Transcript
Files Fallout, Investigation Report Blocked (Hour 1)
Daybreak w/ Brian and Jamie · Tue Feb 24, 2026
You're listening to Civic Media.
You can tune into any of our live shows on any radio station across the state with the Civic Media app.
Find us in your phone's app store and listen anytime, anywhere.
Glad to have you here.
We look forward to talking to you today.
So jump in at your leisure, 855-75 Civic 855-7524842.
Another big news day as we prep for the what is sure to be.
an unbelievable state of the union address tonight.
We've got a lot to get to.
I'm proud of your
My tongue is firmly in cheek.
I'm surprised I can enunciate words that way.
But we endeavor to go on.
Once again, hail Britannia and their justice system because the
The Dominos are starting to fall in other countries regarding the Epstein files.
Of course, you remember former Prince Andrew was arrested the other day.
Now, he's out, but he hasn't been cleared of anything.
He's just out.
They investigated him not for alleged...
Pedophilia or child abuse or anything like that.
No, they invested him for sharing documents while with Epstein while he was in office.
Well now police have arrested former UK ambassador to the US Peter Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office tied to the jeep free Epstein investigation, which is the same Charge that Andrew was arrested under misconduct in public office.
So
Other countries taking this very seriously and other countries are Especially the UK is already gloating a little bit.
Yeah Once we have to subpoena all the records for these cases everything's coming out
Yes, and I think if you are somebody who's been following this closely if you've wanted some of You know the people mentioned in the Epstein files to face some sort of consequence.
I think it's best that you
put your sites on the UK in Europe, because we've talked about it on this program before.
They are taking these allegations much more seriously than obviously our current DOJ is in the United States.
And I think you're going to see the most fallout there.
In fact, with Mandelson, there's actually photos of him in the White House, in the Oval Office
with
and
Documents also show that Mandelson referred to Epstein as my best pal years earlier and also allegedly received payments totaling $75,000, which he says he does not recall and has questioned the authenticity of.
His arrest comes less than a week after the former Prince Andrew.
in the United States, we're also starting to see a few ripple effects, right?
There's a celebrity doctor, he's also a best-selling author, his name is Peter Atia.
Yeah, and he's now stepped down as a CBS News contributor after emails showed that he exchanged messages and jokes with Epstein in the 2010s.
So Atea has not been accused of any crime.
He says his contact with Epstein had nothing to do with abuse and that he was never on Epstein's plane or on the infamous island.
He did apologize for what he called embarrassing and tasteless emails.
I also think it's interesting because Hollywood mogul Casey Wasserman, who, you know, owns some talent agencies, he is on the 2028 Olympic committee, you know, because the Olympics are going to be in LA.
He is being asked to step down from
I know he sold his talent agency.
There was a question about that.
It would be wise of him to step down.
Now, see, here's the thing for a lot of these guys.
And innocent until proven guilty, I get it.
You could make an argument if you travel in social circles in New York that you had met Jeffrey Epstein.
There's probably at a party you might have been introduced to him.
You say, hello.
Once you start...
Said I got you meet a lot of people Jamie.
I
mean a lot of
It was Frank.
Yeah Yeah, you met Frank now.
You don't email Frank all the time with tasteless jokes You know, we don't everybody you meet you don't all of a sudden start exchanging emails with that's when that's when your story doesn't hold water Well, I only met him once.
Yeah, but we have all these emails so you you obviously struck up some sort of
relationship, whether it and relationship may be a strong word, but that's the best one to describe when two people are in contact with each other.
So, yeah, with this ATIA and everybody else, it's and some are more, some are easier, like Wasserman's emails to Gillian Maxwell, it's very easy to say, all right, this is not just a casual meeting.
I think the fallout that we're seeing in the uk in the media in politics It's a very good thing and if powerful people did have these inappropriate relationships because remember at this point These are alleged crimes, right?
