Executive Power and Legal Precedent

Say you've always wanted to have a backyard oasis. Here's the thing, if you get smart with your money, you can do things like that. With empower, you can start making the most out of your money so you can go out and live a little. Isn't that why we work so hard to have some fun with our money ? So use empower and get good at money so you can be a little bad. Join their twenty million customers today at empower dot com not an empower client paid or sponsored. Every kickoff, every seven seventy seven, every pocket ace Bobada. Lv gets you ready for every way you want to play. Hourly jackpots, anonymous poker events, boosted sports odds. Join today and get up to seven hundred and fifty dollars in bonuses. See for yourself why players have chosen us as their online casino for over ten years. Your best bet every day you want to play Bovada. LV ready for everything . Is this PG or is this not Peachy? No, it's not Peach. This is we're talking about legal stuff. No one's listening to this with their kids Hello everyone and welcome to The Illegal News. I'm Sarah Longwell, publisher of the Bullwark, and back with me today is my guy, Andrew Weissmann, bestselling author of Liars Kingdom, host of MSN podcast Maine Justice, , lawyer professor, New Yorker, dog dad, and a multi hyphenate Renaissance man. Andrew, glad you're back. That is a great introduction. I love it. That's not the dog part, but it was great Loved it. Geez. The more we do the show, the more things I have to say about you. Okay, I'm coming back. Great. Okay, before we dive into the illegal news, my producer has just like, ask Andrew if he has a story from his weekend . No, wait, wait, no , that's over like wait, that's I have a feeling that's why I brought it. And you're probably like no story if I hadn't just seen it I would have been like skip this part skip this part okay no instead instead of stories from Eureka we're gonna talk about Iran just because that was actually the story of my weekend because I was pretty glued to the negotiations because they're both on one hand, it's sort of like the show . Incredibly important and substantive and like important to the future and what happens . On the other hand , like so much silliness going on , like and also it's on so much I was like very much struggling to understand what is happening here. And so I know this isn't always what you and I talk about on this show, but I heard that you want to talk about it. And so I'm excited for you to break down this MOU situation. Yes, and I have a big question for you because I am I can't even say in the middle because it's a tome, but I am reading regime change, the shirtbook by Maggie Hayerman and Swan Jonathan and Jonathan Swan. Yeah, he's great. I mean, not that she's she's great obviously, but everyone knows her. Jonathan's just terrific . And I was actually following them on Lawrence the other night. And so it was sort of fascinating to hear them. They're just, they're so serious, they're such great journalists, but I had a question for you , but let's first sort of break it down . Can I give a quick shout out to somebody you and I both know because a lot of my thinking is comes from Tess Bridgeman , who is a co editor in chief of just security . She was in the Obama administration in positions, a whole series of senior positions to know. And I really I've talked a lot about this with her. So in many ways, I'm channeling her, but thought she had such an interesting way of thinking about this because what I wanted to know from her is what exactly have we agreed to? How does it compare to what Obama agreed to? In other words, like what was that? What is this? What are the pluses or minuses of where we are? And what is she thinking about? Like what's going forward? Those were sort of like the three things that were top of mind . And the one of the things that I thought was that she was like, let me just make sure that we're comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges is that when she said, let's just think about what we have now and what you compare it to is there is under the Obam istration is that there were two things under the Obam stration. There was an interim agreement and then there was the final agreement. And she said, So when you're comparing what we have now, you can't compare this to the final agreement because this is just an interim agreement. So you have to compare it to the interim agreement under the Obama administration. I mean, obviously you know what the final result is, so you can think about that . So that sort of was step one. The other is she just said, look, we're just in such a crazy different space because the Obama agreement didn't happen while there was a unprovoked illegal war and the strait of Muse was closed and so that all and that the thing that we're all caring about and the reason that Trump said we went to war , which he now calls a war, but for the it was like, is it a war? No, it's not a war because it was a war. I had to get congressional approval. So it's not a war. But now that I'm resolving it, it's a war. I mean, it's just, I mean, the lies are just unbelievable . But just to be clear what we have now a sort of temporary solution to okay, we're not going to bomb now and the Strait of Hermes is going to open . But the nuclear piece is completely up in the air. Like the thing that we went to war over is not in any way shape or form resolved. Like that is can kicked . And so it's so hard to, like, I was listening to Donald Trump this morning on some news programs saying, and I just want to say like X billion dollars of oil we're going through the Strait of Her moose. And I'm like, and that's where we were and more before the war. So like it's insane that it's like, oh, let me just understand. We are in such a worse position and including a worse bargaining position by the way, sanctions gone . There's this isn't JD Vance, I think is just completely, let's just say misleading when he says, No, no, no, no, the sanctions only go away if Iran does AB and C. No, no, no , they're they're gone . And so Iran is going to get all this like billions of dollars from a conglomerate. We're not acting with all these other international countries in the way that Obama did. We're sort of out on our own. We've given up the leverage of sanctions . The idea now everyone knows that the idea that we're going to drop more bombs and they're going to close off the Strait of Hermes means we're in a worse position because it's proven that they have the Strait of Herm u's leverage . I mean everything about this is worse and the one reason we went to war is not resolved at all, which is ostensibly about whether we're going to do something that is better than what Obama agreed to in terms of the nuclear weapons. Okay , so do I sound triggered ? Yeah you do. Can I just do want to add though because I'm listening to you, the one thing to say that they went in there because they wanted to do something about the nuclear program I actually think isn't is it was the stated reason later much later actually. Like remember how long it took us for them to start to articulate a reason and so in the beginning they went they went Trump went because Netanyahu said, Hey, you know, let's do this. And he'd just done Venezuela, and he thought, well, this will be easy. We'll drop some bombs and then I'll walk away . And he and because he's a moron and thoughtless and he's got Hag Seth who's also a moron and thoughtless, like then they