Latest / The Oath and The Office / Did the Supreme Court Just Save the Election? With Skye Perryman

Transcript

Did the Supreme Court Just Save the Election? With Skye Perryman · The Oath and The Office

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: This episode is brought to you by the Freedom From
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Religion Foundation.
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: Quick civics question.
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: When public officials swear an oath to the Constitution, does
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: that mean protecting everybody's rights or promoting their own religion?
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: Because as students head back to school, that question matters.
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: Public schools serve families of every faith and no faith
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: at all. They should not be used to pressure students,
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: promote religious messages, or make any child feel like an outsider.
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: FFRF says the oath is to the Constitution, not a creed.
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: The Freedom From Religion Foundation works to keep state and
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: church separate and speaks up for free thinkers, atheists, agnostics,
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: and non-religious Americans.
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: Learn more at.
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: Ffrf.us slash office. That's F-F-R-F dot U-S slash O-F-F-I-C-E.
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: Welcome to the Oath in the Office podcast. I'm John Fuglesang.
• 1:14
  Speaker 3: It's so good to have you with us. And it's
• 1:15
  Speaker 3: so good to welcome the star of our show, the Mac.
• 1:19
  Speaker 3: Of the oath in the office, the author of the
• 1:21
  Speaker 3: oath in the office, as well as the author of
• 1:23
  Speaker 3: the presidents and the people, a man thrown out of
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: Wu-Tang Clan for being too hardcore. I give you Professor
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: Corey Bretschneider. Hey, Corey.
• 1:30
  Speaker 2: Hey, John. We have quite a show.
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: We have Sky Perryman is going to join us. We're
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: going to talk about the latest in the post office case,
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, thankfully not allowing Donald Trump to move
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: forward with his plan to essentially use the post office
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: to steal money.
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: Election.
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: We'll talk about why that happened. We'll talk about her
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: ongoing litigation to stop the slush fund, which it turns
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: out is not totally dead, although it should be. And
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: of course, we're going to talk about the theme of
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: this presidency, corruption and the real theft that's gone on
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: using the office to sell pardons to abuse power. And,
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: you know, this is a show about the abuse of power,
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: but also about a hope and the promise of the
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: pledged to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, defend the office,
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: the oath in the office.
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: So we'll do both.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: We'll be honest this week and also offer some hope.
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: Well, I mean, it's amazing. We've been talking about the
• 2:28
  Speaker 3: post office and this battle that's been going on for months.
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: The United States Postal Service delivers Christmas cards and tax
• 2:34
  Speaker 3: returns and wedding invitations and jury summonses and sex toys
• 2:38
  Speaker 3: and your aunt's 47-page Facebook printout, but suddenly, whoa, hold on,
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: this envelope looks suspicious, right, Corey? Like, It's just amazing
• 2:46
  Speaker 3: to me that it's went this far. Nothing says limited
• 2:49
  Speaker 3: government like giving the federal government a new job checking
• 2:52
  Speaker 3: whether you're allowed to receive your ballot in your mail
• 2:55
  Speaker 3: to exercise your constitutional right. I mean, I'm excited to
• 2:59
  Speaker 3: talk about it with Sky, but is this finally over,
• 3:02
  Speaker 3: at least for 2026?
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: It's over for this election, I think.
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: But, you know, the threat to democracy continues because the
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: idea of the unitary executive, which we've talked often about,
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: but we can't talk enough about, that essentially the president
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: has total control over the executive branch. What this maneuver
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: was an attempt to do was to use that control
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: in order to usurp the law, to usurp our elections. And,
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: you know, what's hopeful is that the Supreme Court majority
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: did stop it.
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: But, you know, the.
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: Case is this isn't a final decision on the substance
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: of the law. It is a case that says that
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: it was likely to be an illegal series of maneuvers
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: that they used.
• 3:46
  Speaker 2: Now, could they come up with ways of.
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: Making this attempt to pretend to combat fraud, but really
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: steal the election in the future and future elections?
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: Could they get it past this court? I hope not,
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: you know, but let's be honest too.
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: There were two justices, Thomas and Alito, who essentially, to
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: my mind, I mean, we can't call, there's no legal
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: reason for this.
• 4:07
  Speaker 2: They were essentially saying, Yeah.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: Let this guy steal the election.
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: And really partisan hacks, two of them.
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: Now, Trump also attacked the justices that he appointed that
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: turned on him as he sees it, as he did
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: in the tariffs case. And, you know, that shows this tension.
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: My hope is that those justices are starting to get
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: the message that this isn't an ordinary time.
• 4:32
  Speaker 3: Starting to get the message? Corey, they all know exactly
• 4:36
  Speaker 3: what they signed up for and they all thought they
• 4:37
  Speaker 3: could be the ones to ride the wave.
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah, well, you know, we'll give credit where credit is due.
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: They didn't go along with his attempt to steal the election. I,
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: as you know, last week, a lot of listeners said
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: to me, and I heard from them that, you know,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: we hear the fear in your voice. And I was
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: scared because when you have this Supreme Court essentially enabling,
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, let's just remind people, you know, about a
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: third of Americans vote by mail. And he was able
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: to demand that states certify their voters lists against his
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: lists of blocking off supposed fraudulent ballots, which were really
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: just an attempt to shave votes off and to win the.
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: Election by cheating.
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: That was a threat to the midterm elections. And that's
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: why I was so worried. So you hear me more relieved.
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: There is hope.
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: We'll talk with Sky later about fighting back and citizens'
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: role in fighting back. And, you know, here we did
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: have a victory and those lower court decisions were upheld.
• 5:37
  Speaker 3: And you know that this was good for democracy because
• 5:40
  Speaker 3: Fox News didn't cover it. I mean, the news broke
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: at 7 p.m. Eastern, right? Laura Ingram- who I'm told
• 5:49
  Speaker 3: went to law school and graduated. She didn't think it
• 5:52
  Speaker 3: was worth telling her viewers that the Supreme Court had
• 5:55
  Speaker 3: knocked down Trump's scheme. And then Jesse Waters came on
• 5:58
  Speaker 3: and I never missed that show. That's a summit. You know, Corey,
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: that guy. And then he never mentioned it. Hannity shows up.
• 6:04
  Speaker 3: Hannity at one point said the single most important midterm
• 6:07
  Speaker 3: election in our Hannity never mentioned it. Corey, this was
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: so bad. They had to work overtime their entire primetime
• 6:15
  Speaker 3: lineup to keep Fox News viewers from knowing the news.
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: Well, we live in two realities.
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: You know, there's the people who listen to the Oath
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: in the Office podcast and.
• 6:25
  Speaker 2: Other shows like it.
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: And there's those Philistines.
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: And then there are people who are watching, you know, Fox.
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: which is telling them that, you know, Trump is just
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: trying to fight fraud.
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: And what is Trump telling his supporters? I'm just fighting fraud.
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: I'm not doing anything.
• 6:39
  Speaker 3: He's trying to fight fraud. Yeah, yeah. By the way,
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: Trump University and fight fraud with him. Yeah, right.
• 6:44
  Speaker 2: Meanwhile, they might have overturned an election.
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: And, you know, the theme of his own corruption and
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: his fight against democracy, it's one idea, which is it's
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: all about himself and his own power and self-aggrandizement.
• 6:56
  Speaker 3: So the short version is this Supreme Court just stopped
• 6:59
  Speaker 3: the 2026 election from becoming essentially a nationwide software beta test.
• 7:05
  Speaker 3: I think the funniest part of it all, Corey, I
• 7:07
  Speaker 3: guess you could say in this post office ruling, the
• 7:09
  Speaker 3: Supreme Court stamped it, return to sender. And there we go.
• 7:13
  Speaker 3: So let's get to the fun stuff, Corey.
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: I'm here for the jokes, so I love that.
• 7:18
  Speaker 3: Then let's talk about the $ 5, 000 dividend. You know, the
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: president went to the midterm convention, and I know you
• 7:25
  Speaker 3: weren't watching because nobody was, and he promised $ 5, 000 to
• 7:31
  Speaker 3: every American of voting age, if, if the Republican Party
• 7:36
  Speaker 3: keeps the House and the Senate, if then you'll all
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: get $ 5, 000. Now, this is funny for many reasons. I
• 7:45
  Speaker 3: don't see how it's not a bribe, Corey, because of
• 7:47
  Speaker 3: the if part of it, but essentially, man, baby, who's
• 7:51
  Speaker 3: already owes us money for the tariffs in a check.
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: And I'm still waiting for my doge check from last year.
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: That's coming soon, right, Corey? I'm waiting on the doge check. Now, essentially,
• 8:00
  Speaker 3: he rolled out of bed and said, hey, Alexa, give
• 8:04
  Speaker 3: every adult $ 5, 000. And didn't do the math, which comes
• 8:08
  Speaker 3: out to $ 1. 2 trillion. Now, I don't think we have $ 1. 2
• 8:12
  Speaker 3: trillion lying around, professor. So best case scenario, what? He's
• 8:17
  Speaker 3: trying to borrow from our grandkids to pay us now?
• 8:20
  Speaker 3: I mean, they control the White House House and the Senate.
• 8:23
  Speaker 3: He could give the damn money out right now. But
• 8:25
  Speaker 3: he suggested he might not need Congress to authorize such payments. Corey,
• 8:32
  Speaker 3: does he have any plausible constitutional pathway to do this unilaterally?
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: Well, you know, John, I wish I could. First of all,
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: let me start off by saying, let's talk about the
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: Trying to bribe people in order to vote for you
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: is not consistent with that, to say the least. But
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: so often we're talking about how the system should function.
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: And this show is also about the reality of how
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: it does function. And unfortunately, the First Amendment, in particular
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: the right of free speech, has been so expanded that
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: the court has limited the kind of corruption, even bribery
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: claims that you can bring. And I think that if
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: a prosecutor were to look at this, I mean, there
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: are so many hurdles to ever prosecuting it. that it's
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: unlikely that it would ever happen. He would say certainly
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: there is a right to free speech. He would say
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: that under the immunity case, Trump versus the United States,
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: that this is an official act that.
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: He's engaging in. It's a partisan one.
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: And this court has often rejected challenges, for instance, to
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: partisan gerrymandering on the grounds that, look, you know.
