Speaker 1: Native Lampard is a production of iHeartRadio and partnership with
Speaker 1: Resent Choice Media.
Speaker 2: Welcome, Welcome, Welcome, Welcome, Welcome.
Speaker 1: Welcome, Welcome home. Y'all. This is episode eighty eight of
Speaker 1: Native Lampid, where we give you our breakdowns on all
Speaker 1: things politics and culture. Of course, we're your hosts Tiffany Cross,
Speaker 1: Angela Rye. There together, y'all, and this is me Andrew Gillim.
Speaker 1: What's up, Hi.
Speaker 3: I want to start out by addressing a vicious rumor,
Speaker 3: and that is Angela and I did not plan to
Speaker 3: dress to like today. So if you ever see us
Speaker 3: dressed alike, it just happens. It's just, that's all.
Speaker 4: What happened with Andrew, Andrew always doing the opposite, just
Speaker 4: like he does.
Speaker 5: Welcome.
Speaker 3: We could be a nineteen eighties album cover with Andrew
Speaker 3: in the middle, just butting a few more Bush.
Speaker 1: Thank you, thank you so much.
Speaker 6: Okay, Yes, what Tom?
Speaker 1: Move right on past that.
Speaker 6: It was given Uncle Luke.
Speaker 1: Are we talking about what we talk about?
Speaker 6: Speaking to Uncle Luke?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it sounds like and I'm not saying he's in
Speaker 4: the Epstein files at all, but I am saying that
Speaker 4: there is some treachery in those files and MAGA Republicans
Speaker 4: don't want to release them after the community is split
Speaker 4: on whether or not we should care that much, and
Speaker 4: so is MAGA apparently.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I definitely have a lot of thoughts on that.
Speaker 3: I as always enjoy hearing from our viewers, and thank
Speaker 3: you guys for always taking the time to record videos
Speaker 3: and respond even when you disagree. I just enjoy hearing
Speaker 3: from y'all, So I yield my time as I do
Speaker 3: most weeks, so we can have time to hear from
Speaker 3: our viewers.
Speaker 1: I love it. I love it. Well, I'm with you,
Speaker 1: but I'm with you too, Angela, and I'd love to
Speaker 1: pivot from that Epstein piece to see how are Democrats
Speaker 1: as a party as an organization who we're trying to
Speaker 1: win back power. It's gonna take advantage of this moment
Speaker 1: or create their own moment to try to win the
Speaker 1: hearts and minds of an American voters. So we'll get
Speaker 1: to that on the other side, y'all, let's get at it.
Speaker 7: What's up Native lampod My name is Atalanta and I'm
Speaker 7: a huge fan of the show. You guys actually inspired
Speaker 7: me to start my own podcast called Solar Punking. Where
Speaker 7: every Sunday we talk about solar punk ideology, things we
Speaker 7: can do in our community to make them better, and
Speaker 7: ways to build the world that we want to live in. Anyway,
Speaker 7: the reason for my videos that Tiffany mentioned last week
Speaker 7: come hard. It must be for law students right now,
Speaker 7: and I can tell you as a current too, well,
Speaker 7: it's been a struggle. I'm a second year law student,
Speaker 7: and you know we're meant to read the material, absorb
Speaker 7: the material, analyze the material, and apply the material and
Speaker 7: sort of gaslad ourselves into believing it along the way.
Speaker 7: Chevron difference was a really big one that changed for
Speaker 7: us over my academic year. Birthright citizenship is a really
Speaker 7: big one right now. Do process is a really big one,
Speaker 7: and things are just changing so rapidly it's hard to
Speaker 7: kind of keep up sometimes. But I got into this
Speaker 7: because they wanted to be an advocate for my community.
Speaker 7: So I'm going to stick it out today.
Speaker 6: End either way.
Speaker 7: Anyway.
Speaker 6: I love you, guys, motivated peace.
Speaker 1: I love that.
Speaker 3: Thank you at Alanda, we appreciate that.
Speaker 8: I know that is for real.
Speaker 3: The stay hydrated piece, well, we're popping bottles over here,
Speaker 3: so hereous guys.
Speaker 6: I like sparkling water. I don't know what you like it.
Speaker 3: And you put me on water, but they ain't paying
Speaker 3: for no branding on this show, so I'm putting it
Speaker 3: on the floor. Yeah I like that brand too, But
Speaker 3: the other brand you put me onto I really.
Speaker 1: Liked yea Georgia. That's good.
Speaker 3: They hydrated. And I have a motivational water bottle that
Speaker 3: tells you hour by hour, like I'll look at it
Speaker 3: and it's like, by nine am, I should have consumed
Speaker 3: this much. By ten am, this much, and so it
Speaker 3: keeps me honest on drinking water. So anyway, thanks to
Speaker 3: Adlanda for listening and taking the time to send in
Speaker 3: that video.
Speaker 8: What else we got?
Speaker 6: Well do we not talking about with her video?
Speaker 8: Oh well, I didn't think she had a question. I
Speaker 8: thought she was but we could talk.
Speaker 6: I just want to.
Speaker 4: Say I feel so bad for these law students because
Speaker 4: I mean, I really agree with this point, because you
Speaker 4: are trying to hang your hat, so to speak, on
Speaker 4: the law, on something that you can lean up against,
Speaker 4: and there are moments where you lean up against and
Speaker 4: it it shifts a little bit.
Speaker 6: It feels like you lean up against this.
Speaker 4: Right now and you fall back into a black hole,
Speaker 4: And so I do feel really bad for them because
Speaker 4: what they have to navigate is not what is the
Speaker 4: truth about humanity and what should be the law, but
Speaker 4: also like the fact that people in twenty twenty five
Speaker 4: don't know that that should be the case. That's a
Speaker 4: different type of negotiating with truth. That is that's that's
Speaker 4: really difficult. It's just I do not envy them. I
Speaker 4: also feel bad for the law professors.
Speaker 6: Mm hmm.
Speaker 4: That's what you're telling them, like, I'm about to teach
Speaker 4: you some stuff in this case, and they wrong, they
Speaker 4: all got it wrong.
Speaker 8: Well, can I make a quick point on that.
Speaker 6: CHERYLN.
Speaker 8: Eifel joined Howard Law.
Speaker 3: And I went to her reception and she was talking
Speaker 3: about something that probably would have made a lot more
Speaker 3: sense to you, but some legal precedent. And she was
Speaker 3: talking about it, and there were people in the audience who,
Speaker 3: you know, you heard the murmurs like what, I didn't
Speaker 3: even know about that, And she said, yeah, exactly. When
Speaker 3: I was in law school, I never knew anything about this.
Speaker 3: And so she's like, raise your hand, acknowledge, make a
Speaker 3: noise if you've heard about this, and this huge like
Speaker 3: half the audience started clapping, and they stood up and
Speaker 3: started clapping, and she looked over and composed herself and said,
Speaker 3: those are.
Speaker 8: All my former law students.
Speaker 3: So whatever the piece was that she was talking about,
Speaker 3: they knew about it because she told them about it. Yeah,
Speaker 3: because she taught them. So shout out to CHERYLN. Eiffel,
Speaker 3: you know how much we love you on this podcast.
Speaker 3: And actually, let me just make this in the official
Speaker 3: invite to her to join us on Native Land whenever
Speaker 3: your time permits, madam next week.
Speaker 6: We hope, we hope that's the missus Eiffles court.
Speaker 3: But yeah, I think that's a good point on what
Speaker 3: law professors are going through. And I said last week,
Speaker 3: I think people who go to law school are trained
Speaker 3: to think differently. So I'm just curious how people are
Speaker 3: managing that. So thank you for playing in anything.
Speaker 6: Yeah, that's yes. If you if you have.
Speaker 4: To read through a textbook that may not hold true tomorrow,
Speaker 4: what are you banking on.
Speaker 6: We hold these truths to be.
Speaker 3: What self evidence changing.
Speaker 8: We hold these truths to be changing.
Speaker 3: You know, you know, I don't know if you guys
Speaker 3: have been following the biggest beef going on better than
Speaker 3: any rap beef and that is what's happening in Scotus
Speaker 3: with ACB and K with Amy Coney Barrett and Kintanji
Speaker 3: Brown Jackson. This is the first time that our friend
Speaker 3: Albert is always saying, read the opinions because they're written
Speaker 3: for you know people, and I always get intimidated, like,
Speaker 3: just explain it, tell me what happened. I have been
Speaker 3: reading these opinions. And when I tell you, Justice Kintanji
Speaker 3: Brown Jackson is here for it, and she comes in.
Speaker 3: So what happens is the Descent will issue and correct
Speaker 3: me if I'm wrong, The Descent will issue their opinion,
Speaker 3: and Justice Jackson will issue her own. She issued her
Speaker 3: own like they can say what they want to say,
Speaker 3: but this is what I want to say, and had
Speaker 3: her own statement where she was so clear and precise.
Speaker 3: And then when ain't nobody call for her, Amy Coney
Speaker 3: Barrett came out and responded to Kintanji Brown Jackson, I'll
Speaker 3: do a horrible job and have to correct myself explaining it. No,
Speaker 3: I think hers was written.
Speaker 6: She had.
