Share This Podcast

• Check out Serious Trouble – https://www.serioustrouble.show/
• Call Congress – 202-224-3121
• Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8
• What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcast

Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/

TRANSCRIPT

Jane Coaston: It’s Friday, January 23rd, I’m Jane Coaston, and this is What a Day, the show that has three questions for Vice President J.D. Vance about his Thursday comments on the economy. First, what was the Titanic? Second, is the current U.S. economy comparable to the Titanic, and third, what happened to the Titanic? 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] You don’t turn the Titanic around overnight, it takes time to fix what was broken. 

Jane Coaston: Happy to talk by phone or email about the Titanic J.D., I’m looking forward to it. [music break] On today’s show, Vice President Vance arrives in Minnesota and the temperature just happens to dive to seven degrees below freezing. Coincidence? Almost certainly. And the small horde of incels that appears to run the White House Twitter account gets caught being dishonest. Can you imagine? But let’s start with the Department of Justice. You know how there are phrases that you just don’t want to hear? Let’s add, wow, the Trump Department of justice is sure busy to the list. On Thursday, the DOJ announced charges against protesters in Minneapolis, who interrupted a church service to protest a pastor who is alleged to be a top ICE official in the Twin Cities. This happened basically just as Vice President J.D. Vance arrived in the state. He spoke at a press conference where he said it would be crazy to think that members of immigration and customs enforcement had some kind of immunity. 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] No, I didn’t say and I don’t think any other official within the Trump administration said that officers who engaged in wrongdoing would enjoy immunity. That’s absurd. 

Jane Coaston: Which is so weird, because here’s White House Deputy Chief of Staff and worst person alive Stephen Miller saying the exact opposite thing last week on Fox News. 

[clip of Stephen Miller] You have immunity to perform your duties and no one, no city official, no state official, no illegal alien, no leftist agitator or domestic insurrectionist can prevent you from fulfilling your legal obligations and duties. 

Jane Coaston: If you’re thinking, well, maybe Stephen Miller doesn’t mean immunity if federal officers engage in wrongdoing, I invite you to remember that we are talking about Stephen Miller here. But don’t worry, Vice President Vance also dove into the news that ICE can now enter your home without a warrant. Because they do have warrants, just not from a judge. 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] Nobody is talking about doing immigration enforcement without a warrant. We’re talking about different types of warrants that exist in our system. Typically what happens, not always, but typically in the immigration system, those are handled by administrative law judges. So we’re talking about getting warrants from those administrative law judges. 

Jane Coaston: The Fourth Amendment disagrees. Speaking of the Constitution, former special counsel Jack Smith testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday about the steps Trump and his allies took to overturn the 2020 election and foment the January 6th insurrection. Smith did so knowing that he is already at the top of Trump’s enemies list, which Trump made even more clear by posting on Truth Social Thursday that he hopes Attorney General Pam Bondi, quote, “is looking at what he’s done.” So to get into all of these investigations, I spoke with Ken White. He’s a former federal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney who hosts the legal podcast, Serious Trouble. Ken, welcome back to What a Day. 

Ken White: It’s good to be back. Thank you for having me. 

Jane Coaston: Former special counsel Jack Smith testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday. He led the investigations into the president’s role in attempting to overturn the 2020 election as well as mishandling classified documents, which is why Trump spends a lot of time screaming about him. Why was he testifying? 

Ken White: Well, I mean, he was giving his side of the story and Democrats saw it as an opportunity to get out a narrative about what really happened and how there was real evidence behind the prosecutions he brought. Republicans thought it would go well for them, uh which speaks to their ongoing complete lack of judgment. It actually was not going well for them because Jack Smith is good at what he does and that includes beating down stupid, dishonest questions. 

Jane Coaston: What were some of those stupid questions? 

Ken White: Well, you know, how can we trust the justice system when you’re you know only pushing against Republicans and Democrats aren’t being prosecuted and you know a bunch of kind of conspiracy theory questions and stuff that had two audiences. One was Donald Trump and the other was people so completely addled by Donald Trump that they’ll believe anything. But it was not largely successful in making any of those narratives sound credible because he was able to respond in a restrained and yet forceful way. 

Jane Coaston: What were the takeaways from the hearing? Did we learn anything new and where is this going? 

