 Let me say this, questions around our law enforcement official in the DOJ and in the secret service. This is American Issues Take Two. I'm Jay Fidel, and we have with us Tim Epichela, my co-host, our regular contributor, Stephanie Stowe Dalton, and our special guest, Chuck Crumpton. Thank you so much for being here, all of you guys. Good morning. Aloha. Aloha. Okay, so let's break this down first to what's going on with the DOJ. So we find a couple of days ago courtesy of Rachel Maddow that in fact there was an internal memorandum in the Department of Justice, and they're referring to a policy at William Barr. Remember him? William Barr had told us about in his time, I guess in December of 2020, indicating that the Department of Justice should not and would not initiate any investigations of a candidate for president, which actually would work in Trump's favor. And what happened, this was, I guess, not made known to the public, but Rachel Maddow found out about it, and that caused a lot of consternation. Because we wondered why at this point in time when Trump is saying that he's going to run again, that this memo should exist and further why this refers to and continues a policy reflected by William Barr. So let me go to you first, Tim. Is there something really, really fishy about this or is this just ordinary course of events? Well, I think that was a good morning. I think that was the motivation for Merrick Garland to get in front of the news, the cameras yesterday and explicitly state that if there's a path of criminality, that memo doesn't hold. Yeah, okay, that's what he said and then clearly, that was a response to the news and Rachel Maddow and all the other media that pointed out this was pretty shocking. Also, one of his, one of his assistants, a woman named Monaco, made similar statements. No, we'll, we'll follow the facts wherever we go, don't worry about us. Stephanie, are you worried? Yes, I'm worried. I'm confused. I think the AG is confused. We've got how many of these, these discussions since, since, since the last, the FBI person came out and spilt the beans on the investigations. It's, it's clearly a confusion, even though they say there's memos and, and there's some semi pseudo policy, but I don't think there is so I think we're in jeopardy of bias taking over and pressure and threats. Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. You know, Chuck, as a lawyer, you know, through your long career practicing law, you probably have had enormous respect and awe, not only for the Supreme Court, that's another show, but for the Department of Justice. How do you feel about the Department of Justice now? How do you feel about Merrick Garland now? What's amazing how quick, you can go from one to two syllables from awe to awful, but I think one of the things that decades of mediating has taught me is you look for what's missing. And in a society where too many people have been convinced to act and make decisions out of bias and fear and also the new BFF right, that what's missing is that respect for a rule of law based on any kind of truth oriented objectively is reliable information decision making or action. It's just, it's gone. Yeah. Well, okay, we have we have a kind of year and a half to look at Merrick Garland. And this show, as well as Tim show has frequently talked about our disappointment with Merrick Garland. And, you know, I, there's been a lot of commentary written up in the newspapers about Merrick Garland and some people say including my own self that he's AWOL, that all the stuff is on his desk but he doesn't do anything. And now we find that he makes these statements but only under pressure. And the most interesting aspect of the memo in May was that it is admitted implication that he has not started an investigation from. You know, we all wondered. And now that question has sort of been answered. He has not started an investigation of Trump and frankly, the comments by Monaco and by him, you know about in the future how he will follow the breadcrumbs. That implied that he has not actually started an investigation of Trump. So, what is going on with this attorney general it is the most important issue as you know, from your own two shows on our network. You know this democracy is in trouble. And law enforcement officer we count on more than anyone else to preserve our democracy to protect us from from chaos is the attorney general of the United States. What kind of a job has he been doing. Well one thing we probably should remember about Merrick Garland. He should be sitting on the Supreme Court. And he would have been with Chief Justice Roberts. And the fifth vote to prevent the overturning of Roe versus Wade. The decision may still have gone in favor of Mississippi against Dobs and Planned Parenthood, but maybe not the overruling. I should remember. He's aware of that. If he's going to do this he's going to do it once he's going to do it right, and he's going to stick the landing, if he does it at all. But before he does his figure skating move. He needs to be very sure