Magical Mister Trumpstoffelees

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:00:00 Clip: You must never, ever give up or give in. You must keep the faith and keep your eyes on the prize. That is your calling. That is you mission. That is moral obligation. That is mandate. Get out there and do it. Get in the way. Change happens because people care. The people have the power to make this life free and beautiful. To make this live a wonderful adventure.

0:00:38 Clip: I still believe with all my heart, America can be a place where no child is left hungry, no community is left behind, and no one gets told they don't belong. Our country is always worth it.

0:00:58 Thomas: Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments. This is episode 1139. I'm Thomas Smith. That over there is my amazing wife, Lydia Smith. How are you doing?

0:01:05 Lydia: I am good I'm gonna be talking about theater today

0:01:07 Thomas: Wait a minute. Aren't you that voice I hear on Gavel Gavel this season? Sorry, just for anyone who hasn't checked it out, go check it out. You have episodes some to catch up on. For those who are caught up new episodes coming like within hours yeah just I have to polish up just a couple things and then you're getting uh some very interesting new episodes I hope you like them please check out gavel gavel uh yes back to this intro you were doing that I so rudely interrupted I was starstruck sorry

0:01:12 Lydia: Perhaps perhaps I am imminently yeah The theater is what I'm going to be talking about today. How does that relate to Trump, you ask? Well, two words. Kennedy Center. Yeah. Yeah, we haven't talked about it yet. I've been following it quite a lot. Of the teasers I'll leave the audience with before we dive into this is when this was coming down, when all of this mess was happening related to the Kennedy Center, I was. Trying to go onto their website and I was being held in a queue. That is not normal for the Kennedy Center.

0:02:08 Lydia: It was like, yeah, it was like I joked at the time. I was like am I buying tickets to Coachella? Like what's happening? I was stuck in a cue. They wouldn't let me into the website for a couple minutes because they couldn't handle the traffic.

0:02:08 Thomas: Websites had cues views. Like, look, a lot of people want to see this dumpster fire. Okay, ma 'am, you got to get in line.

0:02:24 Lydia: And it was literally I just wanted to look at the about us section to look like I got put in a queue for that.

0:02:31 Thomas: That's crazy.

0:02:32 Lydia: Yeah. Yeah, it is pretty crazy.

0:02:34 Thomas: It's Wednesday. I mean, we just went right into it, but that's okay. It's Wednesday, I Wednesdays. It's with a wild card plus T3B. So that's always my favorite.

0:02:36 Lydia: Did. I couldn't help it. Yeah yeah yeah. I'm the wild

0:02:44 Thomas: The wild card this week is Lydia Smith talking about the Kennedy Center. Yeah, that's something that there's so much crazy going on that I'm glad we're talking about this because I haven't gotten to keep up with it. And it's perfect. You know, us two theater folk. That's a great thing for you to talk on. What's going on with the Kennedy Centre? He's taking it over. It sounds absurd. I'm sure it is. We'll get to that. And of course, we'll have Heather on for Thomas takes the bar exam. You get another question, get the answer to last week's question. Hope I got it right. Maybe didn't I don't know we'll see uh then lydia will be back for those shout outs we always give our

0:02:44 Lydia: Card. Fingers crossed. Love

0:03:18 Thomas: Patrons a weekly shout out that's the agenda so we'll take our break you can avoid the ads at patreon.com/law if you'd like please support the show makes a massive difference uh so you're reason we can do this so thank you so much and after this break we'll get right to it okay yeah so I dream this so he did take over over a theater? What is this?

0:03:19 Lydia: It.

0:03:42 Thomas: What's going on?

0:03:42 Lydia: So on February 7th, he posted on Truth Social that he was going to be taking over the Kennedy Center and making himself chairman.

0:03:52 Thomas: Jesus.

0:03:52 Lydia: And his reason for the takeover was because they had drag shows that he said were targeting young people. And there was a drag themed show. Last year called Dragtastic Dress Up that was aimed at LGBTQ plus youth under 18, according to the marketing materials. And so that's what drove him crazy. On, you know, reporters asked him while on Air Force One, you this situation. And he said that the shows at the Kennedy Center were terrible quotes and were terrible.

0:04:23 Lydia: And then they asked, you Very cool. Then So the White House press secretary, Caroline Levitt, in a statement after all of this hullabaloo that, quote, the Kennedy Center learned the hard way that if you go woke, you will go broke.

0:04:40 Thomas: I don't really think that's what happened. Did they not sell enough tickets? Was that?

0:04:44 Lydia: Yeah, so they have a—Last year, they had a $268 million budget. They did run a $1 million deficit. Only 16% of that money comes from the federal government. The rest of it is from like ticket sales and donations. And

0:05:01 Thomas: Sounds like they're doing fine.

0:05:03 Lydia: They're doing fine. I would look at the Pentagon first if I were the federal

0:05:05 Thomas: Well, they were, yeah, yeah! How are their shows? Their musicals are crap! Have you seen them lately well

0:05:14 Lydia: Situation. That's not related to what we're going to talk about today. It's very sad. Then she goes on to say, Caroline Levitt, that, know, Mr. Trump and the board that he's going to appoint are going to rebuild a center, quote, where all Americans and visitors from around the world can enjoy the arts with respect to America's great history and traditions. When this came out on Truth Social, the Kennedy Center was like. What?

0:05:38 Lydia: They issued a statement pretty quickly that said.

0:05:37 Thomas: Yeah wait hold on what is the Kennedy Center you just said that it gets 16% of its budget from the federal government so then what it's not like like universities have that same thing it's like the government the president can just be like I own this universe look look at me me I'm the captain of this theater now two three four thing

0:06:00 Lydia: So the way that it works, it's a nonprofit arts organization. Right. Put on a variety of different. Art exhibits, shows, tours. Hamilton was slated to have a tour there for a bit. A lot of times will do like pre -Broadway runs of things. When they did a of Sideshow that was done at the Kennedy Center first, it got picked up for Broadway from there. I recently they the first production of Schmigadoon, which was translated from the TV show, which is very enjoyable, to a stage show.

0:06:34 Thomas: That was a delightful one

0:06:35 Lydia: Yeah. Yeah, I quite a few people in this this production, actually. And. Kennedy Center, though, was like were really confused because they were like, hey, we're a nonprofit. They are in Washington, D.C.

0:06:36 Thomas: Pudding

0:06:47 Lydia: Something that.

0:06:47 Thomas: The imminent domain it like what yeah

0:06:49 Lydia: It their statement, they said, throughout our history, the Kennedy Center has enjoyed strong support from members of Congress and their staffs, Republicans, Democrats and independents. Since our doors opened in 1971, we've had a collaborative relationship with every presidential administration. That time, the Kennedy Center has had a bipartisan board of trustees that has supported the arts in a nonpartisan fashion. And so like the board is made up of folks that the president can appoint. Made up. Yes, was authorized by the National Cultural Center Act of 1958. So the programming is sustained through private funds, but it is a public private partnership for the center itself. Viewed to be like the National cultural center.