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: This is part of partisanship, it's part of politics.
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: So I don't see a successful prosecution. I think the
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: First Amendment would block it off. I think the immunity case.
• 9:47
  Speaker 2: And that's a real problem.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: It's part of why after this presidency, when we have
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: a Congress that wants to preserve the office, we have
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: to start to talk about how to rein in executive
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: power with more specific criminal law. that outlaw exactly something
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: like this. We shouldn't think about politics in terms of
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: what could we prosecute with the laws on the books.
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: We should start with the ethical realization that this is
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: obviously bribery, obviously wrong to try to use the United
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: States Treasury in order to steal an election. And then
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: we've got to think back to the kind of laws
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: that we need to make sure that it doesn't happen again.
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: But the reality is that we have, you know, we
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: don't have sufficient either laws on the books to prosecute
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: it or an infrastructure to prosecute it. And we have
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: this court, despite what it did in the post office case,
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: you know, it didn't totally sell us out, but they
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: blocked off so many of the ways of trying to
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: produce accountability for presidents like this who engage in essentially bribery.
• 10:46
  Speaker 3: So, I mean, it's $ 1. 2 trillion, Professor. Congress hasn't appropriated
• 10:50
  Speaker 3: any of that money. I guess the question I really
• 10:53
  Speaker 3: want to unpack constitutionally is when does a presidential promise
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: become an exercise of presidential power? Because he's always BSing people.
• 11:05
  Speaker 3: I mean, he lies constantly, but this was quid pro quo.
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: Well, what he does, and we saw this in the
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: post office case, the court thankfully stopped him, and I
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: would hope that he would be stopped here, too. is
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: that he looks for either inherent powers, he says, of
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: the executive branch. So just to explain it again, in
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: the post office case, he's saying, look, the post office
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: is part of the executive branch. And in the same
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: way that, you know, the printing office in the White
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: House that, you know, makes brochures when people come to visit,
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: I could say what I want in that or not.
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: I can also tell the post office that I want
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: to combat what I think fraud is.
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: That's what the Solicitor General does.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: So that's one thing that he does, is he looks
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: for inherent powers. He also looks for legislation that he
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: says grants him powers, generalized delegations of power.
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: So by analogy, Sky Perryman's group.
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: Democracy Forward and I, worked on an amicus brief in
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: the tariffs case. And what he did there, there is
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: no power of a president, and this is what we
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: said in our amicus brief, to unilaterally impose tariffs willy-nilly
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: as he wants in an arbitrary way. But he looked
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: for a law, and he found the International Economic Emergencies Act,
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: and he says, that delegates me the power to institute
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: these tariffs. Now, we said in our brief, and the
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: Supreme Court said, I don't think so.
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: We read the law. It says the opposite, actually. It
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: reigns in presidents. So he'll do that, too.
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: He'll look for legislation that he claims enables him to
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: pay this bribe, essentially, assuming that his party wins both houses.
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 12:40
  Speaker 3: And again, like I'm sorry. Go ahead, Corey.
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: And I was going to say, you know, one close
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: cousin of the International Economic Emergencies Act that he used
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: in the tariffs case is the National Emergencies Act. So
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: you could imagine him, for instance, saying, well, we're in
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: a national emergency that requires the payment of these of
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: this money. And, you know, more likely than that, I
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: think the House is going to go to Democrats and
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: they'll have an easy way out.
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: He won't have to pay up. And he'll be relieved
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: about that.
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: But, you know, there are ways to usurp congressional power.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: And the theme of this presidency has all been about that. Remember,
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: Doge just ignored the power of the purse. And so
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: why would he not try it again?
• 13:22
  Speaker 3: Well, because Doge saved us so much money and made
• 13:24
  Speaker 3: the deficit go down.
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: Oh, wait, no.
• 13:26
  Speaker 3: But I mean, look, last question on this. I mean,
• 13:29
  Speaker 3: it's bribery out in the open, right? I mean, linking
• 13:32
  Speaker 3: a government benefit to an election as a quid pro quo.
• 13:37
  Speaker 3: I mean, that... Like I would think if a Democrat
• 13:40
  Speaker 3: did that, we'd hear all about the Democratic and constitutional
• 13:42
  Speaker 3: concerns of such an action. But I mean, it's open bribery,
• 13:46
  Speaker 3: is it not?
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: You know, I wish I could say, John, it's open
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: and shut because should it be?
• 13:52
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: Ethically, should we have laws on the books that would
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: make this obviously illegal and would deter any president from
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: doing it?
• 13:58
  Speaker 4: Absolutely.
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: But I also have to face the reality that the
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: president's lawyers will come up with all sorts of arguments.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: For why this is perfectly legal. It's a normal thing
• 14:07
  Speaker 2: for a president to do.
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: And their arguments include free speech, the unitary executive, and
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: possibly even here are the statutory powers that give me
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: the right to do it. And, you know, the court
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: has been willing to use the free speech clause to
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: limit all sorts of protections of democracy, most famously campaign
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: finance reform.
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: It's limited.
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: And it also has limited the kind of corruption cases
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: that can be brought.
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: Wow.
• 14:32
  Speaker 3: So, OK, let's not talk about bribery. Let's talk about
• 14:36
  Speaker 3: selling pardons. Yeah. We've seen a lot of reporting on
• 14:40
  Speaker 3: this growing network of lobbyists and lawyers and presidential henchmen
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: who are seeking to help all manner of wealthy douchebag
• 14:48
  Speaker 3: get presidential clemency. And CBS on the remains of 60
• 14:52
  Speaker 3: Minutes actually reported this Trump linked lobbying firm got half
• 14:56
  Speaker 3: a million dollars for work involving immigration and parted related discussions.
• 14:59
  Speaker 3: I mean, they actually showed footage of these guys just
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: selling pardons. We already know that Trump is doing this.
• 15:05
  Speaker 3: What does it mean for the rule of law, Corey?
• 15:08
  Speaker 3: when access to presidential clemency becomes something you can just
• 15:13
  Speaker 3: hire a political insider to do for you?
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: Well, you know, this 60 Minutes report really started to
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: bring home just how in the open the selling of
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: pardons has been. It's something like, according to the statistics,
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: 90% of pardons have bypassed the Department of Justice. And
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: that's if you include the January 6th pardons. But even
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: if you take them out, it's something like 70%. In
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: other words, there has always been a process of what's
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: supposed to be consistent with equity in the rule of law,
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: that you submit a pardon application to the Department of Justice.
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: There's a pardon attorney, essentially, who looks at all this
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: information and weighs the recommendation. And then it goes to
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: the president. It's a way of imposing some sort of
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: standard and order on this massive power of a president.
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: But that's not what's going on here. The president is basically,
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: it looks like, allowing People who are being paid talk
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: about bribes in order to get pardons in front of him.
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: They're bragging, these pardon brokers, about their relationship with staff
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: members close to the president. And the reality of what's happening,
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: which is that these pardon applications aren't being granted through
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: the normal process, but are being granted through people who.
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: Had direct access to justice.
• 16:29
  Speaker 3: Exactly.
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: What's happening is obviously that the president of the United
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: States is selling pardons. Now, one thing I'll just say
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: about 60 Minutes, on the one hand, it's such a
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: damning story that it got through the pro-Trump forces there.
• 16:45
  Speaker 3: No, it's very Supreme Court, isn't it? It's very John Roberts.
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, it was just so bad.
• 16:49
  Speaker 3: Here's something to make the family happy, and now here's
• 16:52
  Speaker 3: our token bit of integrity.
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: Go on. Very Supreme Court. But, you know, the way
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: they did the story is not the way I just
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: told it. It really is focusing on these people who
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: are abusing the vulnerable to sell these pardons. And I
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: think you could come away from watching that story thinking
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: it's not the president. that's selling pardons. It's these hucksters
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: who are really trying to profit off naive people.
• 17:14
  Speaker 3: And they're the ones who would take the fall for
• 17:17
  Speaker 3: it as well. But I mean, clearly they're not doing
• 17:20
  Speaker 3: it for themselves. I mean, okay, can a president constitutionally
• 17:24
  Speaker 3: pardon someone for essentially any federal crime, Professor? Are there
• 17:28
  Speaker 3: things a president can't pardon?
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: Well, as you alluded to, we're talking about federal crimes.
• 17:34
  Speaker 2: There is no pardon power for state crimes.
• 17:37
  Speaker 3: That's right, Derek Chauvin.
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: And the way that the.
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: Clause, the way that it's put into the Constitution is
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: there is one exception. The president has the power to pardon,
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: and now here's the clause.
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: Except in cases of impeachment. Now, scholars through the years.
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: Have essentially argued that that clause, except in cases of impeachment,
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: is essentially meaningless, that the power is plenary or absolute,
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: that it's an absolute power. He could pardon whoever he wants,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: even as the anti-federalists worried about co-conspirators, even those who
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: are involved with crimes himself. So, you know, Roger Stone,
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: the January 6th rioters, that there is no limit on
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: that pardon. But a great constitutional scholar and scholar of
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: the presidency named Jeff Toulas and I have teamed up
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: to go back to the history of And to really
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: try to look at that clause, there was a debate
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: about it. We know there was a controversial vote at
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: the founding about the way to word it. And what
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: we argue is, look, no one's really sure what that
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: clause means, but here's a common sense way to read,
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: except in cases of impeachment.
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: That if the president has.
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: Been certainly impeached or committed an impeachable offense that connects
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: him to those he wants to pardon, there should be
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: a limit there.
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: And at minimum, it should be a limit.
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: That Congress has the right to legislate about, that it
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: can come in and say, no pardons for co-conspirators in
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: January 6th, no pardons for Roger Stone and your other
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: cronies who have contributed to impeachable offenses.
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: And we want to see legislation.
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: Passed by Congress that says that common sense thing. But
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: things are so bad with the pardon power that many
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: scholars think that would be unconstitutional, that the president really
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: has this absolute power. That, by the way, I just
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: have to say this, was the nightmare of those who
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: oppose ratification of the Constitution. They worried about the fact
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: that a pardon power would mean not It was called
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: by the pro-Constitution forces of the time, the benign power
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: of prerogative to be used for mercy. But the opponents
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: of the Constitution were like, what if you have a
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: bad president? He's going to use this to get his co-conspirators,
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: his cronies, his fellow criminals off.
