Legal AF - 2/4/2026

21:27Lisa Graves:You know, your fear about Mike Johnson refusing to seat these members of Congress is not something that we know he will do, right? I mean, he did it this, he refused to seat the woman. Exactly. And because she was going to be the vote they needed to vote the Epstein Transparency Act, the Epstein File Transparency Act out onto the floor. And, you know, so he's willing to do that if it suits him. So I think your fear is well placed there for sure. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is calling to nationalize state elections. What do you make of that? And what do you think, what hey can he make there?

22:12Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Well, it really is extraordinary. And if Mike Johnson had any, and I'll just say in my personal opinion, integrity, he would be objecting this because this is the Constitution specifically commits the power to handle state elections to the states. It is not a federal prerogative. It shouldn't be the federal government. The federal government should not be taking over the election process. It is one of the most significant threats to our democratic process that we've ever seen to have a president asserting this.

22:40Lisa Graves:It actually says it in the Constitution, right? Yeah, it's expressly for the states, not for the federal government, not for the president.

22:50Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And we have a president who has denied the actual results of Americans voting in 2020 and sought to stop that vote from being counted. And in my view, incited the crowd to assail the Capitol to try to stop that vote. That's what the indictment on about January 6th, Jack Smith's indictment was about. He said that he had ample evidence, evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to prove the counts that Donald Trump was charged with. But this court, the Roberts Court, intervened and effectively pardoned Trump retrospectively and paved the way for his return to power. And so we have right now someone in the in the executive office in the in the White House who has should have no role taking over state taking over elections during the midterms.

23:35Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Federal elections are handled by state officials and state officials have been doing this correctly, properly for decades. They're well-trained. All of Trump's efforts to try to change the voting rules in 2020 to his advantage, to try to block people from voting absentee, to try to assert fraud. Rudy Giuliani's really absurd claims that were rejected in court after court, he lost over and over. And so he's the last person who should have these powers. But in fact, it wouldn't matter whether it was Trump or someone else in the sense that that's not what the Constitution says. So this is just another anti-constitutional, counter-constitutional, unconstitutional maneuver by Trump in order to, in his desperation, try to stay in power regardless of what our law commands.

24:24What is your understanding of what he's going to try and do to, quote, nationalize federal elections?

24:35Lisa Graves:And what do you think the Supreme Court, how do you think they'll respond to that?

24:40Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Well, you know, I think one of the things we're seeing is some trial runs. So, you know, I think one of the fears coming out of Minneapolis is not just this invasion, this siege by federal officers who outnumber the local police, but that there could be an effort to deploy ICE agents to polling places to try to intimidate voters, to possibly arrest voters. And, you know, we know that they've been engaged in racial profiling. They fought for the right, in essence, the quote right to do so. And the Roberts court in an emergency docket ruling allowed them in the case of their immigration enforcement to consider someone's race, ethnicity, appearance, last name, language, accent, profession as a basis for stopping someone for what had been called Kavanaugh stops.

25:30Karen Friedman Agnifilo:because Kavanaugh basically gave this his blessing, even though he's tried to walk it back a bit. But I think that we could see Trump try to deploy federal troops or ICE agents to polling places to intimidate voters or even arrest people. Given what just happened in Fulton County with the issue of the 2020 election in Georgia has been litigated, litigated, and litigated, and Trump has lost it every turn. Those ballots had been audited and then reexamined by local and state officials as part of their review of the vote in 2020. Republican state officials, the governor of Georgia, the AG of Georgia, both of whom are Republicans, the Secretary of State of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, everyone basically affirmed the certification of those ballots as valid.

26:20Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And yet Trump has gone in there and had them seized, you know, had the DOJ seized them, had the FBI seized them, and was even on a telephone call, basically acting like a cheerleader to the FBI agents for seizing those pallets of ballots. Now, I think that no one can have any confidence in the integrity of those ballots now that they've been seized by the administration that has been determined to perpetuate the big lie, the big lie that Trump won. And we can see that in the White House website that they created around January 6th and other material that they've released in Trump's ongoing claims that he really won in 2020, despite the fact that he actually lost and that votes were counted, that ballots were recounted again to make sure of the election results and he lost, lost, lost.

27:12Karen Friedman Agnifilo:He was the biggest loser of 2020 and he can't accept it. But now he has the power of the FBI and DOJ doing his bidding. And I will say to you, Karen, one of the things that was tucked in that immunity ruling that John Roberts wrote, the one that is extraordinary counter constitutional assertion, invention of this super wide power of Donald Trump of a president engaged in quote official acts, that opinion basically said that the president could direct the FBI, could direct DOJ as part of this sort of unitary executive theory, as part of this so-called official acts of the president. And that's what Trump is doing.

27:56Karen Friedman Agnifilo:That's extraordinary in our political system. For years and years, in fact, for decades, it has been seen as verboten for a president to be directing the prosecution of anyone, including his enemies, but anyone. And there's a long setting set of agreements. I saw them, you know, review them from time to time when I was at the Justice Department along with others in terms of the rules for contacts between the Justice Department and the White House in order to prevent even the appearance that a White House is directing prosecutions or interfering in prosecutions, let alone demanding that his enemies be pursued or that his, you know, conspiracy theories be pursued through the force of law.

28:39Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And so notwithstanding John Roberts's intervention in the January 6 indictment of Donald Trump and other criminal, potential criminal cases against Donald Trump, the fact is, is that what happened in Georgia is so unusual, so irregular, and so worrisome because to go to your initial question, Karen, we don't know if he's going to try to seize ballots during the 2026 election or immediately thereafter with his loyalists trying to go to a judge to try to make a case, to try to stop the results from counting, our votes from counting in the 2026 midterms.

29:18Lisa Graves:Yeah, well, you know, there's certain judges that they're going to make sure they bring cases to, right? Judge Eileen Cannon, for example, I could see them trying to maneuver a case down there for sure.

29:30Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Exactly, exactly.

29:32Lisa Graves:Or Judge Kazmarek, right, in Texas. I mean, that's another one. There's certain judges that you could see them trying to forum shop. So do you think he's going to try to also outlaw mail-in ballots as well? And I mean, And that seems to be a rallying cry. And what was Tulsi Gabbard doing at the execute? It was just, it's one thing to be, okay, yeah, he can be in charge of the FBI and the DOJ and whatever. And they're there executing the search warrant to take these voting machines. But what was the director of national intelligence doing there?

