 Welcome. Thank you for joining us. There's a lot going on these days and thanks for coming to think Hikawaii and sharing your concern and your attention with us. We have with us today. Professor Ben Davis retired from the University of Toledo School of Law. Recently also at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Law as a visiting professor. And now as a visiting professor at Washington and Lee School of Law. So parapetetic legal educator. And as the t-shirt says duty Meredith. So Ben, on the January 6th hearings. You've managed to kind of give a theme name to each of the days so far. How did you name the first day. So I thought the day one laying out the scheme of Donald Trump is was about the big life. And the idea that he was trying to put forward that the election had been stolen, you know, stop the steal all that language. And the evidence that was brought forward of all of the various lawyers, advisors, political campaign types, etc., who made it absolutely crystal clear that there was no evidence of any kind of widespread fraud. And so the court cases that failed, all that stuff to just and that was communicated to Trump, so that there was no truth, not a shred of truth to what he was saying, which made it the big lot. And so day one was saying, here's, there was no problem with the election that was systematic. He kept saying it was and various people around him kept saying it was. And there is the big lot. In fact, the big lie started before the election back in April or something he was trying to say that if he lost is because the election was rigged so that was day one, the big lie. How is it that there is still a huge cult of Trump supporters who are still arguing the big lie theory. Well, I think one thing is that the big lie theory has been put forward by lots of different allies, supporters of Trump, so that if you're in certain kinds of media silos. Then, you know, that's all you've heard and that's what you believe or your Congress people are part of this. That's all you heard and that's what you believe. The second thing is that, you know, if you voted for somebody, because you thought that they were the right person to have yourself being told what he is saying or she is saying is a lie is a hard thing to accept it's cognitive distance. So, there is a sense. I think for people, you know, that was my guy. And I thought he was a good, good guy, maybe a little, a little harsh, but you know, he got me my tax guy. So I'm happy, you know what I mean. And I think that that's probably part of what's going on here for why people would continue to believe it then the converse of that is the course that anybody says anything that contradicts the guy you like. Oh, they're just some kind of person from, you know, the conspiracy deep state whatever you want to do it that is trying to discredit my hero, so to speak. That's the kind of think that's a logic of a person who was in that spot. Okay, so beyond just Adam and confirmation bias like that. Is there really any theory for which there is any significant evidentiary support that this election was subverted stolen somehow. Well, according to Trump's own people. The answer is, no. Okay, what can I say, I mean, everybody that testified that they're who looked into these things the district attorneys whatever the ones who ran down all the rabbit trails the answer is, no, there's not, not zero. I don't know what I can say about it. Okay. And so when bill buyer and many others acknowledge that. What's who what did day two of the hearings focus on. Well, I thought day two is particularly interesting because now that you know that Trump has been advised and no uncertain terms by the people he's appointed or on his campaign that there is no fraud. Trump immediately starts a huge campaign to raise money for what is it called his election defense fund official election defense fund. And apparently, he raises a quarter of a billion dollars, ostensibly to quote unquote fight the fraud. Again, there is no fraud, but they're fighting. So the quarter of a billion dollars and this was when led by representative loft and she coined the term, the big rip off, which I think is really, really, really clear. Because if we have any history of watching Trump University or any of these other things that are happening all the way sounds just like it, you know what I mean. So do we have any idea where that quarter of a billion dollars has gone. There's a whole series of issues of they're still trying to figure out, you know, where the money go. I do know that it was reported that 5 million of it was spent on the event on guess what January 6. 3 million dollars was given to some charity that's run by guess who Mark meadows it was not contributing or is not participating with regards to the meeting with the committee, you know, they're, so there are a couple different places there's this back and forth about one of Trump's sons girlfriend, make your foil. Got it. She got a check for $60,000 for speaking for two minutes on the mall that's my that's good money if you can make it. Okay. And then there's this debate about whether the lady who headed up heads up, Publix down in Florida was part of her check for $650,000 or part of the quarter billion. As for the rest of it. It's gone apparently into a pack called safe pack that Trump put. And it's not any evidence that it's actually been used, at least not been presented that was actually used for any kind of election defense fund