0:07:14 Thomas: So it is a thing it's like a it's like an executive like what is it it so it's a national theater it is okay yeah

0:07:36 Lydia: After honestly, National Theater, man, I've been like doing all this reading about like McCarthyism and like the Dyes Committee and stuff and about like National Theater. The Federal Theater Project out of FDR's work and things like that. Happened was, you know, Trump made this proclamation, essentially, and the Kennedy Center was like, we haven't received any word from the White House. Have heard on the side that some of our board members have received emails dismissing them, but we don't know what's going on. No one's talked to us about anything. Did come to pass, essentially, pretty quickly thereafter. So ended up removing 18 board members and replaced a lot of his own people. So of those folks include Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Sherry Summerall, who is Susie's head of personnel in the White House and also Trump's publisher for some recent books, Sergio Gore, who somehow is younger than you and looks way older than you. It's very confusing. Trump's Sergio favorite singer Lee Greenwood the God bless the USA song or whatever it is called.

0:08:43 Thomas: My god I I, you know what, actually I'm, I'm on the other side. They, now my new, here's my new thing. Have to come up with an original musical and they have 48 hours. No, they could take it as long. As long as I now want to see them come up with art. Like I want to just see, I know they won't, they'll just do some other bullshit, but like write a musical together and perform it.

0:09:05 Thomas: Let's see it. Let's do that meritocracy at work. Oh

0:09:09 Lydia: Well. Yeah. Also have Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, who joined the board. Let's see, Robert Kraft's wife is on the board, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, his wife is the board of the Kennedy Center. Yeah, that's just like a smattering of folks. Then I mentioned, you know, that Donald Trump suggested, oh, maybe I'll be the chair. After convening this board via telephone, once they moved folks out and moved folks in, they did vote and appointed him chair. So, yeah, it is accurate.

0:09:44 Lydia: President Trump is the chairperson of the Kennedy Center and is replacing David Rubenstein, who has been chairman for quite a long time. And he's also like a significant donor for the Kennedy center.

0:09:43 Thomas: Incredible wow oh we'll stop that then is

0:09:58 Lydia: During his tenure, it was something like $120 million from him. It's an incredible amount of money from a single person. Fired the president, Deborah Rutter, months before she was set to retire. She was scheduled to retire in August. He let her go pretty much right away and installed his former ambassador to Germany and now a special envoy in the administration, Richard Grenelle Grenell, as president, no arts background, nothing like that. Gay. I think that's like maybe the reason why. But yeah, it's like you probably like this stuff.

0:10:28 Thomas: Trump like probably honestly like that he goes with like just stereotypes like that

0:10:34 Lydia: Yeah. Yeah, So he the chairperson. That's the new president. Those are some new folks on the board. Did not go over well, as you can imagine, when this came out. This is a remarkable seizure, honestly, of. Of what is thought to be, you know, like like supposed to be this this institution. Happened during the Schmigadoon run and Anne Harada posted on Instagram. She she was in the television show and she's also she reprised her role in the stage version as well. And she said, quote, Well, I'm glad I got to play here one last time. I'm so sorry, Kennedy Center, for the inevitable disruptions, maybe for the destructions. We'll never forget you.

0:10:46 Thomas: This is nuts wow

0:11:12 Lydia: Ominous. Yeah.

0:11:11 Thomas: Yeah I can't imagine any person worth anything continuing to like perform I mean maybe there's contracts or something but like yeah why would you want to do do anything there now even if they let you stay well

0:11:24 Lydia: I mean, Ben Folds has been he was serving in a role that was basically created for him since 2017 called the Artistic Advisor to the National Symphony Orchestra. He stepped down immediately. The second that this went out, he was like, OK, I'm gone. By. Shonda Rhimes was on the board. He didn't have to oust her. She ousted herself. She was like, no, thank you.

0:11:44 Lydia: We'll not be there. Renee Fleming was an artistic advisor at large with the Kennedy Center, opera singer Renee Flemming, and she withdrew from her position. Then I mentioned, you know, they host a lot of shows, concerts, events, and we saw double digits of cancellations related to this takeover. So Issa Rae canceled her upcoming show, and she cited concerns over... an infringement on the values of an institution that has faithfully celebrated artists of all backgrounds through all mediums. Canceled their run.

0:12:05 Thomas: Of the performers yeah if anyone didn't cancel I'd be furious at them like I I mean unless they had a really good explanation of something legal something I didn't like I'll obviously cancel there's no way you can't no artists that's the one thing they can't do they can'T make good art and they can't make you make good art they just can't it's like we cannot give that up much like as dumb as this whole thing seems and is I really mean that like that that's the one fucking thing that they can't do sure

0:12:50 Lydia: Did I see some examples of folks continuing on with their scheduled performances, but then like, you know, put on like anti -Trump clothing things like that. And like, yeah, yeah.

0:12:58 Thomas: Fine yeah finish your run or whatever yeah yeah but

0:13:03 Lydia: It's like been just over a month, essentially.

0:13:05 Thomas: Everything from then on out better be they came up with their own musical and they're going to put on tap shoes and they They're going to do the thing or Lee Greenwood and Kid Rock are performing their duo. And that's it.

0:13:15 Thomas: They can be Trump. Art that these people like comes from the left. It just does. Like pretty with the exception of some really shitty, corny music, everything else. There's no good right-wing fascist art. There just isn't. Good luck. Have fun.

0:13:28 Lydia: My gosh. You to play a video of, you know, post takeover when President J.D. Vance and his wife slash board member of the Kennedy Center, Usha Vance, attended an event at the Kennedy Centre. And what happened? You probably heard about it, but we're going to listen to it. The booing apparently went on for quite some time.

0:14:05 Thomas: What was anyone doing there I hope they went there just to boo I

0:14:12 Lydia: I think it was was a symphony performance of some kind. In response, Richard Grenell posts a thing on Twitter and he says, it troubles me to see that so many in the audience appear to be white and intolerant of diverse political views. Diversity is our strength. We must do better. We will not allow the Kennedy Center to be an intolerant place.

0:14:37 Thomas: They do is bash the version of a thing and say it's horrible, like diversity and all that. And then just the minute it's convenient, take it on. But a shitty version of it

0:14:48 Lydia: So many in the audience appear to be white and intolerant of diverse political views. Yeah. Now. Is actually happening in terms of diversity there? Well, they had a celebration of 50 years of pride that was scheduled for May. You know, World Pride 2025, kind of a big deal. And there was going to be this production called A Peacock Among Pigeons. Was canceled with like no reason given at all. They just pulled it from their programming. Also had a musical that was it had an initial run at the Kennedy Center. Critical success sold out called Finn. And it's about a young shark who realizes he relates more to smaller, gentler fish and figuring out like his place in the ocean. And to be like like really well done. And they were about to do like a tour of it. And Kennedy Center pulled that and said, no, you're not. The media has like, you a purely financial decision. And that's just not accurate because, again, critical success sold out their initial run at the center, won a Helen Hayes Award, pretty you prestigious theater award. So just none of it is making sense. It's like it's just so blatantly obvious what's happening here. Now we get to what happened. This week, we our first in -person board meeting at the Kennedy

0:14:51 Thomas: Kids God.

0:16:09 Lydia: Center. Yeah. Yeah, so I thought it'd be fun to play.

