Speaker 1: Also media. Hey everybody, Robert Evans here, and I wanted
Speaker 1: to let you know this is a compilation episode. So
Speaker 1: every episode of the week that just happened is here
Speaker 1: in one convenient and with somewhat less ads package for
Speaker 1: you to listen to in a long stretch if you want.
Speaker 1: If you've been listening to the episodes every day this week,
Speaker 1: there's going to be nothing new here for you, but
Speaker 1: you can make your own decisions.
Speaker 2: Welcome to it could happen here. The show about how
Speaker 2: a small group of people are trying to keep making
Speaker 2: bad things happen, and we're going to tell you what
Speaker 2: they are. I'm Garrison Davis and joined with me is
Speaker 2: doctor James Stout. Hello, doctor, Hi Garrison. Thank thank you
Speaker 2: for having me put some respect on my name.
Speaker 3: Appreciate it.
Speaker 2: So today we're going to be talking about something called
Speaker 2: Agenda forty seven, and actually we're going to be talking
Speaker 2: about this this whole week. We've gotten a lot of
Speaker 2: quests to talk about the Heritage Foundations Project twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: which is a kind of an a roadmap for how
Speaker 2: a Republican president could to change the country if they
Speaker 2: get elected next year. And although this proposal is scary
Speaker 2: and quite big. It's a massive, massive book.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Trump certainly listens to these types of guys, but he
Speaker 2: doesn't always like really like them.
Speaker 3: Okay, he does what the fuck he wants. And again,
Speaker 3: no one controlling Trump.
Speaker 2: He kind of does whatever he wants, right, Yeah, And
Speaker 2: I mean there certainly are other people like in Congress,
Speaker 2: including the Speaker, who are definitely pushing this project twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five. And I think we'll probably talk about this
Speaker 2: on the show at some other point. But Trump actually
Speaker 2: has his own plans for if he's gonna be elected
Speaker 2: president again, and we're gonna be talking about that, and
Speaker 2: that is called Agenda forty seven, which I believe is
Speaker 2: a subtle reference to the forty seventh president, which will
Speaker 2: be him if he gets elected.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well so the forty fifth president. So yeah, sell
Speaker 3: more much that way.
Speaker 2: So the next the next, the next few episodes, we're
Speaker 2: gonna be diving into Trump's plans for if he becomes
Speaker 2: the forty seventh president of the United States, called Agenda
Speaker 2: forty seven. He has all of these listed on his website,
Speaker 2: and one of my favorite parts is that to accompany
Speaker 2: each one of these, like policy proposals. He has a
Speaker 2: video of him like reading out something on a like
Speaker 2: a teleprompter, and he very often will go off script,
Speaker 2: just completely and just start talking, which which they include
Speaker 2: the entire transcript for underneath each video, which is just
Speaker 2: fascinating to read, totally divorced of like how he talks.
Speaker 2: It's just amazing. Also, all of the videos are embedded
Speaker 2: on his website via Rumble, which is just amazing, amazing
Speaker 2: stuff happening.
Speaker 3: It's perfect.
Speaker 2: So that's that's kind of the the overview of what
Speaker 2: we're gonna be doing this next week and why and
Speaker 2: the reason why I have James here. James you you
Speaker 2: you work in education, right?
Speaker 3: I do? I do some educating.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so you have you have opinions on it?
Speaker 3: I would assume yeah, strong ones as a doctor, Yeah yeah,
Speaker 3: a doctor of mond European history. Just to be clear
Speaker 3: before anyone, yes, pictures of their illnesses, please don't.
Speaker 2: So I'm gonna be talking about Trump's plan for education,
Speaker 2: and by the end we can see if it gets
Speaker 2: the James Stout approval. As someone who works in education.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, I mean, I'm upen minded. Let's see what
Speaker 3: he's got.
Speaker 2: So Trump, now the problem with us doing these episodes
Speaker 2: is that all of these are like videos right for
Speaker 2: his policy proposals. And I don't want to subject to you,
Speaker 2: the listener, to just videos of Trump talking. I don't
Speaker 2: you don't need to hear that. But there's a part
Speaker 2: of me, just deep down, a shameful part of me
Speaker 2: that when I'm reading these quotes, I really want to
Speaker 2: like slip into like a like a bad transgender Trump impression,
Speaker 2: which I've tried to suppress. I've tried to suppress the surge,
Speaker 2: but every once in a while, it just it just
Speaker 2: sneaks out. So as I'm going through these quotes, I
Speaker 2: can not promise that certain things might start happening. And
Speaker 2: it's it's just a part of the deal.
Speaker 3: You've been possessed by the spirit of Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: Oh God. So on this note, Trump opens his education
Speaker 2: proposal with this line quote, our public schools have been
Speaker 2: taken over by the radical left maniacs, which really sets
Speaker 2: the tone for the rest of what we're gonna be
Speaker 2: talking about today.
Speaker 3: I do want to highlight that I've been trying for
Speaker 3: more than a decade, but obviously it's about people have
Speaker 3: been more successful than me in that regard.
Speaker 2: So over these next like twenty five minutes, I'm gonna
Speaker 2: try to explain what he calls his quote plan to
Speaker 2: save American education and give power back to American parents
Speaker 2: and the American parents line is going to be a
Speaker 2: reoccurring trend here. So in kind of a broad overview,
Speaker 2: Trump believes that regular public schools, as well as colleges
Speaker 2: and universities are just so far gone to not only
Speaker 2: require like massive, massive regressive changes, but also frankly whole
Speaker 2: new alternatives are needed, which leads us to our first
Speaker 2: policy proposal. So Trump says that Americans are horrified that
Speaker 2: quote once respected universities express support for the savages and
Speaker 2: jihattists who attacked Israel unquote. So that's obviously not great there.
Speaker 2: It is savages, very very quick, just immediate, immediately getting
Speaker 2: this sort of stuff. Despite spending more money on higher
Speaker 2: education than any other country, schools are quote turning our
Speaker 2: students into communists and terrorists and sympathizers of many, many
Speaker 2: different dimensions.
Speaker 4: What does that even mean?
Speaker 2: They're sympathizing with the alternate dimensions, you know, the the
Speaker 2: near universe version. They're gaining too much sympathy as well,
Speaker 2: as turning into communists and terrorists.
Speaker 3: To be fair, he is right that like one of
Speaker 3: the areas where you will find like the the few
Speaker 3: whole noct Twitter is the other area of unreconstructed Marxist Leninists.
Speaker 3: It's in the Academy that it's there, and on x
Speaker 3: dot com formerly known as Twitter.
Speaker 2: So to combat this communist and savage and hottest incursion
Speaker 2: into universities, Trump is proposing something quote unquote dramatically different.
Speaker 2: His plan is to seize quote billions and billions unquote
Speaker 2: of dollars through taxes, finds in lawsuits against quote excessively
Speaker 2: large private university endowments unquote, and use that money to
Speaker 2: quote endow a new institution called the American Academy unquote.
Speaker 3: That's already The American Academy is already, But is he
Speaker 3: spending it with an E or it's why?
Speaker 2: Like no, it's the why.
Speaker 3: Okay, So it's a place not like the institution.
Speaker 2: So the American Academy will seek to quote make a
Speaker 2: truly world class education avaiable to every American free of charge,
Speaker 2: without adding a single dime to the federal debt. And
Speaker 2: then to do this, quote the institution will gather an
Speaker 2: entire universe of the highest quality educational content unquote. And
Speaker 2: I love the phrase educational content.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, this is this sounds like the short prayer
Speaker 3: you videos that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what do you like? You're starting to You're starting
Speaker 2: to suspect certain things, right like, Yeah, what do you
Speaker 2: think the American Academy is going to be here? Based
Speaker 2: on the limited information you have?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it doesn't seem like a credible university, does it.
Speaker 3: It seems to look like if your world made thats education.
Speaker 3: Maybe it's what Barry Weiss is doing in Texas, you know,
Speaker 3: maybe she's going to be helming the American Academy. It
Speaker 3: sounds like Jordan Peterston's Grift University.
Speaker 2: It's a world class education after you gather an entire
Speaker 2: universe of the highest quality educational content. So this content,
Speaker 2: Trump claims, will quote cover the full spectrum of human
Speaker 2: knowledge and skills and make that material available to every
Speaker 2: American citizen online for free. Unquote.
Speaker 3: That's just a library where he's describing as a library,
Speaker 3: we already have those.
Speaker 2: Not quite the content. It's not just a library because quote,
Speaker 2: the Academy will utilize the latest breakthrough in computing unquote,
Speaker 2: as well as study groups, mentors, and industry partners to
Speaker 2: provide a truly quote top tier education option for the people.
Speaker 2: For the next part, I have to do it in
Speaker 2: the Trump voice, because otherwise the grammar won't make any sense.
Speaker 2: Whether you want lectures or an ancient history, or an
Speaker 2: introduction to financial accounting or a trading get a skilled trade.
Speaker 2: The goal will be to deliver it and get it
Speaker 2: done properly. I love the phrase whether you want lecture
Speaker 2: or an ancient history?
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, Like you can give yourself a history, like
Speaker 3: you could go back to Samaria and insert yourself.
Speaker 2: Whether you want lectures or an ancient history, or an
Speaker 2: introduction into financial accounting or training in a skilled trade.
Speaker 2: So you will be able to learn all of this
Speaker 2: online for free, getting a truly top tier education, which
Speaker 2: sounds like okay. But Trump specified that your American Academy
Speaker 2: education will be quote unquote strictly non political unquote.
Speaker 3: Good.
Speaker 2: I'm really excited to learn an ancient history from a
Speaker 2: strictly non political standpoint. That's that's great.
Speaker 3: We can't discuss the formation of the state because there
Speaker 3: will be a political stance.
Speaker 2: Furthermore, Donald Trump promised that at American Academy. Quote, there
Speaker 2: will be no wokeness or jihadism allowed. None of that's
Speaker 2: going to be allowed.
Speaker 3: How will I teach without you? H My personal jihad
Speaker 3: is is to educate the youth of America, but now
Speaker 3: I can't by taking it.
Speaker 2: Sorry, not allowed, not allowed, going to trump.
Speaker 3: Very sad, very sad.
Speaker 2: So this plan also seeks to help the forty million
Speaker 2: Americans who have some college education but no complete degree,
Speaker 2: by granting credit for past course work at quote unquote
Speaker 2: legacy institutions and giving Americans quote the chance to complete
Speaker 2: your education at the American Academy for free and much
Speaker 2: more quickly than is now possible or available unquote. So now,
Speaker 2: if there weren't red flags going off already, there certainly
Speaker 2: should be now with that last line, more quickly than
Speaker 2: it is now possible or available, which is which is
Speaker 2: a classic tell of an online university scam. Now, the
Speaker 2: exact details of how the American Academy is supposed to
Speaker 2: work are kind of unclear, probably because it hasn't been
Speaker 2: figured out yet. It's bullshit, courage, and quite possibly never
Speaker 2: will get figured out.
Speaker 3: Yeah, many such cases, and Agenda forty seven as it
Speaker 3: turns out.
Speaker 2: But Trump University founder Donald Trump did say that his
Speaker 2: American Academy proposal does plan to quote compete directly with
Speaker 2: existing and very costly four year university systems, like granting
Speaker 2: students degree credentials that the US government and all federal
Speaker 2: contractors will henceforth recognize.
Speaker 3: The other recognize him as fucking useless.
Speaker 4: Not degrees.
Speaker 2: Degree credentials. Yeah, degree credentials.
Speaker 3: Gonna put my degree credential up on my wall.
Speaker 2: This is just another Trump University, an uncredited scam that
Speaker 2: Trump is hoping to prop up with the federal government,
Speaker 2: this time instead of his business empire. It's it's not
Speaker 2: it's not.
Speaker 3: His entire thing, isn't it Like, yes, that is the
Speaker 3: whole thing.
Speaker 2: It's not real. It's not real. He's he's framing this
Speaker 2: plan as a quote unquote revolution in higher education that
Speaker 2: will vital life changing opportunities by awarding American citizens with
Speaker 2: quote the full and complete equilivent of a bachelor's degree.
Speaker 3: I love it when he just fucking sends it on
Speaker 3: there's gonna be one in my in my episode which
Speaker 3: you're here later this week, or when he just cannot
Speaker 3: say the word film and I love that he doesn't
Speaker 3: fucking try. He just he just owns it.
Speaker 2: The full and complete equivalent.
Speaker 4: That's not neither.
Speaker 2: That's neither full nor complete if it's an equil anyway.
Speaker 2: Trump Trump ends this video with an eloquent quote, enjoy it,
Speaker 2: learn from it, and thank you, which is.
Speaker 3: Just I'm gonna finish you on my lectures that way
Speaker 3: that and then I'll do like a smoke puff and
Speaker 3: just disappear.
Speaker 2: So yeah, this is this is the first plan to
Speaker 2: save American education. That sounds great. I cannot wait to
Speaker 2: get a full and complete equivalent of a bachelor's degree credential.
Speaker 2: Very very cool.
Speaker 3: Yeah, wonderful stuff.
Speaker 2: But do you know what isn't a scam? James?
Speaker 3: Can we say that, like I, we might be absolute.
Speaker 2: I trust my life on every single product and or
Speaker 2: service that follows this musical sting.
Speaker 4: We are back.
Speaker 2: Do not, I repeat, do not send me any of
Speaker 2: the advertisers that just aired. I don't care what they are.
Speaker 2: My life is indebted. I don't care. I don't care.
Speaker 3: You can send them to you can send them to Sophie.
Speaker 3: Her Twitter is at I write, okay.
Speaker 2: I write okay, send it to Sophie all right, so
Speaker 2: while this Trump University too will remain uncredited. Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: creator of the Donald Trump board game that did not
Speaker 2: sell there. Well, when I can.
Speaker 3: Eady for what, Yeah, didn't you?
Speaker 4: Yeah, creator of the Dog.
Speaker 2: Trump board game.
Speaker 3: No? Wow, okay, is it like monopoly? But you just
Speaker 3: look lie and generate.
Speaker 4: I didn't.
Speaker 2: I didn't look too far into it for the bit.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna be honest here. This is Yeah, disappointed. I
Speaker 2: was ready to go a deep dive. But Donald Trump
Speaker 2: also plans to attack the current accreditation system for being
Speaker 2: run by a Communist scourge, which leads us to our
Speaker 2: second Agenda forty seven topic titled quote protecting students from
Speaker 2: the radical Left and Marxist maniacs infecting educational institutions. But
Speaker 2: I believe he's talking about you, James.
Speaker 3: Yeah, which is ironic. I'm an anarchist and I'm not
Speaker 3: a Marxist's maniac. No, No, Sadly, not many such cases.
Speaker 3: But I do make them read the Communist Manifesto in
Speaker 3: my one oh one class.
Speaker 2: It's okay, it's okay.
Speaker 3: You got to read it. You gotta. It's it's something
Speaker 3: you should emerge from history education having.
Speaker 2: Read so Trump starts for talking about how quote unquote
Speaker 2: academics are quote obsessed with inductrinating America's youth at colleges
Speaker 2: and universities while charging a ballooning tuition fee. Trump claims
Speaker 2: to have a quote unquote secret weapon that he will
Speaker 2: use to quote reclaim our once great educational institutions from
Speaker 2: the radical left, the college accreditation system. It's called accreditation
Speaker 2: for a reason.
Speaker 3: Quote.
Speaker 2: It's called accreditation for a reason. He never extravolates on that.
Speaker 3: I genuinely don't. I can't fathom what I think he means.
Speaker 3: That could go in so many directions.
Speaker 4: There's no way to know. There's no way to know.
Speaker 3: It just leaves a hanging.
Speaker 2: So Trump explains that quote accreditors are supposed to ensure
Speaker 2: that schools are not ripping off students and taxpayers, but
Speaker 2: they have failed totally unquote, which is not really what
Speaker 2: college accreditors do. Both government run and private accreditation organizations
Speaker 2: exist to develop criteria and CONDUCTI valuations to ensure educational
Speaker 2: quality and authorize if a school qualifies for student aid
Speaker 2: programs from the Department of Education. That's generally what accreditation
Speaker 2: institutions do. They don't look out for if students are
Speaker 2: being ripped off, like that's not really their role, but whatever. So,
Speaker 2: upon returning to sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC, Donald
Speaker 2: Trump promised that he will quote fire the radical left
Speaker 2: accreditors that have allowed our colleges to become dominated by
Speaker 2: Marxist maniacs and lunatics. So he believes that there's like
Speaker 2: communists that are running the accreditation system and that's what's
Speaker 2: currently ruining colleges, is that is his belief.
Speaker 3: They come in, they sit at the back, and this
Speaker 3: is the right little book perhaps to be read, and
Speaker 3: they and then we have a criticism circle afterwards where
Speaker 3: they check how many mark references you've made in your lecture.
Speaker 2: So, after sending all these communists to the Gulag, Trump
Speaker 2: will then begin to quote accept applications for newer creditors.
Speaker 2: Now it's unclear if he's talking about just like the
Speaker 2: public or private sector here, but these newer creditors will
Speaker 2: quote impose real standards and colleges once again and once
Speaker 2: and for all. Now what such standards you ask? Thank you,
Speaker 2: James Well. Trump gave us a handy little list which
Speaker 2: includes like some of the more average conservative to libertarian
Speaker 2: esque positions like protecting free speech, eliminating wasteful administrative positions
Speaker 2: that drive up costs, offering options for accelerated and low
Speaker 2: cost degrees, providing meaningful job placement and career services, and
Speaker 2: implementing college entrants and exit exams to prove that students
Speaker 2: are actually learning or getting their money's worth, right, Which
Speaker 2: all that sounds like kind of standard politician talk. Right,
Speaker 2: It's like, okay, sure, but Trump did mention a few
Speaker 2: other standards that will be imposed once again by this
Speaker 2: new generation of accreditors, which will also include quote, defending
Speaker 2: the American tradition and Western civilization and removing all Marxist
Speaker 2: diverse the equity and inclusion be a regrets unquote. So
Speaker 2: d I Dei the right's new favorite boogiey man that's
Speaker 2: responsible from everything from rising university costs to botched surgeries,
Speaker 2: aviation incidents, and boats malfunctioning and cladding with bridges. It
Speaker 2: is it is the the villain of the of the
Speaker 2: conservative right at the moment. And so because this has
Speaker 2: been a trending topic among conservatives, Trump's trying to jump
Speaker 2: on this Dei train, which sounds incredibly dangerous from their
Speaker 2: perspective because this term he probably never even heard of before,
Speaker 2: like a year ago.
Speaker 3: Like, come on, no, I don't think he. I don't
Speaker 3: think he implemented DII in his business institutions. I think
Speaker 3: this is Yeah, it's a word they say when they
Speaker 3: can't say slurs. They think they've found a funny workaround
Speaker 3: to saying slurs.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's this thing with like every time someone
Speaker 2: says like like critical race theory, woke or DEI, they're
Speaker 2: really just trying to say a slur. And if and
Speaker 2: if you, if you replace those three terms with just
Speaker 2: a slur, their sentences make a lot more sense because
Speaker 2: the way they use the word woke does not mean
Speaker 2: anything in a lot of cases. But if you just
Speaker 2: replace it for a racial slur, you're like, oh, now
Speaker 2: I can understand what they're saying. It's a handy trick
Speaker 2: that really is not fun to.
Speaker 3: Think about, yeah, arisobtle.
Speaker 2: As a part of this DEI frenzy, Trump has promised
Speaker 2: to quote direct the Department of Education to pursue federal
Speaker 2: civil rights cases against the schools they continue to engage
Speaker 2: in racial discrimination unquote, which also kind of calls upon
Speaker 2: like older like affirmative action complaints that conservatives have been
Speaker 2: talking about for years.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 3: That's what I wondered if he was going after.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it kind of it ties into that as well.
Speaker 2: And Trump added that this race based discrimination quote includes
Speaker 2: discrimination against Asian Americans unquote, which is definitely invoking that
Speaker 2: style of affirmative action conservative rhetoric from like, yeah, ten
Speaker 2: five years ago.
Speaker 4: Yay.
Speaker 3: Even more recent is that Supreme Court case. Oh yeah,
Speaker 3: that was that was that was just like last year,
Speaker 3: Becky with the bad grades. Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So beyond just threatening to sick the DOJ on woke schools,
Speaker 2: Trump also made the more specific promise that if schools
Speaker 2: quote persist in explicit unlawful discrimination under the guise of
Speaker 2: equity unquote, he will not only make sure that their
Speaker 2: endowments be taxed, but also quote, through budget reconciliation, I
Speaker 2: will advance to measure to have them find up to
Speaker 2: the entire amount of their endowment unquote.
Speaker 3: Does he realize that, no, no schools have endowments, Like
Speaker 3: I teach you in the community college, we ain't got
Speaker 3: an endowment.
Speaker 2: No, he's he's I'm sure that he's gonna go after
Speaker 2: like the Harvard Endowment. Yeah, that's gonna track. Yeah, have
Speaker 2: have fun finding fifty billion dollars from Harvard. That's totally
Speaker 2: gonna happen. But his plan after he seizes these endowments, quote,
Speaker 2: a portion of the seized funds will then be used
Speaker 2: as institution for victims of these illegal and unjust policies,
Speaker 2: policies that hurt our country so badly. Colleges have gotten
Speaker 2: hundreds of billions of dollars from hard working taxpayers, and
Speaker 2: now we're going to get this anti American insanity out
Speaker 2: of our institutions once and for all. So that's cool, Like, okay, sure,
Speaker 2: you're gonna use this to pay back white people who've
Speaker 2: been if we've been denied college admission. Okay, cool, that
Speaker 2: sounds like a winning electoral statue.
Speaker 3: You have finally the reparations people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly exactly. You know who's had it too hard
Speaker 2: for too long?
