Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: So in recent comments to reporters, Stevin Miller floated suspending
Speaker 2: habeas corpus. Really take a listen to how he lays
Speaker 2: this out here, because I think there are some several
Speaker 2: significant things he says.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 4: Well, the Constitution is clear and that, of course is
Speaker 4: the supreme law of the land that the privilege of
Speaker 4: the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a
Speaker 4: time of invasion. So it would say that's an option we're
Speaker 4: actively looking at. Look, a lot of it depends on
Speaker 4: whether the courts do the right thing or not. At
Speaker 4: the end of the day, Congress passed the body of
Speaker 4: law known as the Immigration Nationality Act, which stripped Article
Speaker 4: three courts. That's the judicial branch of jurisdiction over immigration cases.
Speaker 4: So Congress actually passed is called jurisdiction stripping legislation. It
Speaker 4: passed a number of laws that say that the Article
Speaker 4: three courts aren't even allowed to be involved in immigration cases.
Speaker 4: Many of you probably don't know this. I'll give you
Speaker 4: a good example. Are you familiar with the term Temporary
Speaker 4: protect the Status or TPS. Right, So, by statute, the
Speaker 4: courts are stripped of jurisdiction from overruling a presidential determination
Speaker 4: or a secretarial determination on TPS when the Secretary of
Speaker 4: Home Insecurity makes that determination. So when Secretary Nome terminated
Speaker 4: TPS for the illegals that Biden flew into the country,
Speaker 4: when courts stepped in, they were violating explicit language that
Speaker 4: Congress had enacted saying they have no jurisdiction. So it's
Speaker 4: not just the courts aren't just at war with the
Speaker 4: executive branch. The courts are at war these radical rogue
Speaker 4: judges with the legislative branch as well too, So all
Speaker 4: of that will inform the choice that the president ultimately makes.
Speaker 5: Yes, christ I just want to say Stephen Miller is
Speaker 5: at war with the Trump administration there because the Trump
Speaker 5: administration stopped the invasion.
Speaker 3: Oh, yes, true.
Speaker 5: It's an amazing Yeah, it's an amazing contradiction.
Speaker 3: So are we being invaded or are we not being invaded?
Speaker 5: They are justifying this threat of habeas corpus on the
Speaker 5: idea that we are under invasion. Right, They're also touting
Speaker 5: that they have completely shut down the southern border. So
Speaker 5: these two things are absolutely in contradiction. I was supposed
Speaker 5: to have be on the New media pool duty yesterday,
Speaker 5: but they called a lid. Yeah, and that was like
Speaker 5: the top question that I was going to ask, Like
Speaker 5: which one is true? Did you stop the invasion or
Speaker 5: can we have habeas corpus because we're being invated?
Speaker 2: That is a fantastic question. And I mean the key
Speaker 2: line there, which squares the circle, so.
Speaker 3: To speak, is or whatever, Yeah, got you know what
Speaker 3: I'm saying?
Speaker 2: Got it anyway? Is he says it depends on whether
Speaker 2: the do the right thing or not. So also the invasion,
Speaker 2: apparently that would justify this depends on whether.
Speaker 3: Or not they like the court's decisions.
Speaker 2: In terms of the last thing that he lays out
Speaker 2: there about the court stripping position provisions, et cetera. You know,
Speaker 2: my reading, based on other people who understand this stuff
Speaker 2: way better than I do, is that he's really playing
Speaker 2: fast and loose with the facts there, and that yes,
Speaker 2: there are court stripping provisions basically that push immigration law
Speaker 2: into immigration courts, but appeals into federal courts, as you
Speaker 2: would expect, and that is the process that's been playing
Speaker 2: out in the court system that we've seen. But you know,
Speaker 2: when you hear him say this, of course there's a
Speaker 2: question of, well, is this just Steven Miller doing Steven
Speaker 2: Miller's stuff and you know, trying to make a spectacle
Speaker 2: or raise some threat, But they're not really that serious
Speaker 2: about it. On the contrary, CNN at least has reporting
Speaker 2: that Trump has been directly involved in these discussions himself.
Speaker 3: We can put this up on the screen.
Speaker 2: He's been personally involved in discussions inside the administration of
Speaker 2: potentially suspending habeas corpus lego, procedure that allows people to
Speaker 2: challenge their detention in court. While Trump has not explicitly
Speaker 2: mentioned habeas corpus in public. It was what he was
Speaker 2: referencing last month when he commented on steps he could
Speaker 2: take to combat nationwide injunctions against his actions on deportations.
Speaker 2: According to one of the people familiar with the talks,
Speaker 2: and we actually have that sound of Trump sort of
Speaker 2: vaguely alluding to what Stephen Miller is laying out explicitly here.
Speaker 3: Let's go ahead and take a listen to that.
Speaker 6: You mentioned this last night in your speech and home.
Speaker 6: We're basically an unprecedented situation. There's a lot of abuses
Speaker 6: of nationwide injunctions, so we're seemingly designed to sort kill
Speaker 6: your power, specifically when it comes to deporting these idegal,
Speaker 6: violent aliens that came in or the previous administration. Have
Speaker 6: you spoked your team couplays to mitigate this and continue to.
Speaker 7: Deliver femare Yeah, Well, there are ways to mitigate it,
Speaker 7: and there's some very strong ways. There's one way that's
Speaker 7: been used by three very highly respected presidents, but we
Speaker 7: hope we don't have to go that route. But there
Speaker 7: is one way that has been used very successfully by
Speaker 7: three presidents, all highly respected, and hopefully we don't have
Speaker 7: to go that way, but there are ways of mitigating it.
Speaker 2: So I believe Emily the three presidents he's referring to
Speaker 2: are Abraham Lincoln most famously. I would say, Grant during
Speaker 2: reconstruction to try to get the violence of the KKK
Speaker 2: under control.
Speaker 3: And then George W.
Speaker 2: Bush wouldn't necessarily say highly respect to that one during
Speaker 2: the we're.
Speaker 8: Also taking the Iraq war plans.
Speaker 2: That's true, so I guess there we're rehabbing George W.
Speaker 3: Bush with this administration.
Speaker 2: But yeah, so during the war on terror and effectively, look,
Speaker 2: what they want to be able to do is say
Speaker 2: whoever they want to designate as you know, a quote
Speaker 2: unquote terrorists, whether that's a cartel association or a tattoo
Speaker 2: or just because they say so, or perhaps someone who
Speaker 2: harbors ill will against a tesla, or who said the
Speaker 2: wrong thing with regard to Palestine or Israel, or who
Speaker 2: dared to protest and a hands off protest or something
Speaker 2: like that against the Trump administration. I'm not making these
Speaker 2: examples up, by the way. These are all groups that
Speaker 2: have been floated as domestic terrorists by the Trump administration,
Speaker 2: by Trump administration officials that they can just snatch them
Speaker 2: up and imprison them indefinitely without them being able to
Speaker 2: challenge that imprisonment as unlawful. That's what they are contemplating here,
Speaker 2: and I think most immediately they're contemplating it in the
Speaker 2: context of the of Immigration and obviously their plan to
Speaker 2: use the Alien Enemies Act to effectively get around any
Speaker 2: sort of court challenges and just ship people into these
Speaker 2: foreign goologs where they've never been heard, where they can
Speaker 2: never be heard from. Again, that has been in large
Speaker 2: part blocked by the courts. They're very unhappy with the
Speaker 2: court decisions, and so now this is the next path
Speaker 2: to try to effectuate this same lawless outcome via you know,
Speaker 2: a different legal patina that they're going for.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and I think some of this is van Miller
Speaker 5: trying to ratchet up pressure on judges. I think, of course,
Speaker 5: whenever you see Trump or top officials, someone as powerful
Speaker 5: as Stephen Miller flirting with this stuff in public, you
Speaker 5: have to absolutely take it seriously.
Speaker 8: If I had to.
Speaker 5: Guess, I would say that Steven Miller's strategy here is
Speaker 5: ratcheting up pressure on judges, and that he is not
Speaker 5: entirely serious about doing this.
Speaker 8: Because of what we were mentioning.
Speaker 5: Earlier just that it would make it, you know, it
Speaker 5: would make it appears that there's an ongoing invasion during
Speaker 5: the Trump administration, which is going to become an increasing
Speaker 5: problem for their immigration crackdown period. As you mentioned, that's
Speaker 5: what they're justifying some of these deportations with the idea
Speaker 5: that there's an invasion that is being orchestrated trend by
Speaker 5: the Venezuelan government through trend at raguall which even I
Speaker 5: think John Hudson had this in the Washington Post, even
Speaker 5: the Trump administration's own intelligence underminds that's not being orchestrated
Speaker 5: by the government of Venezuela.
Speaker 2: So I mean, and a Trump, a Trump appointed judge
Speaker 2: said the same, said effectively like this is a preposterous
Speaker 2: invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.
Speaker 3: It fails on every level.
Speaker 8: Yeah, yep.