had to reverse engineer a reason to do it. You're absolutely right, and that raises the question I wanted to ask you. Okay, so that is like a really that's not even like a footnote. That's like a really important point that and I should have said the sort of belated stated reason for the war is not one that there's there's still there's still a belated result in this and that we're not even back to where we were. So in the book regime change , you have reporting says that in the internal meetings at the White H ouse. In spite of the sort of the facade of we're all on board and we do whatever Trump says and there's no dissent , you have military personnel saying don't fall for Netanyahu's constant refrain. He does this all the time . It's hyperbole and it's , you know, you're underestimating like how hard this is going to be, that the Strait of Ramuse is a problem. In other words, all of the things that we're seeing were flagged and there were people who are dead set against it, most notably JD Vance . Right . And that by the way, this is like such a Washington Parlor game because when you see newspaper articles or books come out and like to me it',s like, you know, I would never ask Maggie Hayerman this or Jonathan Swann because they can't possibly give it up. But you know, you read stuff like this and you're thinking, okay, JD Vance wants to be president and he has now differentiated himself from this war, but also Marco Rubio, who is not exactly one hundred percent on board, but let's just say he is not taking the do not do it stance according to this book. So one , isn't it obvious JD Vance is one obviously was the source for that. I mean, there's so many things in that book where it's like there are two people, things are in quotes , and one of the people is talking to Putin. Well, I don't think Putin was a source of Maggie Hayron and Jonathan Swann. So it's like pretty clear who the sources are. And so this is like what you do in Washington if you want to get your story out, but also politically, JV Vance to me is being so duplicative duplicative. He's being so duplicitous because it's like he's out there selling this thing and saying all these things that are just not true, but also behind the scenes he is getting this story out that he was never in favor of this, which have to, by the way, drive Trump and Susie Wildes just insane . Maybe. So I have a I have an alternate theory on this. I totally agree with you that JD Vance is the source of a bunch of these things. Like the question of whether they have tapes for the situation room maybe or JD Vance. It's like let me just out of the same . They don't have tapes. I mean , yeah, there's a solid idea. That always comes up about whether they're tapes . And if you are the person who's telling the truth , you kind of don't mind that people think that you might have tapes because it makes it harder for them to just lie about it . Now, it of course would be totally improper and you cannot have tape recording devices in the situation room. So like your phones are all things that you have to leave outside. If somebody was in the intelligence community, the idea that you would br ing a phone that can be intercepted by adversaries into the situation room is so I mean, of course this administration I'm not saying by the way this administration wouldn't do it because there's no rules of this administration as far as you can tell. So of course it could happen, but I just don't think they have it. And I don't think it hurts Maggie Hamer and Jonathan Swann for people to believe that they might and that people might be crazy enough, the same people who might give war plans over signal to people who have no business getting them are also capable of having made tape recordings just so that they but yeah, I don't think they have tapes . No, I think I think that Trump has a court, the Trump court and like every other court for every king and queen. There is a tremendous amount of palace intrigue. Everybody sees Trump as an old man who's about to go out and they are fighting for the future of their power. I also think so I think that there's no JVL had a great piece early on about how like Shave Fans is definitely the source of this stuff. Like you could it doesn't even seem that hard. On the other hand, though, it's so hamhanded to some degree that I think that Vance must have some kind of blessing from Trump. I forgot to turn off my emoji thing. They keep telling me to turn off my emoji thing because I do so many thumbs up. I do so many hand gestures this is coming up . But so but I think that JD Vance A wants to be I think he wants to be the guy holding the bag at the end of the war, right? He's like he wants to be like they got us into it. I'm going to get us out. He likes that frame , but I also think Trump's got to be giving him some rope because Trump also now wants out of this war . And so like he really does. He doesn't you're right, but how do you square JD is taking like what's in this book is JD telling Trump do not do it. It's a mistake like you know essentially they're going to close down the streets, they're going to like in other words it's basically your like this is is this PG or is this not PG. No, it's not PG. This is we're talking about legal stuff. No one's listening to this with their kids This is basically you're an epic idiot, right? That's sort of the it's hard to see I get you that there could be triangulation, but this just seems like JD is doing it at the expense of Trump. Trump is not known for, let's just say generosity and encourage criticism . This show is sponsored by Factor . Everyone knows you're supposed to eat healthy, but it's not always a willpower problem. It's a life problem. But with factor, I'm hitting my nutrition goals this season without the planning grocery runs or cooking, and so can my team. We're in the midst of election season right now and these fly out of my office fridges like hot cakes, but they are healthier than hot cakes. Factor has meals built around your goals, whether that's weight loss, overall nutrition, more protein, or GOP one support . For strength and workout recovery, check out Fact ors Muscle Pro collection. That's the one I'm on, you know ? Every meal is crafted with functional ingredients, lean proteins, colorful veggies, whole foods, and healthy fats. Factor banns one hundred se andventy five plus ingredients , no artificial colors or sweeteners, no high fructose corn syrup, no refined seed oils, just nutrient dense food. They're fresh and never frozen with over a hundred rotating weekly meals, including globally inspired flavors like Mediterranean and Asian. So there's always something new to look forward to. Ready in two minutes, factor shops, preps, cooks, and delivers straight to your door so you have more time for everything you love this spring. Head to factor meals dot com slash illegal news fifty off and use code illegal news fifty off to get fifty percent off and free daily greens per box with new subscription only while supplies last until nine, twenty seven, twenty, twenty six, go get it You know what? So okay , this is this is very hard to do with that. We are we are entirely speculating how I think there's I think there are different moments in time . I think that the JV Vance could be acting with betrayal and his own interests in mind in terms of being the one who never wanted to get into the war . I also though think because like Marco Rubio right now wants nothing to do with the getting out of the war , right? And so I don't they're playing games too while also being sort of close. And I never quite know whether they' are team and they are they are calibrating together to create I don't know some kind of comprehensive story or if they are adversaries and they're jockeying against each other because sometimes the things that you see, you're like, I don't know, they both feel like, hey, look, I'm taking a lane. Like, obviously, JD Vance, you take this lane. I'm going to take this lane. I'll mark a Rubio. I still think we bomb Iran . And like, they know that about each other. This stuff isn't a secret. But this stuff about getting out right now , I wonder if Trump is feeling betrayed by the people who wanted him to go into the war and now feels like, well, JD Vance was right and I've got to separate from Israel. And actually JD Vance is a good person to be out there on this. Like it is a coordinated idea right now to have JD Vance out there talking about this. He's not doing that without Trump's approval and say so. Look, there's no question. You know, I was reading Carol Lennig's book from a while back about the Department of Justice. And that to me, that's in a world that I know much better. There's no question that the , you know, again, I wouldn't ask her directly these things, but their sourcing was like, oh, so and so wants this story out. Like they want it know that this is their position , which I have to say makes it tricky for journalists because you're getting access, you're getting stories, you're getting somebody who's speaking to you , but they definitely have sort of an ax to grind. They have a position to take, and it's just how much is, you're gonna be able to really know is that actually what happened. Also, 'cause in Washington , a lot of times things are said at the time with an eye towards what I can say later about what I said at this meeting. So it's so many different layers. I mean, it's it can be so ugly . It's so refreshing when this is one of the reasons it was great to be at the FBI when I was under director Mueller because people just were like, this is what we believe. This is where we're going to do. And you know what, later, if they want to criticize us for it. That's what we did. And you know what? If people think it's wrong , so be it . There was just a much more straightforward approach. Yeah, I mean it is true that like if you just stand for the thing you believe in and then tell the truth . So much of the rest of the commentary doesn't matter because yeah, you can do your job. These guys, it's all palace intrigue and sort of no real substance, it's all jockeying . And you know what? Honestly, this could be one of those things. It would not shock me at all. This is murder on the Orient Express, right? It's not just Jadie Vance, it's all of them, right? She's talking to and they're all battling for some position in there. And so she's getting a rounded version of events. Right. And just for case people don't know is it should we get spoiler alert, but a express everybody did it. Everybody did it. Like you're thinking everyone 's got a motive and it turns out not only have a motive, but they all did it. They all did it. And yeah, sorry for the spoiler, but it has been made into many movies and it's been a book that's been out since like the seventies, right? So when you say seventies, I think you mean the eighteen seventies . I'm just joking, but it's a Christie. I know, but I mean, it's been it's a little bit of Weisman hyperbole. But I mean, it's been out for decades and decades and decades. A long time. So sorry for the spoiler. So yeah, so that is true. So one thing that is clear is I think we all agree we're in a worse position in so many ways. We have spent billions of billions of American dollars. We have depleted American military sources, our resources have been greatly depleted and lives have been lost and so which trumps everything because that is irrevocable . So in so many ways we are so worse off and in terms of stated eventual reason, which is that this is about the nuclear program , we have nothing to show for it. We have zero to show for it at this point. We have negative. Like we, in ne'greative territory . Your point about not just the leverage, but like one of the things they know about us now and that we know about ourselves is that you mess with the gas prices, especially before an election , our government is totally at your mercy. Like they can't they can't do anything about it. Right. Exactly. So , you know, and to me , Trump is banking on has worked for him in the past, which is like he needs to get this like off of the press political news plate before the midterms . And so the same way that we are not talking about Abrega Garcia , which was big news when the administration started, we are not talking about Minnesota and Alex Predi and Renee Good , which people that seems like, oh, that's so long ago. I mean we're not talking about Epstein. I mean, so many of these things, it's like, how do I change the conversation because I need to do it before November? He was coming up against the depletion of the oil reserves to, I mean, like the extent to which they didn't have a plan. This is where malevolence and incompetence . So when you talk about lives lost, there are first of all thirteen American American service members who lost lives, but also we bombed a girl's school. We killed like hundreds of little girls. And Sarah, have you been following this, which and shout out to Asha Rangappa, who is a legal colleague well known and she's terrific , she was the person who pointed something out, which is that in filings, the government is saying, well, we were using AI at the start of the war. And one of the reasons that they just moved to intervene in a case and have it dismissed is the NAACP was saying that one of these data centers should be shut down . And the government interceded and said, Well, one of the reasons that you shouldn't do this is because we really need it because this is what we used at the start of the Iran war . And as she pointed out, really, that's what you were using AI at the start of the war. Well, you know, at the start of the war, that is when we bombed the girl school. And for a long time , we were saying, Oh, no, no, no, we don't know how it happened. It seems very clear that is what happened. But her point is that it seems let's just say it's not proved yet, but it is there is substantial reason to think that it was AI being used in connection with the kinetic war that resulted in this bombing. And you'll remember that Anthropic was saying, we do not want our material our clawed utilities and inventions used by the military to engage in a war that is sort of sort of without human oversight . And so you can really put the pieces together that that may be one of the things that happened here , it doesn't, I mean, lives have been lost in a war that was both, in my view, illegal and obviously as we've been talking about, ill advised because we are in such a worse position . But it may also be that in terms of the incompetence that they used something that it wasn't designed to do. Remember, Anthropic said their AI is not designed and wasn't designed. It hasn't been tested to engage in that kind of conduct. And so there's no reason to think that's true with respect to the AI that was being used by the American military . So this is a long way of saying that this is like an ongoing story people should pay attention to. Yeah, I'm going to there is the