Speaker 3: Chance, it's white people who didn't make it through college gars.
Speaker 2: It's it's because they didn't get to it's because they
Speaker 2: didn't go to Yale. Now they have to go to Princeton.
Speaker 3: Yeah, embarrassing, right, why would you even bother?
Speaker 2: So it's but it's not just colleges. Trump also threatened
Speaker 2: to quote cut federal funding for any school or program
Speaker 2: publishing critical race theory, gender ideology, or other inappropriate racial, sexual,
Speaker 2: or political content onto our children. We're not going to
Speaker 2: allow it to happen, folks.
Speaker 3: Very cool, Great, Yeah, I used to teach a gender
Speaker 3: sociology course. Forward to defund defund. Yeah, yeah, I know
Speaker 3: we're going down fight together. We're gonna do that ship.
Speaker 3: They will have to fight that way in there. Don't
Speaker 3: say that on air.
Speaker 2: You can't say that you're gonna turn your community college
Speaker 2: into a you can't say that. So, yeah, he's gonna
Speaker 2: go after school, regular schools, both college and universities, regular schools.
Speaker 2: If there's doing any any CRT gender ideology, you can
Speaker 2: tell that some of this was written like a year
Speaker 2: and a half ago, because no, no one's talking about
Speaker 2: critical race theory anymore.
Speaker 3: But yeah, yeah, I missing. But like, can you imagine
Speaker 3: teaching a sociology course and just being like, yeah, we're
Speaker 3: gonna skip past race and gender.
Speaker 2: Politics, set past politics.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this is this is a man who himself went
Speaker 3: to Like did he go to hot Yale?
Speaker 2: No, he did not go to either. He was sent
Speaker 2: to a military school by his father when he was
Speaker 2: thirteen for being annoying. Then he think he went to
Speaker 2: a school in Pennsylvania, respect And then what other school
Speaker 2: did he go to?
Speaker 3: Critical respect to his dad.
Speaker 2: He yeah, he went to the New York Military Academy.
Speaker 2: That he went to Fordham University and then the University
Speaker 2: of Pennsylvania's Wharton School.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, Wharton Business School. Yeah, not a real graduate degree.
Speaker 2: So the reason why this is also evils because Trump
Speaker 2: thinks that a lot of this stuff is basically forming
Speaker 2: a new religion. All this woke stuff quote, the Marxism
Speaker 2: being preached in our schools is totally hostile to Judeo
Speaker 2: Christian teachings, and in many ways it resembles establishing a
Speaker 2: new religion. Can't let that happen. I can't let that happen.
Speaker 3: One thing we take a big swing at is Judeo
Speaker 3: Christian institutions.
Speaker 2: To combat this growing threat of religious Marxism.
Speaker 3: His administration, I'm sorry, I cannot oh.
Speaker 2: His administration will quote aggressively pursue potential violations of the
Speaker 2: Establishment Clause and the free exercise Clause of the Constitution.
Speaker 2: That's very simple.
Speaker 3: I think you quite understand before we met of that
Speaker 3: that luckily we do Russian Orthodox Marxism at my university,
Speaker 3: so we should say, god, yeah, well a lot of beards.
Speaker 2: So and then, in kind of like a laundry list
Speaker 2: of policies and talking points, Trump pledged to quote veto
Speaker 2: the sinister effort to weaponize civics education, we will keep
Speaker 2: men out of women's sports and will create a new
Speaker 2: credentialing body that'll be the gold standard anywhere in the
Speaker 2: world to certified teachers who embrace patriotic values, support a
Speaker 2: way of life, and understand that their job is not
Speaker 2: to indoctrinate children but very simply to educate them.
Speaker 3: No one's ever done. No one has ever created a
Speaker 3: credentialing body for patriotic teachers who embrace quote our way
Speaker 3: of life before, it's never been done.
Speaker 2: Sinister efforts to weaponize civics.
Speaker 3: Just imagine him looking for looking for the Civics bill. Yeah,
Speaker 3: very funny, So probably distract him for a while. Stuff,
Speaker 3: I'm doing some actual terrible shit.
Speaker 2: A little bit with that last part was like indoctrinating children,
Speaker 2: And this next little bit will kind of demonstrate how
Speaker 2: stuff like QAnon didn't simply go away like some have postulated. Instead,
Speaker 2: it's just been absorbed into the fabric of American politics.
Speaker 2: No longer does the boogeyman have to be a DNC
Speaker 2: pedophilic elite. Now it's been deterritorialized and destroyed and mutated
Speaker 2: into just being any school teacher and or like every
Speaker 2: trans person right or God forbid a transgender school say,
Speaker 2: which is like the prime evil of the current conservative society.
Speaker 2: And Trump promises on day one of his new presidency
Speaker 2: he will he will quote begin to find and remove
Speaker 2: the radicals, Zealots, and Marxists who have infiltrated the Department
Speaker 2: of Education, and that also includes others. And you know
Speaker 2: who you are, because we are not going to allow
Speaker 2: anyone to hurt our children.
Speaker 4: You know who you are. You know who you are.
Speaker 2: So this is the weaponization of nearly eight years of
Speaker 2: QAnon rhetoric, right, that is, that has grown past the
Speaker 2: need to actually invoke QAnon, plus the two years of
Speaker 2: the Republican Party, the daily wire and limbs of TikTok
Speaker 2: working to shift q Andon's kind of disgraced and unfocused
Speaker 2: momentum towards a manufactured continuation in the form of this
Speaker 2: transgender groomer craze that's taking over American schools. Quote, Joe
Speaker 2: Biden has given these lunatics unchecked power. I will have
Speaker 2: them fired and escorted from the building. And I will
Speaker 2: tell Congress that any appropriations bill I sign must reaffirm
Speaker 2: the president's ability to remove defined employees from the job.
Speaker 2: It's all about our children unquote.
Speaker 3: Just imagining an executive order to remove someone from the lecture.
Speaker 2: I am going to be signing an executive order on
Speaker 2: this podcast to go to another at break, we are
Speaker 2: back and thank you James for reaffirming my ability to
Speaker 2: remove defiant ads.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, why you were all away? The several federal
Speaker 3: agents came in and inserted an ad break.
Speaker 2: In this last section here, we're going to return to
Speaker 2: Trump's conception that entire alternatives are needed to America's broken,
Speaker 2: woke school system, now focusing on the grade school side
Speaker 2: rather than just the post secondary. So in this vein,
Speaker 2: Trump is courting the growing number of homeschooling families, though
Speaker 2: according to a Washington Post poll from last year, Republican
Speaker 2: homeschoolers outnumbered Democrat ones two to one, so he kind
Speaker 2: of already has the majority of that vote. But still
Speaker 2: something he is going after. According to Trump, ever since
Speaker 2: quote the China virus, America has seen an estimated thirty
Speaker 2: present increase in homeschool enrollment unquote. It's just a funny
Speaker 2: term as homeschool in roll.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, just going to the homeschool to enroll.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna be enrolling in homeschool. Very funny. An if
Speaker 2: elective president for a second time, he will do everything
Speaker 2: to support quote parents who make the courageous choice of
Speaker 2: home school unquote. Again, the way he uses home the
Speaker 2: word homeschool is unlike anyone else I've ever heard of.
Speaker 2: Talk it is. It is a very odd use of
Speaker 2: the English language.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he doesn't seem to understand parts of.
Speaker 2: Speech like no, no, And Trump said he'll work to
Speaker 2: ensure that homeschoolers will be entitled to all the benefits
Speaker 2: available to non homeschool students, like being able to participate
Speaker 2: in athletic programs, clubs, atter school activities, educational trips, and more.
Speaker 2: He pledged that in his next term, he will allow
Speaker 2: five to nine education savings accounts to be used for
Speaker 2: quote costs associated with homeschool education. A current five to
Speaker 2: nine savings accounts families to withdraw up to ten thousand
Speaker 2: dollars a year to spend tax free on tuition for
Speaker 2: private schools, which Trump called a quote tremendous win for
Speaker 2: a school choice, very important school choice. To remember that
Speaker 2: term unquote. That term never comes up again in this video. Great.
Speaker 2: So Trump is planning to expand this tuition savings program
Speaker 2: to include homeschooling families as well, with a very unknown
Speaker 2: system of checks and balances to determine what exactly qualifies
Speaker 2: as costs related to homeschooling. And often homeschooling is used
Speaker 2: by abusive parents to just have kids do free labor
Speaker 2: around the house, and they try to make it count
Speaker 2: as like education. And like if you're now allowing parents
Speaker 2: to put money into a savings account to remove ten
Speaker 2: thousand a year tax free spent on education, like what
Speaker 2: does what does that mean? Does that mean just curriculum?
Speaker 2: Does that mean like household supplies because that's being put
Speaker 2: towards their homeschool because they're schooling at home. Like very
Speaker 2: very unclear, And it's kind of refers back to some
Speaker 2: of the general problems homeschooling, especially in like conservative homeschooling
Speaker 2: or just as a large way to abuse children not
Speaker 2: in like the groomer way that right wing people talk about.
Speaker 2: It's like, no, you're just literally like limiting your kids'
Speaker 2: access to the outside world because you think if they
Speaker 2: go outside they're gonna turn gay. So but even if
Speaker 2: oh sorry, there's there's one one final quote from this
Speaker 2: homeschooling video, which are just fucking phenomenal to every homeschool family.
Speaker 2: I will be your champion. Do not vote Democrat. They're
Speaker 2: looking to destroy you. If you don't mind me saying
Speaker 2: that Joe Biden can't put two sentences together, and yet
Speaker 2: he's looking to destroy you. Do not vote Democrat. Do
Speaker 2: not vote for crook and Joe vote for honest Donald,
Speaker 2: thank you very much. It's funny because in the video
Speaker 2: when he says vote for honest Donald, he also starts
Speaker 2: to crack up because he knows how ridiculousness is. God,
Speaker 2: I vote for croaking Joe, vote for Arnest Nuddled, Thank
Speaker 2: you very much, Very very cool. They're looking to destroy
Speaker 2: you if you don't might be saying.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if you don't mind me, a man who rarely
Speaker 3: asked permission to say the most exane shit.
Speaker 2: So even if parents are not choosing to homeschool. Trump
Speaker 2: wants to let voters know that he will fight for parents' rights,
Speaker 2: which isn't quite a dog whistle, but it does refer
Speaker 2: to a very specific style of patriarchal rhetoric popularized by
Speaker 2: hyper religious conservative think tanks that propose an extremely narrow
Speaker 2: version of how the American family should operate within society.
Speaker 2: More on this later, But so what can Trump do
Speaker 2: to let right wing religious parents know that he will
Speaker 2: be their champion even in like blue states or big cities.
Speaker 2: As much as Trump might want to be a dictator,
Speaker 2: he doesn't have unlimited power to impose his war on
Speaker 2: wokeness in liberal cities. But Donald Trump, who was impeached
Speaker 2: for trying to blackmail the president of Ukraine in summer
Speaker 2: of twenty nineteen, does have a plan. He wants to
Speaker 2: quote implement massive funding preferences and favorable treatment unquote for
Speaker 2: states and school districts that make four specific quote historic
Speaker 2: reforms and education that Trump has decreed. These four specific
Speaker 2: reforms include abolishing tenure for K through twelve teachers so
Speaker 2: that we can quote remove bad teachers and adopt merit
Speaker 2: pay to reward good teachers. The second is to quote
Speaker 2: drastically cut the blowed number of school administrators, including the
Speaker 2: costly and divisive and unnecessary DEI bureaucracy. Third to adopt
Speaker 2: a parental bill of rights that includes complete curriculum transparency
Speaker 2: in a form of universal school choice. And lastly, quote
Speaker 2: implement the direct election of school principles by the parents.
Speaker 2: Trump calls this last bit the ultimate form of local control,
Speaker 2: something our country has never had, or at least has
Speaker 2: not had for the last fifty years. So those are
Speaker 2: his four reform plans, which is like, yeah, you know
Speaker 2: who's had it too easy for too long, teachers. Let's
Speaker 2: abolish ten year adopt merit pay a disaster of a system,
Speaker 2: cut administrative roles, put more work on teachers, have parents
Speaker 2: be able to fire fire principles by voting, and a
Speaker 2: vote to elect their own principle, and universal school choices
Speaker 2: is actually more of a dog whistle that it just
Speaker 2: refers to a series of like very racist, like urban
Speaker 2: planning policies to direct rich white people's funding into a
Speaker 2: very few, selected number of schools instead of where they
Speaker 2: actually like live and instead of the actual district they
Speaker 2: live in. So there's all of that, and like what
Speaker 2: Trump keeps coming back to. Among all these quote unquote reforms,
Speaker 2: it all kind of relates to complete parental dominance. And
Speaker 2: part of this was the parental Bill of Rights, which
Speaker 2: you've probably seen some conservatives talking about more these past
Speaker 2: few years. And this is another quote from Trump here.
Speaker 2: It's all about the parents for their children, more than
Speaker 2: anyone else. Parents know what their children need. And if
Speaker 2: you haven't heard of a parental bill of rights directly,
Speaker 2: you most certainly have heard of one by another name
Speaker 2: that don't say gay bill that was a parental rights bill,
Speaker 2: a sensibly targeting education, but these bills often end up
Speaker 2: giving parents just complete control over every aspect of the
Speaker 2: child's life. They dictate how children are allowed to express
Speaker 2: themselves and allow parents to impose nearly any discipline or punishment.
Speaker 2: They desire total control over what the child eats, what
Speaker 2: they wear, what they read, what they watch, what they
Speaker 2: see online, and what they're allowed to learn in school,
Speaker 2: who they're allowed to socialize with. Some of these bills
Speaker 2: that I read through for this also bar mandatory masking
Speaker 2: policies and schools back when that was the thing, and
Speaker 2: then are often full of anti vax talking points and
Speaker 2: attempts to ban sex ed and quote unquote gender politics.
Speaker 2: As a part of these bills, teachers in school administration
Speaker 2: are legally required to act as parental surveillance tools to
Speaker 2: report how a child behaves, how they socialize, how they dress,
Speaker 2: how they like to be referred to, and who they
Speaker 2: are friends with. This includes outing children as gay or
Speaker 2: trans to parents if anyone in the school suspects that
Speaker 2: the student has a non heterosexual sexual orientation or is
Speaker 2: acting in any way inconsistent with their assigned gender at birth.
Speaker 2: These types of bills often have other consequences as well.
Speaker 2: In states where some of these bills have passed, like
Speaker 2: North Carolina, due to legal risks, some elementary schools have
Speaker 2: been unable to talk about or give out educational materials
Speaker 2: on consent or how to identify when child sexual abuse
Speaker 2: is taking place as a part of the Safe Touch programs.
Speaker 2: These programs are basically unable to happen because teachers will
Speaker 2: now be held personally legally liable if any parent objects
Speaker 2: to this material. So parental rights bills have been signed
Speaker 2: into law in six states over the past two legislative years,
Speaker 2: famously Florida as well as Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Iowa, and
Speaker 2: North Carolina. Since then, similar bills have been introduced to
Speaker 2: more than twenty five states, many of which have passed
Speaker 2: through at least one chamber. Some of them are still
Speaker 2: in the process of either passing through a second chape
Speaker 2: or being signed by the governor. Yeah, I'm gonna end
Speaker 2: with two quotes here from uh from Trump that kind
Speaker 2: of reiterate this this this parental dominance thing that he's
Speaker 2: really pushing for. And also people like Ronda Santists have
Speaker 2: been pushing forward Tad Cruz, a lot of a lot
Speaker 2: of a lot of writing politicians quote as the saying goes,
Speaker 2: personnel is policy. And at the end of the day,
Speaker 2: if we have pink haired communists teaching our kids, we
Speaker 2: have a major problem. When I'm president, we will put
Speaker 2: parents back in charge and give them the final say.
Speaker 2: We will get back to teaching reading, writing, and math
Speaker 2: called arithmetic, and we will kill our kids the high
Speaker 2: quality pro American education they deserve. They're gonna teach you
Speaker 2: math called arithmetic, magnificence amazing. We may spend the most,
Speaker 2: but we're going to be tops in education no matter,
Speaker 2: no matter where you go anywhere in the world. We're
Speaker 2: gonna be top in education.
Speaker 3: There will be no bottoms in the American education system
Speaker 3: going forward.
Speaker 2: So this is this is Donald Trump, the second host
Speaker 2: of the TV show The Apprentice, who is run for
Speaker 2: public office. This is his plan for education. Doctor jam Stout,
Speaker 2: how do you feel about about these education reform proposals.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it doesn't. It doesn't seem like a rare idea,
Speaker 3: if I'm being honest, Having having listened to it, I
Speaker 3: think perhaps he hasn't got the uh, the sharpest grasp
Speaker 3: on what's going on in the education system. The reason
Speaker 3: we have education is because your parents don't necessarily know
Speaker 3: what's best for you, right, Like.
Speaker 2: Your parents can't be an expert in everything.
Speaker 3: Yes, so some of us go and get PhDs so
Speaker 3: we can, and then we teach your people how the
Speaker 3: important things about that, like you're by definition your parents
Speaker 3: cannot fulfill all the roles in an education system fulfills and.
Speaker 2: Like unlike pink haired communists who have complete who have
Speaker 2: complete total control over every aspect of what a child
Speaker 2: should learn.
Speaker 3: It's one of the things when you enter the university,
Speaker 3: you know, like they did a tuberculosis test and then
Speaker 3: they pass you a pink hair dye, and I mean
Speaker 3: you get a nose piercing as well.
Speaker 2: A lot of this is very much reminiscent of like
Speaker 2: the the fears of like communist education that you see
Speaker 2: in like the nineteen thirties. How there's a lot of
Speaker 2: political a lot of political tension trying to be raised
Speaker 2: over the fear that there's communists teaching you in universities
Speaker 2: and schools.
Speaker 3: Yeah. It's interesting because at the same time.
Speaker 2: Like Frankfurt school style stuff.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I've written a lot about like anarchist ideals
Speaker 3: educational ideals, right, so at the same time, they were
Speaker 3: anarchists in Spain being like, you know, we should we
Speaker 3: should do all our classes in the forest. Let's just
Speaker 3: go out into the forest. Or absolutely there was a
Speaker 3: school by the sea where they talked kids like they
Speaker 3: were just having this incredible utopian education dream, which in
Speaker 3: many ways we still haven't adapted to some of the
Speaker 3: things that that really could offer, and instead, yeah, we're
Speaker 3: having this McCarthyism Part two.
Speaker 2: Well, great, that is that is Trump's plan for education.
Speaker 2: In case, in case you didn't know, So watch out
Speaker 2: for those pink cared communists. Keep an eye out for
Speaker 2: any parental bill of rights being proposed in your state,
Speaker 2: and it is probably has little little to do with
Speaker 2: actually protecting children and more to do with making parents
Speaker 2: just a complete dominating force and controlling every aspect of
Speaker 2: their child's life. And I mean, the other sins we're
Speaker 2: thinking about this is like it removes access to for
Speaker 2: for kids to talk about things that that they may
Speaker 2: be upset about.
Speaker 3: And access to mandated reporters, like exactly, a mandated reporter
Speaker 3: like this seems to exactly gets away from that exactly.
Speaker 2: And and I mean the idea that that that schools
Speaker 2: are going to be legally required to out a child
Speaker 2: if he's if they're acting like perceived to be deviant
Speaker 2: in some like gender actual way. Like all of these
Speaker 2: things are just ways to enable parental abuse in a
Speaker 2: variety of like ways that are explicit and non explicit.
Speaker 2: And it's it's it's it's it's quite it's quite upsetting.
Speaker 2: And that's the that's the thing that conservatives are currently
Speaker 2: trying to push forward. This is a big topic. This
Speaker 2: stuff was talking about in the Republican primaries that were
Speaker 2: completely useless constantly stuff like this is something this is
Speaker 2: referred to while in evoking this fear of like this
Speaker 2: pink haired transgender communist teacher just currently like the biggest
Speaker 2: threat to America according to most conservatives.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they can take us down from the inside.
Speaker 2: That and jihadism, which are probably linked somehow.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I think, Well it's the pink head, your hottest,
Speaker 3: the famous.
Speaker 2: Well that isn't for us today. What are we going
Speaker 2: to be learning about next for Agenda forty seven.
Speaker 3: Games, Well, we're going to be learning next about immigration
Speaker 3: Donald Trump's border policies. Many of you will be shocked
Speaker 3: to hear that they're not very good. And well, I
Speaker 3: have two classes to sell if you're if you're in
Speaker 3: San Diego and you want to get in before they
Speaker 3: take the Marxism out of the education system, you can
Speaker 3: but strike now.
Speaker 2: I do love how I do love how much of
Speaker 2: this is. Like do you know who's had it easy
Speaker 2: for too long? Transgender teachers there they're having.
Speaker 3: Out yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, the people who are so
Speaker 3: fucking broke they have to have like go fundme's up
Speaker 3: for their gender reassignment surgery, the.
Speaker 2: Great wonderful stuff. Yeah, all right, we will be back
Speaker 2: tomorrow to talk about Trump's border policies, things that will
Speaker 2: probably be totally normal, totally chill.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's very very similar to fucking Faddy. They are
Speaker 3: similar to Biden's, but that's a whole other just terpy.
Speaker 2: That's a whole other discussions. All right, see you on
Speaker 2: the other side. Bye, hello, and welcome.
Speaker 3: DA could happen here Pocus where my friend Garrison Davis
Speaker 3: and I inc her countless amounts of trauma by watching
Speaker 3: videos of Donald Trump talking about things he doesn't understand.
Speaker 3: How are you doing today, Garrison.