Speaker 5: The last thing I wanted to say on this is
Speaker 5: I think it is fair to point out that there
Speaker 5: have been some real abuses, abuses of the Universal Injunctions,
Speaker 5: and there's been at executive functions. Jackline and Goldsmith has
Speaker 5: been following this in a really interesting way and a
Speaker 5: very critical way that is very critical of Donald Trump. Basically,
Speaker 5: you know, we were talking about this in our earlier
Speaker 5: corruption block. In general, there has been just a lot
Speaker 5: of norm sliding since twenty sixteen, as everyone kind of knows,
Speaker 5: or maybe backsliding norm backsliding is one way to put it.
Speaker 5: And it is true that some of this so, for example,
Speaker 5: administrative stays. He writes, the practice of administrative stays against
Speaker 5: executive action, according to Christopher Moore, was basically unheard of
Speaker 5: before twenty twenty two. And he says that the Trump
Speaker 5: administration arguments against single federal judges in joining programs on
Speaker 5: a universal basis are entirely legitimate, meaning there have been
Speaker 5: a lot of cases in this second Trump administration where
Speaker 5: judges are acting alone on a national basis with these
Speaker 5: universal injunctions in ways that are inappropriate. That said, obviously,
Speaker 5: he goes on to say, some of this is because
Speaker 5: the Trump administration itself is doing some unprecedented as taking
Speaker 5: some unprecedented steps.
Speaker 8: So I think we're in one of those situations.
Speaker 5: Where it's like the answer to Trump's craziness might also
Speaker 5: be crazy. It's just sort of a question of how
Speaker 5: do you get out of the doom spiral? And that's
Speaker 5: pretty like that that feels. I guess I feel very
Speaker 5: pessimistic about.
Speaker 3: That, Crystal. I indeed I do as well. Emily, I
Speaker 3: do as well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it reminds me of you know, one of the
Speaker 2: talking points that Trump administration officials and defenders like to
Speaker 2: say is like, no president has faced, no presential administration
Speaker 2: has faced more lawsuits. It's like, well, yeah, because they
Speaker 2: haven't done as much illegal shit, just like wildly in less,
Speaker 2: you know, in one hundred days or less as you
Speaker 2: all have. So there's a logical reason why you're facing
Speaker 2: so much trouble with the courts. And it's on immigration,
Speaker 2: it's on a lot of the DOGE activity has been
Speaker 2: enjoined and you know ultimately will likely be struck down.
Speaker 2: You can see that there is has been with this administration,
Speaker 2: I think, and intentionally you talked about this as well.
Speaker 2: They just decided they don't really care about the law.
Speaker 2: They're going to do what they want to do and
Speaker 2: then let the courts have to clean up the mess exactly.
Speaker 3: And so then when the courts come.
Speaker 2: In, are like, you can't do that, and you know,
Speaker 2: you can't just shut down the CFPB, you can't just
Speaker 2: shut down USAID. You can't just decide that you don't
Speaker 2: like this program, so you're not going to spend the
Speaker 2: money that was congressionally appropriated. You can't just ship people
Speaker 2: to foreign gulog no due process. You can't admit that
Speaker 2: you wrongfully deported this person and then be like, we're
Speaker 2: not going to do anything about it. Though when they
Speaker 2: come in to clean up the mess, you don't get
Speaker 2: to kick and scream about it, because your whole plan
Speaker 2: was We're going to break a lot of laws and
Speaker 2: then force the courts to have to come in and
Speaker 2: clean up the mess afterwards. So, you know, I think
Speaker 2: that is a kind of ratcheting up that is that
Speaker 2: they I'm sure anticipated was going to come as a
Speaker 2: result here, And so I think the significance of the
Speaker 2: Miller comments like, I think you have to take these
Speaker 2: things very seriously at this point because of the way
Speaker 2: the Trump administration has conducted themselves, and clearly they do
Speaker 2: have a goal of getting around normal due process and
Speaker 2: normal checks that have existed, you know, in this country
Speaker 2: since the founding and you know, going back to like
Speaker 2: the you know, magne Karta in terms of legal principles.
Speaker 5: And pulling out all of the documentary my pocket man.
Speaker 8: You should sell Breaking Points branded pocket magnet.
Speaker 5: Oh gosh, Soccer would love that. We shouldn't even speak
Speaker 5: it into existence because.
Speaker 3: He'll be our baby gift to him.
Speaker 5: That. By the way, if you're not following executive functions,
Speaker 5: shout out to them. They're pretty Trump critical, but I
Speaker 5: do find them pretty helpful.
Speaker 8: And just one more point from Goldsmith, who writes he's
Speaker 8: argued the.
Speaker 5: Administration has a legitimate complain about universal injunctions administrative states
Speaker 5: that should ultimately be resolved by Supreme Court of Congress.
Speaker 5: There is a pattern of mostly democratic point at district
Speaker 5: judges and joining Trump initiatives, just as there was a
Speaker 5: similar and indeed more extreme in terms of percentages mirrored
Speaker 5: pattern during the Biden years. But to know whether the
Speaker 5: twenty twenty five pattern reflects real or systemic bias, we
Speaker 5: would need to assess a whole slew of issues. And
Speaker 5: this is I'm just gonna list this out so we
Speaker 5: know what to keep our eye on going forward. The
Speaker 5: influence of plaintiff forum shopping, the profile of judges who
Speaker 5: denied relief, and the abundant evidence that Trump two point
Speaker 5: zero is not taking legal compliance seriously. So those are
Speaker 5: the things to follow, I think going forward in this
Speaker 5: broader narrative of the universal injunctions in the.
Speaker 3: Stays yeah, because I mean some things.
Speaker 2: Yeah, their extraordinary actions have required extraordinary actions as well.
Speaker 2: And even so the courts can't really can't really keep up.
Speaker 2: You aren't really a match for and in the Trump
Speaker 2: administration to that point has just in many instances said yeah,
Speaker 2: we got this ruling against us, We're still not really
Speaker 2: going to comply, like we'll do a little bit, or
Speaker 2: we'll pay some lip service, or we'll sort of like
Speaker 2: pretend that we're that we read it a different way, etc.
Speaker 2: But you know, in many and many of them, not
Speaker 2: the high profile like Kilmar Bargo Garcia, but some of
Speaker 2: the decisions that have gone against Doge, for example, where
Speaker 2: they say, okay, you have to reinstate this money and
Speaker 2: then they just don't.
Speaker 8: Well yeah, and you're right, you mentioned this just really
Speaker 8: quickly as we wrap up.
Speaker 5: That's part of the strategy here is to throw as
Speaker 5: many novel legal theories at the wall and see what sticks.
Speaker 8: That's very much the Alien Enemies Act.
Speaker 5: A lot of people in Trump circles would say, listen,
Speaker 5: what we're doing is taking this action while it works
Speaker 5: its way through the courts, and if the courts go
Speaker 5: one way. Trump has said this many times, we'll follow
Speaker 5: the courts. And that's because, as dangerous as it is
Speaker 5: to even tell that line, the reason they're doing that
Speaker 5: is so that they can get as much done as
Speaker 5: quickly as possible. So it's not just a messaging flood
Speaker 5: zone strategy visa Vi Bannon, but it's actually just about
Speaker 5: trying as many different strategies as they can to get
Speaker 5: things done while the courts go through the process. Otherwise
Speaker 5: they feel like they won't have enough time to take
Speaker 5: as many ramatic actions. Dose is a really good example
Speaker 5: of this, just folding the CFPB for example, Well, it's
Speaker 5: basically done like that, that's already happened. Yeah, So, I
Speaker 5: mean it's under they've kind of like truncated it and
Speaker 5: moved it and to formally close it have to go
Speaker 5: through Congress.
Speaker 8: But now the overtime window has just been exploded.
Speaker 5: So when the CFPB, if it goes to the Reconciliation
Speaker 5: Bill that they're getting rid of it, it's less of
Speaker 5: a fight because we've gone through five months now without
Speaker 5: the CFPB.
Speaker 2: Creative facts on the ground, yeap, just really quick. I
Speaker 2: wanted to get this in the show because this is
Speaker 2: just wild. Put this up on the screen. So Trump
Speaker 2: has by and large suspended refugee resettlement, with one very
Speaker 2: specific example, which is white South Africans are not only
Speaker 2: being granted refugee status by Trump, but they're also being
Speaker 2: given you know, funds and plane tickets and all sorts
Speaker 2: of assistants to relocate here. So you know, this is
Speaker 2: a Elon Musk Steven Miller project. You've ever seen one.
Speaker 2: So you know, the refugees fleeing wars and persecution from
Speaker 2: any other place around the world, Nope, even ones who
Speaker 2: had been you know, absolutely vetted people, you know, people
Speaker 2: in Afghanistan for example, who had helped our own troops
Speaker 2: during the war there at grave risk to themselves. And
Speaker 2: now you've got the Taliban back in power, their refugee
Speaker 2: resettlement applications being torn up even though they're vetted, ready
Speaker 2: to go, that's not happening.
Speaker 3: But white South Africans they're.
Speaker 2: Being you know, given the green light and the red
Speaker 2: carpet rolled out for them to come here.
