Evan Havre, founded black rifle coffee company in twenty fourteen, along with Army Ranger Math best, this terrific company combines two passions: one developing premium rose to order coffee and to supporting the veteran and military communities. Black rifle is firmly committed to supporting veteran law enforcement and first responders causes get this with its by a bag. Give a bad campaign black rifle gives the gift of America's coffee to deploy troops around the globe, black rifle coffee offers.

delicious variety of roast profiles all source from around the world through a rigorous process and roasted in the? U S at black rifles facilities in Tennessee and Utah Evan, who started black rifle coffee after serving over twenty years in the? U S, army, as an infantry men and special forces soldier, is continually researching and experimenting with new roasting methods and coffee origins. Now the best way to enjoy black rifle is through the coffee club. It's a free subscription where your chosen coffee is roasted, packaged and shipped free to your door on your schedule. Talk about convenient and get this you'll also receive special discounted pricing and gain,

to exclusive products, member only content, partner, discounts and more. If you want to get the freshest and tastiest coffee in America without leaving the couch visit black rifle coffee com and use the code nor twenty at checkout- and that gets you twenty percent off your purchase- that's black rifle coffee com, discount code and are two zero for that big twenty percent off Welcome to the Mccarthy Report, Podcast, where I Rich Lowry discussed with Andy Mccarthy, the latest legal and national security issue this week, the presidential debate, the latest on the Hunter Biden story and iran-

and Russia, election interference, you're listening to a national review podcast if you listen to podcasts on national review dot com or do I have you, but it'll be easier for you and better for us. If you made as part of your, feed stream of services out there from Spotify to Itunes, and please give this podcast and Andy Mccarthy the glowing be gushing five star reviews they deserve on Itunes and now without further Ado. I welcome to this very podcast through through the miracle field. Tab app, none other and rich course read our yet good anti aerial. I'm doing fine, I'm unintentionally, in a reminiscing mood today, because three different things of sort of nodded themselves together and hit me over the head this morning,

one of them was our buddy ed. Well in noting that it was thirty three years ago today that Robert Works nomination to the Supreme Court was defeated in the Senate and I thought it it's oh interesting, that he notes in connection with the fact that today is the day that the much Mcconnell has moved Amy its nomination forward. So it's it's just that it's interesting, how things have a way of how history has a way of being symmetrical every now and then thirty years later, sometimes the good side the gay people we always have to wait. Thirty years, I haven't met fence, I'm I'm I'm already too that anyhow, but it, but it made me yeah. I've had a couple, a reason to think of what we were doing, what I was doing back then I was a prosecutor but obviously variant.

did what was going on with with work and then hard on that news. We find out that Dub Sudan is going to have a peace agreement with Israel which the Trump Administration has brokered and I dont think it'll get the attend. It deserves, but that would have been when I started working in CANA. Terrorism in the early nineties that would have been in conceive, I mean you wouldn't even have contemplated it because Sudan, I But when I, when I first thought I was gonna, be a communist and leave the litigation world I actually left the: U S attorney's office for about eleven months and ninety. Ninety eight before I went back to run the satellite office and while I was out a bill crystal had me right, a long peace for the weekly standard

which was called Sudan, the missing link in: U S Counter terrorism policy and this was I guess it was ninety ninety eight. But by then I was going through what was like a decade of history, of what a problem Sudan had been and how it was really like the edge and behind the jihad that no one was paying enough attention to, and here they are deal with Israel, and then I guess the third thing was watching all of this sub? Despite news, I couldn't help, but think of we had tamaso pushed on the witness, stand, the pizza connection case in the nine he was the first Sicilian, Mafia turncoat and he was up. There was really remarkable testimony at the time pussies identifying how the mafia is structured in Sicily and who the bosses Warren all that stuff and what

the defence lawyers was asking in question of course, examination and settled you don't have. Well, you don't have any documents that show this guy's participation he's talked about one of the bosses are you feeling, so you don't have any documents? You know that in pieces. Male, you don't have any records and boost a kind of laughed at him and said nothing is written down in the mafia and I couldn't help it dub but think that, in connection with the crazy line of defence that we're seeing in connection with Joe Biden witches, you know this. Don't documents disturbed that thing. There's an here you have like, but a scheme. I know we're gonna talk about this but, like it looks like it's overtly designed to keep his name out of it. and they're trying to make his defense that his name isn't in it. So it's just it's amazing how all the stuff comes around