30:05Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Well, to unpack your question a bit, like in Georgia, the head of the FBI in Georgia resigned because he would not pursue this really illegitimate, in my view, case. And in fact, they brought in an AUSA, not from Georgia, but from Missouri, to handle this case. And so the case is already fraught to begin with. And this is in line with what you mentioned earlier about what's been happening in Minnesota, where six AUSAs resigned because of the actions of this administration. And one FBI agent resigned because instead of investigating Good's death, They wanted to investigate her partner for daring to, you know, dissent from the ISIS presence there in Minnesota.

30:47Karen Friedman Agnifilo:So, you know, what's happened in Georgia just in the past week is unusual in numerous ways, including the fact that longtime career officials who have, you know, they may be Republicans, they may be Democrats, but they have been trying to follow the law, were unwilling to go along with this charade. But as you point out, who was there? The director of national intelligence, which is the DNI, which is Tulsi Gabbard, someone who Trump chose to put in that role at the top, the pinnacle of our national intelligence infrastructure. The DNI is a position that was created after September 11th. It is above the CIA.

31:26Karen Friedman Agnifilo:It's above the NSA. It's above the 1012 acronym intelligence agencies that found that Russia tried to interfere in the 2016 election, notwithstanding Donald Trump's repeated claims that it was a hoax. Our intelligence community found that there was an active effort by Russia to interfere. I'm sure if anyone ever had access to the books of Facebook, you would see it because they were spending millions of dollars on ads targeting Americans as well in that 2016 election. But Donald Trump wanted to put someone who was someone he could trust, a loyalist to him, in charge of national intelligence. And he put Tulsi Gabbard.

32:05Karen Friedman Agnifilo:We've never had basically the head of the spy agencies involved in an effort to seize American ballots, to seize the ballots of American residents. It is beyond unusual. It is, quite frankly, outrageous for the DNI to have been on the ground. Supposedly she was there because Trump asked her to. That's not her job. She actually doesn't have a role within the U.S. in that way. Her role is supposed to be focused predominantly on foreign intelligence, on gathering foreign intelligence and on the processes that these agencies are using for signals intelligence or geographic intelligence or human intelligence.

32:42Karen Friedman Agnifilo:They are not supposed to be focusing on Americans. They are not supposed to be involved in law enforcement, domestic law enforcement. So it was an extraordinary act. She went out there as a political act on behalf of her benefactor, Donald Trump. She called Donald Trump on his cell phone from the scene of the process of seizing those ballots and having the FBI agents there. He called her back. she put him on the phone to cheerlead to those agents that they were doing the right thing, even though this is basically unprecedented in American history to have this kind of intervention by a president over an election that was already litigated and resolved years ago, and he lost.

33:25Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And there was no deterrent to her personally in terms of her own integrity, in my personal view, or her actions or her actual official roller duties. Nothing impeded her from going there, even though it was totally not her job. And it's actually quite worrisome because now we know there are a lot of relationships that Trump has with foreign governments. We know that there's been, you know, these deals struck and, you know, rewards or presents or, you know, all sorts, all manner of intermingling of his personal interests and our governmental actions with respect to some foreign, foreign company, pardon me, foreign governments and foreign leaders.

34:03Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And I don't know that we can have really any confidence about what Tulsi Gabbard may or may not say or assert about foreign involvement in our elections when this administration has rejected the actual independent assessments of the intelligence agencies in 2016. And now he has, in essence, directed the head of the national intelligence for the United States to be part of the process of seizing American ballots with no public statement of any evidence of any foreign involvement or interference in that Georgia election. no indication that the ballots would indicate any involvement by foreign agents or foreign governments.

34:46Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And in fact, back in 2020, when this issue of foreign interference was litigated in Arizona in the face of conspiracy theories that was Chinese paper or other completely ridiculous, laugh out loud, false assertions about the Arizona election, those were roundly rejected in court. There is no evidence, none that has ever been made public, none that exists in my view to indicate any foreign interference in that Georgia presidential race in 2020 or any state for that matter.

35:17Lisa Graves:Yeah, it's crazy. And people aren't outraged by it enough. I think not because it's not outrageous, but because there's so much going on that it's like, how do you decide, you know, any other normal time, this would be something that would be on TV, on the news, in the papers every single day. What was she doing there? Why are they executing a search warrant now four years later? Or no, more than four years later. It's like six years later. Yeah, six years later. How is this not stale for search warrant purposes? How did a judge, why would a judge or a magistrate sign off on this? There's so many open questions to try to unpack here, but it's like a fire hose of outrage with Minnesota, with Epstein, with all the things going on.

36:08Lisa Graves:But it's important that we have to keep calling these things out and really underscoring for people, how unusual this is and really how important the midterms are. And people have to go and vote and vote, vote, vote. I mean, we have to, because that's what's so critical, what's going on here. The world does not look anything like it has looked in my lifetime. It's so, you know, over the years, it's like, sometimes we're liberal, sometimes we're conservative, sometimes we're Democrat, sometimes we're Republican, you know. This is not liberal or conservative. This is not Democrat or Republican. This is truly lawlessness and autocracy, and it's terrifying.

36:47Lisa Graves:And so the more we can kind of call this out, talk about what it is, and talk about the fact that it's really our democracy at stake, I think that's why we are spending so much time talking about these things and bringing them to everybody's attention. So we have to take our first break. So obviously, we have to keep the lights on here at Legal AF and on the Midas Touch Network. So please, if you're not a subscriber, subscribe to Midas Touch and to the Legal AF YouTube channel and to Legal AF Substack and all. There's so much that you can watch and read to stay informed. And we really appreciate all the support and this whole community that is here.

37:27Lisa Graves:So if you can subscribe and you can be a part of that, that really helps us as well. Midas Touch Network is over 6 million subscribers now, and Legal AF YouTube channel has over a million. So we're growing at lightning speed, and it's because of this amazing community and all of you. So we're going to take our first break from some of our sponsors who pick us. They know what we talk about. They know our point of view, and they decide to advertise on this network. So we like our sponsors and we vet them and we're happy to bring them to you.

38:03Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Well, when it comes to dog food, it feels like you have to choose between fresh and healthy or easy to store and serve, but never both. Well, you don't have to choose any more thanks to Sundays. Sundays was founded by a veterinarian and mom, Dr. Tori Waxman, who got tired of seeing so-called premium dog food full of fillers and synthetics. So she designed Sundays, air-dried real food made in a human-grade kitchen using the same ingredients and care you'd use to cook for yourself and your family. And my Lily, a Border Collie chocolate lab mix, loves it and we love it for her. Every bite of Sundays is clean and made from real meat, fruits and veggies with no kibble.