Speaker 3: It wasn't verbal, like she issued a written opinion in
Speaker 3: response to Justice Jackson, and it was clearly like so
Speaker 3: petty she's clearly so intimidated by by Justice Jackson. Is
Speaker 3: so ridiculous.
Speaker 1: You know, one of the things that in addition to
Speaker 1: feeling for law students, I'm feeling for criminally charged defendants
Speaker 1: right now. And this alligator Alcatraz, that Rohn Deasantiss is
Speaker 1: created here in Florida where they're supposedly detaining the worst
Speaker 1: of the worst. And legislators went in there and found
Speaker 1: out these folks, and most of which don't have infractions,
Speaker 1: and in some cases should they have infractions, they're traffic
Speaker 1: These folks aren't out here creating crimes and so on,
Speaker 1: but they're more importantly, the sixth Amendment to the Constitution
Speaker 1: allows for all of us to have rights to an
Speaker 1: attorney should we be arrested, apprehended, or accused of some crime.
Speaker 1: And right now lawyers cannot get in to see their clients.
Speaker 1: They're being told when they show up to see their
Speaker 1: clients that right now there isn't a system that can
Speaker 1: facilitate them seeing their client. Well, we'll take your concern
Speaker 1: and relay it. No, no, no, no, no. These are constitutional rights.
Speaker 1: And guess what about the US Constitution. Its limits are
Speaker 1: within the jurisdiction of the United States. And so whether
Speaker 1: you are a citizen of the US, you're a visitor,
Speaker 1: you are undocumented, you still have access to the rights
Speaker 1: that are guaranteed there, and right now they're trifling over them.
Speaker 1: And so I fear for law students in the world
Speaker 1: they're being introduced to because what's up and what's down.
Speaker 1: But I also fear for people right now who are
Speaker 1: being detained American citizens included being detained without any access
Speaker 1: to a lawyer, no access to their family, basically being
Speaker 1: absented by the government who are wearing disguises when they
Speaker 1: take them and put anywhere, including outside of the boundaries
Speaker 1: of the geographical boundaries, in reach of the US government
Speaker 1: or any of its courts by sending them to foreign
Speaker 1: foreign countries. So the whole thing sucks. But we appreciate
Speaker 1: the comment the comments as they as they continue to
Speaker 1: come in. Let's take another one.
Speaker 9: Hey, Native Land Podcasts. This is changed from the New
Speaker 9: York City and Andrew, I feel so see when you
Speaker 9: scoop Tiffity Cross. I need that new season of Acrush Generations.
Speaker 9: Angela Rye, I need on one back. I wanted to
Speaker 9: contribute to the housing crisis conversation One example of why
Speaker 9: the housing crisis exists in New York City is because
Speaker 9: government salaries, specifically for city and state employees, do not
Speaker 9: keep up with private industries, specifically with real estate rental.
Speaker 9: On average, city employees make around forty thousand to sixty
Speaker 9: thousand dollars with a forty five thousand to fifty thousand
Speaker 9: dollars range. Really, and majority of those people are Blacks
Speaker 9: and Latinos. A ruler thumb across mental real estate is
Speaker 9: they want forty times to rent. So a lot of
Speaker 9: times our average rant can be around three thousand dollars
Speaker 9: for these new buildings being built, and so you have
Speaker 9: to make around one hundred and twenty thousand dollars to
Speaker 9: get into these buildings. And these people.
Speaker 3: Don't sis Agela and a lot of people they to
Speaker 3: rent to damn High But Andrew, this was a topic
Speaker 3: that you introduced, the wanted to talk about, very passionate about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I want to continue to invite people.
Speaker 6: Do you remember the man to rent to damn High Man.
Speaker 6: He probably would win the mayor all election right now.
Speaker 1: He sure would. I mean, and by the way, that's
Speaker 1: a message that folks across the country can run with.
Speaker 1: That's the problem with this crisis is that it isn't
Speaker 1: just the New York cities of the world that are
Speaker 1: experiencing it. All over working people, two income households struggling
Speaker 1: to make ends meet, largely because the rents and the
Speaker 1: mortgages and and and accessibility to affordable housing. And again,
Speaker 1: affordable is whatever you can afford on your salary. So
Speaker 1: don't think we're talking about Section eight or we're all
Speaker 1: talking about Section eight, but we're talking about all housing.
Speaker 1: And y'all, I'm not in my drink.
Speaker 8: Wondering what happened.
Speaker 1: I'm continuing to hydrate. But but importantly, this is a
Speaker 1: crisis that is being experienced all across the country. And
Speaker 1: I got to tell you, if politicians can office around
Speaker 1: the country, I don't care what level of government you're
Speaker 1: running for if they don't wake up and start talking
Speaker 1: about this extreme wealth divide that folks are experiencing. The
Speaker 1: income what's real, what you can afford. I go to
Speaker 1: the grocery store, y'all. I don't know what y'all's experiences are,
Speaker 1: but people literally have their phones out and they're googling
Speaker 1: other stores to price compare. I had not seen this
Speaker 1: in a very long time. People are real time price
Speaker 1: comparing the price of toilet tissue here and if I
Speaker 1: went't here what it would cost, And if I ordered
Speaker 1: an Amazon, this is what it would cost. And I
Speaker 1: don't think this experience that people are having right now
Speaker 1: in real time has been yet reflected in our politics yet.
Speaker 1: I don't think we've had an election to reflect what's
Speaker 1: really going on yet, And I think we ought to
Speaker 1: hold on to our seats when that happens, because anything
Speaker 1: is possible when the bottom ninety percent of us get
Speaker 1: frustrated with the circumstances as they are, especially when it
Speaker 1: comes to our wallet.
Speaker 10: Thank you both entertaining my question on your last when
Speaker 10: your previous podcast, my concern of talking to some of
Speaker 10: us sometimes as if we are political mild contents was
Speaker 10: responded to by Angela by challenging me to stop it
Speaker 10: being mild content. I'm familiar with some of the work,
Speaker 10: and I am critical, friend, but you are what every
Speaker 10: black girl in America's descrived to be. And I feel
Speaker 10: the same way about Miss Cross as well. But can
Speaker 10: angel a pretentious response to me? Can that really show
Speaker 10: the truth issue? And it also shows how deep the
Speaker 10: equal chamber runs My side views some of you as
Speaker 10: being politically compromised, and pushes a white supremacy wrapped up
Speaker 10: in black activism for a party that don't care about us.
Speaker 10: Your side treat my side similar to how Angela treated me.
Speaker 10: There's nobody's listening, but it's just emotional and petty attacks
Speaker 10: on pedagogical intelligence. Isn't that the issue?
Speaker 6: Okay?
Speaker 4: Well, thanks our dear friend for sending in yet another video.
Speaker 4: I think what I would say to this is, you know,
Speaker 4: we make assumptions in this life about people, about their
Speaker 4: allegiances to things. And I just spent the last several
Speaker 4: weeks connecting black people who are like minded and not
Speaker 4: like not like minded at all, people who come from
Speaker 4: different economic backgrounds, people who come from different zip codes
Speaker 4: and states, and so I think the least of my
Speaker 4: concerns right now is being somehow compromised to a party
Speaker 4: that I ain't never paid my bills, and I just
Speaker 4: wish I would. So, I mean, I don't have anything
Speaker 4: other than I am for black folks uniting and figuring
Speaker 4: out what our common ground is, what are common causes
Speaker 4: and how we move forward and like minded fashion to
Speaker 4: hopefully accomplish the same mission, which is our ultimate freedom
Speaker 4: and liberation.
Speaker 6: The rest of that I'm not gonna respond to because
Speaker 6: he ain't talking to me.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I just want to say thank you friend for
Speaker 3: sending in the video, and just to reiterate the point
Speaker 3: that even in disagreement, we're all family and in conversation
Speaker 3: with you. So I appreciate you listening to the next
Speaker 3: episode where we did talk about your question and taking
Speaker 3: the time to send in another video. I do take
Speaker 3: your point about, you know, certain people looking at other
Speaker 3: groups as being politically compromised for a party, and I
Speaker 3: think that some of the I hope anyway, some of
Speaker 3: the nuance that you get in this conversation. The three
Speaker 3: of us don't agree on a lot of things. I'm
Speaker 3: certainly not a party person. I'm never here promoting democratic
Speaker 3: talking points at all. My interest is always in us
Speaker 3: as a community, and I feel like I can say
Speaker 3: that for my co host that that's always our first interest.
Speaker 8: So I would just ask you to keep.
Speaker 3: Tuning in, keep weighing in, and we certainly are not
Speaker 3: above reproach and depend on our audience to hold us
Speaker 3: accountable if you feel like something we're saying you disagree
Speaker 3: with will always be open and receptive. I'm accountable to effects, yeah,
Speaker 3: I am, But I'm saying if they are rooted in facts,
Speaker 3: then we will engage. If it's not your experience or
Speaker 3: or experience exactly their personal experience, I think it depends
Speaker 3: I might not be accountable to your experience.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't know that we're I don't know that
Speaker 1: we're accountable accountable to someone's experience. Accountability requires that we
Speaker 1: take some ownership, so on and so forth. But I
Speaker 1: do think that people's experiences, and we often say this
Speaker 1: when we're all talking about registering people to vote, If
Speaker 1: your experiences is when you vote, nothing changes, And that's
Speaker 1: been your experience every time you've done it, as people
Speaker 1: have asked you to and admonished you to, and that
Speaker 1: you felt compelled to. But yet nothing changes. Again, definitional insanity,
Speaker 1: people's lived experience guides that practice. In fact, I lived
Speaker 1: experience guys most of our practices. What we're experiencing during
Speaker 1: the day very much so dictates what we end up doing.
