In this lively discussion, guests Dave Rubin and Tim Pool, both notable right-wing commentators, dissect recent developments in political scandals. They humorously address the indictment of two Russian operatives linked to funding their work. The conversation dives into the absurdity of claims regarding their worth, touching on themes of misinformation and media ethics. Amidst legal updates involving Donald Trump, they explore the implications of foreign influence on American media and politics, highlighting the complexities of modern journalistic integrity.

The answer for T3BE37 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

This episode features Alec Baldwin, a prominent actor entangled in legal battles following a fatal incident on his film set, and Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the film's armorer. They discuss the tragic shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and the legal implications that ensued. Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer provides insight into the dismissal of the case, sparking debates on prosecutorial conduct and celebrity accountability. The intricate dynamics of evidence handling and courtroom strategies are explored, raising ethical questions for both legal representation and the film industry.

OA1064 One angry Matt brings us two stories from this week’s news: After taking some time to think about the Supreme Court’s decision that former US presidents can’t be prosecuted for anything involving--or in any way touching on--”official acts,” special counsel Jack Smith has returned to a grand jury to obtain a superseding indictment in his DC prosecution of Donald Trump. How has he retooled the charges relating to the January 6th conspiracy? How much weaker will this case be without the many federal government witnesses who would otherwise have been called, and what happens next? Here’s something everyone should know: AGs in 16 red states are now taking a bold and principled stand against--and this is 100% true--traditional marriage. In a suit filed in a Texas federal court last week, these staunch defenders of our most cherished family values argued that there are at least 550,000 US citizens who should be exiled from not only from their states but from the United States for ten years because they married the wrong person--and that the very existence of these families is causing their states “irreparable harm.” Matt controls his unbounded rage just enough to break down one of the weakest and most inhumane challenges to immigration policy in modern history before calling out 16 people who should never hold public office anywhere again. Superseding indictment in U.S. v. Trump (filed 8/27/24) Implementation of Keeping Families Together (Federal Register, 8/23/24) Complaint brought by 16 Republican AGs to stop the Biden administration’s “Keeping Families Together” program (8/23/24) Donation page for Elad Gross, the only candidate in the MIssouri AG’s race who has not argued to a federal court in Texas that 9,000 of his own voters should be exiled from the United States for 10 years If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

The answer for T3BE37 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!    

Dive into the hilariously complex world of legal accountability, where influential figures face absurdities in the law. Explore Neil Gorsuch's bland book, the rivalries among Supreme Court justices, and the critique of misleading narratives in judicial writing. Discover the implications of concurring opinions and the underlying arrogance during nomination battles. Finally, unpack the theatricality of recent confirmation hearings and the misalignment between public perception and legal realities. Get ready for a humorous and insightful legal analysis!

Diana Adams, an attorney and a vocal advocate for non-traditional families, shares insights on evolving marriage rights. They delve into the historical biases of the 'nuclear family' concept and explore legal developments since the 2015 marriage equality ruling. The conversation highlights the challenges faced by queer and polyamorous families within the legal system, emphasizing the need for inclusive legislation. Diana also discusses the implications of an immigration system that recognizes a broader range of family structures beyond white heteronormative norms.

A whimsical dive into a Disney legal debacle involving allergy-friendly dining options kicks off the discussion. The hosts dissect the absurdities of Hunter Biden's tax challenges and a GOP impeachment report against President Biden. Spotlighting Trump's possible Logan Act violations tied to a Gaza ceasefire talks, they humorously navigate the complexities of this 225-year-old law. The show also critiques the political landscape, sparking curiosity about accountability and the implications of unauthorized diplomatic negotiations.

Heather, a knowledgeable figure in Bar Prep discussions, joins to dive deep into fun and insightful legal topics. They share entertaining anecdotes about preparing for the bar exam and spotlight the Alec Baldwin legal case. The conversation shifts to landlord-tenant responsibilities through a humorous scenario involving a hot water heater. They also dissect a homeowner's dilemma with a builder, examining contract law intricacies. Plus, listeners get a taste of community engagement and light-hearted banter around gardening and fashion!

A recent lawsuit reveals troubling connections between Saudi Arabia and the 9/11 hijackers, challenging long-held beliefs about the attacks. The complexities of legal proceedings bring attention to accountability and justice for affected families. Declassified evidence, including a controversial video, suggests deeper ties that warrant a reevaluation of established narratives. The discussion also critiques Saudi influence on U.S. politics and explores the implications of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. Could this push for a new investigation into long-hidden truths?