It's cris it's crystal clear. and I think that works. I think that that is, you know, where you might have Derek: But it works until it doesn't though, right? Because like what we're what Elwyn: Right, but it for if it's in the state control, it has to not work fifty times or twenty-seven times, right? So let's take nationally, let's take your example and say, Well, you know, I can see a path right now for the Democrats to win six seats, to have fifty-three senators, right? They're gonna get North Carolina, Ohio looks really good, Maine looks strong, Texas looks strong, Alaska looks strong, and frankly, Michigan is looking pretty good. I can even throw Iowa there in as pretty competitive. So let's say they win six of those seven I just mentioned, except they don't win Texas because the Republicans have fucked with it, right? Well, because the the elections are set by the states, we still now have 52 seats. Right. We still now have 52, right? But if Donald Trump's in charge of fucking with everything, he's gonna mess with Michigan and he's gonna mess mess with Maine and Alaska and North Carolina and Ohio, and he's gonna make sure that they win. And he's gonna mess with. New Mexico, or New Hampshire, where Republican where Democratic incumbents are running strong, you know, and he's gonna make sure that those get flipped. So, no, the the the 2020 election was not fraudulent in part because it was run by the states, in part, and we should have faith in that result, in large part because guys like Brad Raffensburger in Georgia got up there and said, No, we run this. We ran this clean. I have complete confidence. In even larger part, because when the votes are counted, they're counted by little old blue-haired ladies in tiny counties in Texas and in New Mexico and in Michigan. And they take their, I believe that those individuals, by and large, take their jobs very seriously. The minute you centralize that power, the minute you lose that control. So, sure, can it happen in Texas? Are they trying to do it in Texas? Absolutely. But That just means that they're only doing it in Texas. They're not doing it in the other thirty three states that have a Senate election. Derek: Yeah, fair point. And I I get what you're I get what you're saying, because you're you're correct. If we if if we centralize power or any kind of laws around this, then that gives the ability for if we have another Trump at some point to potentially fuck things up worse than they are now. Which that I I get. I guess my what I'm curious about is that does there need to be something in place? Like maybe the law actually is just that. States need to run their election, like some oversight in maybe not full oversight, but like something that says like this stuff cannot happen. Like the rules for each state are they don't have to be the exact same, but there should be some cohesion some cohesiveness between like how we vote. because I don't you know. Elwyn: don't agree. I I think that that that is once again, right? Like the Constitution is clear. States set the time, manner, and place of elections. It does not require them to set them in a consistent manner. You know, if Derek: Yeah, but when they wrote that, they were still on horses, bro. Like they still had, like, you know, like getting from like New York to Texas was impossible. Now Elwyn: They didn't write that because they were on horses. They wrote that because they were trying to fight being a monarchy. They were trying to fight one guy ruling everything. That's why they wrote that, because they wanted local control over these things. I mean, look, it's September 1st, okay? The last day to register to vote in Texas is October 4th or 5th. It's all over the news that 1.2 names have been scrubbed from the voter rules. Honestly. There's some amount of personal responsibility now. This is not hidden. What they've done is now what they've done is now public. If you're worried, then get online. Like do a Google search. How do I check my registration in Texas and check your fucking voter registration? Right? And and fix it if it needs to be fixed. If it's important to you, you have to do it. At the end of the day, the preservation of that right is up to the individual, not the state. Derek: Yeah. Elwyn: The state shouldn't take that right away unjustly. But the state is not responsible for, you know, seeking to reassure every citizen that their voter registration is correct. There's a pretty healthy middle ground in there that individual responsibility has to slide into. And we can all do, you know, Instagram posts and help people do it and spread awareness and tell people how to do it, right? It takes a village to protect this sort of thing. But for sure, I think that what they're doing is wrong in Texas, but it's also known. It's not. It it's not hidden, we're not gonna find out about it on November tenth. Derek: fair point. I mean, my hope I guess is just then that aliens come back and all of this is a moot point. We have a supreme leader that runs the entire world and that we don't have to worry about elections anymore. You know? We all Elwyn: But