38:44Karen Friedman Agnifilo:That means no weird ingredients you can't pronounce and no fillers. Compared to kibble or other brands out there, Sundays invest 50 times more in its ingredients to ensure premium quality because your dog deserves food made with care, not in the interest of cost-cutting. Even if you don't have a dog yourself, you still want the dogs you love to get the same quality food you'd want for your own family. Real ingredients, no fillers, and something that actually supports their health. And the best part, you just scoop and serve. No freezer, no thawing or prep, no mess. Make the switch to Sundays. Go right now to sundaysfordogs.com slash Legal AF50 and get 50 % off your first order.

39:30Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Or you can use code Legal AF50 at checkout. That's 50 % off your first order at sundaysfordogs.com slash Legal AF50. Sundaysfordogs.com slash Legal AF50 or use code Legal AF50 at checkout. We're a year into the new administration and it's getting harder to read the news and see continued attacks on our First Amendment freedoms daily. Now is the time to look for the helpers, those who are strategically fighting day in and out to preserve our constitutional freedoms. One of the organizations fighting the good fight is Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Their mission is to protect everyone's right to live as they are and believe as they choose, so long as they don't harm others.

40:17Karen Friedman Agnifilo:AU is fighting back against the wave of Christian nationalist threats happening across the country. They filed 11 lawsuits last year alone, multiple against the Trump administration, to protect your individual freedom of and from religion. Whether you support public education, are passionate about LGBTQ plus and reproductive rights, or some combination of all, AU relies on the help of its supporters to do this important work. If you're looking for an organization to support and learn from, head to au.org slash legal AF to see how you can get involved in their work and support the fight against Christian nationalism.

40:55Karen Friedman Agnifilo:That's au.org slash legal AF. When America's divided, we are Americans united. Learn more at au.org slash legal AF.

41:06Lisa Graves:All right, we're back. I want to start with what's going on in federal court in Judge Hellerstein's courtroom. Essentially, just to remind everyone, so Donald Trump was convicted in May of 2024 of 34 felony counts by the Manhattan DA's office where I spent the better part of my my career 30 years i worked there and he was convicted of falsifying business records related to these hush money payments that he made to stormy daniels who he had an affair with and or i don't know if you call it an affair but he had relations with him and his uh his fixer attorney at the time, Michael Cohen, helped broker these hush money payments and they doctored the books to make it look like legal fees.

42:00Lisa Graves:And he went to trial, was prosecuted and convicted of 34 felony counts in Manhattan. Now, Trump tried to get the case removed from state court previously to federal court and and it's called a removal right that's that's what they call it under the law and it's it's essentially it you it's when federal officers are being prosecuted or someone who's being prosecuted um who has a federal defense and they they want to have it removed to federal court so that they can have their case handled there instead of state court and he tried to have uh the case removed but judge hellerstein said no that was entirely personal conduct that had nothing to do with your presidency that happened when you were a private citizen it doesn't belong in federal court so that went down so he rejected that i think there was twice he went for removal in hellerstein's court and twice it was rejected so he finally went to trial he was convicted and And he, after he was convicted in May, in July, a couple months later, the Supreme Court ruled, came down and ruled that this ruling about presidential immunity.

43:23Lisa Graves:Right. And that just created the whole situation we're in, but I'm not going to digress. And essentially said, you know, I think you said earlier, it's almost like pardoning in advance, you know, proactively pardoning him and retroactively pardoning him for anything that you do while you're president. And so Donald Trump made the strategic decision to appeal to the state court first, Judge Mershon, and say, I'm immune, you know, you can't now, you have to vacate my conviction. Judge Mershon ruled that essentially this was entirely private conduct. Almost none of this happened while you were president except one conversation that you had with Hope Hicks.

44:16Lisa Graves:And even if I took that out of the equation, the evidence against you was overwhelming. And so let's say we take that out. I still find that the jury should have found you guilty or could have found you guilty. and so we're going to proceed to sentencing. After that, he then went to Judge Hellerstein and said, okay, I would like you to now remove it again based on, I want to make this removal application again based on the immunity decision. And Judge Hellerstein, there was a hearing, he hasn't ruled yet, but he essentially said, you don't get two bites of the apple. You waited too long. You should have come here first if that's what you wanted to do is removal, but instead you made a strategic decision to see if you can get Judge Mershon to do it.

45:01Lisa Graves:And then when he didn't go your way, now you're trying to get us to do it. And Judge Hellerstein, it doesn't seem like my reading of the tea leaves wasn't having it. And because essentially what the lawyer for Donald Trump admitted to or kind of said was, I just, we just need you to make any ruling so that we can then appeal it and get it to the second circuit. You know, just, just bring to federal court. I don't care if you rule for us or against us. If you rule against us, that's fine too, because then we can just go to the second circuit, get them to rule again. Doesn't really matter what they do because we want to go to the Supreme Court because we know the Supreme Court will basically do, you know, we have our best chance at an audience there, but they have to get there.

45:42Lisa Graves:They have to get to the Supreme Court. And Judge Hellerstein seems skeptical. I don't know. What did you pick up from the hearing?

45:48Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Yeah, I'm skeptical too. And I think he's rightly skeptical. And, you know, this is an area where as broad as that ruling by John Roberts, that edict declaring that Trump had presidential immunity or immunity from criminal prosecution, it was specific to official acts. Now, there are an enormous array of so-called official acts that includes, as in essence, they've asserted pardons, the, you know, they've asserted all sorts of things that the president does in his official capacity. But as you point out, and as the judge, The judges have pointed out Donald Trump's payment of this hush money for this sexual relationship with Stormy Daniels.

46:27Karen Friedman Agnifilo:This was before the election. This was before he became a president. You can't have immunity. Even though I object to the Roberts ruling on immunity for president while acting as a president, you certainly don't get immunity for your actions before you become president or after you stop being president. So it's really extraordinary that he's doing it. But as you point out, it's all about getting to the Supreme Court and trying to make the case to the six Republican appointees of the Supreme Court that perhaps five of them would find some way to rule in his favor to get this case dismissed. I think that on the merits, as you pointed out, and as one of the judges pointed out, only just a teeny tiny percentage of the activity occurred after he became president.

