June 13, 2024 • 39 mins
BIN News Anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis join Host Ramses Ja to discuss this week's major stories.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's been another busy news week and we like to
review the major stories of the week here on the
Black Information Network. Today, we are joined by Black Information
Network news anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis to discuss
this week's major stories.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
This is the Black.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Information Network Daily Podcast and I am your host, ramsy Jah.
All right, Esther and Doug, welcome back to the show.
What's the latest with you?
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Doug? Normally we started with Esther, but I'll give you
the floor today. It's hot out here in Las Vegas. Man,
I don't want to hear that. I'm in Phoenix. Esther.
I know you had a busy morning. What's the latest.
How you feeling?
Speaker 1 (00:36):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Pretty good.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
I'm still, you know, vibing off of the Graycies a
couple of weeks ago, having that and then going out
and talking with the folks with Taraji p Henson and
can we talk. They had a big conference in DC
where I got a chance to talk to other parents
and caregivers, those of kids on the spectrum. So it
(00:59):
was fun.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Yeah, yeah, that's fantastic. Fun. Fact.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
I started a relationship with the facility out here. They
don't like the word facility, but it's called first Place
where they help the severely autistic in transitioning into a
more independent life. And I'm actually going to have them
up on Civic Cipher and your name came up, and
you were part of the reason why I was able
to kind of bridge that connection. So your work is
(01:26):
rippling throughout the country. So I meant to tell you that,
and you just reminded me. In fact, I just got
an email from them about two minutes ago. So anyway,
we'll talk more about it later. First, let's give the
people what they came for. Let's start with the story
of the week. History was made when the child of
a sitting American president stood trial and was found guilty
of a crime. Since this is the first time this
(01:48):
has happened in American history, there's a lot to unpack here. Esther,
Let's start with you give us a breakdown of the
verdict and the Hunter Biden fire arms trial, and then Doug,
of course we're going to come to you for more
details on the story.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Well, the long and short of it is, Hunter Biden
was found guilty on all three federal should say three
federal felony gun charges and the fact that Hunter Biden
violated the laws meant to prevent drug addicts from owning firearms.
That's what basically what it is all about. The conviction
(02:21):
marks the first time a president's immediate family member has
been found guilty of a crime during their father's term
in office, and although his crimes predate Joe Biden's TENUREUS president,
is significant. Hunter Biden could face up to twenty five
years in prison and a fine of up to seven
hundred and fifty thousand dollars at sentencing. Some speculated it'll
(02:42):
be a lot less than the maximum because he's a
first time offender, and Hunter Biden reportedly said he was disappointed,
but he's happy that he has the sport of his family.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
Sure, sure, Doug, let's get you away in here.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
Interesting I've been reading how lawmakers are weighing in on
the guilty verdict from both sides. The recently Democratic representative
Jerry Connelly of Virginia quoted as saying that he regrets
the personal cost to Hunter Biden and his family, but
he thinks that the law ought to be enforced more
often because it saves lives. I thought that was an
interesting perspective from a Democrat. Technically, then Texas Republican Senator
(03:21):
John Cornyn, who's a senior member of the Judiciary Committee,
tells NBC News that the nation could do a lot
to make our community safer if the DOJ would more
actively prosecute gun violations. Interesting, if he really felt that strongly,
I believe he would probably back President Biden's proposal to
(03:43):
ban semi automatic rifles high capacity magazines. And also, you know,
he does not support raising the age to buy guns
like this from eighteen to twenty one, but hey, you know,
I'm just saying. And then a Republican Senator Lindsey Graham
chimed in saying that he doesn't think the average person
would have been charged with this crime, right, That was
(04:06):
interesting too. And then lastly, Senator Richard Bloominghal the Connecticut
said that no single prosecution is necessarily a precedent, but
if it says a trend, all good. So you're getting
some mixed opinions from both Republicans and Democrats.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Off of again, yeah, there's been a lot of.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
Statements being made about it, but I think the one
that feels the most human is the President's statement himself.
He says, quote, as I said last week, I am
the president, but I'm also a dad, Jill and I
love our son and we're so proud of the man
he is today. So the President of course standing by
(04:49):
his son throughout this process. And you know, another thing
is that a lot of people really looked at that
to say that this is how a person should react
to a guilty verdict. This this is how things should go.
And I made a connection. I'm sure other people have
made it as well, but you know, with with Trump
(05:12):
and the guilty verdict in New York, him saying that
that President Biden is kind of the puppet master behind
the whole thing, and that this is a an effort
from Biden and the radical Democrats to interfere with the
twenty twenty four election. It's like, the connection I'm making
(05:36):
is that, you know, the New York is a state trial, yep,
And the Hunter Biden trial is a federal trial, and
federal trials are where the president has a degree of control.
He could have pardoned his own son, and he said
he wasn't going to, and he has not, at least
not yet, and he's letting the judiciary, you know, play
(06:01):
out the way it's going to play out. So it's
interesting that Trump and the rest of his people are
kind of echoing this sentiment that Joe Biden is interfering
with the election via the New York legal process. At
the state legal process, where he has no grounds, he
(06:23):
cannot interfere, there's no jurisdiction, It doesn't work that way.
But where the president actually does have some control, he
is not exercising that control where it benefits him directly
and his family. And I'd imagine as a father myself,
that your son is going to be the most important
thing too, more important than an election, more important than
(06:45):
my son, is more important than me, than heaven and earth.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
So you know, I.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Think that that speaks volumes to exactly what it is
Biden is doing to interfere with a given thing, and that.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
To me appears to be none.
Speaker 1 (07:02):
So moving on next up. Earlier this week, the Pew
Research Center released its findings on a recent study involving
the views of black Americans and public institutions. Doug, this time,
we're going to start with you, tell us a bit
more about this study and some of the findings, and
then esther we're going to follow up.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Yeah, I love this one man.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
According to the Pew Research report most Black Americans believe
in racial conspiracy theories about institutions specifically, we are somewhat doubtful.
The research says about the fairness of these institutions and
suspect that they were designed to hold black people back.
And the survey found that about seventy four percent of
(07:39):
Black adults believe the prison system, seventy six make that,
sixty seven percent believe that the political system, and sixty
five percent believe the economic system are intentionally designed to
hinder black progress. Of course, the suspicions are rooted in
historical experiences of racial discrimination that we still feel today
through the systems of racism, and you know, they include
(08:01):
many events that we have our ancestors have been through,
and they still of course happened today. Nearly ninety percent
of Black adults consider themselves at least somewhat informed about
us black history. That gives a bit more context for
their belief or I should say, belief in these conspiracy theories.
(08:22):
And you know, I believe I don't really believe some
of these are conspiracy theory.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Not at all. The facts pretty factual.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
So it's interesting how they positioned this particular report, sure,
how they position the question, So, yeah, let's get you away.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
In Well, it's funny. I was doing a little bit
more reading about it because I thought it was really
interesting how doctor Keanna Cox, who is the author of
the study and researcher at the Pew Research Center, she
said to the Grio that, you know, it really like
you were saying saying, Doug, that it speak to not
(09:02):
only our history, but personal history that people have. So
that mixed in with people's personal experiences kind of feeds
into the distrust of various systems like healthcare system, the
criminal justice system, and all the systems that are supposed
to be designed to help people in the public eye,
(09:22):
but not the public eye, but the public in general.
And when you look at people's personal experiences, these anecdotes,
and then you compare them with the history that has
happened over the years, you can understand why people have
a racial conspiracy theory quote conspiracy theory, and so you know,
(09:42):
that's why people sometimes are pessimistic, you know, and at
least as far as the study is concerned, she said
that many Black Americans, the vast majority, are pessimistic about
whether equality will ever be achieved.