but let me let me ask you this, because the the the hypothetical that you're putting out to me is, you know, with Texas, is like, well, shouldn't this be, you know, if this happens in Texas and it swings an election, then shouldn't we have federal control over this? Well, what if we had federal control now? Right? Like if you're upset about the federal government fucking with the Postal Service. Then how can you want the federal government to run Texas's elections? Derek: I don't think I want them to run anything. I think I want laws passed preventing these things from happening. Like I want more laws around protecting that that and those laws potentially being need to pa be passed nationally. So things like this don't happen. Like meaning like if it happens and we can prove it happens, that means it's a problem. And it's a problem that needs to be addressed by a law. And I'm just not sure if I I would trust that the Texas people that just fucked up the election and stole it from you know, if if in this situation it would be probably Talo Rico, if they stole the election from Talo Rico by purging these voter rolls, then yeah, I would want a law passed by Congress to say like this shit can't happen again. Because I don't trust Texas to pass a law at that point. Because basically what they've said is like, you were. Republicans are running the state whether you like it or not. And if you don't, just move. And I don't agree with that. Elwyn: Yeah, but why isn't why isn't the first law that gets passed then the basically the text of Donald Trump's executive order directing the states to provide their voter rolls to the federal government so the federal government can cross check them and tell them who is on the rolls properly and who is not. That would be the that's the law. The law you're describing is Trump's executive order, which is the thing that we spent last week saying was bad. Right? There there is risk inherent. What's that? Derek: You know, well maybe I need to revisit this. Maybe maybe I need to I said maybe I need to revisit this and fe maybe I'm a Trump supporter. Maybe I just didn't know it and I'm realizing it now. Elwyn: Yeah. But there there there is risk inherent in the system, right? And and if we believe in our systems, and I happen to believe that our systems in this country are among the best in the world in a lot of ways, right? If we believe in our systems, then we have to have faith in them, even especially and most often when they're under stress. You know, in in the two thousands, Obama was going to bring one of the nine eleven terrorists. from Guantanamo Bay to try him in federal court in New York, and people lost their fucking minds. People went crazy. How could you bring this guy onto American soil? And my response was like, wait a second. If you believe we have the best justice system in the world, then you believe that it should be able to handle this stress. It's only if you don't have faith in it that you need to change it or run do an end run around it. That There is stress, there is nervousness, there is anxiety around these things, right? Of course, it doesn't having faith in your system doesn't mean that you're never worried about someone trying to mess with it. It means that you're confident in this the strength of the underlying strength of the system to survive those attempts. And for me, I believe that state and local control over elections is the right system to prevent just large scale fraud and and vote. vote stealing from the single person or single person party in power and on a federal level, you know, to prevent them from stealing elections. It has to be local. It's not just state. It has to be local, count county, township, right? That is the system that I think works. So that's the system that when the the Texas Republicans go after this stuff, when I say no We have to be very vocal about this. We have to get people to fix their registrations. We can do whatever we want in Texas, try to change the laws, elect a Democrat so they don't do this shit anymore. You know, we can fix gerrymandering legislatively. That's not the same thing. Okay. But I trust in the system. And that means that I'm not going to pass a law that weakens it. And putting more and more power in the federal government when it comes to elections, I believe weakens election security. Derek: All right. I'll I'll roll with you for a minute on that. I was hoping you were gonna, you know, put on your lawyer hat for a second and come up with a law that could be passed federally to protect state elections a little bit more from this stuff to happen. But apparently we just have to roll with leave it alone, don't touch it, it's gonna be fine. and Elwyn: No, we have to get a Supreme Court that's gonna follow the constitution, right? Derek: Well yes, that's part yes, this all of this is part of it, which the Supreme Court's gonna come up more in the weeks to come. But some of the stuff that we wanted I wanted to touch on today too was just that like we are like the Epstein Files might be the most egregious of all of the offenses when it comes to us talking