and he's a conservative, careful legal scholar that it's going to work. A lot of pieces have to be in place. Yeah. Well, you know, I wouldn't mind if he was on the Supreme Court. I think he's better suited for that than the role of Attorney General. Tim do we have time does Merrick Garland have time to go through this very careful conservative analysis, which is taking them in a year and a half now, since we saw the footage of the insurrection, since we saw Trump incite the insurrection a year and a half and he hadn't done anything. Do we have the time. I mean, from a justice standpoint, the wheels of justice move very slowly from a political standpoint, no, but from a justice standpoint, I'm sure in his mind, he thinks he does have time. I think, I think what he did was he sat back and said, Hey, if I'm going to take on, which has never been done before, I'm going to take on the President United States for in a criminal indictment. I've got to have a 98% chance that I swing the bat and I hit that ball, not only hit the ball, but I knock it out of the park. Use a baseball analogy. And I think he thought, Oh, there's going to be just superficial evidence that does not implicate Trump directly to the charges that I need to make. And if I can't direct directly involve him in that with evidence that I'm not even going to take up on the evidence. But until the hearing started to happen and, you know, people start paying attention to it. And I guarantee you he was paying attention to it. He goes, Well, maybe there is an opportunity for direct involvement. And it's starting to look that way. So I think that's when he started to take note that maybe it's time to start the investigation in earnest. You have to remember also in March, I think it was March or April, he got on the airways and said I will follow the breadcrumbs, no matter where it leads to. So it wasn't just the recent announcement. He also made that announcement. I wasn't five months ago, six months ago. I'm myself I'm getting tired of hearing these announcements I want action. We have an election in November, which could terminate the select committee overnight. And that'd be the end of that and Trump gets away again. Thanks, Stephanie. Let's let's go to you. How do you feel about it. Do we have time to let Merrick go through this very, very, very, very careful process. Well, Merritt is the only one that has the time, because the sixth committee is going to be over as soon as the selection takes over the house if it does, might not, but likely. Because he's got con going forward with it. And there is this, this dilemma of whether, not only a sitting president, but a candidate for president can be investigated and indicted. And why there's this confusion, given the severe issues that you know we're grappling with now for years that there ought to be us, you know, a place of this if we're going to stick with the, who is it the Comey memo it's the memo in the doj there's a memo that you can indict a sitting president and then by it follows that you can't indict the candidate either. And is that really there. Where is that man? No, that's an internal memo that's not necessarily the law. That's an internal memo so and he is respecting what William Barr said, which we don't do not feel that William Barr deserves our respect. He's a, he's fallen from grace for sure. No, he wrote, no, he wrote so anyway. And I wrote that memo. No, I kid, I kid, but yeah, probably, probably it's true. But but the point is that it's not at all for sure that he's in position or believes or is committed to doing that. Obviously he's we're barely able to know if he's committed to doing the investigation. But I believe that he is because I believe that in Biden and him and that that that he is a decent choice of Biden to be a G. Of course that's really questionable, but he's in he's there and Biden's not going to be moving him out anytime soon. So we've got to understand that he's going to go with the rule of law and he's going to apply it as he said to the president or the candidate for president because everybody's under the rule of law. Nobody's off the hook according to what I heard him say in his speech the other day. Yeah, so that's Trump that memo. If you were the president, that's Biden, I would be clear that the president is Biden. And you and you saw this memo and you saw this consternation among, you know, all sides of the political spectrum about this memo and about the abilities and tensions of the Attorney General. And you thought she maybe maybe I should pick up the phone. Maybe I should share my thoughts with Merrick Garland. The key question is, what's his strategy, which ducks does he really need to line up with the most reliability, not just witnesses not just evidence, but people within the OJ system and people that can support the process and make it work in a way that even if certain certain courts or certain political entities are unreceptive, he can make a record that will have some judicial force. That's his experience that's his training. So, if I were in