0:16:14 Thomas: There's a recording of it. Oh, yes.

0:16:15 Lydia: So someone managed to get some clips. I don't have all of it, but I do have some clips, so we're going to go through some of those things. And

0:16:22 Thomas: Fantastic. Oh,

0:16:25 Clip: All the best, Phantom of the Opera or Les Mis? Which one is the best? Phantom. Phantom is just so good. You

0:16:36 Thomas: Mean he's not wrong I do like that one better than lame is but okay but but is he saying like the best like like that's the that's the best musical I can't

0:16:44 Lydia: Also, there's going to be a Les Mis production there in like a couple months. So kind of a weird position to take. Then, you know, these are just little clips here and there.

0:16:54 Thomas: Believe this is real uh

0:16:56 Lydia: And then, continues you on to

0:16:59 Thomas: Play all these damn things so

0:17:00 Lydia: So he continues on thorn in his side, I guess, a little bit, because during his first administration, he to not go to the White House. And then, yeah, Trump just refused to participate in the following years of his presidency for the first term. So now he's talking about, like, remaking the Kennedy Center honors and what that might look like under their guidance.

0:17:15 Thomas: What

0:17:27 Clip: Know, you could do entrepreneurs. You could do people that, you know, that were really in charge of your business. You can do, I would say you could politicians, you can do sports stars.

0:17:39 Lydia: Kitty politicians.

0:17:42 Thomas: Let's honor the businessmen who come on god that's so good oh

0:17:48 Lydia: Steve Wynn is a very problematic figure and his wife is on the board. So, yeah, it's concerning. He mentioned, you know, like Babe Ruth might be a good person to to give a Kennedy Center honor to Pavarotti. Pavarotti has already gotten a Kennedy center honors award. Then he he moves on.

0:18:01 Thomas: He's dead I can'T believe believe he's doing this I can't believe he is taking time out of his golf schedule to to not be present by doing this yeah this is this is so pathetic and funny god what if and it just shows like how much they desperately need us and can't ever have us they're just can't it's I can'T what kind of person has the lack of self I'm not talking about trump like some of of these board members, I would, if somebody installed me as a board member of a thing that I didn't deserve, I'd be like, nah, like an iconic thing where all of a sudden now, like, if they're like, Hey, you were, a guy and you get an Oscar. I'd Be like, no, I didn'T do anything like that. I shouldn't be here. That's nothing. It doesn't matter that the statue would still be be there that's nothing

0:18:15 Lydia: Sit on an opera house stage. Yeah. Uh -huh. He continues with this Kennedy Center honors kick to talk about hosting.

0:19:01 Thomas: Here we go zero

0:19:03 Clip: In the past, I mean, these are radical left lunatics that have been chosen. I didn't like it. I couldn't watch it. And their host was always terrible. And believe me, I don't want to do it. I don' want to it. They got lousy ratings. And I will agree for zero to be the host. I do not want to. I have enough publicity.

0:19:29 Clip: They will say, Trump wants to be a host. But I do want this thing to be successful. And Maria, I think you would say, Laura, you would The king of ratings, right? Whether we like it or not, that king of readings. We're

0:19:28 Thomas: Must tell what jesus big zero must tell fan okay what is he saying I'll do it for zero for zero to be that what so he's saying he's gonna do it oh my god I just here

0:19:47 Lydia: Of ratings. Do it for zero. Yeah I know like like he'll he's gonna do it. Yeah then he gets into in the next one, he starts talking about the original cast of Cats.

0:20:14 Thomas: We got I can't wait I I can can't wait I love this so much fucking

0:20:19 Clip: Sitting there, and Betty Buckley starts singing. Now, Betty Buckling was the original. The original. Yeah. I think probably, I don't know, oftentimes it seems like Michael Crawford. Oftentimes it seems the original is the best, but I don' know. So we're sitting here, and then all of a sudden the lights go on, and you see these people moving so incredibly, like nobody can move except a professional dancer. And anyway, then Betty Buckly gets up and sings Cats. And the place went crazy.

0:20:23 Thomas: President everybody this is the president of our country yeah I'm is there a song in cats called cats really so she just say she starts seeing cats wouldn't

0:20:54 Lydia: There is not. No. Yeah. Yeah. No, she was Grizabella. So she was probably singing Memory. But yeah, not not a song called Cats.

0:21:05 Thomas: Know never heard or seen it yeah

0:21:06 Lydia: This isn't clipped in the audio. Unfortunately, I wish we had it. But he talked a lot about cats, actually. They have some quotes in The New York Times article that accompanies this where. He said, you know, when he he went to see it decades ago and he went into the musical with, quote, somebody I should not have been there with and that they were seated in the fourth row. Yeah. He said he was initially turned off by the sight of dozens of dancers lying on stage. He recalled thinking, quote. You've got to be kidding. Let's get out of here. But then he had a change of heart.

0:21:25 Thomas: My like, wow.

0:21:37 Lydia: Quote, I walked in, I saw all these bodies and then I noticed those bodies were gorgeous. They had silk tights on and they were all ballerinas and women from Broadway and men. And then he added, quote, I didn't find those particular bodies as attractive, to be honest. This is during a board meeting.

0:21:36 Thomas: Oh

0:21:56 Lydia: Yeah. And If there were any new musicals that were not, quote, totally woke because they're trying to figure out their programming for the Kennedy Center. And somebody said that.

0:21:55 Thomas: My God. I would watch a 24 seven streaming channel of this, of them just doing these board meetings. This is the best. It's so freaking funny. It is. I mean, look, we've been through a lot these past nine years, whatever of Trump. And this, this is the most, this, yeah, this is The Most. And there are many, I'm not saying this is like a distant most, but this is the most ridiculous brazil 1984 slash like all like like the great dictator every this is the greatest comic fascist bullshit I've ever heard in my life it's so good they all have to just listen to this adhd 12 year old child who has all the power in the world and has made himself king of this theater talk about his idea of theater and

0:22:27 Lydia: An SNL sketch, honestly. Yeah, mm hmm. I know.

0:23:00 Thomas: How reluctantly he'll be the host of the thing like it's what oh my god this is the best I love this please more please wait

0:23:09 Lydia: We're going to end it with the clips there. But I do want you to see when he took questions from the reporters.

0:23:14 Thomas: What's this last one I

0:23:15 Lydia: He's talking about marble. It's not.

0:23:18 Thomas: Don't care I want to hear it overruled

0:23:18 Lydia: All right. When he it's

0:23:20 Clip: You know, I think the IBM should be covered with some incredible stone, probably marble, but marble's a bad outdoor stone, but looks better than granite. But it should be cover, and we'll do that, we'll add that in, but it's not a small job. You've got a lot of them. But they're just sitting there, they're rusted steel, and it never made sense to me, but I think they ran out of money.

0:23:29 Lydia: A bad outdoor stove. Now we get I love for you to pull up this video and and tell me what you think about this visual. Trump speaks to reporters from the presidential box of the Kennedy Center.