So we're, according on Friday afternoon, big debate last night. What was your overall impression? I thought Trump did what and I thought I thought he won. I say like in the boxing analogy. I thought he won the debate on points but what I was struck by as it was going on was that while I, he was winning in the four corners of the debate. I thought where we would really win would be in the after debate. It just seems to me that again and again, Biden said things that just would not be able to be squared up with his public record, particularly on the fossil fuels and the fracking. So that was my take away that it would get better for trumpets. Two days went on. Would you think I unfortunately little

the distant we just did and editors Jim with GM material, and they both also think Trump one. I gotta think by one of the four corners. I take your point. That's there's a lot on the table that Trump can use post debate, especially that the oil and an fracturing stuff. You know you'll get trumped Trump's to seventy, really without Pennsylvania, this very hard giddy and you happy right you

the debate by giving something that should be a real gifted and Pennsylvania. Yeah yeah. That's what I think it's the after about that's the big thing so lets us come up with a start and the debate, treatment of it and then faded into more substantive, larger discussion of it. But a hunter Biden, isolate troubles hammering away on this last night and you thought Biden exposed and real vulnerabilities cause one. He had ample opportunity to say that these emails or fabrications with- I think we discussed this last week, I'll be the natural defence rights of their obligation to say or that's, that's the greatest fancied I have of their their fabrications. You didn't said- and he also had gone out of his way to say what

accusing me of being this year that the big guy are not the big guy. That's a complete misunderstanding and you're completely wrong. He did say out of the six year while the interesting contrast on the second port rich. Is you don't minutes? It seemed before the debate started this guy Tony Bobo Linsky, who is one of the participants in one of the big deals with China, not only authenticates the email, these on and says that you know this transaction really happen. but actually says that yes, Biden is the big guy as somebody who was in the middle of the transaction had an understanding of what everybody was talking about. So I guess if, if he is, in wherever persuaded till I get down the granular level of the fact of this and try to dispute them.

D be at a loss to do that? Since now, the evidence is mounting from people who are actually involved in transactions but are not on the first point I had the feeling watching Biden of the sort of thing that you, to make me giddy when I was a trial lawyer, which is when the other side gets up and tries to make a defence or claim on something that's already been disproven. It tells you two things number one: they don't have anything I mean if their, if that's what they're relying on they, don't they don't really have a defence and numbers they're not up to speed it up, but you would have thought that I would have thought that Biden would. At the very least, you know

I expected that he was going to get indignant because his usual thing, with trying to deny things that he doesn't want to actually engage is to talk about, you know my character and how dare you and be indignant and how dare you ask me that just that without getting you not without denying it effectively you're getting into the facts, and I did expect them to do that- need a little bit of that. But I would stunned to see him. Assuming that he was prep by competent people to rely on the russian disinformation thing, which even I would say three to five days ago. That was not something that had any credibility anymore and then in trying to deny it at work, trying to use that as his defence relies on this cockamamie letter from these fifty trumped arranged former intelligence officials.

and then he miss, characterizes what they say. So he says that Europe it's all russian disinformation, it's a russian plant and there's fifty former intelligence officials. Five of them are former CIA directors, Bush people, people Baba people, and they debunked this and The thing is, if you read their letter and you, leave it, it's I'm not talking about like girl, you know you need the rose out a stone to go through this. It's it's carefully written, but it's easy to see the game there play in here, they do they make a point of saying that know any of the facts. They don't know any details. They no idea whether Russia is involved in this or not, but it sure