NAACP versus like Elon's company is in the back part of the show, so we'll talk about that. This show is sponsored by superpower . Look, a lot of us love our doctors , but when you only see them once a year and maybe something feels off and you're told you know you're fine, you just need to drink some more water that's not good. I mean, I'm in pretty good health, but it's really good to have a backup plan. That's where superpower comes in. Superpower sends a lic ensed professional to your home or you can visit a nearby lab. And it's one simple blood draw with over a hundred biomarkers, which is way more than what you usually get, and it unlocks a real understanding of your body. Their app includes detailed information on your heart, liver, thyroid, hormones, metabolism, vitamin and mineral levels, and even environmental toxins . So from disease prevention to treating that annoying brain fog or simply optimizing your gym game, superpower the most comprehensive and advanced system out there . Superpower doesn't just give you a one time snapshot, it tracks your results over your lifet ime. Each test builds on the last so you can actually see progress year over year instead of starting over every January . They have an on demand care team to answer questions as well. Instead of waiting to see your doctor or don't and don't do this or googling what things mean. That's a bad idea . Make this year the year you stop guessing about your health with super power . For a limited time, our listeners get twenty percent off to unlock their new health intelligence. Head over to superpower dot com and use code illegal news for twenty dollars off your membership. That's code illegal news. And after you sign up, they're going to ask you how you heard about super , do me and Andrew and everybody else that puts together this show a favor and tell them the illegal news with Sarah Longwell sent you . That helps support our show. Appreciate you guys. Appreciate you superpower. I just really quickly on the back to Iran on that, just on the MOU and then we can talk about other aspects of this because I want to talk about Congress . Like do you know what is going to happen ? Because when your point earlier about test was made, it says, okay, we have sixty days now. So you talk about can kicking . And now we're at this point. Okay, so they're negotiating . We know they're going to probably end up worse off because we're releasing money, we're on freezing assets. We're letting Iran start selling. What's our leverage? What's your leverage? So like what is going to happen in sixty days? Where do we get I? guess we expect a deal? Do we expect we go back to war? Do you expect what do you think? So there's no way that we go back to war . So first, you know, you do have this sort of the Senate finally doing something. It is largely symbolic, but this is in your neck of the woods, but it is a way it is it is at least a marker saying that they have lost four Republican votes . And so and just even though they maybe they could pressure , you know, one of those people to change , you know, they have the midterms coming up. And so , you know, this is one reason that, you know, I would say vote vot veot,e vot, ,e, vote, because to the extent that it's the bid terms that's holding this administration to any tethered to any sort of normalcy and rationality , you know, if the midterms go their way , you know, what's just stop them from just saying, okay, as Trump has said, we're going to bomb you bomb your heads, you know, if this doesn't work. I suspect what the administration's going to do is try and just put in effect the things that they were so denigrating and pooping in connection with the Obama deal, put that in place and try and get one thing they can point to that's new and different so they can say, oh look how much better it is even if behind the scenes we are paying billions of dollars for that . And so in many ways, we already are because this idea that the Strait of Hermes could now be subject to taxes, tolls, whatever you want to call it, a fee structure , Iran has to be like , you know, dancing down the street going like , this is okay, I don't want to be bombed, but this is like, okay, now we get billions of dollars. We get sanctions relief completely. You can sell our oil and we get to tax the boats going through the Strait of Ramuz . I mean, again, they don't want the bombing. I'm not saying that they're in favor of it, but if you're sort of them and you're thinking we are where we are , they have played their cards incredibly well. Yeah. And there's one other aspect to this , which is they've also driven a wedge between Israel and the United States now, right? Like Donald Trump is now suddenly unpopular in Israel. He's mad at Netanyahu, Netanyahu, and this is maybe my last question. I don't know if you have an opinion on this. But the thing that keeps being weird to me about this deal is that it is part ially reliant on Israel's behavior. And the thing that keeps and this was what was happening this weekend and why I was sort of glued to negotiations is Israel keeps bombing Lebanon. Republican or Republicans, well it is Republicans, but America and the Trump administration has decided to, on behalf of Israel, say, well, they'll stop doing that. And Netanyahu's like, No, I won't. And he also has elections coming up. So there is I don't even I don't know. So something that Tess pointed out is that when Obama acted , there was world . There is a like everyone likes to think and Donald Trump likes to go, we don't need anybody. We don't need anybody until I ask for help. And then when they say no, it's like, well, I didn't need you anyway , there is a lot of utility in terms of actual effectiveness , in terms of moral high ground , in terms of pressure, in terms of leverage in having a coalition. I mean, this is just so obvious and it has nothing to do with America first versus not America first . It is in America's interest to have that . And so one of the things that we have now is unlike this panoply of international resolve , where which by the way , includ ed Russia and China , we have this thing where it's like it's just us . And you don't have the world going, oh, it's great that we started this war. It's great that there was like a world economic crisis because the Strait of Hermes was closed. I mean this I mean it is unbelievable to me that Americans cannot look at this and go like this is an incredibly bad thing and not just because our gas prices went up. I mean, I understand for people who don't, this is really in your world who are like, I don't care about politics and I don't follow politics because, you know, maybe for whatever reason, I don't care or they're all corrupt or you know, it's it's all happening in Washington and it doesn't affect my daily life. And so they're just thinking about , you know , can I put food on the table? Can I put gas in my cart? So you know, so just I just want to know what's happening to me. But this is one where like people should be able to connect the dots. When you have somebody in Washington who is not thoughtful obligation to the public and they're thinking about , again, as reported in regime change , that I am one of the ten great leaders in world history like Genghis Khan and Hitler . That's from the book because it's not hanging up. I know I know. We talked about this yesterday. It's also like, who else does he have? It's like, it's like all dick stalin Stalin. That's that's, you know, Sarah, that's