47:14Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And it was like incidental to what was already going on to try to keep this out of the news. Because what was really going on was that Trump and, you know, his lawyer at the time, Michael Cohen, did not want Stormy Daniels to speak about the fact that Trump had had sex with a woman for money shortly after his wife, Melania, had given birth to their son. and that this would look bad for Trump, that it could affect his chance of becoming president in 2016. So the whole case, the whole hush money, the payment of the money was all about trying to win that 2016 election. And the idea that Trump can assert immunity or try to drag this case into federal court, I do think that it's a bad case for those claims.

48:04Karen Friedman Agnifilo:I don't think that he would prevail, except that this Roberts court is a wild card in the sense that they have done so much to put their thumb on the scale in favor of Donald Trump in all sorts of ways. In any normal environment, I think this would be an open and shut case against Trump. But we just don't know what this Roberts court is going to do, given so many of the other things it has done to basically allow Trump to do things that no other president has been allowed to do, like these tariffs, that the tariff policy is specifically committed to Congress, not the president, like birthright citizenship.

48:38Karen Friedman Agnifilo:But you know, all these things that are being challenged before this court, the court has not yet ruled on, are things where in any other ordinary court, I think people would have a right to reasonably expect that this court would not rule in Trump's favor. But we just don't know with this court.

48:55Lisa Graves:Yeah, we really don't. It's It's so interesting to see what happens. So people are probably wondering, well, why is this happening now in front of Hellerstein? And it's because Trump brought this, you're supposed to bring it within 30 days of a ruling. He brought it almost 60 days later after he had already gone to Judge Mershon. He made this application. Hellerstein denied it. It was an appeal to the Second Circuit. and the Second Circuit sent it back down to Hellerstein, essentially saying, you have to consider some of these arguments and have a hearing and make findings. And so that's why it's still bubbling around and he's going to have to rule and make a decision and I think take into consideration the things the Second Circuit wanted him to do.

49:41Lisa Graves:So this is still a live issue. It's still going on and we'll see what happens. So let's turn now to across the hall from Judge Hellerstein, Judge Berman, also in the Southern District of New York, who was the judge who was the trial judge for Ghislaine Maxwell.

50:06Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Yep.

50:07Lisa Graves:And he, he, although that case is over, although she's appealing, but it's over, she was tried and convicted and, and she's now in, in prison. People keep running to him to kind of, and try to deal with the Epstein files, right? So that, that trial happens. And then Congress passes the Epstein files, transparency act, which basically gave until I think it was December 19th as a deadline for the Department of Justice to turn over all records that they have. It's got some holes in the law. It doesn't include things like the IRS records. It doesn't include other government records. It's like the DOJ and the FBI, right?

50:51Lisa Graves:So there's still a lot of other records out there that relate to people who were financing the Jeffrey Epstein, his lifestyle, et cetera. There's a lot of government records. So I think they need to pass an amendment to the law that fixes that. But the law also has some holes in it that says DOJ can withhold certain things if there's an open investigation. So it's not a perfect law. But even so, there are lots of documents that should be turned over. And they keep running to Judge Berman because some of those, small portion of them, but some of those records were grand jury material, for example.

51:24Lisa Graves:And grand jury material is sealed. And so Judge Berman had to unseal them in order to comply with the law. They've also gone to Judge Berman to try to enforce the law because DOJ blew past the deadline. And Berman said, I have nothing to do with it, right? This is not my case. Like, my case is over. I can't enforce this law. Maybe you should bring a new action so that we can enforce the law. And in the meantime, the DOJ said, you know, no need. We're working on it. We're working on it. We've got people working on it around the clock. We've got lawyers working on this around the clock. There's millions.

52:04Lisa Graves:You know, sometimes they say there's hundreds of thousands. Sometimes they say there's six million. Then they say three million. Who knows? There's million. We know there's millions of records and documents, but we need to redact out the victim's information and redact out victims' photos and names, et cetera, as well as certain other... So they're not going to redact people out for political reasons, but there are people who I think they are taking out who they've determined are either they were innocent or it didn't go anywhere, and so they're not going to let some people get wrongly tarnished with this.

52:47Lisa Graves:with this. So there were certain names to redact out there. What the victims did is they gave over 100 names to the DOJ so that they can know the names that need to be redacted out. And the way that works, because I'm a criminal defense attorney and I was a prosecutor, the way it works when you get terabytes of millions of discovery documents, whether you're turning them over as a prosecutor or receiving them as a defense attorney, no one expects you to be able to read every single document and so i mean sometimes you have to read the vast majority of them but but typically the way you start such a search is you do word searches right you you put you put them in a searchable database and you do word searches and so by giving over the victims names that was in an effort so that the doj who had southern district of new york i believe had almost every lawyer in the office working on this around the clock and it's a way of giving them the name so that they can whatever whatever files they were in charge of they presumably should be able to put the names into a computer and it should show you everywhere that it shows up same thing with photos you know there should be a way to search for at least look at all the photos unless there were so many of those and and be able to redact out that information well the new york times when this when three million documents were dumped were able to find thousands, thousands, not one or two or a few that they miss, thousands of records where over a hundred victims' names and personal identifying information, including photographs, were leaked.

54:24Lisa Graves:And the New York Times tried to do the right thing and tell DOJ what you did, you know, there's a problem here. And in the meantime, a lot of the victims are like, I never came forward. I mean, I didn't even know my name was in there or, you know, I never had anything to do with this. I wasn't one of the people who wanted to do this. Now my life is turned upside down. Or some of the other victims are like, I came forward, but you promised this wouldn't happen to me. You know, it's very upsetting. And so they ran to Judge Berman, understandably, to basically say, take down the website, make them take down the website.

55:02Lisa Graves:And essentially the DOJ, they were supposed to have a hearing today, but the judge canceled it because the DOJ agreed to handle this, right? They agreed to fix this. So, but it's just unbelievable to me how this could happen. I mean, and under any normal Congress, they should be having hearings to figure out what happened. I mean, I don't know. What are your thoughts about this, Lisa?

55:30Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Well, we've spent, we the taxpayers have spent millions and millions of dollars on this redaction effort. The redaction effort began in part because Trump ran in part saying, you know, along with some of his supporters that they needed to make the Epstein files public. Bondi promised to make them public, claimed she had them on the top of her desk and she was going to release them all or, you know, had a client list, etc. It was just a constant drumbeat. And then suddenly this past spring, it turns out that Bondi informed Trump that he his name appeared numerous times in the files. And then suddenly they were trying to say, oh, no, never mind.