as the ear marks of a russian influence operation, I mean it's laughable and the other thing about the letter is, I think it inadvertently shoot Biden in the foot, because you know one of the things that they come out and say, as we also don't know whether this is genuine or not You don't want when a normal person rates that they said they would say. Well, maybe we should ask the person who is he they're represented to be whether its genuine or not, and that collides them right into the point that you have made, which is the most important thing in and authenticity question is the thing itself and if it's not what it purports to be. Your what it is purported to be by whoever is trying to get you to rely on it. If it doesn't appear to be what it's purported to be, we even have to get into the

innovations of the people who proferred it, because it is obviously what it's purported to be, but here it's so obviously Hunt where's emails and videos and pictures of Hunter and now, while Biden, talking Russia, Russia, Russia, is Trump put it last night we now have three new strains of evidence that. Don't have anything to do with hunters. Computer. That corroborate ports of this gave? You got the boboland ski stuff, which came stressful words, the serb, long, detailed piece on note in the Wall Street Journal today on Friday. you have the YAP, the stuff that the Peter Schweitzer came up, with, which I wrote about the other day that by two thousand

Levin aspect of this and in the bible and ski proof. You also have a new set of text messages, not only between bubble and ski it and other people who were involved in all this. What what I'm? What I'm trying to say is that what's what thing here is that, quite apart from the the Biden Laptop we're now seeing people who are invited openness and paper tree emerge that are, rating important details of the scheme and hears Biden still talking about Russia yeah. So just one quick follow up on debate and analogizing it to trial context or deposition, where you paying close attention to what's going to come out the transcript, oh, why being behind the game or or not up to date, white wiser about signs for the other side,

you don't have a good answer for leisure yeah what it means, especially in a trial context, but I think it's a good analogy now, because we're ten days from the end and people are really paying attention so in it in a trial. you would take heart not only from the fact that the other side was was using an unpersuaded of organ but that they were using the kind of an unpersuasive argument, argument that tells you they're unprepared, because what you always want to feel like in the courtroom is like you're on the you're on the cutting edge like you're right

you're more than the story forward, and nothing is getting by you and if the other side looks like the two or three days behind its that how you, because you never know what they're gonna Stepan got. So let's go through this. Some of that that confirmation, soap bubble and ski you just you- find him credible and destructive take taken. or that, Sir, that this China emails chain that he was on the way. He says it's real to real well I take his word for it because it looks like this a lot, a documentary corroboration of me. I don't know the guy from Adam and we haven't you, don't we have no one's done a deep dive on his credibility yet, but he also produced text messages and emails, and his story makes sense so. yeah and also the motivation with.

Initially suspicious of the motivation when I first heard the story, but now that I understand it a little better, it looks it looks like he thinks he got screwed by these guys. When he first came out. I set my wife yesterday, here's a guy who says that doesn't have an axe to grind and he doesn't want to be involved in this politically, but what we heard last night. said he was going to go with Trump to the debate, which ended up not happening, but he did do a press conference before the debate. So I'm thinking oh well, this is guys obviously ended. take for Trump, which doesn't mean he's lying, but turns out. No, it's not that he's in the tank with Tromp thinks he thinks he's a former naval guy who thinks his honor has been questioned and when you read the story is as Kim Strasse lays it out. Basically, he thinks he got, he got screwed by Hunter and Jim Biden,

and widens friend, this guy Wallace's in the middle of all this and who's, the guy who recruited bubble Linsky into it and in a basically bubble and ski thanks. He's a he's like a straight Arrow Navy guy who is suspicious. under already because he gets thrown on the military for drugs right and he's unknown because he's like the laboring or on this deal with China and the items come in at the last second, and they basically say you're. No luck! If you don't, It's fair, but life isn't fair. What the Chinese want is what I have you don't, which is my name, and he starts to make all kinds of demands, and then it turns out that the deal I'll throw in twenty seventeen, but after it falls through, he doesn't find this out

though, he sees Rhine, Johnson's report, but it turns out that Biden Biden got close to ten million dollars out of China anyway, between a consultancy fee that they pay them another four point, seven million- that they pay them for something else and inexpensive, can't. They gave him that apparently Hunter and Jim Biden and Jim Biden's, wife all dipped into and bought like one hundred thousand dollars worth of worth of stuff. So Chinese gave them an expensive. exactly a hundred thousand very early, I need a look look at the Rangel report. Yeah so and this was this- was all through a vehicle that dumb that Hunter and his camp connected- that was called, I think, thirty west, or something along those lines.