not on your list of people that you're emulating. And Napoleon, it was all this his whole thing is like this, uh, it's dictators Megalaniac Megalaniac conquers like what that's that's and he was he that was one of the things in the book, right? It was like the glee with which counts himself among people like Hitler and Stalin. It's just mass murdering Meglomaniacs. Yeah . But I think we should be grateful h,onestly , this is something I think about a lot. I have a lot of gratitude for the fact that Trump admires strong men, but he does not have the stomach of a strong man, right? He like, this is this is this is part of the problem with Iran problem. I don't quite know how to gauge this . When he says he's going to destroy their civilization , that is Trump's weakness talking, not his strength. Exactly. And so as a result they know now like I'm glad. I'm glad he's not going to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran or other huge bombs on them and obliterate them to prove a point because like he but, he does not have the stomach for mass murder. Now of course, he's committed mass murder in kinetic warfare that they did at the beginning, but he that's like not what he wants to do Um , you know, this is a hard one for me because, you know, I think I told you that I come from everyone in my family and like my, you know, my it's like my parents, my grandparent s, everyone was a doctor . And it is very, very hard with that sort of background and that those voices when I look at what has happened in the way we dealt with COVID and what we're doing with basic research and how like the number of people who are sick and or died or will die because of the way we are dealing with health in this country I think it is the overlooked story in and it's because this is so much Sarah in your neck or the word because it's it's less visible. I mean to say to somebody, we're not investing in basic research. I mean, there's a reason America that they're sort of challenging my dad, which is, you know, the twentieth century was the century of American medicine . We were the whole world, not just our country was fundamentally different at the beginning and the end of that century . And the idea that we are cutting off that and that means it's going overseas at best so short sighted, but you don't see it in the same way as a girl skull being blown up , but it will have the same effect in terms of if not many, many times over. I totally get your point. Like and I agree with you that Donald Trump is doing unfathomable damage in so many ways. And look at what Doge did and cutting off USAID, like all of these things, I think you can obviously put a lot of lives at the feet of Donald Trump's incompetence, malevolence, idiocy, all of that . But Donald Trump doesn't have a like Like want to murder people I mean of course he I mean it is hard because then it's like, I don't know though he does strip they wanted to they wanted to what use the insurrection act to strip illegal immigrants of any rights so that they could deport them all. So look, you don't nobody Trump is the worst. Trump is the absolute worst. My only point is my only point is that like he's a big talker when it comes to things like I'm going to drop big bombs and then he doesn't do it because he is a weak man strong man. But he admires strong man. Yeah , I really get your point, which is that there is a ton of bluster and he wants to pretend as if and he wants the world to think he's as if he's like them, but he's not. Okay , so we're recording this on june twenty fourth and yesterday the Senate voted to block further military action in Iran unless the president receives congressional approval in advance. So now both chambers have said the President cannot act militarily without congressional authority. So we talked about this a little bit earlier , but like, is it does this mean anything or is it just nothing? It's nothing. It doesn't mean anything in terms of enforceability , but it should mean something if you in terms of markers in terms of public opinion, in terms of showing congressional stomach to do something . But just to remember this administration, the second Trump admin istration started with them saying, TikTok ban, TikTok ban, that you just voted. Congress, you just voted that it that it was being imposed . And the Supreme Court just ruled that it's constitut ional and it's valid, but we're ignoring it . So it started it started with that . And so again, it's not because the TikTok ban is the same as war in Iran. It's that if you're looking for like do they give a damn or a rat's ass about sort of Congress truly care? I mean, I just don't think that's like on the agenda for , you know, the sort of Stephen Miller's of the world , that that is like the number one thing that they're thinking about . So I don't think it matters all that much . Yeah, 'cause what? That it's goes to Trump's desk for his Vita. I mean, like, yeah, I mean, so there's this line from I've been on with you when I've talked about Robert Jackson, the Justice Robert Jackson and he has this very famous decision from the nineteen fifties, Justice Robert Jackson had taken a leave from the Supreme Court to be the President Truman's request to be the lead American prosecutor in the first Nuremberg trial. And in this decision, one of the things he says, and it's this famous case where he says the president doesn't have this power . It's Congress's power . Right. Sounds like it's a little like the tariff decision. And it's like it's very much, but it's the courts that stepped in to say , No, no, no, there are checks and balances and the president can't do this, only Congress can. But Jackson says Napoleon was said to have quipped that the tools belong to the man who uses them . Meaning if we can do this, we can step in as the court and say it's Congress's power , but it's all for naught if Congress doesn't stand up. And so one of the big systemic challenges going forward post Trump is how do we reimagine Congress so that its interests are distinct and different of the executive , even when the executives of the same party. And that to me is like a fundamental problem with you have talked about this idea that it's supposed to be a mission against a mission and you have this friction . That to me is a fundamental flaw that we have to figure a way out. We're seeing the courts and especially the lower courts and the executive having that friction . But you know that this goes to your point of like okay, the Sen,ate did this, but if they don't stand by it, if they don't see their own personal interest . And this I can relate this to Todd Blanche , you know, because I'm super focused on this, which is you, would think Todd Blanche would be a place where the Senate might say, you know, we have we have our own interest here in not confirming somebody who was going to indict six of us for doing nothing . And so that if that's not a test of like the congressional will and sort of the idea that they should have their own independent voice , you know, nothing is . Yeah, to me, Trump's fundamental genius and something that it took me a little while to see was just how absolutely hollow the Republican Party was. Like he knew what weaklings they were and seemed to understand all you got to do is threaten them just to smidge , you know, their jobs on social media, like you just bully 'em a smidge and they'll fall right over and because he's got a bully's instinct again, like a weak bully's instinct, but like he