December 23, 2024 • 33 mins
This week, Danielle looks back at some of her favorite conversations from the last few years of Woke AF Daily. Today, her conversation with Elie Mystal about Trump's criminal indictments.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Good morning, peeps, and welcome to wok F Daily with
Meet your Girl Danielle Moody. Pre recording from the Home Bunker. Folks,
it is wokf's holiday week and it is our farewell
week as we close out seven years of conversations, rage, information, celebration,
(00:36):
and trying to deliver keen political analysis over the last
seven years. So this week I am bringing you some
of my favorite shows with some of the voices that
we've brought took f over the years that I am
just so grateful for. First up is my conversation with
(00:59):
our friend Ellie Mistell, who is the Justice correspondent at
the Nation, and he returns and in this episode he
gives his expert perspective on Trump's indictments that we now
have known are no longer they've gone the way of
the wind. But to remind us these indictments were serious,
(01:22):
and had America decided to, oh, I don't know, not
vote for a convicted felon, not vote for somebody that
had been indicted multiple times, not vote for somebody who
showed very little care about the American people but a
lot of attention to America's coffers, maybe we wouldn't be
(01:44):
in the situation that we're in. But I think that
it is important as we wind our way to the
second Trump regime, which is certain to be worse than
the first one, because now they know where all the
keys the kingdom are. The first time around, they were
just case in the joint seeing what they could take,
(02:05):
and as my friend doctor Christina Grier said, it was
a smash and grab job. This time around, they can
be methodical, they can be slow because guess what, ain't
nobody going and check them? So in this best of episode,
Ellie Mistell brings us through the Trump indictments and the
mountain of evidence that America will never see. Folks, I
(02:29):
am so excited to welcome back to wok F after
just too long of a time away, which is our
friend Ellie Mistel, who is a justice correspondent for the
Nation and the author of Allow Me to Retort, A
Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution and just all around.
(02:52):
I don't know what the fuck we call Twitter these days?
Is it X?
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Is it? You know?
Speaker 1 (02:56):
Trash? It is trash, but you you make it a
place still worth going. I will say that, Ellie.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Oh, don't put that. Don't you put that evil on me.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
Let me not put that X on you by that. So, Ellie,
you know I want to talk to you because I
just there are times when I wish that I had
not listened to the old white male professor who told
me it wasn't smart enough to go to law school,
and that I actually went. And it is times when
(03:29):
I'm trying to understand how much legal trouble a normal
person whose name wasn't Trump would be in, uh if
they had all of these indictments that have already come
out and one big one still that is looming, actually
two big ones that are looming if you're also looking
at the state of Georgia. But walk us through, because
(03:51):
it's potential, the potential of Donald Trump being indicted for
a third time while people are listening to this is
very high. So please walk us through where we are
in the insurrection case so as not to get people
(04:12):
confused with the other indictments that the former twice impeach
president has.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Yes, any look, a normal person would be in jail
like eight times over by this point. A normal person's
children would probably be in jail at least twice over
by this point. The normal rules simply don't apply to Trump.
The White Rules does do. And that's kind of how
where we start with. Right, this indictment that's coming from Jacksmith,
(04:40):
potentially already out from Jacksmith, coming at the time that
we're recording. To me, this is the big one. This
is the one that we should have been working towards.
Since January seventh, twenty twenty one. Now, there has been
reporting about how Merrek Carlin has slow walked the investigation
and basically kind of did everything he could to get
(05:02):
Trump off the hook. But finally he appointed Jack Smith.
I've said on other shows Danielle that I think I
was wrong about Jack Smith. I thought he would be
kind of another Robert Muller type, and he has not
been run. Now, he is not an actual fucking prosecutor,
and he has been putting the wood to Trump, not
(05:22):
just in the espionage case, but now finally on the
January sixth case. We already know that he has interviewed. Basically,
he has finally done the work that Garland should have
been doing and that the January sixth Select Committee in
Congress already did. Right, He's finally done the interviews with
the Cassidy Hutchinson's and the Mark Meadows and the Steve
(05:45):
batt Bannons. He's gotten all of that information in and
he's prepared to charge Trump with a number of ofugh crimes.
Right the biggest ticket would be kind of conspiracy to
deprive right through the color of law. That's basically the
trying to intimidate and and potentially assassinate Mike Pence charge,
Like that's that's what that is. He's going to be charged,
(06:10):
we believe, with obstruction and and and and the fake
electors scheme as well. And these are the serious ones,
not just serious in terms of like legal jeopardy, but
serious in terms of actually holding the man accountable for
(06:31):
the coup he tried to pull off against the government,
Like that needs to happen, and it looks like that
that is finally going to happen. The problem, Danielle, is.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
That because there always is one elle race, it's.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
It's never just good news. The problem is that that accountability,
that trial over these charges will most likely happen in
twenty twenty five, and will only be allowed to happen
if Trump loses again another presidential election, where he will
again try to steal it and potentially again try to
(07:09):
do another coupe, right, Like this is all because of
the timeline, because of Merrick Garland's slow walking to get
us to this point. We are now in a situation
where it's just very unlikely that any of these trials
are going to happen before the election. And that's not
and there's almost nothing we can do about that. Like
(07:29):
the timeline is the timeline, and so Trump will get
to run again.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
But but let me ask you, let me ask this.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
I want to say why.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
I don't even want to say I will say why.