Speaker 1: And so I think people's experiences matter, and we're not
Speaker 1: the arbiters of that truth, right they are.
Speaker 3: Yes, But I also think that would be a good
Speaker 3: deeper philosophical mini pod.
Speaker 1: Okay about not.
Speaker 4: To be accountable for your experiences or just accountable for facts?
Speaker 3: What are other people accountable for our experiences too?
Speaker 1: We would let a lot of people off the hook
Speaker 1: if that became the new standard, if that people didn't
Speaker 1: have to be responsible for our experiences in the world.
Speaker 1: White folks right now largely have already wholesale taken themselves
Speaker 1: off the hook for the legacy of slavery and segregation.
Speaker 8: And do we not try to hold them accountable for
Speaker 8: our experience?
Speaker 1: I do believe.
Speaker 6: I do believe that experience I'm responsible for.
Speaker 4: Like your misunderstanding of me, I think that if I,
Speaker 4: if I hurt your feelings, I can apologize to you
Speaker 4: for hurting your feelings.
Speaker 6: That's subjective, but I also.
Speaker 4: Can say that is not what I was factually, that
Speaker 4: was the intention. But let me let me acknowledge that
Speaker 4: you were hurt in some way. What I'm not accountable for, though,
Speaker 4: is like you painting me with a broad brush because
Speaker 4: you using some talking points you learned about on the
Speaker 4: Instagram comment I'm not gonna be responsible?
Speaker 1: Well, no, I don't. Well do we do?
Speaker 3: We want to have this as a mini want to
Speaker 3: get it was even you saying it. I'm like that
Speaker 3: we can take this politically, personally, professionally. I think there's
Speaker 3: a lot of tentacles, So we can talk about it now.
Speaker 3: We can have it as a mini pod.
Speaker 6: Who's going to remember that? We want it as me? Okay, okay,
Speaker 6: all right, all right.
Speaker 1: But but I do think there was something said here
Speaker 1: that Angela you may be able to lift off of,
Speaker 1: which is this, what is the what is each side
Speaker 1: saying to voters? What are they communicating right now? If
Speaker 1: you would pick up the headlines, what's what's out there
Speaker 1: right now? What does the voter get to consume? That's
Speaker 1: a meaning.
Speaker 6: Well, we can talk about this.
Speaker 4: We were supposed to talk about this big, badass bill
Speaker 4: and what people how it is being reported on right now.
Speaker 6: Of course, there's this case with.
Speaker 4: The Epstein files and how people are experiencing that failed promises,
Speaker 4: which is not going to be a unique experience with
Speaker 4: anyone who voted for Donald Trump based on some promises he.
Speaker 6: Made a lie gonna lie every day of a week.
Speaker 4: So I think that one of the things that we
Speaker 4: have to be and one of the things that I'm
Speaker 4: actually proud that we do on this podcast is we
Speaker 4: don't let headlines and whatever's been like on the breaking
Speaker 4: news ticker tape all day on a broadcast.
Speaker 6: We don't let that dictate what we share with our audience.
Speaker 4: So I think here, hopefully you are clear about what
Speaker 4: the big badass Bill does. Here, hopefully you are clear
Speaker 4: about why. Well maybe today you will be clear about
Speaker 4: why this Epstein thing is in the news and why
Speaker 4: his supporters fill away. But yeah, I think that we
Speaker 4: have an obligation to tell people the truth, even if
Speaker 4: it is in the bottom on the bottom fold, on
Speaker 4: the other side of the headline. It's not something that
Speaker 4: you're looking for, but it's something that.
Speaker 6: We think you need to know.
Speaker 1: I just want to remind all of our listeners, those
Speaker 1: of you who may disagree with us vociferously, but you
Speaker 1: still enjoy this opportunity to listen and share what we
Speaker 1: do here at Native Lampid. The best way you can
Speaker 1: support us at this point is to hey, rate, review, subscribe,
Speaker 1: and continue to listen to anybody others to listen. We
Speaker 1: need to support because we want to be around for
Speaker 1: a good little while sharing this community with you. Angela,
Speaker 1: go ahead and take us into what's at the top
Speaker 1: of the fold that we may or may not believe
Speaker 1: should be.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 4: So right now there is a maga war going on,
Speaker 4: folks on actually both sides of the aisle are conflicted
Speaker 4: about whether or not Jeffrey Epstein file should be released.
Speaker 4: And Donald Trump is also speaking pretty ambiguously about this.
Speaker 6: So let's play what Donald Trump is saying right now.
Speaker 1: Your daughter in law said that there should be transparency
Speaker 1: in the Epstein case.
Speaker 7: You agree with her, sir.
Speaker 5: The Attorney General's handled that very well. She's really done
Speaker 5: a very good job, and I think that when you
Speaker 5: look at it, you'll understand that I would like to
Speaker 5: see that also, But I think the attorney general the
Speaker 5: credibility is very important, and you want credible evidence.
Speaker 10: Or something like that.
Speaker 1: But she's handled it very well, and it's going to
Speaker 1: be up to her.
Speaker 5: Whatever she thinks it's credible, she should release.
Speaker 11: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Okay, so he's see would.
Speaker 1: Used to say he would direct he was the chief
Speaker 1: law enforcement. He directs.
Speaker 10: Well.
Speaker 4: And now you're asking Donald Trump to keep the truth going.
Speaker 4: So let's go back to what Pam Bondi said earlier
Speaker 4: this year about the Epstein files.
Speaker 12: The DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Speaker 1: Well, that really happen.
Speaker 12: It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's
Speaker 12: been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 6: I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 12: I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
Speaker 12: process of being reviewed because that was done at the
Speaker 12: directive of the President from all of these agencies.
Speaker 4: Okay, so he directed her, but now it's completely up
Speaker 4: to her. And now it sounds like Attorney General Pam
Speaker 4: Bondi has changed her tune a little bit about what
Speaker 4: is going to be released.
Speaker 6: Let's roll that President said today.
Speaker 11: You would release credible files related to mis reps.
Speaker 10: Are you prepared to do that?
Speaker 6: And when would you do?
Speaker 12: Our memo today our memo speaks for its off and
Speaker 12: we'll get batch you on anything else.
Speaker 11: The DOJ memo said that it found no incriminating client
Speaker 11: list and no credible evidence of blackmail, and therefore no
Speaker 11: further disclosure.
Speaker 4: I think what is interesting and important here is that
Speaker 4: there is this growing groundswell of folks who supported the president,
Speaker 4: including the FBI director Cash Betel, his deputy Dan Bongino.
Speaker 4: They think that these files should be released. Of course,
Speaker 4: the FBI reports to the AGE at the Department of Justice,
Speaker 4: and they are very divided and what they think should happen.
Speaker 4: I think that this is a massive distraction from what
Speaker 4: really matters, which is ensuring that our folks social Security, medicare, Medicaid, snap,
Speaker 4: all of those things are still covered. Julian Epstein, Sorry,
Speaker 4: Jeffrey Epstein, Lord have mercy on a college man. I'm sorry, Julian,
Speaker 4: you did good people.
Speaker 6: Jeffrey Epstein is He's just not right.
Speaker 4: And I think that this is one of those things
Speaker 4: where you know, there's nothing that we can do now
Speaker 4: this man isn't here. There are a lot of people
Speaker 4: who are victims, alleged victims, et cetera.
Speaker 6: I don't know how this is going to pay and.
Speaker 4: Cover people's most basic needs, but they are divided, and
Speaker 4: people have suggested that this is a good place for
Speaker 4: us to show that he's the liar that he is.
Speaker 6: But I feel like we've.
Speaker 4: Been saying this since twenty sixteen, Since twenty fifteen, I
Speaker 4: think that's the key, Like this is the thing that
Speaker 4: y'all want to be mad at Donald Trump over.
Speaker 3: It's such horseshit. I mean, we should just be honest.
Speaker 3: The only reason the quote unquote Epstein Files ever became
Speaker 3: a thing is because they dangled it as red meat
Speaker 3: before their unintellectual base, because the subtext of was the
Speaker 3: Clintons were attached to it, the Clintons were involved. So
Speaker 3: the same half witted conspiracy theorists, believing idiots who supported
Speaker 3: Pizzagate are now not only driving what our government focuses on,
Speaker 3: but they're also driving the narrative in the media. I
Speaker 3: looked at all this week. There's been breaking news, a
Speaker 3: breaking news banner all week, all last week, will likely
Speaker 3: be all next week because this tiny, niche group of
Speaker 3: people is so focused on the Epstein Files. Dan Brigino
Speaker 3: throwing a whole ass temper tantrum, not wanting to show
Speaker 3: up to his job at the FBI because he is
Speaker 3: mad about the Epstein Files, and we're talking about this
Speaker 3: like it's normal. Not the fact that Dan Mangino or Bergino,
Speaker 3: how real say his name Bongino, Not the fact that
Speaker 3: he is a conspiracy theorist himself and he's the deputy
Speaker 3: director of the FBI. Not the fact that he's an
Speaker 3: election denier and he's the deputy director of the FBI,
Speaker 3: not the fact that he has talked religiously saying that
Speaker 3: there is no systemic racism in policing and police departments.