If they shared sensitive information if they were enabled any of this wrongdoing they deserve whatever consequence
has come their way and accountability shouldn't depend on the status, it shouldn't depend on their title or their connections.
And let's be honest, I think if you're sitting here in the United States and you're watching what's happening in the UK between the former Prince and now Mandelson, you're kind of wishing some of that fallout was happening here in the United States too, because- But what's the big difference?
Well, the big difference is the DOJ and who is running our current DOJ, but I guess the argument goes back to, for some people,
The Biden administration also sat on these files for a really long time.
Here's the thing, we can parse out who these files have been under, whose DOJ was involved.
If there's wrongdoing, there's wrongdoing.
If crimes were committed, crimes were committed, and those people need to be prosecuted.
I also think it's interesting that as we mentioned the state of the union address tonight, several House Democrats will be bringing Epstein survivors as guests to the president's address.
And lawmakers, including Ro Khanna, Jamie Raskin, Robert Garcia, say that the goal is
to push for transparency and full accountability in the handling of the Epstein files.
Some Democrats are planning to attend the speech.
Others will participate in what they're calling an alternative people's state of the union address.
I'm not exactly sure what that entails yet.
You know, you look at Representative Massey, he will be bringing his wife to tonight's state of the union, which I think is interesting because President Trump has basically called
her out specifically on social media and threaten Thomas Massey's wife.
So he'll be bringing her as a guest tonight.
I
And I understand what Democrats are trying to do by bringing some of these victims.
They're highlighting them.
They're making a moral statement, and they're saying that the story isn't going away.
But here's my question when I actually sat down and thought about this.
Does it move the needle in any sort of way?
Because this president has shown time and again that public pressure is not going to shame him.
It's not going to.
him.
And I'm not sure that it's going to rattle a lot of the Republicans who are going to be standing there with him.
I think it does rattle him, which is why then he goes into bigger and more varied deflections.
So I think he gets rattled.
I don't think he, it's like the old commercial, never let him see a sweat.
I think he believes that we don't see him panicking.
But we do because of his actions.
And going back to something you said about the with the Justice Department and the Biden administration, they did convict Epstein and Maxwell during that.
Now, if there was an attempt to cover those documents during Biden's administration, that needs to be looked into too.
But Biden didn't campaign on one of his main platforms being that they're going to release all the files.
People are coming to justice.
Well, that's fine until your name starts popping up thousands of times and The other this is what I he sues everybody yes, Trump For nothing being called a pedophile is a really serious thing.
Yep.
Yeah
that's like that would be the that would be probably the first thing and only thing I would not the only thing but the first thing if somebody started publicly saying that about me oh man I'd have all my money invested in attorneys trying to get that straightened out if you're innocent you fight that and I know defense if you're a defense attorney and you're listening I know a lot of times defense attorneys go no you don't want to you don't want to put your client on the stand you don't want them to have to testify you don't yeah I don't know in some cases
Silence, silence speaks volumes.
I think it's going to be fascinating to watch this play out, especially if the UK is about making some sort of prosecution.
And I mean, we've talked about this on this program before.
I don't know if most of the, if any prosecutions come even in the UK, I don't believe it's going to be tied to what's in the Epstein files.
It's going to be other crimes that tie them and at least land
them
And I, I, I totally understand that.
But at some point, if they are in the files thousands of times,
I just want to see him in jail for something, right?
John and Oshkosh listening on WISS this morning chimes in on the text line saying that the Dems have to keep this in the forefront until those responsible are held to justice, release the Trump Epstein files.
Thank you for the comment this morning.
If you want to chime in on any of the conversation, because let's be honest, we have great conversation here.
It's a lot going on.
1-855-752-4842.
That number is 1-855-75 Civic.
We'd love to hear your.
thoughts.
And, you know, when it comes to, I don't know if anybody has handled these files properly, right?
Between all of the administrations who have been involved and you are, you are absolutely right.
At least the Biden administration was able to prosecute Epstein and also Ghislaine Maxwell, but I don't believe any of the,
presidential administrations have handled these files well.