0:23:57 Thomas: Oh my God he's

0:24:06 Clip: If you're ready, go ahead. What are the changes you're going to make? We're going make a lot of changes, including

0:24:10 Thomas: Uh this is this is okay this is incredible yeah

0:24:15 Lydia: Like if you guys can imagine, you know, like that Evita pose, if you know theater, like like that's what's happening. But you have reporters that in this echoey AF opera house that are trying to shout out their questions.

0:24:28 Thomas: It's like you're doing a high school production of Romeo and Juliet and the director's like, Romeo, I got to give you some notes. Come here. And then Romeo's got to stand there and you got to talk to him or whatever. Like it's just, it's, this is so silly. How are we doing? How much are we listening to it?

0:24:44 Lydia: Just a little bit. Yeah

0:24:46 Thomas: Yeah, sure.

0:24:48 Clip: The seats, the decor.

0:24:51 Thomas: Start singing. Please

0:24:52 Clip: Pretty much everything. Needs a lot of work. Mr. President, are you surprised by the reaction that the Vice President got here at the Kennedy Center the other day? I don't know about that. He's the most popular Vice President we've had in years. I don' know anything about it. I figured you'd ask a question. Mr President, what are we talking about?

0:25:12 Thomas: Do you bother? Why? What? I don't know what we're doing here. I'm having an existential crisis. This what it yes

0:25:22 Lydia: I feel like you can only laugh like when this is happening. It's like, it's insane.

0:25:26 Thomas: But some adult got goodbye to their wife and kids in the morning or put on some nice clothes, some professional clothing, and went into a theater to bark a meaningless question at this idiot, this This mindless old moron for no reason. Like it's, that's nothing that's serving no purpose. This is what are we all doing here? Just quit. Everyone quit. Everyone who's not a Republican quit.

0:25:31 Lydia: I know, I know. Just like don't cover him

0:25:54 Thomas: Don't do it. Yeah. Just don't do It. Find another job. Oh

0:25:54 Lydia: Anymore. Like it's it's nonsense. Yeah. Later on in the video, we don't have to keep playing it because it's also impossible to tell what anyone's asking or what he's saying. They ask him to pose for a picture and he literally does the Evita arms like it's he's like, oh, like this does this. Incredible pose. Yeah, it all seems insane. It is insane. He's always been trying to go after the arts, though. He tried in his first term, he tried to zero out the budget for the National Endowment for the Arts in two different budgets. Was not successful doing that. So now this is the next idea that he has is to just physically take over an arts institution. And it is such an authoritarian thing to do. Like this is something that happens in all like fascist regimes. Right. A New York Times op ed in 2017. as Hitler understood, artists play a distinctive role in challenging authoritarianism. Art creates pathways for subversion, for political understanding and solidarity among coalition builders. Art teaches us that than our own have value. Like the proverbial court jester who can openly mock the king in his own court, artists who occupy marginalized social positions can use their art to challenge structures of power in ways that would otherwise be dangerous or impossible.

0:27:13 Lydia: Think a very scary thing for anyone who's involved in the arts. I sit here and laugh because it's insane. And like listening to a board meeting with these people is insane and and honestly hilarious. But that broader implication is very scary, is very concerning. There was an interview with someone, an actor who's affiliated with like a long running show at the Kennedy Center who said that. Their show has not drawn the ire of the administration, but they have been advised by their producers. Like new jokes and stuff all the time to avoid politics, to not talk about the administration.

0:27:42 Thomas: Stop. Leave.

0:27:44 Lydia: Yeah, he yeah. Said he questions all the

0:27:48 Thomas: No. just do anti -Trump stuff and make them fire you. There's no you cannot participate sorry that's just there's not this is I've never felt so certain about something in my life like you can't take over the art when hitler takes over the theater you don't keep doing theater for hitler you just don't sorry this is this is so insane uh well I'm so glad that we snagged the time to cover that because I I really hadn't kept up with that because you there's so much but that was a delight it It was equal parts hilarious and horrifying. And I feel I weirdly, though, I've I've laughed so much I feel better. So thank you for that breakdown.

0:28:23 Lydia: You're welcome.

0:28:25 Thomas: We just have to figure out what's the the best one? Is it Les Mis or is it Cat? No, what was it?

0:28:29 Lydia: Phantom.

0:28:30 Thomas: Phantom or Cats? What's the best one?

0:28:33 Lydia: He only knows 80s musicals, by the way.

0:28:35 Thomas: Yeah. Oh, boy. Show's brought to you by NPR's Up First. News, breaking news, it's just constantly breaking news. I know we're all doom scrolling all the time. It's not our fault. There is so much doom, top quality, top shelf doom of to scroll upon, I don't know, upon which, I point is, I get it if you're over the news. That sounds like you, I I will say you might want to try the Up First Podcast from NPR. First frees you from the all -day scroll obsession by telling you everything you need to know in an easy 15 minutes. NPR's Up First provides the top three stories to start your day. With digestible 10 to 15 minute episodes, it's all the news you need so you can get back to your life feeling informed or, you know, get back Recently, I listened to one where they had Mahmoud wife on, which wife of that Palestinian student that we've talked about on this show. It's stuff like that. It's the top stories covered in great way that keeps you informed by being thorough, but somehow and short, which it's only, like I said, 10, 15 minutes, and it's a great way to start your day. Importantly, it's fact -based, which, you know, that's in your news. I recommend you check out the Up First podcast. You can start your a little little bit more informed. A little more in the know than when you went to sleep. Listen now to the Up first podcast from NPR.

0:30:05 Clip: Sometimes you eat the bar, and sometimes the bar will eat you.

0:30:11 Thomas: How are you doing this week?

0:30:13 Heather: I'm yelling objection at everyone I see on the street. You been asking people questions and then suggesting the answers to them as you've been talking?

0:30:23 Thomas: No, I see. But I was going out for a role in a play and the other person got the lead role. I was like, objection, leading. So I don't think I understand this concept correctly, if I'm being honest with you. But that's, I tried.

0:30:34 Heather: That's what we're here for.

0:30:35 Thomas: What was our question last week? Like,

0:30:37 Heather: We were trying to figure out, out of four choices, we're trying to which of the questions, not only which one we're leading, but which one would not be allowed basically in court. Our options were A, on direct exam of the victim, who was a six -year -old girl, the prosecutor asks, did the defendant hit you there? On direct examination of an eyewitness to an accident, plaintiff's counsel asks, was the light red when the defendant sped through the intersection? On indirect examination, counsel asks her own client, you live at 221B Baker Street, correct? Or D, on cross -examination of an expert witness, counsel asked, isn't it true that psychiatrists routinely prescribe medication for people suffering from depression? What we're trying to figure out. This And was an evidence question.

0:31:20 Thomas: You that's obvious in retrospect. But for some reason, I don't think of it as evidence. I It's didn't guess because maybe I would have guessed wrong. I might have guessed like proceed. No. Yeah, I probably would have gotten there. But geez, sorry. I didn'T try now because I could have failed and it would have been interesting. But no evidence. OK.