can smell weakness in others and knows how to knock him around and that's what he did. And I don't think it was my point about or ambition, counteracting ambition. I think it was, I think it's a Madison federalist. It is right. It is no, no, no. I mean, I don't take credit for Madison, you know, I obvably we're at the same but you always take you always take the high ride. I actually meant that. I mean I meant that you were reminding us of the Madisonian idea that's been said the same way that it's not you know,, I was trying to say what I didn't come up with the quote of Napoleon. It was like, you know, but so it's all derivative, but it's still reminders . Between diets, workouts, and endless advice, it's hard to know what actually work s for weight loss and what's worth your time . That's why Hers offers access to an affordable range of FDA approved GLP one medications that now includes the Wagovi Pill and the Wagovi pen. With Wagovi at hurts lose up twenty percent or more of your body weight when combined with diet and exercise. It helps you regulate your appetite, eat less and keep weight off. Plus Wagovi is the first ever GLP one pill for weight loss so there are no needles needed . Everything is one hundred percent online through hers. You'll connect with a licensed provider who will determine if treatment is right for you. If prescribed, your medication is delivered right to your door , no insurance necessary. And it doesn't stop there. Weight loss by hers goes beyond medication by offering access to twenty four seven messaging with your care team and tons of in app lifestyle and nutrition tips like recipes , meal plans, fitness videos, sleep content, and more. Even better with a range of affordable GLP one options, Hers makes it simple to find an approach that fits your needs and your budget if you're eligible. You'll get a treatment plan, personalized to you and unlimited dosage changes as needed. It's weight loss designed to work with your life. Ready to reach your goals? Visit forhears . com slash illegal news to get personalized affordable care that gets you. That's f O R H E R S dot com slash illegal news for hers dot com slash illegal news . Weight loss by hers is not available in all fifty states. Wugovi is the registered trademark of Novo Nordisk AS to get started and learn more, including safety information, Wigovi clinical study information and restrictions visit for hers. com . Okay, I have a question. I don't know what's on your list, but can we talk about something that I think people are going to be think is really minor, but I think it encapsulates exactly where we are, which is the reflecting pool. Oh yeah, it's not on my list, but let's do it. I was going to talk more about Jadie Vance, but I feel like we covered him. I'm going to be interested in your take because I understand that the reflecting pool seems like small potatoes given everything that's going on, but about the Trump second administration is in this story . You have the sort of graft and these sort of no show , you know, the no bid contract , the spending of needlessly spending money on something , you have the forshow, like the idea that I need to have it preserved, like I'm going to redecorate this and I'm going to put gold fixtures. So you have the sort of the it's all about outward display that I need to defile something and put it in my own image and it's sort of like a in your face component. You have the incompetence because in spite of like saying, oh, I'm a great builder , it's done in a completely incompetent way . And then you have the lying about it, which is like, oh, it's not me, it's you. Like, I didn't do it. Evangels did it. And not only that you then have the retribution because it's like, oh, we're going to prosecute people for doing something that like, I'm sorry , I will wait and see. I will suspend judgment, at least for a nanosecond Really, you think people the reason there's algae and this thing is working is because it's all vandals. I mean, that's just bullshit . You know, they wouldn't be doing everything they're doing. So you have the entire like beginning soup to nuts is in this and it's so great is it's called the reflecting pool and it's a reflection of where we are . It is such a mirror of that is wrong with this administration ? Yeah, I can throw a couple other ones in there. Yeah, reading is this wouldn't even have to be a story. Like the reason this is a story is because Donald Trum p decided to talk about it constantly and hold up pictures in the Oval Office of like see the reflecting pools bigger than a building. You know, he needed to make the whole just like the band whatever. Right . And so and now that it's all gone wrong, it is like, why does the stupid media keep talking about this ? And we're like, You brought it up. Right, right. You brought it up. Dengue the media. Exactly. That's correct. But it's like 's in there it's like it's like it's just like a constant thing and it's it's such a good visual. So I have a question for you . Neck , will this have any sort of political salience? I think it is like I think I don't know that I'm so poetic that but I do think the American people get metaphor or analogy that this is a symbol in the same way that John Kerry when he was doing his flip flop on his windsurfer, it was like a good visual or Michael Du kakis with his like helmet on the tank. I mean this is one where the sort of the reflecting pool may not be quite as salient but people get this ? So So first of all, it is very difficult to have indelible images of Trump because he creates so many of them. Part of the reason those other stories work is that it is you get a really deep metaphor , like a visual, one visual that reflects like a deep metaphor that personifies this person. Donald Trump always keeps these things moving. And so whether he's holding a Bible upside down or I don't know, coming off the bus on access Hollywood, like he's given us a lot of these images. But hold on, I just I do want to answer your question with the American people do not care about the reflecting pool just like they didn't really care about the East Wing exactly . But here's where it does work. When they knocked down the East Wing , it was also when Trump was in like tear down mode. And so it did become a metaphorical way for people to sort of see images and see the things the president was talking about and give them that feeling, right? This is kind of how vibes get created. It was like a vibe of everything's getting torn down. This vibe the reflecting pool is a metaphor in all the ways you just said, but it's also a metaphor for the incompetence and failure and grift and all of the other things in Iran . Like the thing that is it is and the Iran is the one with the personal consequences because it is about gas prices. It is about even Americans sense of because this is something I think matters that people don't talk about enough, which is people's sense that America wins , right? People's sense that America was going to get this done . Like Trump is only at about thirty, there's only about thirty percent that say it was worth going into Iran. Like the vast majority of the country does think it was stupid, doesn't think we got anything out of it, does think it was a failure. And so I think it's like the failure of the reflecting pool in all the ways you said that it's a metaphor for the way that Trump is , it creates it is it is on top of the vibe of failure in Iran that I think gives this overall administration