• 19:52
  Speaker 2: And that's what's happening. That's why we need legislation to stop.
• 19:55
  Speaker 3: It seems like a president could just pardon someone in
• 19:58
  Speaker 3: exchange for money and not pretend it was something else.
• 20:01
  Speaker 3: I mean, what about something more complicated, like not an
• 20:03
  Speaker 3: explicit sale, but a wealthy person makes a large political
• 20:06
  Speaker 3: contribution and then gets a pardon? Like, I guess I'm asking,
• 20:10
  Speaker 3: where does bribery law intersect with the pardon power? Is
• 20:14
  Speaker 3: it just not whether a president can pardon someone, but
• 20:18
  Speaker 3: whether the president is using a legitimate constitutional power for
• 20:22
  Speaker 3: an illegitimate purpose?
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: Well, it doesn't help things.
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: And, you know, I've been critical, for instance, of Joe Biden,
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: and some listeners might disagree with this, pardoning his son,
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: because I think that the idea of the pardon, you know,
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: it's well, I think there's strong evidence anyway, that a
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: self-pardon would be unconstitutional.
• 20:43
  Speaker 3: Well, the Catholic Church doesn't let us do that anymore.
• 20:46
  Speaker 3: We're not allowed to self-pardon. That's like nine Hail Marys.
• 20:50
  Speaker 2: That's one limit.
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: But, you know, if you think about what a pardon
• 20:53
  Speaker 1: of co-conspirators is, it is a kind of self-pardon or pardon,
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: I'll say this about Hunter Biden, of family members.
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: It is a kind of self-pardon.
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: And so, You know, I think members of presidents of
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: both parties have used this power in ways.
• 21:07
  Speaker 2: In which it shouldn't be used.
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: And yes, the dominant view of most constitutional lawyers is
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: that unfortunately it is absolute. I think that can't be,
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: that if a power is abused in such a way
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: that it's going to lead to the downfall of democracy.
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: And you look at the January 6th massive amount of pardons,
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: undoing one of the most important cases ever brought by
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: the Department of Justice to try to fight back on
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: behalf of our democracy.
• 21:32
  Speaker 2: You see how dangerous this power can be.
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: So no, I don't think it's unlimited. I don't think
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: that's what the history or the text suggests. I don't
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: think that's what common sense suggests. And it's one of
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: those areas where we need legislation to stop it. You know,
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: by the way, and this goes back, John, to what
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: you said earlier, nothing is going to protect the pardon
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: brokers who are selling pardons.
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: They very well might be prosecuted. But under the immunity case,
• 21:57
  Speaker 2: under the argument that I just gave you for the
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: absolute pardon power, It's unlikely the president will ever face
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: criminal charges for this.
• 22:04
  Speaker 3: We got to take a quick break. But when we
• 22:06
  Speaker 3: come back, there's a lot to talk about, including we
• 22:11
  Speaker 3: finally reached the exciting stage of artificial intelligence, Corey, where
• 22:14
  Speaker 3: the whistleblowers got so loud, the people building it are
• 22:17
  Speaker 3: starting to say, yeah, maybe we should slow down. Let's
• 22:20
  Speaker 3: talk about this Matrix prequel we are all living in
• 22:23
  Speaker 3: when we come right back on The Oath in the Office.
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: This episode is brought to you by the Freedom From
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: Religion Foundation. We talk every week about the oath, the
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: promise to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. So here's
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: the church-state version of that question. When public officials take
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: that oath, are they promising to protect everyone's freedom of
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: conscience or to use government power to promote their own religion?
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: Because as students head back to school, that question is
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: not abstract. Public schools serve children from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist, Agnostic,
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: and many other families. No student should be made to
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: feel like they belong less because they don't share the
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: government's preferred religious message. The First Amendment is not a
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: bridge to government-backed religion. It is a limit on government power.
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: The Freedom from Religion Foundation works to keep church and
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: state separate. because freedom of conscience means the right to believe, question, doubt,
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: or not believe at all. FFRF also speaks directly for freethinkers, atheists, agnostics, humanists,
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: and non-religious Americans who are too often erased from the story.
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: Learn more at ffrf.us slash office. That's ffrf.us slash o-f-f-i-c-e.
• 23:52
  Speaker 3: Welcome back to The Oath in the Office. I'm John Fugelsang,
• 23:54
  Speaker 3: along with the star of our show, Professor Corey Bretschneider. Corey,
• 23:57
  Speaker 3: I want to jump from one constitutional dilemma to something
• 24:00
  Speaker 3: radically different, artificial intelligence. Anthropic CEO Dario Amadei has now
• 24:07
  Speaker 3: called for slowing the development of frontier AI, while other
• 24:10
  Speaker 3: tech leaders have expressed support for greater safety measures. I mean,
• 24:14
  Speaker 3: he pretty much wandered into the middle of the arms
• 24:16
  Speaker 3: race and yelled, hey, maybe we shouldn't build a god
• 24:18
  Speaker 3: machine at full speed. And suddenly Sam Altman agrees and
• 24:22
  Speaker 3: Elon agrees and Demis Hassabis agrees. And I mean, the
• 24:25
  Speaker 3: AI industry has now achieved something artificial intelligence hasn't consensus.
• 24:32
  Speaker 3: And at the same time, you've got a government like
• 24:35
  Speaker 3: Donald Trump and Mike Johnson saying, no, no, no, can't
• 24:37
  Speaker 3: slow down. China might get there first. Like we're going
• 24:40
  Speaker 3: to race towards extinction because we're afraid somebody else might
• 24:44
  Speaker 3: reach extinction before we do. I guess that's the best
• 24:48
  Speaker 3: way to, to explain it. I mean, Is self-regulation adequate
• 24:52
  Speaker 3: when the potential consequences include national security threats or just
• 24:56
  Speaker 3: catastrophic harm? I mean, when a whistleblower says they know
• 25:00
  Speaker 3: that they can destroy all human life within a decade,
• 25:04
  Speaker 3: that to me seems like, you know what, I think
• 25:06
  Speaker 3: it matters a bit more than the medical visits of
• 25:11
  Speaker 3: trans children. Government, get involved in this.
• 25:14
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, John.
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: My God, the way that this is being talked about.
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: First of all, this ex-employee of Anthropic coming out and
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: saying 10% chance that all of humanity is extinguished by AI.
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: That is an existential threat that is beyond measure.
• 25:35
  Speaker 3: He said they all know it. All the CEOs know it.
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: They all know it.
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: Then when I listened to the CEO- of Anthropic, he
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: essentially said, not that he disagreed, but that he prefers
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: to frame it in a different way.
• 25:46
  Speaker 2: And what is that doing? It's trying to hide the
• 25:48
  Speaker 2: real risk.
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: When you have a risk this high, and the only
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: thing that's comparable is nuclear weapons, you obviously, to my mind,
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: need not self-regulation, but the creation of administrative agencies through
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: legislation in which experts are able to create rules that
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: regulate Now, I just said a lot of words, but
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: what I've just described is one of the most important
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: inventions of the 20th century.
• 26:13
  Speaker 2: And that is the creation of the administrative state.
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: The idea that you can, through laws, create entities that
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: have staff who know more about what's going on than
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: even some of the people who are participating, who are
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: weighing the risks, most importantly, on behalf of all of
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: us citizens.
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: So the idea of self-regulation, I think, doesn't go far enough.
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: We really need to have a government agency that has
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: forcible rules that can be created as the technology improves,
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: that have access, and that can enforce this. There is already,
• 26:50
  Speaker 1: let's say.
• 26:52
  Speaker 2: Two more things.
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: One is There are checks right now, which is, you know,
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: if you create something that you recklessly know is going
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: to kill somebody, you know, that's possibly manslaughter or even.
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: A degree of murder.
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: But it'll be too late if that happens. And that's
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: why we need a preventative measure. And in safety dangers
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: like that, we've done this throughout the 20th century and
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: throughout the 21st century. It's just this Supreme Court and
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: this president have undermined it. By the way, I just
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: have to say one more thing, John, you alluded to
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: this president said that we should trust him, that he's
• 27:24
  Speaker 1: a very smart president and he knows about AI. And
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: his solution to all this is that he'll protect us
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: from going extinct.
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: Wow.
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: I talk about frightening. That is something that is false.
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: He's not going to protect us. I don't even think
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: he knows what AI is. Yeah.
• 27:42
  Speaker 3: No, of course he doesn't know. I don't think he
• 27:44
  Speaker 3: can spell AI. You make a very good point because, yeah,
• 27:47
  Speaker 3: we won the nuclear arms race and we won industrial
• 27:51
  Speaker 3: pollution and we won global surveillance and we won social media.
• 27:55
  Speaker 3: And look at how well all that turned out. You know,
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: these humans, we have this amazing record of inventing something
• 28:01
  Speaker 3: incredibly dangerous. And then like 10 minutes later, we ask, oh,
• 28:05
  Speaker 3: should we have rules for this thing? And like, we
• 28:08
  Speaker 3: don't build the guardrails. We build the damn cliff. And
• 28:10
  Speaker 3: then we debate about having a meeting about guardrails. So
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: what is the government's constitutional authority to regulate these AI companies?
• 28:19
  Speaker 3: I mean, could Congress, at least if they, if they're
• 28:22
  Speaker 3: so bought and paid for, they're not going to regulate
• 28:25
  Speaker 3: them while knowing how dangerous they are. Could they at
• 28:27
  Speaker 3: least require AI developers to demonstrate safety and before they're
• 28:31
  Speaker 3: allowed to release these really powerful models?
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think certainly Congress has the authority, and
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: there was an argument about this in the 20th century,
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: that more libertarian anti-government forces believed that the administrative state
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: that FDR had created was essentially unconstitutional, that it was
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: stealing from property owners, from companies, and it was unjustly
• 28:54
  Speaker 1: regulating and illegally regulating the private economy.
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: But as FDR... was victorious over a Supreme Court that
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: tried to stop him.