But so you have first in the Document's case, ailing
Cannon has set the date from May twenty four, twenty
twenty four, right, yep, And so that is several months
prior to the election. Why is it that? And then
(08:01):
Donald Trump prior to that? I believe that Donald Trump,
it has the another Egen Carroll case that I believe
is happening in October. Why wouldn't this case, which is
going to be heard in Washington, DC, because it has
such a long runway given a Leen Cannon's timeline, and
(08:23):
there is no need for security clearance in the way
that the Document's case requires security clearance. Why wouldn't that
be set for the end of the year or January because.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Trials take a long time. I mean, it's just like
there it is. It is just true that trials, especially
trials of rich white people, take a long time to
process through the system, and the defense lawyers remember, like
a lot of times, here's here's the thing that listeners
have to think about a lot of times when they
hear about court cases or trials from television, news or
(08:58):
even most print media. They're caring about it from the
perspective of a prosecutor, right, And the prosecutors are always like,
go now, go now, we can do this now. And
when they are when the prosecutors are facing criminal defendants
who are underfunded, underprivileged black Latino, the system is very
happy to go as quickly as humanly possible to get
(09:22):
a black and brown people in jail. But when it
happens to white people, the defense attorneys have usually legitimate
reasons and arguments to delay trial. Right. One of the
biggest ones is that the defense lawyers need time to
go over all of the evidence that the government has
(09:43):
and prepare an adequate defense. Right. So in these cases
I always argue kind of in favor of the defense,
because I realize that more often than not, what I'm
doing is arguing on behalf of black and Latino people
who are being railroaded through the system. Right, So I
understand and I guess the need for defend's attorneys to
(10:05):
have time to prepare their cases. Is Trump getting more
time than normal? It depends on what you think normal is. Right.
If you think normal is what we do to black people,
then hell yeah, he's getting way more time. Is he
getting more time than he should? The brass tacks of
it is, if you look at the espionage case, at least,
(10:25):
given when Smith was allowed to make these charges, I
think May twenty fourth is about the right day. I
think that's about the right time. Now. The question is,
and I think that this is the bigger problem. It's
unlike May twenty fourth is unlikely to hold up. You know, sorry,
May twentieth, twenty twenty four is unlikely to hold up
because as we get closer to May twentieth, twenty twenty four,
(10:49):
Trump's lawyers will again ask for a delay. They will
say they were overwhelmed, so they'll be there. They're busy
running a campaign. They'll say whatever they have to say,
and with Trump Judge Eileen Cannon having already own a
willingness to the lay this trial for six months, it's
I think, but this is.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
This is why I think that the insurrection case has
the potential to go before ailing Cannon's case. And my
feeling is one because it's going to be held in DC.
I don't know. And this is a question for you,
who do we think that that judge is like what
circuit is this going through? Is that this is actually
(11:30):
about this about national security?
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Right?
Speaker 1 (11:33):
You're talking about somebody who is going to be indicted
on charges that I am going to assume one of
them may in fact be seditious conspiracy, which we have
seen both keeper folks and others get charged with and
it stick. So I guess, like, am I being in
(11:53):
two naive Ellie in thinking that the fate of our
democracy and the person who instigated and incided the riot
on the Capitol and told people to overturn the government
who is running for election, that that would be caused
(12:14):
for a speedy trial.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
I think you're right. I think it should. I think
that the differences in the January sixth case versus the
espionage case lend itself to a faster timeline than what
Eileen Canon has set up for the espionage case. As
you point out, this is happening in DC, that means
that the judge, we don't know what judge will get right,
and it will be a random choice from among the
(12:39):
judges that sit on in the DC circuit. Right, that
circuit is generally pretty split. Generally, it's not as conservative
as the Florida circuit where Canon was pulled from, is
not as conservative as like the Fifth Circuit if it
was out in Texas or Louisiana. It's a pretty pretty
(13:01):
evenly split circuit, you know. But it's still going to
come down to kind of a random dice roll in
terms of which judge we get right. If you get
an aggressive judge, you will have an aggressive timeline. And yeah,
there's there's a good chance that they will set a
date before the next election. But then the defense lawyers
(13:26):
will appeal that date. And don't forget that these appeals
about the timing of the of the of the trial
could go all the way to the Supreme Court, where
Trump has stacked the Supreme Court with his own hand
picked judges. Brett Kavanaugh in particular, is very susceptible to
arguments that this is happening too close to the election
(13:48):
for us to do anything about it, like he's made
that argument before in cases involving outright racism in electoral jerrymandering. Right,
So I am not confident that an aggressive timeline will
will work in front of Brett Kavanaugh or the other Conservatives.
So we'll still have to wait and see, but I
(14:10):
think that it is very likely that this trial will somehow,
some way get delayed until after the election.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
The positive is where are you going for the positive?
Because you have already put my feelings and my hopes
and dreams in the dumpster along with our democracy. So
what road trip are we go not for the positive side?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
The positive is this the last time Trump lost an election,
he should have immediately been thrown into jail for his
efforts to overturn it. And obviously the system wasn't ready
to do that. We picked Merrick Garland instead of like
a better person. You know, lots of issues happen. We
weren't ready. The system wasn't ready to throw his ass
(14:51):
in jail after he lost the last election. If he
loses the next one, the positive here is that I
really do believe that if he loses the next election,
there will be you know, tiny little handcuffs waiting for
him at the end of that road. Like he needs
to win the election to stay out of jail. And
if he loses, and he should lose because he's a
(15:13):
terrible person and a terrible candidate and blah blah blah blah,
if he loses, there should be handcuffs waiting for him
if he loses.
Speaker 1 (15:22):
And right now we're at a fifty to fifty fucking
toss up that that is going to be the reality,
right Like it's fifty to fifty that Donald Trump doesn't
have the maneuvers still to lie, cheat and steal his
way to the White House. Now, I think that the upside,
(15:43):
if in fact we call it that because it's not
the floor, the upside is that, I hope, because we
have tried the Jurassic Park version where they have touched
all of the fences and folks have been you know,
are there are sixteen fake electors that are being charged
(16:05):
in you know, in Michigan. You got other people that
are being investigated. I think that in my opinion, and
I want to talk about this case next the dragnet,
if you will, is coming out of Georgia, because I
don't think that Trump is the only person that Fannie
Willis is looking at when she's prepared to drop her indictments.
And so again we our democracy held on by a
(16:30):
thread and was tested over sixty six times in court
with Rudy Giuliani, with these fake electors, with the phone calls,
and so I think folks are prepared for what they
know could be coming their way. That's the only hope here.