Speaker 3: But this niche group of people get to focus on. Oh,
Speaker 3: but Dan Mondino doesn't want to go to work anymore
Speaker 3: because he's mad, Like, who.
Speaker 6: Gives a shit?
Speaker 3: I don't understand why this is even a subject. Second,
Speaker 3: here's the hypocrisy. If we're so concerned about sexual abuse,
Speaker 3: let me just tell you guys about Southwest Key Programs.
Speaker 3: They were the largest shelter of migrants across this country.
Speaker 3: They had multiple shelters throughout the country. There were multiple
Speaker 3: accusations of sexual abuse of minors that took place at
Speaker 3: this quote unquote nonprofit which was not really a nonprofit.
Speaker 3: In March, the Trump administration completely shut down a Biden
Speaker 3: era lawsuit that would have sought to hold this conglomerate
Speaker 3: of shelters responsible for what they did. If we're so
Speaker 3: concerned about sexual abuse, where the entire is the breaking
Speaker 3: news banner for that? There is none, Because who cares
Speaker 3: about migrant children. That's not the issue. That's not the
Speaker 3: sexy thing. This shelter they got billions in federal contracts
Speaker 3: for this abuse that allegedly took place during Trump's family
Speaker 3: separation policies in twenty seventeen to twenty eighteen. They capitalized
Speaker 3: off migrant children. So this country allowed migrant children to
Speaker 3: become a billion dollar industry. They allowed children to become
Speaker 3: a part of a business. So miss me with the
Speaker 3: idea that these people care about the well being of children. Furthermore,
Speaker 3: if we're so concerned about sexual abuse, there were multiple
Speaker 3: reports in twenty sixteen of Donald Trump going into beauty
Speaker 3: pageants where girls as young as fifteen years old were
Speaker 3: getting dressed and they were obligated to greet him and
Speaker 3: meet him, and him making completely inappropriate marks and remarks
Speaker 3: and inappropriate gestures talking about these girls. If we're so
Speaker 3: concerned about sexual abuse, then let's focus on that. But
Speaker 3: that is not the real concern. Their concern, as Dan
Speaker 3: Manzino has said, is to own the Libs. I don't
Speaker 3: even know what that means, but it's some stupid, asinine
Speaker 3: bullshit that these right wing extremists say. I don't even
Speaker 3: get the point of it. So I'm frustrated. I don't
Speaker 3: even care about his base. They don't frustrate me anymore.
Speaker 3: What I'm frustrated with is the way the media is
Speaker 3: being led by the nose, by this tiny group of people,
Speaker 3: and they talk about it as though it is normal.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that Epstein case is not important. Let
Speaker 3: the DJ pursue it. I'm saying, there is no way,
Speaker 3: given what's happening in Gaza right now, speaking if we're
Speaker 3: so concerned about children, the well being of children, the
Speaker 3: tens of thousands of kids who are dying there, considering
Speaker 3: what's happening in Sudan right now, and the children who
Speaker 3: are dying there, considering what's happening in Kenya right now.
Speaker 3: There are a lot of stories that we should be
Speaker 3: focused on. This is not one of them. And quite frankly,
Speaker 3: Congressman Hank Johnson, you know, did this whole video of
Speaker 3: him playing the guitar and I'm thinking talking about the
Speaker 3: Epstein case, and I just thought how insulting that has
Speaker 3: to feel to constituents who are not focused on Epstein.
Speaker 3: And it just feels like a moment that we are missing,
Speaker 3: the moment. You're even on the democratic side, you're letting
Speaker 3: them lead you around the nose for these social media
Speaker 3: stunts and that, ain't it. That is not the thing
Speaker 3: that's going to help people out. To Angela's point about
Speaker 3: the big badass bill, is that what you call it,
Speaker 3: The big badass bill like that deserve more attention. If
Speaker 3: we're so concerned about kids, let's talk about the children
Speaker 3: who will literally die because of this bill, the children
Speaker 3: who will be kicked off, who won't have caregivers, who
Speaker 3: won't have health insurance.
Speaker 8: So it's bullshit to me. Andrew, Sorry, I went on.
Speaker 1: Tell us how you really feel. I mean, I felt
Speaker 1: you You and Angela both there and I don't disagree.
Speaker 1: But I will say, as it relates to the political moment,
Speaker 1: is what is making this really outsized? Obviously over the coverage,
Speaker 1: which I think is overblown, but I think one of
Speaker 1: the things that's driving its nature is that there have
Speaker 1: been very few things, In fact, I can't think of
Speaker 1: one where Donald Trump's base has openly criticized, parted with him,
Speaker 1: and are even damned trying to hold the Attorney General
Speaker 1: accountable by saying she ought to be removed from office
Speaker 1: or resign over this Epstein thing. And so the question
Speaker 1: I think is becoming does this create a wedge issue
Speaker 1: between Donald Trump and his really critical base, important for
Speaker 1: not just his election but probably going to be critical
Speaker 1: to the mitchruns as well. Does it create an opening
Speaker 1: And I'm of two minds. One, I don't think that
Speaker 1: there is a single one of these conspiracy theorists who
Speaker 1: is an available voter for Democrats. I don't think that
Speaker 1: is necessarily always what it would have been. But the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party that today is the standard bearer for the
Speaker 1: status quo and the defender of all institutions versus the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party, at least sections of it, who used to
Speaker 1: openly question conspiracies that were going on within the government,
Speaker 1: cover ups that were taking place, the misuse of power,
Speaker 1: going after black civil rights leaders, social justice leaders, and
Speaker 1: using the government's instruments as cudgels to whip those people
Speaker 1: into submission. There was once a Democratic Party that raised
Speaker 1: those issues loud, repeated. You couldn't you couldn't refocus members
Speaker 1: of the CBC twenty years ago, thirty years ago going
Speaker 1: ham over the CIA and their involvement and the introduction
Speaker 1: of narcotics into the black community.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 1: You could ask them anything and they would have drove
Speaker 1: it right back to that issue. But today's Democratic Party
Speaker 1: appears to have adopted as its platform the defender of
Speaker 1: all existing institutions, regardless of how corrupt they may have
Speaker 1: been and what damage they may have done to our community.
Speaker 1: So I don't think that conspiracy theories right now are
Speaker 1: part of the Democratic coalition, and I don't believe that
Speaker 1: they are available voters. But I do think that what
Speaker 1: this moment might create, should these people's animosities be real,
Speaker 1: is that it could have the effect of suppressing some
Speaker 1: of these white male voters and others who turned out
Speaker 1: for Donald Trump, who traditionally don't turn out to vote
Speaker 1: at all. If that has the effect of keeping some
Speaker 1: of them home, then I think fine, drive a niche
Speaker 1: market a campaign to keep them out of the process,
Speaker 1: so long as they're willing to opt themselves out of
Speaker 1: the process because their conspiracy theories didn't pan out. But
Speaker 1: if any Democrat running for office decides to wholesale redirect
Speaker 1: their effort toward in Epstein and release the documents, you
Speaker 1: are on your way to losing. Because, as Tiffany and
Speaker 1: Angela have already so aptly pointed out, that is not
Speaker 1: what our people are talking about. That's not what's keeping
Speaker 1: them up at night. It doesn't inspire them and it
Speaker 1: doesn't quite frankly distract them either, because they're not really
Speaker 1: paying that kind of attention to Jeffrey Epstein or Jillian
Speaker 1: his associate, who is serving time. Maxwell, who I think
Speaker 1: is in Talla, hassee serving time last time I checked.
Speaker 3: She's the only person who served time out of that
Speaker 3: whole thing, the woman and all of this is the
Speaker 3: only person who served time. But she did serve as
Speaker 3: someone who was facilitating these matchups. The question is what
Speaker 3: she's just doing this for mister Epstein or what she
Speaker 3: doing this for other parties as well?
Speaker 1: Right, and guess what? And again, legitimate questions are to
Speaker 1: be asked on all those sides. I think that there
Speaker 1: are legitimate questions about the US attorney who decided to
Speaker 1: give Epstein a cushy deal in the first place, that
Speaker 1: broke the Miami Herald, who broke the news on this
Speaker 1: thing and busted it wide open. But we would be
Speaker 1: I'm hearing people talk about the Democrats out to seize
Speaker 1: this moment as for the midterms, and I am very
Speaker 1: concerned that Democratic policy makers and elected officials who are
Speaker 1: pursuing re election and the consultants who guide those campaigns.
Speaker 1: I am very concerned that they are so weak need
Speaker 1: about what is going to get Democrats back in power,
Speaker 1: that they may be willing to co op this whole
Speaker 1: storyline of Epstein and release the files. And I think
Speaker 1: that would be a death ridden mistake and put the
Speaker 1: nail on the coughing to whether or not there is
Speaker 1: an opposition party to be spoken of after these midterm elections.