Speaker 1 (09:55):
Yeah, yeah, you know, It's funny that you mentioned the
the healthcare system because I remember talking a lot about
the Tuskegee experiments during COVID, and I was one of
the people that was suggesting that black people get vaccinated.
(10:18):
That upset you, I, you know, I just that's just
kind of how I felt. But I understood the black
people that did not want to get vaccinated. I totally
understood that. And what I was looking at was the
(10:39):
data saying that COVID disproportionately affected black people and we
were dying from this, and I had to reconcile our
the historical context of you know, distrust in the government,
well founded distrust in the government, and like, we have
(10:59):
to like survived this, we have to get through this.
You know, I didn't like hindsight is twenty twenty. But
in the moment, you know, you're just looking at the
datas and you just don't want to see the worst happen.
And then, you know, being in a position of leadership
in my community.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
I guess.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
I had to compel folks to take some sort of action,
and so, you know, the Tuskegee experiments was one of
those things where I started to I couldn't understand both
sides of it, and since then and before then too,
because again I grew up with a healthy dose of
black history, and then I got a supercharge when I
(11:41):
got to college and my mentor, doctor Camilla Westernberg, kind
of really poured a lot into me. And I took
all the classes, everything that was offered to me. You know,
this was before it was called CRT all that sort
of stuff. I made sure to understand kind of what
we were up against. And I learned about government sanctioned
housing discrimination against black people and how the legacy of
(12:05):
that persist. I learned about redlining. I learned about the
War on drugs and how that was targeted toward black
people and the Hippie movement to disrupt the Black power movement.
In the hippie movement right, I learned about it wasn't
called environmental racism at the time, but I did learn
(12:26):
how black people tended to live in places where there
was more pollution, which affected health care outcomes. I learned
about how the GI Bill wasn't distributed evenly among all the.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
Soldiers after the war.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
I learned about obviously policing, judicial sentencing, all that sort
of stuff that's very We talk about that a lot,
and the rates and the data that suggest that we
are over policed, were overrepresented in prison populations, but we
don't necessarily omit most of the crimes. We just get
(13:03):
convicted for most of the crimes and arrested for most
of the crimes, which you know, you could argue that
when you look at like low level property crimes, crimes
that poor people tend to commit, that you know, there's
something to be said about economic restorative justice in order
to offset what crime rates do exist, what you can
(13:23):
extrapolate from those crime rates.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
But I learned about that.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
I learned obviously going back, I learned about Jim Crow,
I learned about the Black codes. I learned about how
we were left out of the New Deal and how
that disrupted the structure of the black family, and the
legacy of that continued and still continues. That's not to
say that black men are not present in their children's lives.
(13:47):
And if you disagree, I invite you to look at
the CDC study on Black Fathers from twenty fourteen, because indeed,
black men are the best fathers out of all races,
the most present, the most involved in the best you
can look that up yourself. But in terms of the
familial structure, marriage started to mean less under a Republican
(14:10):
president or sorry, under a democratic No, you're right, it
was a Republican president. Yeah, and that's when we started
to shift away from black people voting Republican to black
people voting Democrat. So, you know, there's this there's obviously
(14:31):
the land theft. You know, we we did have some
land at at some point in time, and we had businesses.
We all there this sort of banking that all these
sorts of atrocities, these tragedies that happened to black people
over the course of our history in this country. So
for us now to look around and think, you know,
there's government programs, institutions that you know, and we still
(14:54):
endure a lot of this stuff today, you know what
I mean. It's not like the War on drugs is over.
It's just we just to know that it's like blown
shoes now, you know. It's not like, you know, there's
been economic restorative justice to offset the crime rates. It's
not like we have access to the fullness of the
American dream as a people, not talking about individuals as
a people. When you look at the data, right and
(15:16):
so when I look at these things, I start to
I understand and appreciate how we could feel this way,
because these are all things that I've learned, and I'm
scratching the service. As you know, this goes a lot deeper.
You know, there's things that we're not even talking about.
There's many things we're not talking about. Many heroes that
have helped bring these things to light that we have
(15:37):
not mentioned. But to the participants in that study that
gave the ultimately gave the data, I say, yeah, that's
about right.
Speaker 5 (15:47):
Join us for the National Urban League Conference in New
Orleans July twenty fourth through the twenty seventh at High
ad Regency, New Orleans. Don't miss out register today and
NUIL conference dot org.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Black Information Network News anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis
are here with us discussing this week's major stories. All right,
an Indiana man is seeking justice this week after an
encounter with local law enforcement that violated his rights and
could have turned out deadly. Esther, you covered this story
for this story for the BI in so share with
our audience a little bit more about this and then Doug,
(16:23):
we'll get your thoughts next.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Well, the story is from WLFI in Indiana, and it's
basically several officers showed up from several officers from the
Lafayette Police Department showed up at Neil William Neil's home
with guns drawn and they were demanding that he and
his girlfriend and his son get out of the house. Well,
(16:46):
Neil opened the door and said why, and they said
they needed to talk to him, and he said, do
you have a warrant? And they said no, And this
is all on surveillance camera that they had set up
in their home. They pulled him, his son and basically
kind of kicking and screaming out of the house and
his girlfriend and arrested the son and father for resisting arrest.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
The station reports that.
Speaker 3 (17:09):
Police said that they had a nine to one to
one call saying someone suggested a domestic battery and confinement
was happening inside the home and that there was a
woman and child inside, so they looked inside. They didn't
find who they were looking for, but it is that
it was a former girlfriend and the man's son from
that relationship and they no longer lived there, and the
(17:30):
police told the station that they had video evidence that
there had been abuse in that home. However, Neill said
that that video that they had was from several years
ago and there was no reason for police to barge
into his home and arrest him and book him and
his son and the current girlfriend who was there was
not arrested. So to me, after listening looking at the video,
(17:51):
reading the story kind of feels like a future lawsuit to.
Speaker 1 (17:54):
Me, Doug, I know you saw this too, man, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
The bigger question is what's going to happen to the
individual who gave the police the wrong information? You know,
it just seems like there's something fishy going on. It's
a video from seven years ago, wrong name, wrong address
of Neil's son who sent the video to the police.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
You know, did the police do a their.
Speaker 4 (18:21):
Old check you know, behind the call in the video
to assure that you know, this was indeed the right person.
You know, just because someone sends in a video doesn't
mean anything technically unless you do some background and I
don't know, it just doesn't seem like that there was
a lot of background check. Too much negligence in my
(18:41):
opinion with this particular instance. Really sad in my opinion
that in some of the smallest towns in America, some
of the biggest instances of police misconduct occur regularly. You know,
we cover a lot of these stories on the BI
and a lot of them happened to African Americans, not
saying that they don't happened to other races, but we
we hear about these instances a lot. And I wonder
(19:04):
how race, you know, played in the decision that this
police department made to you know, abruptly enter this person's
house without a warrant. It just really makes me question
the criminal justice system and how these small towns they,
(19:25):
i mean, continue to kind of get away with stuff
like this. I mean maybe you know, I'm sure it
happens in bigger cities, but it just seems like in
these small towns. Man, these these police forces seem like
they can almost do anything. And so I know that,
you know, this is going to be probably a civil
case against the department, but think about the scars that
(19:49):
this family will now have for the rest of their lives,
you know, and how these officers won't have any scars.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
Just might be you know, tapped on the back a
little bit. Yeah, you know, I'll give you a reference.
You know, I just don't feel like it's equal. You know.