for the 60 case. And correctly if I'm wrong, but wasn't there an issue with regards to Giuliani getting paid for his services. So far as I know, I don't you know that that money sitting in some places and complete control of Donald Trump. And I would emphasize that I think Donald Trump wrote a cease and desist letter to the Republican National Committee telling him not to use his image with regards to Republican National Committee fundraising so you know it really is like like a real funnel to a big ripple. That points to another factor that may not have changed, despite all of the things that have come to light. And that is that over on the Republican side of the fence. No one seems to have been able to exert the fundraising force influence and control that Trump has and continues to. So I read recently that apparently Ron DeSantis down in Florida has been able to start to funnel some of the money. And this way some of the donors for Trump are starting to give money to the scientists like that to the tune of $24 million. But the kind of numbers we're talking about here of a quarter billion dollars a lot of people, you know, sending in $20 30 or again, a big lie. Okay, that's the thing. It's, it's one thing to raise money for what you're trying to do, etc. It's another thing to raise money telling people, there was a big lie, and then trying to and people paying you it's it's kind of they've heard referred to as even a consumer protection kind of issue with regards to fraud, you know, in in advertising kind of thing that would be state consumer protection authorities could even look into. So it looks like there's, they may have bought a lawsuit. I don't know. So, from the big line to the big rip up. What did you see as the theme of day three. I coined the term, the big kill, which is really about essentially putting Mike Pence in a space at a point of risk, where there was a possibility that he could get killed. The basis of evidence I thought was really significant is the or how the proud boys these kinds of gangs, right, that were essentially marching down to the capital at 10 o'clock in the morning, when Trump was speaking only at 12 or one or something like that. So they were down there sort of doing pre approach verifying what were the weak points and all that and then they started going after the, the, the, the barriers and all that stuff kind of softening up the target if I could say it like that so that when the crowds come down, they can go over and the whole thing happened but the significant thing for me was that there were people who gave or informants who had said that if they'd run into Pelosi, if they'd run into. They would have killed it. And so it was essentially kind of setting up a situation that they were in harm's way, and then you would have these intermediary so to speak groups who oh I'm terribly sorry look, Mr Pence has been killed. Oh, I'm terribly sorry. Pelosi what a horror you can do that kind of thing but you set him up to be at risk. Right. And that was in the same way that is, you know, you feel like all those capital police officers were set up to be put at risk. It was very emotional to listen to the commentary of one of those. I think the first day the woman there who said that, you know, she even trained as a police officer right. Yes, can be trained for warfare. This was warfare that they were living. All these people are being set up with the idea of a big kill. And so it looked to me that there were. I mean Trump would not have. It's actually says at some point that maybe Pence deserved it when people were chanting that hang Mike Pence then, which you know for your vice president, I mean that's a little much. Beyond that, when Pence is shepherded away. It turns out that he was only 40 feet away from the insurrectionist at one point that's how close it came to them getting their hands on a guy that they said they wanted to kill. He was over when he's down in the basement or somewhere in the, in the capital and they want to whisk him away in those, you know, with the secret service and all that. He's nervous about who's driving the car. And he says I'm not going anywhere. I guess part of it was his concern about how we'd look to see the him go away from the White House to the world. I mean they were from the capital to the world but the idea of him being a little nervous about who was driving the car just I mean it sounded to me like this was like an effort of big kill with him. And I don't know they didn't get into this but I'm curious about what there was some discussion I remember over time of Trump sort of magnanimously declaring martial law right you know that would be that was sort of something I heard about a couple with three weeks ago is sort of part of the plan that you have chaos and so he did declare martial law and then you know down that path. But it really looked to me from what every one of us presented was that it was definitely a sorry, it was definitely a term for the day was big kill. This was about killing Pence, if he didn't play ball. So, in your view, with the information available. What did the evidence indicate about what the proud boys, the oath keepers and the rest of them knew about where to break in with the least resistance, where to go once they got in and what the opposition to them was likely to be or Well that's been part of what was interesting on that day so there was a document that was revealed in some DOJ case called I think it's 1776 again