The Howie Carr Radio Network
Marc Salinas on Fani Willis Ruling, Alvin Bragg Update, and Karen Read | 3.15.24 - The Grace Curley Show Hour 1
Today's podcast is brought to you by Howie's new book Paperboy. To order today, go to HowieCarShow.com and click on store. It's The Grace Curly Show. You can read Grace's work in the Boston Herald and the Spectator. Where the hills are green, the streams are clear, and the sweaters are so thick, even the boniest fingers none could poke in the chest and it wouldn't bother you. Here's the millennial with the mic. The large lady had a backbone like a ramrod. Grace Curly. Welcome everyone to The Grace Curly Show. You know, I just asked Jared. I said, "Let's try to get into the same Patrick's Day spirit." In the opening, I didn't realize you were going to create a masterpiece. There's so much material from old Joe Oldbiden. There really is. Thank you so much, everyone, for tuning in to The Grace Curly Show. Today and every weekday from 12 to 3, St. Patrick's Day is this Sunday, but we decided, as you could hear, to celebrate a little early here at The Grace Curly Show. I didn't have any green. And usually, Jared, every year I forget to wear green, but today I actually looked through my stuff. Nothing. No green. I'm not a green girl. It doesn't look good on me. It's not my color. I'm going to find this green party hat in the office. So this is my green for right now. Not sure how long it's going to stay there. But we have a lot to get to. And Joe Biden is delivering remarks today at the St. Patty's Day luncheon. So I figured, why not- It's quite the whirly gig. Yeah, why not get a little festive here? I don't know what he's going to say. It actually has to do with our poll question. But whenever he seems to, no pun intended here, but pun intended, he seems to get his Irish up on a day like today. You know, this is when he's at his most confident. This is when he's feeling the most in control, like he knows what's going on. This is his time to shine, which should scare all of us. Some of my predictions, I'm guessing we're going to hear a lot of poetry today. I don't think he's going to quote it correctly, but he's going to try. Let's go late and let the world escape. So we have a lot to look forward to. Big news of the day, the decision we've all been waiting for, you know, I didn't have high hopes for Judge Scott McAfee. I've been watching this thing. I've been waiting, seeing the Chiron's big decision. What's he going to do? And then we got a little sneak peek where he dismissed a couple charges, dismissed a couple counts. I think there were six of them. And I thought, mmm, this isn't good. This is not good. He's setting us up for something. He's softening the soil for some decision that we're not going to like. And there's a few reasons that beyond that, beyond the recent news about the dismissal of, I think it was six counts. Mostly actually, though, the reason I didn't have high hopes for Judge Scott McAfee was his demeanor during the disqualification hearings, his mousiness when he was dealing with Fannie Willis during those hearings. He was a lot more stern with the Trump lawyers, who I thought were very professional and did a very good job, including that lawyer merchant. He would correct them. He would, you know, kind of have, it seemed like he had Fannie's back at a lot of points during this. And she was so disrespectful. And she came in so hot. I was immediately suspicious as to why he would, you know, be handling her with such kid gloves. And she, if you haven't seen this yet, I mean, it's just, even with my measured expectations for Judge Scott McAfee, he managed to surprise me with just how feckless and weak this ruling is. You missed it. He has ruled that either Fannie has to step aside or she has to fire her former lover, Nathan Wade, Wade, like I said, they used to be together. They used to be, I don't want to, I don't want to say they used to be in love because I don't know that. I don't know those intimate parts of their relationship. They used to cruise a lot together. They used to hang a lot together on vacation. You're on a flyaway, that you're going my way. I love it when we're cruising together. I feel like the next cruise is not going to be as fun. They're going to be, they're going to be on a budget for the next cruise. But, yeah, so Wade is her former- Yeah, that cruise from the Sopranos when they found the rat. That's what the next cruise is going to be. Wade is her former lover who she hired to be the special prosecutor in this case. She paid him far more than the other special prosecutors on the case who were, you know, qualified to actually be there. That was the big distinction. Besides, there were two big distinctions between Wade and the other prosecutors. One is that they all had