Speaker 6: Wow.
Speaker 8: I don't know that I disagree with that, but I think.
Speaker 1: I think it's a bad calculation.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think that if they are to rest their
Speaker 4: laurels on just releasing the files, then yes, But if
Speaker 4: they use it as a wedge issue to create space
Speaker 4: around what is fact versus fiction, I actually think it's
Speaker 4: smart and broken promises, Like you know, yes, he broke
Speaker 4: this promise to you, but let me show you all
Speaker 4: the other promises.
Speaker 6: He broke to you. He's broken with you.
Speaker 4: And I feel like I'm being a hypocrite right now.
Speaker 4: And I can feel Tip's eyes burning about to say
Speaker 4: I hold in my cheek because what I'm about to
Speaker 4: say is, I don't know if neutralization of those voters
Speaker 4: is as significant as converting them, and and there and
Speaker 4: I and I don't know. I was thinking that, Yeah,
Speaker 4: it's it's hard because I think that it's a tall order,
Speaker 4: It's a really tall order, because they would rather believe
Speaker 4: to death in white so premiacy, then to believe that
Speaker 4: they have anything in common with folks who look like us,
Speaker 4: or any immigrant family or whatever.
Speaker 6: So it's hard.
Speaker 4: But I do think that when we are in desperate times,
Speaker 4: and if we are honest, we have to acknowledge we
Speaker 4: are in really desperate times, in really dire circumstances, we've
Speaker 4: got to find allies that make the coalition.
Speaker 6: Huh.
Speaker 1: That's why we got to convert our voters. We have
Speaker 1: people who will be with us if they show up
Speaker 1: to vote.
Speaker 11: Yes.
Speaker 1: This is what the Harris campaign, and this is what
Speaker 1: every campaign prior to her has done. They've identified these quote,
Speaker 1: middle of the road folks who may share common calls
Speaker 1: with us on a thing, and believed mistakenly that those
Speaker 1: folks will adopt us wholesale when given the other option.
Speaker 1: And they've proven time and time and again no matter
Speaker 1: where they have exception with Donald Trump, they still go
Speaker 1: home to him. And so if we're talking about limited
Speaker 1: resources and how to spend those, I would never ever
Speaker 1: suggest that a democratic campaign take their precious resources and
Speaker 1: target them towards what they think is this maybe movable
Speaker 1: middle of people who are now disrupted by a broken
Speaker 1: promise over Epstein and convert them to their voters. If
Speaker 1: you're going to convert voters, go to the black voters
Speaker 1: down the street and the Latino voters and the white
Speaker 1: liberal voters who have checked out of the process and
Speaker 1: are choosing not to show up, and give them a
Speaker 1: reason to show up. And I bet that the message
Speaker 1: that they deliver on healthcare, on this big ass bad
Speaker 1: bill that's going to that has created the largest shift
Speaker 1: in wealth that we have ever seen in the history
Speaker 1: of the United States, creating one so large that the
Speaker 1: people who built the pyramids and the pharaohs themselves had
Speaker 1: a less divide and wealth than we do today between
Speaker 1: our oligards and we're working people.
Speaker 6: Did you create that? I like that. That's a good one.
Speaker 1: But this is this is what this is that is saleable.
Speaker 1: Talk about the stuff that the majority of Americans disagree with,
Speaker 1: both Trump voters and the middle of the road voters
Speaker 1: and Democrats. And that's the bill that they just passed
Speaker 1: that's gonna put all us in the poor house before
Speaker 1: we know it. Well, obviously you can tell we got
Speaker 1: a lot more to say on this. Let's pay some
Speaker 1: bills and pick it up. On the other side, don't
Speaker 1: want to miss this.
Speaker 6: Well, here's the only thing I'm saying. I hear that
Speaker 6: I agree with that.
Speaker 4: I'm not saying, take your money Democratic Candidate X and
Speaker 4: spend it on Epstein. What I'm suggesting is that we
Speaker 4: don't let this pass by though, either because if the
Speaker 4: roles are reversed and this was the Democratic Party doing this,
Speaker 4: all they would want a special committee and they should
Speaker 4: do that. They should do some of that. But I'm
Speaker 4: not saying don't spend a dollar on it. Talking heads
Speaker 4: should be talking about it, like, what is there tie,
Speaker 4: I'm not saying that there is anything, but you call
Speaker 4: into doubt everything that they are sitting with, every promise
Speaker 4: that he's broken and this is one of many. Emphasize
Speaker 4: this one is one of many, and then name five.
Speaker 6: Or six others.
Speaker 4: Just from a strategic standpoint, that is smart because at
Speaker 4: some point, at some point, you would think they have
Speaker 4: to start seeing the lie for what it is. It
Speaker 4: didn't work, even though he was in office from sixteen
Speaker 4: to twenty didn't work, or seventeen to twenty didn't work.
Speaker 6: They didn't buy it. I don't know why they didn't
Speaker 6: buy it.
Speaker 1: I gave it, they didn't didn't. They determined that they
Speaker 1: didn't care. And I think the same is true here
Speaker 1: that if there is a connection in.
Speaker 6: My marrying and it's and it's and it is right.
Speaker 1: They care about this one of all the things.
Speaker 4: I don't know that do we have Speaker Johnson's clip.
Speaker 4: I'm just curious do we have?
Speaker 1: We should pull that up, But Angela, just to find
Speaker 1: a lot, I think that your point is well, I
Speaker 1: think it's right. Definitely, don't let this thing slip by.
Speaker 1: If there is a if there is a whole to
Speaker 1: be manipulated to create a greater one.
Speaker 6: Not even manipulation, it is a And this is my
Speaker 6: whole point.
Speaker 4: I think that one of the things that they do
Speaker 4: poorly that we don't do when we when the facts
Speaker 4: and the truth and what is right is on our side,
Speaker 4: we still don't utilize it.
Speaker 6: And I don't get why, Like I.
Speaker 1: Think telling them about his lives is going to do it.
Speaker 1: If we are going to connect an issue, it needs
Speaker 1: to be to the economy people are going to vote
Speaker 1: on their wallets come.
Speaker 6: That novel here of that, because I'm not All I'm.
Speaker 1: Saying is I don't think that. I don't believe that
Speaker 1: the strategy of stringing along all of his letdowns and
Speaker 1: lies is going to be the way forward. They are
Speaker 1: aware of them, they are complicit with them. They have
Speaker 1: forgiven them, or they have said they don't matter up
Speaker 1: until this issue. And I'm saying, on this issue, I
Speaker 1: would say Donald Trump again is proven that he is
Speaker 1: just for himself. And the fact that budget bill did X,
Speaker 1: Y and Z that that that that reiterates the facts,
Speaker 1: that makes plain to us He's willing to close our hospitals.
Speaker 1: He's willing to take our hospital.
Speaker 4: Didn't they don't care about our say close your hospital.
Speaker 1: What I'm saying our I mean in my community.
Speaker 4: I know I'm saying. Talk to them other ones, it's
Speaker 4: their hospitals.
Speaker 1: It is absolutely But to them, if it's their community,
Speaker 1: it's he's willing to close our hospital.
Speaker 6: When they hear you say our, they don't they think good.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying. If I'm the voice of the voter,
Speaker 1: wherever that voter is, they are they are reflecting on
Speaker 1: what they have lost. I want them to know what
Speaker 1: is being taken from them, because they don't seem to
Speaker 1: care about his lies, his missteps, and his mispromises. But
Speaker 1: when I see people in the stores with their calculators
Speaker 1: and their cell phones price comparing toilet tissue and paper towel,
Speaker 1: I know that this is going to be an economic
Speaker 1: collection again. And if we get sidetracked and run down
Speaker 1: the wrong road, make the wrong connections, draw the wrong parallels,
Speaker 1: we are going to find ourselves out of office yet again.
Speaker 3: I think I think you're both making a legitimate point.
Speaker 3: I think Angelia will correct me if I'm wrong. But
Speaker 3: I think what Angela is saying, which because I did
Speaker 3: when you said that, I was like, hmm, I don't
Speaker 3: know how I feel about celebrating people sitting out the price,
Speaker 3: even if they are people who disagree with me. So
Speaker 3: I think, Angela, you're saying, instead of, you know, just
Speaker 3: discarding them, let's try to convert them. And at first
Speaker 3: I was with you, but then hearing Andrew, I'm like, yes,
Speaker 3: that presupposes that they are convertible, and they are not.
Speaker 3: This is not a political party, this is a political cult.
Speaker 3: It's a lifestyle cult.
Speaker 6: But the cult has fractures.
Speaker 3: Well, all groups have fractures. I don't know if it's
Speaker 3: fractured enough.
Speaker 6: I don't know either.
Speaker 3: I know it's not fractured enough that they would ever
Speaker 3: come to R side. There's been enough data to support
Speaker 3: that for the past ten years in this society. We've
Speaker 3: even seen video evidence. If I can find it, I'll
Speaker 3: play it on a later episode. But there was actually
Speaker 3: a group of people who had Trump supporters, and they
Speaker 3: were posing questions to them, and they had faked audio.
