May 14, 2025 • 32 mins
Tiktoker gets detained at the airport - Derek Chauvin wont be released - Steven King's joke. These stories and more are covered in today's Midweek Memo
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):
A man who needs no introduction.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
The Black Information Network is committed to bringing you up
to the date news stories that are relevant, informative, and inspiring.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
And while news stories are always being updated and others
are breaking, we understand that you need to be in
the know all week long.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Welcome to your midweek Memo on the Black Information Network
Daily Podcast with me ramses Jaw and I Am q Ward.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
All Right.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
First up from the Black Information Network of Florida, woman
who makes anti Trump TikTok videos and apparel said she
was detained by Ice at a Miami airport. In a video,
Savannah Pinder, who goes by Eyes of sav on social media,
detailed her accounter with federal authorities at the Miami International
Airport on April twenty six as she returned from a
(00:48):
month long trip in Spain. Pinder, a US citizen, says
she passed through the global entry line and received the
standard green check mark before being directed to the side
by an officer and question about her travel and worker
identified herself as a content creator and was taken through
a series of screenings by multiple officers who allegedly took
her phone and passport and asked detailed questions about her
(01:09):
future travel plans.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
I was taken to around five different officers. Every single
one of them told me they could not tell me
the reason why I was being detained. I was treated
like a literal animal, she said as she moved through
several rooms. Pender said she was repeatedly questioned about her
travel history, work, and the citizenship status of her father,
who immigrated to the US from Panama. Authorities also requested
access to pender social media accounts. Pender frequently shares political
(01:34):
content and runs a nonprofit clothing brand that sells anti
Trump clothing and merchandise.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
They asked me to provide my social media accounts for
them to go through my TikTok, my Snapchat, my Instagram,
and my Facebook, as well as show them how much
money I was making daily on TikTok unquote. Pender's encounter
with ICE comes amid the Trump administration's efforts to deport
migrants without legal status. Federal officials have maintained that the
government is targeting serious criminals, but concerns have been raised
(02:00):
over due process in racial profiling, as dozens of US citizens,
where card holders and legal permanent residents have been detained. Quote,
if you are a United States citizen, you still have
the chance of being detained coming back into the United
States right now. It's crazy times we're living in and
I just want to spread awareness that this is happening.
Speaker 3 (02:19):
It is real.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Uote. So I know that you know you've been very
You've done a great job of warning everyone that this
was coming and tracking this as it's developed. Q. I
also happen to know that you recently were detained at
(02:41):
a United States border crossing because I was there with
you and I saw it happen, and I know that
you also know how scary this can be. So you know,
talk to us about this a bit when you know
when you're at it, because I know you have a
lot more to share about this than I do.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I mean, the thing is, it's not shocking at all,
and it's the thing that I spend the most time
worried about today, for things like this to happen to
myself and people that I care about, and people's response
to me being upset about all of this that we
all well know we clearly all didn't see it coming.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
I very clearly saw this coming.
Speaker 1 (03:21):
US citizens that disagree with him that don't look like him,
or just that he just feels like picking on being detained, arrested,
and in some cases deported for no reason, with no
due process. And when people tried to argue that it
was just about the criminals, and it was, you know,
just about the bad actors and the bad people, and
(03:42):
it was.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Never about that.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
And you know, we'll talk about this more, I'm sure
in the very near future. But turn on the tether
on television. There's chartered planes of immigrants from another place
in the world who look a lot more like him,
being welcome to the country, chartered here with tax payer money,
given some sort of you know, stark package or financial
(04:08):
incentive or assistance to come here because they're persecuted in
their homeland. And as long as you.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Look like them allegedly persecuted, yeah, you can be welcomed
here as a refugee. But if you look like me
and you you're an illegal alien that needs to be.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
Deported and with no due process, and with the person
in power being so immature and so evil and such
a bully, there's no version of this that doesn't reach everybody.
And I think that's people's biggest mistake. As long as
the people identified in the paperwork weren't them, they were
find what it is happening to other people. He's only
(04:45):
talking about the illegals. He's only talking about the bad people. Know,
this could apply to anyone, because you don't walk around
with an identifier or a badge that says bad person
on it. So it's up to them to determine who
they think is bad. And because they think you're bad,
you can be detained and have all type of things
that we've always thought were illegal happened to you in
(05:07):
the name of national security. And you know, black and
brown people, it's always been dangerous here and it just
got way more dangerous. And unfortunately, some of us voted
for this at with the understanding that it would only
affect other people. And here we are.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Yeah, And the crazy thing is that because the Supreme
Court basically granted the presidency the powers of a king,
and because the President and Republicans control all the levers
of government, this this could get a little dicey moving forward.