Speaker 5: Yeah. And part of the reason is that the Trump
Speaker 5: administration feels as though this is a really clear cut
Speaker 5: contrast with some of the BS asylum claims. So it's
Speaker 5: not that they aren't sympathetic stories, but they are economic
Speaker 5: cases that people have claimed asylum come much of the
Speaker 5: unit ST's words claimed asylum, and in some cases I
Speaker 5: think this is probably true with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, but
Speaker 5: who knows. We actually asked his attorney about this a
Speaker 5: month or two ago about the legitimacy of his asylum
Speaker 5: claim that he made in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 8: So the administration feels like they have a perfect juxtaposition here.
Speaker 5: Of people who in South Africa it is a deeply
Speaker 5: uncomfortable thing to think about, or talk about or explore.
Speaker 5: There is still high levels of racial violence, and that's
Speaker 5: where they think they have this clear cut case. And
Speaker 5: they're trolling with this because there's a Tucker did an
Speaker 5: interesting interview actually a couple months back with a South
Speaker 5: African civil rights activist names Ernest Rhetz, if I'm pronouncing
Speaker 5: that correctly, and you Tucker asked him about this, and
Speaker 5: he was like, South Africans, they don't want to leave.
Speaker 5: So that's why I think this is a troll from
Speaker 5: the administration to say, here's what a real asylum case
Speaker 5: looks like versus here's what the economic migrant asylum case
Speaker 5: looks like.
Speaker 8: And South Africans are fighting for a reason.
Speaker 5: It's because they don't like their family settled that land
Speaker 5: hundreds of years ago, if you listen to their point
Speaker 5: on it, So they feel like it would be the
Speaker 5: opposite of what they want to do to flee to
Speaker 5: the United States. So it's just a troll basically, Yeah, okay,
Speaker 5: it's it's I mean, it's so.
Speaker 2: The numbers are that white South Africans make up roughly
Speaker 2: seven percent of the South African population and own roughly
Speaker 2: seventy three percent of the individually held land, and their
Speaker 2: claim is that they are the victims of such egregious
Speaker 2: racial discrimination that their claims should go beyond those of
Speaker 2: like I said, the you know interpreters who worked for
Speaker 2: US in Afghanistan, or people who are fleeing Democratic Republic
Speaker 2: of Congo or Venezuela or correct, Yeah, that's that's right,
Speaker 2: which you know Republicans five seconds ago would have had
Speaker 2: a very different take on that view. And so all
Speaker 2: refugee resettlements shut down except for this group of white
Speaker 2: South Africans, who Steve Bannon says are the most racist
Speaker 2: people on the planet, according to Steve Bannon, just quoting him.
Speaker 8: Just quoting, just quoting Steve.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 2: So anyway, that Steven Miller project is ongoing. One more
Speaker 2: piece here, which is, you know, the some of this
Speaker 2: is breaking through with the public in terms of their
Speaker 2: views of Trump. We can put this up on the screen.
Speaker 2: This was a poll that was taken in the context
Speaker 2: of Trump's first one hundred days that we didn't get
Speaker 2: a chance to cover, but I wanted to, you know,
Speaker 2: make sure to highlight here you have a majority of
Speaker 2: Americans now fifty two percent who say that Trump is
Speaker 2: a dangerous dictator whose power should be limited before he
Speaker 2: destroys American democracy. That was the question here, and I
Speaker 2: think this was commissioned by Axios. So fifty two percent
Speaker 2: of all Americans, eighty seven percent of Democrats, fifty six
Speaker 2: percent of Independence and even seventeen percent of Republicans, which
Speaker 2: is actually a little bit higher than I would have expected.
Speaker 2: Along racial lines, there's some racial divide here. The highest
Speaker 2: numbers are among Americans sixty seven percent, than Latino sixty
Speaker 2: three percent, Asian Americans, Pacific Islander fifty eight percent, and
Speaker 2: white Americans forty five percent. So even among white people,
Speaker 2: you're getting pretty close to a majority who say this
Speaker 2: guy is a dangerous dictator. And you know what I've
Speaker 2: been saying, Emily is I think as his popularity declines,
Speaker 2: I think you will see more and more aggressive authoritarian
Speaker 2: tactics to shut down dissent. Now, I think what we're
Speaker 2: seeing this week, and this is very we see this
Speaker 2: around our show. You've got the China quote unquote deal,
Speaker 2: You've got whatever is going on in Gaza, you've got
Speaker 2: the prescription drug thing we're about to talk about. Like,
Speaker 2: I get the sense he realizes that his popularity is plummeting,
Speaker 2: and he needs to do some stuff, make some announcements,
Speaker 2: make some things happen, get some good pr get some
Speaker 2: good headlines to try to stem the you know, the
Speaker 2: the tide in terms of his plummeting approval rating. But
Speaker 2: in any case, you know, even as people of course
Speaker 2: have responded to typically respond most to their own direct
Speaker 2: material interests, people are also, you know, in America, pretty
Speaker 2: opposed to dictators who threaten democracy.
Speaker 3: We're at least.
Speaker 2: Theoretically ideally committed to having a demic product system here.
Speaker 2: It's something that people take a lot of pride in
Speaker 2: this country. And so I do think because his actions
Speaker 2: have been so extraordinary, so authoritarian, and so rapid, that
Speaker 2: the flip side of the what is Bannon called the
Speaker 2: days of Thunder, the flood, the zone strategy of doing
Speaker 2: so much at one time, you don't get to have
Speaker 2: that boiling frog effect where it's just ratcheting, ratcheting, ratcheting.
Speaker 3: This hit people over the head.
Speaker 2: And you know, I think there's a genuine, deep concern
Speaker 2: among a lot of people about the direction that he's
Speaker 2: taken the country in.
Speaker 7: Well.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and so this poll was February to March and
Speaker 5: it was by the Public Religion Research Institute. It as
Speaker 5: part of this like gargantuan poll. It's a very interesting
Speaker 5: poll actually if you read all of it. And I
Speaker 5: mean that's why I kind of thought the Bukeli stuff
Speaker 5: was just playing with fire for the Trump administrator. Like
Speaker 5: I think they had this idea that the Cali stuff
Speaker 5: made them look cool. And I think to most Americans
Speaker 5: it's like there's nothing cool about Bukele, Like he's so sad,
Speaker 5: Like it's it's such a ridiculous thing.
Speaker 8: That he's doing. I call himself a cool dictator.
Speaker 5: Maybe it flies in Latin America does not fly in
Speaker 5: the United States like it just it doesn't hit the
Speaker 5: same way here. Now, the poll juxtaposed that question that
Speaker 5: you just read with so dangerous dictator. Also that he's
Speaker 5: a strong leader restoring America's greatness was the other option,
Speaker 5: that he's a strong leader who should be given the
Speaker 5: power he needs to restore America's greatness. And then I
Speaker 5: think there was like a skip option. So it was
Speaker 5: fifty two to forty four in that question. Interestingly, in
Speaker 5: that poll, he had a forty three percent approval rating,
Speaker 5: which means that there's probably some overlap of people who
Speaker 5: approve of the job he's doing and also see him.
Speaker 2: As a Well, that's why I was noting the Republican
Speaker 2: numbers seventeen percent saying he's a dangerous dictator. I'm sure
Speaker 2: he probably, you know, is a Republican approval rating is
Speaker 2: probably ninety percent.
Speaker 8: It's probably pretty hard.
Speaker 2: So there's probably you know, some percentage in there that
Speaker 2: are like, yeah, he's a dictator, but hey.
Speaker 3: You do what you gotta do.
Speaker 8: Yeah, that's probably true.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, I mean that's that unfortunately, is what we've
Speaker 2: learned throughout history is when democracy is unable to deliver benefits,
Speaker 2: then guess what.
Speaker 3: People start to become curious. And I do think that's
Speaker 3: where we are.
Speaker 8: It feels like desperate times.
Speaker 5: And I mean, if we don't even talk about this enough,
Speaker 5: nobody talks about this enough. How useless Congress has become
Speaker 5: just utterly useless. This is even if you're look at you,
Speaker 5: if you were a Republican right now, you're looking at
Speaker 5: Republicans holding the presidency, the House, and the Senate, and
Speaker 5: all they can do is muster a reconciliation bill because
Speaker 5: they're not confident in their numbers. There's no way for
Speaker 5: them to build consensus to pass major pieces of legislation.
Speaker 5: They have punted so much of their responsibilities to administrated
Speaker 5: agencies and to the president itself.
Speaker 8: I mean, just to try to take back tariff power.
Speaker 8: They couldn't even get.
Speaker 5: That pass, in part because Democrat was like traveling overseas
Speaker 5: and didn't even care enough about the freaking vote.
Speaker 8: So Congress is just it's a really dangerous situation.
Speaker 5: How much or how how atrophied the political process of
Speaker 5: like republican government is.
Speaker 2: Although, to be honest with you, I don't know that
Speaker 2: that is really necessary. Like we've talked about this in
Speaker 2: the context of immigration. This will be a good transition
Speaker 2: to the prescription drug piece. Yes, Democrats were ready to
Speaker 2: capitulate on all kinds of immigration things, like if they
Speaker 2: have wanted to work through a congressional process to accomplish something,
Speaker 2: especially in the very early days of Trump's term, they
Speaker 2: certainly could have done it. You know, I think it's
Speaker 2: just easier to put on an executive order. Then he
Speaker 2: doesn't have to negotiate.