for voters a sense of, man, everything's going wrong. And okay, so I think that's really smart. And to your initial point about so many images and that Donald Trump's knack of like I'm just going to keep the story changing. If there's a bad story, I move on, which by the way, in my world, a defense lawyer, I'll give you, I will tell you one tiny little anecdote. When you get a bad answer and you're a defense lawyer, that will happen . It'll just be like, you know, you'll be the witness and they'll ask a question and you'll basically be like, oh no, no, no, I heard that admission directly from your client, the defendant, right? So like bad answer, a good defense lawyer is just like, and so tomorrow when the next play, are you going to be just it goes on change the conversation. Change this conversation. Exactly. As if it has never happened. And it's just you don't react to it. You just it's moving right along. It's like hoping that nobody really focused on it. But so my point about that story is how much of that with Donald Trump trying to do that is like what you would do in court is you go back and you're like, no, no, no, no , no Sarah Longwell said the following, look at the transcript. Like in other words, be a dog with a bone. It's like Hilary in the emails. It's like, you know, pick something have confidence that it's good and works and just keep on hitting it. How much is that sort of the problem of the people want to use it not being good at getting distracted. Yeah, so here's the thing and this is where this is my desperation for sort of Democrats on messaging , which is, I think people keep Donald Trump is like nailing Joella Too keep throwsing things up right and people are like, how do we focus? How do we grab get our hands on the one thing? And for me, it's like you don't have to just focus on one thing. You have to tell people a story. The emails, Hillary's emails , again , it was a stand in for the Clintons corruption, right? This was an idea that the Clintons are corrupt and Republicans could use this as a way to just reinforce over and over again that the Clintons were corrupt. And this is where an impurious and that's it right. You had to follow the rules. And that's right. Like it was a this is where if Democrats could just figure out how to be like the story we are telling is that Trump lied to you. He broke all of his promises and he has failed in everything that he's done, right? Your grocery prices are still high. Gas prices are high. He launched a war, he promised he wouldn't. And then he lost that war. Like there's a way to wrap these things . He said he was going to release the Epstein files and he hasn't. This is the least transparent, most incompetent, and it's impacting you. It's having this negative impact on your lives. And so I think and the one person who's really doing this well and in part because he's running for Senate and so he's giving a lot of speeches is John Osoff because he's telling the story and that is where is having a moment. It is really interesting to me that you know, I unlike you, you know, I'm not as attuned to that world. I mean, I watch it, but I'm more spectator than experts the way you are . But from the outside, it is , I think it seems like a good example of, you know, you can learn and get better. Like when he first ran, I thought, okay , but now would you listen to him, whether you agree with him or not, I'm just saying as a matter of way he presents this and the seeming conviction he has, I mean, it really is impressive. So here's how you can save up to seventy percent on your favorite brands. From rebel. com has everything for your home, family, and life, from strollers to skincare at unbeatable prices. Every day, Rebel drops thousands of new products for up to seventy percent off. It's a constant stream of endless deals from brands like Uppa Baby, Nuna, Baby Bjorn, Nespresso, Breville, Wilson, Dyson, Caraway, and more. Every listing is one of a kind, and the best things go first, so you have to move fast. Stay big on your favorite brands. Shop now for up to seventy percent at From Rebel. com . The best cigars, the best deals , and no BS got to be famous cigars . We've been family owned since nineteen thirty nine , so we know how a great cigar makes a great experience. Check out this special offer that's almost too good to be true, but it is. Get eight premium cigars for eight dollars when you visit famous cigars dot com slash perk . This curated sampler is worth over sixty bucks and yours for just eight top quality brands like Drew Estate, Macanudo, Camacho, and more, over eighty percent off, and available in limited quantities. Visit famous cigars . com slash perk where your one stop cigar shop for everything cigars . Eight cigars eight bucks while supplies last. Famous cigars com dot slash per k. Famous cigars dot com slash perk . Well, he's done all the things, right? I mean, he hit the gym and now he's filling out those shirts that he wears they're real tight across his chest and arms , which I'm just he looks like a pre brainworm Kennedy, right? Like he's very handsome and I just think that matter s in this world . I think that he understands his medium. My understanding of him is he's kind of an introvert and he's like got little kids . And so he's not trying to be everywhere , which is usually a challenge because in this communications environment, you do have to kind of be everywhere all at once. But what he's done is he's decided my medium is giving these speeches and I'm going to have people film them in documentary style shooting me up from the bottom so that I look presidential and like somebody who is in leadership . And then I'm going to have them cut them up and distribute them. Like he's got a social media strategy. And it's a good way to say that a lot of legislators today are here hearing the message like I've got to communicate and I've got to be podcasting or I've got to be on Instagram and the TikTok. And how do I do all that? And I'm like, actually, no, you don't. You do have to create content, but it doesn't mean you've got to be on social media. It means you've got to be somewhere expressing who you are, what you believe, so people can see it. And you've got to have a distribution method for that. And he has a theory of the case. The third thing is he's Jewish, which I think that I have like a really strong theory right now that the thing that helps the Democratic Party deal with the big wedge that is Israel and which kind of goes back to Iran and what I think is a real reevaluation of America's relationship with Israel . I think that obviously then it raises tons of concerns for people who feel like anti Semitism is on the rise. And I think having a Jewish senator from a reddish state who is able to be critical of Israel is like, this is how we're going to do it. I have a lot of interesting us off curiosity . Okay, so that is a to be continued. Sorry , we're so far okay. Hold on . What do you have got on your list? Just to wrap up, just to wrap up . You referenced this earlier, but this is a really important case , and it's about AI. So there's been an explosion of data centers across the country, which come with a lot of controversy over the impact on local communities. Data centers have been a real focus so far in this election cycle . I hear about them all the time in the focus groups. I've been talking about since since the twenty twenty five Mikey Schirl, Abigail Spamberger races, when I was watching those closely and I was