about the DOJ. Because Trump is named in the Epstein Files. He was a All over the place in it. There are you know real accusations, like qualified accusations of him raping a 13-year-old. and all of this stuff is is known, but we're not getting any of the information. Like this is being blocked by Todd Blanche. And we have guys like Thomas Massey and Rokana still out there fighting the good fight. Katie Fang is reporting on this, and there's a girl on threads who I love to follow that goes by Kate Justice, which is but basically these I mean there's people at this point that have dedicated their entire lives to figuring out like trying to expose what's going on with the Epstein files and figure finding these these la like the three million documents that we haven't seen yet and the videos and all the stuff because we know it's all there. We know that Epstein every house that he was in every house that he owned every all of this stuff was videoed and archived. And it was either burned or and destroyed, or it was, you know, it's still there and we just the we're not able to get our hands on it yet. But like this to me, you know, like this is the crux of what like elections are critical. I'm gonna we need to be able to vote people in and out. But like when we're talking about laws that need to be codified around the DOJ. This there could not be a more glaring example than the Epstein Files and the protection of people that all should be perp walked for, you know, going after children. Elwyn: So Katie Fang's case, I think, by the way, is really interesting. Super smart. Because I think if I remember correctly, she she's a reporter for I think NBC. she just filed a FOIA request, Freedom of Information Act request, saying these documents are need to be, you know, that by law they have to be released and they've not been released. And I'm a reporter and I want to file a FOIA request on these. And that's it. You know, and she's gotten pretty far. Right. The the fight is ongoing and it's just it's a fascinating fight. But so I was thinking about like what what could we do? How could we solve the DOJ problem? and here's the radical proposal I came up with. Take the DOJ away from the executive. Take it out of the executive branch entirely. Right? Put it under the the judicial branch. You don't have to you know, almost everything in the judicial branch is controlled by Supreme Court justices. That doesn't need to be the case. Right. If the purpose of the DOJ is to enforce the laws passed by the legislative branch, then why doesn't that sit reasonably on in the judicial branch? Like I understand where it can sit in the executive branch as well. I'm not saying that that makes no sense. It's the executive, he gets to decide what laws, you know, what his agenda is and and all that stuff. The it makes sense that the executive branch would enforce. The laws passed by the legislative branch, but it makes just as much sense, I think, that you that the judicial branch would do that. After all, the cases are being brought and tried within the judicial branch, right? So if we did that, now you have a bit of a separation of powers in place, and then take the attorney general and make them a six or ten year appointed position rather than someone that's just appointed or fired at will by the executive. We're used to that. Right. This is not new. Supreme Court justices, all judges throughout the federal system are appointed for life. the Federal Reserve Board of Governors are six-year terms. We have no issue with positions being appointed for terms that are not concurrent to the people that appoint them. You know, so then you get some institutional continuity, right? Where you don't have people turning over every four years or every two years. Based upon the whims of the president. the president can still absolutely say, you know, talk to talk to them and say, I would like these things pursued, right? Then it becomes a political, a little more political game where if the president's like, no, I've been telling them to pursue fraud, they haven't been pursuing fraud, ma, I'm really mad. Just like I've been telling them to lower interest rates and they're not lowering interest rates, ma, I'm really mad. Right. But the interest rate comparison is an interesting one because. Warsh was appointed a few months ago, and you know, I was like, he's lowering rates three points on day one, and he's really struggling to find a way to lower rates because, you know, he is independent, right? There there Derek: Mm-hmm. Elwyn: is independence in that. And, you know, there are other people at play that are helping to make that call. Right. So the the the idea that he hasn't been able to just go in and immediately do Trump's bidding, when I certainly thought that's what he was gonna do. Sort of says, wait a second, if we pull these guys away from the executive branch and create some different terms for them, there is some independence that comes along with it. Maybe we want to elect the attorney general. I doubt that. But why not? Right? So that was kind of my my radical idea. Where now, you know, when