56:13Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Nothing to see here. No, no files could be released. There's nothing more to see, even though in many of these instances, the men who were involved in predatory behavior with the women and girls, that were recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell for Jeffrey Epstein's operations, even though basically the people who victimized them were never charged other than Epstein and Maxwell. And so that's what resulted in this effort in the House where some Republicans joined Democrats in saying, look, make the files public. And so since then, since that law passed, there's been this sort of round-the-clock effort that's been described as involving FBI agents, AUSAs, prosecutors, and others to redact the files.

57:05Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And yet, we've seen a really sloppy process, quite frankly, despite the millions that have been spent. We saw, as you point out, the names of survivors of this racket, this Epstein-Galane-Maxwell racket, them named with personally identifiable information. anyone who runs a website in America is actually required under U.S. law to protect against revealing personal identifiable information as specifically defined in the law. But in this instance, to take special care, if they were supposed to be doing anything with this redaction, it was supposed to protect the survivors, the victims of this multi-year scheme by Epstein and Maxwell.

57:46Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And instead, what we've seen is redactions and deletions to protect Trump. At one point just this past week, they redacted a photo of Trump like his face from a photo that was just a public, like a publicity photo. So they, you know, there was extra effort paid to protect, to try to protect Trump in some ways. We don't know all the redactions. There's been no cataloging of what things were redacted on what basis. Some of the redactions seem super irrational and very much designed to protect Trump. But now we've seen that they have been not so careful in handling the information about people who survived it and and there's i guess two other things that i just want to flag uh for our for our watchers our our listeners one is that in blanche's um todd blanche's uh press conference he's the deputy attorney general the guy who was formerly a criminal defense attorney for donald trump now he's being paid by us as the deputy attorney general blanche said that certain information was removed from files including information about people who were either assaulted or killed.

58:53Karen Friedman Agnifilo:He expressly talked about the removal of information around deaths. And I think the American people have a right to know if there were deaths in fact discussed or documented in these files. It is horrifying that he uttered that sentence. There seems to be no reason for him to utter that sentence unless there is evidence. And the evidence that some have suggested is that some part of Epstein's operations might have included snuff films, which involve killing the person who is being preyed upon by sexual predators. So that should be known. If that in fact happened, where are the prosecutions? Where are the potential prosecutions or at least some sort of public accountability for presumably the men who were involved in this predation against these young women.

59:46Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Or in some instances, certainly with regard to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, children, girls who are not young women at all, but are minors. So that, I think, is a really important component of this. And then the second important component is there's no, like Blanche just said, that's it, we're done. Even though there are more files that have not been released, that they possess, and that they have not, I think, asserted in any proper legal way, a legal basis for excluding those or for not giving any more. It's just like they basically said, look, here's enough. Hope this satisfies you.

1:00:24Karen Friedman Agnifilo:We're moving on. And then in response, Trump has asserted that the files exonerate him when in fact the files are very, very troubling. First of all, his name is mentioned, I think according to the New York times count at least 5 ,000 times in these files in different ways. And that's just the parts that we can see. There are other places where his name appears to have been redacted based on the context of the files. And so that's just the visible mentions of him. That's a lot of mentions by a sexual predator. There are other components of the files. The second thing I would flag is there are conversations between Jeffrey Epstein and Steve Bannon about the 2016 election as it's going on.

1:01:08Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And that's at a time when Bannon was the key advisor to Donald Trump, trying to protect his efforts to win the presidency, to win the White House in 2016. And even though purportedly Donald Trump stopped letting Epstein come to his club circa 2006, 2007, 10 years earlier, even though they'd been best friends for years and had been involved in these modeling agencies and these other activities that have resulted in complaints against Trump, complaints that he's denied, but complaints of, you know, sexual abuse or potential rape by Donald Trump, which he's denied. So there's a lot more that Congress should be investigating.

1:01:49Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Congress needs to get involved in investigating what happened, why there were no prosecutions, why Alex Acosta did not insist on a prosecution based on the more than a dozen girls whose evidence was within the FBI files, within the law enforcement files at the time of Jeffrey Epstein's plea agreement back in 2006, 2007. There's, you know, the fact that we do not have justice for these survivors, that people have not been held accountable other than Ghislaine Maxwell, who Todd Blanche, you know, met with and then suddenly she was moved from a proper prison at the right level of security for the length of her sentence and moved to one of these country country club camps, prison camps in Texas, there has not been accountability for these crimes against so many women and girls.

1:02:39Lisa Graves:Yeah, except Congress is gonna be having the Clintons come and testify, which is, you know, that's their big flex, you know, that the Clintons who initially sent a letter saying this is the hill we're gonna die on, we're not coming and now are coming. But that's the only hearing they're gonna have is with regard to the Clintons. I mean, where are all the investigations? Now that we know how many, that there's more than 100, there's hundreds of survivors, that there are, the number of men that are involved in this are, it's astounding. And yet, we don't know about any investigations, right? We don't know about any prosecutions that are pending, And presumably there aren't any because if they were open investigations into these, they wouldn't see the files because that's one of the exceptions to the Epstein Files Transparency Act is that if there's a pending investigation, we can withhold those files.

1:03:40Lisa Graves:So by releasing them, they're basically saying all these things, these horrible crimes that you're seeing, that you're seeing evidence of, we're not investigating any of these. We're just going to allow this to continue.

1:03:53Karen Friedman Agnifilo:So it's, I was going to say, I mean, I think it's a coverup for Congress not to investigate and just to have, like you said, just this flex around, around Bill Clinton to demand that he testify, but not demand that Trump testify or that other people who are mentioned in these files be called to testify. I'm sorry to interrupt, Karen. No, no, no, you're right.

1:04:13Lisa Graves:You're right.

1:04:14Karen Friedman Agnifilo:They are complicit in this coverup if they do not take further action to investigate. And if laws need to be changed to address sexual misconduct that may have expired in terms of the statute of limitations, as has happened in other instances regarding, you know, some famous comedians and other very famous people, then maybe we need to revisit those laws that might give some impunity for some of these abusers to get away with it. Because if that's part of the issue in terms of the lack of criminal investigation, that needs to be addressed. if Jeffrey Epstein was acting in some sort of intelligence capacity as Alex Acosta asserted and then tried to walk back.

