Who the hell is Miles Taylor? And he made a living on going on CNN talking about the president. And I think what he did, he wrote a book. Anonymous said all sorts of lies and bad things. And I think it's, I think it's like a traitor. [00:00:16] I think it's a very important case. And I think he's guilty of treason, if you want to know the truth. That is President Trump yesterday who signed a memorandum directing the DOJ to investigate two people, including former Homeland Security official Miles Taylor, [00:00:33] over anonymous op ed and book he wrote criticizing Trump during his first term. Now, before we get into the details, I'd love to get your initial take, Jake. Yeah. So there's two guys here, Taylor and then Chris Krebs. Right? They're both outrageous in their own ways. I think Krebs is what they're doing in Krebs is even more outrageous. [00:00:52] He's the guy inside the Trump administration that said, yeah, there was no cheating. The 2020 election was real. And for that crime, they are now launching an investigation of him. This is exactly what an authoritarian state would do. [00:01:07] - But let's give you all the details. - Yeah. Miles Taylor served as the deputy chief of chief of staff in the DHS during Trump's first term and was a strong critic of the president, penning the infamous anonymous op ed piece in 2018 titled I Am Part of the resistance [00:01:24] Inside the Trump Administration. I work for the president, but like minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations. Taylor also then published a book titled A warning, again anonymously, the following year. Miles confirmed he was the author of both pieces in 2020, writing in a statement at [00:01:42] the time, when I left the administration, I wrote A warning, a character study of the current commander in chief and a caution to voters that it wasn't as bad as it looked inside the Trump administration. It was worse. While I claim sole authorship of the work, the sentiments expressed within it were widely held among officials of the highest levels of the federal government. [00:01:59] In other words, Trump's own lieutenants were alarmed by his instability. Trump was critical of the pieces at the time, but he decided to take retaliatory action against Taylor yesterday. Take a look at this video. Memorandum we have for you relates to Miles Taylor. [00:02:15] You may recall that Miles Taylor served in the Department of Homeland Security during your previous administration. What this presidential memorandum is going to do? One, it's going to strip any act of clearance that he has in light of his past activities involving classified information. It's also going to order the Department of Justice to investigate his activities, [00:02:34] to see what else might come up in that context, given his egregious behavior during your previous administration. And I had no idea who this guy was. He wrote a book, anonymous, and I always thought it was terrible. Now we have a chance to find out whether or not it was terrible, [00:02:50] but it was a it was a work of fiction. He had a lot of publicity, got himself a nice job with CNN or one of them. And I think we have to do something about it. You can't have that happen that happens to other presidents. They wouldn't it wouldn't be sustainable for other presidents. [00:03:08] And as you heard in the first video, Trump went so far as to accuse Taylor of treason, which is a capital offense for his work. In addition to Taylor, Trump signed a memo going after Chris Krebs, the former director of cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency. [00:03:24] Krebs in 2020 pushed back against Trump's bogus claims that the election had been fraudulent and was adamant that the nation's elections were not compromised. Let's hear from Trump directly on Krebs. Similarly, Sir Christopher Krebs, the former head of Cisa. [00:03:41] This is a man who weaponized his position against free speech in the election context and the context of Covid 19. This is another a similar presidential memorandum to the one you just signed. We're going to find out about this guy, too, because this guy is a wise guy. [00:03:58] He said, we can prove this is the most secure election in the history of our country. Now, this was a disaster. So, Jack, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this, but to me, I agree with you. Krebs, the Krebs situation is far more egregious [00:04:15] because this is a man just claiming facts and doing so in accordance with his job. Whereas while what he's doing in the other situation with Taylor is also pretty egregious, I think it's also, to a degree, understandable, you should, as president, be entitled, [00:04:33] at least in your own mind, to have the things you're working on within your own office not be leaked by somebody who's saying he's actively thwarting you from within the white House. So it in the twisted context of what Trump's reality would be, that makes more sense than going after a man doing his job. [00:04:50] Yeah. I mean, it's a low bar. What they're doing to Krebs is so unconscionable. Just Taylor being a little bit better situation than that. It doesn't help too much, but but I agree with you. Let's break it down. First on Taylor. So they say. But he leaked, right? [00:05:06] So weaponizing the Justice Department against him is not a bad thing. Well, first of all, guys, every administration has leaks, and and, by the way, not only negative leaks about the administration. Tons of positive leaks done within the administration. And that's usually rewarded. [00:05:22] And so and that happens under Republicans and Democrats. So there's always been a giant hypocrisy about that. Number two. We're talking about leaks of potential national security, information. First of all, I don't remember any national security information that Taylor, revealed. [00:05:38] But I do know there were top secret national security documents in a bathroom in Mar a Lago. But that's totally okay. That's totally if you're leaking all