what Hudson worse like it, I can't remember the name offered up off the tap my head, but they create Did this vehicle the chinese Energy Company that Gene Meng Yea was behind flow money for and it turns out. You know what they're talking about in this transaction, that Bobo Linsky was working on was like ten million dollars a year and a big stick, about. That was the way they divvied it up. It was gonna, be ten percent that Hunter in addition to the twenty percent hunter, was gonna, get another ten percent that he was holding for quota for the big guy so bubbling skis. Big thing is the other that the big eyes is binding. But that deal for ten million a year fell through and then Bulbul Linsky

finds out through the Senate report, and we are seeing now and other reporting that it looks like these guys manage to get most ten million and the Chinese anyway what is less, would it and make? these guys out. They cut bubble Insky out out the the other people working with him got it. So this is as information from acres. I read the Wall Street Journal NEWS, article, which is being put by the rest of the media as it debunking of of the long com from Camp and there's a guy in here and wanted one of these characters involved in this venture go. He said, it's. Never this deal never came through, so I was like okay. So what's the what's, the big deal actually the end of the day if it didn't come through, but they did get, they did even though this deal fell through. They got other chinese money yeah and that's why I think this guy came forward mainly because

they got the money he's too guy they cut out. So he does. All this work drew from twenty fifteen to twenty seventeen to try to seek to pull the steel off he's curious, because Hunter does no work but basically says he's the one who wants to get paid because, He puts it it's my name. The Biden name, the Biden legacy, that's what they are buying here I mean you couldn't be more but blunt about it. So this guy does all the work, you're going to get all the money, so these peace steamed about that to begin with, then the deal false through and he thinks I well. The deal fell through any fine later that these guys figured out a way to get paid anyway, but they cut him out got it. I think that's the thing, and so I'm kind of jumping around here, but since I just mentioned it so this Wall Street Journal a news article which you

and a lot of people are hanging their hats on saying there is a cable. This morning a lot of people saying this is debunk debunk, the whole Biden story. What do you make of that yeah? It doesn't? I mean if you read it carefully, it doesn't very carefully written peace, and I would commend to people. We have Jack Crow on on our side. Site wrote a good piece about this, laying out why it's not a debunking, kids peace, but it alchemists basically laying out stuff. That's that's drawn off the paper trail and be Wall Street Journal is united. but a poking around the story on the new side and their emphasis? Is that there's not anything that in black and white? Basically, that puts Joe Biden in a participatory way. In the Middle all this, which is why hold my little Boucher

It at the beginning, because you know the whole objective here was to keep his name out of it one of the things that bobulinski supplies that they don't really effectively robot is he's, got a text message with. I think this guy Galar, that you were just talking wear glasses to him. He acted bubble and ski actually met Biden. Joe Biden face to face during all the middle of this, which is why he's He's furious reading that you know hunters out there pour out your saying that Joe Biden himself, Joe Biden himself, is out there saying he never discussed this business with hunger which threaten the skies like I had a meeting with him about the transaction, but one of the things that, in the text, messages with a lark is, you know we don't talk about, chose for. Dissipation, except face to face? I know you know that, but you know they're really paranoid about it.

as they show me paranoid about it like put in text messages is not an important question at all, but I'm just curious how you read this so It was not all the tricks. I noticed in the the text messages that there are at least in some of them. They are all capping, but the first names of each other without like a bitchie like you know, what do you think Tony or are you like a formatting thing did you notice that I didn't notice that, and I don't know what that was about You have to remember what it like this, this really Huffy email from from Hunter yeah about that this is this. Is our thing we're