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: One of the things that emerged was, yes, Congress can
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: hand over power to experts with guidelines. It's not that
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: they just give them willy-nilly power. That's a description that
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: opponents of the administrative state claim. And, you know, ideally,
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: this should be done, too, with independence. I wouldn't want
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: a president being able to control this agency. And I
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: think the legislation that creates it should create that independence.
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: The Supreme Court, unfortunately, in that overturning of Humphrey's executor,
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: which we've talked about often, has really limited Congress's ability
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: that way. So this is a clash between what we
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: need and what our superiors need.
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: Court is going to allow.
• 29:42
  Speaker 3: I mean, if we had FDR, we would have been
• 29:44
  Speaker 3: regulating the Internet like a public utility for a decade already.
• 29:49
  Speaker 3: And you're right. I mean, how do you regulate something
• 29:51
  Speaker 3: when the technology evolves faster than the laws designed to
• 29:55
  Speaker 3: govern it? This is like a bunch of addicts to me.
• 29:58
  Speaker 3: We need more AI. We need more AI. It's propping
• 30:02
  Speaker 3: up our entire Wall Street economy. Your toaster needs AI.
• 30:05
  Speaker 3: Your toothbrush, your refrigerator needs AI. We've somehow decided, Corey,
• 30:08
  Speaker 3: that every object on Earth has to become an intelligent
• 30:11
  Speaker 3: software platform because, you know, being a lamp's not good
• 30:15
  Speaker 3: enough now. But beneath all of this, it seems like
• 30:18
  Speaker 3: these CEOs are acknowledging the capability is advancing faster than
• 30:22
  Speaker 3: our ability to understand it. And control what we're creating.
• 30:26
  Speaker 3: If I'm flying on an airplane, I want to know
• 30:28
  Speaker 3: the guy who inspected the brakes isn't the same guy
• 30:32
  Speaker 3: who gets a bonus for convincing everyone the brakes are excellent.
• 30:35
  Speaker 3: You know what I mean? Go ahead. We'll get off
• 30:38
  Speaker 3: of this in a second. But I mean, who's responsible
• 30:42
  Speaker 3: if the AI causes harm? Will it be the developer?
• 30:45
  Speaker 3: Will it be the user? Or will it be the
• 30:47
  Speaker 3: government that chose not to regulate it?
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: You know, I think that.
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: we have analogies that can help us. And what I'm
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: hearing in the public debate isn't breaking this down as
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: simply as it should be. There is a technology out
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: there to deal with new technologies that are dangerous or
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: to deal with materials that are hazardous. And so we
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: just have to think about AI by analogy. So think
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: about the Food and Drug Administration. Do we allow any
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: medicine to be allowed to be sold to the public? No,
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: there's regulation to ensure that it's safe. If it's going
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: to be sold over the counter, that it's been researched,
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: if it's going to be prescribed, that it meets a
• 31:27
  Speaker 1: series of standards. And the Food and Drug Administration does
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: just that. If you think, I mentioned the nuclear threat,
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: and let's get a little more specific about that.
• 31:37
  Speaker 2: I think I could have been more specific.
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: I mean, nuclear power plants serve a purpose, but they
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: are also dangerous. And so they are regulated very intensely
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: by the government who are in agencies that are staffed
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: by experts. And as much as This administration rails against
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: the deep state and against people who know stuff. Well,
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: look at some of the people who are quitting Anthropic
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: or quitting OpenAI to warn us. Those are the people
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: that could help us to staff these agencies and to
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: create rules that.
• 32:06
  Speaker 2: Would protect us.
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: If we're going to protect against dangerous drugs or against drugs.
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: nuclear energy.
• 32:12
  Speaker 3: How do we not protect.
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: Against an AI that has a 10% chance of killing
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: us all?
• 32:17
  Speaker 3: I just think it's easier than it sounds. If you
• 32:18
  Speaker 3: can get them to settle for government salaries, if you
• 32:20
  Speaker 3: can get these privateers to settle for government salaries, then yeah,
• 32:23
  Speaker 3: you might be onto something, Corey, because that's who should
• 32:26
  Speaker 3: be working with the government to regulate this, people from
• 32:28
  Speaker 3: the inside who know how dangerous it can be. And again,
• 32:32
  Speaker 3: I'm enjoying talking about the end of the world, but
• 32:34
  Speaker 3: Can we move it on to something a bit more light,
• 32:37
  Speaker 3: like the return of Nazis to German politics? Because this
• 32:41
  Speaker 3: AFD story, Corey, I mean, they've made a major breakthrough
• 32:46
  Speaker 3: in Germany's Saxony-Anhalt election, winning 39 of 83 seats in
• 32:49
  Speaker 3: the state legislature. They had like 23 previously. I guess
• 32:54
  Speaker 3: congratulations to far right people who are just like Nazis,
• 32:58
  Speaker 3: but don't like being called Nazis. What does this tell
• 33:00
  Speaker 3: us about the resilience and vulnerability, Professor? of established democratic parties?
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: You know, the fact that things like economic, the problematic economy,
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: for instance, or the unequal distribution of wealth in Germany,
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: that some of those things have been co-opted by the
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: right to allow them to take over, at least in
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: these local elections.
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: Should frighten us. And it is a story.
• 33:28
  Speaker 1: The Nazi party, I should say, is illegal in Germany.
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: But the AFD goes right up to the line of
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: what's legal and have not been outlawed.
• 33:38
  Speaker 2: And they're winning elections.
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: So it is a clear message that authoritarianism around the
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: world remains a threat. They were helped by Viktor Orban.
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: But Viktor Orban, I think, also gives us some hope
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: in this story. And as we talk to Sky and
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: pivot to that interview and finish this discussion, if I
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: left people without as much hope as they needed in
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: the last episode, I want to leave them with lots
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: of hope. Let's remember Viktor Orban, who really did destroy
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: democracy in Hungary. And yet citizens, the State Department of
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: the United States, really were able to turn the tide
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: by highlighting his corruption. And as that message got out,
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: including in what were thought to be strongholds of Orban,
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: you know, in areas that were thought to be, you know,
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: solely for him. as those stories of corruption got out,
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: he was defeated in an election. And I think that's
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: what's coming in our own midterm election, that the more
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: we can tell the story of Trump's selling pardons, that
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: we can tell the story of his bribery to try
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: to bribe the American people into voting his way, that
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: in this midterms, we're going to have a serious pushback.
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: It happened in Hungary. There was a destruction of democracy,
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: and yet it recovered. So the AFD story is worrying.
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: You know, aided by people like Viktor Orban, but Orban
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: himself and his own defeat is in many ways an inspiration.
• 35:02
  Speaker 3: And I want to point out that, you know, Orban
• 35:04
  Speaker 3: was not defeated by a leftist or a reform party.
• 35:07
  Speaker 3: The Peter Magyar coalition, I mean, they're right wing. They're
• 35:12
  Speaker 3: just not crazy right wing. And they campaigned heavily on corruption.
• 35:17
  Speaker 3: And it was liberals and conservatives together who brought down
• 35:20
  Speaker 3: this fascist. I mean, do you think that could work here?
• 35:25
  Speaker 3: Could anti-corruption become a strong enough Democratic rallying point that
• 35:29
  Speaker 3: it cuts through traditional left-right politics? I mean, I'm including
• 35:34
  Speaker 3: the Epstein cover-up. I'm including data centers and ignoring the
• 35:39
  Speaker 3: will of the people. I mean, these are all forms
• 35:40
  Speaker 3: of corruption, and these are all the strongest areas, I think,
• 35:43
  Speaker 3: where we could get Republican brothers and sisters to acknowledge
• 35:46
  Speaker 3: they may have been hoodwinked, bamboozled, and led astray.
• 35:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I think what it requires is doing what we're
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: trying to do every week, and which I wish mainstream
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: media was doing more of, but independent media is doing it.
• 35:58
  Speaker 1: And that's telling the story in depth of Trump's corruption
• 36:02
  Speaker 1: and correcting mainstream media like 60 Minutes when it tries
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: to tell the story of pardons as if it's really
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: pardon brokers that are the problem, not the president of
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: the United States. So I think if we're able to
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: get that message out, and I am hopeful that we will,
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: that's not just a message for the Democratic Party.
• 36:18
  Speaker 2: It's for Republicans as well.
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: We had the Attorney General of New Mexico a number
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: of months ago. I think he was one of our
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: first guests. What he said really stuck with me, which
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: is anti-democracy and anti-corruption and pro-economy that will benefit everyone,
• 36:37
  Speaker 1: those are not three separate things. We need to find
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: a vocabulary that to bring them together. And that is
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: what happened in Hungary. And I think that's what is
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: happening here too.
• 36:46
  Speaker 3: I mean, how much does democracy, Corey, depend on laws?
• 36:50
  Speaker 3: And how much of it depends on people just voluntarily
• 36:54
  Speaker 3: respecting norms that the law doesn't necessarily force them to respect?
• 36:59
  Speaker 2: You know, I think you need both.
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: You had a period after the Nixon administration in which
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: we did pass a series of laws that reigned in
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: presidential power and that created real checks on power, created
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: an independent council.
• 37:10
  Speaker 2: That gave us.
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: The evidence, at least, of the scandal of Iran-Contra that
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: put presidents in check. And the fact that we've undermined that,
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: combined with the fact that we've got this deeply unethical president,
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: this criminal president, that's been the danger of the moment.
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: That is why it's created so much fear. So the
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: answer is, you know, we need good people to fight back.
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: We need to elect leaders who have virtue in the
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: way the framers meant, which was to obey the law.
• 37:38
  Speaker 2: That's what they meant by virtue.
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: And we need to, you know, push back against those
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: who would use the office just to benefit themselves.