It's almost like, you know, there's stuff in them that they don't want people to see.
And
right
now and you know republicans will always say well what if so and so is it i don't care who's in the file and you shouldn't care either uh and i don't care what side of the aisle they're on i don't care who you voted for i don't none of that should matter what should matter is you have all these young women telling you that they were victims
Case after case after case has proven that women don't lie about this.
The amount of false testimony in sexual assaults and abuse is miniscule.
So the fact that we still, after all this time, won't believe women is unconscionable.
You're listening to Civic Media.
Stay up to date on the latest news and information for your local community and Wisconsin by signing up for our free email newsletter.
Visit civicmedia.us slash email to get started.
And as the big voice guy told you, we want you to get involved.
And that's how we came to this little segment.
Because if you're joining us today and you weren't here with us yesterday, really, there's no excuse for that.
Civic relaunched civic media relaunched the talk network.
We're the same Parker still here.
Thank goodness and Frank's still here So the crew is the crew is the same the name is different But the network has changed a little too and the approach of the company to what is on the air Has changed not drastically and Jamie I'm so that I don't misspeak
because God knows I am a fan of misspeak.
I'll let you explain the little bit of direction before we get to this.
Somebody texted us last week and it made us, Jamie and I were talking about this and so we decided we would bring it to the air and use it as a kind of explainer for what we're trying to do.
So the foundation that civic media was built on was essentially building a stronger democracy and democracy with a little D. One that all voters, no matter where their part, where your party alliances are, can come together and have open dialogue and conversation.
Because we feel here at civic media, when that happens, we build a stronger.
we built a stronger democracy.
That's essentially what we do.
We also want to talk about the stories in the news, but follow those up with not just a bunch of hyperbole, and sometimes you're gonna get that because, you know, we give our opinions too, but a lot of fact-based...
discussion about what's happening in the news.
And that is essentially what we have built civic media on.
Um, and I know for some of our listeners, it's been a little bit of a different switch because we, we have talked more of the fact based instead of just opinion all of the time, but we try to lead a little bit with both and, but our opinions are always based in the facts.
And we also want to make sure that if our opinions are wrong or we give the wrong information that we are willing
to correct that because we also feel here at Civic Media that that builds a stronger democracy but we believe everybody has a vote no matter how you how you
what happens when you go to the ballot box?
Everybody has a say in how government operates and that starts at our very local levels all the way up to Washington DC.
And so that is essentially what we are trying to do here at Civic Media.
And we've gone through some changes because let's be honest, it's expensive to run radio and
it's
and I are
And you got Pete and Greg from Five to Seven on Nightlight.
And then the other shows in there, but things evolve.
And that's why I'm here because when I talk to everybody at Civic, they're like, well, it's a politics show and a news show.
And I was like, okay.
I said, but are we, where are we on the far edge of either thing?
And they said, no, we want you to talk about it based in facts and facts are facts.
And yes, then, then as Jamie said, we get to give our opinion and you can argue with my opinion all day long.
But really, we can't argue with facts.
And there are no my facts and your facts and our facts and their facts.
Turns
And somebody said love civic texture.
And I don't they didn't include their name.
They're relatively new texture.
As a former MAGA, I just caution against talking down or elitism.
I don't focus.
I don't consider myself that.
But fact checking is good.
Exposing half truths is great.
being gentle with us is nice.
And listen, I know sometimes you'll hear me do a voice of a character.
Those voices are unfortunately in my head and they have to come out.
They are not an attack at any individual person.
Sometimes, yes, they lump in a group, but if we're honest, humor can be used to point out the
silliness, the absurdity, the craziness of a certain group of people.
And that doesn't mean do I think all Republicans think that way?
Absolutely not.
And I'm only speaking for me.
My criticisms are mostly for the administration.
Because who you voted for, that's in the past.
You're allowed to change your mind like this, like this texture.
It sounds like they're changing their mind about that.