Ken White: Not anywhere seriously. This is largely performative uh for Congress in a way to get on camera either saying nice things to Jack Smith or mean things to Jack Smith. It’s not so far going anywhere that that is really going to accomplish anything. We didn’t learn a lot new nor should we have because it was really not a situation where he was able to reveal for instance grand jury information or other things that had previously been secret. It wasn’t the right context for that. There wasn’t court authorization for that, the only new thing that really came out, I think is just the the ongoing willingness to carry water for false Trump narratives about things. And the ongoing willingness of some people on the Democrat side and for Jack Smith to continue to say in a forthright way, No, actually. We had evidence that he knew he lost and he was pushing false narratives anyway, and that’s why he was charged. 

Jane Coaston: Jack Smith is near the top of Trump’s very long list of enemies, which includes you, me, the New York Times, Rosie O’Donnell. And that list grows longer every day, and he’s been now–

Ken White: Yes. 

Jane Coaston: –using the Department of Justice to go after his enemies. His latest targets are Minnesota officials, some of whom, including Minnesota Democratic Governor Tim Walz, received grand jury subpoenas on Tuesday. The Trump administration is investigating, and I’m saying investigating, but you can feel the air quotes around it. 

Ken White: Yes. 

Jane Coaston: Whether they obstructed federal immigration enforcement in the state through public statements they have made, according to the Associated Press. Is there anything solid behind the DOJ’s argument given that these are public officials? Like can you say, stand up to ICE if you are the governor of a state? 

Ken White: Yes. There is no there, there in reality. There is no remotely valid basis for federal charges or even a federal criminal investigation. However, this is the challenge for people like you or like me who talk about this administration and the legal issues surrounding it. They say an enormous amount of stupid stuff and make a lot of entirely bogus threats, But they also do a lot of stupid stuff and stupidly aggressive attempts at prosecution. So James Comey and Letitia James being two examples. And they hope you’ll ask me about in a while, Don Lemon. So it’s hard to know which crazy threats to report on when sometimes they actually follow up on them with crazy charges or attempts to charge. But there is no valid basis for any actual federal criminal charges against anything that any of the Minnesota people have done. It is simply not a federal crime to say, ICE should fuck off, which they should. 

Jane Coaston: Agreed. But to that point, on Thursday, Trump officials announced the arrests of three activists involved in a protest that disrupted a St. Paul church service over the weekend. In a tweet announcing one of the arrests, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote, quote, “listen loud and clear, we do not tolerate attacks on places of worship.” Now, obviously, this wasn’t an attack. But is it legal to protest inside of a church? 

Ken White: So here’s the thing. No, it’s not necessarily legal, but that doesn’t make it a federal crime. So there’s a difference between saying that going into a church and disrupting a service might be disorderly conduct, a state misdemeanor, and saying that it’s a violation of the Ku Klux Klan Act and a federal crime, which is what this administration is trying to push. But–

Jane Coaston: Right. Can I interrupt just for one second because–

Ken White: Yeah. 

Jane Coaston: I hear Ku Klux Klan and I think, huh, what is the Ku Klux Klan act? Very quickly. 

Ken White: Basically it makes it illegal to conspire with a group of people to go out and injure or oppress people in the exercise of their rights. It was designed during the reconstruction period and later period to stop the Klan and other groups that were willing to use force to stop Black people from voting or assembling or anything else that they’re supposed to be able to do under the laws of the United States. So the theory here is, well, these people conspired to interfere with the First Amendment right of freedom of religion. The problem is that’s a bad argument, because again, not every disruption is a federal crime. The history of the civil rights movement included some disruptions in churches, like Black people going into segregated churches and kneeling and praying. But unless something is done with a specific intent to injure or oppress people, to prevent them from exercising their rights, That is not a violation of the Klan Act. This is a fairly broad gesture to intimidate protesters and also to take advantage of optics. The key optic here, I think, is that the protesters were Black and the parishioners were white. And this administration loved the optics and the hatred and resentment they could whip up off of that. 

Jane Coaston: As you mentioned earlier, a judge in Minnesota rejected the DOJ’s attempt to charge former CNN anchor Don Lemon over the same protest. Lemon says he was there as a journalist. What does this attempt to prosecute Lemon say to journalists and activists right now? 