That and you know, a fourth indictment, the fourth and
(16:51):
final I don't know, coming out of Georgia.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
Yeah, I mean, if we're looking for hope, that's where
we find it. Right like that, people will be more
prepared that are there, elections will be more resilient this
time than they were last time. Of course, you also
have to worry about the fact that, you know, one
of the reasons why it's so important to prosecute people
who attempt coups is that if you don't prosecute them,
and if you don't hold them accountable, they just try
(17:17):
it again, and the second time they're better. So as
much as we can say that like, okay, our elections,
our election system should be better prepared to defend itself
from Trump. We also have to understand that Trump and
his forces will make a better coup attempt round two,
having potentially learned lessons from round one. We know that
(17:40):
they've done a lot to stack the courts, to stack
the secretaries of states in ways that are amenable to
various coup attempts, whether the legal ones, the quote unquote
legal ones of fake electors and whatever. We all, but
we also know that his more violent forces, you know,
have also learned some lessons about how to violently overthrow
(18:04):
the government, and we can we have to at least
expect that they will be coming again. You know. We know,
for instance, one of the biggest organizing things that Trump
used to put the coup out there with social media,
and after you know, being banned, we know that he
now has an ally in Elon Musk and social media
(18:26):
potentially to organize another coup. So like, yes, there are
more defenses, but also they're going to be new attacks,
and so we have to be you know, I am
still hopeful that he loses, and I'm still hopeful that
after he loses, he loses all of his attempts to
overthrow the election. But I'd be a fool to think
that they're not going to be It's not going to
be like, you know, we're watching TV on November whatever
(18:49):
and CNN says no, the winner is declared for and
then that's it. Right. We know there's going even after
he loses at the balance, we know there's going to
be another attempt, and we're prepared for that too.
Speaker 1 (19:01):
We shall see. Let's switch gears a little bit just
to go down to Georgia and then I want to
go to the Supreme Court. So down in Georgia, you
do have Fannie Willis. You do have another what I
deem as another very serious case right that she's been
building an unlike the slothlike pace of Merrick Garland, she's
(19:23):
actually been going full steam ahead for the last two years.
So give us your thoughts on where Fannie while Willis
is in terms of her You know, she gave us
an announcement several months ago that said we were to
be on the lookout between July and September. Well we're
headed into August now, So what do you think about
(19:44):
her case and the timing and then how again this
all measures up as we head into the fall a
year out from the presidential So I've.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Always thought Georgia had the strongest case because they have
the motherfucker on tape trying to overturn the election. Right,
They've got, like everybody's heard the tape where he tries
to find eleven thousand votes, which has just happens to
be exactly how many he needs to overturn the election.
So I've always thought that just kind of evidentiary, that
(20:14):
is the strongest case against him. But one thing, and
I do believe that Fannie Willis has been a dedicated,
kind of hardworking public servant and is trying to do
things the right way. But we have seen that Fannie
Willis is also sensitive to political pressure, and so you know,
we saw her say before the midterms that she wouldn't
(20:37):
release any news within a kind of zone of secrecy
around the midterms so as to not unduly influence the
midterm elections, which is not a legal position, it's a
political position. So, you know, not something that I would
have done. But okay, so now again what we what
we worry about with Willis is not whether or not
she's going to diligently charge a crime that she can prove,
(21:01):
but whether or not that trial comes off before the election,
and you know, if Fannie Willis is not willing to
make any an announcement within a zone of secrecy around
the midterms, you know, is she gonna be willing to
put this man to trial and let's say July twenty
twenty four, right before the Republican National Convention, or he
(21:21):
will be crowned the GOP nominee. Again, I don't know that.
I don't know that she'll do that. I don't know
that I don't know that a judge will let her
do a Georgia judge will let her do that. So again,
the I just am not sure, despite the immense legal
jeopardy he's under, I'm just not sure that any of
(21:46):
these trials, the Willis one, either of the Jack Smith ones,
I'm not sure that any of them come off before
November twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
So essentially we're fucked right, And essentially we've all played
into Donald Trump and his lawyer's hands in knowing exactly
how they were going to use this, how it was
going to be spun, the timeline that was going to
be created, and the person to blame isn't just Donald
Trump and his lawyers, because we always know the tactics
that we're going to be made. It is Merrick Garland
(22:17):
and his desire to not play politics and play the
most insane politics at the same time, which is, let
me not go after Donald Trump because I don't want
to look like this is something partisan. Let me waste
twelve months of time, and now we're here.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
The analogy that Ivan mcgarland is like a basketball referee
who swallows the whistle and refuses to call a file,
and that referee says like, Oh, I'm just trying to
be neutral and fair to both sides. I'm not going
to call file. I was going to let the games
play out. That's not being fair and neutral. That is
benefiting the team that fouls. If you don't call the
(22:57):
rules correctly, you benefit the team that breaks the rules.
And that's Merrick Garland and his alleged attempt to be
non political. He has. All he's done is completely politicize
the process. And that the reason why I've been screaming
about Merrick Garland for two years prior to this is
because at some point his failure becomes unrecoverable, right like
(23:21):
you can't and This is where I'm talking about the timeline.
Because of his delays, it's now very hard to squeeze
everything in before the election. I mean, Danielle, riddle me this. Okay,
Let's say one of these trials goes off and he
gets convicted. Is he gonna get sentenced before the election.
Is he gonna be sent to jail before the election?
(23:43):
How does that even work? Are we gonna actually send
federal marshals to arrest the Republican nominee for president eight
weeks before the general election? Is that really something that's
gonna happen in America? Because that's gonna look like something
that happens in you know, other cut and true Banana
(24:05):
republic countries. Right. So, because the timeline has been so truncated,
I just don't know how any of this happens before
he's allowed to run again. And so even if he's
tried and convicted, if he wins the presidency, he will
pardon himself from that conviction commute, I think at that
point is what you would call what he would do,
(24:27):
And so he would never face actual accountability even if
he was convicted, and he's convicted on the state charges
where he can't pardon himself. I mean again, are the
Georgia State troopers gonna go arrest the president of the
United States? Is that at some point the practicality kind
of trumps the theory of the case, right, Yeah, and
(24:52):
and and so that's my problem, that's my that's my worry.