That's fine.
So I'm not criticizing people.
I'm criticizing the administration.
It's about sometimes what people just simply know.
It's about the family, the jobs they're in, the churches, their neighbors.
It's about wanting stability, safety, opportunity for all of the people they love.
And this is where I feel like we always have common ground no matter how we're voting because most of us want strong communities.
We want good schools.
We want safe neighborhoods.
We want a fair shot at success.
We want to be able to pay for our medicines.
Philosophically,
we might land in very different places on how
we get
The desire to get there is often the same.
But we should be willing to fact check, including ourselves.
No politician, no party, no media outlet should be above any sort of scrutiny.
And if we care about our communities, then that truth really matters.
And the facts...
are always going to matter.
So we want to debate the ideas.
We want to challenge policies here at Civic Media, but we cannot dismiss or demean the people behind those votes, and that is never our intention.
And if we're all serious about moving forward as a country, then that's going to start with respecting most Americans, even the ones that we might disagree with, and believe that they're just trying to do the right thing at the end of the day.
And that's, I think, how we
I want you to get involved because I'm wondering from you when we tell you this story about a judge barring Jack Smith's final report.
How do you feel about this?
Are you surprised?
Is this business as usual?
Let us know 855-757-855-757-524842.
Yes, yesterday you may have heard.
Jack Smith had written his final report and it's been in court for a while.
They're trying to figure out what to do with it.
Well, this is all about Donald Trump's alleged mishandling of classified records and obstruction of justice at Mar-a-Lago.
You remember the pictures?
Boxes of files in the bathroom, which is where I keep...
all my important files.
All our show materials is right next to the throne.
We also hear it's
This file is not going to be released because a U.S.
district judge, Eileen Cannon, who just happens to be a Trump appointee from where you may ask?
Florida.
Yes.
She threw out the case that Smith... She also had thrown out the case that Smith brought against the president.
Now she's saying he can't even release the file.
What could possibly be in there, Jamie, that again, nobody wants us to see?
portion of what's been happening with Jack Smith over the last year and a half, two years or so, you'll know that she's been very kind to the former president at the time when this case started and now the current president.
Now, she called the unlawful appointment
of Jack Smith and the Justice Department determination, reason to not disclose this particular report.
Now, she'd previously dismissed all the classified documents case in July of 2024, ruling that Jack Smith's appointment was unconstitutional.
So we're going way back, we're going into the way back machine for some of
And the Justice Department appealed that decision at the time.
Now, in this order that came out yesterday, Cannon said that Smith continued preparing the report after she dismissed the case and used discovery materials that were subject to a protective order, which she says bars public disclosure without court approval.
So she's argued that it's not customary for prosecutors to release detailed reports when a case has been dismissed without
what a finding of guilt.
So I feel like at this point, she's stretching a little bit to find reasons why she can't move things forward.
And if you followed the case going back to 2024, she was also doing that at the time.
But of course you're in Florida, so things move a little slower and they like to stall things on behalf of certain individuals.
So we never really did get to see any of this come to fruition.
Now, Eileen Cannon had already barred the Justice Department from sharing the report with members of Congress earlier this year, saying that it contains extensive evidence that was never made public in court filings.
Guess why it was never made public in
Yes,
we're giving you the facts, but my opinion and I want to hear yours too We both want to hear your opinion eight five five seven five civic eight five five seven five two four eight four two It it doesn't make sense What we were able to hear from Jack Smith when he was initially testifying things seemed to point toward wrongdoing
Okay, again, if there's nothing there, tell us.
If you've got something to hide...
That's when you use all the machinations, all the loopholes.
You stretch, you stay within the law, but you stretch it to its boundaries to make sure that you get the desired results.
Some of Trump's defendants, or co-defendants rather, actually asked for this file to be destroyed.
Yes.
Now the judge said no, she wasn't going to destroy it.
But what are you, what's going on?