qualifications. Their resume is actually backed up them getting this job and getting paid this much. And two, he was having a relationship with Fannie Willis and the rest of the prosecutors weren't. So that kind of explains the disparity in pay, which, by the way, she also denied. So, after Wade starts making the big bucks, just to give everyone a little flashback, a little refresh. After Wade starts making the big bucks, the two lovebirds went on cruises as we said. They went to wineries, the tattoo parlors and Belize. And so then this ruling comes out that either she has to step aside or she has to fire Wade. And I was trying to think of what it reminded me of. And I guess it's like something you'd see in a movie, like a rom-com, some sort of ridiculous fluff movie where in order to advance the plot, they do something that's unrealistic, but it's a dumb movie so nobody cares. And I'll give an example. I saw a movie a couple years ago. I don't go to the theater a lot now, but I went to the movie theaters and I saw this stupid movie with Ashton Kutcher and Cameron Diaz. And in the movie, they got married in Las Vegas, like a drunken night out. And the judge says something like, "Okay, we're not going to know this, but you have to live together for a month and try to work it out, and then we'll see if we'll know it." Or something where you just go, "Just don't do that. That's stupid, but fine, whatever. I want to see Cameron Diaz on screen for, you know, 80 minutes, sure, whatever." But this is what you would see in something like that. It's such a cop-out, wuss decision by this judge. And you know who actually put this really well? Meghan Kelly, she said, she called it a split-the-baby decision. He can't make an actual move here. He doesn't want to take people off. So he says, "Oh, well, you're both guilty of sin, but instead of taking you both off the case, I'm going to let you guys decide who gets to stay." I've never heard of anything like this. This is like what happens when two people are dating with an company and they have a no-dating policy. So HR says, "All right, one of you needs to quit, or you're both fired." Yeah. This is not a legal, like, the legal ramifications of what's going on here. Like, this is not the time to have this soft HR policy. Yeah. You got going on. Well, the part of it for me -- and I got to give credit here to Red State because Bonchi had a great piece on this, and he said, "This actually helps Trump because if she's going to stay on, which we know she will, I don't think she's going to say, "You know what? No. I'm not going to fire him. I'm going to step aside." Like, that's not going to -- she doesn't give me the idea that she is this benevolent, like, super magnanimous person who's going to take one for the team or take one for Nathan Wade. No, no, no, no. She's going to say, "Okay. Yeah. As long as I can stay in my position of power, hit the road, Jack. Don't you come back?" So, with that being said, though, it looks good for Trump because if she's the face of this case, it's even further proof that this is a -- what does Woody Allen say? A mockery of a sham of a mockery of a whatever, whatever, whatever, whatever. And I do think that that is correct, that having her as the face of this looks good for Trump, but remember the Nancy Pelosi's favorite Latin phrase, falsis and uno, falsis and omnibus? Why would we trust a woman who lied so many times under oath about hiring someone she was sleeping with? Are we supposed to believe that she lie about that, but she has very high standards of conduct when it comes to other areas of her life or other areas of her job? This is clearly a woman with bad judgment. It isn't that kind of important when you're the district attorney of Fulton County and you're running a case that could put someone in jail for 10 years? I mean, yeah, there was a lot of this that was humorous to me. You bring in Grey Goose, you bring in caviar, you bring in those little details. You guys know I love that. So, I'm going to find the amusing parts of this circus, but let's not forget she is running this case that is attempting to get Trump put in jail. This is not a nothing burger kind of case. I mean, it is in some senses, but the consequences of this are pretty high. The stakes are pretty high and she's in charge of it. And she clearly doesn't have good judgment. She clearly has no issue with skirting the truth, but this is going to be the woman who's in charge. I want to take Jonathan Turley. I was waiting all day for his for his take on this. This is cutting. You'd have to reassign this to another set of prosecutors that would cause considerable delay could also cause the dismissal of the case. If those new prosecutors looked at this racketeering theory and said, like many of us, wow, this doesn't really hold