(05:56):
So but you know, we're going to do our part
and pay attention to it and make sure that we
keep everyone as well informed as we can. So next up,
this from the Black Information Network. Minnesota Attorney General Keith
Ellison made it clear that the former Minneapolis police officer
who killed George Floyd will serve his full state conviction,
despite calls for President Donald Trump to issue him a
federal pardon. During a May eleventh interview on MSNBC's Politics Nation,
(06:20):
Ellison said the push for Trump to pardon Derek Chauvin
is irrelevant when it comes to his state conviction, noting
the ex officer still owes Minnesota twenty two and a
half years.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
He's not getting out, Ellison said in an interview. Chauvin
was sentenced in twenty twenty one to twenty twenty a
half years in state prison on charges of murder in
manslaughter and connection.
Speaker 3 (06:40):
In Floyd's killing.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
He also pleaded guilty to violating Floyd's civil rights and
was sentenced to twenty one years in federal prison. Chauvin
is currently serving his sentences concurrently. In March, for those
that don't remember, right wing commentator Ben Shapiro announced an
online petition to secure a federal pardon for Chauvin, arguing
that he was unjustly convicted of Floyd's murder, during which
the ex officer pinned his knee on the forty six
(07:02):
year old black man's neck for roughly nine minutes. Tack
billionaire and head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency Elon Musk,
that Shapiro's pushed to pardon Chauvin was something to think about.
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
I think they're pushing for it because they want to
agitate and outrage people, Ellison told MSNBC of the pardon.
Goes on to say, I don't know if Trump is
going to pardon Chauvin or not, but if he does,
it doesn't change his prison sentence. He still owes Minnesota
twenty two and a half years, and he's going to
do it either in Minnesota or somewhere. So that is
(07:33):
somebody sounding like they got some sense and understanding that
that is a prudent move for the criminal justice system,
a prudent move for the United States if we are
ever going to continue to try to pursue fellowship in
(07:55):
this land that we share, you know, talk to me
about you know what you were thinking.
Speaker 3 (07:59):
When you were this.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Once upon a time, this would have felt like some finality,
like Okay, they got it right, except checks and balances
don't exist anymore. Documents don't protect people anymore do process
is no longer a thing. And if the guy in
charge wants this guy pardoned, it seems he'll move earth
to make sure it happens, and no one will say
(08:24):
or do anything. So until it's you know, May thirteenth,
twenty forty five, there's a chance this guy might not
spend his whole sentence in prison, especially with you know
who's in charge now and how they're going about things.
They do what they want. You know, some of us
(08:44):
get enraged and frustrated about it, like was highlighted in story,
but they still do what they want and there's no accountability,
there's no punishment for it. There's no reconciliation. Is they're
doing what they want, breaking the law, violating the constitution
with impunity, and people who have their entire lives made
(09:05):
a brand of themselves by being the party of law
and order and standing up for the constitution watch it
happen and do and say nothing to actually applaud the
guy and make him out to be some type of hero.
So I'll be watching until twenty two and a half
years from now.
Speaker 3 (09:18):
We'll see.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
I can't say you're wrong, but you know, we could
have read some worse news than this today, and so
for today we'll call it a marginal amount.
Speaker 3 (09:35):
Of breathing room. So for today, Hey, what's up.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
This is Ramsy's Jah and I am q Ward, and
we're inviting you to subscribe to Civic Cipher, are weekly
social justice podcast right here in the app.
Speaker 4 (09:47):
We pride ourselves on creating a show that busters allyship
empathy and understanding, all the while conducting journalistically credible research,
featuring influential, noteworthy guests, and empowering historically marginalized communities.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
The African proverb breeds, if you want to go far,
go together. So we are asking you to search for
and subscribe to Civic Cipher.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
That Civic cip h e er right here in the app.
This is your midweek memo on the Black Information Network
Daily Podcast with your hosts Rams's Jaw and q Ward.
Speaker 3 (10:19):
All right.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Next up from the Black Information Network, Texas Representative Jasmine
Crockett has revealed that Democratic donors have already are already
eyeing the safest white boy as the party's presidential nominee.
During a recent radio appearance, Crockett discussed the future of
the Democratic Party following Vice President Kamala Harris's lost to
now President Trump in the twenty twenty four election. Per
The Independent, quote it's this fear that the people within
(10:41):
the party, within the primary system will have about voting
for a woman, because every time we voted for a woman,
we've lost so far, Crockett said. She goes on to say, quote,
I think that that's a natural fear because we just
want to win. So there's a lot of people that
are like, you know what, like, let's go find the
safest white boy we can find.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
I mean, I'm just saying.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
I had a donor on the phones with me telling
me that all the donors are lining up behind a candidate.