Speaker 2: Oh, I'm doing fine and peachy on this wonderful spring afternoon.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we'll sort that out for you. We'll bring you
Speaker 3: back down because what we gathered here today to discuss, Garrison,
Speaker 3: is that we talked about gender forty seven yesterday. So
Speaker 3: hopefully people have listened. If you haven't, you know, you
Speaker 3: can go back and understand what gender forty seven is.
Speaker 3: This short version is that it's Donald Trump's policy platform
Speaker 3: for his proposed second term. Right, if he gets elected
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty four, and there is a lot of
Speaker 3: agenda forty seven, we'll.
Speaker 2: Breaking down a lot of forty seven. Yeah, yeah, arguably
Speaker 2: too much agenda forty seven.
Speaker 3: Yes, so yeah, yeah, one could argue that, I think
Speaker 3: quite compellingly, what we're talking about today is his board
Speaker 3: of immigration policy. And I don't think it'll shock anyone
Speaker 3: to hear that these are major pillars of forty seven. Right.
Speaker 3: He kind of launched his political career with an incredibly
Speaker 3: bigoted speech about migrants, and it's been the real through line,
Speaker 3: Like the only thing, one of the few things where
Speaker 3: he actually was able to be efficient enough to do
Speaker 3: a large amount of harm was at the border and
Speaker 3: with immigration right, and it certainly seems like he has
Speaker 3: plans to a lot more in twenty twenty four. Post
Speaker 3: twenty twenty four, I guess Biden's tried to counter this
Speaker 3: by lurching to the right, but he's handled a lot
Speaker 3: of people in the process. But this hasn't stopped Trump
Speaker 3: without taking a breath out flanking him far to the
Speaker 3: right on immigration policy. So that's what we're going to
Speaker 3: talk about today. So gender forty seven website. It's structured
Speaker 3: with a series of these scripted rumble videos which are
Speaker 3: embedded and then in a spectacular own goal also transcripted,
Speaker 3: which just like like Garrison said yesterday, it is a
Speaker 3: joy to read Donald Trump speaking without hearing Donald Trump speaking,
Speaker 3: it is you never know what coming next, like it
Speaker 3: consistently blindsides you. No one can the best to ever
Speaker 3: do it, and no one, no one could replicate Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: So a lot of the pages detail his proposed actions
Speaker 3: on his first day in office, right what he's going
Speaker 3: to do with his executive power or which, as we'll
Speaker 3: go into, he seems to be this is not a
Speaker 3: man who attended to civic class and paid attention.
Speaker 2: Well because because it was weaponized.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, he he's loving American didn't
Speaker 3: go okay. The other things address like cloudy right wing
Speaker 3: talking points which in many cases kind of either fictional
Speaker 3: or over exaggerated, are not really related to what's going
Speaker 3: on with the border and midration, and he sort of
Speaker 3: proposes quite unquote solutions often it's not exactly clear how
Speaker 3: or if these things are legal, but I think, as
Speaker 3: we'll get into, that doesn't really matter. His big theme
Speaker 3: going through all of his immigration content is to end
Speaker 3: what he calls automatic citizenship for children. I'm not going
Speaker 3: to do the voice. I can't do the voice.
Speaker 2: Because you're cursed with your britishness. Blessed yes, yeah, sure,
Speaker 2: yea God chosen people. Okay, yeah, average average Christian identity
Speaker 2: opinion heverage.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, big, big Christian identity opinion have it. Okay.
Speaker 3: So Donald Trump, right, his big thing is taking a
Speaker 3: swing at the Fourteenth Amendment, right, at birthright citizenship. It's
Speaker 3: very funny that it's not funny. Actually it's quite fucked.
Speaker 3: But if you're not familiar, the Fourteenth Amendment right was
Speaker 3: passed after the Civil War, and in the first part
Speaker 3: of the Fourteenth Amendment, there's a sentence that reads, all
Speaker 3: persons born or naturalized in the United States and the
Speaker 3: subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.
Speaker 4: Cool.
Speaker 2: That sounds very simple.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it does, doesn't it. It does. What you're not considering
Speaker 3: garrison is like fringes on the flag tier legal bullshit,
Speaker 3: which Donald Trump and his camp, unsurprisingly are pursuing. We're
Speaker 3: going to get to a little bit about this later.
Speaker 3: This is they're not the first group of people to
Speaker 3: make ending birth right citizenship the whole thing right. It's
Speaker 3: been a sort of a bugbear on the right for
Speaker 3: a while. So, as I said, the Fonding for Men
Speaker 3: was strongly opposed by Confederate States after the Civil War. Right,
Speaker 3: but they were forced to ratify it in order to
Speaker 3: regain representation in Congress.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I get fucked.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So John Donald Trump's now bringing, I guess, coming
Speaker 3: back on behalf of the Confederacy to challenge the Fourteenth
Speaker 3: to make in any such cases in this and many
Speaker 3: other ways. That's why they call him stone Wall Trump,
Speaker 3: do they they? Yeah? Wait, really no, I don't think
Speaker 3: I mean, I guarantee, I guarantee. Let's just google it
Speaker 3: real quick. Let's see what comes up Stonewall Trump. It's
Speaker 3: going to be one of two things. Stone Wall really splits. Wow. Okay,
Speaker 3: now there's some curse stuff there. Google that your own risk.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 3: So the Fourteenth Amendment has been really pivotal in American history.
Speaker 3: It's one of the most litigated amendments to the Constitution.
Speaker 6: Right.
Speaker 3: It gave us the Road decision, which has now been overheard,
Speaker 3: give us the Obergefel decision, which legalizes the same sex marriage.
Speaker 3: Gave us Brown versus Board of Education. More relevant here
Speaker 3: is that it superseded the dread Scott case and shrind
Speaker 3: in law the right if anyone born in the USA,
Speaker 3: regardless of race or a snithety to be a citizen,
Speaker 3: and it has a few exemptions, like I think the
Speaker 3: children of foreign diplomats and visiting heads of state are
Speaker 3: not US citizens. So like King Charles couldn't come over here,
Speaker 3: have another kid and then have that kid be a
Speaker 3: dual citizen. Trump proposes that he's going to stop this
Speaker 3: immediately on entering office by executive order.
Speaker 2: Can you remove an amendment of the Constitution by executive order? James,
Speaker 2: I'm not a legal expert by any means.
Speaker 3: No. No, Look, I am a historian of anarchists in Spain.
Speaker 3: This is not the center of my area of expertise.
Speaker 3: But I'm pretty confident, like without going full seth Abramson here,
Speaker 3: that no, you can't. You can't just do that because
Speaker 3: it certainly feels wrong. Yeah, it seems like it doesn't
Speaker 3: pass the smell test. No, I think if American history
Speaker 3: would be very different if you could change the Constitution
Speaker 3: by executive order. But this isn't going to stop Donald
Speaker 3: Trump crying. The specific case he has a beef with
Speaker 3: is US versus one kim Ark. It's called it's a
Speaker 3: couple of people who were Chinese nationals who have a
Speaker 3: kid in the United States and the Supreme Court found
Speaker 3: that their kid would citizen right. We don't need to
Speaker 3: go into the case, sure, but Republicans have been on
Speaker 3: this for a long time. I think they really began
Speaker 3: to get concerted momentum behind it during the Obama administration.
Speaker 3: Obviously before Obama was elected, right, Donald Trump sort of
Speaker 3: really entered politics with his birth a lives right and
Speaker 3: this idea that was not a US citizen therefore was
Speaker 3: not eligible for the presidency, and sort of that tendency
Speaker 3: continued in Republican politics. Lindsey Graham, a man who looks
Speaker 3: like a melting slath, attempted to introduce a constitutional amendment
Speaker 3: during the Obama administration, failed to do so. I don't
Speaker 3: think he actually ever introduced it. I think he just
Speaker 3: sort of shopped it around see if he could get support,
Speaker 3: and then failed. This has been a continuing theme since. Actually,
Speaker 3: Matt Gates, along with Gosas Santos and some other representatives,
Speaker 3: tried to institu a House resolution last year ending birthright citizenship.
Speaker 3: Trump has also been cooking up some rather unique legal
Speaker 3: theories about this for a while. In twenty eighteen, he
Speaker 3: claimed that you don't need a constitutional amendment to change
Speaker 3: the fourteenth Amendment. He also repeatedly claimed that birthright citizenship
Speaker 3: is something that's either rare or in some cases, he
Speaker 3: claimed it's unique to the United States, which is not true.
Speaker 3: There are about thirty countries that offer birth right citizenship.
Speaker 3: The legal justification that he offers most often comes from
Speaker 3: someone called John Eastman. Do you know who John Eastman is? Garrison?
Speaker 2: I do not.
Speaker 3: Johnny'sman was one of the legal architects of Trump's plan
Speaker 3: to overturn the twenty twenty election.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 3: He has also been indicted in the Georgia case against
Speaker 3: Trump and his co conspirators. Johnnysmonan also tried to do
Speaker 3: birth a shit about Kamala Harris. Many of you will
Speaker 3: be able to draw the line between Karmala Harris and
Speaker 3: Barack Obama and perhaps the underlying motivation for their birth
Speaker 3: and stuff. But Eastman is contending, I guess that the
Speaker 3: quote subjects to the jurisdiction thereof element of the fourteenth
Speaker 3: Amendment means that somehow people who live in the United States,
Speaker 3: work in the United States, and pay tax in the
Speaker 3: United States are not subject to its jurisdiction if they're
Speaker 3: not citizens themselves, which look, it doesn't matter how Like
Speaker 3: I think the big thing I want you guys to
Speaker 3: take away from this is but everything he wants to
Speaker 3: do is probably illegal, and none of that really matters, right,
Speaker 3: because we'll have a court like he's he's got a
Speaker 3: Supreme Court which has but it's packed with Republicans, right,
Speaker 3: and it.
Speaker 2: Has constantly affirmed his ability to do crimes and get
Speaker 2: off with basically no punk.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, like, this is a man who tried to
Speaker 3: do a coup and it's standing for election again, Like
Speaker 3: the court system is not going to save us. If
Speaker 3: he has enough time and he can and enough political will,
Speaker 3: he will try and do this. And I think it's
Speaker 3: not unreasonable to expect that he will attempt buy executive
Speaker 3: order on the first day of his presidency to take
Speaker 3: birthright citizenship away from the children of undocumented migrants. Garrison,
Speaker 3: do you know what won't take rights away from your children?
Speaker 2: I forget what food service box we have and therefore
Speaker 2: cannot make jokes about on air. But it's one of them.
Speaker 2: One of them can, one of them can't. And you
Speaker 2: have to know which one, whatever one advertises, is the
Speaker 2: good one.
Speaker 3: Yeah, always it'll be when they speak really fast at
Speaker 3: the end, just just slow that down. You hear them
Speaker 3: talking about your children. We're back. We hope you enjoyed
Speaker 3: this outwards. The second thing Donald Trump is big mad
Speaker 3: about is something called birth tourism. What that he calls
Speaker 3: birth tourism?
Speaker 2: Right, it's okay, I think, I think I see where
Speaker 2: this is going.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's when you take a holiday to the the womb,
Speaker 3: you go into like a pod and it's very I thought.
Speaker 2: It's where you take a holiday sumwhmer to pop out
Speaker 2: of kin and they get automatic citizenship.
Speaker 3: That's what it actually is. Yeah, which is a great plan. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 3: you go on holiday to like an all inclusive resort
Speaker 3: and then you don't have to pay for your birth
Speaker 3: expenses because they're included when you go to your inclusive resort.
Speaker 3: It's a great deal for everyone.
Speaker 2: I didn't I didn't think of that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, many few people have. But now now the words
Speaker 3: out and it might close that loophole. What I think
Speaker 3: interesting about his quote unquote birth tourism claims. It's not
Speaker 3: like obviously this again has been a right wing talking
Speaker 3: point for a long time. Right, it's that in this
Speaker 3: particular section of the Agenda forty seven website. He includes
Speaker 3: links to provide evidence for some of his claims, which
Speaker 3: is a bold move for Donald Trump, a man who
Speaker 3: excus evidence. But what he links to is the Center
Speaker 3: for Immigration Studies, right, the CIS. The CIS is an
Speaker 3: extremely right wing thing tank. It's founded by someone called
Speaker 3: John Tantun and it's lifted by the SBLC as a
Speaker 3: hate group. The reason it's listed by the SBLC as
Speaker 3: a hate group is because it pretty consistently publishes the
Speaker 3: work of someone called Jason rich Wine, who is an
Speaker 3: unreconstructed race science guy, right, like a modern day phrenologist,
Speaker 3: if you will. This is a man who is so
Speaker 3: racist that he was forced to resign from the Heritage Foundation.
Speaker 2: Oh oh wow.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I didn't know what was possible. Actually it
Speaker 3: was quite.
Speaker 2: I didn't know they had like a bar for that. Huh.
Speaker 3: No, two races for the Heritage Foundation.
Speaker 2: Is is quite racist gravestone.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they probably will after CIS when there's a bit
Speaker 3: of a blow up about this is during the first
Speaker 3: round presidency and CIS claim they it wouldn't be unusual
Speaker 3: to occasionally include a racist or an anti semite, given
Speaker 3: the volume of content they put out. So this led
Speaker 3: to the Southern Poverty Law Center conducting an analysis of
Speaker 3: their weekly newsletter. I'm going to read you a summary
Speaker 3: of that analysis now. Southern Poverty Law Center and the
Speaker 3: Center for New Community examined approximately four hundred and fifty
Speaker 3: of CIS's weekly emails dating back almost ten years and
Speaker 3: found that CIS circulated over one thousand, seven hundred articles
Speaker 3: from vdare dot com. Garrison's face just looks like they've
Speaker 3: stepped in something horrible.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I have this podcast recording.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, that's right, an average of three VEDA articles
Speaker 3: every week. Huh yeah, So that that's where Donald Trump
Speaker 3: is getting the bulk of his statistics and information, or
Speaker 3: at least Donald Trump isn't writing this stuff, right, I
Speaker 3: don't think he has the attention span. But whoever is
Speaker 3: writing his immigration policy, it is sourcing from vdare.
Speaker 2: Do we want to explain what the yeah is?
Speaker 3: Go off, Garrison. Let us know.
Speaker 2: So VEDE is like this white nationalist like anti immigration,
Speaker 2: not like a lobbying group, but like I kind of.
Speaker 2: They produce a whole bunch of rhetoric and talking points
Speaker 2: about all of the big risks of immigration. It gets
Speaker 2: sent stuff to like Fox News. Trump's used this stuff before.
Speaker 2: It's it's not it's not great. They receive like dark
Speaker 2: money from conservative like funding groups like Donors Trust. It's
Speaker 2: it's it's way to it's finding a whole bunch of
Speaker 2: silly ways to try to justify their types of racism.
Speaker 2: And they are they are still a problem. They were
Speaker 2: founded nearly twenty five years ago and they're still They're
Speaker 2: still going.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean they they've compared the anti
Speaker 3: white rhetoric to the Rwandan genocide before, and just they
Speaker 3: What I think is important to hear about v DAY
Speaker 3: is that they exist to take straight up hate rhetoric
Speaker 3: and insert it to mainstream politics.
Speaker 2: And yes, they take stuff from like actual, like like
Speaker 2: very like recognized like white nationalist groups and turn it
Speaker 2: into rhetoric that is acceptable on Fox News.
Speaker 4: That is their entire goal.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and cis one might argue, exists to take that
Speaker 3: VDA stuff and dress it up as research article, statistics
Speaker 3: information that might inform policy. There's a bunch of stuff
Speaker 3: in his sort of abolished birth right sitsonship that I
Speaker 3: don't think we need to get into. He talks a
Speaker 3: lot about birth Hotel. He links to a National Affairs
Speaker 3: op ed from Peter Shuck and Rogers Smith. These are
Speaker 3: the people who have really been like the originators of
Speaker 3: the abolished birthright citizenship movement. They wrote a book about it,
Speaker 3: I think in nineteen eighty five. It's also worth noting
Speaker 3: just so, like Trump repeatedly claims in his little videos
Speaker 3: that children can then make their parents citizens as soon
Speaker 3: as they become citizens. Like so, if someone was undocumented,
Speaker 3: right and their child became a citizen in the child,
Speaker 3: you know, five year old child consponsored and for citizenship,
Speaker 3: and a way they are now the whole family is
Speaker 3: is American citizens right. And then the logic of this
Speaker 3: website goes that like Biden imports these people, they all
Speaker 3: become citizens, they all vote for the Democrats, right, And
Speaker 3: this is sort of the great replacement theory with a
Speaker 3: couple more steps. It's worth noting the children have to
Speaker 3: be twenty one to sponsor a parent, and if that
Speaker 3: parent has entered the country in an undog commented way,
Speaker 3: then the parent has to leave for a decade and
Speaker 3: then come back to apply. It's not possible to simply
Speaker 3: citizenize your parents as soon as you become a citizen
Speaker 3: by birth right citizenship. It would be an extremely long
Speaker 3: game to try and have a kid in order to
Speaker 3: gain your own citizenship. I've met thousands of migrants who
Speaker 3: have entered between ports of entry, right, I've never met
Speaker 3: anyone who have articulated this this sort of goal, this
Speaker 3: this route to citizenship. He then goes on he has
Speaker 3: this like like it's literally a bullet pointed list of
Speaker 3: border policies.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: These include quote unquote extreme vetting at a quote national
Speaker 3: vetting center. That's a little that's a little worrying that
Speaker 3: the national vetting center.
Speaker 2: Who's going to be doing this vetting? What are they
Speaker 2: vetting for? Who are they vetting?
Speaker 3: Yeah, well the migrants. Who's going to be doing the
Speaker 3: vetting probably the people who forced women to have abortions
Speaker 3: in their custody and lost thousands of children and have
Speaker 3: been able to relocate their families. So that'll be great.
Speaker 3: It's not also clear what they're vetting for. He doesn't
Speaker 3: say that specifically. He does say that he wants to
Speaker 3: quote unleash interior immigration enforcement, which anyone who's lived in
Speaker 3: the United States in the last decade may have noticed.
Speaker 3: So we in fact have interior immigration.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that has been unleashed.
Speaker 3: But yeah, it's kind of me as whole Twitter thing.
Speaker 3: But yeah, I think I guess this is part of
Speaker 3: his massive deportation thing, right, his goal to deport undocumented people.
Speaker 3: He does not at any point differentiate between undocumented people
Speaker 3: in the asylum secrets. He seems to see them as
Speaker 3: one of the same.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, they're all good, dangerous illegals or whatever.
Speaker 4: Yes, yeah.
Speaker 3: And anyone crossing the border for any reason other than
Speaker 3: with a visa in hand to him, falls into this,
Speaker 3: like should be deported.
Speaker 2: If you are a certain skin tone? Yes, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: VI's a plus. The skin tone is what makes it okay?
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, yeah, I think it's probably fair. And what
Speaker 3: else has he got on his lord list here? Let's see,
Speaker 3: there's ending federal grants to sanctuary cities. I'm not quite
Speaker 3: sure how he thinks that would work or what exactly
Speaker 3: he means by federal grants, like we're just going to
Speaker 3: stop having highways in California. That, yeah, yeah, let's return.
Speaker 3: I'm ready. I'll be riding my bike everywhere like a king.
Speaker 3: He also talks about and he calls he ending quote
Speaker 3: catch and release at the border. It's not clear what
Speaker 3: he means by this.
Speaker 2: I've certainly heard this term a lot the past year.
Speaker 2: Catch and release.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and it's like catching release was used to refer
Speaker 3: sometimes to Title forty two, a policy that Trump put
Speaker 3: in place whereby migrants would be caught and immediately turned
Speaker 3: back into Mexico and released there, and they generally try
Speaker 3: and cross again. And we've covered it's an entire series
Speaker 3: I made on Title forty two. Right. Another of his uh,
Speaker 3: his weird little bugbears is ending the visa lottery. Are
Speaker 3: you familiar with the visa lottery? Garrison? Roughly, but not
Speaker 3: super Okay, So the visa lottery is more properly called
Speaker 3: something called the Diversity Visa Program. It allows for up
Speaker 3: to fifty five thousand immigrant visas a year for individuals
Speaker 3: from countries that are underrepresented in the US immigration system.
Speaker 3: So it's literally there to increase diversity, right, I guess
Speaker 3: it's d I. It's d I. He must have recorded
Speaker 3: this before di I was a big deal because he
Speaker 3: doesn't have that shame.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure how much equity there is going to
Speaker 2: be in the lottery program.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Well, you're about to find out Garrison Okay. Trump
Speaker 3: has repeatedly suggested that he believes that this diversity visa
Speaker 3: program consists of non US countries raffling off green cards
Speaker 3: like you pay and then they draw your number. That
Speaker 3: that's not how it works. It's the United States who
Speaker 3: decides gets them. It's a computer program that selects about
Speaker 3: fifty thousand applicants from about fifteen million. I have met
Speaker 3: probably hundreds of people who have applied for diversity visas.
Speaker 3: I meet them all the time every time I'm traveling
Speaker 3: for work. Myanmar, Thailand, Iraq, Kurdistan, and Syria, like You'll
Speaker 3: meet people from all these places who have tried to
Speaker 3: apply for the system. Most of them end up not
Speaker 3: getting it because the odds are very slim. Sure, when
Speaker 3: they do get it, they then have to go through
Speaker 3: a series of vetting processes, and then they have to
Speaker 3: make an appointment at a consulate. One of the last
Speaker 3: parts of the process making appoints at a consulate to
Speaker 3: get an interview. Right, what the Trump administration did last
Speaker 3: time was stop people from getting appointments at consulates, citing
Speaker 3: COVID right that they couldn't with the COVID restriction to
Speaker 3: get an appointment. That meant that de facto because you
Speaker 3: only have seven months once you get awarded the visa
Speaker 3: to fulfill the process us and get the paper visa
Speaker 3: and begin your travel. Those people weren't able to get it,
Speaker 3: and they had to go back to the start right,
Speaker 3: which is crushing, Like, I know how much of their
Speaker 3: money and hope people allocate to these programs and to
Speaker 3: be told like, yeah, you got it, it's incredibly rare,
Speaker 3: and then to be like, oh, actually you can't make
Speaker 3: the appointment. Screw you. It's crushing. Now the Biden administration,
Speaker 3: in all fairness, has restored their right to book an interview,
Speaker 3: but it's moved to the bottom of the priority list.