together very well. So this avoided the cliff, but it did not avoid the questions that will inevitably come up. You know, it's like, you know, finding two people in a bank vault and taking one off the jail. I mean, the question is, you know, the appearance problem that the judge identified with regard to Wade was directly related to his relationship with Willis. They both testified in the same way. They were the two parts of this, this relationship. And yet only one of them was disqualified. And so that's going to lead to these questions. I mean, well, why should Willis escape that same penalty? The opinion leaves us feeling like the court went and shot the wounded. Yeah, if you're Wade right now, you're probably sitting there going, wait, so I'm going to get all of this. I'm getting the brunt of all this punishment. I get kicked off the case. My career. I mean, his reputation. I don't want to jump the gun here, but his reputation is certainly not in a great position. Called the man trap Nate, you got to avoid that. Yeah, and it is. If you were to look at these two Jared and just, you know, from what you discerned from the hearings from the questioning. Who do you think was calling the shots in that relationship? Oh, it was funny. A hundred percent. Yeah, I think so too. Yeah. Like, I don't think that, not to say that that means that she should, she should be the only one punished. I think they both should be tossed off the case. I think they both should be disbarred. But it definitely, if I'm looking at this, I don't get the sense that he's the brains behind the operation. He might have been the brains behind the cabin operation, you know, booking those cabins because apparently he does that quite a bit. But I don't think lots of cabins. I don't think he was the brains behind anything else. That's just a sense I get. Just another cabin boy discarded. Eight four four five hundred forty two forty two. We will be right back. We've got a lot more to get to today. So don't go anywhere. This is the Grace Curly Show. Hi, it's Toby from Cape Gun Works. I'm taking all your firearm and self-defense questions every Tuesday. Join Grace and me for two eight Tuesday Tuesdays at two p.m. This is the Grace Curly Show. [Music] Judge Scott McAfee ruled that Fanny Willis must step aside from the Trump case or fire special prosecutor Nathan Wade. I don't think it's going to be a tough decision for her on which one she's going to do. See the nature of films with praying mantises. You know how this one ends. You know, Jared, what would be really cool though? What would be really romantic and really cinematic because this does remind me of a movie. It's like these two people fall in love. The work gets involved. The world is watching. The relationship falls apart. We know that from the disqualification hearings that they're not in a relationship anymore. They're former lovers. And I think it would be really beautiful. I just got chills thinking about it, actually. If Fanny Willis said, "No. No, I'm not. I will not step aside if it means firing the man that I love. I won't do it." Imagine she fell on her sword for him. It would be beautiful. And it could be the beginning of a beautiful relationship because we know it ended. And it ended too soon. These two were built to last. There's still so many unexplored cabins. There'd be a shame if they stayed vacant. There really are. There really are. There's so many places. There's so many tattoo parlors to visit. So much to be done and so little time. Today's poll question is brought to you by the Eden Pure Thunderstorm. Three-pack special. Everyone loves a thunderstorm. It doesn't take up any floor space. There are no filters to replace. And it's only one-third the cost of those bulky air purifiers. Take advantage of the Thunderstorm three-pack special at edempurdeals.com and use promo code GRACE3. Jared, what is the poll question and what are the results thus far? Today's poll question, which you can vote in at gracecurlyshow.com, is what's Joe O'Biden's most offensive Irish stereotype remark. None of my Irish family were in jail. People think I'm not Irish because I don't hold a grudge. I'm the only Irishman who's never had a drink or I may be Irish, but I'm not stupid. Jack? I've got a sneak peek at the results here. And I disagree with the majority of people. Everyone's voting for I may be Irish, but I'm not stupid. And I agree that that is offensive and that is... Also factually incorrect, but... Yeah. No. Yeah. Wrong on both counts. But I think that the worst one is the thing about jail. And can I actually play that, Jared? Because this did not get. I looked up the New York post story from last year. So here's something I thought. I thought last year Joe Biden went to Ireland with Hunter and it was because of St. Patrick's Day. That