Crockett said, So I can tell you, and I can
tell you it's not a black person nor a woman.
So they have quote unquote, they have chosen.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
She continued.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
She goes on to say, when I say they, it's
the same donors that most likely had their opinions about
Joe Biden and moved so like that they would be
the they that I would talk about. Quote Crosman declined.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Sorry.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Crockett declined to reveal the candidate's identity. There are several
twenty twenty eight frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nominee that
aligned with Crockett's comments, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, Pennsylvania
Governor Josh Shapiro, Illinois Governor JB. Pritzker, and former Transportation
Secretary Pete Boudajedge. So no real surprises here. I think
I'll just I'll offer this and then you know, let
(11:53):
you share your thoughts too. But I I think that.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
How do I say this?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
So I don't want to sound foolish and like I
haven't been paying attention, but you know, I saw I
think that the past couple of elections, they weren't necessarily
because the candidates were women, right. I do believe that
(12:28):
it is possible for a woman to win the presidency
in the United States. I just and as illustrated by
the fact that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and
we've had this conversation for you and IQ, I do
believe it's possible for a black person to win the
presidency because famously Barack Obama won the presidency twice as
a black man. I see consistently that you know, on
(12:51):
the top of like a presidential candidates wish list for
you know, Democratic voters Michelle Obama is consistently at the
top of that list. Everyone wishes she would run, right,
and she is both a black person and a woman.
(13:11):
I think that the first or not the first, but
the twenty sixteen election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump
that came down to the wire, and Donald Trump pulled
it off for whatever reason that was he was the
guy that was more up. We thought Hillary Clinton was
(13:33):
all the way up. But Hillary Clinton did some stuff
that a lot of people didn't like. I'm one of them.
You know, the Democratic establishment did some stuff that.
Speaker 3 (13:43):
A lot of people didn't like. I'm one of the
people that didn't like that.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
When they, as Dave Chappelle famously stated, karate kicked Bernie Sanders'
legs out from under him.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
And that didn't feel fair.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
It didn't feel like it represented the people and the
wishes of the people, certainly the people that you know,
I was running with. So, you know, that lack of
support and that last moment, I think that could have
cost the race. Now, she still won the popular vote,
meaning that most of the people that voted in that
election voted for a woman, right, And then you know,
(14:21):
obviously later I think that while we did run another
woman in you Know twenty twenty four. I think that
election famously was decided by voter apathy more than a
woman's inability to get people.
Speaker 3 (14:44):
Off the couch.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
It was issues that were relevant to a lot of
the voting base, issues that we've delineated on this show
many times, issues like you know, Palestine, issues like you know,
you know, trans writes, things like this, And with Democrats
trying to appeal to both sides, they were they made
themselves vulnerable to both sides. Again, this is a conversation
(15:05):
we've had before, but I think that those things better
explain the results of those elections than the fact that
it was a woman, Right, And so for Jasmine Crockett
to say that the donors are putting their backing behind
the safest white boy, you know, it's it's not impossible
(15:27):
for white men to lose elections. You know, white men
have lost elections since the beginning of elections in this country, right,
So that's no guarantee. You know, there's other factors that
go into elections, and so that's I think that Democrats
are kind of I don't know, I just it feels
(15:47):
like kind of premature to just write women off right
now because you know, being able to study. Especially Kamala
Harris's campaign. It wasn't a perfect campaign, but it was
about as solid as a person can run. It was just,
you know, not choosing a side. You know you're vulnerable
from the tax on all fronts, and you know that results,
(16:07):
in my estimation, a lot of voter apathy. Those are
my thoughts. Man, You know, talk to me about yours
qu first and foremost. God bless your heart.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
I envy the level of hope and optimism that you
have in this country. Still I don't, but I envy
that you do. You think a black person or a
woman could win the presidency in this country today?
Speaker 3 (16:38):
God bless your heart.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
I think you're conflating whether or not women are qualified
and capable with whether or not this country.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
Will elect them.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
The worst presidential candidate in history, or at least in
our lifetime, has won twice against two of the most
well qualified, reputable women candidates or candidates period. I don't
even have to use the word women human candidates, two
of the most qualified, well established political veteran candidates ever.
(17:15):
A celebrity reality TV star, proven essay, proven racist, proven bigot, proven.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
Misogynists proven not our opinions.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Fact won twice because contrary to what people want to believe,
this country has not yet shown that it will elect
a woman to be the leader of the free world.
Not because we don't think they're capable. Of course they are.
They're the most capable, the most sympathetic, the most qualified.