you move you move the DOJ over, you don't you you you put in some laws Right. But because they're not so directly tied to the political whims of the president, you know, if Merrick Garland was was appointed by Biden, let's say, two years into his term and still attorney general through the rest of Trump's term, Merrick Garland would be like, No, I'm not prosecuting Jim Comey. You know, shove it up your ass. Right. And Trump would be like, I'm really mad. But you would have this independence and you would have the same thing, let's say. If it were reversed, let's say Trump appointed someone in twenty eighteen and in and started a whole investigation into Hunter Biden where Biden would Joe Biden, elected president, would be like, you know, I can't stop him. so Derek: Yeah. Elwyn: that's my that's my solution for the day. Derek: dude, I think that's really smart. And every time I talk to other people, I'm going to still that like it was mine. unless they listen Elwyn: Yeah, go for it. Derek: to the unless they listen to this podcast, then they'll be like, You're just spouting off what Elwyn said. I'll be Yeah, well, Elwin and I are very like-minded. How do you know he didn't get that from me in our pre-call Elwyn: That's right. Derek: podcast prep? You know, like you never know. I I'm smart too, y'all. Elwyn: But you know, the I did see I'm seeing more like thirteen justices for thirteen circuits and Jim Clyburn, who was a pretty prominent guy, he came out for expanding the Supreme Court this week. Derek: Just not while this president's in office. So Elwyn: Yeah, exactly right. Derek: yes. okay, well, I think we'll wrap up the conversation there because we're gonna and we're gonna continue down like this path on you know, elections and enforcement, codifying norms is gonna kind of be the theme of our conversations until we get through the the primaries. so I'm not sure what's gonna come up next, but we'll it'll probably be the Supreme Court. or something related, but who are we telling to shut the fuck up to today? Elwyn: Alright, so I've not been rude. I've been looking at my phone because I wanted to pull something up to read it for the shut the fuck Derek: Yeah. Elwyn: up segment today. Because today we are telling the International Association of Genocide Scholars to shut the fuck up. Okay. Yeah, Derek: Yeah, fuck those guys. All right, I'm in. Elwyn: fuck those guys. So whenever somebody I I'm I'm turning my personal attention a little bit to the assumption that Israel has been committing a genocide. and Because it's just screamed so often and seemingly without any thought. And amongst those people who are screaming it, one of the things that they cite almost right away is that, well, the International Association of Genocide Scholars had a survey of their members, and 80% of the members surveyed called this a genocide. Therefore, look, these are genocide scholars, right? This must be a genocide. And that sounds compelling, right? Like when I heard that, I was like, fuck. Man, like that's gonna be a tough one to overcome. However, from the International Association of Genocide Scholars website, IAGS members are scholars, human rights activists, students, museum memorial prof museum and memorial professionals, policymakers, educators, sociologists, artists, political scientists, economists, historians, psychologists, literature, and film scholars. You and I can become a proud voting member of Of the International Association of Genesis of Genocide Scholars for the bargain basement price of $125 for one year, $200 for a two-year membership. That Derek: That's you just have to buy the membership? Elwyn: you just have to buy the membership. Derek: You don't have to be a scholar or anything. Elwyn: No, you can be a film scholar. You can be a fucking painter, an artist, a librarian, you know. I Derek: We're doing this. This is our first before you speak investment is getting we're we're buying into this. Elwyn: I think the only reason you can't be a proctologist is because they know what an asshole looks like. And they don't want they don't Derek: Ha ha ha. Elwyn: so they don't want them in there. You know, so Derek: Hmm. Elwyn: let's so already bullshit calling bullshit right away. But let's talk about the 80%, because that's a lot. The IAGS has roughly 500 members. The referendum or the survey that they put out was responded to by 102, I think, members, about 24% of their members responded to this survey. Of that 24% that responded at all, 80% said it was a genocide. So in an organization of 500 plus members, you had about 90, 80 to 90 people calling this a genocide. And that is used as one of the foundational bedrock moments of people who are calling what Israel's doing a genocide. And I didn't know that until last week. And I when I saw that, I was startled, let's say. So for obvio for fairly obvious reasons, right? International Association of Genocide Scholars, you are not genocide scholars. I'm sorry, I don't I just don't believe if I hear genocide scholar, I think of a university professor, I think of a Derek: Mm-hmm. Elwyn: human rights attorney, maybe