or something like that, which was a detailed nine page document that laid out from the proud boys internally about how to take over based actually Capitol Hill office building, right, so that there was a this was something that was organized ahead of time, and it said detail who plays this role who plays this role you're the lead or you need to second and all that kind of stuff. So, you know, almost like military style construction. In addition, you know you have these proud boys that went into the room went into the capital and what they call stacks which was a new word for me, which is the, these lines of sort of militarily camouflage wearing guys, going up into a to go into the building with. So, there was a lot of evidence to show that this was very systematically organized by the proud boys that the proud boys were essentially responding to a call from Donald Trump to them. And they were even recruiting based on that call. And I mean there seems to be a lot of evidence that there's nothing spontaneous here that this thing was very systematically set up, and then you move you move the crowd up to the capital. And, and you put all these people in harm's way with the idea of getting the counting of the electoral college votes suspended or stop. And so we know that they knew and planned and acted in advance on where to break in, where to go once they got in where. Vice President Pence and Speaker Pelosi and others were. And they went directly for those targets. So, yeah, you know, I should just add something that there's this the video of a representative named Lauderdale, you know, taking people around the day before, kind of showing them various, you know, security sites inside that was part of what was the presentation of, I mean literally now going and pointing out members of Congress, who were allies and supporters of what was happening and putting them before the question of please explain what you were doing, you know, fascinating to watch. So, days one two and three. What did that bring us to in day four, in your view. In day four I called a big elector scam, which is basically the state by state elector scams in the seven states that Biden won the swing states to try to get alternative electors put in place. And here, the evidence was from mainly state officials or poll worker pointing out the amount of pressure that Trump laid directly on them. And also, the cooperation of entities like the Republican National Committee, or there was a congressman Andy Bates, who was pushing the folks in Arizona, or, you know, there was even the, the fake slate of electors. The fake forms, these fake elector forms from Michigan and Wisconsin, that there was an exchange between the chief of staff of Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, literally, 20 minutes before the vote of the meeting on January 6 with us, someone on the staff of the president saying hey, Ron Johnson's got to give something to, to the vice president and the person from the vice president asked vice president staff says, What is it is it's alternative electors from Wisconsin and Michigan forms. And the person from the thing that had not been received by the National Archives parents, and the other person came back and said do not give them to them. The thing that's really heavy about that right now is last night I was watching on Rachel Maddow is that the National Archives had actually received these alternative elector documents, and it never passed them on. So that they did have them from Michigan, they did have them for Wisconsin. So the chief of staff of Ron Johnson is telling a lie with regards to what had actually happened with the National Archives. And that makes it even more intriguing, right, doesn't it. I mean, there was basically hey I'm going to throw a little story here or maybe they just didn't know the fact that they'd actually been received or maybe they've been told they had been received. But it's a, Ron Johnson's head is in, you know, his head is in the box right now. This just like that louder Mike guys head is in the box. I think the key thing again is that these are all people for the most part would voted for Trump in the state legislatures or staff that refused to go along with the scheme because they thought it was illegal. And secondly, there was no evidence that was for their states on the basis of which that they could move for with doing the kinds of things like calling special sessions on the legislature and all that. So, from what we're seeing, are those strategies continuing to expand and be put in place by the Republican operatives at state and local levels for not only voter suppression but for vote subversion, electoral counting and electoral designation. Right. So, yes, in this sense that if you can get the legislative term to pass a law that makes that law. Well, that kind of works for you. So, for example, if you've got, sorry, just my guitar fell over. With. For example, you know, there is this effort to basically increase the power of the state legislature to override what the vote by the people in the state will be in terms of setting up elective if you have a law that says that as opposed to this ad hoc structure. That's a risk and apparently that's a risk that's being played out in Arizona in Georgia, you know, these various kinds of efforts to say that local election commissions can be over overridden overseen replaced by people from the political branches like a secretary of state again, you get