by means of that, is that how do you think you know what you know? What's happened to be rich after four years of reading trumps text it just like gets right past, be that they start capitalizing running around of digital relations. Have you and so on. So let's say that this this is your had gone through or those same caught, a kite like a ten percent cut in that other ten million dollars for Joe Biden. Is there something illegal about that on the face of it or with any potential illegality, be well? He didn't reported taxes or didn't pay taxes on or something like that. You're. I don't see you don't we should. We should be mindful of the fact that, when they were trying to close this deal with twenty seven team, so he was out of office by then, and I don't you know on its face. I don't see anything unlawful about it. You know the

there's all kinds of regulations about people who are in government being involved, in financial transactions with foreigners, particularly people who have security clearances and reporting requirements along those lines. any time you you're dealing, Box kind of way with foreigners and Julie foreigners who are connected to the regime, you know you always have to look at the foreign corrupt practices. Look at the registration is a foreign agent that the people supposed to do with the Justice Department. We frequently What about your in the investigation? They got manner on And money laundering- and you know, if you're

doing a deal like the bidens were seemingly doing in this bobulinski guy he's come forward because he wants everyone to understand, among other things, that he's a legitimate guy. I don't think necessarily any reason to think that there was gonna be any violations as far as the move, of money or not discussing things on taxes. Now you know, if an investigator looking at this one the things I've been looking at hard is especially if Biden, has denied any participation in this, and then you see money flowing his way, one of them, I want to know, is how are they occur, for that money? Is he accounting for it, as income and another thing: you're obviously looking at is here's a guy Who was politician on a on a you know, a public service salary for most of fifty years and yet

yeah he's living very lavishly. Is there you know if there's some connection here now? It makes a lot of money now on speeches in the sort of stuff. You know people in his position are able to do when they're at a public life. So there's nothing wrong with that, but for a long long time he didn't have the kind of income that he's had the last couple of years, and yet he lived quite lavishly. So obviously that's something that investigates You wanna, take a look at so what about the question of whether is being investigated and by whom? For what sir, when it came out that the FBI was obsession of laptop and we saw that the memo where the letter, whatever it was from the FBI requesting the laptop there's coding in there, that has to do with

money laundering. I believe we how it's been interpreted. I defer to you right, but some people on the left immediately. Well, this is the Rudy Giuliani, money laundering investigation, if money was changing hands over this laptop with shady characters and in Ukraine. Yet that's that's why the FBI would investigating to nail Rudy yeah that quick, wasn't any one from there from the Rudy the Rudy Russian espionage to the Rudy money laundering. As soon as the money laundering code came out, the coding As I understand it, I used to be a more of an expert on how the FBI codes things. I've been sort of of a game for a while, but I do recognize the format that they use and then other people have reported on this and filled in so you have to every time the FBI opens. Investigation investigation gets a number

coding, which is the likely the number one offence that you think that you're investigator, It doesn't have to be you know if you have seven different offences, you just gotta pick one, but they for their cattle, lorries they needed because they file all the stuff with the Justice Department and then The designation for which field office is doing the investigation, so the way. The FBI is coded this. It's a money laundering investigation out of the Baltimore Field Office, which makes sense because the We knew that the? U S attorney from Delaware, had issued this subpoena, its money laundering, Baltimore Field Office and then the number the case so What we know about Rudy, to the extent that the wee wee there's been reporting that he has it, that anyone has looked at his conduct, its

it's in connection with these two ukrainian guys, who are being investigated by the southern district of New York, and the way the Justice Department works. If Rudy and I'm not saying this is true Richard that you don't because we don't know who is a suspected, was a subject, but if it Rudy belongs in the southern district of New York for investigative purposes than its occupy a Delaware case and at the same time, if it Delaware case, it makes sense if it's looking at the guidance because, that's you know, sort of Biden, Central Delaware and the other thing is, if you will This started out the suspicion about, or what what's being put.

in the media about Rudy and Russia was put out in in counter espionage terms. I think, if it's not in connection with the criminal investigation, the southern district of New York, it would have been done as a Catherine elegance investigation. If what they were worried about was that Rudy was acting as an agent of a foreign power. That's the way they would have inquired into it wouldn't have been a. a criminal investigation, and you would begin the grand jury. You know, only time. Intelligence stuff gets into the grand jury is like, if you a case, like my case in the nineties, so I We have a terrorism case because there's been a bombing and then there's been another plot to bomb other things right. So now, when it's time for me to indict, which could be many weeks and in fact the neck.