Like all of this, all of this looks great on paper,
right when you actually when it actually comes to time
to try convict and jail this man before the election,
I just think it's too late. It wouldn't be too
late if we were having this trial right now, right.
And that's again where the failure of Garland where the
(25:12):
slow pace of all the investigations really take a hole.
If you think about where we were at the end
of the January sixth Select Committee process, right where Trump
could have been charged that day based on that final
report from the Congressional Select Committee, right, like an aggressive
prosecutor would have been really ready to charge his ass
(25:34):
that day. At the end of twenty twenty two, then
we're talking about a trial that happens not in May
twenty twenty four, but May twenty twenty three. Yeah, we're
talking about a sentencing process that's happening over the summer.
We're talking about the legitimate ability to capture and jail
this man before Labor Day, a year and a half
(25:56):
before the election, and that would have been doable. Now
I don't know. I just it's very hard to see
it happening.
Speaker 1 (26:08):
God, this was depressing.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
Well again, if he loses straight to the pokey right,
if there's no addition like the again, the other way
to positive to spend this positively is that Trump is
using his last get out of jail free cards and
as long as we don't give him four years of
(26:35):
another one, right, as long as we don't give him
another draw for those cards, he's gonna run out eventually
and we should be able to put his ass in jail.
Speaker 1 (26:46):
Okay, I mean, here's hoping, right, I have no faith,
but you know, here, here's hoping. Before I let you go, Ellie,
I'm gonna scrap Scotis because you know they've scrapped democracy
in the country, integrity. But I do want to get
to someone who I believe that both of us probably
(27:06):
grew up listening to, whose music had resonated, and who
has clearly had a fucking lobotomy. And that is the
one and only ice Cube, who was just recently filming
(27:27):
with none other than Tucker Carlson, Please take the floor.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
I would like our friend Torrejo was big, you know,
feature pieces titled from Fuck the Police to Fund the Police,
the punk bitification of ice Cube.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
I'm texting him right now like that, that.
Speaker 2 (27:50):
Is what I want to read, because how this man
has gone from where he was, where he was one
of the what what the what the over educated black
folks like me like to call one of the urban
poets who is you know, talking about police brutality and
(28:11):
the devastating effects that has on the black community to
this point where he's kissing their ass is just one
of the biggest devolutions that I can think that I
have seen in my lifetime. Now I have a theory
about this, Danielle. I call it the special black Man
theory is that there are there are you know, one
(28:33):
of the and this kind of They're gonna call me
a critical race theorist after this, but like you know,
one of the issues that I think a lot of
black people chafe against is the fact that we're always
grouped in with everybody else, right, We're always we're always
you know, collectively viewed as if we are a monolithic
people and we're not right, and some but some special
(28:57):
black men like chase at that more than others, right,
And so then their idea is just that whatever most
black people are doing, they gotta do something different just
to prove that they special, they not like the rest
of us. Right. And so you could argue, and this
is why I want again a scholar like Terrey to
kind of explain it to me. You could argue that
(29:18):
maybe he was never really about fuck the police. Maybe
he was always just about being special, just just saying
that special thing that makes him a little bit different
than the other black And so now it actually so
maybe it's not incongruous. Maybe it actually perfectly tracks. He
was fucked the police when the most black people were like, okay,
we have to have belize what can we do? And
now that most black people are like, you know what,
(29:39):
fuck the police, he's like, oh, actually no, Tucker and
I tan our balls together, like because he's just like
that special guy. Like that's my that's my theory. But
I have not studied, and so I study want somebody
explain it to me.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
You as I mean, but I think that everything that
you just laid out is right. Maybe we're the ones
that got it wrong, and he just wanted to be
a standout, and so at a time in the eighties
and early nineties he was going to be that standout
with Fuck the Police. But maybe we too closely associated
(30:20):
his rapping in the way that like Chuck D of
Public Enemy, actually is that fucking guy right who believes
what it is that he is rapping about and has
always right been that rapper of thought. And so maybe
it fell on the rest of us that this motherfucker
has just been a performer that has played the industry,
(30:43):
played his fans, and this is who he is.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
Maybe for ice Cube that was just the song man.
It was raw, like you you write a song for
Kesha and she's gonna say it and it's gonna be awesome,
And maybe that's all it was. For him. It was
just a song, you know, and and and it wasn't
you know, he's not as you say, He's not Chuck D.
He's not k R. S One. He's not one of
these guys who actually live that life or or or
(31:12):
live that progressiveness. He was just a guy singing a song.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
He was just a guy singing a song, how fucking sad.
I want my money back, but I don't know I I.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
I want a deeper dive into what's happening because the
other thing, Daniels, and you know, we're old enough and
black enough to have seen this. There is always the
like negro gets a bit of money and loses their
damn mind, right, Like, they get a bit of money,
and it's like, you know the black people who when
(31:49):
they meet the I R s for the first time
as an adult, it's wait a minute, what are these
tax I? Don't like these? Ronald Reagan told me, and
that that's how it happens, right, Like, It's not uncommon
for people of any race, color, or creed to get
a little bit more conservative as they get older and
(32:10):
get more money and start to try to figure out
how to keep it. That's not uncommon. This is just
the kind of extremist, extrema extremophile version of that, you know,
normal aging process.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
I don't know, Well, I'll just tell you breaking news.
Tore just said, good idea. I can't wait, So so
you know, folks who will have to wait and see
got Danielle.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
I'm like, oh my god, I'm gonna be able to
read something like I don't want to read more about
what the hell is going on?
Speaker 1 (32:46):
Yeah, so well we'll see, we'll see what because I
have to, I have to tetch them like in the moment,
so we won't see. Uh, we will see uh where
that goes. But you know, you could be right for
a tour Ray, you know, I mean, for for a
tour Rade, this would be the interview I'd want to see.
But for ice Cube maybe that's the title of it.
(33:07):
It was just the song. We took it too seriously evidently.
As always, my friend Ellie Vistal, it is a joy
and a pleasure when you bring the bad news, but
you bring it with such passion and flair to WOKF.
I always appreciate you.
Speaker 2 (33:24):
Thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
That is it for me today, dear friends on wok F.