Speaker 3: So in practice it's still happening that people can be
Speaker 3: they can quote unquote win the green card lottery and
Speaker 3: still not get a green card. It's a complete mess,
Speaker 3: and transporposal lists to entirely do away with it, this
Speaker 3: would require legislation that doesn't matter. He also has a
Speaker 3: little there's like a one sentence where he claims that
Speaker 3: Biden's border policies are killing migrants, and weirdly, he links
Speaker 3: to an NPR article about it. He's not wrong, like
Speaker 3: he is absolutely not wrong. Like but but yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3: The butt is that Donald Trump would kill a lot
Speaker 3: more great. I mean yeah, I mean is are those also?
Speaker 2: Are those like referring specifically to Biden stuff or like
Speaker 2: the stuff that like like that like Governor Abbott's doing,
Speaker 2: like what.
Speaker 3: It's the increase in border crossings and bordered deaths from
Speaker 3: twenty twenty to present. Much of that is due to
Speaker 3: Trump's Title forty two policy that Biden wholeheartedly supported defended
Speaker 3: in court. Right, because when people were caught and then
Speaker 3: released back across the border, they often they were offered
Speaker 3: unlimited crossings by the people who were like helping them cross,
Speaker 3: or they the facto, had unlimited chances to cross because
Speaker 3: they're just being dropped back in Mexico, right, Yeah, They're
Speaker 3: often they're dropped without any resources in places where they
Speaker 3: have no community. So they try and cross again, and
Speaker 3: they end up going to more and more remote places
Speaker 3: because they don't want to get caught, right, or so
Speaker 3: they end up crossing in the places where there are
Speaker 3: gaps in the wall. Those tend to be very and
Speaker 3: those tend to be the places where people die. So
Speaker 3: you can map the deaths and you can you can
Speaker 3: see this in real time happen.
Speaker 2: And Trump's pretending to find this to be a problem.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, Trump is very sad about this. He's big sad.
Speaker 3: So he's gonna he's gonna make a kind of gender
Speaker 3: immigration system. It's garson.
Speaker 2: Do you know.
Speaker 3: Do you know what else? It is kinder and gentler
Speaker 3: than the immigration system. Well, I guess ads. I mean,
Speaker 3: I don't know if ads might kill less people, but
Speaker 3: it's really hard to say. Yeah, it's I think they
Speaker 3: probably would. I think we can we can confidently say
Speaker 3: now that cigarette ads are are What if it's a
Speaker 3: banana advert, because then you can get into the whole
Speaker 3: sort of you know, like.
Speaker 2: All right, well here, let's play these ads.
Speaker 3: We're back. Enjoy your fruit.
Speaker 2: I love call fruit.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and then nothing, Grow your own fruit. That's the
Speaker 3: message of this podcast. And then if we didn't have
Speaker 3: if we did grow our own fruit, we wouldn't have
Speaker 3: destabilized many of the countries that these migrants are coming from.
Speaker 2: Beautiful Georgia, peaches.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, we destabilized Georgia. A boy can dream. So
Speaker 3: there's a couple of other bugbears, little sort of things
Speaker 3: that Trump has. One of them is benefits for migrants. Now,
Speaker 3: this is something that's been hopping around the right wing
Speaker 3: for a while. It's really been more sort of one
Speaker 3: of their talking points in the last few months. I
Speaker 3: think like since right wings stream has certainly started coming
Speaker 3: to places where I volunteered on the border, I've heard
Speaker 3: them talking about it, and I tried not to hear
Speaker 3: them talking, So they might have been talking about it
Speaker 3: for and I was just not paying attention. Just be
Speaker 3: super clear, undocumented people are not eligible for most benefits.
Speaker 3: Even people with legal status have a range of hurdles.
Speaker 3: Even if you have even if you have a green card,
Speaker 3: there's a lot of you can't yes. Yeah, And there
Speaker 3: are also public charge rules, which in some cases some
Speaker 3: forms of assistants might be a hurdle if you are
Speaker 3: looking to change your immigration status, So even if you
Speaker 3: had accepted them, that that might stop you moving along
Speaker 3: the immigration pathway. That's only for things like SSI and TANF.
Speaker 3: But I don't think we need to go into the
Speaker 3: nitty gritty of it. He claims that people are coming
Speaker 3: here to live off benefits he calls quote welfare and
Speaker 3: a gigantic magnet drawing people from all over the world.
Speaker 3: They want to come to the United States. They want
Speaker 3: to feast off the sweat and savings of the American taxpayer.
Speaker 3: Feasting off sweat is not a beautiful image, but well no,
Speaker 3: it's He continues to claim that these migrants also take
Speaker 3: American jobs right so at once claiming unemployment benefits and
Speaker 3: taking American jobs. And again, like, I don't think Donald
Speaker 3: Trump stuff has to line up for it to be dangerous.
Speaker 3: Just to like inject a moment of factual analysis. Again,
Speaker 3: you have to wait at least five months after applying
Speaker 3: for work permit. When you arrivee her as a refugee
Speaker 3: to get a work permit. You may not apply straight away.
Speaker 3: Many people wait for a year or more without the
Speaker 3: right to work. Undocumented workers working under the table, a
Speaker 3: hugely underpaid, very frequently abused, and the reason again where
Speaker 3: your fruit is cheap. He says in his Day one
Speaker 3: plan that he's going to stop migrant workers taken American
Speaker 3: jobs by having like American hiring provisions for all federal agencies.
Speaker 3: Federal agencies are not hiring undocumented people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's simply not happening.
Speaker 3: That is just that is like, believe me, I am
Speaker 3: a person who has been a migrant to this country.
Speaker 3: The amount of bullshit you have to go to to
Speaker 3: even do a government job like teaching is a large
Speaker 3: amount of bullshit. And they absolutely are not hiring undocumented people.
Speaker 3: I bring this garrison to the final pillar of the
Speaker 3: Trump immigration policy and fit one garrison. I want you
Speaker 3: to take a moment to listen to this clip of
Speaker 3: Donald Trump explaining the well researched information that he uses
Speaker 3: to develop his immigration policy.
Speaker 6: I was thrilled to host a screening at Bedminster of
Speaker 6: the important new film Sound of Freedom, about the power
Speaker 6: of faith in overcoming evil, and in particular the evil
Speaker 6: of child trafficking, big problem. We had it down to
Speaker 6: the lowest number in many years just four years ago,
Speaker 6: and now it's gone through the roof, even though the
Speaker 6: fake news media has tried to ignore it. Sound of
Speaker 6: Freedom has been a national sensation and a colossal success
Speaker 6: at the box office.
Speaker 4: Really big numbers.
Speaker 6: Everyone should see it. This is a very important film
Speaker 6: and very important movie, and it's a very important documentary
Speaker 6: all wrapped up in one.
Speaker 5: Oh wow, that's crazy, yeah film. Yeah, it's like you're
Speaker 5: sliding another I there in between L and M.
Speaker 3: I've heard spoken around the world, and I've never heard
Speaker 3: that pronounced that way.
Speaker 2: Curious choice.
Speaker 3: Yeah, just a fascinating man.
Speaker 2: I mean yeah, besides the point like most of those
Speaker 2: Had A Freedom tickets were but by right wing billionaires
Speaker 2: and were completely empty seats.
Speaker 3: He goes on to detail the exact number of dollars
Speaker 3: it took in the opening week to talk about how
Speaker 3: it's such a success. Yes, decent, A decent amount of
Speaker 3: his entire child drafting policy. Is him describing the film
Speaker 3: The Freedom. It's incredible, like that was that was a
Speaker 3: gift that I did not. This is if you read
Speaker 3: the transcript, you miss out on some of these absolute
Speaker 3: easter eggs Trump leaves for us.
Speaker 2: I think I think I saw a clip of him
Speaker 2: at a rally recently where he was talking about Center
Speaker 2: Freedom and he also said it like that, No, it
Speaker 2: was I know what it was. It was talking about
Speaker 2: David Lynch. When there was that misquote about about Lynch
Speaker 2: saying like like Trump seems like like like an energetic
Speaker 2: guy or something, and he's like Philim Pillim director David
Speaker 2: Lynch endorsed me for president. It's like, okay, that's not whatever.
Speaker 3: Yeah, then he's uh yeah.
Speaker 2: So he's he's been saying this way for like almost
Speaker 2: ten years at least, because that's insane.
Speaker 3: Actually yeah, like.
Speaker 2: Because because that yeah, because that clip was from like
Speaker 2: the twenty fifteen campaign rallies.
Speaker 3: Wow, it's so it's not Yeah, wow, the power of
Speaker 3: simility an incredible thing.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 3: If any anyone else, anyone we could do like the
Speaker 3: NPR thing, if you if they said film where you
Speaker 3: come from?
Speaker 2: I don't think anyone else, says Phil, I really don't
Speaker 2: think so.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, no, there's not a Yeah, he just comes
Speaker 3: up with this stuff from a blank slate. Well that's cool, Yeah,
Speaker 3: anyone else is cool.
Speaker 2: It's uh, this is all of this video is called
Speaker 2: like Trump calls for a death penalty.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and we're.
Speaker 2: Laughing and we're laughing about pronunciation.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, unfortunately, Garrison, it's time to stop laughing because yes,
Speaker 3: Donald Trump, I'm going to outline a death penalty thing. Quote.
Speaker 3: I will urge Congress to ensure that anyone caught trafficking
Speaker 3: children across our border receives the death penalty immediately. And
Speaker 3: that includes also for women, because women, as you know,
Speaker 3: are number one in trafficking children are actually number two.
Speaker 3: That's the sentence which you could pick apart for a
Speaker 3: long time. What does he mean by trafficking That is
Speaker 3: extremely unclear. He seems to mean the arrival of people
Speaker 3: in the United States.
Speaker 2: Right, Like, that's kind of what it sounds like. Yeah, Like,
Speaker 2: it sounds like it just means crossing the border.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, he well because he he also says, quote,
Speaker 3: I will use Title forty two to end the child
Speaker 3: trafficking crisis by returning all traffic children to their families
Speaker 3: in their home countries and without delay. I made an
Speaker 3: entire fucking series on Title forty two. I recorded it
Speaker 3: in a week, and then I wrote it in a week,
Speaker 3: and then we edited it. And it has destroyed me
Speaker 3: and I have never recovered. Title forty two does absolutely
Speaker 3: nothing about child trafficking. Title forty two returns all migrants
Speaker 3: or anyone crossing the border between ports of entry to Mexico,
Speaker 3: which suggests that he sees all these people as trafficked, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: It also absolutely does not reunite children with their families.
Speaker 3: This is the administration that separated families at the border
Speaker 3: and has in some cases been unable to find the
Speaker 3: parents of the children. It's separated. Friends of mine have
Speaker 3: worked for a very long time, very hard, absolutely not
Speaker 3: for the Trump administration, trying to find those people's families.
Speaker 3: But it's really interesting that he is talking about Title
Speaker 3: forty two again. Title forty two, if you're not familiar,
Speaker 3: as a public health law, right, it's to stop the
Speaker 3: introduction of infectious disease into United States. It's a very
Speaker 3: old law that was initially designed around tuberculosis. So, and
Speaker 3: we know that the Trump administration planned to use Title
Speaker 3: forty two before coronavirus was a Coronavirus is already a
Speaker 3: thing before COVID nineteen with the thing right, So he's
Speaker 3: just being completely open about his idea to manipulate public
Speaker 3: health law in a way that allows him to do
Speaker 3: things immigration law would not allow him to do.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 3: He also finishes up, I guess by making his claim
Speaker 3: once again he goes back to the well that is
Speaker 3: the fucking border war. Right. I'm just going to quote here.
Speaker 3: We created the most secure border in US history, dealing
Speaker 3: a major blow to the cartels in traffickers. We built
Speaker 3: hundreds of miles of war, we renovated hundreds of miles
Speaker 3: of war, we built hundreds of miles of war. We
Speaker 3: never had anything like it. And then I got Mexico
Speaker 3: free of charge to give us twenty eight thousand soldiers
Speaker 3: to protect us from people coming into our country illegally.
Speaker 3: It's not going to surprise anyone that this is bullshit, right.
Speaker 3: Trump first made this hundreds of miles of war claim
Speaker 3: in a debate with Biden. I filed a foyer for
Speaker 3: a new war building that night. The best estimate I
Speaker 3: can come up with, based on the documents I got
Speaker 3: from Foyer and from other people's foyers, is that they
Speaker 3: built about eighty five miles of new war. They did
Speaker 3: replace several hundred miles of war, and in some cases
Speaker 3: that went from a pretty insignificant barrier to a pretty
Speaker 3: large one. The twenty eight thousand soldier thing this will
Speaker 3: shock you was also not true. There was an agreement
Speaker 3: at twenty nineteen with Mexico that didn't list a specific
Speaker 3: number of troops, but it did say that most of
Speaker 3: them will be in the southern half of the country
Speaker 3: and Mexico's border with Guatemala. He then goes on just
Speaker 3: a complete tangent where he says I will rage war
Speaker 3: on the cartels, just as I destroyed the ISIS Caliphate
Speaker 3: one hundred percent gone, one hundred percent destroyed.
Speaker 2: Uh yeah, that's why that in Russia.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I was going to say, yeah, it's all gone. Yeah.
Speaker 3: ISIS car bombed the street that I stayed on a
Speaker 3: couple of weeks after I left in October.
Speaker 2: Like, this is why the ISIS press people are like
Speaker 2: begging people to like to believe that ISIS is like
Speaker 2: still a thing. They're like, no, please, We're still real,
Speaker 2: We're still around, please, I'm a real boy. Yeah exactly, Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, the Pinocchio Isis. That'll be a highly entertaining film. Look,
Speaker 3: I want to finish up by saying here that, like,
Speaker 3: as we saw in Donald Trump's first term, his malice
Speaker 3: is really only matched by his incompetence, and his incompetence
Speaker 3: at the border is much less important. I guess He's
Speaker 3: been able to be more competent at the border than
Speaker 3: he has been anywhere else in enacting his policies. He
Speaker 3: managed to do plenty of things in his first term
Speaker 3: that are unconstitutional, because the system only really works when
Speaker 3: the people playing the game agree that the rules of
Speaker 3: the game are more important than the outcome, and that's
Speaker 3: not the case with Donald Trump, Right. We know that
Speaker 3: the fact that he dedicated so much of his agenda
Speaker 3: forty seven pages to migration tells us that peddling great
Speaker 3: replacement theories is going to be a major part of
Speaker 3: his campaign and a major part of his second term
Speaker 3: if he gets one. The sources that he links to
Speaker 3: here tell us that he's as addicted to right wing
Speaker 3: rage bait as he ever was, and that he's still
Speaker 3: surrounded by cranks and crackpots with fringe on the flag
Speaker 3: level conspiracy theories. None of this stuff, none of my
Speaker 3: suggestions that what he's saying is false or illegal or
Speaker 3: impossible under the constitution mean that it's not dangerous.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 3: I would have told you in twenty sixteen that it
Speaker 3: was illegal to bounce people back to Mexico without hearing
Speaker 3: their asylum claims, because it is. But we had it
Speaker 3: under a democratic president for three years. We had it
Speaker 3: under Trump for a year. Right, it still happened. He
Speaker 3: succeeded in moving the border and migration debate massively to
Speaker 3: the right, and we have Biden advocating for things that
Speaker 3: would not have flown like that. Clinton would have been
Speaker 3: a ghast at right, and just by Trump making this
Speaker 3: an issue, even if he doesn't get elected in November,
Speaker 3: Biden's going to try and fight him on this by
Speaker 3: claiming that he too is tough on the border, he
Speaker 3: too is tough on these fictional things like the taking
Speaker 3: of American jobs or migrants claiming public benefits or birthright
Speaker 3: citizenship right that Biden has completely failed to plow his
Speaker 3: own path on this, and he said he's entirely reactive
Speaker 3: to Trump. So I think I guess the big take
Speaker 3: home here is that whatever happens in November, things that
Speaker 3: the border are going to be terrible, just like they're
Speaker 3: terrible now.
Speaker 2: And and you can't just rely on politicians to do
Speaker 2: things at the border, like there's actually like you can't
Speaker 2: just push it away, be like, oh, now that so
Speaker 2: and so is in charge, now I don't have to
Speaker 2: think about It'd be like, well.
Speaker 3: That's the whole fucking problem, right. The reason that we
Speaker 3: are so broke, the reason that I personally am so
Speaker 3: broken and my truck is falling apart, is that that
Speaker 3: is what people are doing. At least with Trump. We
Speaker 3: got money in twenty eighteen when he held the MI
Speaker 3: caravan at the border in Tijuana. My friends and I
Speaker 3: were there doing mutual aid, and we did just what
Speaker 3: we're doing now in a cumba right. We fed people,
Speaker 3: we bought them blankets, we took care of them, and
Speaker 3: we stole them from dying. But at least libs sent
Speaker 3: us money, like we had tons of money. I remember
Speaker 3: spending one thousand dollars on soft toys in the Costco
Speaker 3: in Tijuana. That doesn't happen anymore because people think that
Speaker 3: they voted for the kind, gentle, nice guy. And I guess, like,
Speaker 3: I want people to look at this with the understanding
Speaker 3: that whatever happens at the ballot box, like you need
Speaker 3: to help with a board it because neither of these
Speaker 3: politicians are going to That's my speech. Thank you for
Speaker 3: listening to our podcast. Anything else, Garrison.
Speaker 2: No, No, But we will be back tomorrow with more exciting,
Speaker 2: exciting news about Yeah, what are we looking about sell
Speaker 2: an agenda either, Actually I don't know because we have
Speaker 2: not planned it out that far ahead. Throughout the rest
Speaker 2: of the week, we'll be talking about Trump's plans for
Speaker 2: handling the gender question, trump declaring war on cartels, and
Speaker 2: his plans to fix the pharmaceutical industry. So all stuff.
Speaker 3: I can't wait.
Speaker 7: Welcome zacodapp gear podcast where the future president wants us
Speaker 7: to die and the current president doesn't give a shit.
Speaker 4: I'm your host Miah Wong with me as Garrison.
Speaker 8: Hi.
Speaker 7: Okay, so we're covering another aspect of Trump's agenda forty seven.
Speaker 7: All right, we're looking at President Trump's plan to protect
Speaker 7: children from left wing gender insanity. Now, despite that title,
Speaker 7: this is the least trumpy of all of these. He
Speaker 7: is just phoning this one the fucking It's the most
Speaker 7: hymn reading off a teleprompter I've ever seen in any
Speaker 7: speech he's ever given.
Speaker 2: Because historically he's never cared about this kind of stuff.
Speaker 2: He's just having to do it now to appease the
Speaker 2: people he needs to get votes from. But like, if
Speaker 2: you look at Trump's stances on transgender people historically, however,
Speaker 2: not good. They're not like a genocidyl. And you can
Speaker 2: really tell his heart, isn't it. It's in some of
Speaker 2: these he I.
Speaker 7: Mean, legitimately, he sounds like so someone doing an ad
Speaker 7: read for a Raige Shadow Legend.
Speaker 4: Sponsorship, Like it's it's he's so bored.
Speaker 7: There's like one It's funny because you can tell this
Speaker 7: is something I started happening in the middle of the administration.
Speaker 7: Was you could tell when his speech writers were just
Speaker 7: writing in a Trump word for him to say so
Speaker 7: it would look less like he was And they're doing
Speaker 7: it in this one. There's only like one genuinely trumpy
Speaker 7: thing in this Unfortunately, it all fucking sucks ass, It's
Speaker 7: quite bleak. So let's let's get into what exactly is
Speaker 7: in this. I would love to hear Trump's plan for
Speaker 7: the true genders. Yeah, so first he wants to end
Speaker 7: Biden's executive order on gender affirming care. Now you might
Speaker 7: be asking, wait, meal.
Speaker 4: What the fu?
Speaker 8: Wait what executive what executive order? I looked this up too,
Speaker 8: because I was like, wait, what is he talking about?
Speaker 8: So apparently, back in twenty twenty two, Biden issued a
Speaker 8: series of executive orders that were supposed to protect the
Speaker 8: rights of trans kids to get gender affirming care.
Speaker 2: So that didn't happen.
Speaker 7: No, no, no, now these weren't. Yeah, these were mostly
Speaker 7: stunningly ineffective. Well let's let's I'm going to quote from
Speaker 7: I finally found the actual executive which is disturbingly hard
Speaker 7: to find. The actual text of because everyone just wanted
Speaker 7: you to read the press release, because what's actually in
Speaker 7: it is, okay, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall,
Speaker 7: as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, used the Department
Speaker 7: of Health and Human Services authority to project LGBTQI plus
Speaker 7: individuals access to medically necessary care from harmful state and
Speaker 7: local laws and practices. And I'll promote the adoption of
Speaker 7: promising policies and practices to support health equity, including in
Speaker 7: the area of mental health for LGBTQI youth and adults.
Speaker 7: Within two hundred days of this order, the Secretary of
Speaker 7: HHS SE develop and release sample policies for states to
Speaker 7: safeguard and expand access to health care for LGBTQI individuals
Speaker 7: and their families, including mental health care services. Now, let's
Speaker 7: pull out for one second to try to figure out
Speaker 7: what does that actually do. So what is being done there.