listening to voters, I couldn't believe how much the data centers were coming up. So now there's this NAACP case in Mississippi. And as I understand it, the basic gist of the case is that the NAACP sued Elon Musk's AI company , XAI, under the Clean Air Act for putting up data centers that are powered by unlawful method methane burning turbines that pollute the air. And then so NAACP brought the suit because the data centers and the turbines were constructed in predominantly black areas. Do I have the basics of that right ? That is right. That's the just to be clear, that's the allegation. They have brought this suit . So they may be right, they may be wrong , but that's what plaintiffs do. They brought this case saying that we can prove this. It is not unusual to have private lawsuits under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. There are a whole series environmental statutes and other statutes where Congress has set up a private right of action as well as a public right of action, meaning that the federal government or the st ates or the locals can bring a lawsuit. So there's different ways that Congress has said this can be enforced. If X is happening , then various people can sue stop that happening. And it can be a government entity and it can be a private entity. That's sort of the basic structure. There are some nuances. We'll get into it. But here it's a private lawsuit where the NAACP has said this should stop . And it's also unfortunately not uncommon to have these environmental issues have a disparate impact on black and brown communities. And so it's a big issue in the environmental world about environmental justice and that just if people think about where they're going to build waste treatment plants, sewers, things like that . A lot of times it is put in places where there are low income communities , black and brown communities. And so there is this sense of environmental laws and equal justice should be interacting. That's that's sort of the substance of the case. The reason this is news and the reason this is so important is not because of what the law is , it's what the Department of Justice under the Trump administration has filed a brief saying what they think the law should be and what they're advocating. And it's clear that they want this case to go up to the Supreme Court . The Trump administration has said that they have intervened in the case and they have said that that only the federal government has the right to bring this case and they want to intervene and the case has to be dismissed with prejudice, meaning that you cannot have a private party bring this case and that the government has decided that this is a good thing to have these data centers and there cannot be a challenge to them. And the court has no right whatsoever to do anything but allow the United States government to intervene and then to dismiss the case with prejudice because it is the exclusive province of the Department of Justice and the Executive Branch to decide whether or to enforce the statute or not to enforce the statute . To be clear , there is no Supreme Court case that has ever said that. There is case law contrary to this position . And this is the kicker not to be too in the weeds . When Congress set up this and other statutes where they said that private parties can sue . This is the idea and this makes total sense . They said, You know what ? We're creating this Clean Water Act, this clean air act, and the federal government and state and locals can sue to enforce it . But you know who else can sue ? Private parties can sue secondarily if there is no government entity that is suing . And so if you bring a private suit, it is true that the federal government, the state can step in and say, wait a second, we want to take this over. So you're out because we're going to go forward. And Congress said that could happen but only if the government entity is going to diligently pursue the lawsuit . In other words, the whole idea is that you need the private people there if the government isn't going to be pursuing the violation . So it's like the go ifvernment isn't going to do it, then the locals then the private parties can do it. But it's completely against the congressional regime for the government to say, oh no, no, no, we want to step in and we're not going to diligently pursue it. We actually are going to kill it. It is basically saying that Congress has no power to create a private right of action , period the end. So this is a huge , huge deal. And it is clearly going to be something that this administration takes to the Supreme Court because they want to have a view that this is the ex ecutive branch on steroids. If you think this is not just unitary executive, this is unitary executive and trumping and stepping on Congress and our ability as private people to bring lawsuits. Yeah, you know, that's a good distinction. It's one thing to sort of just ignore Congress. It's another thing to actively say , I'm going to like, yeah, stop on your power I'm trying to take these things away from you. And just to be clear, the government's right to sue here was created by Congress. Right . So imagine here's my hypothetical. I pose this to Mary. Imagine Congress said, You know what ? This is our new regime on the Clean Water Act. We're not even going to get the federal government involved. We just think there should just be a private right of action that private parties can sue over this because we just don't think the federal government is good at it. Like whatever reason, also every four years we don't want this changing. Like you know, like you do, you don't., whatever It's like we're just gonna have a private right of action. Does the federal government just come in and say, No, no, no , not you cannot even have a private right of action. It only is us that can do that . That's not how our legal system works. They're private lawsuits all the time. So I mean this is so wrong headed and this is this brief is signed by a million people at the Department of Justice and I'm telling you it is heading its way to the Supreme Court . This is the imperial presidency , you know, on steroids. I want people to understand that this is actually we're in early days here, but like this could be an extraordinarily big deal. And part of it is this is a question I had for you as a follow up. Like if DOJ is allowed to dismiss this case , what does that mean by community? Does it mean for communities impacted by data centers because does that just mean there's no way under federal law to challenge any of the harmful impacts? Not under the Clean Water Act, not under the Clean Air Act. And there's so many statutes that give private rights of action. And just be clear, what the government asks for here is for the case to be dismissed with prejudice . That is the legal term for meaning that the NAACP's case is decided against them for all times . It's not as if they haven't brought it. It is saying that you lose on the merits of this without ever having seen the court , like having your day in court . So this means that one of there is no way if there is an ongoing harm under the Clean Water Act or the Clean Air Act and the government decides we're not going to do anything about it , then even though Congress has said private parties can do it , this would be saying and they want the Supreme Court to say that these this can go on. So if everyone listening to this is sitting there going, wait a second, you're telling me that company A