Speaker 3: He can just be a king.
Speaker 2: He can just issue his proclamations and then you know,
Speaker 2: kick it to the courts and make the courts stop him.
Speaker 2: And so I think he just prefers that to the
Speaker 2: messiness of having to get in the weeds or god forbid,
Speaker 2: work with some Democrats on something that he would want
Speaker 2: to get done.
Speaker 8: And they don't want to take votes. I mean, Congress
Speaker 8: doesn't want to take votes.
Speaker 5: They don't want to be held accountable when it's easier
Speaker 5: to go through the president, So it just better.
Speaker 2: It's mutually reinforcing. They don't have to take any tough
Speaker 2: votes and he can just do whatever he wants. Right.
Speaker 8: Trade war, trade wars, actual wars, all of that.
Speaker 5: I mean, we're just completely like Biden kept the Trump
Speaker 5: tariffs and that didn't go through Congress. The same thing
Speaker 5: with like we've had an AMF for however long that
Speaker 5: bipartisan presidents have used three or whatever. Yeah, mutually, it
Speaker 5: is mutually reinforcing. Yeah, huge news yesterday. That could turn
Speaker 5: out to be ultimately kind of nothing or it could
Speaker 5: turn out to be I guess.
Speaker 8: Sort of significant. And part of that depends on Congress.
Speaker 9: Crystal.
Speaker 3: Yeah, as we were saying, so we can put.
Speaker 8: The first element on the screen.
Speaker 5: This is Donald Trump on Sunday afternoon talking about prescription
Speaker 5: drug prices, untrue, social and I'm going to read this.
Speaker 5: For many years, the world has wondered why prescription drugs
Speaker 5: and pharmaceuticals in the US were so much higher in
Speaker 5: price than they were in any other nation, sometimes being
Speaker 5: five to ten times more expensive than the same drug
Speaker 5: manufactured in the exact same laboratory or plant by the
Speaker 5: same company.
Speaker 8: Question Mark, question mark, question mark.
Speaker 5: After a few lines of all caps there, If you
Speaker 5: didn't get it from my voice, I'll just let you
Speaker 5: know that's what it is. Now.
Speaker 8: How we're going to lowercase.
Speaker 5: It was always difficult to explain, and very embarrassing because
Speaker 5: in fact there was no correct or rightful answer.
Speaker 8: Rightful.
Speaker 5: Interesting, the pharmaceutical drug companies would say for years that
Speaker 5: it was research and development costs, and that all of
Speaker 5: these costs were and would be for no reason whatsoever
Speaker 5: borne by the quote suckers of America alone, campaign contributions
Speaker 5: can do wonders.
Speaker 8: But not with me, he says, and not with the
Speaker 8: Republican Party. Interesting.
Speaker 5: On the same day Crystal as the Cutter plane announcement. Yeah,
Speaker 5: so we could go to the next sled. Yeah, so,
Speaker 5: he says. Therefore, I'm pleased to announce that tomorrow morning.
Speaker 5: So today in the White House at nine am, I
Speaker 5: will be signing one of the most consequential executive orders
Speaker 5: in our country's history. Prescription drug and pharmaceutical prices will
Speaker 5: be reduced almost immediately by thirty to eighty percent.
Speaker 8: They will rise throughout the world.
Speaker 5: In order to equalize and for the first time in
Speaker 5: many years, bring fairness to America. I will be instituting
Speaker 5: a most Favored Nations policy, whereby the US will pay
Speaker 5: the same price as the nation that pays the lowest
Speaker 5: price anywhere in the world. Our country will finally be
Speaker 5: treated fairly, and citizens of healthcare costs will be reduced
Speaker 5: by numbers never even thought of before. So Chrystal, this
Speaker 5: is a fairly significant announcement. I think, probably more significant
Speaker 5: if a if momentum builds in Congress to actually codify this.
Speaker 5: So Roe tweeted actually late last night eleven thirty eight pm.
Speaker 5: I'm willing to introduce the Trump EO exactly as written
Speaker 5: as legislation to be bipartisan and get something done for
Speaker 5: the American people. Any Republicans willing to co sponsor, Let's
Speaker 5: then get Speaker Johnson to call a vote on it.
Speaker 5: So Congressman Conna, obviously a Democrat in the House of Representatives,
Speaker 5: now calling on Republicans to take that EO text and
Speaker 5: pass it through Congress, pass it through the Senate, and
Speaker 5: make it law because an EO can get again, as
Speaker 5: Roe says, challenged by big Pharma. So that I think
Speaker 5: the likelihood of this actually becoming law probably depends on
Speaker 5: whether Republicans are willing to get this through Congress, and
Speaker 5: that seems highly unlikely, especially the Senate.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean my top line reaction is that this
Speaker 2: is probably fake, an attempt to generate positive headlines to
Speaker 2: distract from the fact that the big beautiful bill entails
Speaker 2: giving a giant tax cut to the rich paid for by,
Speaker 2: you know, cuts to.
Speaker 3: Healthcare for poor people. So that's my big day. And
Speaker 3: the reason I say that, I would love to be
Speaker 3: proved wrong. By the way. The reason I say that.
Speaker 2: Is because he did almost six exact same executive order
Speaker 2: in his first term and it got immediately blocked by
Speaker 2: multiple courts. So maybe something will be different, maybe there's
Speaker 2: a different legal strategy. I it's nine oh nine now
Speaker 2: as we're as we're recording this. I don't know if
Speaker 2: he's released it yet, but we haven't seen all the details.
Speaker 2: But the way he describes it in this Truth Social
Speaker 2: is pretty much identical to the executive order in the
Speaker 2: first Trump administration, which immediately got blocked isstruck down. We
Speaker 2: also know that he had been talking to the Republicans
Speaker 2: about including something like this in the reconciliation bill and
Speaker 2: they all balked at it. So you know, the Republicans
Speaker 2: are not willing to go along with it, and he
Speaker 2: hasn't shown in the past that he was actually like
Speaker 2: committed to following through in order to get something accomplished.
Speaker 2: And what I mean by that is, look, if you're
Speaker 2: going to if you are going to do something like this,
Speaker 2: it really can't be done through executive It does have
Speaker 2: to go through Congress. So if he wants to accomplish this,
Speaker 2: he would take row up on his offer here. He
Speaker 2: would you know, steamroll Republicans and make this as much
Speaker 2: of a priority as it would take, it being as
Speaker 2: much of a priority as something like his immigration policy is.
Speaker 3: And I see no signs of that.
Speaker 2: So until improven otherwise, I have to think that this
Speaker 2: is an attempt to grab headlines and distract from many
Speaker 2: of the very indefensible and unpopular things that are happening
Speaker 2: with this reconciliation villain, with his administration in general.
Speaker 5: This sparked another billionaire on billionaire war, by the way
Speaker 5: civil war in the billionaire class, because it seems as
Speaker 5: though Bill Ackman popularized this idea in Trump circles.
Speaker 8: He was kind of bragging about that it was.
Speaker 5: He posted an idea that looks a lot like this
Speaker 5: on March seventh of twenty twenty four, kind of took
Speaker 5: a victory lap. Yesterday, Then Mark Cuban jumped on and
Speaker 5: said the manufacturers aren't the big problem, Bill. They could
Speaker 5: sell brand meds for far, far less and in some
Speaker 5: cases lower than other countries today. If you take the
Speaker 5: big PBMs, so pharmacy benefit managers out of the middle,
Speaker 5: and you are proud of the problem, Bill, I'll bet
Speaker 5: you've signed a pharmacy benefits deal with a big PBM tomorrow.
Speaker 5: Call them and ask for a list of your claims
Speaker 5: and the net drug price paid for each. Ask them
Speaker 5: for a net price list after rebates that you can verify.
Speaker 5: Let me know how long they laugh at you. He
Speaker 5: goes on to say the issues that CEOs have no
Speaker 5: clue about their pharmacy or health care benefits, so they
Speaker 5: work with the PBMs that cause this mess, assuming their
Speaker 5: consultants are doing the right thing by them. He said,
Speaker 5: this EO can have a huge impact, but it has
Speaker 5: to be built around transparency and removing the middleman. So
Speaker 5: the PBMs are obviously a part of this problem. Actually,
Speaker 5: there's there's going to be some conservative backlash this. We've
Speaker 5: seen that before too, because it's price fixing and they're
Speaker 5: in the park pocket of big pharma. There will be
Speaker 5: some completely ideological and sincere conservative disagreement with this because
Speaker 5: they see it as price fixing, and we don't need
Speaker 5: to open up that can of worms necessarily.
Speaker 8: But whether this.