1:04:55Karen Friedman Agnifilo:But now you see in these files, these ties to Russia and this notion of potential compromise or compromising material, we need to get to the bottom of that. If a sexual predator was allowed to pursue women and girls in America because someone in the intelligence community thought that he could provide them value information, we should know who made that

1:05:17Lisa Graves:decision yeah no it's there's a lot that needs to be done and i imagine if the democrats take back congress this is going to be one of the first things they take they take up and do real special investigation into all of this um we need to take our second and final break and then we are going to go straight to minnesota where again so much is still happening so uh we're going to take a quick break and come back and find out everything that's going on in Minnesota. And we'll be right back.

1:05:50Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Fresh start, same system. Banks win, you pay. Fees and calls piling up monthly. Unless you fight back, PDS Debt has already helped hundreds of thousands cut their debt and put money back in their pockets, not the banks. Whether you're struggling with credit cards, personal loans, collections, or medical bills. PDS Debt has customized options for anyone in that situation. PDS Debt understands your specific scenario and will help you provide alternative solutions to becoming debt-free with a personalized plan designed just for you. There's no minimum credit score required. They're here to help you save more, pay off your debt faster, and start putting money back where it belongs, in your pocket.

1:06:32Karen Friedman Agnifilo:PDS Debt is A-plus rated by the Better Business Bureau, has thousands of five-star reviews on Google and a five-star rating on Trustpilot. Every month you wait costs you more in interest and fees. The best time to start was yesterday. The second best is right now. Don't wait another month. Take back control in 30 seconds. Get your free personalized assessment and the best option for you at pdsdebt.com slash legal AF. That's pdsdebt.com slash legal AF. pdsdebt.com slash legal AF. You're 30 seconds away from being debt-free. Get your free assessment and find the best option for you right now at pdsdebt.com slash legal AF.

1:07:17Lisa Graves:We're back. And Lisa, I want to turn our attention now to Minnesota because big news coming out of Minnesota. Tom Holm and the Borders are, went to Minnesota, sidelined Kristi Noem and the others who were there and essentially is trying to take the temperature down, is moving about almost a third of the officers who were there, over 700 of them. Still going to be over 2 ,000 of them there, but they're going to move a big chunk of them to try to scale down the efforts in the area. And he said essentially that officials in Minnesota made significant progress working with state and local officials despite some differences.

1:08:00Lisa Graves:they're allowing ICE to take custody of illegal, you know, people who are here illegally or undocumented before they're released from jail. But my question is, it's unclear what policy has changed because there's never been a problem with ICE and DHS to take custody of people who are in jail or prison. I mean, even in blue states like New York, that's where most of the deportations happen. I mean, you've got someone who's arrested, you've got them convicted, they're in jail, they're in prison, and that's when they start the deportation proceedings. So that's always been the case, but I guess he's going to advertise something that already existed as a win, and they're going to go back to targeting these individuals, people who are convicted of crimes, and this is cooperation, which has led to a safer environment for ICE officers, blah, blah, blah.

1:08:55Lisa Graves:It's just kind of BS, but it is a good start. It is taking the temperature down because people were losing their lives, right? It's over 100 people were injured. Many people were arrested. Two people lost their lives, Renee Goode and... Alex Preddy. I admire Frey's name in my head. Of course, Alex Preddy, who tragically was shot and killed. And this Operation Metro Surge, which has been really catastrophic for Minnesota in so many ways. I mean, people, neighbors are losing loved ones, right? People are getting deported. People are afraid to go to work. So businesses are losing revenue. People aren't going or staying home.

1:09:45Lisa Graves:And, you know, it was heartbreaking today. Renee Good's family members testified before Congress, before this Minority Oversight Committee talking about her and the brothers, her brothers talking about losing her. And it was really heartbreaking to listen to. And, you know, just really outrageous that this was Democrat-led and the Republicans, of course, wouldn't come. And you've got this prejudging that's going on at the federal level, right? We all saw with our own eyes what happened to Renee Good. We all saw with our own eyes what happened to Alex Preddy. But unfortunately, there's this gaslighting where no-no is justified, self-defense, you know.

1:10:33And because they say that, somehow we're supposed to believe it.

1:10:37Lisa Graves:And they prejudged it without doing an investigation. And perhaps they were justified. Perhaps they weren't. But you don't know until you conduct an independent investigation into all a dispassionate one. You don't prejudge it and say, oh, no, it's justified. And I've worked on many law enforcement-involved fatalities. And the one thing the police commissioner, the district attorney, the governor, the mayor, whoever it is, never does is prejudge it. They wait for an investigation. And that can be frustrating for both sides sometimes. No, I want you to call this outrageous. Or no, I want you to say this was okay or not okay.

1:11:20Lisa Graves:But that's really what you're supposed to do. You have to really look at all the facts, interview witnesses, analyze. We don't even know in Alex Preddy's case whose gun went off, right? Who shot him? How many people shot him? Did his gun go off? We have no idea what the forensics are. And certainly because there is no investigation into it, law enforcement presumably does not know either. And instead, for example, in the Renee Good case, you know, there were prosecutors who resigned rather than investigate Renee Good and her wife. And it's just the level of kind of topsy-turvy upside-down world or bizarro world here is outrageous, you know, because they're not doing things the way they should be doing it.

1:12:08Lisa Graves:They're doing it the way that fits their narrative. and, you know, it's putting a huge strain on what's going on in Minnesota to the point where we have a lawyer who was a special assignment, a special AUSA or a special assistant United States attorney who had to go work for the U.S. Attorney's Office. Her name is Ms. Lay. and she, I think her name is Julie, her first name, and Julie Lay was, I think she was like general counsel to ICE or she worked for ICE and she went over to the Department of Justice to be a Special AUSA to help deal with this overwhelming number of claims that were being filed, hundreds of claims being filed saying writs of habeas corpus, you know, basically saying I'm being, people who are here who are being held in response to this immigration enforcement, who bring these writs, who bring these legal claims saying, I'm being held illegally.

1:13:13Lisa Graves:There was this huge number of them being filed, and they couldn't keep up. So she came over to help with that. And unfortunately, they still couldn't keep up with the responses, frustrating federal judges. And she broke down in court in a way that I've never heard of before, crying, asked to be held in contempt. saying that's the only way she's going to get 24 hours sleep and said, this job sucks. The system sucks. It's broken. You could tell the judge was trying to calm things down. Okay. Okay. You know, like, let's not have a, have a breakdown in my courtroom because this is so unusual. But I think the strain on her is really showing because if you're going to have an operation Metro surge, and you're going to sweep up everybody, including people, you know, they didn't go in with a scalpel, right to take the people this targeted enforcement of violent criminals who they said they were going to do they just swept up anyone who looked you know black or brown or spoke a different language or fit the profile that they they thought you know fit what they wanted um and as a result a lot of people who are here legally who are citizens it's a five-year-old child you know people who are are getting swept up in this and it's outrageous.