Speaker 3: It was like AI and they had faked all these
Speaker 3: things that Donald Trump said, and he talked about sleeping
Speaker 3: with his daughter, He talked about the the most obnoxious things,
Speaker 3: and one by one they all found a way to
Speaker 3: excuse it, to apologize for it. Even people who have
Speaker 3: been fired from their jobs, who have been directly impacted,
Speaker 3: have said, I do not regret my vote. I just
Speaker 3: didn't think it would happen to me. You voted for
Speaker 3: it to happen to someone else, but you didn't think
Speaker 3: it would happen to you. And even when it does
Speaker 3: happen to you, you are still resolute. You are so convicted,
Speaker 3: and that they're united in our impression you're so convicted
Speaker 3: in your belief that you need, that you ought to have,
Speaker 3: that you deserve and that we do not, that you're
Speaker 3: willing to cut off a limb just to make sure
Speaker 3: that we don't have. So I get your point, I
Speaker 3: just don't I know that they are not convertible.
Speaker 6: So what's our path? And ask this?
Speaker 4: So what I'm saying is Andrew and tif Uh, my
Speaker 4: question is, if you don't think that they're gettable, that
Speaker 4: they're not convertible, what is the path forward?
Speaker 6: Because we have the math, a mathis so what's the
Speaker 6: path forward? Is it going to the ninety million? What
Speaker 6: is it like?
Speaker 8: What motivating ore is to what ends motivating voter?
Speaker 1: So let's be very clear.
Speaker 6: We do have the numbers.
Speaker 1: We do have the numbers when their regular base shows up.
Speaker 1: You see what Donald Trump benefited from.
Speaker 3: Was he he had a hyper sized, uh white production
Speaker 3: of white Yeah, that.
Speaker 1: Is not the normal course of white voters in this country.
Speaker 1: He juiced it. So when I say keep them home,
Speaker 1: I'm saying, y'all weren't interested before, go back to being
Speaker 1: non interested. I absolutely do care about what voter suppression
Speaker 1: looks like. When they suppress our vote they change the laws, right,
Speaker 1: they make it illegal for us to access it. What
Speaker 1: I'm talking about is not a llegal means by which
Speaker 1: to suppress a vote. That's not my issue. I'm saying,
Speaker 1: you thought you bought into a system by buying Donald
Speaker 1: aprothetic that reflected what you think, your values, your your
Speaker 1: best interests, and now it's proven that that ain't true
Speaker 1: for you on this issue of Epstein, whatever that be.
Speaker 1: All these guys are losers. Don't support any of them.
Speaker 1: And guess what, that's not a hard argument. That's what
Speaker 1: they believe before and that's what they believe now, except
Speaker 1: except for Donald Trump.
Speaker 8: But you're the path forward.
Speaker 1: Democratic voters who are already our voters but have chosen.
Speaker 8: But I guess I'm asking that gets us to a win.
Speaker 3: That okay, But what I'm asking is in the current
Speaker 3: infrastructure that we have, in the Democratic Party that exists
Speaker 3: in this country, and in the Maga cult that exists
Speaker 3: in this country, in the big bucket of apathetic people
Speaker 3: that exist in this country, do you think that is
Speaker 3: a logical path forward that can produce a tangible success
Speaker 3: when it comes to policy and participation?
Speaker 1: Okay, absolutely, guess what that that produced, that produced Joe
Speaker 1: Biden and twenty twenty. What produced Joe Biden was the
Speaker 1: fact that Republicans who had been there for him in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen decided they were not going to be there
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty. What did they do? They sat at home.
Speaker 1: By the way, that is also the gateway that gave
Speaker 1: us Barack Obama. The same white voters who showed up to.
Speaker 8: Put they stayed home in twenty.
Speaker 1: Twenty four did not decide that they were going to
Speaker 1: block Obama from becoming president. They stayed home.
Speaker 6: Some of them voted for Barack Obama.
Speaker 1: That may be true, but I'm telling you the victory doesn't.
Speaker 8: Yeah, but not in number. Overwhelmingly.
Speaker 3: They stayed home in two thousand and eight, in two thousands, well,
Speaker 3: but there were vertibles. Well, I don't know that they
Speaker 3: were convertibles. There were people who were frustrated with the
Speaker 3: Bush administration. So it wasn't necessarily a vote for Obama,
Speaker 3: but a vote against the party that.
Speaker 4: Existed, the same thing that we may be going tours now.
Speaker 4: It could be a coalition of people who are voting
Speaker 4: against what they thought they were.
Speaker 8: I don't I think I'm a playbill. Almost twenty years old. Now,
Speaker 8: I don't know what.
Speaker 4: We need to throw ship at the wall to see
Speaker 4: what sticks. That's the playbook, his ship.
Speaker 6: We need our own ship at his ship. But it
Speaker 6: sounds like.
Speaker 8: You are hopeful, like you face, I.
Speaker 6: Am desperate, is what you're Okay, that's desperate answer to
Speaker 6: get people. I am not. Let me make sure that
Speaker 6: everybody p s a everybody.
Speaker 4: I am not opposed to getting black people out to
Speaker 4: the post. I am not opposed to getting brown people
Speaker 4: out to the polls. I am not opposed to getting
Speaker 4: Indigenous people out to the post. What I'm saying is,
Speaker 4: with all of that, we still need to make sure
Speaker 4: we have more numbers. Andrew is saying we to include
Speaker 4: white people today. That's a new breaking news on this show.
Speaker 4: That's fine, Andrew. I'm with we being white people too great.
Speaker 1: But I'm just saying this is, this is, this has
Speaker 1: been our map by the way to victory every cycle,
Speaker 1: juicing our voters over theres.
Speaker 6: But your hour is very loose in a way that
Speaker 6: was confusing.
Speaker 1: I'm saying.
Speaker 8: I'm saying this is the difference as a democratic voter.
Speaker 1: That's not what I'm saying. Our let me define it.
Speaker 1: Real quick. Yeah, our are the voters who, if they vote,
Speaker 1: they will vote for Democrats.
Speaker 6: Okay, so what she said.
Speaker 1: That's not a Democratic voter.
Speaker 8: Yes, I understand, but it makes your difference.
Speaker 1: It's a big difference.
Speaker 6: So what is it then?
Speaker 8: Who's the power is somebody who will vote for it.
Speaker 3: It doesn't matter if Democrat, if your party, but if
Speaker 3: you vote, you will vote for.
Speaker 6: But includes white people.
Speaker 3: And he's not speaking right. He's not speaking from a
Speaker 3: race perspective. He's speaking from a political perspective.
Speaker 1: I'm right, And so I want to contrast that voter,
Speaker 1: that voter who if they vote, they will vote for
Speaker 1: the Democrat. I want to contrast that voter with a
Speaker 1: voter who has to be persuaded. A voter who has
Speaker 1: to be persuaded is one who is right now inclined
Speaker 1: to supporting Donald Trump, probably has and is up until
Speaker 1: this point, up until this fisher has arrived. That persuadable
Speaker 1: voter one has to make has to draw the conclusion
Speaker 1: that they're in a better bed if they switch over
Speaker 1: and vote for the Democrat than they would have on
Speaker 1: the whole. Taking the totality of their interest into consideration,
Speaker 1: then they would be if they stayed with Donald Trump
Speaker 1: or state with the Republicans, or they could also draw
Speaker 1: the conclusion that they're pissed as hell with the Republicans.
Speaker 1: They don't sanction what they did on Epstein or maybe
Speaker 1: some other issue, and they say I'm staying home. I
Speaker 1: think we underestimate the power of a voter who is
Speaker 1: determined to vote for Democrats don't easily get persuaded to
Speaker 1: change their vote to a Republican and vice versa. I
Speaker 1: will never so long as I live and have a
Speaker 1: brain to think with and hard to care with, I
Speaker 1: don't think I'll ever be in common cause with today's
Speaker 1: Republican party. I don't care how mad I get with Democrats.
Speaker 1: I may vote for a third party, I may not
Speaker 1: vote at all on that particular race. But to tell
Speaker 1: me to be bad at Democrats on this issue and
Speaker 1: then go wholesale to the other side, who's ninety nine
Speaker 1: percent agenda is against me, it's tom foolish. It is.
Speaker 3: So you're saying there's a pathway on the other side.
Speaker 3: I think Angela is kind of saying the same thing.
Speaker 3: Out of desperation, let's try to get whomever we can.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying we don't have to be desperate and
Speaker 1: make the choice to go persuadable.
Speaker 3: I get the nuance you're saying, like tap into people
Speaker 3: who are receptive.
Speaker 1: To We're already with you, yes, right, because.
Speaker 3: You and I agree that anybody who's a Trumper.
Speaker 8: Is not convertible.
Speaker 1: It is not convertible.
Speaker 3: And I think Angela correct me if I'm wrong. You're saying,
Speaker 3: let's try to get everybody, including them. Let's try to
Speaker 3: get everybody.
Speaker 6: And I'm not saying starting with them.
Speaker 4: I hope I'll never clearly abandon your base, and by base,
Speaker 4: I don't mean just the people who turned out in
Speaker 4: this last election. Yes, if there is another election, we
Speaker 4: need to have all hands on days.
Speaker 1: I think Democrats interpret that message of persuadable and go
Speaker 1: get everybody to mean that ninety percent of their budgets
Speaker 1: around who they talk to.