who's been doing this for 40 years, right? I don't think of an artist, I don't care what you've been writing about. I don't think about a film scholar. I don't care what films you've been making. Okay. None of that shit. But they'll take anyone. So you you get out. Shut the fuck up. Okay. You are you are tilting the discourse in a way that is disingenuous and dishonest. And the more that I learn about different things, and I'm only talking about one thing because I honestly think that people can only chew this stuff one bite at a time. This Derek: Yeah. Elwyn: idea of Israel committing a genocide. Is just possibly the most successful Psyop. And I'm like allergic to the term PSYOP, but one of the most successful PsyOps that I think I've come across in in my life. Because more the evidence, when you start to peel it back in the way that I just did with the genocide scholars, like, look, those 90 people who voted for it may honestly believe it was a genocide. Maybe they are all university professors. I don't know who they were. Maybe they are the most scholarly scholars in that organization. Okay. But they weren't vetted. Aside from did they're check cash? You know, there there's no baseline of expertise or knowledge that they need to have. So no, shut the fuck up. Okay. You're dishonestly contributing to a discourse that is harmful and dangerous and having worldwide r repercussions every day. And your work, you bullshit organization, is cited as like one of the three or four pillars. for the claim every time, time and time again. Something the ICC said, something the UN said, and the International Association of Genocide Scholars. This is referred to over and over and over again. And not only should they shut the fuck up, everybody who refers to them should absolutely shut the fuck up when referring to them because you don't know what you're talking about. Derek: well said, bro. and I will agree with this one completely. So they can all shut the fuck up. I mean, I think it's you know, we've we've talked a lot about this stuff on on here and understanding that Israel's doing some terrible shit with Gaza. Like we're not and the acceptance of that. The the hard part is is with data, and I know this with my job, you can take data points and skew them in whatever dys direction you want. to try to make the argument that you're pressing. And the problem is is that when there's so much hatred involved. And like when you look at data points and you're using that to bend it into a narrative to justify hatred of anyone, that's where I'm just gonna say it's fucked up. And you know, what are we doing here? You know, like there's the the conversation it is losing its you know it its purpose. If we're going down those routes. So well done, sir. and Elwyn: Yeah. Derek: they Elwyn: Yeah. There's a longer conversation to be had there, but you're you're exactly right. And then the question becomes why is it so important that this be a genocide? Why is it not sufficient to say, yep, Netanyahu's committing an ass ton of war crimes, right? And he should absolutely be put on trial. And what they're doing is and has been for a couple of years way, you know, beyond the pale. And and they're they deserve recrimination and consequence, whatever through funding or Whatever. All of that, true. Believe it. Okay. But why is it so important that this be called a genocide? And when you think about the origins of the word genocide and who they're referring to in this case, some connections that you know, that I pay a lot of attention to and that I find difficult to ignore start to come to to into the light. Derek: Agreed. it's ugly, and I don't like it and they can shut the fuck up and I'm excited to maybe one day I need to do a shut the fuck up. I don't even know Elwyn: You can. Derek: who I don't even know who I'd tell the shut No, it'd be terrible. I'm Elwyn: You're too nice. Derek: not angry enough. I'm angry, but more internally. I like to process it and then Elwyn: Like, bro, shut the fuck up about states at the time, manner, and place of elections. Derek: No, I'll tell you who needs to shut the fuck up. Packers fans, Chicago Bears fans, and Minnesota Vikings fans. That's who can shut the fuck up. as long as the Lions win the division this year. That's all I care about. Elwyn: Yeah, yeah, I feel like there's some pretty big caveat there. Derek: Well, next week we'll continue our series on codifying norms and anybody that made it we need to have a like a a tagline that we say as we're signing off here. So you know, like we'll start with like maybe before you speak, tell somebody to shut the fuck up. no, that doesn't work because you hear speaking then. What what do you do before think before you speak? But that's kind of a saying already. I'll think of something for next week. But see all the Elwyn: We'll work we'll work on the words. Derek: Yeah. See, that's what I'm telling you. I verbally process I went. It's Elwyn: That's right. Derek: a word it's a word salad. These are all this the last three minutes of this conversation has no meaning whatsoever. So See y'all next week. Elwyn: See ya.