Speaker 3 (20:07):
It's funny, Doug, when you said about the video, it
made me think of you know AI. Now you can
use AI to create video quite well. And you wonder
if you know, in the future, somebody could create something
that causes if you don't check it, you know, and
not are not diligent, then it can be used to
(20:27):
you know, a bad way, not true, you know. So
it's interesting that you said that.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
Yeah, you know, there's whenever I see videos like this,
it's it's always kind of disturbing, you know, part of
part of you know, So you mentioned his girlfriend didn't
get arrested. The police, you know, come to this man's house.
He's bewildered by this. For those that haven't seen the video,
(20:54):
he's okay, so what's going on here? He They don't
have warrant then now the police are doing a wellness
check or whatever. But everyone in the house has accounted
for and they don't have a warrant. So unless you're
actively hearing someone in distress or some other way that
you need to like enter into someone's house. Right, But
(21:17):
even when they did, they grabbed his son. His son
was fuming. His son wasn't doing anything right, And I
know that. I know that police have an obligation to
investigate something if they feel like someone could be in
(21:37):
harm's way, right, And so there's some legal framework that
will allow them to enter a residence even if they
don't have a warrant, and perhaps even if they don't
actively hear someone yelling for help, So that I believe
that exists. But the thing that got me was when
I saw them interacting with the gentleman's son and he
(22:02):
was saying, no, that's my son, you know, get off
of him. He's you know, he's blameless, super blameless in this.
And then I read from it was a quote I
believe it was from the girlfriend. It says, you know,
pull me down the steps. I trip, I hurt my knee.
You know, if you're here for a wellness check for
a female and then you man handle a female, it
(22:24):
doesn't make sense to me, right, So it kind of
shows this heavy handed approach that police have. You know,
we mentioned the scars that the family has moving forward
in the increased paranoid and then of course we all
see that, and before we could see it, we would
all hear about stories like that, you know, before videos
and things like that we knew that this was how
the police treated us, right, and so we had this
(22:44):
like kind of shared trauma. I'm convinced that for a
lot of police officers, this is their therapy. It's the
opposite of trauma. They get excited when they get to
go out and bash some heads and you know, man
handle some people and be aggressive and get the bad
guys or whatever it is that they've been indoctrinated to thinking,
or however they can deal with their bully complex and
(23:06):
take it out on us. But you know, Doug, you
mentioned how race factors in, and you know, my litmus
test is always, if the police would not do this
to a sixty five year old white female, if the
police would not do this to a sixty five year
(23:28):
old privileged corporate executive, then they are leaning into their bias,
regardless of what it is. That's my test. If I
could conceive of them doing the same thing to a
to an old white woman, then okay, it's a fair
play that they're doing their job. If they're doing something
(23:50):
that is inconceivable that they would do to an older
white woman an older white man, If it's inconceivable that
they would behave that way, then I'm looking right at
their bias. And that's why I probably they'll never put
me on a jury, because I could see it plain
as day. But yeah, I hope there is a lawsuit
(24:11):
and and I hope that we continue to follow this
story because I'd love for there to be some form
of justice here.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
Doug, you wanted to jump in.
Speaker 4 (24:17):
Yeah, I was just saying, I mean, I totally agree
with everything you said. I mean, I like the litmus thing.
I think I'm going to start to embellish that mind.
I start examining how we're treated, you know, and it's
just very true. You know, we're not treated with care
and we should be, you know, period, we're human beings.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
It's a very simple test too.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
And the one thing that I found in the way
that it's useful is that it often stops white folks
from there the easy mental gymnastics. It won't stop them
from all of it, but it'll stop it from the
low hanging mental gymnastics. Well, police are just doing their job.
Could you conceive of the police doing this to a
(25:04):
sixty five year old white woman. If you can, then
I'll stop right here. Can you conceive of a police
officer kneeling on the neck for eight minutes of a
sixty five year old white woman. If not, then you're
seeing their bias on full display. And they have to
try a lot harder to get the mental gymnastics off,
and they will. But it's a very good starting point
(25:24):
for a lot of conversations like this. Q doesn't love it,
but you know, he lets me get it off every
so often, so I roll with it anyway. For our
final story this week, it centers around the release of
financial records from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Doug share
with our audience some details on this report, and then
esther We're going to come to you for your thoughts.
Speaker 4 (25:42):
As Justice Thomas has formally disclosed two trips that he
took with Republican mega donor Harlan Crow in twenty nineteen.
The trips were in to Ballet and a vacation spot
in California. He said that the information was quote unquote
inadvertently omitted at the time of filing US. The Supreme
Court's disclosure reports were the first release since the Court
(26:05):
adopted a code of conduct last year in response to
epics scandals. The disclosure show that Justice Konaji Brown Jackson
received four concert tickets from singer Beyonce, valued at about
three thousand dollars. Thomas's report states that he received two
photo albums worth about two thousand dollars, and several of
the justices received book royalties and stuff like that. Thomas
(26:28):
did acknowledge that Republican billionaire Harland Crowe did pay for
his accommodations during these trips to Bali and California, and
the acknowledgment of Crowe's quote unquote generosity was included an
annual financial disclosure report filed by Thomas and made public
not long ago. So he's considering or he continues to
(26:51):
face criticism for accepting these lavish trips from Crow And yeah,
I mean, you know, I personally feel that something they
write and things need to be reformed because you know,
these these mega donors have megapower, you know, and so
in my opinion, it's I'm not saying that it's to
(27:13):
pay for play. I'm not saying that technically, but come on, man,
there's just too much gray in between there. These billionaire
mega donors are hoping that some of the decisions that
these Supreme Court justices make will affect their bottom line.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
That's just my opinion dropping the mic on that one.
There you go, all right, esther, let's get you to
weigh in.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
Well, I think that I'm glad that you brought out
the fact that you know, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson, you know,
she got the concert tickets from Beyonce. Justice Brett Kavanaugh
he also got a book advance of about three hundred
and forty thousand bucks for a legal memoir that he's
working on, so he is not alone. But I feel like,
(27:56):
you know, Thomas has been in the game for quite
some time and a lot longer than the other two,
and that regardless of how long they've been in the game,
they all have been are on the Supreme Court and
should be held to a high standard in terms of ethics,
(28:17):
and those ethical standards should be written out in playing
English as to this is what you cannot do, and
this is what you should do, and this should be disclosed.
And I think that that's where a lot of the
gray area is for a lot of people, because there
are no written, you know, standard ethical rules when it
comes to what the Supreme Court can and can't do.
(28:39):
And I think that that's one thing that needs to
be like re established and fixed, and that that there
has to be you know, they had to be held
to a standard if they want others to be held
to a standard, and they rule on different things in
terms of you know, legalities that other people who have
(28:59):
to be held to a standard, they should be held
to a standard as well, especially since they are Supreme
Court justices which have so much power, and how we
as a as a public, those in the public have
to we have to abide by their their rulings now,
you know. So you know, I mean just just in
(29:21):
the terms of Roe v. Wade, how many women are
suffering that are you know, trying to just get healthcare
when they're in a very precarious situation. And uh, this
ruling has made it made it possible for states to
do a lot of things that are you know, somewhat
(29:41):
dangerous to women's health in many cases. So I just
think it's important. It's important that they that the reporting
comes out, it's important that people, you know, shine a
light on it, and there's important that that some things
can be changed in terms of law.
Speaker 1 (29:57):
Absolutely, you know, there's a there's one sort of almost
fatal flaw that is present in the Supreme Court's ethics framework,
and you wouldn't think that it would become a thing,
(30:17):
but it has in twenty twenty three, twenty twenty four.