his seat I'd be thinking of, what's my team. What do we need to have who do I need to have on board. What kind of commitments do I need to have through the end of 2024 and what evidence and witnesses can we assemble that will get us on board. But I rely more heavily on my team now on the witnesses and the evidence we all know that Trump tried to overturn the election. Bannon has said it, Lynn has said it stone has said it. How many times do we need to hear it. Do we need to hear it from a 25 year old White House staffer as to how clearly they were aware of this. It's a long strategy to make sure that when he does it once, he does it right, and the record will stick, whether he wins or not. I think a lot of people out there who are tired of hearing that you know he's got to be very careful, and he's got to have all this ducks in the road 99.9% certainty of a conviction. We have tape. Not only we have tape of the insurrection we have we have tape of the incitement. And now we have a lot more evidence than you're right, the 22 year olds don't count there the peanuts. He's got to go after the big boys and he should be getting all kinds of information now and he should be sharing that with the committee, but he's not really supporting the committee not supporting those subpoenas either. So my question to you now we clear. I'm addressing this question to Tim. What is the problem in the department of justice. Is it is it Merrick is it people around him. Other people that are Trump holdovers there that are influencing him. You know he hasn't been a prosecutor in his career. He just doesn't have the prosecutorial mentality to handle this. What's wrong in the department of justice. I think you just hit up in the last note. I don't think he has the personality for it. A great personality for the Supreme Court. I mean, it takes the time to think things out but as far as one of those personalities to move quickly and look at look at the playing field and say there is or there isn't merit to prosecute. I don't think that's in his wheelhouse. And let's think of something else though. It was after January 6 that Merrick Garland was appointed as AG. Maybe President Biden didn't want to go down that road. I'm not saying he's the Gerald Ford of the Nixon administration, but maybe President Biden didn't want to spend his administration on the tumultuous prosecution of a former sitting president. That's a possibility. Yeah, and likewise he doesn't want to spend the rest of his administration trying to get confirmation of another attorney general. He could ask Merrick to resign already. Merrick is not popular and try to put somebody else in there but he'd run into resistance and he could spend a lot of time getting confirmation. I'd like to like to move to the next topic if I may, which in its own way is even more interesting and in fact delicious. And it has a lot to do with the Secret Service happening. So what's going on with the Secret Service? Have they got a legitimate position in deleting all that email? They're just saying they could get it back and now saying they can't get it back. Do they have a legitimate position in saying this all connected to some routine maintenance of their, of their, what do you call it, text messaging system? What's your, what's your nose tell you Stephanie? The Secret Service is no seal team six. I am appalled. I am appalled. You know, they're supposed to, you know, go down if they can't get it right. And there, there seems to me a huge red flag. Because this might have something to do with Gardner, Gardner, Gardner, the AG, because although he's not going to have much life after this administration, but it's seeped so far. The corruption, the, the vile, the vile eruption of all of this out of out of Trump that he's unleashed these gorgons. And it's now seeping into every crevice. Where's the belly taken over the Hawaiian Island? It's, it's alarming, it's terrifying, because that is added another institution bites the dust under Trump. And then it's the questions about the FBI follow through from that. And so we're there biting the dust too. So this is very, very serious. And so I'm afraid of it. I'm afraid of it. And that's why I'd like to see some move from Garland and I hope that he's only worried about that he can't get a jury, or judge on it, because the, the seepage is so bad that there's no person walking around DC, they can serve to make a decent, you know, verdict. I mean, this, I think it's just more signs of the mess we're in. And the loss of our, what virginity loss of our innocence as a democratic republic where where this is really, to me, another serious consideration I hope this afternoon might give us some more info or hope. Chuck, how do you connect the dots on this? You know, because James Murray, who is still yet today, the director of the Secret Service was appointed by Trump. And we know from, you know, just a human observation that Trump tried to corrupt all the people around him. He tried to make the Secret Service his Secret Service, and loyal only to him. Was, was