• 37:46
  Speaker 3: And, you know, you're right. I'm the guy who's still
• 37:49
  Speaker 3: angry about Iran-Contra all these years later. I'm still furious
• 37:52
  Speaker 3: about it. As soon as I was old enough to
• 37:54
  Speaker 3: understand what it was, I've been mad ever since. But
• 37:57
  Speaker 3: we will never know for all of the lack of
• 38:00
  Speaker 3: any kind of accountability and all the pardons that Bush
• 38:03
  Speaker 3: gave for everyone convicted. We'll never know how much that
• 38:07
  Speaker 3: investigation held the administration in check. You know, they sent
• 38:10
  Speaker 3: weapons to illegally arm the same Iranians who had killed
• 38:13
  Speaker 3: our Marines in Beirut. They illegally used the money to
• 38:16
  Speaker 3: fund the Contras in Central America after Congress passed a
• 38:18
  Speaker 3: law saying they couldn't. They lied about Israel's involvement in
• 38:21
  Speaker 3: the shipments. Israel was shipping weapons to Iran. I mean,
• 38:25
  Speaker 3: the whole thing was dirtier than Chris Christie's hamper. And
• 38:29
  Speaker 3: yet we'll never know how much that held the administration
• 38:33
  Speaker 3: in check, which is why I'm a big fan, Corey,
• 38:35
  Speaker 3: of every last impeachment measure that you want to bring.
• 38:39
  Speaker 3: Carter Balgreen, let him have all he wants, because I
• 38:43
  Speaker 3: want the next like these Democrats are all saying we're
• 38:45
  Speaker 3: not going to impeach him, not going to impeach him.
• 38:46
  Speaker 3: I disagree. I want this administration to be so busy
• 38:50
  Speaker 3: on defense that they don't have time to invade other
• 38:54
  Speaker 3: countries or have these illegal wars or do crypto grift.
• 38:57
  Speaker 3: I want them terrified every day. And I think the
• 39:00
  Speaker 3: American people are going to vote for the candidates who
• 39:02
  Speaker 3: are going to bring the fight to them and really,
• 39:05
  Speaker 3: really make accountability more than just I'm going to give
• 39:08
  Speaker 3: an angry speech.
• 39:10
  Speaker 2: And I think I'll say it right here.
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: I don't love predictions, but I will predict this, that
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: if Democrats win the House of Representatives, I think we
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: will see an impeachment. And part of its importance isn't
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: just in stopping Trump. It's in getting the information out,
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: because when we get information about corruption out, about abuses
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: of power, as we did to a degree during Nixon,
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: not enough, but to a degree. that's how we start
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: to get the motion towards legislation to really reform and
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: protect and restore this democracy.
• 39:37
  Speaker 3: Well, let's take a quick break. And when we come back,
• 39:39
  Speaker 3: let's sit down with the great Sky Perryman. I've got
• 39:42
  Speaker 3: a lot of questions for both of you about this
• 39:44
  Speaker 3: Supreme Court ruling on mail-in ballots. Don't go away, everybody.
• 39:47
  Speaker 3: Be right back on The Oath in the Office. Welcome
• 39:59
  Speaker 3: back to The Oath in the Office. Professor Brettschneider, I'm
• 40:01
  Speaker 3: really excited about this next guest because the last time
• 40:04
  Speaker 3: she was on this show, I wasn't here. And the
• 40:06
  Speaker 3: last time she was on my show, you weren't there.
• 40:08
  Speaker 3: So I'm thrilled you were able to get Sky Perryman
• 40:11
  Speaker 3: to return your calls.
• 40:13
  Speaker 2: Absolutely.
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: We're delighted to welcome back to The Oath in the
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: Office for the second time, Sky Perryman. Sky, of course,
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: is the president and CEO of Democracy Forward. And I'd
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: say that Democracy Forward has really been at the forefront
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: of the legal fight against the Trump administration's abuses of power.
• 40:31
  Speaker 2: As we're talking about different.
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: Cases in which the lower courts, for instance, have stopped Trump,
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: it's often them that have brought the cases, that have
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: worked with the litigants. And I've also had the pleasure
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: of working with Democracy Forward on the tariffs case, on
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: an amicus brief challenging the constitutionality of the tariffs. That
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: was a real honor and an amazing team, I have
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: to say, to work with. So I've seen firsthand, too,
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: the outstanding work that Democracy Forward does. Skye also has
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: a new book out, and we'll ask her about it.
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: It's called Ordinary People, Extraordinary Times, How to Reclaim Your Power,
• 41:13
  Speaker 1: Fight for Freedom, and Reimagine Democracy. And we'll put a
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: link to it in our show notes. So Skye, welcome
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: back to The Oath in the Office.
• 41:22
  Speaker 4: Oh, it's so good to be with you all. Yeah,
• 41:25
  Speaker 4: thanks for having me.
• 41:26
  Speaker 3: It's great to have you. Thank you. It's a rather
• 41:29
  Speaker 3: auspicious time because we're recording this Right after the Supreme
• 41:33
  Speaker 3: Court has more or less decided, no, the post office
• 41:36
  Speaker 3: isn't Donald Trump's secretary of state. And I'm so glad
• 41:39
  Speaker 3: you're here to talk about it with us. I mean,
• 41:41
  Speaker 3: he wanted the post office to verify voters sky before
• 41:46
  Speaker 3: delivering ballots. I mean, just think about how this this
• 41:48
  Speaker 3: sentence sounds. The government wants the post office to decide.
• 41:52
  Speaker 3: whether we are sufficiently voter-ish to get our own ballot.
• 41:56
  Speaker 3: What did you make of this? And do you think
• 41:58
  Speaker 3: the Supreme Court's ruling changed anything about these new rules
• 42:01
  Speaker 3: for mail-in ballots? What is still not resolved?
• 42:04
  Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, this is really, if you take a
• 42:06
  Speaker 4: step back, and this is what we want everyone to
• 42:09
  Speaker 4: really pay attention to here, this administration has lost in
• 42:13
  Speaker 4: court every single attempt that it has made so far
• 42:17
  Speaker 4: to undermine the midterm elections through engaging in federal administration elections.
• 42:23
  Speaker 4: We have a range of cases where we have secured
• 42:25
  Speaker 4: court orders that remain in place. The Postal Service case,
• 42:28
  Speaker 4: there's not a single federal court. We've had multiple federal
• 42:31
  Speaker 4: district courts. There's not a single federal court that has
• 42:33
  Speaker 4: said that what the president has done there is lawful.
• 42:35
  Speaker 2: You saw the.
• 42:36
  Speaker 4: Supreme Court keeping those court orders in place last night,
• 42:40
  Speaker 4: as it should, given how close we are to the
• 42:43
  Speaker 4: elections and given the lack of authority that the president
• 42:45
  Speaker 4: has here And I do believe that we will continue
• 42:49
  Speaker 4: to see the courts, including at the Supreme Court, be
• 42:53
  Speaker 4: a reasonably strong guardrail against interference with these elections. That
• 42:57
  Speaker 4: does not mean that the courts are the silver bullet.
• 42:59
  Speaker 4: And that's why, you know, we're going to talk about
• 43:01
  Speaker 4: my book. That's why I've written an entire book, not
• 43:02
  Speaker 4: about the courts, but about what ordinary people and all
• 43:05
  Speaker 4: of us as Americans need to do in this time.
• 43:07
  Speaker 4: But this is really the White House is trying to
• 43:09
  Speaker 4: confuse people. And so I just want everybody that's listening
• 43:12
  Speaker 4: to hear there is not I'm unaware of any case that.
• 43:16
  Speaker 4: right now, where a court has said that anything the
• 43:18
  Speaker 4: administration is trying to do with respect to these elections
• 43:21
  Speaker 4: is lawful. And I think you're going to continue to
• 43:23
  Speaker 4: see that.
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, how do we understand?
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: I mean, I, of course, was thrilled, as I'm sure
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: you were, and many of us around the country care
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: about democracy, where the Supreme Court has not enabled Donald
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: Trump to move forward with his plan to really use
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: his control over the post office to undermine the midterm elections.
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: How do you understand what's going on in the court?
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: I mean, do you think there's a fundamental shift happening,
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: a recognition that this president really does threaten democracy? Or
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: is it potentially that, as was the case in birthright citizenship,
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: a sort of, what are you talking about?
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: Like, this is just so far beyond the pale.
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: I have to just throw one more thing in, and
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: I don't know if you were concerned as I was,
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: but the fact that we had this earlier ruling saying
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: that it was too early to decide when the election
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: was so close That.
• 44:12
  Speaker 2: To say the least, worried me. So where are we
• 44:15
  Speaker 2: with the Supreme Court and what does this decision tell us?
• 44:18
  Speaker 4: Yeah, look, I think, you know, we've always said the
• 44:21
  Speaker 4: courts are an important guardrail. They're not the silver bullet.
• 44:23
  Speaker 4: And one reason they're not the silver bullet is, of course,
• 44:25
  Speaker 4: that with this Supreme Court, the Roberts Court, we've certainly
• 44:28
  Speaker 4: seen across a number of cases, some generational setbacks in
• 44:32
  Speaker 4: the fundamental rights of people in this country. The voting
• 44:34
  Speaker 4: rights decision, Louisiana v. Calais, there's no way around it.
• 44:37
  Speaker 4: It was a huge setback. for the ability of people
• 44:40
  Speaker 4: to be represented, particularly for the ability of black and
• 44:42
  Speaker 4: brown communities in the South in particular to be represented.
• 44:46
  Speaker 4: That will be generational work to not only win back
• 44:50
  Speaker 4: that right, but hopefully be able to transcend where we
• 44:52
  Speaker 4: really have a democracy that can represent everybody. We've seen
• 44:55
  Speaker 4: cases like Dobbs and I could go on and on
• 44:57
  Speaker 4: as could you all with your study of the court.
• 45:01
  Speaker 4: Those types of cases represent, I think, a real shift
• 45:06
  Speaker 4: in the court that is the completion in some ways,
• 45:09
  Speaker 4: or the next step in what has been a multi-decade
• 45:12
  Speaker 4: effort to push back on the civil rights gains and
• 45:16
  Speaker 4: the gains to achieve what I would call an unrestricted democracy.
• 45:19
  Speaker 4: That's what I call it in the book, a truly
• 45:21
  Speaker 4: unrestricted democracy, where there is no way around it. You
• 45:24
  Speaker 4: have a very far-right, extreme legal movement that has worked
• 45:27
  Speaker 4: through the political system in order to to appoint judges
• 45:30
  Speaker 4: that they perceive will adopt a view that is in
• 45:35
  Speaker 4: backlash to many of the gains that we got through
• 45:38
  Speaker 4: the civil rights movement and the courts in those earlier decades.