And how do you expect us not to
be skeptical and not to question and not to assume when you do nothing to I know you're not I know in the legal system you don't have to prove innocence right people the state or the country has to prove your guilt but again common sense and that's I know I operate in that area much to my chagrin and but why not why not prove your innocence
Right.
Or at least clear your name or erase any suspicion.
It doesn't make any sense to me.
But now just days after a lot of us were applauding the Supreme Court for upholding the rule of law in the tariff case, we've got Judge Candid who steps in again, and this time just blocks the public from seeing any of the special counsel's report, which, you know, there's serious questions being raised here.
So, you know, you can applaud part of the judicial system and then realize that some of them were
put there for a certain reason.
Now, before leaving the Justice Department, Jack Smith actually told lawmakers, if you remember, this just happened a few weeks ago in those close door depositions, and then eventually in a public hearing, that his team had gathered what he described as powerful evidence that President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents at Mar-a-Lago and repeatedly tried to obstruct justice.
Critics of this particular ruling, including watchdog groups and free speech advocates, say that blocking this report keeps the public from seeing the full factual record of a taxpayer-funded investigation involving this country's national security.
And Trump's attorneys are praising the decision, as you can imagine, arguing that Smith's appointment was unconstitutional and that the investigation itself was improperly funded.
Well, it was funded through taxpayer dollars.
And
if we're talking
It can't be right if you believe that it's right, and it can't be wrong if you believe that it's wrong.
I mean, sometimes there is truth that is in the middle, and this administration likes to skew the...
facts and the evidence to their benefit.
They do it over and over again.
Now, the public paid for this investigation.
We can't see what's being released.
Congress can't see what's in this report.
And if you, I don't care how you vote, that is a transparency issue.
And this is what matters in this country.
When an administration works this hard to keep a report like this from seeing the light of day,
I mean, it's fair to ask the question, what are they afraid of us seeing?
What are they actually afraid of us seeing if they're working this hard between Eileen Cannon telling us that, basically gaslighting us saying that, oh, there's no evidence there.
It's fine.
It's fine.
John and Ashkash text in the whole Trump regime as a cover-up.
It's hard not to argue.
It's hard not to agree with John, so I won't.
I will agree with him.
I'm not going to argue.
Again, I know sometimes it seems very basic and a lot of
And I've had this conversation with attorneys for decades.
Sometimes when I look at the law, I look at it to my peril from a common sense, every day guy kind of view, because that's what I am.
And I know if I were being accused of all kinds of heinous acts, whether it's obstruction of justice or keeping classified material in a bathroom or...
trying to rig an election.
All these alleged crimes.
If I was being accused of those, I would want to fight until my last breath to clear my name.
I understand that the political class and the powerful in this country operate under another set of laws than you and I do.
That we're all supposed to operate under the same set of laws, but you and I
do not operate under the same set of laws.
Look at any time someone is excused from their horrible behavior because of who they are or who they know.
And think about would that be extended to me?
And no, it wouldn't.
So the fact that they are keeping this report under wraps, when Jack Smith had an unimpeachable record,
leading up to being appointed by Merrick Garland, which nobody said was unconstitutional at a time.
At the time, people said, oh, this is great.
Let's get an independent investigator in here.
Let them work outside of the Justice Department because we're, you know, already we were a little dubious about the Justice Department with Merrick Garland and his slow walking things here and all of that.
So it was great.
Well, the problem with saying getting a special investigator is great.
is that that person is going to investigate and if you didn't think that Jack Smith was going to get to the bottom of this you hadn't been paying attention because he was going to get to the bottom of this case and it sounds like he did from what from what we were able to glean from his public testimony and what congress has said he got to the bottom of it.
Now we're at the point where you don't want it released that can tell
A logical guy, like myself, only one thing.
And I don't know what it tells you, but it should at least, at least, raise red flags.
18557524842, 185575CIVIC if you want to get involved in the conversation.
This is about accountability and if there is evidence that a sitting or former president tried to interfere with the lawful transfer of power, obstruct judge justice,
All of us deserve to know that information.