Speaker 5: Actually gets through Congress, that's the problem is Republicans partially
Speaker 5: are in the pocket of big pharma like many Democrats,
Speaker 5: and then partially also are have this this ideological aversion
Speaker 5: to anything that looks like price fixing. So good luck
Speaker 5: with that, Mike Johnson and Roe sadly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, and I mean on the merits, like, it
Speaker 2: is absolutely unjustifiable that Americans pay so much more for
Speaker 2: prescription drugs than discussing anywhere around the world. Trump is
Speaker 2: right that we are expected to put the bill for
Speaker 2: their overhead and their quote unquote research and development. Now,
Speaker 2: the other thing that this is wildly at odds with
Speaker 2: the rest of the Trump administration plan is every single
Speaker 2: new drug molecule has been developed over the past several
Speaker 2: decades has been funded by public research.
Speaker 3: It has not come out of industry, come out.
Speaker 2: Of public research dollars, the very dollars that are being
Speaker 2: completely slashed and gutted by the Trump administration currently. So
Speaker 2: the actual innovation that has pushed for an advanced science
Speaker 2: that is under assault and that would inherently actually push
Speaker 2: more into the into private industry, and you know, we
Speaker 2: would have to rely more on private industry. And a
Speaker 2: lot of the quote unquote R and D that private
Speaker 2: industry does is more about trying to extend their patents,
Speaker 2: you know, reformulate something they already know works and is
Speaker 2: popular in order to extend their patent life. That is
Speaker 2: what a lot of their research and development funds ultimately
Speaker 2: go into. And yes, the American taxpayer and the you know,
Speaker 2: American consumer have been forced to front that research and
Speaker 2: development through these extraordinarily high prescription drug prices. You know,
Speaker 2: the place where it's most egregious is with Medicare where
Speaker 2: we're banned, have been banned from negotiating negotiating with drug
Speaker 2: makers to lower drug prices. That's something the Biden administration
Speaker 2: took some tepid steps in the direction of fixing. I
Speaker 2: believe this is part of the Inflation Reduction Act where
Speaker 2: they had a list it wasn't all drugs, but a
Speaker 2: list of certain top drugs that now Medicare is going
Speaker 2: to negotiate on, and that is you know, a small
Speaker 2: but quite significant win. Those are the sorts of things
Speaker 2: that you would need to do to actually get this
Speaker 2: under control, so we'll see where things where it goes
Speaker 2: from here. But you know, color me skeptical until I
Speaker 2: still see some actual, you know, actual commitment to this
Speaker 2: and action beyond what again he did in the first
Speaker 2: Trump administration with literally zero effect.
Speaker 5: Fair enough, should we move on to Kanye. I know
Speaker 5: you're tramping at the bit to get to the segment.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So, Kanye of Us is out with a new album.
Speaker 2: I believe the album title is cuck Leave is the
Speaker 2: name of the album title, and one track in particular
Speaker 2: has garnered quite a lot of attention because it is
Speaker 2: the whole chorus of the track is basically just Hyle Hitler.
Speaker 8: It's n word, Kamayle Hitler.
Speaker 3: Yes, that is uh, that is the course of the track.
Speaker 2: Now, Spotify and Apple and a bunch of other you know,
Speaker 2: a bunch of other outlets have banned distribution of it.
Speaker 2: They've really tried to block it, but it hasn't matter
Speaker 2: because it's gotten millions and millions of views on Twitter
Speaker 2: and other places where it's been allowed to go. So
Speaker 2: we have a little bit of a censored version of
Speaker 2: the video just so you can get a taste of
Speaker 2: what this is all about.
Speaker 3: Let's go ahead and take a listen.
Speaker 8: I don't understanding things I say.
Speaker 5: I don't understanding things I say.
Speaker 2: Some of the other lyrics Emily, according to Grock are man,
Speaker 2: these people took my kids from me, then they closed
Speaker 2: my bank account. I got so much anger in me,
Speaker 2: got no way to take it out. Think I'm stuck
Speaker 2: in the matrix where the fs my nitrous of referring
Speaker 2: to nitrous oxide. Yes, I am a cook. I like
Speaker 2: when people f on my b word the shit that
Speaker 2: I'm posting on Twitter. They're telling me, hey, don't say that.
Speaker 2: How Edwards can see me in public. I'm driving an
Speaker 2: off road maybox, so get some you know, classic wealth
Speaker 2: poorn in there as well. With all the money and fame,
Speaker 2: I still can't get my kids back. With all the
Speaker 2: money and fame, I still don't get to see my children.
Speaker 2: So I became a Nazi. Yeah, bitch, I'm the villain.
Speaker 2: That is some of the sampling of kin the lyrics
Speaker 2: of someone who's clearly like, I mean, I don't know
Speaker 2: what to say. He's clearly in the midst of a
Speaker 2: mental break, has been for a while surrounded with people
Speaker 2: who are not going to intervene and you know, in
Speaker 2: a way that is incredibly destructive to himself obviously, his
Speaker 2: his family, his kids, his relationships. Apparently the only people
Speaker 2: who surrounded with are you know, yes, men who just
Speaker 2: will will hype him up and tell him everything he
Speaker 2: does is great and glorious and brilliant and with you know,
Speaker 2: damaging impacts on society as well.
Speaker 5: I think you have to say, can you read the
Speaker 5: last lyric by the way, those last two lines.
Speaker 2: With all the money and fame, I still don't get
Speaker 2: to see my children. So I became a Nazi? Yeah,
Speaker 2: bitch on the villain.
Speaker 8: Yeah, this is like profoundly sad. Yeah.
Speaker 5: The point of the song, so like there's been this
Speaker 5: understandable reaction to the song is though it's like Kanye
Speaker 5: West embracing, which he's done in other formats, by the way,
Speaker 5: white supremacy and like.
Speaker 3: Being an overt Nazi, being an overt celebrating Hitler.
Speaker 5: Yes, right, what he's saying in this particular song is
Speaker 5: that and this is very Kanye West and just an
Speaker 5: absolute torture genius and extremely profoundly sad. He's saying that
Speaker 5: he's been pushed into this basically because he's so desperate.
Speaker 5: This is a cry for help that he is nobody
Speaker 5: is helping him, basically, and so he is now turning
Speaker 5: to the most taboos object in this country and in
Speaker 5: the broader West, just to just to get attention from
Speaker 5: his family and just to get help from his family.
Speaker 5: And it's like one of the saddest things to witness.
Speaker 5: And John Legend has said that he's like, this is
Speaker 5: they used to be friends, and he's like, this is
Speaker 5: incredibly sad to watch.
Speaker 8: I think we all feel it the same way. It's
Speaker 8: incredibly sad to watch.
Speaker 5: And the song is interesting to me because it's his
Speaker 5: turn into extreme extreme right wing like fascist, race science,
Speaker 5: disgusting nazi bullshit.
Speaker 8: I think I have no idea what he believes.
Speaker 5: I don't think he has any idea what he believes
Speaker 5: because he's so he's in the throes of like this,
Speaker 5: this horrible mental illness. It's crazy that it also sounds
Speaker 5: like subconsciously at the very least, he's starting to grapple
Speaker 5: with the fact that this is a cry for help,
Speaker 5: and that is just is incredibly sad.
Speaker 2: The song concludes with the sample from a nineteen thirty
Speaker 2: six Adolf Hitler speech, If you consider the work I'm
Speaker 2: doing to be right. If you think I have been diligent,
Speaker 2: that I have worked, that I've advocated for you this year,
Speaker 2: that I've spent my time honestly in the service of
Speaker 2: my people, then cast your vote. If so, then stand
Speaker 2: up for me like I have stood up for you.
Speaker 2: So including a you know, well sampling from Hitler himself
Speaker 2: into the song. I mean, I don't know, I struggle
Speaker 2: to have as much empathy as you do at this point, Emily,
Speaker 2: because it's not like there haven't been people who have
Speaker 2: tried to get him to He obviously needs medication, yeah,
Speaker 2: like he needs to be probably institutional and not nitrous.
Speaker 9: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And you know, there's it's very it's a very it's
Speaker 2: a very difficult situation. But even in the throes of
Speaker 2: mental illness, there is still some level of agency. I mean,
Speaker 2: if you're able to pen a song that people would
Speaker 2: you know, part as some sort of cry for help,
Speaker 2: then there's obviously some level of agency there. So you know,
Speaker 2: get yourself on a trajectory where people who actually care
Speaker 2: about you, where you listen to them, where you stop
Speaker 2: damaging them, and that's where you know it's I saw
Speaker 2: I think it was Ken Klippenstein who said something to
Speaker 2: that is another really difficult aspect of this story, which
Speaker 2: is there are, understand for very good reasons, you know,
Speaker 2: a lot of a lot of guardrails in place against
Speaker 2: people being institutionalized against their will. Yeah, right, and I
Speaker 2: totally get that, right, and we understand where that comes from, and.
Speaker 3: We really respect it.