your right kind of secretary state in place, you can play playing machinations with that. So yes, there are Republican operatives who are working aggressively in various states to essentially weaken the control of elections by the sovereign act of voting by the people and put it into the hands of political person. And that's unfortunate. And we've seen that in the most recent hearing days with Ruby Freeman. Hey, shame us election workers whose lives have been subjected to incredible disruption and impairment. Oh, because they did their job. And in another session I talked with you about this that I used to be a poll worker, not a poll worker poll observer. When I was in Toledo for 17 or 18 years so I used to sit at the polling places and observe what was going on. And I tell you, and I don't know if anybody else has done that out there listening but it is one of the most moving experiences of your life to watch ordinary citizens vote. It is just beautiful to watch all kinds of people all shapes and sizes and looks and whatever sitting down you know whether they got tattoos or no tattoos whether they're in a suit or they're in running bands, you know, sitting down doing their citizens duty. And secondly, the poll worker working aggressively or not aggressively but working studiously and diligently to make sure everyone is treated fairly. And so when I heard what happened to Shay Moss and Ruby Freeman I was actually at the pool talking with something about it. It was really shameful and a guy came up to me and he said, Yeah, my wife is working down here in Charlottesville is one of those election types and the stuff they had to deal with. You know as an election worker, you know was awful he was upset too, you know, and you know that that kind of subversion of who does the actual poll worker role is another thing to be concerned about and. So there's two aspects to that one you have poll observers who will be agitated and try to get in the way of people voting. And I would say that the solution that was done up in Toledo when this happened was real simple. You got a poll observer was obnoxious. They got kicked out by the poll worker, the judge of the team for the second at level is within the poll workers Okay, and that's another concern. And I don't know how you remove a poll worker at a polling site during the middle of an election but I know that there's an effort to become sort of these insidious poll workers will go against the oath that they take. But I imagine that there are controls, you know, sort of like alternate poll workers sitting in the background so that somebody acts obnoxiously. The chief can say get rid of that person and bring in another one and we'll continue on. So that's the hopes that I have is that people will challenge the people who don't respect. And I mean this, I mean this the dignity of ordinary citizen voting. It's a most beautiful thing or bring tears to your eyes if you ever do it as a poll observer. So, in our last couple of minutes here. How does this all bode for the 2022 midterm elections. What do you expect to see in that process in those elections. So, from what you're seeing right now, you're seeing, I think Donald Trump's balloon. Going down within the Republican Party. That saying that there aren't a lot of republicans to like him but I think they saw something about 20% of republicans were saying that Donald Trump should be held responsible or something. And when you have those kind of numbers happening. The end result is going to be that there's going to be some difficulties for Republican candidates, you know, now this the ironies of course Republican candidates are trying to sort of put themselves in place, as I am the Trump light, so to speak. And, you know, and sort of using the language of Trump, and then Trump is a desperately trying to make himself relevant by figuring who to what to endorse or unendorse and endorse the other one looking for the winning Of course, it's always about winning, not about anything else. So, my gut feel is that it's going to be an election full of a lot of craziness, but at the same time, there's going to be the basic issues of inflation and all that stuff that are going to work against the democrats. On the other hand, there's going to be these concerns about, do we really want more of these Trump kind of people on the republican side and maybe republican tools sit out from voting because there's those disgusted with everything. But I encourage everybody to vote. Okay, please don't sit out everybody vote vote for the first you believe it. Personally, I don't see how a democrat independent or republican could have vote for a republican who did not break with Donald Trump. I based on what I'm watching in these hearings so far. And we're talking about the Department of Justice today, and trying to corrupt that and not you know I mean in the middle of those hearings right now so I'm still finding out the kind of effort that he was doing there I mean this stuff is so that you know I just say whether you're a democrat or republican or an independent. I don't understand how you could vote for a republican who did not break with Donald Trump. Whatever they like. So on that note, then Davis, thanks for your insights your input and your decades of legal scholarship. All of you for joining us come back in a couple of weeks. We will be back again with more law and social justice issues. Think Tech Hawaii. Aloha. Be safe. Be well. Thank you very much.