1:14:29Lisa Graves:So these amazing lawyers are doing an incredible job to try to bring these actions to release these people who deserve to be released and they're not getting released and judges are getting frustrated, right? There was another judge in federal in Minnesota who essentially, because Julie Lay, who when she talked about how upset she was about the system, that was in front of Judge Blackwell. Well, another judge, Judge Schlitz, essentially was ordering the acting director of ICE, Todd Lyons, to appear before him last week, basically saying, why shouldn't I hold you in contempt? Because 96 times ICE has violated court orders in 74 cases.

1:15:12Lisa Graves:96 times. Like, you know, it's outrageous. I know it's a word that I'm using a lot tonight, but it is. You can't violate a court order, right? It's not optional. It's not something that you're allowed to do. And so if you were going to do this type of operation and send 3 ,000 ICE troops, you probably should have been prepared and sent a lot of lawyers too who are going to handle all these filings so that you can deal with this barrage of incoming and not hold people that you're not allowed to hold and comply with court orders. So, it's really kind of a really disorganized, to say the least, and unprepared operation that's going on there that are causing innocent people to be held in jail when they're not supposed to, who it's causing people to lose their lives.

1:16:08Lisa Graves:And it's, I don't know how they're going to get out from under this. But I want to hear what you have to say about all this, Lisa.

1:16:15Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Well, it really is outrageous. I wish I had a stamp. I would just be stamping it all over everything because it's extraordinary. It's outrageous. It's unprecedented. It's really unacceptable in America for this to be going on, to have this siege of an American city by the president through his loyalists and through these agents who have been either poorly trained or allowed to think that they've got the license to hurt people. It's extraordinary what we've been seeing on our TVs and on our social media over these past several weeks. And I want to just begin with the point you made at the outset, which is, this is, or at least I'm going to extrapolate from a point you made at the outset, which is, this is all in part due to the lie that Donald Trump has been telling the American people and his followers about the supposed millions of criminal aliens in America everywhere.

1:17:15Karen Friedman Agnifilo:It's just not actually true. It's a lie. There are people who are in the United States without documentation who've been working as dishwashers or hotel maids or, you know, in other capacity who have not committed any crimes at all. And in fact, being in the United States without documentation is not a crime. It's a civil violation and one that subjects someone to the potential for being removed. Some people without documentation are in the process of getting documentation. Perhaps they've married someone or they're trying to adjust their status or they're awaiting an asylum petition to be finalized, whether they are going to be awarded asylum or not based on the circumstances that they fled in their home country.

1:17:56Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And what we've seen in Minnesota is people who are US citizens, including a guy being dragged out of his house in his underwear or his shorts in freezing cold weather, just based on either non-existent evidence or evidence that's not accurate or just a whim. They were going door to door to door in neighborhoods of Minnesota, not based on any probable cause of any crime whatsoever. And seemingly in response to a memo that Todd Lyons issued last May, but was leaked just last month, in which he asserted that this administration had a right not to follow the Fourth Amendment, that they did not have to get a warrant, that they could engage in warrantless searches of people's homes, seize people without warrants, and to do so without following longstanding rules.

1:18:51Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And the point you made at the beginning of this conversation was about the normal process. So there, there is a small number of people in this country who commit crimes. Most of them are citizens, a smaller, the person is in that like much smaller, um, are immigrants who commit crimes when they commit a crime, they're seized, they're charged. They're usually held without bond because of flight risk, whether it's in federal or state court, depending on the rules and they face trial, they go to trial or they plead, they're convicted, they're sentenced, and they are transferred to what used to be called INS, to the control of the Department of Homeland Security, and they are removed.

1:19:31Karen Friedman Agnifilo:This has been the process in place for decades. When I was working at the Justice Department on asylum law and helping to rewrite the asylum rules during the Clinton administration, there were only in super rare cases where people not removed. In those instances, it was some people, a very small number of people from Vietnam and Cuba, because we did not have diplomatic relations with those countries. And so could not make a transfer from the U.S. to travel directly into Vietnam at that time, or into Cuba at that time, because of the lack of a formal relationship between our two countries. And those individuals were not then released into the public.

1:20:11Karen Friedman Agnifilo:They remained in custody and there was an actual set of issues about whether you could hold someone indefinitely because they could not be removed to their home country. So this notion that there are all these convicted uh criminals who uh are foreigners who are just randomly walking the streets is not the case. If someone may have had a drunk driving arrest and they're awaiting an immigration proceeding to determine whether they could be removed based on that arrest or conviction for drunk driving. You know, maybe that person could be subject to one of these sweeps, but even then they're already in a legal process with DHS through the immigration court.

1:20:49Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And what this administration has been doing has been seizing people when they show up for court. They're not fleeing. They're not people who are absconding from process. They're people who are participating in our legal process and trying to defend their rights. And so it's no surprise, as you point out, that in the face of 3 ,000 plus agents being flooded into Minnesota, a state which does not have a huge population of immigrants, has a very well-integrated population of Somalis who fled the civil war there and were granted permission by the United States government to come to the United States, many of whom have adjusted their status, have become citizens, many of whom have had children here, U.S.

1:21:32Karen Friedman Agnifilo:citizen children. They work in all fields of industry in Minnesota, at the airports, you know, pushing people's wheelchairs so they can get to their flight. They work in restaurants all over the community. And they have been targeted because of racism by this president, an attack to try to weaponize, you know, a fraud investigation that was already resolved separately in order to justify this surge, a surge that has put more ICE and CBP or whatever acronym they're using on any given day agents into Minneapolis than there are police. There are, I think, fewer than 800 police in Minneapolis handling all the things that happen in Minneapolis, car accidents, crimes, investigations at people's houses.

1:22:18Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And there are, you know, four times, there have been four times as many ICE agents as actual police. It's overkill. It's designed to intimidate. It's designed to disrupt. It's something that no president has ever done in U.S. history. And it has targeted Minnesota in part, I think, because it did not support Trump. It did not vote for Trump. And you can see the sort of twisted way this is proceeding because just two weeks ago, Pam Bondi sent a letter or message to Governor Walz saying that they would withdraw the federal officers from Minnesota if he would just give over the voting files of Minnesotans that this administration has no right to.