As always, power to the people and to all the people. Power,
get woke and stay woke as fuck.
Good morning, peeps, and welcome to wok F Daily with
Meet your Girl Danielle Moody. Pre recording from the Home Bunker. Folks,
it is wokf's holiday week and it is our farewell
week as we close out seven years of conversations, rage, information, celebration,
(00:36):
and trying to deliver keen political analysis over the last
seven years. So this week I am bringing you some
of my favorite shows with some of the voices that
we've brought took f over the years that I am
just so grateful for. First up is my conversation with
(00:59):
our friend Ellie Mistell, who is the Justice correspondent at
the Nation, and he returns and in this episode he
gives his expert perspective on Trump's indictments that we now
have known are no longer they've gone the way of
the wind. But to remind us these indictments were serious,
(01:22):
and had America decided to, oh, I don't know, not
vote for a convicted felon, not vote for somebody that
had been indicted multiple times, not vote for somebody who
showed very little care about the American people but a
lot of attention to America's coffers, maybe we wouldn't be
(01:44):
in the situation that we're in. But I think that
it is important as we wind our way to the
second Trump regime, which is certain to be worse than
the first one, because now they know where all the
keys the kingdom are. The first time around, they were
just case in the joint seeing what they could take,
(02:05):
and as my friend doctor Christina Grier said, it was
a smash and grab job. This time around, they can
be methodical, they can be slow because guess what, ain't
nobody going and check them? So in this best of episode,
Ellie Mistell brings us through the Trump indictments and the
mountain of evidence that America will never see. Folks, I
(02:29):
am so excited to welcome back to wok F after
just too long of a time away, which is our
friend Ellie Mistel, who is a justice correspondent for the
Nation and the author of Allow Me to Retort, A
Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution and just all around.
(02:52):
I don't know what the fuck we call Twitter these days?
Is it X?
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Is it? You know?
Speaker 1 (02:56):
Trash? It is trash, but you you make it a
place still worth going. I will say that, Ellie.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Oh, don't put that. Don't you put that evil on me.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
Let me not put that X on you by that. So, Ellie,
you know I want to talk to you because I
just there are times when I wish that I had
not listened to the old white male professor who told
me it wasn't smart enough to go to law school,
and that I actually went. And it is times when
(03:29):
I'm trying to understand how much legal trouble a normal
person whose name wasn't Trump would be in, uh if
they had all of these indictments that have already come
out and one big one still that is looming, actually
two big ones that are looming if you're also looking
at the state of Georgia. But walk us through, because
(03:51):
it's potential, the potential of Donald Trump being indicted for
a third time while people are listening to this is
very high. So please walk us through where we are
in the insurrection case so as not to get people
(04:12):
confused with the other indictments that the former twice impeach
president has.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Yes, any look, a normal person would be in jail
like eight times over by this point. A normal person's
children would probably be in jail at least twice over
by this point. The normal rules simply don't apply to Trump.
The White Rules does do. And that's kind of how
where we start with. Right, this indictment that's coming from Jacksmith,
(04:40):
potentially already out from Jacksmith, coming at the time that
we're recording. To me, this is the big one. This
is the one that we should have been working towards.
Since January seventh, twenty twenty one. Now, there has been
reporting about how Merrek Carlin has slow walked the investigation
and basically kind of did everything he could to get
(05:02):
Trump off the hook. But finally he appointed Jack Smith.
I've said on other shows Danielle that I think I
was wrong about Jack Smith. I thought he would be
kind of another Robert Muller type, and he has not
been run. Now, he is not an actual fucking prosecutor,
and he has been putting the wood to Trump, not
(05:22):
just in the espionage case, but now finally on the
January sixth case. We already know that he has interviewed. Basically,
he has finally done the work that Garland should have
been doing and that the January sixth Select Committee in
Congress already did. Right, He's finally done the interviews with
the Cassidy Hutchinson's and the Mark Meadows and the Steve
(05:45):
batt Bannons. He's gotten all of that information in and
he's prepared to charge Trump with a number of ofugh crimes.
Right the biggest ticket would be kind of conspiracy to
deprive right through the color of law. That's basically the
trying to intimidate and and potentially assassinate Mike Pence charge,
Like that's that's what that is. He's going to be charged,
(06:10):
we believe, with obstruction and and and and the fake
electors scheme as well. And these are the serious ones,
not just serious in terms of like legal jeopardy, but
serious in terms of actually holding the man accountable for
(06:31):
the coup he tried to pull off against the government,
Like that needs to happen, and it looks like that
that is finally going to happen. The problem, Danielle, is.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
That because there always is one elle race, it's.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
It's never just good news. The problem is that that accountability,
that trial over these charges will most likely happen in
twenty twenty five, and will only be allowed to happen
if Trump loses again another presidential election, where he will
again try to steal it and potentially again try to
(07:09):
do another coupe, right, Like this is all because of
the timeline, because of Merrick Garland's slow walking to get
us to this point. We are now in a situation
where it's just very unlikely that any of these trials
are going to happen before the election. And that's not
and there's almost nothing we can do about that. Like
(07:29):
the timeline is the timeline, and so Trump will get
to run again.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
But but let me ask you, let me ask this.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
I want to say why.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
I don't even want to say I will say why.