would actually be false. He went later and that's when he confused. Well, he made a lot of comments. Yeah, that's where we got to let go lick the world from the podium in Parliament. And we heard that Hunter was staying in a cot in his bedroom. Weird stuff from that story. But he also, last year during St. Patrick's Day, he said this. And I'm surprised. It didn't get a lot of play at the time. It still doesn't. This is cut too. When I went over to Ireland, it was a great experience. I had been to Ireland many times, but not to actually look up to find my actual family members. And there were so many. And they actually weren't in jail. They were all, but all kidding aside. I didn't like... As a proud Irish American. I did not like that. I did not appreciate it. So that's where my vote goes. Just 11% for none of my Irish family were in jail. That's tied with the only Irishman who never had a drink. 7% for people think I'm not Irish because I don't hold a grudge. And 71% for maybe Irish. But I'm not stupid. Hmm. Okay. Okay. I wanted to give people a heads up that when we come back, we're going to be talking to Mark Salinas. He's an attorney. He's going to give us a rundown of what he thinks of this Fannie Willis decision. And also I want to ask him about the Manhattan DA, Alvin Bragg asking for a delay in Trump's hush money trial. So we have all that and more. But Jared, before we go to break here, since we're on the topic of Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade, can I get... And you know, I should mention here, yesterday we talked a lot about Eddie Scary's piece and the Federalist. And he wrote this entire piece about how he does not think Judge Scott McAfee is brave enough to make the right decision. And he listed some reasons why. But he also made the point that it's scary right now to be a judge. Like, I'm not giving an excuse to him at all because the facts were on his side in this case. But you know you're going to be vilified if you do anything the left doesn't like. And I'd be lying to you if I didn't say that it takes guts to make the right decision in that situation. And unfortunately, a lot of these judges do not have the backbone. They don't have, unlike me, they don't have a backbone like a Ramrod, as Joe Biden would say. Let's take a little bit of Alan Dershowitz. This is cut nine. She conspired to commit perjury with Nathan Wade and with the other witness. Who are you going to believe? This judge of your lying eyes. We all know there was an actual conflict of interest here. He just doesn't have the guts to say it. And I predicted he wouldn't have the guts to say it. He has to live in Fulton County. Now, he may have said some things that are very critical of her. But still, he should have removed the case from the case. There is an actual conflict of interest. She made money from this case. Yeah, I think that's all you have to know. And you know how it's really bad is that CBS News had on an attorney who was saying that he doesn't like this rule. If CBS News, fake but accurate, can get this right, there's no excuse for Judge Scott McAfee. When we come back, Mark Salinas, our favorite attorney, is going to come on and give us his rundown of the Fanny Rules case. Don't go anywhere. Welcome back, everyone, to The Grace Curly Show. I am so thrilled to have on Mark Salinas from Silva and Salinas to get his reaction to the news about Fanny Willis. If you haven't heard about Judge Scott McAfee's ruling, let me read you just a little bit here from Fox News. It says a Georgia judge has ruled the embattled Fulton County District Attorney Fanny Willis must either step aside from the case against former President Donald Trump or fire special prosecutor Nathan Wade. Mark, as far as a ruling goes, this to me seems like something out of a movie. I've never really seen anything like this. She has the option of stepping aside or firing her former lover. What do you make of this decision by Judge Scott McAfee? Oh gosh, what do I make of it? I guess what I make of it is the clown show in Georgia just continues on and on and on. The judge in this case found that there was no actual conflict of interest here, but there was the appearance of it. Therefore, he fashioned this remedy giving the district attorney two options here, like you said. What I don't understand is that he's essentially leaving the remedy to the individual who created this appearance of impropriety. As you said, she's either going to step aside or Wade has to go. I think we all know the decision she's going to make on that one. Yeah, but you just said it, Mark. I love how they always say, you know, it doesn't matter if there is an actual conflict of interest, even if there's an appearance of a conflict of interest. I'm sorry, but if hiring your boyfriend to be the special