With several once after we had made the initial arrests in, worse and figuring out. All of the evidence, that's in the government's position that might help me prove the case. I find out that they have five warrants are Pfizer wires. The blind shake so now Get that evidence at that point. I might put it in the grand jury because by then everybody knows I have it and it's not. You know, there's no classified information problem with it. But at the investigative stage you would not put FISA evidence into the grand jury and you'd make a decision down the road if there was ever a criminal case that there might be some classified information that you would need, but you wouldn't be doing you're doing a grand jury investigation. That means you have a predicate for a criminal investigation, whereas you're doing

investigation on the theory that somebody's acting as an agent of a foreign power than that's counterintelligence, and that that TWAIN does not meet at the at the investigative stage. So where do you think this goes goes next Well, you know, I think that is the political aspect of it is going on, overwhelm, at least in terms of the public discussion. whatever investigation is going on here to the extent that the president was kind of crazily for a few days of anger, It's the Justice Department, angry at the FBI, because nobody had gotten arrested. That was kind of ridiculous, because number one to me before an election, they are not going to arrest him it's not going to happen and for the president to be talking. That way plays into,

who exactly what people are saying about, which you studies, trying to politicized the Justice Department and here, Rich, yet again, I think you know we talked about this with DOM again. We talked about it. In connection with other White House staff, General Kelly, I think, as well and You can see it with bar now is to which is the president's been very lucky in. some of the senior season people that he's had working for him and keeping him out of trouble, because we don't want the Justice Department and the FBI indicting people in a political context, two weeks before an election, I mean that's like common sense and I think bars been pretty adamant that that is not going to happen and he's been saying that for a long time. So then, what what the president said

was well. You know, then he's got to appoint a special counsel and I'm like special. also reports, the attorney general. It's that it, the issue- isn't any different either the inappropriateness of it connected to a political context, or you know the fact that the judge this department is moving fast enough, because whether it's a prosecutor in the Justice Department or prosecutor they bring in, outside the attorney general still running the investigation in the sense of being you know, ultimately, in charge of all Justice Department work. So The whole special council thing and the whole: why aren't they arresting them? It was legally dumb and you know, subjected the president at his own for his own fault of to the young man to the complaint, which is very viable complete

that he's politicizing law enforcement and its also politically I thought it was malpractice because the issue here as we've covered any number of times in connection with the with the Russiagate investigation, is the power, and in this instance, self dealing That's a serious thing regardless of whether anybody ever gets indicted or arrested for it. So I did. I couldn't understand why the it was making his own justice support. The FBI, the issue when the issue in a political context should be binding and is their corruption here and the reason I guess I may be the reason I'm higher on the president performance last night, then you are in part, is because I thought he writes the ship as far as that was-

instead of talking about the FBI and the Justice Department, he was keeping the focus on Biden and corruption which, where I think it should have been all along, so So, let's get to another story this week from couple of days ago, we had this warning from director of national intelligence. John Ratcliff that IRAN and Russia are meddling in the election particular focus on on which obtained voter data. I guess publicly available voter data and then was emailing voters under the guise of being proud boys or as Joe Biden Poor boys saying today, there being tracked there being survey on they better vote for doll, shrub or else so reckless laid this out and said

this was met to her doll tribe, which caused a lot of outrage. On the other side, there are saying well, what would he talking about is that these are people harassing voters for not voting for Trump. How, possibly, can IRAN be engaged in a scheme to hurt Donald Trump? What did you make of it? I think this is so rock and I've written my account for the weekend on it, because I just think it's so obvious. Now you have to ask certain point rich, if we're really worried about these adversary countries, like IRAN and Russia, and to a lesser extent in this, context, China, North Korea and the rest. Why do we keep doing things that are exactly what they would want us to? Do I mean it is perfectly obvious

to me anyway. That what's going on here is to the extent these foreign powers are up to anything. What's up, is they realize that they have exactly what would push the american media is button? And all they have to do is flawed out a little but a nonsense. The baby, jumps on it. actually use our own intelligence service to get the public whipped up. So here you have this instance, where the Iranians are posing apparently in false information that they're putting out as the proud boys and you know, sending provocative messages to register Democrats. Do you know the first question that you asked the way that the way