Speaker 7: The thing that is being commanded is that the Department
Speaker 7: of Health and Human Services make sample guidelines for state.
Speaker 7: And then there's another part where they were talking about
Speaker 7: how they were going to form a committee to study
Speaker 7: trans mental health care. Uh huh, so none of this
Speaker 7: did shit right, But this is the first thing that
Speaker 7: Trump's like, we're going to overturn this. I guess the
Speaker 7: actual substantive shift here is and we'll get to this
Speaker 7: in a bit. This didn't do anything. This was just
Speaker 7: a pr op he does. And this is funny because
Speaker 7: he does a series of these things every single trans
Speaker 7: day of visibility, and then nothing ever happens because ye
Speaker 7: as joke.
Speaker 2: We've had like so many states since twenty twenty two
Speaker 2: completely restrict healthcare for trans people under the age of eighteen,
Speaker 2: and I've not heard of a single instance where the
Speaker 2: federal government has intervened to to help to help a
Speaker 2: kid get puberty blockers in in a state like where
Speaker 2: they passed these sorts of bills.
Speaker 7: I will say this, The Justice Department has done lawsuits, sure, sure,
Speaker 7: and I think they won like one of them. So
Speaker 7: that's not literally nothing, it's just mostly nothing like And
Speaker 7: then this is the thing. It's coming through the judiciary,
Speaker 7: not through the federal bureaucracy. And that's a point of
Speaker 7: contrast that I want to get to because Trump, you know,
Speaker 7: and this is something that's that's always been true about
Speaker 7: sort of the use of executive power by democratic versus
Speaker 7: Republican presidents, right, sure, you know there are Like the
Speaker 7: Democrats sometimes do use like massive executive power overreach, things like,
Speaker 7: for example, Obama's claimed to have the legal authority to
Speaker 7: kill any man, woman, or child moment they self off
Speaker 7: the US or regardless of citizenship status, the thing that
Speaker 7: he used to kill a sixteen year old American citizen
Speaker 7: in Yemen, So that he does that sometimes, right, But
Speaker 7: they don't do anything useful with it. And now let's
Speaker 7: get to what Trump is going to do with this quote.
Speaker 7: Sign a new executive order instructing every federal agency to
Speaker 7: cease all programs to promote the concept of sex and
Speaker 7: gender and transition at any age. Ask Congress to permanently
Speaker 7: stop federal taxpayer dollars from being used to promote or
Speaker 7: pay for these procedures. Okay, so that's bad. What exactly
Speaker 7: this does is kind of murky. We're going to talk
Speaker 7: about planned parenthood in a second, because there's another one
Speaker 7: of these proposals that's a lot worse for plant parenthood, and.
Speaker 2: I guess that'd be going after some level of like
Speaker 2: government insurance. If you're trying to get medical care paid
Speaker 2: for if you have government insurance, I guess that'd be
Speaker 2: what that's trying to target.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think there's like two things.
Speaker 7: One and I think this is the main target is well,
Speaker 7: I don't know, it's sort of unclear, but the two
Speaker 7: main targets I think are any kind of federal education
Speaker 7: program that talks about queer people. Sure, and then the
Speaker 7: second one. Yeah, it's like if you're in the military,
Speaker 7: you won't be able to transition anymore because or if
Speaker 7: and this is actually a pretty big deal because there
Speaker 7: are a lot of federal employees. The federal employees health
Speaker 7: insurance would no longer cover any gender for macare. And
Speaker 7: this is for everyone, right because it's.
Speaker 2: Not Unfortunately a lot of transgender employees at the dot yep.
Speaker 4: So that's very bad.
Speaker 2: Why those drones?
Speaker 7: Oh god, oh you meant oh the you had DoD, Yes,
Speaker 7: the department, But no, you said do two probably a
Speaker 7: transportation I was like, well, yeah, that too.
Speaker 4: There's a bunch of well.
Speaker 2: Yes, because yes, I meant, I meant the DoD.
Speaker 7: Yeah, no, you know, it's bad. There's an open question
Speaker 7: here about how exactly this works. So one question that
Speaker 7: I'm genuinely not sure about. There's a possibility this works
Speaker 7: like abortion funding where I So federal money can't go
Speaker 7: to promoting abortions. I think there's some very weird stuff
Speaker 7: with U said money overseas, So sometimes happens, but I
Speaker 7: don't know someone I'm not I'm not a USCID expert.
Speaker 7: But you know, so for example, you so if you
Speaker 7: are a clinic that does abortions, right, you can take
Speaker 7: federal money. You just can't use the federal money for
Speaker 7: the abortions. So it's possible that you know, for example,
Speaker 7: so one of the one of the the influm consent
Speaker 7: clinics in Chicago takes federal money for HIV treatment. Under
Speaker 7: this wording, it seems like they could still get federal
Speaker 7: funding for that, but they couldn't take any money for
Speaker 7: gender firming care. But also so Congress could just pass
Speaker 7: a bill that stops I'm pretty sure it could pass
Speaker 7: a bill that stops all funding for anyone who does this.
Speaker 7: So you know, this is something that's kind of interesting
Speaker 7: about these is that this stuff is all very very bad.
Speaker 4: It's also not quite.
Speaker 7: The maximalist genocidal policy yet, I think in large part
Speaker 7: because they haven't taken power and because the groups who
Speaker 7: are like pushing this stuff This is actually kind of
Speaker 7: an older this. This is from February twenty twenty three,
Speaker 7: So okay, it's actually a lot older than a lot
Speaker 7: of the other stuff here. And even even back like
Speaker 7: in twenty twenty three, the beginning of the year, stuff
Speaker 7: was less radical than.
Speaker 4: It is now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that was before the big we must eliminate transgenderism.
Speaker 2: Yeah thing that started with the Daily Wire, and then
Speaker 2: Trump mirrored some of that rhetoric in his like a
Speaker 2: seapack talk from that spring. Yeah, it was kind of
Speaker 2: a ramp up like on some of like the quote
Speaker 2: unquote transgender ism rhetoric really was getting more popular on
Speaker 2: that time. The kind of groomer rhetoric from the year previous,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty two is starting to kind of fade away,
Speaker 2: and they were finding a new thing to replace it.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: So there's a good, just decent chance that this stuff
Speaker 7: is all actually much worse when it gets implanted. That's
Speaker 7: the way it's written right now, as best as I
Speaker 7: can tell. So the third one, and this one is
Speaker 7: a fiasco. Any hospital or healthcare provider who either gives
Speaker 7: up puberty blockers or does genderfirming surgery for miners, or
Speaker 7: gives hormones to miners can't accept Medicare or Medicaid, they
Speaker 7: get knocked off of the approved list. Okay, so that
Speaker 7: is a huge deal because that immediately knocks out planned parenthood.
Speaker 4: Who you plan pair?
Speaker 7: Who gets this like Sophie's choice thing of either you
Speaker 7: don't provide puberty blockers like you, you don't provide gender
Speaker 7: firming care of either like either sort of hormones or
Speaker 7: puberty blockers to kids, or you lose every single person
Speaker 7: who uses Medicare Medicaid. And that's a lot of people.
Speaker 7: That's like I've seen numbers that suggest it's like forty
Speaker 7: percent of people who use Planned parenthood use particularly Medicare,
Speaker 7: And this is a complete fiasco.
Speaker 2: I also wonder how this would impact like cis, children
Speaker 2: who need to be put on puberty blockers, because people
Speaker 2: forget that, like puberty blockers have been a thing for
Speaker 2: like decades and decades that are like well proven to
Speaker 2: be safe and effective for delaying puberty. It does not
Speaker 2: stop puberty from happening altogether. It does not cast straight
Speaker 2: you permanently or in any of these kind of wild claims.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: Well, and the stuff that's weird here too is like
Speaker 7: it's the language they're using is really inflammatory shit, So
Speaker 7: it's actually deeply unclear what the fuck they're talking about.
Speaker 2: So, I mean, and I've read a lot of these
Speaker 2: sorts of bills, even like the Arkansas bill targeting IVF.
Speaker 2: When these politicians are questioned about some of the language
Speaker 2: that would, ultimately, if written and acted upon as written,
Speaker 2: would like block a whole bunch of regular medical procedures
Speaker 2: from happening, they're often confused about why they're being asked
Speaker 2: about this because they're like, no, obviously things will continue
Speaker 2: on as normal, and if we have to amend the
Speaker 2: bill to like change this one little thing, then we'll
Speaker 2: do that. They don't actually think about all the little
Speaker 2: tiny ways that this will also just like interferes with
Speaker 2: like regular medical science. Yeah, and they just need digital
Speaker 2: care because they know it's because they're never in a
Speaker 2: prosecute for stuff like that. It just isn't it. They're
Speaker 2: genuinely not thinking about those other use cases at all.
Speaker 7: Yeah, And like I'm going to read the first sentence
Speaker 7: the first one of these, like the text of it
Speaker 7: revoke Joe Biden's cruel policies on so called gender affirming
Speaker 7: care and quotes a process that includes giving kids puberty blockers,
Speaker 7: mutating their physical appearance, and ultimately performing surgery on minor children.
Speaker 7: So that's like not real, that's not what gender affirming
Speaker 7: care is. So but the thing is right, it's fucking
Speaker 7: impossible to tell whether this would result in them actually
Speaker 7: banning all gender affirming care whatsoever, which includes other stuff
Speaker 7: as well, or if it's just a more limited ban
Speaker 7: like who the fuck knows, because they're not being specific
Speaker 7: at all, so this can mutate into a whole bunch
Speaker 7: of stuff. One of the other immediate sort of impacts
Speaker 7: of banning, particularly of banning medicaid, is that like there's
Speaker 7: a lot of trans people on it, because trans people
Speaker 7: are significantly poorer than SIS people. So I mean, just
Speaker 7: just to take like a random statistic op so, the
Speaker 7: unemployment rate right now in the US is three point
Speaker 7: eight percent. The unemployment rate for trans people is eighteen percent,
Speaker 7: which is nineteen thirty five great depression levels of unemployment.
Speaker 7: So you know, if you're a transperson out there and
Speaker 7: you're listening to people tell you how great the economy is,
Speaker 7: and you're like, what the fuck is going on, the
Speaker 7: answer is that you literally do not live in the
Speaker 7: same world as the cist people who are telling you this.
Speaker 7: You live the nineteen nineteen thirty five Great Depression. So yeah,
Speaker 7: and you know, so, so cutting off one of the
Speaker 7: ways that people can access medical care if they you know,
Speaker 7: can't afford it is a fucking disaster.
Speaker 4: This is going to I don't like, presumably if this.
Speaker 7: Goes through with, the only way that you're going to
Speaker 7: be able to get like gender affirming care if you're
Speaker 7: a kid is by having rich parents and going to
Speaker 7: like some kind of clinic that doesn't take Medicaid Medicare Medicaid. Yeah,
Speaker 7: so you know what else doesn't take Medicare Medicaid?
Speaker 4: Actually who knows? I don't know.
Speaker 7: Look, it's a bad time to ad pivots. Okay, so
Speaker 7: we're back, So okay, now, having gone into all of
Speaker 7: that detail, Number four is just quote pass a law
Speaker 7: prohibiting child sexual mutilation in all fifty states.
Speaker 2: So this is see, this is this is a great
Speaker 2: example of the thing I was just talking about, how like, theoretically,
Speaker 2: if one was as smart ass, you'd be like, oh,
Speaker 2: so you're banning circumcision. You're like, no, of course not,
Speaker 2: because they're they're not thinking about this sort of thing.
Speaker 2: This is this is like yeah, no, it's it's just yeah,
Speaker 2: trans kids can't get which also like almost never happens.
Speaker 2: There may be like one or two very bizarre like
Speaker 2: outliers where someone has gone through extensive therapy from a
Speaker 2: very young age that might result in them receiving such
Speaker 2: surgery at like sixteen or seventeen, but that is such
Speaker 2: a minuscule amount that that simply just does not happen. Yeah,
Speaker 2: in any real statistical notion, you know.
Speaker 4: But I mean, but this is one of these things.
Speaker 7: It's hard because it's like, okay, so like what are
Speaker 7: they actually what are they talking about?
Speaker 4: And the answer is who the fuck knows.
Speaker 2: This cure they think this is happening?
Speaker 4: Well no, But but also.
Speaker 7: Like because like the you know, one of the things
Speaker 7: that they do here, right is they'll they'll talk about
Speaker 7: female like they'll talk about like general and mutilations like whatever.
Speaker 7: But they're also include in a like puberty blockers.
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course because because to them, peuty blockers are
Speaker 2: like a chemical castration device.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and it's all you know, this is one of
Speaker 7: these things. But you know, but the thing I should
Speaker 7: mention about this one that is, I don't know. It's
Speaker 7: something I'm short of resident to talk about because I
Speaker 7: I don't know, like, I don't like I'm torn between
Speaker 7: wanting to spread panic and wanting to be like, well,
Speaker 7: this is probably what's going to happen. But there's a
Speaker 7: non zero chance that with how far this stuff has gone,
Speaker 7: they Republicans take the House in the Senate, that this
Speaker 7: bill turns into just a full band, because that's what's
Speaker 7: being pushed for now by the sort of constituencies that
Speaker 7: this stuff is for. It's just like a full band
Speaker 7: and all care. It's way less popular than even the
Speaker 7: anti TRANSCITD stuff, which is not very popular. But on
Speaker 7: the other hand, like this is I mean, this entire
Speaker 7: thing is just Trump sort of like being like yeah,
Speaker 7: sure whatever to these like these weird anti transdiptions.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there certainly are a percentage of Republican politicians and
Speaker 2: like right wing influencers who do want some of these
Speaker 2: bills to expand up to just including everyone or everyone
Speaker 2: under the edge of twenty five. As as we've mentioned before,
Speaker 2: I still don't think there's it's it's it's too far
Speaker 2: off to say whether or not this is like something
Speaker 2: to actually like worry about in any in any real sense.
Speaker 2: It's it's it's too murky.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: But on the other hand, he is he is very
Speaker 7: explicit on just banning all banning care for minors. Like
Speaker 7: that's this thing that he's very like, that's just in
Speaker 7: the text.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 7: The next one is one of the this is like
Speaker 7: one of the sort of almost every bill that gets
Speaker 7: passed by a state legislature now has this provision that
Speaker 7: creates like quote the private right of action for victims
Speaker 7: to sue doctors for anyone who got any kind of
Speaker 7: gender for mccare as a minor.
Speaker 4: This is We've talked about this on the show before.
Speaker 4: This is this is you know, this is.
Speaker 7: A thing that lets d transgrifters who think that God
Speaker 7: talks to them like try to go and destroy like
Speaker 7: doctors and clinics. Yeah, it's one of the tactics that
Speaker 7: they use to try to like run people who they
Speaker 7: can't otherwise go after legally out of existence. So you know,
Speaker 7: that's like a that's just a sort of normal, classic
Speaker 7: anti trans thing that they want to bring to And well,
Speaker 7: I guess the other important part of it is is
Speaker 7: having this on a national level, lets them target clinics
Speaker 7: in like blue states that they otherwise normally wouldn't be
Speaker 7: able to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, that's the big goal of a lot
Speaker 2: of this federal stuff is being able to actually have
Speaker 2: it effect, like in New York, California, the other half
Speaker 2: of the country. Whereas because right wing governors are doing
Speaker 2: all this sort of stuff in a lot of the
Speaker 2: red states, but that is not satisfying to a lot
Speaker 2: of these people. They the reason why this is being
Speaker 2: pushed on off level is to try to put as
Speaker 2: much pressure on blue states as they can, just out
Speaker 2: of the desire for sheer human misery. Yep.
Speaker 7: Now speaking of the desire for human misery. So there
Speaker 7: is just a there is one very trump one that
Speaker 7: I've actually haven't seen before, quote direct the Department of
Speaker 7: Justice to investigate big pharma and the big hospital networks
Speaker 7: to determine whether they deliberately covered up horrific long term
Speaker 7: side effects of quote sex transitions to get rich at
Speaker 7: the expense of vulnerable patients, or illegally marketed hormones and
Speaker 7: puberty blockers which are in no way licensed or approved
Speaker 7: for this use.
Speaker 2: That's that's deeply fundy because it's just like nothing he's
Speaker 2: saying is real.
Speaker 7: No, like, all that's fake. The long term side effects
Speaker 7: of sex transition is being extremely based and cool, but.
Speaker 2: No, like there's also there's just nothing to support any
Speaker 2: of that notion. So even if the DJ does investigate this,
Speaker 2: they're not gonna find anything because no one's trying to
Speaker 2: market testosterone or estrogen to like make money off of it.
Speaker 4: I know.
Speaker 2: This is one thing that certain freaks at the Daily
Speaker 2: Wire try to like talk about being like, Ooh, the
Speaker 2: shady pharmaceutical companies are making all this money off of estrogen.
Speaker 2: It just isn't true because not Yeah, most people aren't
Speaker 2: paying for estrogen anyway, They're getting it through like health
Speaker 2: insurance that the most I have to pay for is
Speaker 2: the fucking needles.
Speaker 7: Well and also and also think about estrogen, is like
Speaker 7: the majority of the people who get estrogen urs sists women.
Speaker 4: Yes, yes, Like so.
Speaker 2: The majority of people who get testosterone are male bodybuilders.
Speaker 7: Yeah, And it's like, like, have you ever fucking tried to
Speaker 7: like get a like get like like even something like
Speaker 7: facial feminization surgery, which is like technically speaking, is like
Speaker 7: a fairly highly paid from when use plastic surgeon do
Speaker 7: you know how long the waiting lists are for that
Speaker 7: you can't even pay them to do this to you.
Speaker 7: You have to pay them and then wait for fucking
Speaker 7: years because no one does it.
Speaker 2: It's like it's it's something that I think coming off
Speaker 2: of like the epidemic, we have certain influencers online who
Speaker 2: are trying to like find different ways to tie in
Speaker 2: big pharma to whatever thing they're currently talking about, and
Speaker 2: they're trying to do that with trans healthcare, and it
Speaker 2: just it is Honestly, it doesn't the reason why you
Speaker 2: hardly get talked about because because it doesn't lead anywhere.
Speaker 2: It'll get a passing mentioned and the what is a
Speaker 2: Woman documentary, it'll get this passing mentioned by Trump, but
Speaker 2: like you don't actually see anything on the legislative level
Speaker 2: actually targeting this because it's just there's just nothing to do.
Speaker 2: There's nothing to investigate. Also, all of these drugs are
Speaker 2: approved and tested for all of these things. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: it happened for like decades, so like it's it's it's
Speaker 2: simply not real.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean, this is the thing where I think
Speaker 7: the actual effect of this with DJ would just be
Speaker 7: Trump doing like random witch hunts and like going through
Speaker 7: and like rating patients files for shit, which.
Speaker 2: Like Peppa, Heppa, you're not allowed, not allowed.
Speaker 7: I don't think the trumpets this department is gonna give us.
Speaker 7: So well, here's the thing. Is the Supreme Court going
Speaker 7: to stop them? No, of course, this ree courd is
Speaker 7: not gonna stop.
Speaker 2: Like this is such a non problem because there's just
Speaker 2: nothing to do here.
Speaker 7: Yes, but it's like I don't know, like I think
Speaker 7: the prospect of Trump realizing he could actually just do
Speaker 7: unlimited judicial tyranny and do whatever the fuck he wants
Speaker 7: in the Supreme Court, like sure seven to two will
Speaker 7: be like, yeah, cops have the right to like execute
Speaker 7: trans prisoners or some ship.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but that's not what's currently being talked about.
Speaker 7: Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, But I mean I do I
Speaker 7: do think there'll be sort of like fake scare mongeri investigations.
Speaker 4: I don't sure.
Speaker 2: I just don't think it'll lead. I just don't think
Speaker 2: it'll lead anywhere. I think it's mostly just like a
Speaker 2: wild goose chase to satisfy whatever fucking person who watches
Speaker 2: too many right wing podcasts on YouTube. So like it's
Speaker 2: it's I don't see this as anything like super pressing
Speaker 2: the next one I think.
Speaker 7: Actually could be real, depending on how motivated they are
Speaker 7: to do it. So the next one, so this is
Speaker 7: a ban on teachers and anyone who works. So this
Speaker 7: this is this is supposed to be a directive sent
Speaker 7: down from the Department of Education, and it says no
Speaker 7: one who works for a school, So no teachers or
Speaker 7: any school administration can tell a kid that they might
Speaker 7: be trans and that the consequences for this are civil
Speaker 7: like civil rights like investigations into them, and also the
Speaker 7: elimination of federal funding for any school district where this happens. Okay,
Speaker 7: and that's this is effect What this effectively is is
Speaker 7: a threat to cut off federal funding from states if
Speaker 7: they don't implement what is effectively a don't say trans bill.
Speaker 4: That one.
Speaker 7: I think that one's going to be pretty real. It
Speaker 7: kind of depends on the extent to which the Department
Speaker 7: of Education is willing to spend a bunch of time
Speaker 7: going through individual cases. But you know, like, given that
Speaker 7: it's possible that Department of Education just gets filled with
Speaker 7: a bunch of like deranged Trump weirdos, I think there's
Speaker 7: a real chance that this one actually goes through and
Speaker 7: does stuff yeah. And the other thing without that one
Speaker 7: is because because that's a directive through federal agencies, he
Speaker 7: doesn't it doesn't have to go through Congress, which is
Speaker 7: sort of alarming. It's I don't know, It's one of
Speaker 7: these things where it's the question of how powerful is
Speaker 7: the federal bureaucracy going to be? And I tend to
Speaker 7: lean towards the side of the federal bureaucracy has an
Speaker 7: imense capacity to cause harm. The last part is try.