prosecutor in a case against the former president and then paying him more, even though he's less qualified than the other special prosecutors, if that doesn't qualify as a conflict of interest, Mark, what does? Exactly, and it's not that hard to analyze. This is just the same reason why as an employer you don't get into a romantic relationship with an employee because it skews the dynamic. It changes everything. And so the question was, was Fannie Willis financially benefiting from the ongoing prosecution? The judge said, "Well, I don't see that that actually existed here, but it just looks bad, so that's the reason I'm going to do this." So the question then becomes, what does that do for the public confidence in the prosecution? That the prosecutor, the lead prosecutor in this case, was making such profoundly bad decisions and bad judgment in this case. That calls in the question whether or not this prosecution is in the best interest of the public. Yeah, I'm so glad you brought that up, public opinion and optics, because I think they play a huge, huge part in this. And I remember Mark when Brett Kavanaugh was testifying on Capitol Hill and he was getting questioned about his past indiscretions, which were farting or writing something in a yearbook or drinking beer. And he was also being accused of heinous things that there was no proof of, including rape and things like that. And he was obviously very, very upset by this and he was defending himself. And what got called into question was his temperament. There was this big discussion about does he have the temperament to be a Supreme Court justice based off the hearing that we saw? And I know the judge Scott McAfee said that she was unprofessional in her testimony, but based off the hearing we saw, how are they going to continue on as having Fannie Willis as the face of this investigation or this case? After her behavior? That's a good question. And so they're going to have a brand new prosecution team. We're going to assume the fact that Fannie Willis isn't going to step aside. Her pride would never allow her to do that. So we're going to operate in the assumption that Wade is the one that's going to have to go. So we're going to have an entire new set of prosecutors coming in to look at this case. And then what happens? Let's say the new set of prosecutors look at this and say, look, there really isn't the evidence here to go forward with these charges. And then they're going to have to answer to Fannie Willis who's already displayed this incredible lapse of judgment and unprofessionalism that the judge noted in his decision neither Wade nor Fannie Willis came out looking good in this at all. And the decision was, although I disagree with it, was fairly well written and neither one of them came out looking good on this. Yeah, that's another question I have for you because you brought up Nathan Wade and he's obviously going to be the one who has to take the fall. Could you see a world mark? And maybe this is outrageous, but could you see a world in which Wade has a case against the state of Georgia or anyone? And he can kind of say, hey, why did I get this treatment? I got treated so differently than she did. She's allowed to keep her job. I'm the one being punished. Like, is there anything there? Is he going to end up playing the victim card in this case? That's the question I have. Yeah, he's going to come out and say, look, you know, I didn't deserve this. I was doing my job the way I was supposed to be doing it. And, you know, I shouldn't have been the one to take the fall here. And now it's going to become interesting. Are they going to turn on each other? This is a soap opera. This is not the way these prosecutions are supposed to go. And let's not just forget about the fact. This is a criminal prosecution. Donald Trump is being charged criminally. And we have to consider all of this nonsense in the context of a criminal prosecution. It's just completely unacceptable. It never should have got to this point. Any reasonable prosecutor never would have hired their boyfriend to begin with. Or at some point they would have said, this doesn't look good. I need to step aside or I need to put somebody else in charge of this prosecution. It's all outrageous. Yeah, indeed. The other thing I wanted to ask you about, Mark, while we have you here is the story about the other case that Trump's involved in. And this is also from Fox. It says Manhattan DA Bragg asked for a delay to Trump's hush money trial. It seems like both sides here are asking for a delay. Trump's lawyers are seeking a 90-day delay or the dismissal of charges. Alvin Bragg is pushing for a delay as well. Can you give us an update on what you think's happening here? What I don't understand is why the prosecution team in this case is dumping 30,000 