Speaker 2: But also you look at what he's doing to himself,
Speaker 2: let alone to his kids who now don't have the
Speaker 2: benefit of a relationship with their dad, who you know,
Speaker 2: I'm sure, I mean, obviously that's a really important thing
Speaker 2: for any kid in the estrangement from his family. And then,
Speaker 2: you know, even as you and others can can parse
Speaker 2: since how this is a cry for help or whatever,
Speaker 2: we also have to acknowledge that the way it's being
Speaker 2: landing in society is just as a celebration of Hitler totally,
Speaker 2: and because he has so much fame and power in
Speaker 2: Cachet and the torture Genius blah blah blah. That is
Speaker 2: that furtherre's a lot of extremely ugly, racist, horrific ideologies
Speaker 2: where you know, it's just like, oh, this is now,
Speaker 2: this is now on the table. I think it's also
Speaker 2: a demonstration of the of the doom loop spiral that
Speaker 2: society is in as well, where there's rewards just for
Speaker 2: saying the most provocative thing you possibly can. And I
Speaker 2: think that's part of what's going on here very intentionally
Speaker 2: with Kanye as well, is like this is the ultimate
Speaker 2: third rail. There is nothing more horrific that people can
Speaker 2: imagine than the intentional extermination of millions of people just
Speaker 2: for who they are, Jewish people, just for who they are.
Speaker 2: And so for you to overtly embrace that, then you're
Speaker 2: going to instantly win the race in terms of who
Speaker 2: can be the most outrageous and the most provocative. And
Speaker 2: I think he understands that too. So it is also
Speaker 2: a reflection not just of you know him in throes
Speaker 2: of mental illness, but is also a reflection of the
Speaker 2: things that are rewarded in our society.
Speaker 5: Right and increasingly, No, I think that's your I mean,
Speaker 5: he absolutely has agency on the point that you just
Speaker 5: made let's roll E three on the screen, because that's
Speaker 5: how this is what we have video basically of how
Speaker 5: this is landing with some people who I think you
Speaker 5: know there, Crystal. This is one of many examples of
Speaker 5: music that geez, people are doing like just full listening
Speaker 5: to the song, doing just full Nazi salutes. If you're
Speaker 5: if you're listening to this and not watching that was
Speaker 5: a video.
Speaker 3: Of there's a Roman salute. Simily they're throwing their heart
Speaker 3: out to Kanye West.
Speaker 5: You know, is this a throwback to another debate that
Speaker 5: we add But yeah, definitely not Roman salutes in this case,
Speaker 5: one hundred percent not Roman salutes in this case because.
Speaker 8: They are literally saying Hile Hitler, singing Hail Hitler. I
Speaker 8: imagine they're dropping the N word in there as well.
Speaker 2: And yeah, it's it's, which is also something that's being
Speaker 2: apparently celebrated on the right currently, at least as aimed
Speaker 2: at at five year old autistic children.
Speaker 5: Well, and this is to your point that, yes, Kanye
Speaker 5: West absolutely has agency, and the people around him who
Speaker 5: are indulging this have agency as well. And the reason
Speaker 5: that he is able to make these music videos and
Speaker 5: produce this music is because there are people around him
Speaker 5: who think that they can continue profiting off of this
Speaker 5: extremely sad situation, both monetarily and by you know, the
Speaker 5: actual like proximity to.
Speaker 8: Fame that they have with Kanye.
Speaker 3: Well, in his spell in a way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, who believe that he really is the
Speaker 2: victim of this elaborate conspiracy and he really is this
Speaker 2: you know, this world historic genius and it's eccentricity not
Speaker 2: mental illness. You know, I don't know anything about him person,
Speaker 2: I've never been around him or whatever, but you know,
Speaker 2: he may be one of these people who's able to
Speaker 2: create this sort of like reality distortion field around him,
Speaker 2: where you couple that the you know, those sort of
Speaker 2: like powers of persuasion into distort reality with the personal
Speaker 2: self interest of wanting to be close to someone who
Speaker 2: is rich and famous, and you end up with a
Speaker 2: crew of enablers who are you know, in it for
Speaker 2: what they can get out of effectively exploiting a person
Speaker 2: who is deeply mentally ill in a way that is
Speaker 2: very damaging to him himself, his family and the culture.
Speaker 8: Yeah, and the culture. Yeah, I think that's an important point.
Speaker 5: Though.
Speaker 8: The last time I'll say is I mean, the.
Speaker 5: Song is obviously awful, it's out there now, and I
Speaker 5: can't dismiss that it's also such a horrible insight into
Speaker 5: the mind of Kanye West, which is that in this
Speaker 5: sense in the song, there's this recognition and you mentioned this.
Speaker 5: This is this recognition that this is the ultimate taboo
Speaker 5: and that this is an awful or that this is
Speaker 5: an extreme place to find yourself. That's the like he's
Speaker 5: acknowledging that and clearly conscious of it in the song.
Speaker 5: And I mean, how sad is it that in some
Speaker 5: sense he recognizes other people want to hear this for
Speaker 5: reasons that are different from his own in the song,
Speaker 5: which is I can't get my kids, so now I'm
Speaker 5: going full Nazi. There are other people out there who
Speaker 5: are just like they just care about the full Nazi part. Yeah,
Speaker 5: And that's just like, I mean again, like he does
Speaker 5: have agency. I don't want to dismiss that at all,
Speaker 5: but it's just so sad that there's room right now
Speaker 5: for that to be powerful, for that to be something
Speaker 5: that gets a lot of attention views that people see
Speaker 5: something so cathartic in gravitating towards like overt racism and
Speaker 5: Holocaust denial and whatever else they're going towards. I mean,
Speaker 5: maybe not Holocaust denial, Holocaust celebration. And it depends on
Speaker 5: who you're talking to in those like fringe fringe awful circles,
Speaker 5: whether they're outright denihialists or celebrationists. But yeah, it's it's
Speaker 5: it's in the song. It's like baked into his sort
Speaker 5: of admission here that he's going full Nazi.
Speaker 8: Is this idea that other people are they want that
Speaker 8: and he can sort of get some type of attention
Speaker 8: for doing it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, that's true.
Speaker 2: But it's like, listen, if you want to see your kids,
Speaker 2: take your mads and get well, yeah, you're gonna have
Speaker 2: a much better chance at seeing your kids. And if
Speaker 2: they you know, if you have the chance to see them,
Speaker 2: about them having an actual.
Speaker 3: Like healthy relationship with you as well.
Speaker 8: Horrible.
Speaker 3: Yeah, all right, guys.
Speaker 2: I was able yesterday to speak with the mayor of Newark,
Speaker 2: who also, by the ways, running for governor of New Jersey.
Speaker 2: He's in a pretty packed Democratic primary against some leading
Speaker 2: lights of the Democratic Party like Josh Gottheimer.
Speaker 3: That's one example. In any case, I do get in
Speaker 3: a question to him.
Speaker 2: At the very end about that race for New Jersey
Speaker 2: governor governor. He was arrested on Friday. He and three
Speaker 2: Democratic members of Congress had gone to this ice facility.
Speaker 2: Apparently the Democratic members there arrived there first. There is
Speaker 2: a law in place that was passed during or after
Speaker 2: the first Trump administration to permit any member of Congress
Speaker 2: going to inspect a federal facility. So they were availing
Speaker 2: themselves over that opportunity in the law to conduct to
Speaker 2: this inspection and oversight. He joined them, he's told to leave,
Speaker 2: he does leave, and then he's arrested for alleged trespassing.
Speaker 2: He denies that he did anything wrong or broke the
Speaker 2: law in any way. In the context of him being arrested,
Speaker 2: I'll show some of the video in this segment. There
Speaker 2: was a we'll just call it a very chaotic scene
Speaker 2: that plays out.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 2: The Trump administration is threatening also those Democratic members of
Speaker 2: Congress with arrest as well. So in any case, I
Speaker 2: had a chance to record this interview. The mayor was
Speaker 2: on his way to I think a Mother's Day event
Speaker 2: or something of that nature, but got some good insights
Speaker 2: on his side of the story, at least of what unfolded.
Speaker 2: Let's go ahead and take a listen to that. Mayor
Speaker 2: Ross Baraka of Newark, New Jersey, was arrested by mass
Speaker 2: federal agents on Friday after attempting to accompany three members
Speaker 2: of Congress. Democratic members on an inspection of an ice
Speaker 2: facility that it opened over his objections and which he
Speaker 2: says is operating illegally in his city. I'm going to
Speaker 2: let the mayor lay out the timeline of exactly how
Speaker 2: these events unfolded, what his goals were for this action
Speaker 2: on this day, what occurred, what led to his arrest.
Speaker 2: But I can show you right now a quite chaotic
Speaker 2: scene that unfolded outside of this ice facility as they
Speaker 2: did attempt and eventually successfully did arrest mayor of Newark
Speaker 2: ross Baraka. He was released several hours early later, and
Speaker 2: he was charged with trespassing.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 2: The mayor says that these charges are false, that he
Speaker 2: did nothing wrong. Here take a look. So the mayor
Speaker 2: is there at the center in the red is representative
Speaker 2: of Lamonica mckiv. Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman is also there
Speaker 2: in the midst eighty eight year old woman in the
Speaker 2: center of this action. So the Trump administration claimed that
Speaker 2: these members attempted to storm the ice facility. This is
Speaker 2: not backed up by the video evidence and the eyewitness
Speaker 2: accounts on the scene. They have also now said that
Speaker 2: they are looking at potential charges against the members of
Speaker 2: Congress who were there to perform that oversight on that day,
Speaker 2: So in order to get a breakdown of everything that unfolded,
Speaker 2: the plans for the day, what the timeline was, the
Speaker 2: differences between what actually happened and what the administration is
Speaker 2: claiming unfolded. Is the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, and
Speaker 2: New Jersey golubminatorial candidate Ross Braka. I want to start
Speaker 2: off by getting your reaction to Trisia McLaughlin. She is
Speaker 2: the Trump Administration's Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at DHS
Speaker 2: and her characterization of the events that unfolded leading up
Speaker 2: to your arrest. Let's go ahead and take a listen
Speaker 2: to that.