But so you have first in the Document's case, ailing
Cannon has set the date from May twenty four, twenty
twenty four, right, yep, And so that is several months
prior to the election. Why is it that? And then
(08:01):
Donald Trump prior to that? I believe that Donald Trump,
it has the another Egen Carroll case that I believe
is happening in October. Why wouldn't this case, which is
going to be heard in Washington, DC, because it has
such a long runway given a Leen Cannon's timeline, and
(08:23):
there is no need for security clearance in the way
that the Document's case requires security clearance. Why wouldn't that
be set for the end of the year or January because.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Trials take a long time. I mean, it's just like
there it is. It is just true that trials, especially
trials of rich white people, take a long time to
process through the system, and the defense lawyers remember, like
a lot of times, here's here's the thing that listeners
have to think about a lot of times when they
hear about court cases or trials from television, news or
(08:58):
even most print media. They're caring about it from the
perspective of a prosecutor, right, And the prosecutors are always like,
go now, go now, we can do this now. And
when they are when the prosecutors are facing criminal defendants
who are underfunded, underprivileged black Latino, the system is very
happy to go as quickly as humanly possible to get
(09:22):
a black and brown people in jail. But when it
happens to white people, the defense attorneys have usually legitimate
reasons and arguments to delay trial. Right. One of the
biggest ones is that the defense lawyers need time to
go over all of the evidence that the government has
(09:43):
and prepare an adequate defense. Right. So in these cases
I always argue kind of in favor of the defense,
because I realize that more often than not, what I'm
doing is arguing on behalf of black and Latino people
who are being railroaded through the system. Right, So I
understand and I guess the need for defend's attorneys to
(10:05):
have time to prepare their cases. Is Trump getting more
time than normal? It depends on what you think normal is. Right.
If you think normal is what we do to black people,
then hell yeah, he's getting way more time. Is he
getting more time than he should? The brass tacks of
it is, if you look at the espionage case, at least,
(10:25):
given when Smith was allowed to make these charges, I
think May twenty fourth is about the right day. I
think that's about the right time. Now. The question is,
and I think that this is the bigger problem. It's
unlike May twenty fourth is unlikely to hold up. You know, sorry,
May twentieth, twenty twenty four is unlikely to hold up
because as we get closer to May twentieth, twenty twenty four,
(10:49):
Trump's lawyers will again ask for a delay. They will
say they were overwhelmed, so they'll be there. They're busy
running a campaign. They'll say whatever they have to say,
and with Trump Judge Eileen Cannon having already own a
willingness to the lay this trial for six months, it's
I think, but this is.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
This is why I think that the insurrection case has
the potential to go before ailing Cannon's case. And my
feeling is one because it's going to be held in DC.
I don't know. And this is a question for you,
who do we think that that judge is like what
circuit is this going through? Is that this is actually
(11:30):
about this about national security?
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Right?
Speaker 1 (11:33):
You're talking about somebody who is going to be indicted
on charges that I am going to assume one of
them may in fact be seditious conspiracy, which we have
seen both keeper folks and others get charged with and
it stick. So I guess, like, am I being in
(11:53):
two naive Ellie in thinking that the fate of our
democracy and the person who instigated and incided the riot
on the Capitol and told people to overturn the government
who is running for election, that that would be caused
(12:14):
for a speedy trial.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
I think you're right. I think it should. I think
that the differences in the January sixth case versus the
espionage case lend itself to a faster timeline than what
Eileen Canon has set up for the espionage case. As
you point out, this is happening in DC, that means
that the judge, we don't know what judge will get right,
and it will be a random choice from among the
(12:39):
judges that sit on in the DC circuit. Right, that
circuit is generally pretty split. Generally, it's not as conservative
as the Florida circuit where Canon was pulled from, is
not as conservative as like the Fifth Circuit if it
was out in Texas or Louisiana. It's a pretty pretty
(13:01):
evenly split circuit, you know. But it's still going to
come down to kind of a random dice roll in
terms of which judge we get right. If you get
an aggressive judge, you will have an aggressive timeline. And yeah,
there's there's a good chance that they will set a
date before the next election. But then the defense lawyers
(13:26):
will appeal that date. And don't forget that these appeals
about the timing of the of the of the trial
could go all the way to the Supreme Court, where
Trump has stacked the Supreme Court with his own hand
picked judges. Brett Kavanaugh in particular, is very susceptible to
arguments that this is happening too close to the election
(13:48):
for us to do anything about it, like he's made
that argument before in cases involving outright racism in electoral jerrymandering. Right,
So I am not confident that an aggressive timeline will
will work in front of Brett Kavanaugh or the other Conservatives.
So we'll still have to wait and see, but I
(14:10):
think that it is very likely that this trial will somehow,
some way get delayed until after the election.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
The positive is where are you going for the positive?
Because you have already put my feelings and my hopes
and dreams in the dumpster along with our democracy. So
what road trip are we go not for the positive side?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
The positive is this the last time Trump lost an election,
he should have immediately been thrown into jail for his
efforts to overturn it. And obviously the system wasn't ready
to do that. We picked Merrick Garland instead of like
a better person. You know, lots of issues happen. We
weren't ready. The system wasn't ready to throw his ass
(14:51):
in jail after he lost the last election. If he
loses the next one, the positive here is that I
really do believe that if he loses the next election,
there will be you know, tiny little handcuffs waiting for
him at the end of that road. Like he needs
to win the election to stay out of jail. And
if he loses, and he should lose because he's a
(15:13):
terrible person and a terrible candidate and blah blah blah blah,
if he loses, there should be handcuffs waiting for him
if he loses.
Speaker 1 (15:22):
And right now we're at a fifty to fifty fucking
toss up that that is going to be the reality,
right Like it's fifty to fifty that Donald Trump doesn't
have the maneuvers still to lie, cheat and steal his
way to the White House. Now, I think that the upside,
(15:43):
if in fact we call it that because it's not
the floor, the upside is that, I hope, because we
have tried the Jurassic Park version where they have touched
all of the fences and folks have been you know,
are there are sixteen fake electors that are being charged
(16:05):
in you know, in Michigan. You got other people that
are being investigated. I think that in my opinion, and
I want to talk about this case next the dragnet,
if you will, is coming out of Georgia, because I
don't think that Trump is the only person that Fannie
Willis is looking at when she's prepared to drop her indictments.
And so again we our democracy held on by a
(16:30):
thread and was tested over sixty six times in court
with Rudy Giuliani, with these fake electors, with the phone calls,
and so I think folks are prepared for what they
know could be coming their way. That's the only hope here.