Transparency is not optional when you are in a democracy, especially when it involves the president of the United States.
And yes, that is very Pollyanna of me, but it is how the Constitution works and it's how our government was set up to work.
Now you brought up Merrick Garland and I know we're getting close to a break, but there's always been some consternation around Merrick Garland and his role.
And there was a lot of people who didn't think he did his job.
Do you think he did his job or do you think he was being slowed and trying to build an airtight case?
that
Jack Smith and his team had locked everything down.
Merrick Garland decided not to act for whatever reason.
And I'm not here to read Merrick Garland's mind, but I don't believe he did his job correctly.
I think he slow walked this.
I think it was another horrible reminiscent of James Comey right before a week before the election, that kind of thing.
So, no.
There's my long answer to a short question.
listening to Civic Media.
Find the latest news, information and archives of all your favorite shows on the Civic Media website, civicmedia.us.
That's
nearly half gallon.
This is actually kind of crazy.
It's called a Duncan refresher.
And this bucket comes with a handle.
It comes with a lid and it comes with an extra long straw because duff 48 ounces.
And it's currently being tested at fewer than 10 locations, mostly in the Northeast.
Well, with the snow, they're not getting those in the next
There's some early reports that say prices start around about nine bucks for iced coffee and about about 10 bucks for these refreshers.
Unlike regular Duncan orders, they appear to be prefilled and they are not customizable.
So you grab whatever's available on the shelf.
Now there's been, as you can imagine, a lot of online reaction on these because,
Well, it's ranged from everything from excitement to complete disbelief and some fans are begging for a nationwide rollout.
Others are joking that the drink is as big as my head on
some
social media platforms and wondering how it would even fit into a car cup holder.
I feel like at that point, if you're doing 48 ounces, you really want this for the morning.
And by the way, who needs that much coffee?
You're gonna need some sort of specialized cup holder for your car, which then adds to the cost of all of this.
Now, there are some questions already about this.
as far as the caffeine levels, which could easily hit triple digits in milligrams for the coffee version.
Listen, I know that doctors are gonna say too much caffeine is bad for you.
I say too little caffeine is really bad for me.
One, because I'd be snoozing during the show.
Two, I would be grumpy grumpy.
And three, I'd probably fall asleep everywhere.
Yeah.
I love, I love caffeine.
I use it on the days when I'm going on about, you know, four hours of sleep, which happens more times than I want to admit.
But Duncan hasn't said whether or not this giant bucket will expand beyond its limited test market of the Northeast corridor right now, but it is definitely getting some attention.
I also love that this is not customizable, right?
Like
you can't, yeah, you
can't do any milk swaps.
There's no extra
pumps.
Here's your bucket.
no old
Just get your bucket.
It reminds me of if you've ever been to a truck stop and I'm not sure if quick trip they had those those giant coffee mugs and you would see it like at first I only saw them at like I said at truck stops and then I would see them at other
convenient stores, and they were the big thing like this.
Now, Jamie, John and Oshkosh.
I see this.
At 85575 Civic, 85575248402.
Kind of backing my play, he says, sturgeon spirits in Oshkosh may or may not have a chocolate liqueur that may go well in hot coffee, hypothetically speaking, of course.
That sounds like hypothetically, John.
A breakfast of champions.
I like John's
I didn't start drinking it till I was 30 and now I can't stop Going back to this Duncan thing 40 a big
The barrel is gonna be heavy.
This is not for the... Maybe people are using this as their morning workout and hydration all in one.
You get two and you're doing curls while you're driving with your knees.
Not safe, but effective.
Network.
but it can be hard to find news about your local community.
Civic Media is dedicated to providing quality local and state news coverage across Wisconsin.
With the Civic Media app, you can get notifications about local stories that matter to you and your community.
Find the free Civic Media app in your phone's app store and choose notifications from the menu to tell us what kind of news you want to hear about.