Speaker 5: Thanks Victor for having me.
Speaker 10: I'm glad I can be here to actually give viewers
Speaker 10: the facts. What happened as that these members of Congress,
Speaker 10: including the mayor as well, and a mob of protesters
Speaker 10: as there was a bus full of detainees going through
Speaker 10: the gate, they stormed the gate and actually entered the
Speaker 10: first security checkpoint. This put law enforcement at risk, and
Speaker 10: this actually put the detainees as well at risk. If
Speaker 10: any official, including these members of Congress, want to enter
Speaker 10: the facility and take a tour DHS is more than accommodating.
Speaker 10: But just because you're a member of Congress does not
Speaker 10: mean you can break the law, trespass, put law enforcement
Speaker 10: at risk, and storm the detention facility. I haven't yet
Speaker 10: to hear anyone on this network actually talk about who
Speaker 10: is in this detention facility. There are members of MS thirteen,
Speaker 10: known terrorists, murderers, child rapists, there are some of the
Speaker 10: worst of the worst in.
Speaker 8: This detention facility.
Speaker 10: And I'm still very confused why these Democrats are so
Speaker 10: held then on getting these heinous actors out of this
Speaker 10: facility when we have the proper permitting. And actually in
Speaker 10: that press conference, those members of Congress actually noted the
Speaker 10: great conditions of this facility that are ice enforcement officers
Speaker 10: so bravely operate.
Speaker 2: So, Mayor what is your response to her allegation there
Speaker 2: that you and these members of Congress stormed the facility.
Speaker 11: Either she's misinformed because she wasn't there, or she just
Speaker 11: flat out lying. I mean, it's insane how these people
Speaker 11: behave like they lie over and over again, and they
Speaker 11: figured if they lie enough people to believe it, it's
Speaker 11: the truth. The reality is nobody stormed the gate when
Speaker 11: I got there. The members of Congress who are already inside,
Speaker 11: they were in a booth. They didn't go all the
Speaker 11: way in, but they were in a booth. Uh so
Speaker 11: they were They were there waiting over an hour for
Speaker 11: Homeland Security officials to come to give them a scheduled
Speaker 11: visit that they had through the building. So number people
Speaker 11: have to storm. They were invited there right, So that
Speaker 11: that right there is a flat out line. You know,
Speaker 11: all of this stuff about being assault a salting people,
Speaker 11: all of it is wrong. I mean, either she's misinformed
Speaker 11: or she's just lying.
Speaker 2: So you arrived, the members of Congress are already there
Speaker 2: inside the gates, and then what happens from.
Speaker 9: There, they're already in a booth.
Speaker 11: I don't even see them because they're in the building
Speaker 11: in a waiting area, waiting to get the tour.
Speaker 9: There are people outside who are there every day.
Speaker 11: You know, the protesters outside who are there every single day,
Speaker 11: by the way, they're there today as well. So I
Speaker 11: mean outside of the Congress, people, outside of media, protesters there,
Speaker 11: they're going to be there and they have a right
Speaker 11: to be there, right outside of the gate. I arrived
Speaker 11: there waiting for the press conference that are supposed to
Speaker 11: happen after that. She alluded to, there's a scheduled press
Speaker 11: conference they're supposed to happen at one point thirty outside
Speaker 11: of that gate. But obviously it didn't happen at that
Speaker 11: time because these people never arrived when they were supposed to.
Speaker 2: They charge you, obviously with trespassing, which I know you dispute.
Speaker 2: So can you lay out for us you know what
Speaker 2: happened in terms of your entry and you know an
Speaker 2: exit from the facility.
Speaker 9: I didn't break any law.
Speaker 11: I was first of all, if I'm on the property,
Speaker 11: somebody let me in the property or invited me in
Speaker 11: the property. That that's what happened. I walked in there.
Speaker 11: I didn't kick, push, shove, run. I stat in there
Speaker 11: with ICE agents for over an hour. ICE agents were
Speaker 11: in there with me for over an hour. They didn't
Speaker 11: do anything for me. They didn't say anything. Then asked
Speaker 11: me to go.
Speaker 9: I just sat there.
Speaker 11: It wasn't until the special agent in charge showed us
Speaker 11: we probably would give it. Was given orders to approach me,
Speaker 11: and that's what he did. He approached me. The congress
Speaker 11: people responded trying to stop him from harassing me. I
Speaker 11: left the gate. You know, told me to get out.
Speaker 11: I left, I left, it went out. They came outside
Speaker 11: of the gate and proceeded to try to arrest me
Speaker 11: outside of the gate after I already left the property.
Speaker 11: The Congress people and uh, you know people that were
Speaker 11: standing by got engaged in it because I mean they
Speaker 11: were being very very very aggressive, you know.
Speaker 9: So obviously if you come outside of the gate, that's
Speaker 9: what's going to happen. And that's what they did.
Speaker 11: They took me and these are the ones that dragged
Speaker 11: me back onto the property and cuffs.
Speaker 9: No, they cuffs me and dragged me back into the
Speaker 9: property and arrested me for a trespassing So.
Speaker 2: I'm sure you know, Mayor that the administration is now
Speaker 2: threatening those members of Congress who were there with you
Speaker 2: with arrest as well, and they are sharing some body
Speaker 2: camera footage that they claim shows some of these members
Speaker 2: of Congress in their view, assaulting.
Speaker 9: His offers.
Speaker 3: Masses were there. Let me just go ahead and show
Speaker 3: you a little bit of that.
Speaker 2: So it's clearly it's extremely chaotic that's represented of mackivor
Speaker 2: and the Red Relieve. Can you just tell us what
Speaker 2: we're looking at there and what from your perspective, was.
Speaker 11: Them assaulting me, grabbing me, trying to lock me up
Speaker 11: them they were holding on to me.
Speaker 9: Uh, so they were pushing them off of me. Uh
Speaker 9: if you see the whole video.
Speaker 11: There's several videos out there with all kinds of viewpoints.
Speaker 11: Several people were thrown to the ground, Several several bystanders
Speaker 11: were thrown to the ground by agents. They were pushed,
Speaker 11: they were shoved. If you see people being pushed, it
Speaker 11: is them pushing the Congress people. And you can hear
Speaker 11: people in the background saying, don't touch them, keep your
Speaker 11: hands off of them. You're not supposed to touch them.
Speaker 11: They're members of Congress, mayor.
Speaker 2: One thing that I think has disturbed a lot of
Speaker 2: people is the use of masks by these federal agents
Speaker 2: in this situation and many others that we've seen with
Speaker 2: ICE arresting immigrants across the country. What do you what
Speaker 2: do you make of the significance of this wide spread
Speaker 2: use of masking to obscure the face of these federal agents.
Speaker 11: That's pretty strange, and it makes it feels like they're
Speaker 11: on a like real military uh, you know, special obsmission.
Speaker 9: I don't know what's happening there.
Speaker 11: The excuse is that ICE agents are under attack, and uh,
Speaker 11: you know, they have to hide their identity because they're
Speaker 11: under attack. I mean, our police officers in Newark can't
Speaker 11: go to places like this, like they have to always
Speaker 11: be visible. The body camera footage has to always be on.
Speaker 11: They have to be visible, and they face harrowing and
Speaker 11: difficult and dangerous situations.
Speaker 9: All the time.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 11: You know, I don't understand why this is happening, but
Speaker 11: I mean the reality is their behavior and the things
Speaker 11: that they're doing to people, in my mind is extra
Speaker 11: legal and beyond the constitution.
Speaker 3: What is your objection to this ICE facility in Newark?
Speaker 11: Our issue was with GEO. It's not even with ICE.
Speaker 11: It's not an ICE facility. First of all, it's GEOS
Speaker 11: facility that they changed in the process of trying to
Speaker 11: change because a contract that just got from ICE to
Speaker 11: Howse some detainees, same kind of contract they gave to
Speaker 11: El Salvador.
Speaker 9: They've given to these people here locally sixty three.
Speaker 11: Million dollars over a billion dollars over a period of
Speaker 11: time to house detainees. Our contention is that they need
Speaker 11: a certificate of occupancy. They argue that they have one
Speaker 11: They have one from twenty years ago, which we think
Speaker 11: is outdated and it needs to be updated, updated to
Speaker 11: explain what the use of the property is. Now inspectors
Speaker 11: have to go in the building and inspect everything from
Speaker 11: fire code inspections to health inspections to electrical inspections.
Speaker 9: Now they're playing with that and not allowing people in.
Speaker 9: We went up there, We go there regularly.
Speaker 11: We're in court about this, and they have a right
Speaker 11: to dispute what we're saying if they don't think they
Speaker 11: need a stificant occupies if we think they do. In America,
Speaker 11: these things are settled in courts of law, and that's
Speaker 11: where we're at. We're in a dispute with the court.