That has shown us to not matter. With one they
(17:48):
made up a scandal, They made up a scandal about
emails while this guy was on camera Anna hot mic
talking about grabbing women by the pre election that guy
won against a woman, and this time the voter apathy thing,
well enough, people were not apathetic when it came to
the white supremacist agenda that won, the misogynist, sexist, bigoted,
(18:12):
white supremacist the agenda that won, and that is showing
itself true in every news cycle since the day he won.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
So I won't conflate the ideas.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Of course women are capable and qualified and can do
probably a better job. But will this country elected them
and give them the opportunity to do so. I'm not
hopeful for that. I have no evidence that would make
me think so.
Speaker 3 (18:38):
None.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
Well, it looks like we're going to have to wait
a good while because if this is the takeaway the
Democrats have that women are not capable of winning elections,
and it's going to be a long time before it
gets revisited. And I feel like that that takeaway will
(19:03):
last longer than Trump's lifetime. You know, I think that
it's possible that any number of ways to explain this,
it could do that, you know, could could explain it.
Speaker 3 (19:14):
You know, the power of Trump.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
You know, Trump resonated and activated an element of white
supremacy or whatever that they want to call it. But
you know, white people that feel like they got their
guy finally to do their bidding right that listens to them,
you know, not the George Bushes and all them people,
but the people that listen to them on the ground. Somehow,
this billionaire, they've made him into that that figure for them.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
But that's what I mean, the same country that would
make him into their figure. But see that that would
be the same.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Country that would say, yes, a woman can run this.
So here's I think the distinction here is that.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Donald Trump won in twenty sixteen, Donald Trump one in
twenty twenty four. Donald Trump lost in twenty twenty right,
so Donald Trump is not immune what was the difference,
But I think that makes my point. Sure, the difference
is COVID. The difference is that you know, he there
(20:16):
are circumstances. But that's my point, that there are circumstances.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
In order to nuance point.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
You can't leave out that obvious truth that he ran
against a white man.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
You can't.
Speaker 1 (20:25):
And that even if you don't agree with the point
they're making while making your point, leaving out that part
to a.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
Listen, yeah, I didn't.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
I know that point well made, well made, understood, right,
But again I think that the point is better made
when we look at the fact that Hillary Clinton won
the popular vote.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
Right.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
If Hillary Clinton did not win the popular vote, right,
then okay, totally get it understood. Women have to wait
another fifty years before they get another shot.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Right. They didn't though they didn't wait another fifty years,
they were ready to.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Right. But see the thing is with again adding in
that the extra nuance, the extra color, like the COVID stuff,
and you know, all all the rest of it when
you add in why Kamala Harris lost. In my estimation,
this is not this is just me guessing, but the
voter apathy shape that election more than the fact that
(21:22):
Kamala Harris was a woman. Now you have two examples,
and in perpetuity, or at least for the next fifty years,
in my you know, hypothetical example, women have to suffer
or women get relegated to kind of the back of
the bus in a manner of speaking, and they don't
get a chance to kind of pursue this because the
(21:42):
Democratic Party is now afraid that women lack the capacity
to win elections.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
And I think that that's wrong.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
I think that I agree that that's wrong, but I
don't think the reasoning is flawed.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
I do. I do I think the reasoning is flawed
because if I take a coin, person, you think, hold on,
watch this. If I take a coin, and I know
it's not a coin toss, right, but I think that
we've made a point that Hillary Clinton won the popular election.
Joe Biden won the election in twenty twenty, right, So
(22:14):
you know, the elections can go either way. It's not
decided on just is this a woman, or just is
this a white man, or just is the you know,
it's not decided on It's decided by the voters and
the issues and all that other type of stuff, right,
there's nuance, there's there's political forces, there's COVID, there's diseases,
there's all kinds of stuff that influence elections. Right, there's wars,
(22:35):
the stuff in Palestine that effect you know, so all
this stuff, right, it's not a coin toss. But for
the sake of argument, if I was making a decision
based on the fact that sometimes it goes this way
and sometimes it goes that way, if I flipped a
coin twice and both times it landed on heads, if
I was to say, Okay, every time for the next
(22:56):
fifty years that I flip a coin, it's going to
land on heads. So I'm not going to flip a
coin anymore, that's just the wrong approach. Like, no, there's
still a chance, and the chance is evidenced by the
fact that again Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and
Kamala Harris lost under a set of circumstances that would
have been difficult for them to given the party stance,
(23:17):
not the fact that she was a woman. To say
that women are just kind of shut out of this
process and have that mentality, I know they're not saying that,
but them that mentality can be very cancerous, not just
for Democrats, but for Republicans too, because they are looking
(23:38):
at it over here and they're basing their conclusions on
what the conclusions Democrats are arriving at, and then that
affects the people.
