20 Comments
User's avatar
Bee Carter's avatar

Josh is so deeply offended that Menéndez’s wife only got a C class Mercedes out of their shady dealings.

Makes me crack up every time.

Leon's avatar

No posthumous pardon for the late, great Hannibal Lector???

Chris.holt's avatar

Josh says paramount doesn't have much business infront of the government unlike meta, but Paramount is literally undergoing a merger/sale to skydance, and is probably chiefly worried about FCC approval to let them take over CBS. Shari redstone and the ellison family are somewhat politically aligned with trump, but there are still likely pressures to make sure nothing goes amuck.

PJDuke's avatar

Unrelated to the episode but something I’ve been thinking about. Can the families of the victims of the plane crash sue the federal government blaming them for DEI policies, using the president’s statements as an admission of guilt or responsibility?

Laurence Yarosh's avatar

Ken is always talking about public politically-related statements as an "admission" of something. I would love to hear some examples of this actually being introduced at trial.

Brendan's avatar

"Written like they bought ChatGPT at RadioShack." is an amazing turn of phrase/cross decade reference. Bravo 👏👏👏.

Susan Baker Sotelo's avatar

How come a president in office can sue and at the same time cannot be sued? Will these years be the best ever for lawyers?

babaganusz's avatar

who said they can't be sued? they can't be prosecuted by the Justice Department without House impeachment and Senate advancement of the case, but that was already a thing.

Chris's avatar

Nixon v Fitzgerald?

Only covers official acts but that is a wide net.

Jeff Winn's avatar

When the DOJ drops a case against someone, is that person protected from a subsequent administration refiling charges against them under double jeopardy?

Laurence Yarosh's avatar

The last thing I heard is that double jeopardy attaches when the jury begins hearing evidence, but let's see what Ken says.

Mark's avatar

Does the agreement Meta reached have any implications on whether 2025 Twitter could be considered a state actor for purposes of 1A?

Robert Kalanda's avatar

Question for Ken / Josh / other commenters:

Ken and Josh mentioned that there are other places where the broader topics of Trump's actions and their legality/constitutionality are being discussed that will be beyond the scope of Serious Trouble.

Any specific recommendations (preferably but not necessarily podcasts) where we should look for that kind of content? Finding content from people that are both knowledgeable and reliable isn't always easy.

Chris's avatar

Definitely interested to hear more about this Fork in the Road saga.

Radical Centrist's avatar

Here’s another interesting one about Schedule F and the federal workforce EO

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/PEER-Complaint.pdf

Marc Melzer's avatar

Since it was discussed on the show before, isn't Elon still litigating his Tesla compensation package in Delaware, all the while abandoning his duties to Tesla to play co-president (or to be the de facto president)? Seems like this frolic and detour should be sufficient for the DE courts to continue denying his comp package, and for the Tesla board to be sued by shareholders for trying to pay this much while he harms the company's image by being a [insert expletive].

Wes's avatar

Ken, does Kendrick Lamar Grammy win make Drake’s lawsuit harder?

Mad Sintist's avatar

Thank for the multiple laughs this week. Bravo.