There is no like there, believe it or not. There
is an ethics code, but the ethics code was decided
on by the Supreme Court and there is no mechanism
(30:41):
were enforcing it. There are no consequences if it is violated.
And the Supreme Court justices are justices for their entire life,
so there's no election that they have to run for,
so they can just be corrupt in perpetuity. And yes,
(31:04):
if they are as far gone as let's say, a
Justice Clarence Thomas, they will ultimately make Republicans look bad.
But Justice Thomas does not have to care about anybody's opinion.
It will never affect his bottom line or his capacity
to feed his family or indeed his place in history,
(31:27):
which you know, to us is not very significant. I
mean it's significant, but it's not significant in a positive way.
You know, I've been to the National Museum of African
American History and Culture. Right, and to be fair, Justice
Clarence Thomas is a black Supreme Court justice. Right, But
when I walk into the exhibit of the Black Supreme
Court justices. You have Thurgood Marshall, you have Katanji Brown Jaw,
(31:50):
you have all of these like major figures. And then
in the bottom corner right as you walk out, there's
a little tiny plaque that says Justice Clarence Thomas as a.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Photo and maybe like a one paragraph on them. Right.
But to Republicans, he's fine, you know, what's the big deal?
Speaker 1 (32:06):
You know what I mean? And if they're celebrating him,
and he's got his money and he's got his obviously
he's got some friends, and you know, he's a million
years old, and he's what else is there to see here?
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Soon as.
Speaker 1 (32:19):
There's another Republican president in office, he's going to retire,
and that Republican president is going to appoint a brand
new justice in their late thirties early forties to push
a Republican agenda for the next you know, forty years.
And so this is where we are, and this is
(32:41):
what Clarence Thomas specifically has allowed to take place by
kind of I don't want to call him a race trader.
That wouldn't be fair because there are a lot of
people that feel how he feels that are black, but
I think disconnected from the black experience. Really, like at
(33:03):
some point he had to really become disconnected or lost
his empathy, or maybe never had it.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
Who's to say, I don't know that man, But I
will say that while Roe v.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
Wade was struck down, the Supreme Court did, and this
is kind of recent headlines, the Supreme Court did, unanimously,
including Clarence Thomas, unanimously decide to retain full access to
the abortion pill maffet prazone. I believe that's how it's pronounced.
(33:38):
I don't take abortion pill, so I don't know how
to say it. But there's still access to that.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
So maybe this is who knows.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
I feel like there's a lot of Republican influence on
the Supreme Court justices at present, and because this is
an election year, and because there are a lot of
women who are very upset about Roe v. Wade who
would otherwise vote Republican, this might be a maneuver in
trying to get some of those voters back. But you know,
(34:12):
this has been a long standing, concerted Republican effort that
has resulted in where we stand right now with respect
to abortion access, with respect to affirmative action and so forth.
And this plan continues more or less into the future.
I suspect it will get a lot worse for marginalized folks.
(34:34):
And if you think I'm just making that up or
it's a conspiracy theory, I invite you to check out
Project twenty twenty five and their plan is there in
living color for everyone to read, and you can see
exactly what Republicans are trying to do up to an
including owning the Supreme Court so that anything that is
challenged will ultimately fall. You can appeal it, appeal a pillo,
(34:55):
but once it gets to the Supreme Court, it will
ultimately fall on the side of the conservative moral right.
Speaker 2 (35:03):
So a lot to look.
Speaker 4 (35:04):
Out for their power to do that, though, I mean,
you know, I'm familiar with the Project twenty twenty five.
I mean, do they really have the executive power to
do such a thing.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
If they get the president back in office? Yeah. Yeah,
So that's why this election is such a big deal.
Speaker 1 (35:19):
And I'm so disappointed with our Democrat establishment because you know,
we have the options that we have, and we have
other options that might work, work and look a little
bit better, but they feel like Joe Biden beat him once,
so he can beat him again. And you know, it's
a decision. It's made obviously a lot higher than this conversation.
(35:41):
So we're stuck with Project twenty twenty five and the
next forty to fifty years of reliving Jim Crow, I
mean more or less, or I'll be moving together Biden
term which of the two? I know which one I
would pick, But I just don't love that I have
to vote for someone who is participating in an active genocide,
(36:02):
who failed to deliver on his promises. And we elected
him in twenty twenty after we saw George Floyd's life
gets snuffed out, after you know, all these other sorts
of things. And I understand a lot of black people saying,
you know, Democrats are not they're taking advantage of the
black vote. You know, I understand that. But now it's
kind of mission critical and it's like, well, we can
get nothing, or we can get things that get a
(36:24):
lot worse. And honestly, Juneteenth is not nothing, because nothing
is nothing. So he did give us Juneteenth and a
couple of other symbolic things, you know, and there's some
some good stuff too. I got, you know, the student
loan stuff. I understand that all that, but.
Speaker 4 (36:38):
Well, he also fought very strongly when it comes to
environmental justice.
Speaker 2 (36:44):
Sure, sure, but see the thing is fighting and results
are two different things. And we learned that after the residency.
Speaker 4 (36:51):
Was he did establish a environmental Justice office. Yeah, and
so they are enforcing and they've been enforcing you.
Speaker 1 (36:59):
Okay, fair point, but in terms of like keeping that
same energy when it comes to all of the rest
of the things. And now that we know what a
strong leadership looks like, granted he wasn't our strong leader,
but you know, Donald Trump got in there and bullied
everybody and he was like, this is how it's gonna be.
And he shoehorned in Supreme Court justices and he made
you know, he was on his level. And Joe Biden
(37:22):
is just like trying to play old school politics. And look,
I don't like I mean, I know what I'm gonna do.
I have a responsibility as a voter in this country.
I have to vote. But you know, everything flew out
the window when he started sending all those missiles to Israel.
I'm like, I couldn't do this. You know, I get
(37:42):
to hug my son every day and I've seen people
hug their body parts of their kids, you know what
I'm saying, And it just doesn't feel morally, it doesn't
feel just it doesn't feel right. And you know, if
he had a little bit more in the way of
like Gusto, like we know that position whole the capacity
for again, after seeing Trump and he had done a
(38:03):
couple more things, it might be a little easier to say, look, man,
maybe he was caught in a bad situation whatever. Maybe
I don't suspect I personally would get there, but for
black people in general, it might be like you take
the good with the bad.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Whatever.
Speaker 1 (38:16):
But you know, when we look around and we see
June tenth and student loan relief, and you know, some effort,
you know, this laid into his administration about you know,
trying to you know whatever, it's it's like, I understand
why people say, you know, these people are playing in
our face.
Speaker 2 (38:29):
So I either won't voter or I'll vote for the other guy.
And we're here.
Speaker 1 (38:34):
But I again, I'm a lot more afraid of Project
twenty twenty five than I am of you know, forty
years of you know, I got a pretty decent life here.
I'm not afraid of too much. You know what I'm saying,
I don't want it to get worse. So anyway, that's
all the time we have for today, So I appreciate
you both as always for sharing your brilliance and your
insight into these stories once again. Today's guests are Black
(38:55):
Information Network news anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis. This
has been a production of the Black Information Network. Today's
show was produced by Chris Thompson. Have some thoughts you'd
like to share, use the red microphone talkback feature on
the iHeartRadio app. While you're there, be sure to hit
subscribe and download all of our episodes. I'm your host
Rams's Jaw on all social media, and I'll be hosting
(39:17):
another episode of Civic Cipher this weekend on a station
near you. For stations, showtimes, and podcast info, check Civiccipher
dot com and join us Monday as we share our
news with our voice from our perspective right here on
the Black Information Network Daily podcast
It's been another busy news week and we like to
review the major stories of the week here on the
Black Information Network. Today, we are joined by Black Information
Network news anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis to discuss
this week's major stories.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
This is the Black.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Information Network Daily Podcast and I am your host, ramsy Jah.