there an issue with loyalty here by James Murray or by the members of the Secret Service who are presumably still in those jobs? What, how do you connect the dots between Trump and what happened? Well, look at what we know. One, we know when you migrate data from one system to another, your first and foremost priority is backup. We could give Michael our masterful tech and ask him, and he would say that's the first thing you do. We've all done it. I've done it with my system multiple times over the years. It's the first thing you do. In fact, you have multiple backups in case the first one fails. Any engineer, including computer engineers will tell you that. So we know that the awareness of the need for backup was there. Second, what's missing? January 5th and 6th, text, give me a break. That's not even close to a con incident coincidence, that fools no one. The third, here's what's really appalling. And Stephanie's right on it. There is a complete disregard for the rule of law, whether it be subpoenas, whether it be legal process, whether it be legal compulsion, or any other kind by all of the Trump allies. And they feel they can get away with it. And until somebody steps in and your question about Mary Garland is a good one because until somebody steps in to enforce it. Right now we're looking at the Attorney General of Georgia, not the Attorney General of the United States to be the enforcer of the rule of law against the Trump. That's the creation of evidence and disregard for it. Kim, how do you feel about this? Yeah, yeah, let me let me tag team on to what Stephanie and Chuck has said. And let's go down the road path of history. Remember, Donald Trump asked James Comey, the head of the FBI for his loyalty. If you have one of his commands, if you want to continue to be the director of the FBI, then loyalty is is kind of a prerequisite. Okay, so Joe Biden should have realized that that's what Trump demanded from his department heads, either in the DOJ, or Secret Service, or let's not forget Louis D joy in the post office. I demand loyalty first, your mission second, your mission to the agency second, and to the country, and to the country. So what's the problem. The problem is with Joe Biden being so naive to think that you can keep these figureheads in those agency spots. And they're somehow going to change the way they act and believe and behave. And Joe Biden just did the rule of law or their, their oath office. They were, they were dedicated to one thing and one thing only and that's loyalty to Donald Trump, and they're still serving in that capacity. I'm sorry but the Secret Service is nothing more than a willful destruction of evidence and certainly obstruction. Minimally, minimally, there's more to it than that. Now, what's wrong. It goes to Joe Biden for allowing them to stay as department heads in those agencies. I go to Joe Biden first. Yeah, well, that's, that's what my next question to Stephanie was. How does Joe Biden fair in this in the failure of the Department of Justice to do anything after a year and a half. And in his failure to replace obvious Trumpers within his administration, he has the power, he had the power year and a half ago to replace James Murray and Secret Service. He didn't do it. I guess he didn't realize or didn't know or didn't care that Trump had established all these loyalty relationships with people in Biden's government. Okay, so what, you know, what should, what should Biden do about this and is, is this another nail in his presidential coffin. Well, I've just heard that that 36 years in the Senate is driving Joe Biden and on that ride. He's, he's developed this whole Kali collegial cooperative approach to everything and that work for many years. And that just does not work now. It's not working. And his, his ratings ought to be informing him. And yes, I'm so sorry he has COVID but it's mild but he needs to get up off that safe bed and get busy with exactly what Tim says I thoroughly agree at this point. I'm still waiting around for field tea. This, he's asking for it to Brutus stuff. He's, I mean, it's going to be bloody. And so it's so yes Tim, I agree and Biden's going to have to and where are his advisors, speaking of all these people that are telling us what to do. Where are Biden's advisor. I'm going to give you an answer to that, definitely. We're going to ask Chuck. Chuck, we're going to give Chuck another free phone call. This is your phone call to Joe Biden about, you know, the apparent problems in his law enforcement actions. And by the way, the Secret Service works for Homeland Security. So to the extent there's, you know, there's some problem in the Secret Service that also opens the question about whether there's a problem. I think I already know the answer in Homeland Security in general, which is so important to the country. So Chuck, here we are dial tone. And there's Joe Biden on the phone. What's your advice. I think Stephanie nailed it on the head. One, he slept on leaving Trumpers in positions of ability to do great harm. And now it's coming