Speaker 6: Done.
Speaker 1: But that's why I'm saying that the message must be
Speaker 1: clear here to the extent. By the way, I'm not
Speaker 1: saying every person to a person who is with Donald
Speaker 1: Trump can't be converted. That's not what I'm saying. What
Speaker 1: I'm saying is they cannot be converted, and large enough
Speaker 1: numbers to make an electoral difference, and that's what matters
Speaker 1: at the end of the day. So the numbers that
Speaker 1: make a difference are your voters going to the polls.
Speaker 1: That's why the negotiation of Democrats and candidates make every
Speaker 1: time when they're in cycle is whether they spend their
Speaker 1: money toward getting voters who are not with them but
Speaker 1: persuading them to their side to now vote, or doubling
Speaker 1: down on your current base of voters and juicing that
Speaker 1: number to the best of your ability. Democrats in my
Speaker 1: state have large we believed that the best investment is
Speaker 1: and taking those precious resources and spending it toward what
Speaker 1: you believe is the movable middle, I think, and every
Speaker 1: time that lesson has taught us a loss.
Speaker 6: I think.
Speaker 4: My frustration with this conversation is we are talking about
Speaker 4: an election that's not currently happening, and all I'm talking
Speaker 4: about right now is getting these folks aligned with the
Speaker 4: with us on other issues so that we can proactively
Speaker 4: fight and then put up what an alternative to what
Speaker 4: this disaster.
Speaker 6: Is looks like.
Speaker 4: Right now, we keep talking about an election that I
Speaker 4: want to be honest with people, we don't know is
Speaker 4: going to happen.
Speaker 1: It is scheduled. It is scheduled.
Speaker 6: It is scheduled across it's scheduled.
Speaker 4: But I'm just saying, I know you mean, I'm saying
Speaker 4: that there are people who are DOCA recipients, who are
Speaker 4: in holding facilities and ready to be deported. I'm saying
Speaker 4: that the rule of law does not matter. Whether it's
Speaker 4: about immigration, or it's about our civil rights, or it's
Speaker 4: about labor, it doesn't matter. Like everything is on the
Speaker 4: chopping block, and at the very least, maybe if we
Speaker 4: pull together right now, we can stop some of the hemorrhaging.
Speaker 4: I'm not at the election yet, so I mean, I'm
Speaker 4: happy to have an election conversation, but I think that's
Speaker 4: foolish because there are so many fights that we have
Speaker 4: to have to even get there and to even.
Speaker 6: Protect whether or not election day would be here for
Speaker 6: us to go cast a ballot.
Speaker 3: Don't go anywhere, guys, because we're shifting focused to midterms.
Speaker 3: I think gonna happen or not, let's get into it.
Speaker 3: We'll see on the other side. So I definitely I
Speaker 3: understand what Jaday and Angela completely because you brought it up.
Speaker 3: I want to punctuate this point about midterms, because we
Speaker 3: talked about this last week on the podcast, and producer
Speaker 3: Nick is telling us we have like ten minutes left,
Speaker 3: so I'll be brief so we can get to our CCA's.
Speaker 3: But we see already Republicans cheating in Texas. They are
Speaker 3: the Republican control legislature is redrawing the maps. And so
Speaker 3: what Republicans would say is, well, how can you say
Speaker 3: that we had more people vote in the last election
Speaker 3: in the time before. And yes, you have more people voting,
Speaker 3: but they're voting in jerrymandered congressional districts. And jerry mandering
Speaker 3: is something that's practiced by both parties. It's not illegal,
Speaker 3: but racial jerry mandering is. And those two twin components
Speaker 3: are often right exactly those two twins. Well, they're still
Speaker 3: technically illegal. But what's illegal?
Speaker 8: Now, what's the law the Civil.
Speaker 6: Rights Division that would normally look at these maps and
Speaker 6: tell them.
Speaker 3: That they have reclassed white people as the victim class,
Speaker 3: and the Civil Rights Division at the DLJ. And so
Speaker 3: I take your point Angela, where you're saying, we're talking
Speaker 3: about an election that's not here and that may not
Speaker 3: happen in the terms of how we experience elections to happen.
Speaker 3: We've never really had free and fair elections, but it
Speaker 3: has been in boldened now where they're throwing everything at
Speaker 3: the bit. My perspective on that ridge, even if Democrats
Speaker 3: were to seize control of the House, the Senate, and
Speaker 3: some state legislatures across the country, I don't know that
Speaker 3: this party, even given a modicum of power, is ready
Speaker 3: to meet the moment to combat what we're seeing happening
Speaker 3: by the Trump administration. I'm not saying to abandon hope.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying don't vote. I think, to Angelo's point,
Speaker 3: we have to fight with everything we've got everywhere we
Speaker 3: can fight. I want to make that clear. I reach
Speaker 3: y'all's comments that y'all tired of me and the doom
Speaker 3: and gloom. Fine, I'm trying to say there is something
Speaker 3: that can be done. I'm not encouraging or discouraging action
Speaker 3: from anyone. I just don't know, when you ask what
Speaker 3: the path forward is, I don't know that there is
Speaker 3: a path to stop what we're seeing. I'm a bit exhausted.
Speaker 3: These were the things that we grew up reading about
Speaker 3: are still happening in our lifetimes. The things that we've battled,
Speaker 3: the things that we've seen happen. Mandatory minimums are back
Speaker 3: mass and Carson will once again increase if you look
Speaker 3: at Project twenty twenty five as a guide. So I
Speaker 3: just don't know that there's a path to a better tomorrow.
Speaker 3: The only path I can focus on is a path
Speaker 3: to shelter and safety for our people. And when I
Speaker 3: say our people, I mean our community. And if we
Speaker 3: can ally if fifty or fifty two percent of Latino
Speaker 3: men voted for Donald Trump, I'm certainly willing to ally
Speaker 3: with the forty eight percent who did not, and I
Speaker 3: would extend that to all communities across which I think
Speaker 3: is your point.
Speaker 1: Andrew Well, I would just say, as a matter of
Speaker 1: not my opinion, but of fact, if Democrats were to
Speaker 1: become the majority party inside the House of Representatives, as
Speaker 1: they have under Hakim Jeffrey's leadership, the Speaker designee of
Speaker 1: the House of Representatives, should Democrats gain control, he has
Speaker 1: been able to hold his party to vote to a
Speaker 1: person every Democrat against the Republican's agenda. So far in
Speaker 1: this as an opposition party, they ain't been the greatest
Speaker 1: on messaging. I have issues with the fact that they
Speaker 1: should do more alternative programming opposite what Trump's doing. When
Speaker 1: he signed that build better, build badly, build that will
Speaker 1: burnish all of us, they should have had counter programming.
Speaker 1: I got my issues, but I know this much. There
Speaker 1: were speakers of the House that could not do could
Speaker 1: not match what he's been able to do to this
Speaker 1: point by keeping all Democrats voting the exact same way.
Speaker 1: If he's able to carry that into leadership as the
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House, he can stop Donald Trump's agenda wholesale,
Speaker 1: should it have anything to do with a piece of
Speaker 1: legislation that needs to be passed through both the House
Speaker 1: the Senate and then signed into law by the President,
Speaker 1: they could bring their legislative agenda to a complete and
Speaker 1: total halt. Suddenly, when they gain control, they can appoint
Speaker 1: chairmans of committees that can launch investigations across the broad
Speaker 1: swipe of this government, and they can barrel this administration
Speaker 1: and investigations. Now, the Supreme Court may have made Donald
Speaker 1: trumpet king, but everybody under him can be punished by
Speaker 1: the law, can be jailed, can be prosecuted if they
Speaker 1: run a foul of the law. So a Department of
Speaker 1: Justice that says ignore the orders of a judge or
Speaker 1: a just right.
Speaker 3: That that is what I swear. I was sitting here thinking,
Speaker 3: so let's just say that he's gonna be right. So
Speaker 3: they run investigations, they find him guilty, I would direct
Speaker 3: you to the Muller Report.
Speaker 1: Put him to the work of doing it.
Speaker 4: I think, I think, Andrew, this is this is where
Speaker 4: I think we get it wrong.
Speaker 6: I mean, I really do that.
Speaker 1: Opposed to what we have today, which is we can
Speaker 1: put masks up and hold signs up during a speech
Speaker 1: but have no power to do anything.
Speaker 6: Well, what I think that.
Speaker 4: I think that my issue is, in order for us
Speaker 4: to change what is happening, we have to accept what is.
Speaker 4: And I think some of the things that we keep
Speaker 4: putting up as strategies to combat what's going on is
Speaker 4: denial of what is actually happening.
Speaker 6: Yes it is, Andrew, you can shake your head.
Speaker 4: But I'm saying, like, if you keep coming up with
Speaker 4: solutions that would work in ordinary circumstances, or we're gonna
Speaker 4: engage in oversight, We're going to pass legislation to do
Speaker 4: He's still got to sign a bill into law.
Speaker 6: He's not going to sign it into law.
Speaker 1: No, law. There will be no law.
Speaker 6: There's not law now, there's not. Yes, there's not.
Speaker 1: There's lawlessness now because Republicans run rough shot over the
Speaker 1: government at every level.