pages of documents on them at two weeks before trial. And then saying, there's a lot more to come. Now, what's really troubling about this is it seems that the source of these documents are documents that the federal prosecution team had in their possession when they were looking at this case. And just to remind you and the viewers, the feds looked at this case and said, you know, the touch money case, we don't see anything here. We're not going to prosecute on these facts. But the assistant district attorney in New York said, no, well, I'm going to do it then. So the very document that the federal government was relying upon and made the decision not to prosecute Donald Trump, they just gave to the defense team. So there's going to be a continuance on this. 30 days is not enough time for a defense team to be able to digest this and figure out what it means. And so what I see happening now is this another delay on another trial for Donald Trump. I don't see any of these trials making it before a jury, before the election now. Yeah, and I think the timing of this was something that Democrats had in mind when they were pushing for a lot of these cases to be brought forward before the election. And now they're all getting a very aggravated that the timeline is not working out the way they wanted it to. Mark, I don't mean to catch you off guard here. So I'm going to ask this first. Have you followed the Karen Reed case at all here in Massachusetts? I have. It's really, really troubling that this one bothers me even more than the Trump cases because it hits home. It's here in Massachusetts. And every time I see something with this case, it really, it just boggles my mind. And now that we have the federal government looking at this, it seems though the mass state police has some issues with this prosecution. The district attorney has some issues with this prosecution. It's a very, very strange, strange case. Yeah, well, I wasn't even going to go here, but we were talking about conflict of interest. And that's a huge part of this story now. And I'm just going to read from the Boston Herald. It says defense attorneys have challenged the prosecutions theory heavily and have painted a portrait of Proctor. He's one of the lead investigators in this case. And other investigators in the case is being very friendly to Brian Albert and his family. Reed's defense attorney said at the most recent hearing in the case that Proctor texted Julie Albert to have her babysit his child. And also that Julie Albert even offered some kind of thank you gift. Now, for people who are not in the weeds of this and haven't been following, my question for you, Marcus, if an investigator is texting people involved in a case, whether it's the bodies found at their house and maybe they're not, maybe they're not being questioned themselves, but they're involved in it in some way. And he has a prior relationship to them and does not, does not let that on or does not, you know, is not forthcoming with that information. How big of a problem is that? Is that like fruit of the poison tree where how can we trust anything that's coming out of this case now? The whole thing is ruined or what? Yeah, it is. Well, you know, what it does is it creates a question of bias in the investigation of the case and all of this information should have been disclosed to the defense team because that's something that should be presented to the jury. You can't have an investigator having a personal relationship with the key players in any type of criminal prosecution. I mean, that that's just a no-no right from the beginning, sort of sounds a lot like what was going on in Georgia, except that now it's happening here in Massachusetts. Yeah, no, I think that's that's such a great point. And as far as the Karen Reed case goes, what are your predictions on that? Do you think it will be dismissed? We know that the federal authorities brought in their own experts to kind of recreate this scenario and see if the injuries that happened to police officer John O'Keefe were consistent with someone who had been hit by a vehicle. They determined no, it hasn't in my mind, Mark, and I'm not a lawyer, but in my mind, that's his case closed. How do you have a case where someone allegedly hit somebody else with a car if the experts don't think that his injuries look like he was hit by a car? Yeah, and the bigger question is did the process, did the state prosecution team, but were they aware of this forensic evidence and did they fail to disclose it to the defense team in this case? If this case ends up getting dismissed, that is going to be an incredibly incredible decision that's going to make the district attorney's office look terrible. It's going to make the Massachusetts police look terrible. And again, it's going to shake the