All right, Esther and Doug, welcome back to the show.
What's the latest with you?
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Doug? Normally we started with Esther, but I'll give you
the floor today. It's hot out here in Las Vegas. Man,
I don't want to hear that. I'm in Phoenix. Esther.
I know you had a busy morning. What's the latest.
How you feeling?
Speaker 1 (00:36):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Pretty good.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
I'm still, you know, vibing off of the Graycies a
couple of weeks ago, having that and then going out
and talking with the folks with Taraji p Henson and
can we talk. They had a big conference in DC
where I got a chance to talk to other parents
and caregivers, those of kids on the spectrum. So it
(00:59):
was fun.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Yeah, yeah, that's fantastic. Fun. Fact.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
I started a relationship with the facility out here. They
don't like the word facility, but it's called first Place
where they help the severely autistic in transitioning into a
more independent life. And I'm actually going to have them
up on Civic Cipher and your name came up, and
you were part of the reason why I was able
to kind of bridge that connection. So your work is
(01:26):
rippling throughout the country. So I meant to tell you that,
and you just reminded me. In fact, I just got
an email from them about two minutes ago. So anyway,
we'll talk more about it later. First, let's give the
people what they came for. Let's start with the story
of the week. History was made when the child of
a sitting American president stood trial and was found guilty
of a crime. Since this is the first time this
(01:48):
has happened in American history, there's a lot to unpack here. Esther,
Let's start with you give us a breakdown of the
verdict and the Hunter Biden fire arms trial, and then Doug,
of course we're going to come to you for more
details on the story.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Well, the long and short of it is, Hunter Biden
was found guilty on all three federal should say three
federal felony gun charges and the fact that Hunter Biden
violated the laws meant to prevent drug addicts from owning firearms.
That's what basically what it is all about. The conviction
(02:21):
marks the first time a president's immediate family member has
been found guilty of a crime during their father's term
in office, and although his crimes predate Joe Biden's TENUREUS president,
is significant. Hunter Biden could face up to twenty five
years in prison and a fine of up to seven
hundred and fifty thousand dollars at sentencing. Some speculated it'll
(02:42):
be a lot less than the maximum because he's a
first time offender, and Hunter Biden reportedly said he was disappointed,
but he's happy that he has the sport of his family.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
Sure, sure, Doug, let's get you away in here.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
Interesting I've been reading how lawmakers are weighing in on
the guilty verdict from both sides. The recently Democratic representative
Jerry Connelly of Virginia quoted as saying that he regrets
the personal cost to Hunter Biden and his family, but
he thinks that the law ought to be enforced more
often because it saves lives. I thought that was an
interesting perspective from a Democrat. Technically, then Texas Republican Senator
(03:21):
John Cornyn, who's a senior member of the Judiciary Committee,
tells NBC News that the nation could do a lot
to make our community safer if the DOJ would more
actively prosecute gun violations. Interesting, if he really felt that strongly,
I believe he would probably back President Biden's proposal to
(03:43):
ban semi automatic rifles high capacity magazines. And also, you know,
he does not support raising the age to buy guns
like this from eighteen to twenty one, but hey, you know,
I'm just saying. And then a Republican Senator Lindsey Graham
chimed in saying that he doesn't think the average person
would have been charged with this crime, right, That was
(04:06):
interesting too. And then lastly, Senator Richard Bloominghal the Connecticut
said that no single prosecution is necessarily a precedent, but
if it says a trend, all good. So you're getting
some mixed opinions from both Republicans and Democrats.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Off of again, yeah, there's been a lot of.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
Statements being made about it, but I think the one
that feels the most human is the President's statement himself.
He says, quote, as I said last week, I am
the president, but I'm also a dad, Jill and I
love our son and we're so proud of the man
he is today. So the President of course standing by
(04:49):
his son throughout this process. And you know, another thing
is that a lot of people really looked at that
to say that this is how a person should react
to a guilty verdict. This this is how things should go.
And I made a connection. I'm sure other people have
made it as well, but you know, with with Trump
(05:12):
and the guilty verdict in New York, him saying that
that President Biden is kind of the puppet master behind
the whole thing, and that this is a an effort
from Biden and the radical Democrats to interfere with the
twenty twenty four election. It's like, the connection I'm making
(05:36):
is that, you know, the New York is a state trial, yep,
And the Hunter Biden trial is a federal trial, and
federal trials are where the president has a degree of control.
He could have pardoned his own son, and he said
he wasn't going to, and he has not, at least
not yet, and he's letting the judiciary, you know, play
(06:01):
out the way it's going to play out. So it's
interesting that Trump and the rest of his people are
kind of echoing this sentiment that Joe Biden is interfering
with the election via the New York legal process. At
the state legal process, where he has no grounds, he
(06:23):
cannot interfere, there's no jurisdiction, It doesn't work that way.
But where the president actually does have some control, he
is not exercising that control where it benefits him directly
and his family. And I'd imagine as a father myself,
that your son is going to be the most important
thing too, more important than an election, more important than
(06:45):
my son, is more important than me, than heaven and earth.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
So you know, I.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Think that that speaks volumes to exactly what it is
Biden is doing to interfere with a given thing, and that.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
To me appears to be none.
Speaker 1 (07:02):
So moving on next up. Earlier this week, the Pew
Research Center released its findings on a recent study involving
the views of black Americans and public institutions. Doug, this time,
we're going to start with you, tell us a bit
more about this study and some of the findings, and
then esther we're going to follow up.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Yeah, I love this one man.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
According to the Pew Research report most Black Americans believe
in racial conspiracy theories about institutions specifically, we are somewhat doubtful.
The research says about the fairness of these institutions and
suspect that they were designed to hold black people back.
And the survey found that about seventy four percent of
(07:39):
Black adults believe the prison system, seventy six make that,
sixty seven percent believe that the political system, and sixty
five percent believe the economic system are intentionally designed to
hinder black progress. Of course, the suspicions are rooted in
historical experiences of racial discrimination that we still feel today
through the systems of racism, and you know, they include
(08:01):
many events that we have our ancestors have been through,
and they still of course happened today. Nearly ninety percent
of Black adults consider themselves at least somewhat informed about
us black history. That gives a bit more context for
their belief or I should say, belief in these conspiracy theories.
(08:22):
And you know, I believe I don't really believe some
of these are conspiracy theory.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Not at all. The facts pretty factual.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
So it's interesting how they positioned this particular report, sure,
how they position the question, So, yeah, let's get you away.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
In Well, it's funny. I was doing a little bit
more reading about it because I thought it was really
interesting how doctor Keanna Cox, who is the author of
the study and researcher at the Pew Research Center, she
said to the Grio that, you know, it really like
you were saying saying, Doug, that it speak to not
(09:02):
only our history, but personal history that people have. So
that mixed in with people's personal experiences kind of feeds
into the distrust of various systems like healthcare system, the
criminal justice system, and all the systems that are supposed
to be designed to help people in the public eye,
(09:22):
but not the public eye, but the public in general.
And when you look at people's personal experiences, these anecdotes,
and then you compare them with the history that has
happened over the years, you can understand why people have
a racial conspiracy theory quote conspiracy theory, and so you know,
(09:42):
that's why people sometimes are pessimistic, you know, and at
least as far as the study is concerned, she said
that many Black Americans, the vast majority, are pessimistic about
whether equality will ever be achieved.