Speaker 3 (23:45):
People are like, look, man, we tried to run a
woman and didn't work. So you know, no, there was
more to it.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Than that, right, And that's the thing I'm trying to say, Like,
I get and you're not wrong. I think the bigger
point here is that women are qualified. But I worry
that this being the lesson the Democrats take from it,
could be problematic for women and girls, you know, for
the rest of everyone's lifetime conceivably, because if that's the
(24:10):
lesson that that's what you choose to take from this,
then you know, I feel like that's and I know
we're not talking about democrats in this one story, we're
talking about donors. But I just I worry that that
people are putting the blame on the wrong And I
learned this from you Q believe it or not, because
you're like, yo, they ran a solidk, they did the
(24:31):
best they could, that woman was qualified, you blah blah blah.
To stand the third it racism is strong Okay, we
have to acknowledge that, and you know there are external
factors that shape outcomes. In Commala's case, specifically, my belief
is that it was Palestine, that little bit that would
have been the difference those people motivated and then motivating
(24:55):
other people, that would have been it.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
I think you allow Palestine to be the singular issue. Well,
I think running as a black woman because Donald Trump
had a public Donald Trump had a public stance on Palestine.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
Two.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
It's not like we weren't sure until he won. We
knew he said it out loud. But about that to
be your singular issue when you just don't want to
elect someone. So I don't want to spend two hours
talking about this topic. We can agree to disagree and
move on. There's nuance and lots of unpacks. So we
probably should do a whole show on this topic, just
get breaken down and spend a lot more time on it.
But I don't want to give America a pass on
(25:30):
its racist, sexist history, not that that's not the truth.
So I won't just concede that well, it couldn't have
been that, because no, that definitely played a part Donald
Trump winning both times against women when he's the grossest
candidate we've ever had. America shows up and shows it
tells us who it is. Barack Obama won. That didn't
(25:51):
change my mind that this country's racist. He won twice.
This country still is.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
What it is.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
Its history is what it is, The truth is what
it is. So you know, I love to unpack this more,
but we could go back in four four hours.
Speaker 3 (26:05):
On this topic.
Speaker 2 (26:07):
All right, Well, then the last story this from the
Black Information Network. Author Stephen King is facing backlash after
dragging Haitians into a joke he made about President Donald Trump.
On Wednesday, May seventh, King, a vocal critic of the
Republican Party, made his controversial joke in a Threads post,
calling back to Trump's false claims of Haitian immigrants eating
pets in Springfield, Ohio. Quote why did Donald J. Trump
cross the road? King wrote, in an apparent reference to
(26:29):
the why did the Chicken cross the road joke? He
goes on to say, to see Haitians eating pets on
the other side. King's comment sparked backlash across the aisle,
with some social media users calling for a boycott of
King's books and others saying he took the joke too
far quote, this is not the way to be an ally.
You can punch up without kicking down. At the same time,
(26:49):
one person commented, there's still time to delete this. Another
person commented despite the backlash, King doubled down on his
joke and a follow up post on May.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
Eleven, quote, the joke was about Trump.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
If you don't get that, you should see a doctor
and get your sense of humor checked. Goes on to say,
anyone else noticed, how all of a sudden, no one's
eating your cats and dogs anymore. No one's performing sex
change operations in schools, or aborting babies after birth anymore.
The price of eggs doesn't matter, and a recession isn't
a bad thing, just a necessary growing pain. The author
(27:21):
again caught heat for his response to the backlash quote.
Rather than seeing you made a mistake and being an
adult about it, you're doubling down as most white men do.
Speaker 3 (27:31):
How predictable, one person wrote.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
A different person says, quote, it wasn't just a bad joke,
but it was a racist one. I thought you were
a writer, and a writer of your merit would have
more self awareness. You're not above criticism, do better, so
I didn't love this. It felt like like maybe it
was It wasn't like a funny joke, It wasn't anything
(27:55):
like that, but you know, he made his point. He's like,
this is what the joke was intended to illuminate. You know,
everybody is kind of stopped focusing on all of the
quote unquote issues that plagued the Biden administration, not because
the things have stopped, but because you know, Trump's in office.
(28:15):
In other words, all these stories were made up and
they were sensationalized. But you know, now that Trump is
in office, there's nothing there's really nothing to see here.