0:31:34 Heather: Yeah. And any time we're looking at things like objections or whether pretty much any time looking at admissible evidence or if something can kind of come in, a lot of times we're at evidence, especially when we're kind of looking at objections that will oftentimes be an evidence question. And our issue is the call of the question actually tells us was it says objection leading. It actually tells that we're specifically at the leading category of objections. Oftentimes when we get questions like this, it tells us that there are three, oftentimes what it's telling us is that there three that are allowed and then one that is not. In this case, it actually tells us we've got three questions that are leading and actually all of them are leading. These are all leading questions and I'll explain how it happens. One of is going to be the one that is most likely to not be allowed in the courtroom.

0:32:23 Thomas: Of them is the murderer. We'll gather the four question options around the room and tell a long story. The end of which is the leading question being the the one who did it and I thought a quite odd question question b that you happen be in the same location with the yeah no go through a long I monologue the

0:32:25 Heather: It's the murder. Sorry, I've been watching traitors lately. Is leading questions generally are, well, I'll say this. Leading questions are ones, just to clarify, in which as you're asking the question, you're basically suggesting the answer or you're suggesting to the witness the fact that you expect them to confirm. I'm asking you a question and I want you to basically, I'm telling you the answer and I don't allow those types of questions. So like if I'm you onto the witness stand, I generally can't lead you on with the questions. For the purposes of the bar exam, we generally want to hear open -ended questions on direct. So if I'm asking you a question about a topic that's at issue, let's go back to last week's question. We've got tortious assault. I'm going to ask you some open -handed questions. So tell me about why you were at the bar on Tuesday, why you're at Hops and Hatchets. And that's kind of a good way to kind of start.

0:33:34 Thomas: I did it I killed him gosh she's a tough she's a tough questioner I don't know I fold it yeah

0:33:41 Heather: Instead, leading questions are going to sound like, right, the answer choices that we have. And it would sound a little bit more like, so you threw the ax at Oscar's head, right? If I'm asking that on direct exam, that's disallowed, generally. We'll apply that way of thinking and go through the answer places. And we'll kind of explain some of which of the types of leading questions since I did kind of distinguish between direct and I didn't say anything about cross, I can start talking a little bit about cross. Right. There's no restriction on the use of leading questions during cross for purposes of the bar.

0:34:06 Thomas: Very

0:34:16 Heather: We can start there. So with answer choice D on examination of the expert witness, this is generally going to be allowed. Is asking, isn't it true that psychiatrists routinely prescribe medication for people suffering with depression? That's usually okay on cross, right? Because you're asking a lot of times on cross -examination, at least for purposes of the bar, you're actually asking a leading question on cross. Asking questions in which what you want, yes.

0:34:40 Thomas: You're trying to get the person who's not your witness to say the thing that you want and I I almost had it except that like I did think there was some line there but I guess not oh

0:34:49 Heather: You that's how we eliminate D is because this question is going to be allowed.

0:34:52 Thomas: Even noticed it, but I just, yeah. Okay, that sucks.

0:34:57 Heather: Then that brings us to C, which is on direct when counsel is asking their client about the place in which they live. You had said you thought, oh, well, this seems like information that you can about it might be leading, but it's okay because it's basic information and you'd be correct. So on direct examination, you are allowed to develop a witness testimony. So when you have preliminary background information that's not in dispute, like a witness's address, it's OK to lead them through this information because we don't have all the time in the world. Because if I ask you, let's say, again, let'S go back to last week's question. We're talking about the assault and I start to ask you. Tell me about where you live. And you're like, oh, my house is white. I have trees in my front yard. We're going to be here forever. So that's why it's okay to ask a question like this, a leading question in which you can affirm the answer. You were a right to eliminate C. then we're down to A and B. And talking a little bit about A, about with the question was trying To get folks to infer, is that we're somewhere, whether it's, you know, criminal or whether it civil, we've got a kid, we got a young child who's been injured and we're trying to Get this victim to sort of develop some of their testimony around that particular incident. What we do know is that on direct, you're allowed to ask leading questions of witness who has difficulty communicating. And when they have difficulty

0:36:14 Heather: Communicating related to their age or mental or physical condition, right? Because people sometimes still need help, especially in the high pressure situation, like being on the stand and that sort of thing. And here

0:36:14 Thomas: Which sucks. Cause that's also the prime situation for like putting words in someone's mouth that aren't actually, you know, like it's very easy to like things to a kid that they might, take you on. So that's weird. It makes sense, but also I could see that being kind of a problem.

0:36:38 Heather: Yeah, absolutely. And I'll just make a quick note. Now, this is not related to the bar exam, but depending on where you are, sometimes you'll have access to a victim's advocate who can sit with you. They can't help you with your testimony, but they can definitely help and be like if you need to take a break or. Off for a minute or they can help you maybe give you like a doll to hold or something like that to make the process not easier because that's not a thing. Like it, a I little bit more manageable or help manage some of that trauma around the situation. There's definitely some courts will have access for that kind of a resource to have a victim's advocate.

0:37:11 Thomas: I yeah, I didn't capture how this question was going. Which is really interesting to hear you say. So, so for all of these to be leading is definitely fascinating. I think what threw me off was B, I really felt like B is a different objection and I'm obviously we can wait till we get to that, but I think that threw me Off. Cause then I think if I hadn't thought that I probably would have of picked up on the fact that they're all leading. And that's interesting. So they're all leading, but then there's different ways that it's kind of fine, which So A is out because with a six-year-old, yeah, it makes sense. That's, yeah,

0:37:42 Heather: And then that leaves us with B, right, on direct exam of an eyewitness to an accident. The plaintiff counsel asks us, was red when the defendant sped through the intersection. And what that's trying to do is tell us that part of whether or not the light was red and then the defendant was speeding, that's kind of what's at issue. That's sort of the thing that we're trying to avoid is on direct leading the witness to an answer about that issue. Don't want to do that. Direct. And that's exactly what's happening here.

0:38:13 Thomas: I really think what got me is it feels like it's a compound question. Cause if you asked, was the light red? I mean, that might be technically leading, but probably I can't imagine would be objected to. Cause it's pretty simple to be like, no, it's great. Like it's two options. I don't know. But like, was it a light red when they sped through? Like, I felt like that was a, you but I didn't think leading was the objection. I really thought that there was some other kind of objection. Is there anything I'm thinking of that makes sense there? Or am I just fully out a limb?

0:38:39 Heather: No. You're right. To your point, there's different types of objections that can make. And compound is one of them because when you're in that particular instance, you're asking two or more questions at the same time.

0:38:50 Thomas: Yeah, because you'd almost be asking, was the light red? And also, did they speed through the intersection? Or did they, you know, were they driving at a normal speed? Or were they, You know, like that kind of thing. It felt like two questions to me. Thought as a test taker, a of a prank would look as a test takER. I'm here trying to avoid the pranks. And it's it's I've developed a lot of skills around it. And when I see a question that's which of the following questions is most likely to be disallowed in response to objection that is leading a helluva goof would be to put in an answer that's an objection, but not leading, which is totally normal bar exam behavior. Like we get this with other types of stuff all the time where it's like, Ooh, they're kind of tricking you because it's this, but it's not the right thing or an objection that's like the, to a conclusion because I just thought asking when they sped through the intersection was a tough one like um asking a witness a conclusion that they're not necessarily like not if they're not a cop who had a radar gun on them then like theyre not gonna I felt like that was an unfair way to characterize that, but maybe the best fit for an objection was leading. And I was just kind of seeing that weren't, quite weren't as good of a fit. I don't know.