Speaker 1 (09:55):
Yeah, yeah, you know, It's funny that you mentioned the
the healthcare system because I remember talking a lot about
the Tuskegee experiments during COVID, and I was one of
the people that was suggesting that black people get vaccinated.
(10:18):
That upset you, I, you know, I just that's just
kind of how I felt. But I understood the black
people that did not want to get vaccinated. I totally
understood that. And what I was looking at was the
(10:39):
data saying that COVID disproportionately affected black people and we
were dying from this, and I had to reconcile our
the historical context of you know, distrust in the government,
well founded distrust in the government, and like, we have
(10:59):
to like survived this, we have to get through this.
You know, I didn't like hindsight is twenty twenty. But
in the moment, you know, you're just looking at the
datas and you just don't want to see the worst happen.
And then, you know, being in a position of leadership
in my community.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
I guess.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
I had to compel folks to take some sort of action,
and so, you know, the Tuskegee experiments was one of
those things where I started to I couldn't understand both
sides of it, and since then and before then too,
because again I grew up with a healthy dose of
black history, and then I got a supercharge when I
(11:41):
got to college and my mentor, doctor Camilla Westernberg, kind
of really poured a lot into me. And I took
all the classes, everything that was offered to me. You know,
this was before it was called CRT all that sort
of stuff. I made sure to understand kind of what
we were up against. And I learned about government sanctioned
housing discrimination against black people and how the legacy of
(12:05):
that persist. I learned about redlining. I learned about the
War on drugs and how that was targeted toward black
people and the Hippie movement to disrupt the Black power movement.
In the hippie movement right, I learned about it wasn't
called environmental racism at the time, but I did learn
(12:26):
how black people tended to live in places where there
was more pollution, which affected health care outcomes. I learned
about how the GI Bill wasn't distributed evenly among all the.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
Soldiers after the war.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
I learned about obviously policing, judicial sentencing, all that sort
of stuff that's very We talk about that a lot,
and the rates and the data that suggest that we
are over policed, were overrepresented in prison populations, but we
don't necessarily omit most of the crimes. We just get
(13:03):
convicted for most of the crimes and arrested for most
of the crimes, which you know, you could argue that
when you look at like low level property crimes, crimes
that poor people tend to commit, that you know, there's
something to be said about economic restorative justice in order
to offset what crime rates do exist, what you can
(13:23):
extrapolate from those crime rates.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
But I learned about that.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
I learned obviously going back, I learned about Jim Crow,
I learned about the Black codes. I learned about how
we were left out of the New Deal and how
that disrupted the structure of the black family, and the
legacy of that continued and still continues. That's not to
say that black men are not present in their children's lives.
(13:47):
And if you disagree, I invite you to look at
the CDC study on Black Fathers from twenty fourteen, because indeed,
black men are the best fathers out of all races,
the most present, the most involved in the best you
can look that up yourself. But in terms of the
familial structure, marriage started to mean less under a Republican
(14:10):
president or sorry, under a democratic No, you're right, it
was a Republican president. Yeah, and that's when we started
to shift away from black people voting Republican to black
people voting Democrat. So, you know, there's this there's obviously
(14:31):
the land theft. You know, we we did have some
land at at some point in time, and we had businesses.
We all there this sort of banking that all these
sorts of atrocities, these tragedies that happened to black people
over the course of our history in this country. So
for us now to look around and think, you know,
there's government programs, institutions that you know, and we still
(14:54):
endure a lot of this stuff today, you know what
I mean. It's not like the War on drugs is over.
It's just we just to know that it's like blown
shoes now, you know. It's not like, you know, there's
been economic restorative justice to offset the crime rates. It's
not like we have access to the fullness of the
American dream as a people, not talking about individuals as
a people. When you look at the data, right and
(15:16):
so when I look at these things, I start to
I understand and appreciate how we could feel this way,
because these are all things that I've learned, and I'm
scratching the service. As you know, this goes a lot deeper.
You know, there's things that we're not even talking about.
There's many things we're not talking about. Many heroes that
have helped bring these things to light that we have
(15:37):
not mentioned. But to the participants in that study that
gave the ultimately gave the data, I say, yeah, that's
about right.
Speaker 5 (15:47):
Join us for the National Urban League Conference in New
Orleans July twenty fourth through the twenty seventh at High
ad Regency, New Orleans. Don't miss out register today and
NUIL conference dot org.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Black Information Network News anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis
are here with us discussing this week's major stories. All right,
an Indiana man is seeking justice this week after an
encounter with local law enforcement that violated his rights and
could have turned out deadly. Esther, you covered this story
for this story for the BI in so share with
our audience a little bit more about this and then Doug,
(16:23):
we'll get your thoughts next.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Well, the story is from WLFI in Indiana, and it's
basically several officers showed up from several officers from the
Lafayette Police Department showed up at Neil William Neil's home
with guns drawn and they were demanding that he and
his girlfriend and his son get out of the house. Well,
(16:46):
Neil opened the door and said why, and they said
they needed to talk to him, and he said, do
you have a warrant? And they said no, And this
is all on surveillance camera that they had set up
in their home. They pulled him, his son and basically
kind of kicking and screaming out of the house and
his girlfriend and arrested the son and father for resisting arrest.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
The station reports that.
Speaker 3 (17:09):
Police said that they had a nine to one to
one call saying someone suggested a domestic battery and confinement
was happening inside the home and that there was a
woman and child inside, so they looked inside. They didn't
find who they were looking for, but it is that
it was a former girlfriend and the man's son from
that relationship and they no longer lived there, and the
(17:30):
police told the station that they had video evidence that
there had been abuse in that home. However, Neill said
that that video that they had was from several years
ago and there was no reason for police to barge
into his home and arrest him and book him and
his son and the current girlfriend who was there was
not arrested. So to me, after listening looking at the video,
(17:51):
reading the story kind of feels like a future lawsuit to.
Speaker 1 (17:54):
Me, Doug, I know you saw this too, man, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
The bigger question is what's going to happen to the
individual who gave the police the wrong information? You know,
it just seems like there's something fishy going on. It's
a video from seven years ago, wrong name, wrong address
of Neil's son who sent the video to the police.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
You know, did the police do a their.
Speaker 4 (18:21):
Old check you know, behind the call in the video
to assure that you know, this was indeed the right person.
You know, just because someone sends in a video doesn't
mean anything technically unless you do some background and I
don't know, it just doesn't seem like that there was
a lot of background check. Too much negligence in my
(18:41):
opinion with this particular instance. Really sad in my opinion
that in some of the smallest towns in America, some
of the biggest instances of police misconduct occur regularly. You know,
we cover a lot of these stories on the BI
and a lot of them happened to African Americans, not
saying that they don't happened to other races, but we
we hear about these instances a lot. And I wonder
(19:04):
how race, you know, played in the decision that this
police department made to you know, abruptly enter this person's
house without a warrant. It just really makes me question
the criminal justice system and how these small towns they,
(19:25):
i mean, continue to kind of get away with stuff
like this. I mean maybe you know, I'm sure it
happens in bigger cities, but it just seems like in
these small towns. Man, these these police forces seem like
they can almost do anything. And so I know that,
you know, this is going to be probably a civil
case against the department, but think about the scars that
(19:49):
this family will now have for the rest of their lives,
you know, and how these officers won't have any scars.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
Just might be you know, tapped on the back a
little bit. Yeah, you know, I'll give you a reference.
You know, I just don't feel like it's equal. You know.