Ratliff, and Chris Ray the FBI director was so so was somber and serious when they came out at this press conference. The other day you know, is there some kind of, hacking going on is the counter and two euro counter espionage, these these people but whatever the Iranians are doing, they getting information? That's available to anybody, if, if you too, the information is available to I don't know about you, but by my phone I feel like for the last four months goes off about four times five times an hour with fundraising pitches from like this one, that one all over the place right, there's information about boulders and registration information. You don't have to do hacking or anything like that to get a lovely information that bilbil. So what they're saying is the Iranians are sending these messages? So you know what are they

They won the Iranians. Think it do. You think the uranium instinct that they're going to swing in american election know, but what do they think? Well, they think if they send, if they send proud messages to Democrats in the media gets window. It they're gonna have a field day for a few days. with another. You know trump the White supremacist stirred ground, has his army of proud boys ready to start a race war after he loses election, and he's already said that he won't endorse the peaceful transition of power of Europa. So all they're doing is there pushing the media's buttons, they know what media is going to report and that gets everybody or whipped up for a few days. In the meantime, you have the the Trump Intel it community represented by Ratcliff and they want to show that Trump doesn't isn't colluding. With foreign powers he's being hurt by

Potential collusion with foreign powers, so that's the reason they're putting this out the FBI everybody to know that they're not asleep at the switch again like they were the last time and they're not being taken and by russian disinformation, and it's all it's all play acting in it's all for the benefit. I mean, I'm not it. I shouldn't say, play acting cause. I know there are serious, about it, but the only peace. Who were laughing all the way to the bank on this stuff are the Iranians and the Russians because they get exactly what they what they know. They're, not gonna, swing in election with it, Jim moronic messaging, you remember the last time that the messaging was not things like Satan. Jesus arm wrestling area what? If you wanted to help Jesus when you hit like you're not doing, but that was the that's the political messaging. That's gonna influence the outcome of the election

they're gonna, get roll call about here. The obsession with Russia this week, and there is peace- sprang by the near ties were out of Russia's under meaning of western science going to waging a war in american size to think it was, and this investigate about that kind of went back in and look at this near times, peace and in one day they make a big deal of this than one blotter called the Russia file. Like repeated one of these dads Is it an emanated from our tea or something, and others passage near times about this? And this guy points out Russia File is? Is a swedish blogger? It's like a one man aggregation outfit, I guess, no traffic and the guy has like five thousand twitter followers and the tweet you sent out promoting this story that the time was exercised about literally got one retreat and likes. It also a really good thing. I just bought up

that it really is amazing. But you know it reminds me when I was doing terrorism cases the thing that struck me about it, the most was, I guess this is what General Mcmaster would call like: asymmetrical warfare or whatever their term, for it is But once you want your kind of into it and onto what they're doing the thing about it is that they can. They can make the bat field smaller and more competitive, so that you know they think they have no way of competing with the United States armed forces. But if they're going to do sneak attacks on civilian populations and they're not really attached to a country, so that you can't, like obviously, retaliate against a man. You can't take their treasure and put the matter business that way like you could with a country, it makes

battlefield smaller, because you know now all of the advantages that you have against other countries are not really effective against these terrorist outfits and I think the same thing is happening in in cyber warfare. So you know, if you can about Russia. Everybody wants to talk about them like your ten feet, all and in the peace that you wrote Youtube you mention you know it has then, since, like the red Scare days of the Soviet Union that, like Gub suddenly it's the left, but everybody's worried about a Russian under every rock right. meantime. This is now your Father Soviet Union right. This is a basket case- country. That has a lot of nuclear weapons. But it's a fading power that doesn't have the the GDP of ITALY or or Canada and they ran

even more of a basket case? Then Russia is but if you're gonna make the battlefield the cyber stuff, with the hackers messaging and these guys learn that they can level our own intelligence agencies and our own media against our country in the sense of sowing discord and having at the having us at each other's throats. That's a big achievement for given the the relative work, differences in power. No doubt so say one last thing, because this another election relate. it matter. We discuss a little bit editors this week or last week these. Pennsylvania decision where these Supreme Court did not take up their sir, this case coming up there from the state course of Pennsylvania, with the Republican Party of Pennsylvania objecting to the.