That and you know, a fourth indictment, the fourth and
(16:51):
final I don't know, coming out of Georgia.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
Yeah, I mean, if we're looking for hope, that's where
we find it. Right like that, people will be more
prepared that are there, elections will be more resilient this
time than they were last time. Of course, you also
have to worry about the fact that, you know, one
of the reasons why it's so important to prosecute people
who attempt coups is that if you don't prosecute them,
and if you don't hold them accountable, they just try
(17:17):
it again, and the second time they're better. So as
much as we can say that like, okay, our elections,
our election system should be better prepared to defend itself
from Trump. We also have to understand that Trump and
his forces will make a better coup attempt round two,
having potentially learned lessons from round one. We know that
(17:40):
they've done a lot to stack the courts, to stack
the secretaries of states in ways that are amenable to
various coup attempts, whether the legal ones, the quote unquote
legal ones of fake electors and whatever. We all, but
we also know that his more violent forces, you know,
have also learned some lessons about how to violently overthrow
(18:04):
the government, and we can we have to at least
expect that they will be coming again. You know. We know,
for instance, one of the biggest organizing things that Trump
used to put the coup out there with social media,
and after you know, being banned, we know that he
now has an ally in Elon Musk and social media
(18:26):
potentially to organize another coup. So like, yes, there are
more defenses, but also they're going to be new attacks,
and so we have to be you know, I am
still hopeful that he loses, and I'm still hopeful that
after he loses, he loses all of his attempts to
overthrow the election. But I'd be a fool to think
that they're not going to be It's not going to
be like, you know, we're watching TV on November whatever
(18:49):
and CNN says no, the winner is declared for and
then that's it. Right. We know there's going even after
he loses at the balance, we know there's going to
be another attempt, and we're prepared for that too.
Speaker 1 (19:01):
We shall see. Let's switch gears a little bit just
to go down to Georgia and then I want to
go to the Supreme Court. So down in Georgia, you
do have Fannie Willis. You do have another what I
deem as another very serious case right that she's been
building an unlike the slothlike pace of Merrick Garland, she's
(19:23):
actually been going full steam ahead for the last two years.
So give us your thoughts on where Fannie while Willis
is in terms of her You know, she gave us
an announcement several months ago that said we were to
be on the lookout between July and September. Well we're
headed into August now, So what do you think about
(19:44):
her case and the timing and then how again this
all measures up as we head into the fall a
year out from the presidential So I've.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Always thought Georgia had the strongest case because they have
the motherfucker on tape trying to overturn the election. Right,
They've got, like everybody's heard the tape where he tries
to find eleven thousand votes, which has just happens to
be exactly how many he needs to overturn the election.
So I've always thought that just kind of evidentiary, that
(20:14):
is the strongest case against him. But one thing, and
I do believe that Fannie Willis has been a dedicated,
kind of hardworking public servant and is trying to do
things the right way. But we have seen that Fannie
Willis is also sensitive to political pressure, and so you know,
we saw her say before the midterms that she wouldn't
(20:37):
release any news within a kind of zone of secrecy
around the midterms so as to not unduly influence the
midterm elections, which is not a legal position, it's a
political position. So, you know, not something that I would
have done. But okay, so now again what we what
we worry about with Willis is not whether or not
she's going to diligently charge a crime that she can prove,
(21:01):
but whether or not that trial comes off before the election,
and you know, if Fannie Willis is not willing to
make any an announcement within a zone of secrecy around
the midterms, you know, is she gonna be willing to
put this man to trial and let's say July twenty
twenty four, right before the Republican National Convention, or he
(21:21):
will be crowned the GOP nominee. Again, I don't know that.
I don't know that she'll do that. I don't know
that I don't know that a judge will let her
do a Georgia judge will let her do that. So again,
the I just am not sure, despite the immense legal
jeopardy he's under, I'm just not sure that any of
(21:46):
these trials, the Willis one, either of the Jack Smith ones,
I'm not sure that any of them come off before
November twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
So essentially we're fucked right, And essentially we've all played
into Donald Trump and his lawyer's hands in knowing exactly
how they were going to use this, how it was
going to be spun, the timeline that was going to
be created, and the person to blame isn't just Donald
Trump and his lawyers, because we always know the tactics
that we're going to be made. It is Merrick Garland
(22:17):
and his desire to not play politics and play the
most insane politics at the same time, which is, let
me not go after Donald Trump because I don't want
to look like this is something partisan. Let me waste
twelve months of time, and now we're here.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
The analogy that Ivan mcgarland is like a basketball referee
who swallows the whistle and refuses to call a file,
and that referee says like, Oh, I'm just trying to
be neutral and fair to both sides. I'm not going
to call file. I was going to let the games
play out. That's not being fair and neutral. That is
benefiting the team that fouls. If you don't call the
(22:57):
rules correctly, you benefit the team that breaks the rules.
And that's Merrick Garland and his alleged attempt to be
non political. He has. All he's done is completely politicize
the process. And that the reason why I've been screaming
about Merrick Garland for two years prior to this is
because at some point his failure becomes unrecoverable, right like
(23:21):
you can't and This is where I'm talking about the timeline.
Because of his delays, it's now very hard to squeeze
everything in before the election. I mean, Danielle, riddle me this. Okay,
Let's say one of these trials goes off and he
gets convicted. Is he gonna get sentenced before the election.
Is he gonna be sent to jail before the election?
(23:43):
How does that even work? Are we gonna actually send
federal marshals to arrest the Republican nominee for president eight
weeks before the general election? Is that really something that's
gonna happen in America? Because that's gonna look like something
that happens in you know, other cut and true Banana
(24:05):
republic countries. Right. So, because the timeline has been so truncated,
I just don't know how any of this happens before
he's allowed to run again. And so even if he's
tried and convicted, if he wins the presidency, he will
pardon himself from that conviction commute, I think at that
point is what you would call what he would do,
(24:27):
And so he would never face actual accountability even if
he was convicted, and he's convicted on the state charges
where he can't pardon himself. I mean again, are the
Georgia State troopers gonna go arrest the president of the
United States? Is that at some point the practicality kind
of trumps the theory of the case, right, Yeah, and
(24:52):
and and so that's my problem, that's my that's my worry.
Like all of this, all of this looks great on paper,
right when you actually when it actually comes to time
to try convict and jail this man before the election,
I just think it's too late. It wouldn't be too
late if we were having this trial right now, right.