Speaker 7: He wants to get a bill in Congress that ends
Speaker 7: all recognition of their being non binary people and saying
Speaker 7: that the only genders are men and women. So this
Speaker 7: would do things immediately like getting rid of like the
Speaker 7: ex gender marker on passports and only recognizing people's to
Speaker 7: sign gender at birth, which means the government is now
Speaker 7: saying that only to like, only two genders exist, and
Speaker 7: also that the federal bureaucracy gets to assign you a gender,
Speaker 7: which is, you know, normally the exact kind of federal
Speaker 7: tyranny the Republican Party decries, but you know, they hate us.
Speaker 2: Do they ever? Do they ever actually decry that sort
Speaker 2: of tyranny.
Speaker 7: Federal Why federal tyranny they're supposed to. I think it's
Speaker 7: to be their thing.
Speaker 2: It's also less like the federal government declaring your gender.
Speaker 2: It's like whatever random doctor fills out that.
Speaker 7: Yeah, for sure, but sure, but the the but the
Speaker 7: government now is forcing you to, in their eyes, be
Speaker 7: whatever gender that they decide that you want.
Speaker 2: Yes, And we've had we've had some stuff like this
Speaker 2: try to get passed through in Europe and certain certain
Speaker 2: certain US states for like their own state ideas.
Speaker 4: Yes, So that's part. I don't know.
Speaker 7: Why this bill is these three things lumped together, but
Speaker 7: it's the bill. This specific bill is this one using
Speaker 7: Title nine to stop transfoman from playing in women's sports
Speaker 7: in college or in schools. Sure, and then protecting the
Speaker 7: right of the parent to keep your kid from transitioning,
Speaker 7: which is fucking So that's fascinating because protecting the right
Speaker 7: of the parent to make to have your kid not
Speaker 7: transition that that's some really interesting wording there. Yeah, well,
Speaker 7: so let me read the exactly. The exact wording is
Speaker 7: protect the right of parents from being forced to allow
Speaker 7: their child to assume a new gender identity without the parents' consent.
Speaker 2: Yes, so they're referring to the types of parental Bill
Speaker 2: of Rights laws. Yeah, that have passed in at like
Speaker 2: six Republican states. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 7: So the last one I think is really interesting and
Speaker 7: it kind of gives the game away as to what
Speaker 7: this is all, like, what the actual point of this
Speaker 7: is for someone like Trump who's not that interested, doesn't
Speaker 7: like transile but isn't that interested. And this one, okay,
Speaker 7: I'm going to read it first. As part of our
Speaker 7: new credentialing system, a credentialing body for teachers, we will
Speaker 7: promote positive education about the nuclear family, the role of
Speaker 7: mothers and fathers, and celebrating rather than erasing the things
Speaker 7: that make men and women different and unique. Sure, so
Speaker 7: this is literally this is this is legislating institutional like
Speaker 7: sexism education. Yes, And you know, we've talked about the
Speaker 7: credentialing stuff. It's unclear to me how this would work.
Speaker 7: It's not it's not quite the same credentialing thing that
Speaker 7: you were talking about. But basically, this is a federal
Speaker 7: mandate that says that you can't be a teacher without
Speaker 7: teaching sexism, which.
Speaker 2: Is I'm sure, I'm sure the teachers unions will love
Speaker 2: to take that one on.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: Well, you know, I'm I and this is one of
Speaker 7: the things that I I don't know. I mean, you
Speaker 7: have to like go into like walk in with a
Speaker 7: stick and beat them on it. But I am so
Speaker 7: excited for the Trump administration has to deal with an
Speaker 7: actual national teacher strike. Like, have fun with that one,
Speaker 7: you dip shits.
Speaker 2: This is why these types of conservatives really really hate
Speaker 2: teachers unions.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they frame teachers unions as being like one of
Speaker 2: like the most evil lobbying forces in America because they
Speaker 2: really don't like that they don't have complete total control
Speaker 2: over teaching kids whatever kind of fucked up nuclear family
Speaker 2: patriarchal bullshit that they want to like mandate by law.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and so they're going to attempt to do They're
Speaker 7: they're they're they're they're going to attempt to every every
Speaker 7: They're gonna they're gonna make everyone watch a shitty Matt
Speaker 7: Walsh documentary or some ship. And if you complain about it,
Speaker 7: they they they prosecute you under the Civil Rights Act
Speaker 7: for being good luck discrimination or something. So that's that's
Speaker 7: that's that's Trump's plan to protect children from left wing
Speaker 7: gender insanity. It's really quite bad. As funny as some
Speaker 7: of it is. I mean, it's a bunch of gender
Speaker 7: firming care bands sort of stitch together with stuff trying
Speaker 7: to knock hospitals out from doing it. Stitch to the
Speaker 7: just the sexism law.
Speaker 2: Very cool.
Speaker 7: Yeah, it's quite bad. Come back tomorrow for probably even worse.
Speaker 6: Ship.
Speaker 7: Don't remember which one is tomorrow, but you'll.
Speaker 4: We'll find out when we do.
Speaker 9: Hello, welcome, This is it could happen here and I
Speaker 9: am Sharene. Today we are continuing to talk about Agenda
Speaker 9: forty seven and this episode is about quote unquote big Pharma.
Speaker 9: Trump often goes after big Pharma in his campaign rhetoric,
Speaker 9: and there is a lot of content within Agenda forty
Speaker 9: seven that addresses what he views as the problems with
Speaker 9: the pharmaceutical industry. In his first campaign for president, Donald
Speaker 9: Trump tapped into bipartisan anger over high drug prices to
Speaker 9: bash pharmaceutical companies. In his latest run for president, he
Speaker 9: is echoing more extreme elements of his party to suggest
Speaker 9: that the industry's products may be hurting Americans, particularly children.
Speaker 9: Using children in this way is usually a tried and
Speaker 9: true tactic to make people get up in arms about something,
Speaker 9: and it works especially on those who may be less informed,
Speaker 9: and there are a plethora of reasons as to why
Speaker 9: our healthcare system is absolute shit and completely sucks, and
Speaker 9: it's more often a hindrance to the average American. But
Speaker 9: when Trump continues to spout unfounded and dangerous claims about
Speaker 9: the pharmaceutical industry, all this does is further undermine public
Speaker 9: health and any remaining faith that Americas have in it.
Speaker 9: It reflects how deeply the mistrust of health institutions and
Speaker 9: anti science rhetoric have become embedded, especially within a sizeable
Speaker 9: faction of the Republican Party, following the pandemic. Trump's comments
Speaker 9: about drug makers, posted in policy proposals and videos on
Speaker 9: his campaign website have largely flown under the radar, as
Speaker 9: his campaign speeches have doubled down on extreme rhetoric, like
Speaker 9: his use of anti immigration language and praise of foreign authoritarians.
Speaker 9: One of the Jenda forty seven proposals on Trump's campaign
Speaker 9: website is called Addressing the Rise of Chronic Childhood Illnesses,
Speaker 9: and it cites a quote unexplained and alarming growth in
Speaker 9: the prevalence of chronic illnesses and health problems, especially in children.
Speaker 9: End quote. In a June twenty twenty three video that
Speaker 9: was posted to truth Social Trump questions whether the food
Speaker 9: we eat, environmental toxins, or the quote over prescription of
Speaker 9: certain medications is contributing to this increase of chronic health
Speaker 9: problems and illnesses in children. In the video, Trump says,
Speaker 9: too often our public health establishment is too close to
Speaker 9: big pharma. They make a lot of money big pharma,
Speaker 9: big corporations, and other special interests does not want to
Speaker 9: ask the tough questions about what is happening to our
Speaker 9: children's health. If big pharma defrauds American patients and taxpayers,
Speaker 9: or puts profits above people, they must be investigated and
Speaker 9: held accountable. Trump goes on to call for a quote
Speaker 9: special presidential can mission of independent minds who are not
Speaker 9: bought and paid for by big pharma to investigate the
Speaker 9: rise of chronic illness. Interestingly enough, Trump's language around childhood
Speaker 9: illness is reminiscent of Robert F. Kennedy Junior's views, who
Speaker 9: has been a prominent vaccine skeptic running for president as
Speaker 9: an independent, and he has been praised by Trump as
Speaker 9: a quote common sense guy. In a video on his
Speaker 9: campaign website, Kennedy promises to quote end the chronic disease
Speaker 9: epidemic in this country. Kennedy has promoted the discredited theory
Speaker 9: that vaccines cause autism, and though he doesn't directly make
Speaker 9: this claim in the video, he previously tied the quote
Speaker 9: children's health crisis to quote environmental toxins and vaccines in
Speaker 9: an ebook published by The Children's Health Defense, which he
Speaker 9: also founded. Kennedy's campaign spokesperson Stephanie Spear said that Kennedy
Speaker 9: is pleased that Trump is highlighting the rise in childhood disease.
Speaker 9: Trump's attention to the issue testifies to the success of
Speaker 9: the Children's Health Defense, she said, and many other activist
Speaker 9: organizations in putting the chronic disease epidemic on the political radar.
Speaker 9: And while it is true that the rate of conditions
Speaker 9: including disabilities, mental health diagnoses, ADHD diagnoses, and obesity, they
Speaker 9: have gone up among children in recent years, and this
Speaker 9: is according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, there are
Speaker 9: numerous and complex social, health and environmental factors that underlie
Speaker 9: these numbers. Increased awareness and better ability to diagnose some
Speaker 9: conditions are believed to be contributing factors. Vaccine scientist and
Speaker 9: pediatrician Peter Hotez said Trump's conspiratorial language is unhelpful, as
Speaker 9: the anti vaccine movement in recent years has sought to
Speaker 9: tie vaccines to a range of chronic diseases.
Speaker 4: Quote.
Speaker 9: Now that the far right has adopted the anti vaccine movement,
Speaker 9: it's very conspiracy laden. The anti vaccine movement's rhetoric on
Speaker 9: chronic illnesses now being voiced by Trump is so vague
Speaker 9: and badly crafted. He says, how do you even address it?
Speaker 9: Hotels want to say that it gives them a license
Speaker 9: to bring up any condition they want, whether it's asthma,
Speaker 9: or whether it's a peanut allergy, or whether it's lupus.
Speaker 9: They just use it as a catch all for whatever
Speaker 9: they feel like alleging. At the time, a spokesperson for
Speaker 9: Pharma aka the main drugmaker lobby, did not address Trump's
Speaker 9: proposals directly when they were asked about them. Alex Shreiver,
Speaker 9: Pharma's senior vice president of public affairs, told Axios in
Speaker 9: an emailed statement, political rhetorics surrounding healthcare will only continue
Speaker 9: to rise as we enter an election year. Candidates should
Speaker 9: focus on voters' top priorities, lowering out of pocket costs
Speaker 9: and holding insurers and their pharmacy benefit managers accountable. Long
Speaker 9: story short. The trust in public health institutions plummeted among
Speaker 9: Republicans during the pandemic, with prominent members of the party
Speaker 9: questioning the safety of COVID vaccines and the actions of
Speaker 9: vaccine makers as well as government agencies in Despite Trump's
Speaker 9: own history of vaccine skeptical comments, his administration's Operation Warp
Speaker 9: Speed produced safe and affected COVID vaccines at an unprecedented pace,
Speaker 9: an achievement that his base doesn't really give him much
Speaker 9: credit for. Vaccine skepticism has grown among GOP voters in
Speaker 9: recent years. In recent KAFAKA the Kaiser Family Foundation polling,
Speaker 9: it found that Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats
Speaker 9: to believe that misinformation about COVID nineteen in vaccines are true,
Speaker 9: although independents are not very far behind them, or in
Speaker 9: some cases they are more likely to believe misinformation. For example,
Speaker 9: twenty nine percent of Republicans said that it's probably or
Speaker 9: definitely true that the combined measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine
Speaker 9: has been proven to cause autism in children, compared with
Speaker 9: fourteen percent of Democrats and thirty four percent of INDE.
Speaker 9: It's very important to emphasize that scientific research has repeatedly
Speaker 9: found no association whatsoever between the MMR vaccine and autism.
Speaker 9: Trump's calls for investigations into big pharma. It also taps
Speaker 9: into GOP voters' anxieties over education, gender affirming care for adolescence,
Speaker 9: and the youth mental health crisis. A school's related proposal
Speaker 9: on Trump's campaign website calls for the Food and Drug
Speaker 9: Administration to convene a quote, outside panel to investigate whether
Speaker 9: transgender hormone treatments and ideology increase the risk of extreme depression, aggression,
Speaker 9: and violence. Last spring, Trump made a similar pledge during
Speaker 9: a speech given at the National Rifle Association's annual meeting.
Speaker 9: The campaign says that the Trump administration will explore whether
Speaker 9: quote common psychiatric drugs, as well as genetically engineered cannabis
Speaker 9: and other narcotics, are causing psychotic breaks. It also calls
Speaker 9: for a Department of Justice investigation into way their quote,
Speaker 9: big pharma and the big hospital networks have covered up
Speaker 9: the horrific long term side effects of sex transitions in
Speaker 9: order to get rich at the expense of vulnerable patients.
Speaker 9: And another proposal to quote dismantle the deep state. It
Speaker 9: specifically calls out big pharma as part of the plan
Speaker 9: to quote ban federal bureaucrats from taking jobs at the
Speaker 9: companies they deal with and regulate. In an ideal world,
Speaker 9: which we are clearly very very far from. The idea
Speaker 9: that you can trust the prescription drugs that a health
Speaker 9: provider offers you. It should be a basic societal norm.
Speaker 9: While mainstream politicians across the political spectrum on both the
Speaker 9: right and the left four years have criticized the pharmaceutical
Speaker 9: industry over pricing, there has been a common understanding that,
Speaker 9: for the most part, the US system can be trusted
Speaker 9: to place safe and effective drugs on the market and
Speaker 9: to remove them if new evidence showing otherwise arises, is
Speaker 9: suggesting negligence or cover ups of safety issues. Vaccine science
Speaker 9: is a pediatrician Peter Hotess again. He said, elements of
Speaker 9: the GOP, especially the far right, has been targeting science
Speaker 9: and scientists as enemies of the state. I was hoping
Speaker 9: Trump would not go there. Let's take our first break
Speaker 9: and we will be right back. Another part of Trump's
Speaker 9: Agenda forty seven plan to take on big pharma is
Speaker 9: to end the global freeloading on American consumers. It's honestly
Speaker 9: a little difficult for me to just not read aloud
Speaker 9: the transcripts that are on Trump's website that describe his
Speaker 9: agenda for Agenda forty seven, because they're just pure comedy
Speaker 9: and they're all just provided on his website for our entertainment.
Speaker 9: So I won't read all the transcripts, but I will
Speaker 9: read the highlights. Here it goes crooked. Joe Biden likes
Speaker 9: to pretend that he stands up to big pharma, but
Speaker 9: in fact, I was the only president in modern times
Speaker 9: whoever took on big pharma, and I took it head on.
Speaker 9: Biden canceled my tough on pharma policies the moment he
Speaker 9: had a chance as president, I signed a historic executive
Speaker 9: order declaring that the United States government would pay the
Speaker 9: same price for pharmaceuticals as other foreign countries, and no more.
Speaker 9: We don't want to pay anymore. Can you imagine that?
Speaker 9: How simple would that be? This would have saved American
Speaker 9: patients billions and billions of dollars. But shortly after taking office,
Speaker 9: Joe Biden rescinded my executive order, stabbing patients and US
Speaker 9: citizens and especially our seniors right in the back. For
Speaker 9: many years, Americans have been paying among the highest prices
Speaker 9: in the world for our prescription drugs, while other countries
Speaker 9: negotiate sweetheart deals off the backs of America. On day
Speaker 9: one of my new term, I will sign an executive
Speaker 9: order to end this global free loading on American consumers
Speaker 9: for once and for all. The United States is tired
Speaker 9: of getting ripped off. We've been ripped off by everybody
Speaker 9: for so many decades. We are tired of it not
Speaker 9: going to happen. They should have never rescinded my original
Speaker 9: executive order. It just shows you the power of big pharma.
Speaker 9: Thank you very much. This was a very easy one,
Speaker 9: and this was an honor to tell you because this
Speaker 9: is something that should never have happened. It should never
Speaker 9: ever have rescinded my executive order. I just I had
Speaker 9: to read that whole thing because it's incredible that these
Speaker 9: transcripts are up here, because they are so ridiculous. Sometimes
Speaker 9: I love that they also included like the ending after
Speaker 9: he already said thank you, how he was like, this
Speaker 9: was a very easy one, right anyway, I just thought
Speaker 9: that transcript was worth a little read. Those are his words,
Speaker 9: what he wants to do, and how he thinks. There's
Speaker 9: more transcripts later that I find funny, but for an now,
Speaker 9: let's go into what he's saying. Trump also has a
Speaker 9: plan to quote end Joe Biden's pharmaceutical shortages and return
Speaker 9: the manufacturer of life saving drugs to the United States.
Speaker 9: This is not just a public health crisis, it's a
Speaker 9: national security crisis, he says. As part of my plan
Speaker 9: to obtain total independence from China, we will phase in
Speaker 9: tariffs and import restrictions to bring back production of all
Speaker 9: essential medicines to the United States of America where they belong.
Speaker 9: I signed an executive order to begin this process in
Speaker 9: twenty twenty, but Biden has shamefully failed to follow through.
Speaker 9: Part of this plan for Agenda forty seven will be
Speaker 9: to restore this executive order. He keeps talking about Executive
Speaker 9: Order one three nine four to four, which was dated
Speaker 9: August sixth, twenty twenty. The executive order required federal agencies
Speaker 9: to quote by American by facilitating the domestic production of
Speaker 9: medicines and medical devices that the FDA determined essential to
Speaker 9: public health. It did so by requiring federal agency to
Speaker 9: buy medicines and medical devices that are entirely produced in
Speaker 9: the United States. Trump says that restoring this executive order
Speaker 9: will kickstart the domestic production of life saving drugs. His
Speaker 9: website says, American doctors should never have to give a
Speaker 9: patient a drug from an unapproved facility in China or India.
Speaker 9: We can and must produce these essential medicines at home,
Speaker 9: rather than allowing federal agencies to buy essential medicines from
Speaker 9: quote unsafe foreign countries. Another angle of his Agenda forty
Speaker 9: seven plan describes how Joe Biden's drug shortage constitutes an
Speaker 9: urgent public health crisis. It says that Joe Biden's drug
Speaker 9: shortage is fueled by over reliance on foreign made medicines and,
Speaker 9: in some cases, potentially unsafe manufacturers. Here's some of that
Speaker 9: fund transcript. Under Crooked Joe Biden, there has been a
Speaker 9: catastrophic increase in shortages of essential medicines. It's a mess.
Speaker 9: There's currently a shortage of at least fourteen critical cancer drugs
Speaker 9: ugs in the United States. They just can't get it,
Speaker 9: and every month of delay cancer treatment increases the risk
Speaker 9: of death by at least ten percent. It's unthinkable that
Speaker 9: this could be happening in the United States of America
Speaker 9: in twenty twenty three. It is truly unbelievable. We are
Speaker 9: becoming a third world country very rapidly, between our open
Speaker 9: borders and our bad elections. We are third world. He
Speaker 9: goes on to say that, even more dangerously, the top
Speaker 9: producer of critical medicines that we rely on in the
Speaker 9: United States is a place called China. China produces ninety
Speaker 9: five percent of all ibuprofen, ninety one percent of hyder cortizone,
Speaker 9: seventy percent of all taile nol, and nearly half of
Speaker 9: all penicillin. Can you imagine that this is not just
Speaker 9: a public health crisis, this is a national security crisis.
Speaker 9: As part of my plan to obtain total independence from China,
Speaker 9: we will phase in tariffs and import restrictions to bring
Speaker 9: back production of all essential medicines to the United States
Speaker 9: of America where they long. I signed the executive order
Speaker 9: to begin this process of twenty twenty, but Biden has
Speaker 9: shamefully failed to follow through. He wants it ended, He
Speaker 9: wants to take care of China. This is a matter
Speaker 9: of tremendous urgency. American lives are on the line, and
Speaker 9: it will be one of my top priorities as president.
Speaker 9: It will also create countless new American jobs. Thank you.
Speaker 9: In another Agenda forty seven video, Trump announced his plan
Speaker 9: to eradicate the drug addiction crisis in America. We will
Speaker 9: not rest until we have ended the drug addiction crisis,
Speaker 9: he says. For three decades before my election, drug overdose
Speaker 9: deaths increased every single year. Under my leadership, we took
Speaker 9: the drug and fetanol crisis head on, and we achieved
Speaker 9: the first reduction in overdose deaths in more than thirty years.
Speaker 9: On his website, in all caps, it says saving American lives.
Speaker 9: It says that Trump has pledged that he will not
Speaker 9: rest until we end this crisis, and that he will
Speaker 9: impose a full naval embargo on the drug cartels and
Speaker 9: deploy military assets to inflict maximum damage on cartel operations.