over, like, literally in a bathroom. Okay. That's fine. But if this guy does it, that's a problem. But if and it seems like a very broad investigation. [00:05:55] So there's tons of things that are wrong with it. But if it was just at, hey, wait, let's investigate what he leaked and was it classified or not classified? Okay, that's at least defensible. All right. So if they go beyond that, not defensible. And and I'm worried about what they're going to do in terms of, ramifications [00:06:14] of basically a political opponent here, nine out of ten times the government lets this go. But one out of ten times they don't. I mean, as Edward Snowden and Chelsea manning right now, those were actual national security, stuff. I think they were heroes for revealing that. But that's a different issue here. [00:06:29] I don't know that I don't remember much national security information. That was Taylor, revealed, but at least they have a leg to stand on to see if he leaked anything that was classified. Okay, now you move over to Krebs. No leg to stand on at all. They said he weaponized his position. [00:06:47] Trump asked, was there fraud in this election? He looked at all of the information. He's on the Trump team. He was appointed by Trump. He wants Trump to win, but he looks at the information and goes, oh, I'm sorry, Mr. President. There wasn't fraud. And so you did actually lose. [00:07:05] That's not weaponizing his position. That's just telling you what happened. And they're like how dare you say the truth. That's it. Justice Department investigate my political opponent. Well, he's not even your opponent, dude, you. You're the one who put him in charge in the first place. And so he had the crime of telling the truth. [00:07:22] Now, here we are in 1984, right? Truth is lies. Lies are truth. And so he was a wise guy. What does that mean? What is. He was a wise guy. I mean, so and if you, thought that, Joe Biden weaponized his Justice [00:07:39] Department against Donald Trump. Look, I don't agree, but, okay, let's grant it to you for a second. So is because I hear this. What? Aboutism all the time, right? Well, what about Biden? Okay, so now you say that's why we should also break the law. [00:07:54] We should also trash the Constitution. We should also weaponize the Justice Department against a guy who didn't do anything wrong, but do his job. You must be so proud if that's your principled position. Know what they're doing to Krebs is exactly why I voted against Donald Trump. [00:08:10] Because he doesn't respect the Constitution at all. Not 1%. And here he is now, using the Justice Department to carry out personal grievances against people who were telling the truth about him. What do you think about it? In Trump's defense, though, you can't be allowing somebody [00:08:28] to use truth to, you know, use truth basically as a weapon against the reality you invent in your own head. So I do understand Trump's perspective on that. The news of the investigation into Taylor and Krebs was not taken lightly has not been, to say the very least. Take a look at this. [00:08:45] So, Ellie, what does this mean for Miles Taylor and Chris Krebs? Well, look, it's big trouble for them. I mean, let's be real here, because Ordinarily, this is something a president would never do. Has never done, which is issue a formal proclamation saying, I order you, the Justice Department, to open a criminal investigation of these two individuals. [00:09:03] Now, what's missing from the proclamation is any evidence, any indication that either of these people committed a crime? You just heard some of the general language. If you look at the proclamations, the big accusation is they are, quote, bad faith players. But let me say. Wise guys, right? I mean, not a crime. [00:09:21] Here's the thing though. The ball is now in Pam Bondi's court, and she's shown us where her loyalties sit with the administration by her refusal to even look into the signal controversy. Even if she opens an investigation and finds no crimes, that's a big deal. Getting investigated is stressful. It's terrifying. [00:09:38] It's costly. It can damage reputations. So this is very serious. This retribution tour has gotten personal and very dark now. Very dark indeed. And others have chimed in on X, editor and CEO of The Dispatch. And NBC news political analyst Stephen Hayes [00:09:54] tweeted in response to Krebs outrageous. Trump is targeting by name a civil servant widely respected by both Republicans and Democrats. And he's doing so in service of his false claims, thoroughly and repeatedly debunked that he won the 2020 election. This won't stop here. [00:10:11] Tim Miller, host of The Bulwark podcast and MSNBC analyst, also wrote, this is madness. Chris Krebs was a public servant, a GOP appointee who did his job ensuring the 2020 election was secure. For our government to target him like this is appalling and stalinesque. [00:10:26] Any person who reveres our constitutional republic should speak out against it. But of course, the MAGA world will not, because their reverence for the Constitution is very rubber band esque as it bounces back and forth based on the way Trump tells them to feel about it based on his whimsical opinions. [00:10:44] Yeah. So last thing is, when does it cross over to authoritarianism? Well, step one is Trump saying, I would like to be authoritarian. I would like to imprison people who said that I lost the last election. Well, I got bad news for you, Donald Trump. 