back on him. There are people in his administration that have the strength and the force to act. He's got a longtime former prosecutor as his vice president, and he's made absolutely no use or benefit of that throughout his time. Why would she not have been working with Merrick Garland to build this case. And with the Attorney General of Georgia, Georgia, they should be collaborating on evidence. They're going in the same direction. And I meant when I said earlier, he really needs to look at who are his most important people to line up and get his loyalty from his commitment from to be able to accomplish what he needs to do to make a record, whether he wins it or loses it. If he makes that record effectively. That's his best shot as a judicial officer as the head of the DOJ. It's the morning after Tim. Chuck has had his call with Joe Biden, and Chuck has given him some real wisdom. But the question is, what does Joe Biden actually do to effectuate that wisdom to correct the problems. I mean, after all, he still has a year and a half in office, and there should be something he can do to alleviate this he's losing popularity or other so many things including these two, what I call scandals that are both happening around him right now. What, what, assuming that he accepts Chuck's advice and I think he really should he really should. What does he actually do. Let me give you that answer in various language. Yet, nada, nothing. I'm going to go with Stephanie's answer. And that is he is a creature of his Senate environment doesn't have a mean bone in his body. He doesn't have any kind of concept that maybe someone's not acting in my best interest. And he's so scared, almost, you know, a year and a half, two years into his presidency that, my God, there might be political polarization. Oh, I, that was not what I wanted when I first became president. I wanted to sing kumbaya and everyone hold hands. Like Lincoln, I'll leave all these people in place. And, you know, I'll be the next Abraham Lincoln to say I wasn't looking for any kind of revenge or any kind of cleaning of house. Well, that was his mistake. And that continues to be his mistake right now. What would you tell him, you know, he says, you know, Tim, I have great regard for your action advice. What should I do today. I'm going to be the next president in five minutes I'll have a list of the various people in charge of your agencies be it law enforcement or otherwise, we'll start with the post office, the joy gone Murray gone. I mean, I would just give Melissa say, call it a Saturday night Saturday night slaughter special I don't care what you call it, get rid of them. They're not serving your interest, they're serving the former president's interest, because of political ideology. They're not not loyalty to the mission of your administration. Stephanie I noticed you've been shaking your head and I wonder if that's a quick in your neck. I'm right on with Tim here where does partners in the on the horse ride here I think that he's got to unleash. Let's see what she can do she hasn't done a damn thing yet excuse my French, but she's been backed into something that's not working for her. So let's go Kamala do it help out with this. The other thing is Tony Blinken. What a wonderful guy, but he's been a sidekick in Biden for 25 years. And so I don't think Tony Blinken as Secretary of State is doing what he needs to do for for Biden, because you know here's usually you have these stellar people and certainly Tony Blinken is a bright guy I mean but he's not got that edge you know that that we're looking for here to change the tax course and start going after these idiots and taking care of business. So who else is there but see there's the question now where are his, these people that can take him forward and help him break out of the 36 years of Kumbaya. And, and let, and let Kamala out I don't know maybe he doesn't have confidence in her because you know I think she's a G because I mean she's a vice president, because she was a big friend of both, because he was a, the AG of Rhode Island or she was of California they were doing a lot of stuff together. So I see him with more of a fatherly approach to her a more father daughter, and I think he's lost the benefit of her, her killer instinct, which is definitely there. So anyway, there's he's got stuff he can tap into that Chuck could be talking to him about now then there are other people you all may know the other people I mean already Tim has mentioned a well some fire but then where these people they're going to give him the guidance to get to get on his horse and let's get on to the joust. Yeah, there are practical problems aren't there Chuck. I mean if you took the advice of Tim and Stephanie on what Joe Biden should do. Hey, and aside from the fact that he may not have the, what do you want to call it the courage to do this. The, you know, the background the aggressiveness to do this. There are other issues I mean, getting consent from the Senate on any, any official that needs consent is a problem, finding