Speaker 9: Ask Congress to ensure that drug dealers and human traffickers
Speaker 9: receive the death penalty. Direct US federal law enforcement to
Speaker 9: take down the gangs and organize street crime that distribute
Speaker 9: these deadly narcotics on a local level. Permanently designate fetanol
Speaker 9: as a federally controlled substance, tell China that if they
Speaker 9: do not clamp down on the export of fentanyl's chemical precursors,
Speaker 9: they will pay a steep price. He wants to strengthen
Speaker 9: the pillars of work, faith, and family, which give life,
Speaker 9: meaning and hope for those struggling with addiction, and he
Speaker 9: wants to expand federal support for faith based counseling, treatment,
Speaker 9: and recovery programs. It's faith based for me. Even if
Speaker 9: in theory some of this kind of sounds like a
Speaker 9: good idea, both subtly and not so subtly, you see
Speaker 9: the bigotry seep through. It's actually not about saving lives
Speaker 9: or taking care of addicts. It's about implementing and cementing
Speaker 9: this country as a quote faith based country and having faith,
Speaker 9: which obviously only means Christianity. When it's using this context,
Speaker 9: it's going to be America's savior. And Trump over here
Speaker 9: is literally being a Bible salesman. It's so nauseatingly obvious
Speaker 9: and slimy. It drives me crazy, and the shit actually
Speaker 9: works on many many people. The last thing I'll touch
Speaker 9: on is a section of Agenda forty seven that is
Speaker 9: titled quote ending the Nightmare of the homeless, drug addicts,
Speaker 9: and the dangerously deranged. It describes his plan to quote
Speaker 9: rescue American cities from the scourge of homelessness, the drug addicted,
Speaker 9: and the dangerously deranged. Trump wants to ban urban camping,
Speaker 9: offering violators the option to either receive treatment and rehabilitation
Speaker 9: or face arrest. In this transcript, he says, are once
Speaker 9: great cities have become unlivable, unsanitary nightmares, surrendered to the homeless,
Speaker 9: the drug addicted, and the violent and dangerously deranged. We
Speaker 9: are making many suffer for the whims of a deeply
Speaker 9: unwell few, and they are unwell. Indeed, the homeless have
Speaker 9: no right to turn every park and sidewalk into a
Speaker 9: place for them to squat and do drugs. Americans should
Speaker 9: not have to step over piles of needles and waste
Speaker 9: as they walk down the street in a beautiful city,
Speaker 9: or at least once beautiful city, because they've changed so
Speaker 9: much over the last ten years. Our first consideration should
Speaker 9: be the rights and safety of the hard working, law
Speaker 9: abiding citizens who make our society function. When I am
Speaker 9: back in the White House, we will use every tool, lever,
Speaker 9: and authority to get the homeless off our streets. We
Speaker 9: want to take care of them, but they have to
Speaker 9: be off our streets. There is nothing compassionate about letting
Speaker 9: these individuals live in filth and squalor rather than getting
Speaker 9: them the help that they need. We need professionals to
Speaker 9: help them. For a small fraction of what we spend
Speaker 9: on Ukraine, we can take care of every homeless veteran
Speaker 9: in America. Our veterans are treated horribly likewise, With all
Speaker 9: the money we will save by ending mass unskilled migration,
Speaker 9: we will have a huge dividend to address this crisis
Speaker 9: in our own country. Under my strategy, we will ban
Speaker 9: urban camping wherever possible. Violators of these bands will be arrested,
Speaker 9: but they will be given the option to accept treatment
Speaker 9: and services if they are willing to be rehabilitated. Many
Speaker 9: of them don't want that, but we will give them
Speaker 9: the option. Okay, it's meet again. Basically, Trump's plan to
Speaker 9: end homelessness is to criminalize it. He wants to make
Speaker 9: homelessness illegal. Alan Mills, executive director of the Uptown People's
Speaker 9: Law Center, told Newsweek that Trump's plan is unconstitutional and
Speaker 9: will dissuade people from seeking assistance when they truly need it.
Speaker 9: Mills said Trump's remarks left him feeling appalled but unsurprised
Speaker 9: by the former president's antics based on Trump's long history
Speaker 9: of anti homeless agendas. He says, it is blatant in
Speaker 9: the constitution that you can't arrest people just because they
Speaker 9: don't have a home. But more importantly, it doesn't work.
Speaker 9: People are not homeless because they're afraid of punishments. People
Speaker 9: are homeless because they don't have a home. Trump's plan
Speaker 9: isn't over yet, though, He continues by saying that we
Speaker 9: will then open up large parcels of inexpensive land, bringing doctors, psychiatrists,
Speaker 9: social workers, and drug rehab specialists, and create tent cities
Speaker 9: where the homeless can be relocated and their problems identified.
Speaker 9: We will open up our cities again, make them livable,
Speaker 9: and make them beautiful. For those who are just temporarily
Speaker 9: down on their luck, we will work to help them
Speaker 9: quickly reintegrate into a normal life. For those who have addictions,
Speaker 9: substance abuse, and common mental health problems, we will get
Speaker 9: them into treatment. And for those who are severely mentally
Speaker 9: ill and deeply disturbed, we will bring them back to
Speaker 9: mental institutions. Where they belong, with the goal of reintegrating
Speaker 9: them back into society once they are well enough to manage.
Speaker 9: It's a tough task, a very tough task. What's taking
Speaker 9: place on the streets, what's taken place when they're taking
Speaker 9: so much drugs. But the fact is we're going to try.
Speaker 9: This strategy will be far better and also far less
Speaker 9: expensive than spending vast sums of taxpayer money to house
Speaker 9: the homeless and luxury hotels without addressing their underlying issues.
Speaker 9: And they have so many of these underlying issues and needs.
Speaker 9: This is how I will end the scourge of homelessness
Speaker 9: and make our cities clean and safe and beautiful once again.
Speaker 9: We will do it. We will bring back America. Anne Olivia,
Speaker 9: the chief executive officer for the NAEH, the National Alliance
Speaker 9: to End Homelessness, also condemned a Trump's plan, calling it
Speaker 9: alarming and dangerous in numerous ways. She said the way
Speaker 9: to end homelessness is not to arrest people and move
Speaker 9: them out of sight into internment camps. Jail isn't housing.
Speaker 9: Prison isn't housing. Tent cities aren't housing. Housing with services
Speaker 9: tailored to people's specific needs must be at the center
Speaker 9: of any plan to end homelessness. Prioritizing any immediate strategy
Speaker 9: other than housing is a red herring, a political ploy
Speaker 9: to divert attention from the real resources communities need while
Speaker 9: othering people in the most vulnerable situations imaginable. And then
Speaker 9: there was Vote Vets. Vote Vets is a veterans advocacy group.
Speaker 9: They said on Twitter that rather than continue the progress
Speaker 9: of helping homeless veterans, Trump lust to find them and
Speaker 9: toss them into what can be best described as internment camps.
Speaker 9: Who all, in all, Agenda forty seven is a big
Speaker 9: fucking yikes, and it should concern you. I'm going to
Speaker 9: leave you all with a uplifting quote from February twenty fourth,
Speaker 9: when Trump spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference. He said,
Speaker 9: November fifth will be our new liberation day. It will
Speaker 9: be their judgment day. Wow. Can't wait until then.
Speaker 1: See ya, hello, and welcome to it could happen here
Speaker 1: a podcast about things falling apart In this week podcast
Speaker 1: Agenda forty seven Donald Trump's plan for you know what
Speaker 1: to do if he winds up winning re election and
Speaker 1: being back in all of our lives in the sense
Speaker 1: of having political power as opposed to just back in
Speaker 1: all of our lives because he never shuts the hell up,
Speaker 1: and neither do any of the journalists who report on him.
Speaker 1: So we're talking about that all week. You've been listening
Speaker 1: to the episodes put together one of my colleagues. Today,
Speaker 1: I'm going to be talking about Trump's border policy, particularly
Speaker 1: his promise to declare war on the cartels and use
Speaker 1: the United States military to attack them. Before we get
Speaker 1: into it, I do want to note, if you notice
Speaker 1: this sounds a little bit different. I am in Texas currently.
Speaker 1: My father has leukemia. He's being treated for it. He's
Speaker 1: on chemo in the hospital, just finished chemo actually, But anyway,
Speaker 1: I had to fly down to Texas last minute. And
Speaker 1: I'm not recording this in my normal space. We should
Speaker 1: be back to normal, you know, very soon here. But
Speaker 1: I just wanted to explain, if you think it sounds different,
Speaker 1: it's not me fucking something up. I just had to
Speaker 1: fly across the country. So let's talk about Agenda forty
Speaker 1: seven and the Cartels. Back in two thousand and eight,
Speaker 1: when I was still a baby and in fact in Dallas, Texas,
Speaker 1: as i am right now, I worked as the secretary
Speaker 1: for a financial planner named Al Jones. I was bad
Speaker 1: at this job, and I didn't really know much about
Speaker 1: financial planning then, but I have since come to suspect
Speaker 1: that Al was not great at his job either. The
Speaker 1: first sign of this might have been the fact that
Speaker 1: when I took the job, Al got excited because I
Speaker 1: mentioned during our little interview that I wanted to be
Speaker 1: a writer someday, and he was like, I'm a novelist,
Speaker 1: and I was like, I thought you were a financial planner,
Speaker 1: and then he hands me a copy of his self
Speaker 1: published novel.
Speaker 3: Operation night Watch.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 1: The plot to this motherfucker was barkingly mad, spurred on
Speaker 1: by an epidelic of inner city violence. The government sent
Speaker 1: in a team of special forces guys to take on
Speaker 1: the criminals. I think it's the government who sends them.
Speaker 1: They may just be a bunch like Green Berets and
Speaker 1: Navy seals who decide to fight crime on their own.
Speaker 1: It's been a while since I read the thing. I'm
Speaker 1: trying to have a hardcover delivered to me, but there's
Speaker 1: not a lot of them left, so you may get
Speaker 1: to hear more from this book.
Speaker 4: But anyway, the.
Speaker 1: Idea of this is that, like Yeah, there's all of
Speaker 1: these very much racially coded criminals in the streets making
Speaker 1: life too dangerous for regular people, these evil drug dealers
Speaker 1: and robbers, and we just need our special forces guys
Speaker 1: to murder them, right, it was. There was a lot
Speaker 1: of like uncomfortable fetishization of brutal violence from this very
Speaker 1: mild mannered seeming dude who mostly held meetings at Texas
Speaker 1: roadhouses with old people to try to get them to
Speaker 1: invest in innuities or whatever a split annuity is. I've
Speaker 1: since forgotten so again, obviously, even at that point in time,
Speaker 1: mostly having lived either in the country the suburbs, I
Speaker 1: had spent enough time in Dallas to know his description
Speaker 1: of inner city life was not precisely accurate. But what
Speaker 1: I remember most about the book is that it wasn't
Speaker 1: even really a story. It was and talking to Al
Speaker 1: made this clear, a literal description of the policy he
Speaker 1: wanted to see. The thin characters that he included in
Speaker 1: the story were basically just there to help dress up
Speaker 1: what was again a policy proposal, and that policy was
Speaker 1: we should use the US military to kill quote unquote
Speaker 1: drug dealers. Right now. Over the last fifteen years or so,
Speaker 1: mainstream Republican policy has actually caught up to my old boss,
Speaker 1: and now President Trump has included in Agenda forty seven
Speaker 1: a promise to invade Mexico with US special forces. That's
Speaker 1: not the extent of the promise. We will be talking
Speaker 1: about that all through this fun episode. On Deceiver twenty second,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three, the Trump campaign uploaded a page titled
Speaker 1: President Donald J. Trump declares War on Cartels to his
Speaker 1: campaign website. And I don't know about you, guys, I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sick in the motherfucker's voice, So I'm just going
Speaker 1: to read how this opens. But if you go to
Speaker 1: the website, you can listen to him say this if
Speaker 1: that makes you happier. The drug cartels are waging war
Speaker 1: on America, and it's now time for America to wage
Speaker 1: war on the cartels. In this war, Joe Biden has
Speaker 1: cited against the United States, and with the cartels, they're
Speaker 1: making more money than they've ever made before. Times ten,
Speaker 1: There's never been anything like it. They're major, major companies.
Speaker 1: They're bigger than even some of our biggest companies. Biden's
Speaker 1: open border policies are a deadly betrayal of our nation.
Speaker 1: He's definitely got a unique diction. Yet you know, Trump
Speaker 1: came up with that one more or less on his own,
Speaker 1: didn't need to be scripted. Now, Trump goes on to
Speaker 1: state after this that when he is president again, the
Speaker 1: United States government will treat cartels the same way they
Speaker 1: treated Isis, which you might recall still exists and recently
Speaker 1: carried out an attack in Russia. Republic picks might note
Speaker 1: that this attack was by Isis k or Isis Coruscond,
Speaker 1: which is true. And boy, howdye does Afghanistan come back
Speaker 1: into this story in a little bit, So just just
Speaker 1: keep that in mind. But first let's continue with Trump.
Speaker 1: He claims that under his presidency we had a quote
Speaker 1: very very strong border and in fact, the strongest border
Speaker 1: in the history of the country, and quote drugs were
Speaker 1: at a low for forty five years. Now, it's important
Speaker 1: to fact check things that both Joe Biden and Donald
Speaker 1: Trump say. The use the diction he uses here does
Speaker 1: make fact checking slightly difficult. The strongest border kind of
Speaker 1: a meaningless term, right, But the claim about drugs being
Speaker 1: at a low for forty five years can be fact
Speaker 1: checked to some degree, although again his approach to grammar
Speaker 1: makes it hard to tell what he's claiming here, right,
Speaker 1: it's drugs at a low for forty five years, mean, like,
Speaker 1: drug use is at a low, drugs smuggling is at
Speaker 1: a low.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 1: He has made variations of this claim often, though, including
Speaker 1: a note on his campaign website in January twenty twenty
Speaker 1: three that under his presidency, quote, drug overdose deaths decline
Speaker 1: nationwide for the first time in nearly thirty years. So
Speaker 1: let's assume that that's kind of what he meant to claim,
Speaker 1: that drug overdose deaths were the lowest they've been for
Speaker 1: forty five for forty five years, right, which is again,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just wrong on its face because earlier
Speaker 1: he said for thirty years, So like, which is it? Donald?
Speaker 1: But whatever, Let's say that what he meant to claim
Speaker 1: is that under his presidency, drug overdose deaths were at
Speaker 1: the lowest point in a long time. Right, If we're
Speaker 1: being fair, that's the fairest I could be to him.
Speaker 1: And it is true that the overdose death rate dropped
Speaker 1: during Trump's presidency for one year in twenty eighteen. That's
Speaker 1: the only year that it dropped. During each of the
Speaker 1: other three years he was in office, the overdose rate rose,
Speaker 1: and in fact, it rose by record numbers in twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: PolitiFact also notes quote looking at overdose deaths from synthetic opioids,
Speaker 1: the closely watched category that accounts for the largest share
Speaker 1: of all opioid overdose deaths, the rate rose every year
Speaker 1: of Trump's presidency. This is worth noting because all of
Speaker 1: the things he wants to do at the border to
Speaker 1: the cartels, all of his justifications for really needing to
Speaker 1: crack down on human trafficking, for wanting to use the
Speaker 1: navy seals or whatever to kill cartel guys to basically
Speaker 1: invade Mexico, it's to stop Fentonel, which he describes as
Speaker 1: an existential threat to the country. And you know, makes
Speaker 1: the claim that basically, when I was president, you know,
Speaker 1: all that stuff was, we were taking care of it.
Speaker 1: It was all all declining, and then when Biden took over,
Speaker 1: it got a lot worse. No, the rate of finanel
Speaker 1: use wrote in Finnyl related deaths in particular rose every
Speaker 1: single year of Trump's presidency, every single year. Anyway, Trump
Speaker 1: promises no mercy to the cartels and that he will
Speaker 1: designate the major ones foreign terrorist organizations with the goal
Speaker 1: of cutting off their access to global financial systems. Incidentally,
Speaker 1: this would provide a pretext to basically charging every drug user,
Speaker 1: whether or not their drugs had anything to do with
Speaker 1: a cartel with material support of a terrorist organization, and
Speaker 1: thus allow night marriish penalties for people caught dealing weed
Speaker 1: or LSD or whatever, on the justification that they're aiding
Speaker 1: the cartels with whom we are at war. Trump also
Speaker 1: states that he will ask Congress to pass legislation to
Speaker 1: allow the death penalty for quote drug smugglers and human traffickers. Now,
Speaker 1: He's made similar statements around drug dealers in the past.
Speaker 1: Here's how this particular rant on the Agenda forty seven
Speaker 1: website ends. The drug cartels and their allies and the
Speaker 1: Biden administration have the blood of countless millions on their hands.
Speaker 1: Millions and millions of families and people are being destroyed.
Speaker 1: When I am back in the White House, the drug
Speaker 1: kingpins and vicious traffickers will never sleep soundly again. We
Speaker 1: did it once, and we did it better than anyone else.
Speaker 1: There's never been a better border than we had just
Speaker 1: two years ago. It was strong, it was powerful, and
Speaker 1: it was respected all over the world, and now we're
Speaker 1: laughed at all over the world. And we're not going
Speaker 1: to let that happen much longer. We have to take over.
Speaker 1: We have to be tough, and we have to be smart,
Speaker 1: we have to be fair. But if we don't do
Speaker 1: something immediately, our country is gone. Now that's all ridiculous,
Speaker 1: but it behooves us to look into the origins of
Speaker 1: this particular violent fantasy. When President Trump was still in office,
Speaker 1: he repeatedly floated variations of a single idea using US
Speaker 1: missiles to destroy so called drug factories, specifically those producing
Speaker 1: either fentanyl or methamphetamine. Obviously, cartels do operate sizable facilities
Speaker 1: and where they prepare drugs for smuggling and sale. They
Speaker 1: have places where they cut fentanyl, which generally comes from elsewhere,
Speaker 1: into other drugs, or make it into pills, etc. And
Speaker 1: they've got places where meth is cooked. Obviously, so, as
Speaker 1: best as The New York Times has been able to trace,
Speaker 1: his obsession with military action against Mexico seems to have
Speaker 1: started in late twenty nineteen. So while the coronavirus is spreading,
Speaker 1: our president rather than focusing on a response, it's kind
Speaker 1: of obsessed with the fentanyl crisis, which is serious, but
Speaker 1: his way of dealing with it was to hold these constant,
Speaker 1: large oval office meetings that people absolutely had to attend.
Speaker 1: Quote some part tennisis from the New York Times. Some
Speaker 1: participants felt the meetings were of little use because officials
Speaker 1: tended to perform for mister Trump, and he would perform
Speaker 1: for them. And that does put the fun idea in
Speaker 1: my head of Donald Trump and a bunch of friends
Speaker 1: all dancing about, like, I don't know whatever kind of
Speaker 1: animal you would train to dance. I'm spacing on that
Speaker 1: right now. So why don't we just roll to ads
Speaker 1: for a second. Well, I think of animals. We're back,
Speaker 1: so I'm going to continue that quote from the New
Speaker 1: York Times. When the idea of military intervention was brought
Speaker 1: up at one such meeting, mister Trump turned to Brett Geroor,
Speaker 1: who was there in his role as the US Assistant
Speaker 1: Secretary for Health. Mister Gero was also a four star
Speaker 1: admiral and the Commission Corps of the US Public Health Service,
Speaker 1: and he was wearing his dress uniform. His main point
Speaker 1: was that the United States was unable to combat the
Speaker 1: crisis with treatment alone. According to a person briefed on
Speaker 1: his comments, it was clear from the way mister Trump
Speaker 1: singled out mister Gerror that he had mistakenly thought he
Speaker 1: was in the military because of his dress uniform. According
Speaker 1: to two participants in the meeting, mister Gerroor in his response,
Speaker 1: suggested putting lead to target. The two participants were called
Speaker 1: that seems likely. Geror denies this right. He claims, well,
Speaker 1: the President knows me really well. We met all the time.
Speaker 1: He would never mistake me for a soldier, and like, sure, buddy.
Speaker 1: For one thing, I totally believe he could meet with
Speaker 1: Trump regularly and Trump not remember him. But also, it
Speaker 1: kind of sounds assuming I mean again, and these are
Speaker 1: all maybe not the best sources, but assuming the people
Speaker 1: who are like he said we should put lead to
Speaker 1: target are telling the truth, that sounds to me like
Speaker 1: this guy wearing his uniform because he knows it'll impress
Speaker 1: Trump was also trying to use military metaphors because I
Speaker 1: think maybe was just trying to have this impact on Trump, right,
Speaker 1: make Trump think of him as like a military official
Speaker 1: giving advice. There's some claims that people in the administration
Speaker 1: were so concerned about this and were so terrified that
Speaker 1: like Trump might actually attack Mexico that they asked Jeror
Speaker 1: to stop wearing his uniform to meetings, basically being like
Speaker 1: he's hypnotized by this shit man, Like if you dress
Speaker 1: like a soldier, he'll take you seriously when you say
Speaker 1: this crazy bullshit. Anyway, at the same time this is
Speaker 1: all going on, Attorney General William Barr had also started
Speaker 1: floating the idea to the President that maybe the United
Speaker 1: States should consider carrying out some attacks in Mexico to
Speaker 1: kill cartel guys to stop the fentanyl.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 1: His argument, though, was not so much that we should
Speaker 1: do it, but that if we threaten Mexico with military action,
Speaker 1: that will force the Mexican government to be more aggressive
Speaker 1: against the cartels. Now, William Barr is not a guy
Speaker 1: I consider very smart, and this is in fact a
Speaker 1: dumb idea, because like Mexico's government has tried a bunch
Speaker 1: of different ways to fight the cartels, they haven't destroyed them.
Speaker 1: Right now, the current president of Mexico's is more on
Speaker 1: the left, and he has a policy is described as
Speaker 1: hugs not bullets, right, which is not using the stick
Speaker 1: to fight the drug cartels. But that doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: hasn't been tried. The Mexican government and the Mexican military
Speaker 1: have carried out a number of very high intensity operations
Speaker 1: against cartels over the years. It's just like, it's hard.