These problems aren't as big as they once were, and
you know, people kind of piling on to you know,
Stephen King, the person who's been very critical of the
(28:36):
Trump administration and provided a lot of how would I
say it, a lot of insightful political, original political thoughts
in so far as Donald Trump and as presidencies plural
are concerned. You know, I think that it's attacking people
(29:00):
is just kind of the culture, the online culture. So
even if people are saying something that you just kind
of like didn't really get it or missed the mark
or whatever, to attack that person and to say, you
know whatever, I just you know, we just people are
not perfect. People are not always going to hit the
mark according to you and your sensibilities. And I think
attacking people just is, especially when they've shown that they
(29:25):
kind of are on the same side as you.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
We get to nowhere.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Obviously the opposition is well fortified and they are, for
the most part, in lock in lockstep, and for us
to bicker over little stuff like this feels like it
feels foolish if we're trying to accomplish anything else, you know.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
So those are my early thoughts. What about yours.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
I think if you and I were still on Twitter,
we could have quote tweeted this tweet said my bad comma,
it was a joke about Trump, and then erase the
if you don't get that, you should see a doctor part,
because you don't get to tell people that are offended
that they can't be offended.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
So you don't have to insult people because they didn't
get the joke. You went on to explain it, which
is great, but you had to insult the people first,
which is why somebody pointed out a white person would
do this. You're our ally until it's uncomfortable for you,
and then you get to stand up and insult us
because we got our feelings hurt. If I'm a Haitian person,
I can be offended by that joke, and if you
(30:33):
really have the sensibilities or ballayship that you pretend to
have and are not just an anti Trump person, because
you can be anti Trump and not pro black, right,
So an anti Trump person that was also an ally
would have said, my bad, the joke was about Trump.
Anyone else noticed how, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. And then those
people could have said okay, and everybody moves on.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
But his's doubling.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
Down because he can't dare be wrong and can't dare
apologize to the people that.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Were hurt, like who are you?
Speaker 1 (31:01):
You and I have had to say sorry to people
and we weren't even wrong, but we you know, a
user or a listener sent us a message or an
email and wrote us a letter, and we had to
take the semantic that we got wrong and apologize even
though the point we were trying to make was correct,
because we're not above reproach, we're not above being corrected,
(31:22):
you know, So you could have just simply said my bad.
You didn't have to write a heartfelt apology. You could
have made the same points instead of insulting the people
who are offended by it. You know, sometimes I don't
have a sense of humor when somebody's making a racist
joke about me.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
My bad Stephen. Yeah, that's more than there. Well, lesson learned.
And you know, I know it's not said as widely
these days, but once upon a time, there was something
that was said widely in circles that you and I
run in Q and I feel like, you know, bringing
(31:54):
it back might be a little necessary, just because you know,
we work in these circles.
Speaker 3 (31:58):
But maybe people should say less don't forget.
Speaker 2 (32:04):
These and other news stories can be found at binnews
dot com. This has been a production of the Black
Information Network. Today's show is produced by Chris Thompson. Have
some thoughts you'd like to share, use the red microphone
talkback that you're on the iHeartRadio app. While you're there,
be sure to hit subscribe and download all.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Of our episodes.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
I'm your host ramses Jah on all social media.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
I am Qward on all social media as well, and
Speaker 2 (32:28):
Join us tomorrow as we share our news with our
voice from our perspective right here on the Black Information
Network Daily podcast
A man who needs no introduction.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
The Black Information Network is committed to bringing you up
to the date news stories that are relevant, informative, and inspiring.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
And while news stories are always being updated and others
are breaking, we understand that you need to be in
the know all week long.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Welcome to your midweek Memo on the Black Information Network
Daily Podcast with me ramses Jaw and I Am q Ward.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
All Right.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
First up from the Black Information Network of Florida, woman
who makes anti Trump TikTok videos and apparel said she
was detained by Ice at a Miami airport. In a video,
Savannah Pinder, who goes by Eyes of sav on social media,
detailed her accounter with federal authorities at the Miami International
Airport on April twenty six as she returned from a
(00:48):
month long trip in Spain. Pinder, a US citizen, says
she passed through the global entry line and received the
standard green check mark before being directed to the side
by an officer and question about her travel and worker
identified herself as a content creator and was taken through
a series of screenings by multiple officers who allegedly took
her phone and passport and asked detailed questions about her
(01:09):
future travel plans.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
I was taken to around five different officers. Every single
one of them told me they could not tell me
the reason why I was being detained. I was treated
like a literal animal, she said as she moved through
several rooms. Pender said she was repeatedly questioned about her
travel history, work, and the citizenship status of her father,
who immigrated to the US from Panama. Authorities also requested
access to pender social media accounts. Pender frequently shares political
(01:34):
content and runs a nonprofit clothing brand that sells anti
Trump clothing and merchandise.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
They asked me to provide my social media accounts for
them to go through my TikTok, my Snapchat, my Instagram,
and my Facebook, as well as show them how much
money I was making daily on TikTok unquote. Pender's encounter
with ICE comes amid the Trump administration's efforts to deport
migrants without legal status. Federal officials have maintained that the
government is targeting serious criminals, but concerns have been raised
(02:00):
over due process in racial profiling, as dozens of US citizens,
where card holders and legal permanent residents have been detained. Quote,
if you are a United States citizen, you still have
the chance of being detained coming back into the United
States right now. It's crazy times we're living in and
I just want to spread awareness that this is happening.