Ken White: Well first of all, I think they kind of um got out over their skis and talked themselves into this, because once it became clear that Don Lemon was there covering and reporting on this protest, Kristi Noem and all these other people immediately said, well, we’re gonna go after him. We’re gonna get him. He’s a media person. He’s outspoken and he’s Black. So of course they want to take him down. So they thought they could get him, but you know they could not get it past a magistrate judge. So for federal charges, they have a couple of options of how to try to charge you with a crime. They can go to a grand jury, which they’ve been having a lot of problem with recently and have you indicted, or they can get an initial complaint against you by taking a sworn affidavit to a United States magistrate judge. The magistrate Judge reads the affidavit and says, is there probable cause here? Now, magistrate judges giving a thumbs down to a complaint against somebody is somewhat more common than a no-bill from a grand jury but it is still very uncommon. It represents a pretty big blunder or a pretty big failure of understanding by the government. So I think the magistrate looked at this and said, okay, clearly Don Lemon was there and he was reporting, but what remotely plausible evidence do you have that his intent was to conspire to injure people in the exercise of their rights? There’s no evidence of that. 

Jane Coaston: The Associated Press also reported this week that immigration and customs enforcement officials have authorized agents to use force to enter homes with only an administrative warrant. Now, historically, officers have needed a judicial warrant to enter a home. I did not go to law school. What is the difference between an administrative warrant and a judicial warrant? 

Ken White: Okay, A, it’s not too late to go to law school. B, but you definitely shouldn’t. 

Jane Coaston: Okay. 

Ken White: C, the fourth amendment says that no warrant shall issue except upon oath or affirmation, meaning the person has to come in and say, I swear this information is true based on probable cause. So to get a search warrant for somebody’s home, you’ve got to go before a neutral judge and convince that judge that there’s probable cause to believe there’s evidence of a crime in there. An administrative warrant is one, employee of the executive branch telling another employee of the executive branch, yes, you can go do this. So the administration is saying basically, we want to give ourselves permission to go into people’s houses. And they are doing it, they are kicking down doors on camera, they’re being very brazen about it, breaking into people homes on the theory that we have an administrative warrant for this person who is deportable. 

Jane Coaston: Yeah, no, that sounds bullshit to me. So–

Ken White: It does. 

Jane Coaston: Will this change in ICE policy stand up in actual court with actual judges? 

Ken White: No, I don’t think it will. And most Fourth Amendment experts do not think it well. They think it’s clearly bogus. Orin Kerr is probably the preeminent Fourth Amendment expert in the United States. He is extremely reserved and professional. His reaction was, if they have a theory why this is right, I would like to see it, which is the equivalent of me saying, you all are completely full of shit. So um the part that’s gonna make you unhappy is that I’m gonna tell you that they’re not gonna win, but there are very few remedies that work. So um the conservative movement, the right, the heritage foundation, the federalists, the conservative majority of the United States Supreme Court have worked very hard and very successfully to make America a place where the government can violate your rights with largely impunity. And they have steadily chipped away at every method that we might use to make it meaningful that this is unconstitutional to do. 

Jane Coaston: As always, Ken, thank you so much for joining me. 

Ken White: It’s good to see you, thank you as always. 

Jane Coaston: That was my conversation with Ken White, criminal defense attorney and host of the legal podcast, Serious Trouble. Did you know that you can watch What a Day? We’re on YouTube. So check us out in living color five days a week and don’t forget to smash that subscribe button. Pew, pew, pew. More to come after some ads. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: Here’s what else we’re following today. 

[sung] Headlines.

[clip of unknown news reporter in Minnesota] Are you proud how your administration is conducting this immigration crackdown here in Minnesota?

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] Well, I’m proud of the fact that we’re standing behind law enforcement and I’m proud of the fact that were enforcing the country’s laws. 

Jane Coaston: Blah, blah, blah. Vice President J.D. Vance did way too much of that while visiting Minnesota and Ohio on Thursday. Sorry to those states. After delivering a defiant speech in Minneapolis, Vance took questions from the press, including one about reports that federal agents detained a five-year-old boy in Minnesota earlier this week. Vance did his best to somehow rationalize it. 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] And I’m a father of a five-year-old, actually, a five year old little boy. And I think to myself, oh my God, this is terrible. How did we arrest a five year old? Well, I do a little bit more follow-up research. And what I find is that the five year-old was not arrested, that his dad was an illegal alien. And then when they went to arrest his illegal alien father, the father ran. So the story is that ICE detained a five year old, well what are they supposed to do? 