• 45:42
  Speaker 4: I mean, that is just the bottom line. And I
• 45:44
  Speaker 4: think when you look at the cases that way, we
• 45:47
  Speaker 4: should be very concerned about the future of civil rights,
• 45:50
  Speaker 4: about the future of voting rights. There have been areas,
• 45:53
  Speaker 4: and our tariffs case is one, which we worked on together,
• 45:57
  Speaker 4: that don't really involve the types of civil rights backlash,
• 46:04
  Speaker 4: but that involve structural areas of the Constitution, where to
• 46:08
  Speaker 4: some degree, this court has been a bit more reliable. Now,
• 46:11
  Speaker 4: I say to some degree, because you can look at
• 46:13
  Speaker 4: cases like Trump v. United States, and you can look
• 46:16
  Speaker 4: at that as a structural case around the scope of
• 46:18
  Speaker 4: executive power. And Trump v. United States was wrongly decided.
• 46:23
  Speaker 4: We know that. And we know that that's part of this,
• 46:26
  Speaker 4: whatever this movement is that some of the justices have
• 46:28
  Speaker 4: been a part of on the court. But I will
• 46:30
  Speaker 4: say that we've not seen any evidence. In 2020, we
• 46:33
  Speaker 4: didn't see any evidence of this. After January 6th, 2021,
• 46:37
  Speaker 4: by the way, it's the same Supreme Court. We've not
• 46:40
  Speaker 4: seen any evidence that this court is willing to, at
• 46:43
  Speaker 4: this point, provide the president with powers the Constitution does
• 46:47
  Speaker 4: not provide him with respect to elections particularly. Now, I'm
• 46:51
  Speaker 4: not saying that they will continue to do that. I
• 46:52
  Speaker 4: want to be very clear. We wrote a whole thing
• 46:56
  Speaker 4: about how people have got to push back because we
• 46:57
  Speaker 4: know that these institutions, they have not completely buckled, but
• 47:00
  Speaker 4: they have buckled in time. But that said, even this summer,
• 47:05
  Speaker 4: after the Louisiana v. Calais voting rights decision, we saw
• 47:08
  Speaker 4: another decision that involves sort of when ballots are counted.
• 47:13
  Speaker 4: The Supreme Court definitely sent a message and an opinion
• 47:17
  Speaker 4: written by Amy Coney Barrett that it wasn't adopting the
• 47:20
  Speaker 4: administration's position that it had taken in that case. And
• 47:23
  Speaker 4: so I think many of us have hauled out some
• 47:25
  Speaker 4: hope that on these structural issues where the president just
• 47:29
  Speaker 4: has no authority at all, that the Supreme Court hopefully
• 47:33
  Speaker 4: will do what it should do and will uphold lower
• 47:36
  Speaker 4: court orders that are protecting the ability of these elections
• 47:39
  Speaker 4: to be administered by states and local governments. Now, the
• 47:44
  Speaker 4: other piece of that, I'll just say, is that we
• 47:48
  Speaker 4: also know, at least with Justice Kavanaugh last night, in
• 47:51
  Speaker 4: the concurring opinion he wrote, that some of the justices,
• 47:54
  Speaker 4: and particularly maybe some of the justices that were appointed
• 47:57
  Speaker 4: by the president, maybe not all of them, are deeply
• 47:59
  Speaker 4: concerned about the time and the sort of way in
• 48:02
  Speaker 4: which this administration is operating, trying to push through all
• 48:04
  Speaker 4: these changes so close to an election, which is, there's
• 48:08
  Speaker 4: also legal principles that suggest they should not be able
• 48:10
  Speaker 4: to do that And so I think it will remain
• 48:12
  Speaker 4: to be seen where the court really is on the
• 48:14
  Speaker 4: substance of this. And that will be a fight because
• 48:16
  Speaker 4: we have not just elections this year. We've got elections
• 48:18
  Speaker 4: every year, including in 2028. But I think that hopefully
• 48:22
  Speaker 4: what we see is the court, at least in this instance,
• 48:25
  Speaker 4: seeking to preserve the legitimacy of these and the stability
• 48:29
  Speaker 4: of these elections. But it is going to take every
• 48:32
  Speaker 4: single person doing their part and the lawyers to continue
• 48:34
  Speaker 4: to litigate these cases.
• 48:36
  Speaker 3: I'm so glad after determining that he has immunity from
• 48:39
  Speaker 3: any crimes he might commit, they're going to put some
• 48:42
  Speaker 3: limitations on the man. That's very promising. I want to
• 48:45
  Speaker 3: ask both of you, as a concerned person who's never
• 48:48
  Speaker 3: spent a day in law school, does this simply just
• 48:51
  Speaker 3: preserve the status quo for 2026? Or is this setting
• 48:54
  Speaker 3: a broader limit on federal authority for the next election?
• 48:58
  Speaker 3: I mean, is this the final word on their mail-in
• 49:01
  Speaker 3: voting policy? Are we going to see more challenges in
• 49:04
  Speaker 3: before this November or before 28th?
• 49:08
  Speaker 4: I'm happy to, I mean, look, I don't think this
• 49:10
  Speaker 4: is the final word. I think it probably and rightfully
• 49:13
  Speaker 4: is the final word before this election, because I think
• 49:16
  Speaker 4: that every court to consider this, including, by the way,
• 49:18
  Speaker 4: a federal district court in Washington. D.C. earlier this week,
• 49:21
  Speaker 4: Judge Carl Nichols, who was appointed by President Trump in
• 49:24
  Speaker 4: the first Trump administration, has blocked this rule. So it's
• 49:27
  Speaker 4: not just one particular court. It's courts across the board
• 49:30
  Speaker 4: are blocking this rule. The Supreme Court has rightfully said
• 49:34
  Speaker 4: that it's not going to take the administration up on
• 49:37
  Speaker 4: its invitation to use the shadow docket to disturb the
• 49:40
  Speaker 4: status quo. So I think that that for these elections
• 49:42
  Speaker 4: should provide some manner of stability. But you do have
• 49:45
  Speaker 4: an executive branch that seems intent on wanting to claim
• 49:50
  Speaker 4: power for itself over elections that we don't believe it
• 49:52
  Speaker 4: has under the Constitution. I think you'll see them continue
• 49:54
  Speaker 4: to do that. And that will continue to get played
• 49:57
  Speaker 4: out in the courts. And there could be opportunities in
• 49:59
  Speaker 4: the future. These are very early cases. These are cases
• 50:02
  Speaker 4: on some, you know, on preliminary emergency injunctions and those
• 50:06
  Speaker 4: kinds of things. So I do think you can see
• 50:08
  Speaker 4: it play out.
• 50:09
  Speaker 1: And of course, the theory of the unitary executive, which
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: is what they bring up in so many cases, is
• 50:16
  Speaker 1: a play here too. And as you know, they were,
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: I think, in a sort of, not in a positive way,
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: but cleverly, dangerously trying to usurp our voting laws by saying, well,
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: the post office is just internal to the executive branch.
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: And so under the theory of the unitary executive, we're
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: not trying to interfere with the election. We're just trying
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: to you know, manipulate the post office in the same
• 50:40
  Speaker 1: way that we control, you know, what pens we order
• 50:43
  Speaker 1: for the Oval Office. We can tell the post office
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: to fight voter fraud.
• 50:48
  Speaker 2: And unfortunately, that's not going away.
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: But I, with you, Scott, I take a lot of
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: hope in the fact that the court did push back.
• 50:55
  Speaker 1: You know, this president also, both after the tariffs case that,
• 50:59
  Speaker 1: as you said, we you know, both cooperated on. The
• 51:03
  Speaker 1: president attacked, of course, those justices he appointed who, in
• 51:06
  Speaker 1: his view, turned on him. And he did the same
• 51:09
  Speaker 1: thing here, too. And the fact that there at least
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: is that tension emerging can only be a good thing. Skye,
• 51:15
  Speaker 1: I really want to get to the book, but I
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: know our listeners would really be disappointed if I didn't
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: ask you to follow up on some of what we
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: talked about last time first, which is the state of
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: where things stand with your courageous and this is a
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: good gateway into talking about the book, but your courageous stand,
• 51:35
  Speaker 1: an important stand against the President's slush fund. When we
• 51:38
  Speaker 1: left off last time, you were pointing out that although
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: the administration is saying this thing is dead, and we
• 51:44
  Speaker 1: were hearing that from the Attorney General, that they weren't
• 51:47
  Speaker 1: giving up in court.
• 51:48
  Speaker 2: So have they now given up? Where did things stand?
• 51:50
  Speaker 4: No, we're still in court. If the slush fund is dead,
• 51:54
  Speaker 4: it's because of the court order that our brave clients
• 51:56
  Speaker 4: and our exceptional team here at Democracy Forward went in
• 51:59
  Speaker 4: and secured. So we have a court order that continues
• 52:02
  Speaker 4: to block the operation of the slush fund. The government
• 52:04
  Speaker 4: has moved to dismiss that case, and we will have
• 52:06
  Speaker 4: a hearing on that this week. At the same time,
• 52:09
  Speaker 4: we're gathering information because that case already has a trial date.
• 52:12
  Speaker 4: And so we're gathering information in order to to really understand.
• 52:16
  Speaker 4: And the administration's fighting us every step of the way.
• 52:21
  Speaker 4: They don't want to give over any information about whose
• 52:23
  Speaker 4: idea these things were, who did what, where, and when,
• 52:26
  Speaker 4: which is, of course, one of the things you do
• 52:28
  Speaker 4: in court as you find information. The update since we
• 52:31
  Speaker 4: last talked, though, is that we also have amended that
• 52:33
  Speaker 4: lawsuit to address the other element of this series of settlements,
• 52:40
  Speaker 4: which is the fact that the government, the federal government,
• 52:43
  Speaker 4: the DOJ, the IRS and Treasury feels as if they
• 52:46
  Speaker 4: can give the administration, President Trump and his family immunity
• 52:50
  Speaker 4: from IRS scrutiny. And that is plainly arbitrary, but it's
• 52:54
  Speaker 4: also unlawful. We represent brave plaintiffs in the case, the
• 52:59
  Speaker 4: National Treasury Employees Union, NTEU, it's one of the oldest
• 53:03
  Speaker 4: federal employees unions in the country. But these are people that, workers,
• 53:07
  Speaker 4: who may be conscripted into engaging in unlawful activity, if
• 53:11
  Speaker 4: they were required to exempt the president from this type
• 53:16
  Speaker 4: of scrutiny. And so we brought that range of claims
• 53:18
  Speaker 4: as well, which we're looking forward to the court hearing.