0:39:53 Heather: The objection you were looking for there was speculation, right? When you're asking someone to speculate about something that they might not have knowledge of or expertise in. Does that sound right?

0:39:59 Thomas: Possibly. Yeah yeah.

0:40:02 Heather: Because there's a whole host of objections, and one of them that can come up on the bar exam is speculation. When you are asking, I think more specifically, you are calling for a conclusion that the witness isn't qualified to make.

0:40:12 Thomas: Conclusion. I think that was it. Yeah I was thinking conclusion. I think I even said something about conclusion I knew there was something in my rattling around in my brain when I see sped I was thinking of speeding in the legal sense but but maybe that was like I kind of messed up because they were just saying speed in like a general sense and it wasn't necessary because like if I look up conclusion, it says a question that calls for a witness to make a conclusion, which is the job of the judge or jury. Through the intersection really read to me like you're asking them to conclude that they were breaking the law but second chance bar exam came in strong. You know, at least I recognized that was going to be the one if I got it wrong. So, Hey. There you go.

0:40:49 Heather: Heck yes.

0:40:51 Thomas: Well, that brings me down to a 62.07, but you know, 36 strong. You know, back in the day, 60 was what I was going for. And I don't know if the questions have gotten easier or if I've gotten better. I don't know.

0:41:01 Heather: If it's a little bit of both?

0:41:02 Thomas: I'd rather just be one. There's one that I would firmly rather be. I don't know, but

0:41:05 Heather: Listen, listen, I prefer, me too, listen me too. I Listen, have my suspicions it's one of those things.

0:41:10 Thomas: You're like me too, but also I've made the questions easier because let's face Jason.

0:41:14 Heather: Absolutely, listen absolutely not. I am not capable of doing that.

0:41:17 Thomas: This one was, tricky was for me, but I lawyer, for anyone who would have seized on that cross-examination thing better than I did, I think this would have been pretty easy. I think, I Think that really was the key. Maybe that, I wonder how intentional that is. I don't know. Like if, if it's It's like, a bit ambiguous, but then by, knowing enough to firmly eliminate the other ones, that's part of like able to to arrive at the right answer. Maybe that is kind of what it, rather than just like, oh, you, you recognize the right Answer, because you know the law well enough, you know what I mean? What do you think about that?

0:41:44 Heather: I think that... what you said, because I think a lot of times in the test scenario, especially, it's are times when it's hard to get to that exact right, to go, oh, I go from the call, the question, to the fact pattern, and then go right to the right answer, because that's often... can often often get it down to two, and then you're trying to figure out between the two questions. And to be frank, it's really hard because

0:42:04 Thomas: It's an interesting test creating thing that I never really explicitly thought about, which is like, normally you'd think about, you might think about a test as, as like, what uh, was the name of the guy? Like, it was a history test or something, you Know, who's the guy who led the fucking in the a 17a whatever yeah and it's just like a different names and you're like I know the right one it's that one whereas like with something like this it can be like well and look maybe I'm just full of shit this is obviously leading that's entirely possible and like if like if its ambiguous but then the the the other component of the test is knowing firmly enough that the other ones can't be it you I say that like I feel like that's probably an explicit like test making strategy like it kind of makes sense yeah

0:42:16 Heather: Fact recall. Yeah. Yes. And to your point earlier, too, that's part of what I try to explain to students. That's part why doing these questions is so hard is because it's not just what you're used to in terms of fact recall. Your Oh, a lot more complicated than a lot of what

0:42:54 Thomas: No yeah I don't mind him being hard yeah it's just like I want to always feel like I know what went wrong and now I I feel Like that makes sense now

0:43:01 Heather: Yeah And I'll also add to that. I think what complicates sometimes things like this is like media, like gets a lot of stuff wrong wrong, or as it relates at least to the bar exam. And so like, what'll happen is that like a lot leading questions will come up like on a direct exam, like on TV shows, like in a movies and you're like, Oh, is that how it works? And it's like, no, you know, for the bar. And then you have that in your, well, I had that, I've had that in my mind. What my professor would do is that she would, as she was teaching us evidence, she would play clips from popular movies and TV and be like, sometimes she'd be like this is a great example of how this works. And then sometimes she'll be like This is exactly how it does not work. And so like, I would have that in my mind. And see, that's really smart. Know what you're doing?

0:43:36 Thomas: That's awesome that's what we try to do with the show yeah almost think it goes the other way for me which is like I don't watch a lot of law stuff other than already with a lawyer telling me why it's wrong. So okay. Learned a lot. That was a great question. I love it too, because it's like one sentence, you know, a question is only one sentence that must be nice and refreshingly easy it's like no it's even harder than yeah let's gather gather today's winners who hopefully did better than I did on this one. Don't I start with Blue Sky? We had a handful of players and I don't know what's in the water over on Blue Sky but all incorrect answers including someone, this is a lesson of why to maybe not come in so hot. Someone said, holy shit, Thomas, you really dropped the ball. Don't you have kids young kids are very impressionable and they'll tell you what they think you want to hear and that's uh saying answer a but yeah no I I know kids are impressionable that's definitely not the right answer though so maybe don't come in so hot um

0:44:36 Thomas: I guess if I were to pick the best, I'd say Quintopia said we can eliminate D because leading is allowed on cross. Okay. So they got that.

0:44:43 Thomas: I'm with you that no one cares about confirming an address. So not C. Okay, so close. I am leaning toward A because it's focusing on the witness getting hit in a particular place and obviously less suggestive question would be where did the defendant hit you and yeah uh the last step that that messed up there so Quintopia closest best answer on blue sky but I wanted to shout out blue sky follow open args on blue guy uh done better luck next time hey to me as well I got this one wrong too so heather why don't you tell us who the reddit winner is

0:44:42 Heather: I yeah uh sandwich time who's a frequent flyer we really like uh and there's not a really great discussion again over on

0:45:15 Thomas: Always sandwich time all

0:45:15 Heather: Reddit Yes, listen. Answer was, these are all leading questions to some degree, so we need to pick the most egregious. And that was exactly the task. So it's sandwich time, totally nailed it. They also continued with, to me, that's B. It's leading the witness to say that the defendant not only disregarded a red light, but was speeding through the intersection. It is reasonable to assume that this is a critical aspect in the case, not some trivial issue like some of the other choices. Correct. Regarding A, I think a judge would allow some leeway when a child is testifying on direct. Also correct. For D, when you were cross -examining an expert. For C, if the other lawyer objected to a question as trivial as a witness's address, I would not only overrule, but they would instruct the bailiff to smack the lawyer upside the head.

0:45:57 Thomas: Right well well done there um yeah definitely this This was a hard one. A lot of people got it wrong. Need to now go to patreon.com/law where we had some correct answers, but also a lot of wrong ones and a lot of participation, which I love. Thank you folks so much.