70% of the country thinks [00:10:59] you lost the last election. Another 30% have been massively lied to by you and right wing media. Donald Trump didn't come close to winning that election. Now, if we were to cheat as Democrats, etc., then why didn't they cheat in 2024? Why didn't they cheat in 2016? You could just get all the BS excuses. [00:11:18] Why didn't Donald Trump lose 61 cases in a row? BS excuses? No. In the reality based world. Look, Trump already won two terms. He's president right now. He's got another four brutal years ahead of him. Okay. For brutal for us. [00:11:36] Can you just let it go, guys? Trump and MAGA. He didn't win the 2020 election. No sane person thinks 61 court cases in a row, including Trump appointed judges, were all like, oh, we're in on it, or we're scared of black rioters. [00:11:52] Oh, no, he didn't win. He didn't win. Jesus Christ, man, what a bunch of sore loser crybabies, especially after he won in 2024. And he's currently the president. Okay, now, apparently, though, 70% of the country can get arrested and [00:12:09] investigated by the Justice Department. So Trump is already authoritarian. He's declaring, I would love to trash the Constitution, weaponize the Justice Department, and go after my political opponents and anyone who dares tell the truth about the 2020 election. [00:12:24] So that's exactly why I voted against him. Number two is Justice Department. The Justice Department is not supposed to be Donald Trump's personal attorney. They're supposed to actually represent the American people. No. Same Justice Department or decent or honest Justice Department would pick up this investigation. [00:12:40] Will Pam Bondi do it? Of course she will. He she was picked to serve Trump, not the American people. She will betray the American people. She'll violate her oath in office, and she'll do exactly as Trump orders her. That's step two. Step three is the most important step by far. [00:12:57] This eventually will get to the courts. So if they bring in Chris Krebs to a court and they say he stole, he said that Donald Trump didn't win the 2020 election. We want to throw him in a gulag, right? The courts have to say, get the f out of here. No, no you're not. [00:13:13] You're not going to let you arrest people and put them in jail because they accurately believe that Donald Trump won or lost the 2020 election. So I believe the courts will do that. I believe the courts will easily throw away these garbage cases [00:13:31] that are totally unconstitutional. But if the courts don't hold, then that's it. Then we've slipped into authoritarianism. And then, hey, everybody's fair game because the overwhelming majority of the country thinks he lost that election because he did lose that election. [00:13:46] What he's targeting here is not just his political opponents. He's targeting the truth. Because Donald. Trump hates the truth. He's a legendary, lifelong con man. He loves lying. He's a pathological liar. So. And he's so deeply insecure. [00:14:03] He's one of the weakest people I have ever seen in public life. So he's like, he can't deal psychologically with the fact that he lost. He lost the 2020 election and his thin skin knows no bounds. [00:14:19] Brother, you're the president. You're the commander in chief. Focus on the goddamn job instead of. My feelings were hurt in 2020. They thought I was a loser because you were. But it doesn't matter because you won this election. But no. Donald Trump's ego must be satiated. [00:14:37] Even if you have to burn the Constitution to do it. So exactly what we feared about Trump. And I only disagree with one thing you said. You said no sane person can believe that he actually won the election in 2020, in, in 2020. [00:14:52] And I just disagree with that unfortunately, because it, I know so many people who are sane and even very smart and even very well informed who believe there were irregularities, who believe there was something fishy about it, because it really just speaks to the power of persistent propaganda and consistent [00:15:10] lies, and the beating of the drum continuously from the people in power, and backed up by news networks and backed up by social media echo chambers where people just are not exposed to the truth. And so they start to believe all they really hear, and they hear a bunch of complete lies. [00:15:27] With an entire media system, both conventional and new media, that is just bombarding them with complete lies. And it becomes very hard for even rational people to see the truth. And that makes the problem a lot harder than saying versus not saying. [00:15:42] It's just we don't. We just truly, sadly, live in this post post-truth era now. Yeah. No, I, I actually totally agree with you, Ben. So I'll retract that. Because it's so frustrating because it makes no rational sense. [00:15:58] So I think, how could any sane person think that the all 61 court cases were somehow just all the Republicans in all those swing states, that all of them lied because they wanted they were in on it with Hugo Chavez and whoever else was supposed to be part of that plot. [00:16:15] It's just so unbelievable. But you're right. People get I mean, look, an enormous percentage of the country believe that Joe Biden was young and dynamic and was the best Democrat, to take on Donald Trump and would easily beat Donald Trump despite all available evidence. [00:16:32] So propaganda, in a sense, propaganda is driving huge parts of this country insane. Like insane, as in not living in the rational world. And so these bubbles are super thick. But you're also right. We shouldn't blame the voters on either side. [00:16:49] I don't look, I know that you, MSNBC told you that Joe Biden was young and that he had no mental problems, and they had a thousand excuses to cover up his obvious problems, like shaking hands with invisible people and not being able to complete sentences, etc. [00:17:06] And they got you to believe it. And for Trump, they, the right wing media, lied so thoroughly and then they had to pay 800. Like Fox News had to pay $800 million and admit that they were lying about the election. They admitted they were lying about the election. [00:17:21] But nevertheless, propaganda is the strongest drug on Earth. So let's take on the leaders like Trump and others. Let's take on the powerful. But for the voters, let's try to all snap out of it, get out of our bubbles [00:17:37] and try to join the rational, sane world. Every time you ring the bell below, an angel gets its wings. Totally not true, but it does keep you updated on our live shows.