Speaker 6: Andrew, that's why, Andrews.
Speaker 11: Let me.
Speaker 6: Let me just make sure that.
Speaker 1: We just no lot of that.
Speaker 6: That I'm not saying something different.
Speaker 4: I'm saying and as our friends Vince will say, I
Speaker 4: am in violent agreement with you on that and to
Speaker 4: that point, because there is rampant lawlessness. Because the folks
Speaker 4: on January sixth, twenty twenty one are now literally in
Speaker 4: the freaking cabinet, we have a different set of circumstances.
Speaker 6: This is wartime now. This ain't no time to pass
Speaker 6: your little bill that he's not gonna sign.
Speaker 1: This is not your.
Speaker 4: Time to hold a special have a special committee and
Speaker 4: an oversight responsibility around his God. This ain't the time
Speaker 4: to go knock on the doors of the Department Education
Speaker 4: is about to be defunded and hope they'll let you in.
Speaker 4: This ain't the time to go and try to sit
Speaker 4: down and meet with him and come let us reason.
Speaker 1: Everything you're talking about is wellowed persist, because there's a
Speaker 1: way I'm not done. No accountability there's exactly.
Speaker 4: And the accountability, No, the accountability won't change in a
Speaker 4: year and a half when maybe my could potential twenty
Speaker 4: twenty six elections come up.
Speaker 6: I don't think that. I don't think that's what time
Speaker 6: it is. I think the time is now inaccurate. It's
Speaker 6: not How is it accurate?
Speaker 1: Because where you are failing to take into consideration, I'm
Speaker 1: not I'm not talking about Democrats advancing any legislation. I
Speaker 1: don't think that'll do anything other than investigate the mother
Speaker 1: put people in jail who are breaking the law.
Speaker 6: And he's gonna let them out of jail.
Speaker 1: Stand up the third that's fine, put into the work line.
Speaker 6: It put Andrew, it's not fine.
Speaker 3: And I'm telling you that's what I'm.
Speaker 1: Saying, until until they have to do it, until they're
Speaker 1: out of office.
Speaker 4: And I was presuming that they're going to be out
Speaker 4: of office. So I guess all I'm saying is because
Speaker 4: let me.
Speaker 1: There are some bedrocks to the system.
Speaker 6: Andrew, the bad rocks have been shook.
Speaker 1: To their own because they are in total and complete control.
Speaker 6: Yes, and that's not going to change.
Speaker 4: The Supreme Court makeup is not going to change. Or
Speaker 4: three branches, Andrew, the three branches are compromised.
Speaker 1: The three branches are compromised because Republicans control all Yes,
Speaker 1: and Andrew, Wait a minute. As a matter of factor
Speaker 1: and not an opinion, Andrew, is that if Democrats hold control,
Speaker 1: they are one of the one third that makes up
Speaker 1: the governing structure of the country. I hear you saying
Speaker 1: that everybody's.
Speaker 4: Rolling the government, which puts us in the constitutional crisis
Speaker 4: we're in right now. He's defied the constitution because there's
Speaker 4: in a constitutional crisis to him, No, Andrew, even with
Speaker 4: the opposition, Andrew, if the Democrats get control of the House,
Speaker 4: they might they likely won't get control of the Senate.
Speaker 4: They still are going to be in a constitutional crisis
Speaker 4: if the Democrats get control of the Senate.
Speaker 6: But it is a constitutional not.
Speaker 1: A constitutional executive. Democrats only control one bud. It is
Speaker 1: not a constitutional crisis, Andrew.
Speaker 4: It is if you decide, all that require is required
Speaker 4: for a constitutional crisis is for one branch of government
Speaker 4: to defy the orders of another. It is happening every
Speaker 4: single day. The other thing that I want you to consider,
Speaker 4: maybe we talk about it next time. They getting ready
Speaker 4: to do a constitutional.
Speaker 3: Convention and then and then well is it not good?
Speaker 6: Not good?
Speaker 8: But let me it's not good to open it in.
Speaker 1: A long time, and there are a lot of people in.
Speaker 4: The legislats that are going to rough shot over everything
Speaker 4: public and lead, Yes, what.
Speaker 3: I think because because unfortunately we're out of time, guys,
Speaker 3: I think we can either pick this up on the
Speaker 3: mini pod because I think this is a good I
Speaker 3: think what you two are representing our factions on our
Speaker 3: side of the divide, because I find myself getting frustrated
Speaker 3: with things.
Speaker 8: Both of y'all are saying and agreeing with things.
Speaker 3: Both of y'all are hands so and I think that
Speaker 3: there's that we all are saying the same thing on
Speaker 3: some level. So with that, unfortunately we do have to
Speaker 3: move to CCAS and we're doing this normally. We will
Speaker 3: let the conversation go for the folks listening and watching,
Speaker 3: but Angela has a flight, we have more to record.
Speaker 1: It's all good. We got to be disciplined do with
Speaker 1: our time.
Speaker 8: I guess, yes, and then we can move it.
Speaker 1: Forward, which is simply that there are some dead rocks
Speaker 1: that if a conversation is supposed to happen collesially that
Speaker 1: have to be under recognition. We don't get the makeup facts. Facts,
Speaker 1: we have opinions. Facts should be immutable, and we're all
Speaker 1: entitled to an opinion, but we're not entitled to our
Speaker 1: own facts. And I do think that I hope this
Speaker 1: bay continues, not only on this platform, but wherever you are.
Speaker 1: I hope you are assessing what options you have to
Speaker 1: hold your elected officials accountable.
Speaker 8: Love it handle well?
Speaker 4: Yes, I hope that people are not having fact free
Speaker 4: debates at home. We certainly don't do it on this podcast.
Speaker 4: But I would also say I am hopeful that folks
Speaker 4: will take the time I have m a sound like
Speaker 4: you today tip to read what's really going on and
Speaker 4: make an assessment, even spiritually, about where you think we are.
Speaker 4: I don't think that things are going to be as
Speaker 4: fixable just with one election, because our democracy has essentially
Speaker 4: been unraveled in seven months time. So I'm hoping that
Speaker 4: people will really see how they can lean in what
Speaker 4: they feel called to do and push. It's going to
Speaker 4: take all hands in, all great minds and innovation on
Speaker 4: deck to make it through this one.
Speaker 3: My CTA is just curating moments of joy. I wants
Speaker 3: to thank everyone for agreeing with Andrew and me and
Speaker 3: our CTA from last week for the speakerphone Angela, Yeah,
Speaker 3: the poll, the data is and speakerphones are out.
Speaker 1: That's it.
Speaker 6: Walking down the street, we're doing that.
Speaker 3: Like even yesterday, I'm like, I feel like I'm being
Speaker 3: trolled because I said this, and now everybody around me
Speaker 3: is on a speakerphone. So I want to thank you
Speaker 3: guys for weighing in. I also want to thank you
Speaker 3: all for weighing in with all your comments about Angela's glasses,
Speaker 3: which I get to see in person. Everyone loves your glasses.
Speaker 3: They were like, Angela, so you got those glasses. So
Speaker 3: I want to thank you all for that. So this
Speaker 3: is just my joyful moment saying thank you for agreeing
Speaker 3: with me because that felt nice. Uh, And to invite
Speaker 3: you all to curate moments of joy because whatever the
Speaker 3: path forward is, if it's OVA in five years, five months,
Speaker 3: or whatever, treat each day like it's your last. Tell
Speaker 3: the folks you love them. Do what makes you feel
Speaker 3: good as long as it le and just you know,
Speaker 3: that's my whole thing. If it don't make me smile
Speaker 3: or laugh, I don't want no parts of it.
Speaker 1: There it is curate joy and as always we want
Speaker 1: to remind everyone to please leave us a review and
Speaker 1: subscribe to Native lampod. We're available on all podcast platforms
Speaker 1: and YouTube of course. And did you know that Native
Speaker 1: lampod is part of a podcast network called Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 1: You should know that after this episode, We've got a
Speaker 1: lot of colleagues over there. Jamel Hill is on Reasent
Speaker 1: Choice Media Network with her show Politics, and se Cup
Speaker 1: on her show with Off the Cups cupp Be sure
Speaker 1: to check out those and don't forget to follow us
Speaker 1: on social media and subscribe to our text our email
Speaker 1: lists on native lampod dot com. We are of course
Speaker 1: Angel Rah, Tiffany Cross, and I'm Andrew Gilliam. Welcome home, y'all.
Speaker 1: There are four hundred and seventy four days until the
Speaker 1: inevitable mid term elections.
Speaker 8: If we can keep it wealthy.
Speaker 2: Thank you for joining the natives, attention to what the
Speaker 2: info and all of the latest Roy Guillem and Cross
Speaker 2: connected to the statements that you leave on our socials.
Speaker 2: Thank you sincerely for the patients. Reason for your Choice
Speaker 2: is cleared, so grateful and took to execute roads for
Speaker 2: serve defendant, protect the truth been in paint. For walking
Speaker 2: home to all of the natives, we thank you.
Speaker 1: Native Lamppid is a production of iHeart Radio and partnership
Speaker 1: with vis and Choice Media. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio,
Speaker 1: visit iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to
Speaker 1: your favorite shows.