Speaker 1: The cartel problem is a massive, massive, complicated thing, and
Speaker 1: the idea that like, if we threaten Mexico, they'll finally
Speaker 1: do it kind of understates the degree to which Mexico
Speaker 1: is capable of ending this epidemic or ending this problem
Speaker 1: right of somehow taking back this territory and rendering the
Speaker 1: cartels unable to function. I don't actually know that they are,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't know that. I certainly wouldn't say
Speaker 1: that the current president's plan is working. But no one
Speaker 1: else has stopped them either, so I don't know. I
Speaker 1: think Bar is rather silly when he thinks that it's
Speaker 1: just a matter of threatening Mexico with an invasion that'll
Speaker 1: force him to take care of this shit. I don't
Speaker 1: really know that they have the ability to do that
Speaker 1: either way. So for his part, Barr does not seem
Speaker 1: to have actually wanted at military action in Mexico. Again,
Speaker 1: he's thinking that the threat will do the trick, and
Speaker 1: in fact, when Trump pushed back that, like, well, maybe
Speaker 1: we could just shoot some missiles into Mexico. Barr pushed
Speaker 1: back on this and was like, well, if we fire,
Speaker 1: missiles will hit we might hit the wrong target, right, Basically,
Speaker 1: civilian casualties you know, could happen, so we should avoid that.
Speaker 1: And that really kind of showcases how fucking dangerous someone
Speaker 1: like Barr is because his plan is he's thinking he's
Speaker 1: playing forty chess or whatever. It's like, yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: the Mexican government will get scared and they'll take care
Speaker 1: of these cartels for us. But when you start floating
Speaker 1: that to a guy named Trump, he's going to be like, well, yeah,
Speaker 1: let's just shoot him with missiles. And you may you
Speaker 1: may push back against that initially, but when your stupid
Speaker 1: plan to bully Mexico into destroying the cartels doesn't work
Speaker 1: because they can't or because don't want to be bullied,
Speaker 1: then what where are you?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 1: You can't step down at that point. You can't back
Speaker 1: off once you've threatened to bomb them, right, because if
Speaker 1: you threaten to attack and they don't do shit and
Speaker 1: then you just kind of like back off, you're gonna
Speaker 1: look weak. And that's the worst thing in the world
Speaker 1: to these people, right, Trump's certainly not going to accept
Speaker 1: something like that. It's part of why, like what Bar
Speaker 1: was doing here is just like incredibly irresponsible. Just with
Speaker 1: a guy like Trump, you can't pull that shit. So
Speaker 1: this means again that at some point, if this kind
Speaker 1: of process goes on, if Trump wins office, if he's
Speaker 1: to carry out something like what Bar was suggesting or
Speaker 1: something like what your r was suggesting, at some point,
Speaker 1: Trump's kind of need to use military assets to strike
Speaker 1: Mexico if only to save face. And again, the safest
Speaker 1: thing for him to use would be missiles to basically
Speaker 1: fire missiles, you know, guided missiles at factories or whatever
Speaker 1: making drugs. This avoids risking US servicemen. It certainly avoids
Speaker 1: it's the risk of them getting captured anyway. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: quote from the New York Times against here. At least
Speaker 1: twice during twenty twenty, mister Trump privately asked as Defense
Speaker 1: Secretary mister Esper about the possibility of sending patriot missiles
Speaker 1: into Mexico to destroy the drug labs and whether they
Speaker 1: could blame another country for it. Patriot missiles are not
Speaker 1: the kind that would be used. They are surfaced to
Speaker 1: air weapons, but mister Trump had a habit of calling
Speaker 1: all missiles patriot missiles. According to two former senior administration officials,
Speaker 1: I just find that fuddy, like, man, you are the
Speaker 1: you're the commander in chief, and you don't know, like
Speaker 1: you don't even know that. Like it's I don't expect
Speaker 1: the president to say, like I want you to fire
Speaker 1: this exact version of missile. You know, that's maybe a
Speaker 1: little more granular than is necessary for him to know.
Speaker 1: But like you should know that patriot missiles don't get
Speaker 1: fired at ground targets. That's not what they do. They're
Speaker 1: kind of a major part of like our military or
Speaker 1: mince anti missile defense. It's just it's just very silly
Speaker 1: of him. All this nonsense came to a head for
Speaker 1: the first time, I'm in twenty twenty when during one
Speaker 1: of these interminable fentanyl meetings, Trump looked over to Defense
Speaker 1: Secretary Mark Esper and asked, can we blow up these
Speaker 1: drug labs with a missile and make it look like
Speaker 1: another country did it?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: That's you know, bad, right, Like it brings up a
Speaker 1: lot of questions, namely, like what other country is in
Speaker 1: a position to fire missiles into Mexico, right, Like, if
Speaker 1: you're saying, oh, it wasn't US, are you saying it's
Speaker 1: Canada because they'd have to kind of cross a lot
Speaker 1: of space to do that. He's saying Guatemalas firing missiles
Speaker 1: into Mexico because it doesn't really seem like a Guatemala move.
Speaker 1: You know, who are you going to blame? Thankfully, Esper
Speaker 1: was one of those rare Trump appointees who possessed a
Speaker 1: basic minimal capacity for rational thought, and we never, thankfully
Speaker 1: got the answer to the question what would have happened
Speaker 1: if he'd fired a missile into Mexico. Esper argued against
Speaker 1: the idea, and then he wrote about it in his memoir,
Speaker 1: which I have an issue with. He's one of these
Speaker 1: guys who, yeah, maybe we should have known about that
Speaker 1: when it happened, rather than waiting for your fucking book.
Speaker 1: But people got to get paid.
Speaker 2: I guess.
Speaker 1: Reactions from Mexico to these revelations about Trump considering missiling
Speaker 1: them and now the fact that he's got on his
Speaker 1: website like our plan is to use military assets to
Speaker 1: attack the cartels, reactions from Mexico have been pretty universally
Speaker 1: negative for reasons I probably don't need to elaborate on.
Speaker 1: President Lopez Obrador told reporters in March, quote, this initiative
Speaker 1: of the Republicans, besides being irresponsible, is an offense to
Speaker 1: the people of Mexico, a lack of respect to our independence,
Speaker 1: to our sovereignty. They do not change their attitude and
Speaker 1: think they are going to use Mexico for their propaganda,
Speaker 1: their electoral and political purposes. We are going to call
Speaker 1: for not voting for this party because it is interventionalist
Speaker 1: and human, hypocritical and corrupt. I don't know he's wrong there.
Speaker 1: I don't know how much ability the president of Mexico
Speaker 1: has to shift votes in the United States. But you know,
Speaker 1: it is interesting. You don't often hear a world leader,
Speaker 1: specific particularly not of the US's largest trading partner, say
Speaker 1: that they're going to take sides in an election, not
Speaker 1: that openly at least, but you know who never takes
Speaker 1: sides except for your side, because they're always on your side.
Speaker 1: The products and services that support this podcast and or program.
Speaker 4: We're back.
Speaker 1: So the opposition candidate in next year's Mexican presidential elections
Speaker 1: also made a statement that was it was a little
Speaker 1: bit more moderated than obradors, but it belittled Trump's comments
Speaker 1: about using military force on Mexico and stated, rather than threats,
Speaker 1: we should work in a smart way. So nobody's really
Speaker 1: happy with this down in Mexico. Not surprising to see why. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: in US politics, conservatives are now falling over themselves to
Speaker 1: justify military intervention in Mexico. As soon as Trump adopts this,
Speaker 1: it now becomes basically the standard Republican line that we
Speaker 1: need to be sending our special forces guys in to
Speaker 1: fight the fucking cartels. I'm not going to go over
Speaker 1: a laundry list of all the dumbfucks who have embraced
Speaker 1: this crap idea, but I do want to read one
Speaker 1: quote from an ABC News article quote House Oversight Committee
Speaker 1: Chairman James Comer, Republican Kentucky, on Tuesdays said that it
Speaker 1: was a mistake that then President Donald Trump did not
Speaker 1: bomb meth labs in Mexico after he had reportedly asked
Speaker 1: his Defense secretary about the possibility in twenty twenty. One
Speaker 1: of the things we learned post Trump presidency is that
Speaker 1: he had ordered a bombing of a couple fentanyl labs
Speaker 1: crystal meth labs in Mexico just across the border, and
Speaker 1: for whatever reason, the military didn't do it. Comer said
Speaker 1: on Fox and Friends, I think that was a mistake.
Speaker 1: Now I want to discuss for a second how impossible
Speaker 1: it is for this plan to work. As I noted earlier,
Speaker 1: there are drug labs in Mexico, quite a few of them,
Speaker 1: making a variety and not just making, but in many
Speaker 1: cases taking drugs that come from elsewhere and basically packaging
Speaker 1: them in a way that they can be sold or smuggled.
Speaker 1: That is, those facilities certainly exists, but they are not
Speaker 1: like the large centralized factories that I don't know, like
Speaker 1: a military rival would use to produce tanks. Right, most
Speaker 1: of this work, even if it is currently being done
Speaker 1: in a sizable facility, can be done in smaller facilities
Speaker 1: and can be moved pretty readily. And again, it's just
Speaker 1: not very intelligent to think that you can cripple this
Speaker 1: the same way you can cripple an enemy's ability to
Speaker 1: produce missiles or tanks. And even then that's not easy.
Speaker 1: We're actually really bad at it. We've repeatedly during wars
Speaker 1: bombed countries to attempt to destroy their ability to produce
Speaker 1: munitions and failed to really do that to a substantial extent.
Speaker 1: And so something like the narcotics industry, which is even
Speaker 1: more underground, even more hard to identify by nature of
Speaker 1: what it is. It's a big ask on the surface, right.
Speaker 1: It's also worth laying out why it's done as hell
Speaker 1: to conflate drug cartels with ISIS, because a big part
Speaker 1: of why Trump, how Trump thinks things are going to go,
Speaker 1: is like, well, Isis took over Raka, took over Moses,
Speaker 1: and then we beat them up, you know, we kicked
Speaker 1: the crap out of them, We destroyed ISIS. That's what
Speaker 1: he I think, that's literally what he thinks happens, and
Speaker 1: it's certainly what he wants his voters to think happened.
Speaker 1: But that's not really what happened. Right when the physical
Speaker 1: caliphate was liberated, ISIS went underground, and they are still
Speaker 1: there and still have the potential to take a whole
Speaker 1: territory again. ISIS attacks in both Iraq and Syria have
Speaker 1: been raising steadily for years. There's a lot of reasons
Speaker 1: for this. Big part of why things have gotten worse
Speaker 1: in Syria is that the Biden administration has done fuck
Speaker 1: all to stop the Turkish government from attacking the autonomous
Speaker 1: region Rojava. Who are the folks who defeated ISIS in Syria?
Speaker 1: And that has degraded their capacity to keep a fucking
Speaker 1: lit on thing. So number one, this victory, he claims,
Speaker 1: wasn't a total victory. And number two, the reason why
Speaker 1: ISIS was knocked out of you know, Mosl and knocked
Speaker 1: out of most of their territorial claims fairly short period
Speaker 1: of time was because of a couple of things. Number One,
Speaker 1: the US was providing support, but we were not carrying
Speaker 1: out either operation on our own in both Iraq and Syria.
Speaker 1: We were supporting other extant militant groups that had a
Speaker 1: long history and a decent amount of support in the region,
Speaker 1: right And number two, and maybe you can make the
Speaker 1: claim that that's the case with the Mexican army, But the
Speaker 1: other aspect is that Isis were not guys who had
Speaker 1: been in charge for forever in that region and had
Speaker 1: deep bases. Most of them were foreigners, and they were
Speaker 1: foreigners who had very quickly taken urban areas and then
Speaker 1: started running them like dog shit cartels have existed for
Speaker 1: a lot longer. They have effectively and do effectively rule
Speaker 1: large chunks of Mexico and have done so for longer
Speaker 1: than ISIS has existed. They have deep networks of local
Speaker 1: ties and in many areas a reputation for providing services
Speaker 1: better than the Mexican government has done. I don't say
Speaker 1: this to whitewash how horrible these organizations are, but they
Speaker 1: are not ISIS, which just came up seemingly out of
Speaker 1: no where, took over a bunch of cities and then
Speaker 1: got fucking kicked out, and you know, never had a
Speaker 1: huge base of support among the populace, particularly in Iraq,
Speaker 1: because again there were just some assholes who showed up
Speaker 1: one day as opposed to the cartels, which you know,
Speaker 1: especially once the US starts bombing Mexico and killing Mexican civilians,
Speaker 1: which will happen anytime we're bombing them. Just the idea,
Speaker 1: the amount of support it could potentially build for the
Speaker 1: fucking cartels is substantial. But even beyond that, the idea
Speaker 1: that you could knock these beat people out easily, they're not.
Speaker 3: Again, they have a.
Speaker 1: Deep base of support, a deep history in these areas.
Speaker 1: They have functioned for a long time, not just running
Speaker 1: things but also constantly fighting against a military and the
Speaker 1: government that has a degree of capacity and technology at
Speaker 1: its back. So the idea that like, you're just going
Speaker 1: to be able to kick these guys out of whatever. Sonora,
Speaker 1: the way that you know isis was quote unquote kicked
Speaker 1: out of Mosel. It's fanciful rights. It's a farce. Now,
Speaker 1: speaking of farces, I want to talk about kind of
Speaker 1: the thing that we should all see is the model
Speaker 1: for what might actually how it would actually work if
Speaker 1: Trump tried to go into Mexico to take out the cartels.
Speaker 1: And this brings me back to Afghanistan. Right during Trump's administration,
Speaker 1: the Department of Defense was empowered by the President to
Speaker 1: use vastly more force and their attempts to destroy Taliban
Speaker 1: drug labs. Obviously, Taliban funded a lot of their war
Speaker 1: effort with the sale of opium, you know, aeroin whatever,
Speaker 1: and it was you know, believed that if we can
Speaker 1: cut if we can destroy their ability to grow and
Speaker 1: process this stuff, we can cut the legs out from
Speaker 1: underneath the Taliban. And Trump really bought into this and
Speaker 1: allowed the DoD to accelerate their efforts to do this.
Speaker 1: Our forces started carrying out a mix of air strikes
Speaker 1: and special operations attacks on talent Lebhan drug labs in
Speaker 1: twenty seventeen. It is the same plan that they executed
Speaker 1: that Trump is pushing for the United States to use
Speaker 1: in Mexico and in Afghanistan. This plan was such an
Speaker 1: abysmal failure that not only did it not stop drug production,
Speaker 1: it actually accelerated the production of opiates in fucking Afghanistan
Speaker 1: at the highest level in recorded history. This program failed
Speaker 1: so badly that the Pentagon ended their strikes on drug
Speaker 1: labs in twenty nineteen. They gave up in two years
Speaker 1: because they didn't couldn't do it. They were bad at it. Now,
Speaker 1: the fact that this kind of plan that Trump is
Speaker 1: pushed would undeniably fail to actually destroy the cartels to
Speaker 1: stop drugs and human trafficking across the border, this does
Speaker 1: not mean that it would actually be a failure for
Speaker 1: the reasons that Trump and many other Republicans wanted to fail,
Speaker 1: which is that declaring war on cartels allows them to
Speaker 1: justify a major power grap and destroy or in the
Speaker 1: lives of US citizens they already see as enemies. And
Speaker 1: I don't mean to say that this is more serious
Speaker 1: than the lives that will be lost in Mexico. It's
Speaker 1: certainly not, but this is very serious as well. Last October,
Speaker 1: a think tank, the Center for Renewing America, published a
Speaker 1: policy paper with the fun title It's Time to wage
Speaker 1: War on Transnational Drug Cartels. Paper makes it clear that
Speaker 1: illegal immigration is just as much a priority as fentannel
Speaker 1: and carrying out these actions, and in fact, it lists
Speaker 1: the goals of this planned military policy in Mexico this way.
Speaker 1: Number one, ending the illegal flow of people trafficking victims
Speaker 1: and drugs across the southern border. Now, the paper suggests
Speaker 1: creating a new classification that is similar but different to
Speaker 1: foreign terrorist organization for the cartels. It lists a series
Speaker 1: of escalatory stages that Trump's administration should take, starting with
Speaker 1: putting pressure on the Mexican government to take care of
Speaker 1: things themselves. And since the Mexican government is not really
Speaker 1: capable of pre of ending a present of ending either
Speaker 1: migration or drug cartels, escalation is inevitable. So after this
Speaker 1: phase fails, phase two is to have the President start
Speaker 1: deploying military units, initially to interdict the coast, but also
Speaker 1: to coordinate with the DEA to target and kill cartel
Speaker 1: figures and destroy their assets. US ports will be closed
Speaker 1: whenever the number of illegal immigrant apprehensions that the border
Speaker 1: increases past a certain level. Right, So they are also saying,
Speaker 1: and again you get the feeling from this paper. While
Speaker 1: Trump always harps on the drugs and the horrors of fentanyl,
Speaker 1: is very clear from this paper there is concerned and
Speaker 1: if not more concerned about the fact that non white
Speaker 1: people are entering the country. Quote. While costly to the economy,
Speaker 1: this closing ports would incentivize the Mexican government to crack
Speaker 1: down on human smugglers, migrant caravans, and cartel trafficking networks.
Speaker 1: Now into the fourth and final phase of this plan,
Speaker 1: the US government would basically carry out a full scale
Speaker 1: invasion of parts of Mexico in order to defeat cartels
Speaker 1: and secure the border. At no point are there any
Speaker 1: suggestions made as to how this might be done or
Speaker 1: why it would be more successful than the attempts that
Speaker 1: failed in Afghanistan. Instead, they just move right onto the
Speaker 1: last phase, the victory phase, which includes these suggestions. Congress
Speaker 1: should enact legislation that creates enhanced penalties for US citizens
Speaker 1: found guilty of collaborating with the cartels. Punishment should include
Speaker 1: mandatory minimum federal sentencing of fifteen years in prison for
Speaker 1: working with cartels labeled as transnational criminal organizations, and mandatory
Speaker 1: minimum sentencing of twenty five years in prison for working
Speaker 1: with cartels labeled under the new Cartel statutory guidelines. Congress
Speaker 1: should enact legislation that defines material and financial supports for
Speaker 1: the cartels designated under the new statutory framework as tantamount
Speaker 1: to engaging in terrorism against the United States. This basically means,
Speaker 1: depending on how this is written, it could mean that
Speaker 1: doing drugs, possessing drugs, having friends who sell or use
Speaker 1: drugs could mean that you're committing terrorism by supporting the cartels.
Speaker 1: It is not impossible that that is how this law,
Speaker 1: these laws, should they be actually put on the books, ever,
Speaker 1: should this program be enacted, that's not impossible that that's
Speaker 1: how it would be interpreted. And why wouldn't they want
Speaker 1: to write this would allow them to lock up a
Speaker 1: shitload of people that they see as being on the left.
Speaker 1: If you think back to Richard Nixon, A big reason
Speaker 1: why and this is a stated reason why you know
Speaker 1: the war on marijuana was escalated is that it lets
Speaker 1: you arrest the fucking hippies and anti war protesters and
Speaker 1: put them in prison. You know, that is a big
Speaker 1: part of what a lot of people in Trump's orbit
Speaker 1: want to do with this. And I say that because
Speaker 1: the guy who wrote this fucking thing is a dude
Speaker 1: named kN Kuchinelli. Ken is a major anti left culture warfucker.
Speaker 1: One of his jobs under Trump was he worked under
Speaker 1: Chad Wolfe, who was the illegally the director of the
Speaker 1: DHS during the twenty twenty uprising. In sept Timber of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, he ordered the intelligence branch of the Department
Speaker 1: of Homeland Security to downplay threats by white supremacists and
Speaker 1: instead focus on the danger of Antifa. Under his watch,
Speaker 1: DHS also compiled and tel reports on journalists in Portland, Oregon.
Speaker 1: Might have some issue with this guy personally, and defended
Speaker 1: the abduction by federal agents of civilians in unmarked vehicles, right,
Speaker 1: you know, when people were being abducted off the streets
Speaker 1: of Portland. He was a big fan of that. Ken
Speaker 1: Guchinelli really likes that idea. He is also essentially a
Speaker 1: white nationalist himself. In August of twenty nineteen, he announced
Speaker 1: a revised regulation to go into effect October fifteenth, twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: that expanded the public charge requirements for legal immigration made
Speaker 1: it harder to get green cards and visas if you
Speaker 1: were poor. Basically, he stopped. He made basically, if we
Speaker 1: might need something like food stamps, it's harder to get,
Speaker 1: you know, to immigrate legally to the United States. He
Speaker 1: was asked, doesn't this kind of contradict, you know, that
Speaker 1: poem on the Statue of Liberty about welcoming you know,
Speaker 1: poor and persecuted people. Kucinelli suggested a revision to the
Speaker 1: poem on the Statute of Liberty, On the Statue of Liberty,
Speaker 1: give me you're tired and you're poor, who can stand
Speaker 1: on their own two feet, and who will not become
Speaker 1: a public charge. So that's that's cool. He also made
Speaker 1: a point that the poem referred to European immigrants, so
Speaker 1: you know, fuck those non white people, right, you know,
Speaker 1: like the poem was never meant for them. He's a
Speaker 1: fucking nazi, right, He's a white nationalist at the very least,
Speaker 1: like kN Kuchinelli is the kind of person that a
Speaker 1: decent society would google what the Romans did with the
Speaker 1: Tarpeian rocks when they had someone who was a trader
Speaker 1: to their system, and that's what should happen to Ken Cuccinelli.
Speaker 1: But instead he's trying to get the US military to
Speaker 1: invade Mexico. So that's good anyway, that's a Trump's Agenda
Speaker 1: forty seven policy on the cartels. I hope you all
Speaker 1: had a lot of fun anyway, by hey, we'll be
Speaker 1: back Monday with more episodes every week from now until
Speaker 1: the heat death of the Universe.
Speaker 9: It Could Happen here as a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 9: For more podcasts from the cool Zone Media, visit our
Speaker 9: website coolzonemedia dot com, or check us out on the
Speaker 9: iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Speaker 9: You can find sources for It Could Happen Here, updated
Speaker 9: monthly at coolzonemedia dot com slash sources. Thanks for listening.