Speaker 3 (20:07):
It's funny, Doug, when you said about the video, it
made me think of you know AI. Now you can
use AI to create video quite well. And you wonder
if you know, in the future, somebody could create something
that causes if you don't check it, you know, and
not are not diligent, then it can be used to
(20:27):
you know, a bad way, not true, you know. So
it's interesting that you said that.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
Yeah, you know, there's whenever I see videos like this,
it's it's always kind of disturbing, you know, part of
part of you know, So you mentioned his girlfriend didn't
get arrested. The police, you know, come to this man's house.
He's bewildered by this. For those that haven't seen the video,
(20:54):
he's okay, so what's going on here? He They don't
have warrant then now the police are doing a wellness
check or whatever. But everyone in the house has accounted
for and they don't have a warrant. So unless you're
actively hearing someone in distress or some other way that
you need to like enter into someone's house. Right, But
(21:17):
even when they did, they grabbed his son. His son
was fuming. His son wasn't doing anything right, And I
know that. I know that police have an obligation to
investigate something if they feel like someone could be in
(21:37):
harm's way, right, And so there's some legal framework that
will allow them to enter a residence even if they
don't have a warrant, and perhaps even if they don't
actively hear someone yelling for help, So that I believe
that exists. But the thing that got me was when
I saw them interacting with the gentleman's son and he
(22:02):
was saying, no, that's my son, you know, get off
of him. He's you know, he's blameless, super blameless in this.
And then I read from it was a quote I
believe it was from the girlfriend. It says, you know,
pull me down the steps. I trip, I hurt my knee.
You know, if you're here for a wellness check for
a female and then you man handle a female, it
(22:24):
doesn't make sense to me, right, So it kind of
shows this heavy handed approach that police have. You know,
we mentioned the scars that the family has moving forward
in the increased paranoid and then of course we all
see that, and before we could see it, we would
all hear about stories like that, you know, before videos
and things like that we knew that this was how
the police treated us, right, and so we had this
(22:44):
like kind of shared trauma. I'm convinced that for a
lot of police officers, this is their therapy. It's the
opposite of trauma. They get excited when they get to
go out and bash some heads and you know, man
handle some people and be aggressive and get the bad
guys or whatever it is that they've been indoctrinated to thinking,
or however they can deal with their bully complex and
(23:06):
take it out on us. But you know, Doug, you
mentioned how race factors in, and you know, my litmus
test is always, if the police would not do this
to a sixty five year old white female, if the
police would not do this to a sixty five year
(23:28):
old privileged corporate executive, then they are leaning into their bias,
regardless of what it is. That's my test. If I
could conceive of them doing the same thing to a
to an old white woman, then okay, it's a fair
play that they're doing their job. If they're doing something
(23:50):
that is inconceivable that they would do to an older
white woman an older white man, If it's inconceivable that
they would behave that way, then I'm looking right at
their bias. And that's why I probably they'll never put
me on a jury, because I could see it plain
as day. But yeah, I hope there is a lawsuit
(24:11):
and and I hope that we continue to follow this
story because I'd love for there to be some form
of justice here.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
Doug, you wanted to jump in.
Speaker 4 (24:17):
Yeah, I was just saying, I mean, I totally agree
with everything you said. I mean, I like the litmus thing.
I think I'm going to start to embellish that mind.
I start examining how we're treated, you know, and it's
just very true. You know, we're not treated with care
and we should be, you know, period, we're human beings.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
It's a very simple test too.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
And the one thing that I found in the way
that it's useful is that it often stops white folks
from there the easy mental gymnastics. It won't stop them
from all of it, but it'll stop it from the
low hanging mental gymnastics. Well, police are just doing their job.
Could you conceive of the police doing this to a
(25:04):
sixty five year old white woman. If you can, then
I'll stop right here. Can you conceive of a police
officer kneeling on the neck for eight minutes of a
sixty five year old white woman. If not, then you're
seeing their bias on full display. And they have to
try a lot harder to get the mental gymnastics off,
and they will. But it's a very good starting point
(25:24):
for a lot of conversations like this. Q doesn't love it,
but you know, he lets me get it off every
so often, so I roll with it anyway. For our
final story this week, it centers around the release of
financial records from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Doug share
with our audience some details on this report, and then
esther We're going to come to you for your thoughts.
Speaker 4 (25:42):
As Justice Thomas has formally disclosed two trips that he
took with Republican mega donor Harlan Crow in twenty nineteen.
The trips were in to Ballet and a vacation spot
in California. He said that the information was quote unquote
inadvertently omitted at the time of filing US. The Supreme
Court's disclosure reports were the first release since the Court
(26:05):
adopted a code of conduct last year in response to
epics scandals. The disclosure show that Justice Konaji Brown Jackson
received four concert tickets from singer Beyonce, valued at about
three thousand dollars. Thomas's report states that he received two
photo albums worth about two thousand dollars, and several of
the justices received book royalties and stuff like that. Thomas
(26:28):
did acknowledge that Republican billionaire Harland Crowe did pay for
his accommodations during these trips to Bali and California, and
the acknowledgment of Crowe's quote unquote generosity was included an
annual financial disclosure report filed by Thomas and made public
not long ago. So he's considering or he continues to
(26:51):
face criticism for accepting these lavish trips from Crow And yeah,
I mean, you know, I personally feel that something they
write and things need to be reformed because you know,
these these mega donors have megapower, you know, and so
in my opinion, it's I'm not saying that it's to
(27:13):
pay for play. I'm not saying that technically, but come on, man,
there's just too much gray in between there. These billionaire
mega donors are hoping that some of the decisions that
these Supreme Court justices make will affect their bottom line.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
That's just my opinion dropping the mic on that one.
There you go, all right, esther, let's get you to
weigh in.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
Well, I think that I'm glad that you brought out
the fact that you know, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson, you know,
she got the concert tickets from Beyonce. Justice Brett Kavanaugh
he also got a book advance of about three hundred
and forty thousand bucks for a legal memoir that he's
working on, so he is not alone. But I feel like,
(27:56):
you know, Thomas has been in the game for quite
some time and a lot longer than the other two,
and that regardless of how long they've been in the game,
they all have been are on the Supreme Court and
should be held to a high standard in terms of ethics,
(28:17):
and those ethical standards should be written out in playing
English as to this is what you cannot do, and
this is what you should do, and this should be disclosed.
And I think that that's where a lot of the
gray area is for a lot of people, because there
are no written, you know, standard ethical rules when it
comes to what the Supreme Court can and can't do.
(28:39):
And I think that that's one thing that needs to
be like re established and fixed, and that that there
has to be you know, they had to be held
to a standard if they want others to be held
to a standard, and they rule on different things in
terms of you know, legalities that other people who have
(28:59):
to be held to a standard, they should be held
to a standard as well, especially since they are Supreme
Court justices which have so much power, and how we
as a as a public, those in the public have
to we have to abide by their their rulings now,
you know. So you know, I mean just just in
(29:21):
the terms of Roe v. Wade, how many women are
suffering that are you know, trying to just get healthcare
when they're in a very precarious situation. And uh, this
ruling has made it made it possible for states to
do a lot of things that are you know, somewhat
(29:41):
dangerous to women's health in many cases. So I just
think it's important. It's important that they that the reporting
comes out, it's important that people, you know, shine a
light on it, and there's important that that some things
can be changed in terms of law.
Speaker 1 (29:57):
Absolutely, you know, there's a there's one sort of almost
fatal flaw that is present in the Supreme Court's ethics framework,
and you wouldn't think that it would become a thing,
(30:17):
but it has in twenty twenty three, twenty twenty four.