Just rewriting on the fly election rules and Pennsylvania than very excoriated about this decision from the court, which was four four! So what did you make of it? And particularly, talk about this Cavanaugh concurrence and at another case that maybe tells us the outcome would be different. If this wasn't coming up to the State well, yeah, I'm not as persuaded by the difference between it coming up from the federal courts or the state courts. I think Roberts, just she I owe you I wrote a common last weekend. Flooring them to take a case before election day and To my mind, rich, it was not a. This was not a Trump or Biden thing. It was about

the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and and what you can already see happening, which is if they took a case before the election There are very strong ground, on the basis of prior decisions in election law, to say that Congress has by statute election day, We have one election day and while the states a lot of authority in terms of finding some of the conditions of an election and allowing early voting and and and the like, they don't have a right to override Congress on what election day is. That is a federal election. It's a matter of federal law when election day is in Congress has said it's November, the not November third and fourth and fifth and sixth sixth November. Third, so I thought that on the basis of a lot of law that the Supreme Court has already developed if they took a case before

Election day, then legitimate Lee you would be saying all they're doing is setting the rules for the election and that may in one place at me and you are to the benefit of one party and another place that me and you are the benefit of the other party, but at least they're. setting the rules, whereas if they wait We have a disaster after the election, then they are in a position of picking the president, which I don't think the country should want. The court shouldn't want. Nobody should want the Supreme Court looking like therein that position, so I just for the sake of the country in the the court as an institution, they should decide a case they and they should grab the Slovenia case the other case. I talked about Wisconsin case, which involves how long you gonna let them count after November third, but they should just grab those cases set the rules and let everything go from there instead by

Thing they did, they not only didn't decide when they could have they also encourage other states to change the rules at the last minute, which is against what the Supreme Court's doctrine is, which is the doctrine is known as the Percel doctrine. And what a basically says he can't change the rules as it gets closer. The other thing, I think that's important about the the setting of the rules and that you as discussed on the editors podcast, is this idea of? Is it supposed to be the state legislatures or you know, is that when it's state patient, just court courtier say. While the state can work it out, whether it's the legislature of the courts or or bureaucrats or whoever you know they they make

there lies and all we look at is have they made the changes to close to election day and that's not what the law is written, what cabin or says in this concurrence, which goes to the Wisconsin case that they just quit background on this? This is a federal district judge, in Wisconsin who tried to change the rules of the election in terms of how long they be able to count ballots when the election would begin and end, and so and he got slapped down by the seventh circuit, and then the Supreme Court ended up taking the case. I think this was actually in connection with the with the primary rather than the latest but you're the national action, but the same principles apply and what what

says is not only that you can't change the rules when it gets wanna get close to election day. But also that, when we're talking about elections, and particularly when we're talking about it in the context, the same rules need to be changed because of the pandemic. that's supposed to be done by the state legislatures, because they are politically accountable to the public So they don't one of the things that the court stressed in their cases. They don't want the court's involved in making these rules and changing these rules. So the two things they want, that the guidance back then was the two things we want you to know you can't change the rules too close to the to the election day and Judges shouldn't be overdue, overruling what legislature stew

unless there is some legal infirmity in some election statute, that a legislature is enacted and what these courts were doing, whether it was state courts or federal courts Basically saying because of Rona virus this or that perfectly legitimate deadline that the legislature head enacted by statute, couldn't be honoured and what the court said is. That's not the court's placed do that? Okay? Well, that's all the time we have this is it produced by the incomparable Sarah City thanks everyone for listening and thank you, Andy Mccarthy, thanks rich.