Jane Coaston: I don’t know, not detain a five-year-old. Also, I should note here that nothing he says has been verified. This is the same man who said the fatal shooting of Renee Good at the hands of an ICE officer was, quote, “a tragedy of her own making.” So empathy is not something I would expect from him. Ironically, Vance said he wanted to meet with ICE officials, business leaders, and local law enforcement in Minneapolis, partly to, quote, “tone down the temperature a little bit.” Not sure it’s working. The next stop on J.D.’s peace tour is the March for Life in Washington, D.C. Today’s event is the nation’s largest annual anti-abortion rally, drawing thousands to the Capitol every year. And yesterday, the Trump administration rolled out fresh anti-abbortion policies just in time to re-energize their frustrated conservative base. Trump’s policies target the usual suspects. Blue states with abortion protections and federal funding tied to Planned Parenthood. But according to Politico, anti-abortion activists aren’t very impressed. They see these policies as the least the administration could do, and they don’t go far enough to guarantee their support for Trump’s agenda heading into the midterms. But of course, they will support Trump’s agenda in the mid-terms, they always do. Trump blew a bit of a hole in his relationship with anti-abortionists recently after he suggested flexibility on abortion funding and the FDA approved a new generic abortion pill. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] We’re going to be very successful in Gaza. It’s going to be a great thing to watch. And we can do other things. We can do numerous other things once this board is completely formed. We can do pretty much whatever we want to do. And we’ll do it in conjunction with the United Nations, you know? 

Jane Coaston: Trump and company established the new Board of Peace as an official international organization in Davos, Switzerland on Thursday. The supposed mission of the board is in part to help ensure, quote, “accountability as Gaza transitions from conflict to peace and development.” But momentum to map out a future for the war-torn Gaza Strip has been overshadowed this week by Trump’s ongoing will he, won’t he invade Greenland thing. At the board’s inauguration on Thursday, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, presented a master plan for the Gaza Strip. 

[clip of Jared Kushner] Rafah we’ll start with, this will show a lot of workforce housing, we think this can be done in two, three years. We’ve already started removing the rubble and doing some of the demolition. And then New Gaza, it could be a hope, it could be a destination, have a lot industry and really be a place that that the people there can thrive, have great employment. 

Jane Coaston: New Gaza! More buildings, fewer Gazans. Great. Head to our YouTube channel to see the slideshow of white futuristic skyscrapers in flourishing cities that are supposed to make the area perfect for coastal tourism. Sounds great, right? No, not at all. The reality on the ground shows a stark difference. Palestinians are still suffering from the humanitarian crisis unleashed by the war. And according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, more than 470 people have been killed by Israeli fire in Gaza since the ceasefire began in October. As we mentioned earlier, Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the arrests of three people allegedly involved in an anti-ICE protest that disrupted a Minnesota church service on Sunday. A local official with ICE reportedly serves as a pastor at the church, but that’s the least surprising part of the story. According to an analysis by The Guardian, the White House posted an image on Twitter of one of the women arrested that had been digitally altered to make it look like she was crying. Yes, the White House. Whata Day’s Matt Berg reached out to the White House press office to ask if the photo had indeed been altered. The press office simply replied with a link to a tweet from a White House official that said in part, enforcement of the law will continue. The memes will continue, thank you for your attention to this matter. None of these people will see heaven. And that’s the news. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: That’s all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, congratulations to the mayor of Austin’s 37th Street, a pug-chihuahua mix named Mobamba, and tell your friends to listen. And if you’re into reading, and not just about how Mobamba is the first dog to win the office, which was established four years ago, with more than 12,000 people casting a ballot, like me, What a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at Crooked.com/subscribe. I’m Jane Coaston. And Mobamba’s campaign slogan was, he won’t just fight for you, he will bark at you. Inspiring. [music break] What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It’s recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producers are Emily Fohr and Chris Allport. Our producer is Caitlin Plummer. Our video editor is Joseph Dutra. Our video producer is Johanna Case. We had production help today from Ethan Obermann, Greg Walters, and Matt Berg. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison, and our senior vice president of news and politics is Adriene Hill. Our theme music is by Kyle Murdock and Jordan Cantor. We had help today from the Associated Press. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.