0:46:10 Heather: Love to read the conversation between people, too, when they're like, oh, well, this is what I was thinking. Oh, well. This is what I was thinking or oh, I had this kind of a question. Yeah Yeah

0:46:18 Thomas: Think I'll pick two winners. Fireball old fashions. Oh yeah. Recent winner. Answer is B. There's a prejudicial coloring of the question by saying, was the light red when the driver ever sped through. The word sped and saying it happened as a matter of fact feel very wrong. A doesn't feel great, but also doesn't feels very out of bounds. Being a non -lawyer, I wonder if you should have to establish the defendant hit her before asking where. C feels very matter of fact. Maybe it's better if counsel asks her client where he lives, but doesn't seem like a huge deal. D is weird because I don't know if you can lead someone when you're cross -examining. Yeah, no, that's a good non - lawyer nailing it. And I'm going to give our biggest winner at patreon.com/law to Tom Evans, who said, oh no, Thomas had the right idea, but rootied it at the last minute.

0:47:00 Thomas: All the questions are somewhat leading, but D can be ruled out as it is cross -examination. So it's not helping the witness. C is not going to be a problem unless in some extremely unusual situation, the case turns on the client's ability to know their own address. Yeah, maybe like a memory loss situation. A is more likely to be problem, a problem than C, But the context may be that hitting was already established and the fact that the witness is a young child will mean she needs more help to understand the question clearly. B is the most likely to be ruled out because it's an adult and an eyewitness, which makes the power of suggestion especially hazardous. And it suggests the answer in two different material ways, red light and speeding. And that is why I thought it was a compound question or whatever, but that's okay. Tom Evans wins. Thank you also so much for playing. A lot of people nailed it. Lot it. Of people played and a few got it right. So this one makes me feel a little better that I got it wrong.

0:47:53 Heather: And your second chance answer too, right Germany

0:47:55 Thomas: Rather just get it on the first chance. Why don't, I see, if I, can do that with question, 63 after this break? Right, Heather, lay it on on me. Here we go. I'm going to get it. We're doing it.

0:48:07 Heather: Was a defendant charged with arson and she pleaded not guilty Immediately before trial began she fired her defense attorney and decided to represent herself

0:48:17 Thomas: False, wrong, bad move. Is that the answer? Did I win?

0:48:20 Heather: Yeah, you won. Question over. Opening arguments, Allison got up and galloped like a horse, as the other people in the courtroom. No one else raises the issue of Allison's competency to stand trial, is the responsibility of the trial judge?

0:48:26 Thomas: Now, hold on. Now she, wait a minute. Now, she might have me back. Back in her corner. What an impossible question, but I love it. I am going to give it wrong, but it will be delighted along the way.

0:48:46 Heather: A. The trial judge must raise the issue because Allison is representing herself. The trial judge must raise the issue of competency because the Constitution obligates the judge to do so. The trail judge has no responsibility because Allison decided to defend herself. Or D, the travel judge has not responsibility because he cannot decide whether Allison is competent to stand trial.

0:49:10 Thomas: Oh my gosh. What a, what a question. I absolutely love it. Off, what is this? It seems to be criminal law, but it also feels like it's a something else, but I guess I was going to say civil procedure, but we're definitely in criminal and I could almost see some sort of constitutional issue, but I think we're gonna have to just say criminal law and procedure. I think think that probably is the best fit okay so we're in horse court and played it not guilty immediately before trial began she fired her defense attorney and decided to represent herself opening arguments she got in and galloped like a horse as well as neighing at the other people in the corner okay if no one else raises the issue and I don't know who would would think in a just world the uh you know the state this whoever's prosecuting would be like uh maybe this is an issue we should raise but no they wouldn't because they always want to just give everybody the chair uh for for arson um so she's not going to raise it and I've never thought about this if you're first off if you want to go pro se you should probably Just be declared incompetent to stand trial because that's a terrible decision. If you go pro se, then I think the logic of, well, the attorney needs to raise the issue of competency to stand trail if the person who's standing trial is incompetent. Like, imagine if instead of galloping like a horsey, she's just, I don't know, incommunicative or I don'T know. I could imagine something relating to that. I guess if something happened to her, then she, as her own lawyer, can't defend herself. So it does feel like that logic would mean there has to be some exceptions here. There has to Be some way to handle this. Can a judge just raise an issue? Okay, let's go through it. This is, man, I do not know. I feel am leaning toward a judge doing it, but it also seems like a very weird thing. So I guess the judge could say, you I have concerns about the competency stand trial. So then they what? Do they have the prosecution, like, grab an expert witness? Like, how do you evaluate that? Is there a court -appointed psychiatrist, I guess, or something? Mean, I Guess that could make sense. I guess The Judge could do that. Right, let's see. A, the trial judge must raise the issue of competency because Allison is representing herself. I think that is a good guess. I think A is a solid possibility. Logic is sound. So therefore, if she's incompetent or whatever, then she's not going to do that right anyway. So therefore she won't have the ability to raise the issue. So I think a is solid. B, the trial judge must raise the issues of competency because the constitution obligates the judge to do so. Think it's a trick because it sounds more law -y. In a way you could say all of this boils down to the Constitution in some way, but know, there's certainly no clause in the Constitution about this unless I've really missed some of it, which I have, but I donT think I've ever heard of this. Of think not B. B IS A TRICK. Like, see, the trial judge has no responsibility because Allison decided to defend herself. That I think is trick wording because it's possible that the judge might have no responsibility, but it wouldn't be because Allison decided to offend herself. It would be because that's just not how judging works. Works. Like this would imply that if Allison had a lawyer, then the judge would have responsibility to raise it, which is not true. So I think C is just bad wording, not true, let's look at D. the trial judge has no responsibility because he cannot decide Allison is competent to stand trial. Well, I don't really think it's that either. Either. Can't decide. That wouldn't really decide. Don' t think that makes sense. Think that, you some sort of medical professional might be doing the deciding. I imagine maybe there's still a fight over that. Maybe, like, I d n't know how this works, actually. It the kind of thing where you have, like an expert on either side, and then the judge decides between the two opinions? Or is there something known as, like a court appointed psychiatrist. He's just job. It is to like, have that, you know, make that determination. Don't remember, but either way, I don'T think the that trial judge having no responsibility is based on not being able to decide whether Allison is competent to stand trial. Even if, yeah, I DON'T, I Don'T like that wording. Cause it's like, even if for some reason, someone else is doing the deciding, that could mean the judge still has a responsibility to just give it to that other person. If it's like a, I don't know, a psychiatrist or something. I don'T think that's necessarily how it works, but just the wording doesn't logically make sense there. So I'm, I'm definitely against C. I'm pretty solidly not B. - I think A is my answer. I think I'm deciding between B and D for my second chance. There a chance I'm just forgetting something about the Constitution? Don't I know. I don' t think it's B. honestly don't think D is even a very good second chance answer, but I think I will go between A and D, but solidly A is my final answer. It makes sense that the judge would have to do this. I'm trying to think if I was wrong about this. C is such a a nice, tricky, attractive one because it seems like, oh, that's great because Allison decided to defend herself. That can't be the reason that the trial judge has no responsibility. That just can't. That doesn't make any sense. Maybe I'm between A and B, honestly. I just don't think D is very good at all. There's some chance that the wording makes more sense. I know. But yeah, I think I'm Between A and and B, and I'll go with A. final answer, I think it is that the trial judge must raise the issue of competency because Allison is representing herself. Right. Well, if you'd like to play along, you know how to do it. Go to blue sky, find open args, you or can also go to reddit .com slash r slash open arg. Or best of all, go to patreon .com slash law and get the mostest, the bestest shout out. Thanks to all who are playing. It's a lot of fun. We love reading your answers.