confidence of the public in legitimate prosecutions. Mark Salinas, we love having you on. Thank you so much. I know I threw some of that stuff at you last minute and I really appreciate you answering all of our questions. Please let people know where they can follow you, where they can find you, and where they can ask you their own questions. Oh, thanks. Great. I always love coming on. Our main offices in North and over Massachusetts. You can find us at SSlawteam.com and Happy St. Patrick's Day. Happy St. Patrick's Day to you as well. And just an update for everyone on this, Karen Reid front. This is from the Herald. It says notorious blogger, Aiden Turtleboy Kearney, known for his defense of accused murderer Karen Reid, was released on personal recognizance after a new allegation accused him of breaking the terms of a restraining order. So we had Turtleboy on this week. He's really been one of the only people from the beginning at least who's been covering this and really diving into every single detail. The media now is picking up a little bit more on this and they're covering it. I just think they know that this is a huge story. I mean, that's always my question with the media is like, I get, I get it to an extent when they don't want to cover certain things that make Trump look good or whatever. But in this case, you've got all of the ingredients of something that people would click on. And isn't it about clicks? Isn't it about driving, you know, readership? Yeah, when there's an official story, you can kind of avoid it. But when there starts to become the appearance of impropriety at the highest levels, that's something you can't avoid. I mean, that's just as a news organization. At that point, you get to start at least giving it minimal coverage. And Turtleboy has a lot of enemies. He really does. And when we have him on the show, we'll get a lot of pushback from people who don't like Turtleboy. And I'm like, that's fine if you don't like Turtleboy, but he's the only one reporting on it. Like, who else are we going to? We want to go to somebody who's been following this and who has at least a little bit of the the gumption to actually write about it. And there isn't a lot of people in the mainstream media who are doing that. And so don't you want to go to the person, even if you don't like them, even if they're not, you know, they have things that you have a problem with. Where else are we going to go? Nobody else is talking about it. And again, it's changing a little bit. Like the Boston Globe recently wrote about this, but I would say a little too late. I mean, it's. It's pretty far along at this point. 844 542 42 recently a Grace Curly show listener called in. She was telling us how much she loved the thunderstorm. There's so much to love, Jared. I mean, you plug it in. And it just works. It's going to get rid of smells. It's going to get rid of pollutants. It's going to get rid of allergens. And it's going to do it all quietly. And it's going to do it without taking up a lot of floor space. So it's the perfect device for everyone. Yeah, and it doesn't make things smell flowery. You don't get that like syrupy, sticky feeling in the air. No, you get as you get an absence of smell. Because the thunderstorm ionizes the air, which creates a super oxygen, which eliminates any odors that are in the air. The same way it can do that with allergens and pollutants. It's great. I love it for my allergies. And not only can you just plug it into a wall, you can take it in your car. I have one in my car because each one comes with a USB cable that you just plug into. Plug it into the USB port in your car. And I get that allergen free ionized air in my car. Yeah. And if you go to edimpuredeals.com, you can check out the three pack special. Like Jared said, there's so many different reasons to have the three pack special, you know, at your beck and call. You want it in your office. You want it in your kitchen. You want it in your basement. You want one in your car. And you can have all of that if you go to edimpuredeals.com. But don't forget to use code grace three. I want you guys to get this three pack deal. Go to edimpuredeals.com code grace and the number three will be right back. You're listening to the Grace Curly Show. This is the Grace Curly Show. [MUSIC PLAYING] Top of the morning, Kia. Welcome back to the Grace Curly Show. Thank you all so much for joining us. Happy early St. Patrick's Day. Joe Biden has postponed his luncheon by, what Jared, is he having a delay here and an hour delay? Yeah, originally it was supposed to be 12.30. He's been pushed back to 1.20. OK, so everybody you have more time to prepare for what I'm sure is going to be a very respectful, well thought out speech by Joe Biden while he pays homage to his Irish heritage. There was an old