• 53:22
  Speaker 4: And we really hope, we're confident we should, but we
• 53:24
  Speaker 4: certainly hope that we will secure a court order to
• 53:27
  Speaker 4: prevent that too, because that's just a level of corruption
• 53:30
  Speaker 4: and self-dealing that's unlawful.
• 53:32
  Speaker 3: Are there other Americans who are free from the burden
• 53:36
  Speaker 3: of worry about inconvenience to IRS? Absolutely not. Absolutely not.
• 53:40
  Speaker 3: Only these three, huh? Only three, huh? Right.
• 53:42
  Speaker 4: And in fact, you know, some of these things rhyme
• 53:45
  Speaker 4: a little bit with what happened to Watergate. They're not
• 53:48
  Speaker 4: fully there because this is so much more outrageous. It's
• 53:50
  Speaker 4: a Watergate level scandal a day at a time here.
• 53:53
  Speaker 4: But there were protections that were actually put in place.
• 53:57
  Speaker 4: in order to prevent the president from being able to
• 54:01
  Speaker 4: manipulate the IRS with respect to your political favorites or
• 54:05
  Speaker 4: your political enemies or those types of things. And so
• 54:07
  Speaker 4: he is violating a range of, the administration's violating a
• 54:11
  Speaker 4: range of laws, and we're looking forward to seeing that through.
• 54:14
  Speaker 2: In the case. I'm going to pivot to a hopeful note.
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think actually this discussion simultaneously is, of course,
• 54:22
  Speaker 1: both worrying because you have a president trying to use
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: the IRS once again, as Nixon did, for his own
• 54:28
  Speaker 1: personal benefit, and then crafting a deal essentially with himself,
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: pretending it's a separate entity to create this slush fund
• 54:38
  Speaker 1: And the hopeful part, of course, is that your group
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: literally did, at least for now, it looks like, stop it.
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: And they're pretending simultaneously to drop it, but yet it
• 54:48
  Speaker 1: looks like they're continuing to fight in court. But for now,
• 54:51
  Speaker 1: that is looking good. And so it brings us to,
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: I think, the hopeful message of your book. Sky, you've
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: written about why it is that a very passive democracy
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: is you know, is not a good thing.
• 55:06
  Speaker 2: And that why it's not.
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: Up to judges or elected officials, but it really is
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: ordinary citizens that are going to push back if we
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: are to save and reclaim, as you say in the title,
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: our democracy. I'll mention the title again, Ordinary People, Extraordinary Times,
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: How to Reclaim Your Power, Fight for Freedom, and Reimagine Democracy.
• 55:28
  Speaker 2: So Sky, tell us about the, there you are, nice.
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: Tell us about argument of the book and who these
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: ordinary people are that can inspire us to fight on?
• 55:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 55:41
  Speaker 4: So this book is really, it's meant to be a
• 55:43
  Speaker 4: guide for everybody. And I think people are actually quite
• 55:46
  Speaker 4: exceptional and resilient and amazing, but people don't see themselves
• 55:50
  Speaker 4: that way. They see themselves, what can I just do
• 55:52
  Speaker 4: as an individual? So the book, Ordinary People, Extraordinary Times,
• 55:55
  Speaker 4: is really a call for all of us. It is
• 55:57
  Speaker 4: available in paperback. It came out straight in paperback. We
• 56:00
  Speaker 4: didn't do hardback. This is really meant to be used,
• 56:04
  Speaker 4: marked up and used, put in your backpack, not admired
• 56:07
  Speaker 4: on a shelf. And then of course we have the
• 56:09
  Speaker 4: ebook and I read the audio book. So there's lots
• 56:11
  Speaker 4: of ways to get access to it. It's been out
• 56:12
  Speaker 4: for a little bit over two weeks. There are seven
• 56:16
  Speaker 4: steps that anybody can take. And these steps are not
• 56:18
  Speaker 4: just about how to take action in your community, although
• 56:21
  Speaker 4: that is a huge part of it. There are also
• 56:23
  Speaker 4: steps that we need to take as people to be
• 56:24
  Speaker 4: able to navigate an environment where fear and chaos are
• 56:28
  Speaker 4: coming at us constantly. The book really seeks to weave
• 56:32
  Speaker 4: together the personal resilience, the steps we need to take
• 56:35
  Speaker 4: to make sure we're building our own personal and community resilience.
• 56:38
  Speaker 4: with the steps that we can take externally to make
• 56:40
  Speaker 4: a difference. There are seven steps. There are essays in
• 56:43
  Speaker 4: each chapter that are from the front lines of our work.
• 56:46
  Speaker 4: So many folks that like to follow the work will
• 56:49
  Speaker 4: probably enjoy those. Some people that are exhausted have said
• 56:52
  Speaker 4: those essays are help, you know, inspiring in ways. But
• 56:55
  Speaker 4: then we get really to the brass tacks where we
• 56:57
  Speaker 4: talk about why it's important to take the action we're
• 56:59
  Speaker 4: suggesting and then all the to-dos. We have to-do lists.
• 57:02
  Speaker 4: We have websites you can go to. Lots of things
• 57:05
  Speaker 4: that can be your kind of action companion. The book
• 57:08
  Speaker 4: has been out just a little over two weeks. It
• 57:10
  Speaker 4: was an immediate USA Today and New York Times bestseller. Congratulations.
• 57:16
  Speaker 4: More importantly, I mean, that should give us hope, by
• 57:18
  Speaker 4: the way, that a book, and we were told it's
• 57:21
  Speaker 4: a paperback, it's a how-to book, the how-to list of
• 57:24
  Speaker 4: the New York Times. They only do really cookbooks and
• 57:26
  Speaker 4: how to build muscle mass after 40. I mean, these
• 57:28
  Speaker 4: are like not really books about civics or politics and
• 57:31
  Speaker 4: yet we made that because right now in this country
• 57:34
  Speaker 4: in the same way you need to know how to
• 57:35
  Speaker 4: make dolly parton's mashed potatoes or how to build you
• 57:39
  Speaker 4: know your own muscle mass or whatever we've got to
• 57:41
  Speaker 4: know what we need to be able to do to
• 57:43
  Speaker 4: navigate this environment so really pleased with that but more
• 57:46
  Speaker 4: importantly than those lists this book has been selling out
• 57:49
  Speaker 4: of small town bookstores in places that you might not
• 57:52
  Speaker 4: expect including we were on a bestsellers list in oklahoma
• 57:55
  Speaker 4: in places that aren't necessarily seen as the most progressive
• 57:58
  Speaker 4: bastions of the country. I grew up in Waco, Texas.
• 58:01
  Speaker 4: I mean, it's been very popular. It's been sold out
• 58:03
  Speaker 4: places like that. And so it really is a book
• 58:05
  Speaker 4: that's trying to meet everybody where they are to say,
• 58:08
  Speaker 4: this is a moment that is beyond politics and we
• 58:10
  Speaker 4: can all come together.
• 58:12
  Speaker 3: I got to say, I don't think you sold the
• 58:15
  Speaker 3: book adequately. I'm going to go beyond everything you just said, Skye,
• 58:18
  Speaker 3: because I think this book is an important guide and
• 58:20
  Speaker 3: it can help people understand What we're living in right now,
• 58:24
  Speaker 3: the question at the heart of this book is what
• 58:27
  Speaker 3: we hear so many times. What can I do? So
• 58:30
  Speaker 3: many people feel so helpless about democracy. And I think
• 58:34
  Speaker 3: this book really is very much a guide to navigating
• 58:37
  Speaker 3: this Fellini film we find our country has turned into.
• 58:40
  Speaker 3: You make such a strong distinction between being a spectator
• 58:44
  Speaker 3: in democracy and by being a participant. And I got
• 58:47
  Speaker 3: to say, your first introduction, your first instruction, rather, is
• 58:51
  Speaker 3: so blunt and stop spiraling and pick up a shovel.
• 58:55
  Speaker 3: I love it. To you, Sky Perriman, what does the
• 58:59
  Speaker 3: shovel represent?
• 59:01
  Speaker 4: The shovel is affirming that all of us have something
• 59:05
  Speaker 4: we can do. We can't control what happens to us.
• 59:09
  Speaker 4: And there's a lot of reasons to be spiraling and panicking.
• 59:11
  Speaker 4: And I talk about them in the book, and I'm
• 59:13
  Speaker 4: not saying don't panic at all. But the bottom line
• 59:15
  Speaker 4: is we have to decide how we're going to respond.
• 59:19
  Speaker 4: And if all we do is spiral and panic and
• 59:21
  Speaker 4: pull the covers over our heads and hope this is
• 59:23
  Speaker 4: going to pass by... we're going to endanger ourselves and
• 59:28
  Speaker 4: we're going to endanger our communities and our democracy. So
• 59:30
  Speaker 4: we have to decide to pick up the shovel and
• 59:32
  Speaker 4: get to work. And then I have a lot, what
• 59:33
  Speaker 4: your shovel looks like will be different for different people
• 59:37
  Speaker 4: in different circumstances.
• 59:39
  Speaker 3: But I just want to say on the, on the
• 59:40
  Speaker 3: fear point and Corey, like one of the most interesting
• 59:42
  Speaker 3: points about it is what you just said. You don't
• 59:44
  Speaker 3: tell people to get rid of their fear. You tell
• 59:48
  Speaker 3: them to get serious about it. Explain the distinction.
• 59:52
  Speaker 4: Yeah, absolutely. So I think one of the downsides of
• 59:56
  Speaker 4: this moment, there's so many, is that the conversations about
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 4: fear sometimes go in the wrong direction because people are
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 4: shaming folks across this country for being afraid. There is
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 4: no shame in being afraid. And this is an incredibly
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 4: scary time. And for many of the people in communities
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 4: we work on behalf of, they're being directly targeted and
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 4: directly attacked. So, you know, you get to be afraid.