And that's again where the failure of Garland where the
(25:12):
slow pace of all the investigations really take a hole.
If you think about where we were at the end
of the January sixth Select Committee process, right where Trump
could have been charged that day based on that final
report from the Congressional Select Committee, right, like an aggressive
prosecutor would have been really ready to charge his ass
(25:34):
that day. At the end of twenty twenty two, then
we're talking about a trial that happens not in May
twenty twenty four, but May twenty twenty three. Yeah, we're
talking about a sentencing process that's happening over the summer.
We're talking about the legitimate ability to capture and jail
this man before Labor Day, a year and a half
(25:56):
before the election, and that would have been doable. Now
I don't know. I just it's very hard to see
it happening.
Speaker 1 (26:08):
God, this was depressing.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
Well again, if he loses straight to the pokey right,
if there's no addition like the again, the other way
to positive to spend this positively is that Trump is
using his last get out of jail free cards and
as long as we don't give him four years of
(26:35):
another one, right, as long as we don't give him
another draw for those cards, he's gonna run out eventually
and we should be able to put his ass in jail.
Speaker 1 (26:46):
Okay, I mean, here's hoping, right, I have no faith,
but you know, here, here's hoping. Before I let you go, Ellie,
I'm gonna scrap Scotis because you know they've scrapped democracy
in the country, integrity. But I do want to get
to someone who I believe that both of us probably
(27:06):
grew up listening to, whose music had resonated, and who
has clearly had a fucking lobotomy. And that is the
one and only ice Cube, who was just recently filming
(27:27):
with none other than Tucker Carlson, Please take the floor.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
I would like our friend Torrejo was big, you know,
feature pieces titled from Fuck the Police to Fund the Police,
the punk bitification of ice Cube.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
I'm texting him right now like that, that.
Speaker 2 (27:50):
Is what I want to read, because how this man
has gone from where he was, where he was one
of the what what the what the over educated black
folks like me like to call one of the urban
poets who is you know, talking about police brutality and
(28:11):
the devastating effects that has on the black community to
this point where he's kissing their ass is just one
of the biggest devolutions that I can think that I
have seen in my lifetime. Now I have a theory
about this, Danielle. I call it the special black Man
theory is that there are there are you know, one
(28:33):
of the and this kind of They're gonna call me
a critical race theorist after this, but like you know,
one of the issues that I think a lot of
black people chafe against is the fact that we're always
grouped in with everybody else, right, We're always we're always
you know, collectively viewed as if we are a monolithic
people and we're not right, and some but some special
(28:57):
black men like chase at that more than others, right,
And so then their idea is just that whatever most
black people are doing, they gotta do something different just
to prove that they special, they not like the rest
of us. Right. And so you could argue, and this
is why I want again a scholar like Terrey to
kind of explain it to me. You could argue that
(29:18):
maybe he was never really about fuck the police. Maybe
he was always just about being special, just just saying
that special thing that makes him a little bit different
than the other black And so now it actually so
maybe it's not incongruous. Maybe it actually perfectly tracks. He
was fucked the police when the most black people were like, okay,
we have to have belize what can we do? And
now that most black people are like, you know what,
(29:39):
fuck the police, he's like, oh, actually no, Tucker and
I tan our balls together, like because he's just like
that special guy. Like that's my that's my theory. But
I have not studied, and so I study want somebody
explain it to me.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
You as I mean, but I think that everything that
you just laid out is right. Maybe we're the ones
that got it wrong, and he just wanted to be
a standout, and so at a time in the eighties
and early nineties he was going to be that standout
with Fuck the Police. But maybe we too closely associated
(30:20):
his rapping in the way that like Chuck D of
Public Enemy, actually is that fucking guy right who believes
what it is that he is rapping about and has
always right been that rapper of thought. And so maybe
it fell on the rest of us that this motherfucker
has just been a performer that has played the industry,
(30:43):
played his fans, and this is who he is.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
Maybe for ice Cube that was just the song man.
It was raw, like you you write a song for
Kesha and she's gonna say it and it's gonna be awesome,
And maybe that's all it was. For him. It was
just a song, you know, and and and it wasn't
you know, he's not as you say, He's not Chuck D.
He's not k R. S One. He's not one of
these guys who actually live that life or or or
(31:12):
live that progressiveness. He was just a guy singing a song.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
He was just a guy singing a song, how fucking sad.
I want my money back, but I don't know I I.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
I want a deeper dive into what's happening because the
other thing, Daniels, and you know, we're old enough and
black enough to have seen this. There is always the
like negro gets a bit of money and loses their
damn mind, right, Like, they get a bit of money,
and it's like, you know the black people who when
(31:49):
they meet the I R s for the first time
as an adult, it's wait a minute, what are these
tax I? Don't like these? Ronald Reagan told me, and
that that's how it happens, right, Like, It's not uncommon
for people of any race, color, or creed to get
a little bit more conservative as they get older and
(32:10):
get more money and start to try to figure out
how to keep it. That's not uncommon. This is just
the kind of extremist, extrema extremophile version of that, you know,
normal aging process.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
I don't know, Well, I'll just tell you breaking news.
Tore just said, good idea. I can't wait, So so
you know, folks who will have to wait and see
got Danielle.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
I'm like, oh my god, I'm gonna be able to
read something like I don't want to read more about
what the hell is going on?
Speaker 1 (32:46):
Yeah, so well we'll see, we'll see what because I
have to, I have to tetch them like in the moment,
so we won't see. Uh, we will see uh where
that goes. But you know, you could be right for
a tour Ray, you know, I mean, for for a
tour Rade, this would be the interview I'd want to see.
But for ice Cube maybe that's the title of it.
(33:07):
It was just the song. We took it too seriously evidently.
As always, my friend Ellie Vistal, it is a joy
and a pleasure when you bring the bad news, but
you bring it with such passion and flair to WOKF.
I always appreciate you.
Speaker 2 (33:24):
Thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
That is it for me today, dear friends on wok F.
As always, power to the people and to all the people. Power,
get woke and stay woke as fuck.
Host
Danielle Moodie
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com