Speaker 3 (02:19):
It is real.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Uote. So I know that you know you've been very
You've done a great job of warning everyone that this
was coming and tracking this as it's developed. Q. I
also happen to know that you recently were detained at
(02:41):
a United States border crossing because I was there with
you and I saw it happen, and I know that
you also know how scary this can be. So you know,
talk to us about this a bit when you know
when you're at it, because I know you have a
lot more to share about this than I do.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I mean, the thing is, it's not shocking at all,
and it's the thing that I spend the most time
worried about today, for things like this to happen to
myself and people that I care about, and people's response
to me being upset about all of this that we
all well know we clearly all didn't see it coming.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
I very clearly saw this coming.
Speaker 1 (03:21):
US citizens that disagree with him that don't look like him,
or just that he just feels like picking on being detained, arrested,
and in some cases deported for no reason, with no
due process. And when people tried to argue that it
was just about the criminals, and it was, you know,
just about the bad actors and the bad people, and
(03:42):
it was.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Never about that.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
And you know, we'll talk about this more, I'm sure
in the very near future. But turn on the tether
on television. There's chartered planes of immigrants from another place
in the world who look a lot more like him,
being welcome to the country, chartered here with tax payer money,
given some sort of you know, stark package or financial
(04:08):
incentive or assistance to come here because they're persecuted in
their homeland. And as long as you.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Look like them allegedly persecuted, yeah, you can be welcomed
here as a refugee. But if you look like me
and you you're an illegal alien that needs to be.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
Deported and with no due process, and with the person
in power being so immature and so evil and such
a bully, there's no version of this that doesn't reach everybody.
And I think that's people's biggest mistake. As long as
the people identified in the paperwork weren't them, they were
find what it is happening to other people. He's only
(04:45):
talking about the illegals. He's only talking about the bad people. Know,
this could apply to anyone, because you don't walk around
with an identifier or a badge that says bad person
on it. So it's up to them to determine who
they think is bad. And because they think you're bad,
you can be detained and have all type of things
that we've always thought were illegal happened to you in
(05:07):
the name of national security. And you know, black and
brown people, it's always been dangerous here and it just
got way more dangerous. And unfortunately, some of us voted
for this at with the understanding that it would only
affect other people. And here we are.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Yeah, And the crazy thing is that because the Supreme
Court basically granted the presidency the powers of a king,
and because the President and Republicans control all the levers
of government, this this could get a little dicey moving forward.
(05:56):
So but you know, we're going to do our part
and pay attention to it and make sure that we
keep everyone as well informed as we can. So next up,
this from the Black Information Network. Minnesota Attorney General Keith
Ellison made it clear that the former Minneapolis police officer
who killed George Floyd will serve his full state conviction,
despite calls for President Donald Trump to issue him a
federal pardon. During a May eleventh interview on MSNBC's Politics Nation,
(06:20):
Ellison said the push for Trump to pardon Derek Chauvin
is irrelevant when it comes to his state conviction, noting
the ex officer still owes Minnesota twenty two and a
half years.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
He's not getting out, Ellison said in an interview. Chauvin
was sentenced in twenty twenty one to twenty twenty a
half years in state prison on charges of murder in
manslaughter and connection.
Speaker 3 (06:40):
In Floyd's killing.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
He also pleaded guilty to violating Floyd's civil rights and
was sentenced to twenty one years in federal prison. Chauvin
is currently serving his sentences concurrently. In March, for those
that don't remember, right wing commentator Ben Shapiro announced an
online petition to secure a federal pardon for Chauvin, arguing
that he was unjustly convicted of Floyd's murder, during which
the ex officer pinned his knee on the forty six
(07:02):
year old black man's neck for roughly nine minutes. Tack
billionaire and head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency Elon Musk,
that Shapiro's pushed to pardon Chauvin was something to think about.
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
I think they're pushing for it because they want to
agitate and outrage people, Ellison told MSNBC of the pardon.