man named Ambrose Finnegan. He had whiskers on his chin again. They fell out and then grew in again poor old man, Ambrose Finnegan. Jared, are you Irish? I am not. I am Italian and French. Will you partake in any of the St. Patrick's Day tradition? I'm actually making it's not really an Irish tradition, but it's the St. Patrick's Day tradition. I'm making the corn beef and cabbage tomorrow. A nice what color corn beef? Red, the one that just comes in the package. Tough to find gray. I think my mom in the wild. My mom likes gray. My dad. Get the sense with great corn beef. You kind of got to do it yourself or like have a really good specialty shop that doesn't. You know, I was talking to someone from Ireland the other day and they said that they don't actually eat it there. Yeah, no, it's actually it's a very American thing that came because there really wasn't a lot of beef available in Ireland at the time. So what happened is when the Irish immigrants came to New York, they were living next to the Jewish communities who have, you know, brisket is one of their main foods that they eat. And so the brisket sort of kind of made its way into the cabbage in place of what are we waving? Taylor looks like he's skeptical of this entire history lesson you're giving. He's making cases again. Okay, I mean, I'm just telling you what Taylor told me. Do you want to be a fact checker here? Do you want to be Daniel Dale? They would eat a lot of mutton over there. They didn't really have a lot of a lot of beef. A lot of potatoes. They'd have a lot of potatoes, except when they did it. Except when they didn't. Yeah, right. But yeah, so that they kind of the American Irish, as I understand, has sort of adopted that and it became the thing. All right. He's like the Grim Reaper. He's just loosing. Sounds like a lot of malarkey to me. That's all I'm saying. You think so? Well, we'll fact check it. We'll absolutely fact check it. So I'll be real. I was more focused on what the faces Taylor was making. But what are we fact checking here? We're fact checking about if they had a lot of beef available. I don't know exactly what we're fact checking, but that's you seem very offended that he's questioning your legend has been told to me. Okay, I don't want to fight to break out. That's not what St. Patrick's Day is about. I want to give everyone an update here. Trump's Lead Defense Council said this in a statement about the Fannie Willis decision. While respecting the court's decision, we believe that the court did not afford appropriate significance to the prosecute for the misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct of Willis and Wade, including the financial benefits, testifying untruthfully about where when their personal relationship began, as well as Willis's extra judicial MLK Church speech where she played the race card and falsely accused the defendants and their counsel of racism. Yeah, you know, I actually agree with Trump's Lead Defense Council on that, that MLK Church speech, that was one of a kind. That was something that you go down in the history books where she compared herself to MLK right after these charges came out. And she also did say that this was only happening to her because something along the lines of because she's a black woman, but the other person I want to play, you could expect that from Donald Trump's defense team, you know, they're going to come out and say we're disappointed in this decision. But what I didn't expect is an attorney on CBS of all places to say something very similar. Jerry, can I get cut 10? What does it mean? I'm personally disappointed. I disagree with it. I found it interesting that Judge McAfee made pretty clear, I think, that he thought Fannie Willis was lying on the stand, that he thought Nathan Wade was likely lying on the stand, that he thought Nathan Wade's former law partner was likely lying on the stand. And then yet at the end of the day, he said, in order to purge all of this, these issues, all that needs to happen is that Mr. Wade step aside. Let me ask you, if you were being charged with a crime that could land you in prison for 10 plus years, would you feel under these circumstances that you were being given a fair shape? That was Scott Grubman. Now, he's the defense attorney who's been representing a co-defendant in this case. So it does make sense that he is obviously not happy with this decision. What surprises me though is that they had him on CBS. But I agree. I mean, if you saw all these shenanigans going on, caviar, cruises, text messages, she's paying Nathan Wade more than everybody else. He doesn't really have any qualifications for this, and she supposedly has a castle full of cash at her house. Would you feel like this is the person you want, making sure you end up in jail? I don't think so.