somebody who'd be willing to do it. That might be an issue. And finally, you know, pushback afterwards criticism and attacks. There's a bad pick yet again. I mean anything that GOP can do to criticize him, they will do. So, and all of this plays into its infusion process into whether to do anything. But query, let's assume that he does this. Let's assume that he picks new people, new people who are more loyal to him may use that term and tries to get them into the into the mix here. What are the risks for him. What are the things that might happen that would deter him from doing that. I think we need to think about, but what are the benefits. And those will show us what the risks are but one of the benefits if you get strong aggressive leaders, like Kamala like the ages of New York City or New York and Georgia. Like Cory Booker. There are people out there with that strength and that force and that training Adam shifts a former prosecutor. He's got a lot of people available to him to move this thing in the right direction without his having to exert personal leadership. He needs to delegate. He leads to learn to do that. He doesn't have the leadership force or charisma to be able to do it himself. He's got two and a half years, give him a shot. The risks. If it doesn't succeed 100%. To me are smaller than the benefits of giving strong aggressive bright knowledgeable people. The ability to take those risks to pursue that path and to see if they can make a change that makes a difference. Yeah. Well, Tim, let's suppose just hypothetically that Merrick Garland did, did not accept the call and that Joe Biden did not accept the call. Let's assume for a moment. I know this is a ridiculous assumption that neither of them watch this show with you guys. And that Merrick continues his flow walk and Joe Biden continues his, you know, observer role, if you will. What happens. This is the question out of Charles Dickens and the Christmas Carol. Oh, you know what happens going forward. What's what's the dark side. Let's go to the point where Scrooge was at the gray side of his own grave. And that will be Joe Biden. He'll be flambéed he'll go down in history as one of the, the most ineffectual presidents of the United States. Yeah, did he bring calm after Trump left office. Not really, but he was a, he was a soothing personality for that. That's not very good. I don't think as president, but let's look at the, the denial justice and what the impact has on the perception of the United States as a nation of a rule of law. And, you know how the Constitution is is implemented fairly, or hopefully fairly, always progressing in that in that fashion and manner. But those are the two side effects that if they don't take the call. And, you know, Chuck said something that I just kind of, in its true Chuck you said, he may not have the, you said I think something like personality of the leadership to pull this off. My God, he's president of the United States, the most powerful leader in the world. He never had the personality, but he doesn't. And you're right Chuck, he's got to delegate it to other people that have the personality and what a sad statement that is. Maybe we need a college course called leader of the free world one oh one. Yes, Jay, it's called one oh one. Okay, it's time for wrap up Stephanie you go first what are your closing thoughts here. What would you like to leave without listeners. Well I would like to do the ringy ding ding of the bell of alarm because he also made the mistake of going to Saudi Arabia, and that is just unconscionable. I'm, I'm, I'm just seeing a disarray here that is, he is still salvageable if these people as Chuck mentions and, and Tim and sure like Cory Booker to get a, get a chance at something here. Very good. And others like that and what you're saying is for him to look out at his stable and to start hooking up those 10 horses on his chariot and get on with that because we're out of time. We're out of time out of time and Chuck, your last comments and let me let me throw a question at you to is it too late. Is this salvageable, or is Joe Biden and his administration post. We've got two and a half years. If he's willing to let his strongest best people the best and the brightest really form their own teams, form their own strategies and go for it. That's our best chance. Yeah. Amen to that. Okay Tim you're shaking your head I assume you do not have a quick in your head. I don't know it's shocking. Comment and that'll be my final word because we're out of time but Chuck comment is my comment and I think it's spot on. Let him out of the cage. Yeah, absolutely. Very important discussion G I hope he does listen and you guys should make a call, you know, make sure the White House make those calls. Yeah. All right, this is think tech Hawaii. This is American issues. Thank you. We'll see you next week. Thank you so much. Stephanie and Tim and Chuck Allah. Thank you so much for watching think tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn and donate to us at think tech Hawaii.com. Mahalo.