0:54:58 Heather: Well, and I don't know about you, but I'm going to be playing horsey for the next week.

0:55:03 Thomas: To that, I say nay. Right. Thanks for stopping by as always. And we'll get the answer next week. Horse sound effect. I see it.

0:55:11 Heather: We will. I just keep thinking from Monty Python when he has the coconuts.

0:55:20 Clip: Thank you for being, say we started from the bottom, now we're here, girl.

0:55:29 Thomas: All Now only one thing left to do, which is to thank our patrons, and uh, of course Lydia is back hasn't stopped laughing this whole time that she was gone about this board I want more board just give me more board meeting footage or audio any of it I'll take a a podcast that's that oh

0:55:42 Lydia: I know, I know. C-SPAN. Does it have to be on C-SPAN because it involves the president?

0:55:51 Thomas: It doesn't have to be but it could I

0:55:55 Lydia: Don't know. Sunshine laws. I don' know.

0:55:57 Thomas: Gotta love it all right but we've got to thank our patrons I'll start by thanking the new patrons at patreon .com slash law this week thank you to silver hand amber graham and sarah maurice brubaker thank so much for joining on hope you enjoy the goodies and the warm fuzzy feeling of supporting the show and And not hearing ads. Of course we've got to thank our hall of famers our all -time greats these are the amazing folks who pledge at that five dollar level and above for at least a month over on patreon .com slash law and they get a shout out every week they can change their name they can not change their aim it's up to them so thank you too I tap two blue two white and two men of any color to summon Azor the Law Bringer to the U.S. Supreme Court nice magic the gathering joke yeah so and summon anyone anyone who does a lot of damage summon them to the supreme court please yeah what what lands are blue and what lands are white

0:56:32 Lydia: Say whatever. Lands. Island. And... I donno. White? I dono. What is it?

0:57:03 Thomas: White lands yeah planes and Casey Khan thank you democracy cannot survive unregulated capitalism Alvin Bragg should indict Eric Adams yeah James H two corgis in a trench coat Quote, cyanitis. Disappointed in the number of businesses capitulating to fascism. Yeah. As I've said before, some of them are just they like it.

0:57:17 Lydia: Please. You know, actually, the San Francisco Pride Festival just lost like major corporate sponsors. A bunch just pulled out. So they're like they don't know how they're going to fund it right now.

0:57:38 Thomas: Man, thanks for bringing that bummer to us right now, hun. Ward, Fourth Circuit attorney reluctantly changing her font. And gender are different things. Apprentice of adventure. Vehicular man's laughter finally shifting gears on edit preferences to to navigate sharp turns on the road of life. Sell your Tesla. I think, look, we are not selling our Tesla, especially at this bad time to do it. But I was thinking the other day, maybe it'll be my first ever bumper sticker purchase. Like maybe we should buy the ones that are like him. That or I want to like if it weren't so offensive, I would love to get the one of him jumping in the Nazi symbol

0:57:40 Lydia: Sorry. Yeah, Toyota. Oh,

0:58:17 Thomas: But or just anyone that's that says uh you know screw that guy essentially we'll see still rooting for the hamburgers to deliver more timely justice than the current system unfrozen came in lawyer Nick Fish phallus tark A Negative Phenomenon cavalri irregardless of anything Ovechkin is only eight goals from the record yeah he didn't no no that can't be right he scored well here's the thing we've got it we've We've got a bit of a discrepancy here because I don't know if he's saying eight goals from breaking the record or, you know. Yeah. So that's that's the problem, because did score one on the Sharks. It was actually it was great. It was fantastic. Let I think it's eight eight more to beat the record right now so he's seven that's been the wording thing he's seven goals from the record I guess to tie it and eight goals from owning the record the other cool thing is if he does it like gonna be close but he actually could end up doing it in fewer games than Wayne Gretzky which is insane but it's going to be close he has to like really like get on it he only has a few more left. Crazy. Anyway, (You Gotta) Fight For Your Right (To Ex Parte). Jaysank, excuse me. I believe I was told we can't have gun control to prevent tyranny. Yeah. It is by the juice of Sappho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, and the stains become a warning. I think that is Dune. I guess. I don't know. I'm not sure. I mean, I don' know. Someone said I

0:58:40 Lydia: Score against the Sharks. Oh tying. Interesting. Wow. Listen,

0:59:36 Thomas: Was right about that. Let's see.

0:59:37 Lydia: I just feel like I need a more dramatic reading from you next time on

0:59:41 Thomas: I finally changed my name for real, legally E.T. what did we decide oh oh in the winky face that's right yeah and Thomas Freeman your turn

0:59:47 Lydia: .T. Winky Face. Right. Thank you to Cajunkilla. Fraud Fishy Hates Everything. Chris Simpson. Love the extra episodes. Gun -owning liberal who knows that root cause mitigation and gun control are both important. Gun control works. See Australia. This isn't a Patreon name, and I'm not reading anything right now. I just personally think Legal Eagle is so handsome. Schultz. The Cincinnati Kid. Bob Loblaw's Law Podcast. Philly Basement Bar is back open and isn't taking the shit lying down. Elect Thomas Smith President, American Honkytonk Bar Association. Baltakatei. Philip Kizer. A hung jury is great for them, but I don't see what genital size has to do with a verdict. Hors d'oeuvres in the court before we report. Coryn_Lann. A string of unpronounceable characters. Milo Meadsong is fighting petty tyrants. Malaika Chandler. Malcolm the Dragon, the precious variant. RhondaTheDork.com. Big Easy Blasphemy. FRED R GROOTHUIS. Chris Waltrip. Classic Lib Tard. And Mitchell!

1:00:53 Thomas: Congrats, thank you so much patrons, you're the best, and thanks Lydia for the breakdown and the shout outs. That's all folks, we'll see you for a rapid response Friday. And don't forget to check out Gavel Gavel. Thanks for listening

1:01:04 Clip: This podcast is a production of Opening Arguments Media, LLC, All Rights Reserved. It is produced and edited by Thomas Smith, who also provided the fabulous intro and outro music used with permission.

1:01:22 Thomas: Sorry. I didn't try now because I could have failed and it's always an interesting grab bag.

1:01:24 Lydia: Overture for these folks. Doing theater references.

1:01:29 Thomas: What?

1:01:30 Lydia: Overture for this, but I'm just diving straight into the book that like the intro. OK, anyway, cut it.

1:01:32 Thomas: I'm trying to, oh, what I don't know. I see where your head's at. Look, I didn't get it, but that could have been me. I don't know.

1:01:44 Lydia: It's fine. Eli will get it. He will. Eli, I'm expecting your message.

1:01:53 Thomas: After I send this to him and, yeah, he doesn't listen. No, maybe he does, actually. I don' t know. Pudding

1:01:57 Lydia: Wednesday.