There is no like there, believe it or not. There
is an ethics code, but the ethics code was decided
on by the Supreme Court and there is no mechanism
(30:41):
were enforcing it. There are no consequences if it is violated.
And the Supreme Court justices are justices for their entire life,
so there's no election that they have to run for,
so they can just be corrupt in perpetuity. And yes,
(31:04):
if they are as far gone as let's say, a
Justice Clarence Thomas, they will ultimately make Republicans look bad.
But Justice Thomas does not have to care about anybody's opinion.
It will never affect his bottom line or his capacity
to feed his family or indeed his place in history,
(31:27):
which you know, to us is not very significant. I
mean it's significant, but it's not significant in a positive way.
You know, I've been to the National Museum of African
American History and Culture. Right, and to be fair, Justice
Clarence Thomas is a black Supreme Court justice. Right, But
when I walk into the exhibit of the Black Supreme
Court justices. You have Thurgood Marshall, you have Katanji Brown Jaw,
(31:50):
you have all of these like major figures. And then
in the bottom corner right as you walk out, there's
a little tiny plaque that says Justice Clarence Thomas as a.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Photo and maybe like a one paragraph on them. Right.
But to Republicans, he's fine, you know, what's the big deal?
Speaker 1 (32:06):
You know what I mean? And if they're celebrating him,
and he's got his money and he's got his obviously
he's got some friends, and you know, he's a million
years old, and he's what else is there to see here?
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Soon as.
Speaker 1 (32:19):
There's another Republican president in office, he's going to retire,
and that Republican president is going to appoint a brand
new justice in their late thirties early forties to push
a Republican agenda for the next you know, forty years.
And so this is where we are, and this is
(32:41):
what Clarence Thomas specifically has allowed to take place by
kind of I don't want to call him a race trader.
That wouldn't be fair because there are a lot of
people that feel how he feels that are black, but
I think disconnected from the black experience. Really, like at
(33:03):
some point he had to really become disconnected or lost
his empathy, or maybe never had it.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
Who's to say, I don't know that man, But I
will say that while Roe v.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
Wade was struck down, the Supreme Court did, and this
is kind of recent headlines, the Supreme Court did, unanimously,
including Clarence Thomas, unanimously decide to retain full access to
the abortion pill maffet prazone. I believe that's how it's pronounced.
(33:38):
I don't take abortion pill, so I don't know how
to say it. But there's still access to that.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
So maybe this is who knows.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
I feel like there's a lot of Republican influence on
the Supreme Court justices at present, and because this is
an election year, and because there are a lot of
women who are very upset about Roe v. Wade who
would otherwise vote Republican, this might be a maneuver in
trying to get some of those voters back. But you know,
(34:12):
this has been a long standing, concerted Republican effort that
has resulted in where we stand right now with respect
to abortion access, with respect to affirmative action and so forth.
And this plan continues more or less into the future.
I suspect it will get a lot worse for marginalized folks.
(34:34):
And if you think I'm just making that up or
it's a conspiracy theory, I invite you to check out
Project twenty twenty five and their plan is there in
living color for everyone to read, and you can see
exactly what Republicans are trying to do up to an
including owning the Supreme Court so that anything that is
challenged will ultimately fall. You can appeal it, appeal a pillo,
(34:55):
but once it gets to the Supreme Court, it will
ultimately fall on the side of the conservative moral right.
Speaker 2 (35:03):
So a lot to look.
Speaker 4 (35:04):
Out for their power to do that, though, I mean,
you know, I'm familiar with the Project twenty twenty five.
I mean, do they really have the executive power to
do such a thing.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
If they get the president back in office? Yeah. Yeah,
So that's why this election is such a big deal.
Speaker 1 (35:19):
And I'm so disappointed with our Democrat establishment because you know,
we have the options that we have, and we have
other options that might work, work and look a little
bit better, but they feel like Joe Biden beat him once,
so he can beat him again. And you know, it's
a decision. It's made obviously a lot higher than this conversation.
(35:41):
So we're stuck with Project twenty twenty five and the
next forty to fifty years of reliving Jim Crow, I
mean more or less, or I'll be moving together Biden
term which of the two? I know which one I
would pick, But I just don't love that I have
to vote for someone who is participating in an active genocide,
(36:02):
who failed to deliver on his promises. And we elected
him in twenty twenty after we saw George Floyd's life
gets snuffed out, after you know, all these other sorts
of things. And I understand a lot of black people saying,
you know, Democrats are not they're taking advantage of the
black vote. You know, I understand that. But now it's
kind of mission critical and it's like, well, we can
get nothing, or we can get things that get a
(36:24):
lot worse. And honestly, Juneteenth is not nothing, because nothing
is nothing. So he did give us Juneteenth and a
couple of other symbolic things, you know, and there's some
some good stuff too. I got, you know, the student
loan stuff. I understand that all that, but.
Speaker 4 (36:38):
Well, he also fought very strongly when it comes to
environmental justice.
Speaker 2 (36:44):
Sure, sure, but see the thing is fighting and results
are two different things. And we learned that after the residency.
Speaker 4 (36:51):
Was he did establish a environmental Justice office. Yeah, and
so they are enforcing and they've been enforcing you.
Speaker 1 (36:59):
Okay, fair point, but in terms of like keeping that
same energy when it comes to all of the rest
of the things. And now that we know what a
strong leadership looks like, granted he wasn't our strong leader,
but you know, Donald Trump got in there and bullied
everybody and he was like, this is how it's gonna be.
And he shoehorned in Supreme Court justices and he made
you know, he was on his level. And Joe Biden
(37:22):
is just like trying to play old school politics. And look,
I don't like I mean, I know what I'm gonna do.
I have a responsibility as a voter in this country.
I have to vote. But you know, everything flew out
the window when he started sending all those missiles to Israel.
I'm like, I couldn't do this. You know, I get
(37:42):
to hug my son every day and I've seen people
hug their body parts of their kids, you know what
I'm saying, And it just doesn't feel morally, it doesn't
feel just it doesn't feel right. And you know, if
he had a little bit more in the way of
like Gusto, like we know that position whole the capacity
for again, after seeing Trump and he had done a
(38:03):
couple more things, it might be a little easier to say, look, man,
maybe he was caught in a bad situation whatever. Maybe
I don't suspect I personally would get there, but for
black people in general, it might be like you take
the good with the bad.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Whatever.
Speaker 1 (38:16):
But you know, when we look around and we see
June tenth and student loan relief, and you know, some effort,
you know, this laid into his administration about you know,
trying to you know whatever, it's it's like, I understand
why people say, you know, these people are playing in
our face.
Speaker 2 (38:29):
So I either won't voter or I'll vote for the other guy.
And we're here.
Speaker 1 (38:34):
But I again, I'm a lot more afraid of Project
twenty twenty five than I am of you know, forty
years of you know, I got a pretty decent life here.
I'm not afraid of too much. You know what I'm saying,
I don't want it to get worse. So anyway, that's
all the time we have for today, So I appreciate
you both as always for sharing your brilliance and your
insight into these stories once again. Today's guests are Black
(38:55):
Information Network news anchors Esther Dillard and Doug Davis. This
has been a production of the Black Information Network. Today's
show was produced by Chris Thompson. Have some thoughts you'd
like to share, use the red microphone talkback feature on
the iHeartRadio app. While you're there, be sure to hit
subscribe and download all of our episodes. I'm your host
Rams's Jaw on all social media, and I'll be hosting
(39:17):
another episode of Civic Cipher this weekend on a station
near you. For stations, showtimes, and podcast info, check Civiccipher
dot com and join us Monday as we share our
news with our voice from our perspective right here on
the Black Information Network Daily podcast
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com