• 1:00:17
  Speaker 4: That is a human emotion. The question now is how
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 4: we can get serious to understand what fear really is.
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 4: And with autocratic actors and actors like Donald Trump, they
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 4: seek to raise the cost. They seek to ratchet up
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 4: the fear of doing basic things, of living consistent with
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 4: your values, of living consistent with your identity. And what
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 4: we have to do is learn to build the muscle
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 4: to respond to fear with courage. And courage is not
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 4: a knight in shining armor. It's not some big heroic Hollywood.
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 4: I mean, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 4: about people in their daily lives making decisions to be
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 4: true to themselves and their values, even when it is very,
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 4: very hard to do so. And to understand that in
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 4: this moment, the cost of giving into fear is much higher.
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 4: And the cost of seeking to respond to fear in
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 4: a way. It's not the cost is nothing. There's cost
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 4: to everything right now. But that should be liberating. And
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 4: so the book, there is another chapter just about fear, courage,
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 4: and joy. And really getting underneath those concepts, but also
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 4: underneath our daily habits of how we can build that
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 4: muscle so that we're really ready to go. Courage is
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 4: a practice. And sometimes you have to fake it until
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 4: you make it.
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 3: Well, that's why this book is not about talking yourself
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 3: off a ledge. This book makes you want to get
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 3: off the damn ledge and get busy. I'm sorry, Corey,
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 3: go ahead.
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 2: No, not at all.
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: I mean, I really relate to so much of what
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 1: you're saying. I mean, personally, I remember it was my
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: daughter's 10th birthday when Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton.
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 2: And, you know, I didn't know how to react. She
• 1:01:49
  Speaker 2: was in tears.
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: She was woke up excited for the first female president
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: to be, you know, to take office. And instead, we
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: have somebody who I had been, you know, describing, maybe
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 1: she was a little young to hear this, but as
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: a real threat to democracy, which I believe from the beginning,
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: and John, when you and I met, it was because
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 1: I wrote what I hope would be a one-off piece
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 1: called Trump versus the Constitution, a guide going through why
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: his proposals were so dangerous. And yes, that idea of,
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 1: you know, that we all can take the lesson, that
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 1: fear can be channeled into, well, into doing something, as
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 1: you argue.
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 2: Sure.
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 1: So let me ask you about a different part of
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: the book, which you already mentioned, but I'd love some
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: examples for our listeners. I mean, who are the people,
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 1: the individuals that you've come across in your work, your
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: really heroic work in.
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 2: Fighting to save our democracy?
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 1: And, you know, if you could give us one or
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 1: two examples and tell us why they inspired you, I
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: think that people would love to hear it.
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 4: So there's a lot of stories throughout the book that
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 4: I hope will inspire folks. I mean, look, even before
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 4: this administration took office, we had really, really profound threats
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 4: to our democracy, to people's freedoms. at the state and
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 4: local level across this country and including in other spaces
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 4: as well. And at Democracy Forward, we have represented a
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 4: series of librarians and independent booksellers in pushing back against
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 4: censorship laws, including a law that would criminalize librarians in
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 4: the state of Arkansas. And so I tell the story
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 4: of Adam Webb, who was a librarian who that was,
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 4: you know, what he chose to do with his career.
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 4: He was not looking to be in the middle of
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 4: a big legal dispute or in the middle of a
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 4: bunch of headlines. But that is where he ended up
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 4: when he used his own bravery in order to be
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 4: able to try to make reading accessible to people in Arkansas.
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 4: And this is an example of where, you know, doing
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 4: the right thing for him, right, for his profession, for
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 4: someone that is dedicated to making sure that people can
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 4: access books and ideas became a costly thing under a
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 4: government that in that instance, the state legislature in Arkansas
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 4: and the governor, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, became a costly thing.
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 4: And he had to decide how he was going to respond.
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 4: And so he responded with us and a range of
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 4: other people and organizations across the state that went to court.
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 4: So I talk about him and how these things can
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 4: pop up. And a lot of the cases that we've
• 1:04:17
  Speaker 4: been bringing against this administration that we've been winning court
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 4: orders on behalf of people that are really protecting the
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 4: entire country, they've been brought by ordinary people who didn't
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 4: have some special recipe for courage that is not accessible
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 4: to all of us, but that who really decided in
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 4: that moment to live consistent with their values. I talk
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 4: about people like Erez Ravini, who's on our staff here
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 4: at Democracy Forward. Erez was a career Department of Justice lawyer.
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 4: He represented and defended policies that Republican presidents and Democratic
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 4: presidents had put forth, including, by the way, policies in
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 4: the first Trump administration. Arez was the lawyer for the
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 4: Department of Justice in the Abrego Garcia case. And Arez
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 4: refused to lie to a federal court when his superiors
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 4: really wanted him to not be truthful about what had
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 4: happened with Abrego Garcia. He told the truth. He was
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 4: fired for it. And he didn't have some place to
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 4: go once he's fired. I mean, that's sort of your
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 4: that was sort of his profession was being a government lawyer.
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 4: But he did the right thing. He paid a really
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 4: high consequence for it. He then became a whistleblower and
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 4: provided more information about what was happening at the Department
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 4: of Justice. And now, of course, he's an attorney here
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 4: at Democracy Forward where he's bringing cases to help defend
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 4: immigrants in this country now. against really corrosive violations of
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 4: the rule of law. But Erez in that moment, following
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 4: our professional ethics as attorneys, right? His decision to do
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 4: something that should just be a daily decision. You don't
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 4: lie in the courts. When you're an attorney, you follow
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 4: your professional ethics. This is an administration that wants to
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 4: create a cost for that. And it's in how we
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 4: respond to those instances that we can really, really come
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 4: to being and living in courage and community with each other.
• 1:06:03
  Speaker 4: So I have lots of examples of that. in the book,
• 1:06:06
  Speaker 4: and some that are very accessible to people. You know,
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 4: the student or the parent that speaks up in a
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 4: community group when somebody's being ostracized from the community, that's
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 4: really important. And, you know, I grew up in communities
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 4: like that where a lot of people were otherized. And
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 4: your ability, if you're in that community, to use your
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 4: power to step up and to speak up is really important.
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 4: So I hope it's very, encourages everybody to sort of
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 4: do the right thing in these circumstances.
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 1: There are heroes, you know, in a moment in which
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 1: democracy is being attacked. And a moment, I like that
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 1: you said it so bluntly because it's so true, that
• 1:06:42
  Speaker 1: is frightening. There is no doubt about it, who have
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: been able to channel that fear into really heroic action.
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 1: And these are people who weren't famous before, aren't famous now,
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 1: but yet took the really important actions that we need
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 1: to save our democracy. So, Skye Perryman, thank you so
• 1:06:59
  Speaker 1: much for your work at Democracy Forward. Thank you for
• 1:07:02
  Speaker 1: writing Ordinary People, Extraordinary Times, How to Reclaim Your Power,
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 1: Fight for Freedom, and Reimagine Democracy. And finally, thanks for
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 1: joining us again on The Oath in the Office.
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 4: Yeah, absolutely. Good to be with you.
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 3: What a pleasure. Thank you so much.
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 2: Thanks.
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 3: It really is a good book, Corey. I hope a
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 3: lot of people buy it because it's a book that'll
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 3: make you feel better about where we're at and better
• 1:07:26
  Speaker 3: about what we can still do.
• 1:07:28
  Speaker 1: I was so eager to have Skye back on the show,
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: not just because of her expertise in the frontline work
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 1: of really using the courts, especially the lower courts, to
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 1: stop this threat to democracy and an effort that started
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 1: in the lower courts, thankfully in the post office case,
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 1: has now resulted in a victory, at least for this election,
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 1: as you heard, at the Supreme Court. But I also
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 1: just thought that, you know, we all, listeners, if you're
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 1: listening to this show, it's because you care about democracy,
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 1: because you likely are feeling that fear. And yet here
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 1: is her series of stories about how to fight back
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 1: and principles of what specifically to do. So great interview,
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 1: amazing discussion, John, as always.
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 3: It really is. It's a guide. I recommend it. Her
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 3: material on what she calls information sobriety. alone in the
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 3: internet age makes it worth the purchase. Professor, thank you
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 3: so much for all the brilliance you bring to the table.
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 3: What is the best way for our audience to follow you, Corey,
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 3: and to keep up with your brilliance the other six
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 3: days of the week?
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 1: Well, you're going to hear me say it a lot
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 1: of times because it's so important. If you haven't pushed
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 1: that subscribe button, push it. If you're watching on YouTube,
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: push that subscribe. If you're listening on Spotify or on Apple,
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 1: be sure to push it.
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 2: And share it.
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: We're growing because of word of mouth and that, you know,
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 1: we're not owned by corporate media. This is an independent
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: podcast and it's really listeners that are making it happen.
• 1:08:56
  Speaker 1: And this is about saving our democracy. And it's really
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 1: a pleasure to do it with you every week, John.
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: If you haven't checked out our Substack, there's an author
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 1: in the office, Substack. And if you want to watch,
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 1: not listen, check out our YouTube.
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 3: And I'm also on Substack and on socials at John Fuglesang.
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 3: Sirius XM Progress, channel 127, every afternoon, 12 noon, 3 p.m. Eastern,
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 3: 9 a.m. to 12 noon Pacific. We're doing one show
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 3: this year, Professor, with the Stephanie Miller Sexy Liberal Comedy Tour.
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 3: It's going to be Saturday, the 24th of August at
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 3: the Saban Theater in Beverly Hills, Los Angeles. It's our
• 1:09:31
  Speaker 3: big midterm show. If you're in California, come on down.
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 3: Our guests, it'll be Stephanie Miller, Hal Sparks, Frangela, me,
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 3: and our guests for this show will include... Glenn Kirshner,
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 3: and Senator Adam Schiff, and The Last Jedi himself, Mark Hamill.
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 3: So come on down to our live show on Saturday
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 3: the 24th in Los Angeles. And Corey, it's always a
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 3: pleasure to see you. And thank you again for classing
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 3: up our SiriusXM show every week.
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 2: What a pleasure, John. Thanks for listening to The Oath
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 2: in the Office.