Speaker 11: Ice doesn't settle that. The President doesn't settle that Homeland security,
Speaker 11: nor ICE settles that judges settle these things. These are
Speaker 11: disputes that are settled by judges, not by authoritarianism. And
Speaker 11: so while we're going through this, they make a decision
Speaker 11: to go forward anyway to do what they want to
Speaker 11: do despite our effort to get this redress in court,
Speaker 11: which we believe is beyond the scope of their capacity,
Speaker 11: and they don't have the right to do this. So
Speaker 11: we're pushing back against this, and it's that's a terrible precedent.
Speaker 11: We allow them to do this. Anybody could come in
Speaker 11: here and set up whatever the heck they want and
Speaker 11: say they don't need to listen to the city's laws.
Speaker 11: We allow these people to do it. So we're going
Speaker 11: back and forth with them about this. ICE has interceded
Speaker 11: and have decided to do what they're doing today.
Speaker 2: Mayor, I'm sure you know that for years, activists have
Speaker 2: contended that ICE is a lawless roguauate and sy that
Speaker 2: should be abolished.
Speaker 3: Do you agree with that?
Speaker 11: Well, I think that there is some use for homeland security. Obviously,
Speaker 11: there is use for us to have law enforcement. But
Speaker 11: at the end of the day, I think what they're
Speaker 11: being weaponized to do is wrong. I think what the
Speaker 11: President has weaponized these agencies to do, it is far
Speaker 11: beyond their scope.
Speaker 9: Right now.
Speaker 11: They weaponized to attack anybody that speaks out against the
Speaker 11: president of the United States, anybody that's against the policies
Speaker 11: of the United States, whether they're documented or not, whether
Speaker 11: they have a student VIZA, you know, whether they have
Speaker 11: a green card or whether they're undocumented. And frankly, they're
Speaker 11: not just this lie about the places everybody's every place
Speaker 11: is filled with like child rapists and murderers.
Speaker 9: And gang members. It's just a flat out lie.
Speaker 11: These people are attacking everybody, right, everybody in America that's
Speaker 11: going through the process to become documented is not documented.
Speaker 9: Yet and sometimes it takes seven, eight, nine years. So
Speaker 9: in that process, any of.
Speaker 11: These people are eligible to be deported, they will come
Speaker 11: and grab these people and deport them, which we think
Speaker 11: is unfair, unconstitutional, lacking of due process, you know, and.
Speaker 9: You know, should we pushed back against.
Speaker 11: And people all over the country are and so my
Speaker 11: position against Ice, my contention was ICE, and and really
Speaker 11: my contention with the you know, with the Trump immigration
Speaker 11: policy is different than my contention with GO. Those are
Speaker 11: two different issues, right, and we have the right to
Speaker 11: fight those issues on different fronts.
Speaker 2: Last question I have for you, Mayor, I know you're
Speaker 2: you're busy, and I appreciate you taking the time today,
Speaker 2: is you're running for governor and you have a pretty
Speaker 2: crowded Democratic primary field that you're up against. You know,
Speaker 2: do you think that you would interface with the Trump
Speaker 2: administration as governor of New Jersey in a different way
Speaker 2: than your primary opponents would do you think that that's
Speaker 2: an aspect that sets you apart.
Speaker 11: Clearly. You know, everybody is saying that they are gonna
Speaker 11: do are gonna fight Donald Trump. That's the buzzword of
Speaker 11: today because he's become so rogue. I mean, violating the Constitution,
Speaker 11: undermining people's democratic rights, taking away medicaid, you know, attacking
Speaker 11: social security, veterans benefits, attacking diversity, equity inclusion.
Speaker 9: I mean, it's just all out attack on working people.
Speaker 9: You know.
Speaker 11: Obviously, Uh, we're gonna have to defend ourselves in New Jersey,
Speaker 11: and I'm gonna do that. We're gonna have to unite
Speaker 11: with other states that are pushing back to do that, and.
Speaker 9: We're gonna do that, clearly.
Speaker 11: But we're also trying to build a democracy in New Jersey,
Speaker 11: one that you know, all Americans can be proud of
Speaker 11: and and and obviously, uh, we we think that if
Speaker 11: if the President of the United States supports that, then fine,
Speaker 11: If he doesn't, doesn't our ideas and a thing that
Speaker 11: we create will be opposed to that. I mean, we're
Speaker 11: not building a New Jersey that's centered around Donald Trump
Speaker 11: or what he's for and what he's against.
Speaker 9: Building a New Jersey.
Speaker 11: That's democratic, and that's a you know, supportive and available
Speaker 11: of what we believe in in this state and create
Speaker 11: a pathway for all New Jersey ins.
Speaker 2: All right, Maya ross Broka, thank you so much for
Speaker 2: taking the time.
Speaker 3: I appreciate it.
Speaker 2: All right, guys, that is the show, Emily Pleasure. Three
Speaker 2: lady shows in a row, discounting Friday. I mean Friday,
Speaker 2: we had Ryan in, but Friday's like a little bit different.
Speaker 3: So I'm talking about the main shows.
Speaker 5: Yeah, main shows, three in a row. So you guys
Speaker 5: will get your fix of the normal man woman dynamic.
Speaker 5: I guess tomorrow and Wednesday, because Ryan and I will
Speaker 5: be in on Wednesday, and Crystal, I'm really excited to
Speaker 5: watch you host with Tim Miller tomorrow.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm looking forward to It'll be interesting. I get
Speaker 2: some questions for him. I'm actually listening to his book
Speaker 2: to hear his explanation of his major ideological transition. And
Speaker 2: you know, he did a fair amount of self assessment
Speaker 2: about his sort of like culpability in the trends that
Speaker 2: led to where we are now.
Speaker 8: So SPI's a lot of tea in that book too.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's a lot of definitely.
Speaker 2: So I'm probably is a Republican reading like on the
Speaker 2: right reading it, you probably picked up on even more
Speaker 2: of the tea or some of the interpersonal dynamics.
Speaker 5: Well, yeah, I mean it's a really interesting book and
Speaker 5: I've actually recommended it to people before who want insight
Speaker 5: in how Washington operates. And people can dispute Tims and
Speaker 5: maybe I'll talk to the talk to him about this tomorrow,
Speaker 5: but they can dispute Tim's motivation for writing this, and
Speaker 5: he might actually even come out and say this. But
Speaker 5: you know, as soon as he was kind of i
Speaker 5: guess ostracized because of his views on Donald Trump and
Speaker 5: could no longer kind of operate in that space, he
Speaker 5: wrote the tell all about it, and you know, again
Speaker 5: question the motivations by all means. But I think for
Speaker 5: Tim he did have a pretty sincere conversion away from
Speaker 5: the GOP orthodoxy that he really was aggressively pushing and
Speaker 5: making money off.
Speaker 8: Of for a long time here in DC.
Speaker 5: So what you get in that book is a glimpse,
Speaker 5: a really really i think detailed and a granular glimpse
Speaker 5: of how the sausage is made here by consultants and oh, lobbyists,
Speaker 5: and all of that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, he talks about how the.
Speaker 2: Compartmentalization that he was able to deploy as a gay
Speaker 2: man who was working for politicians who were anti gay
Speaker 2: in the context of a party that was overall very
Speaker 2: anti gay. It still is that that compartmentalization is in
Speaker 2: some ways the very same skill that other operatives who
Speaker 2: previously may have been, you know, disgusted with Trump and
Speaker 2: opposed to what he stood for, et cetera, how they're
Speaker 2: able ultimately to just sort of cope with it and
Speaker 2: go along with it. So it's somewhat at least, you know,
Speaker 2: so far few chapters into the book, it's so much
Speaker 2: self deprecating about how he recognizes in the Trump justification
Speaker 2: the very same justifications that he was using in the
Speaker 2: context of working for John McCain or John Huntsman or
Speaker 2: other Republican politicians or for this group that basically would
Speaker 2: like fund AstroTurf, you know, organizations to bolster whatever conservative
Speaker 2: billionaires wanted them to do.
Speaker 5: No, and I knew t him back then, and you know,
Speaker 5: even just talking to him now, I'm really excited for
Speaker 5: this episode tomorrow because he's he's i think has a
Speaker 5: lot to say about it like he's willing to talk
Speaker 5: about it, and I think that's really helpful because it's
Speaker 5: very rare that you get someone who's fully willing to
Speaker 5: kind of uh divorce themselves from the previous, their previous
Speaker 5: life in Washington. And he's also like really funny, so
Speaker 5: it'll be it's it's a he's a good messenger for
Speaker 5: the past.
Speaker 3: Life, excellent explaining it all.
Speaker 2: I'm looking forward to Thank you guys so much for
Speaker 2: watching it. Thank you so much for sure supporting the show.
Speaker 2: If you are premium subscriber, we're going to switch over
Speaker 2: and do a premium a m A. If you want
Speaker 2: to be part of those in the future, make sure
Speaker 2: to subscribe at Breakingpoints dot com. I'll see you back
Speaker 2: here tomorrow