1:23:03Karen Friedman Agnifilo:So it's extraordinary what we're seeing. It's extraordinary that we're seeing people being killed. Those two deaths, Alex Preddy and Renee Good, have been ruled a homicide by the coroner. We're seeing the federal government abscond with evidence, take evidence from the scene of those potential crimes, and I think they were crimes in my opinion, and not allow state officials, whether they're the state prosecutor's office, the state equivalent of the FBI, to investigate those crimes. They, you know, not cooperating with them, but also keeping the evidence from them, hiding the names of the agents who were involved in those killings of people from other authorities, asserting that revealing the names is somehow doxing them when in fact America has no place for secret police.

1:23:51Karen Friedman Agnifilo:No officer, whether they're an agent with ICE or our local police, should not have to have a name badge and a number to know who they are. In fact, we don't even know, how do they know who each other is when they don't have any actual valid insignia on the outside of their uniform saying their name other than just a vest saying police, which could be bought in all sorts of locations in the country. It's a crime to impersonate a police officer. But I don't even know if they know who they are. And in fact, they've sent these squads in, in what almost seems like they've got some sort of quota of the number of people they're trying to arrest or seize or pump these numbers.

1:24:30Karen Friedman Agnifilo:And people are exercising their rights, their fundamental due process rights under the Constitution, which specifically says that no one can be deprived of their life, liberty, or property without due process of law. no person. And so people, whether they're citizens or immigrants, have a right to seek court intervention if they are seized by the state. That is one of the most fundamental human rights in our Constitution and in our Bill of Rights. And yet this administration is acting as if it does not have to follow those rules.

1:25:04Lisa Graves:Yeah, you're absolutely right. And it is just listening to you talk about it, it's like, it reminds me of all the things that I can't believe is going on in Minnesota. There's just too many to count. And this whole thing started because of them, right? This whole thing started, there's upset and unrest in Minnesota because they brought all those ICE agents and DHS agents there. Minnesota was doing fine before, right? This is nothing to do with, like, that's the only reason there's a problem, because they're going in and lawlessly sweeping up so many people. And Renee Goode should be alive today, and Alex Preddy should be alive today.

1:25:49Lisa Graves:And I think you're probably right. There probably is a crime that was committed against them. But I still reserve, I still think there should be an investigation, because I do think that is important. But, yeah, it doesn't look from what we see. it certainly doesn't, I would say the opposite of what Trump says, which is it's justified. It does not look justified. And so if it is justified, that's why they need an investigation because from the naked eye, it does not, it looks like assassination. It looks like a murder. And it looks like they lost their temper and, you know, they like F you, you know, F me, F you.

1:26:27Lisa Graves:Like that's what it kind of looks like to me. Um, you were so spot on Lisa about Pam Bondi saying, oh okay we'll stop you know because like either there's unrest or there's not right either there's a problem or there's not oh but we'll stop if you give us your your voting you know your your ballots your your voter rolls and your ballots well those things are unrelated and i think she's just they're just saying how this is a political flex that they're doing another one and and i'm happy to see though that people the american people are pushing back and it's working and the more we talk about it, the more we take to the streets, the more we vote with our fingers and our feet.

1:27:08Lisa Graves:Everything we can do to stop this, we all have to do what we can do, whether it's podcast, write a book, whatever time you have, even if it's just listen to a podcast, even if it's just subscribed to the Midas Touch Network or to the Legal AF Network or to the Substacks, whatever it is, that is helping. And being a part of the community and not putting your head in the sand and not saying, oh, politics, it's just so depressing. I'm not going to have anything to do with it, which I know some people want to do. And I get it. But it's important, and it's important because we need to stick together.

1:27:41Lisa Graves:We need to stay informed, and we need to fight like hell. And so, Lisa, we have reached the end of another midweek episode of Legal AF. Again, so grateful to you for stepping in for Michael Popok, who couldn't be here. and we hope you'll come back often and your perspective is great and we really appreciate it. Is there any final words you want to say to people before we sign off?

1:28:07Karen Friedman Agnifilo:I just want to say, Karen, it's a joy to do these with you, even though these are hard topics. I so appreciate your experience as a prosecutor in Manhattan. It really helps inform people across the country about what the legal rules are or the norms are or should be. And really, it's an honor to be part of Legal AF And I just stand in solidarity with our watchers, our viewers, our listeners, because together we actually can get through this. We can make sure this does not continue to happen in our country. We can vote. We can speak. And we can hold each other's hands as we get through this.

1:28:44Lisa Graves:Okay, until the next episode of Legal AF on Saturday with Ben Meizelis and Michael Popak, or next Wednesday with me and Michael Popak, say goodnight to everybody. Take care. Thanks for listening.

1:29:13Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Wrapped and ready. These handheld wraps pack bold flavor and 40 plus grams of protein into something hearty, satisfying and built for life on the go. From craveable sauces to satisfying textures. They're designed to keep you going without slowing you down. So put that fork down. Try the new wraps today in app or at order.sweetgreen.com. Available at participating locations only. Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same premium wireless for$15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities. So do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today.

1:29:53Karen Friedman Agnifilo:I'm told it's super easy to do at mintmobile.com slash switch.

1:29:57Lisa Graves:Upfront payment of$45 for three-month plan equivalent to$15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only. Then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. Default terms at MintMobile.com.

1:30:08Karen Friedman Agnifilo:You know what's wild? Most people are still overpaying for car insurance, just because it's a pain to switch. That's why there's Jerry. Jerry's the only app that compares rates from over 50 insurers in minutes and helps you switch fast with no spam calls or hidden fees. Drivers who save with Jerry could save over$1 ,300 a year. Before you renew your car insurance policy, do yourself a favor. Download the Jerry app or head to jerry.ai slash lipsyn. That's J-E-R-R-Y dot A-I slash L-I-B-S-Y-N. From lashes for days with the Viral Liquid Lash Extensions Mascara to lift and color from their brilliant eye brightener, Thrive Cosmetics is the go-to for amplifying everyday looks.

1:30:53Karen Friedman Agnifilo:Plus, every product is 100 % vegan, cruelty-free, and made with clean, skin-loving ingredients that work with your skin. Amplify your everyday. Go to thrivecosmetics.com slash shine26 for an exclusive offer of 20 % off your first order. That's Thrive Cosmetics, C-A-U-S-E-M-E-T-I-C-S dot com slash shine26.