Goes on to say, I don't know if Trump is
going to pardon Chauvin or not, but if he does,
it doesn't change his prison sentence. He still owes Minnesota
twenty two and a half years, and he's going to
do it either in Minnesota or somewhere. So that is
(07:33):
somebody sounding like they got some sense and understanding that
that is a prudent move for the criminal justice system,
a prudent move for the United States if we are
ever going to continue to try to pursue fellowship in
(07:55):
this land that we share, you know, talk to me
about you know what you were thinking.
Speaker 3 (07:59):
When you were this.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Once upon a time, this would have felt like some finality,
like Okay, they got it right, except checks and balances
don't exist anymore. Documents don't protect people anymore do process
is no longer a thing. And if the guy in
charge wants this guy pardoned, it seems he'll move earth
to make sure it happens, and no one will say
(08:24):
or do anything. So until it's you know, May thirteenth,
twenty forty five, there's a chance this guy might not
spend his whole sentence in prison, especially with you know
who's in charge now and how they're going about things.
They do what they want. You know, some of us
(08:44):
get enraged and frustrated about it, like was highlighted in story,
but they still do what they want and there's no accountability,
there's no punishment for it. There's no reconciliation. Is they're
doing what they want, breaking the law, violating the constitution
with impunity, and people who have their entire lives made
(09:05):
a brand of themselves by being the party of law
and order and standing up for the constitution watch it
happen and do and say nothing to actually applaud the
guy and make him out to be some type of hero.
So I'll be watching until twenty two and a half
years from now.
Speaker 3 (09:18):
We'll see.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
I can't say you're wrong, but you know, we could
have read some worse news than this today, and so
for today we'll call it a marginal amount.
Speaker 3 (09:35):
Of breathing room. So for today, Hey, what's up.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
This is Ramsy's Jah and I am q Ward, and
we're inviting you to subscribe to Civic Cipher, are weekly
social justice podcast right here in the app.
Speaker 4 (09:47):
We pride ourselves on creating a show that busters allyship
empathy and understanding, all the while conducting journalistically credible research,
featuring influential, noteworthy guests, and empowering historically marginalized communities.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
The African proverb breeds, if you want to go far,
go together. So we are asking you to search for
and subscribe to Civic Cipher.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
That Civic cip h e er right here in the app.
This is your midweek memo on the Black Information Network
Daily Podcast with your hosts Rams's Jaw and q Ward.
Speaker 3 (10:19):
All right.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Next up from the Black Information Network, Texas Representative Jasmine
Crockett has revealed that Democratic donors have already are already
eyeing the safest white boy as the party's presidential nominee.
During a recent radio appearance, Crockett discussed the future of
the Democratic Party following Vice President Kamala Harris's lost to
now President Trump in the twenty twenty four election. Per
The Independent, quote it's this fear that the people within
(10:41):
the party, within the primary system will have about voting
for a woman, because every time we voted for a woman,
we've lost so far, Crockett said. She goes on to say, quote,
I think that that's a natural fear because we just
want to win. So there's a lot of people that
are like, you know what, like, let's go find the
safest white boy we can find.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
I mean, I'm just saying.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
I had a donor on the phones with me telling
me that all the donors are lining up behind a candidate.
Crockett said, So I can tell you, and I can
tell you it's not a black person nor a woman.
So they have quote unquote, they have chosen.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
She continued.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
She goes on to say, when I say they, it's
the same donors that most likely had their opinions about
Joe Biden and moved so like that they would be
the they that I would talk about. Quote Crosman declined.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Sorry.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Crockett declined to reveal the candidate's identity. There are several
twenty twenty eight frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nominee that
aligned with Crockett's comments, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, Pennsylvania
Governor Josh Shapiro, Illinois Governor JB. Pritzker, and former Transportation
Secretary Pete Boudajedge. So no real surprises here. I think
I'll just I'll offer this and then you know, let
(11:53):
you share your thoughts too. But I I think that.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
How do I say this?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
So I don't want to sound foolish and like I
haven't been paying attention, but you know, I saw I
think that the past couple of elections, they weren't necessarily
because the candidates were women, right. I do believe that
(12:28):
it is possible for a woman to win the presidency
in the United States. I just and as illustrated by
the fact that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and
we've had this conversation for you and IQ, I do
believe it's possible for a black person to win the
presidency because famously Barack Obama won the presidency twice as
a black man. I see consistently that you know, on
(12:51):
the top of like a presidential candidates wish list for
you know, Democratic voters Michelle Obama is consistently at the
top of that list. Everyone wishes she would run, right,
and she is both a black person and a woman.
(13:11):
I think that the first or not the first, but
the twenty sixteen election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump
that came down to the wire, and Donald Trump pulled
it off for whatever reason that was he was the
guy that was more up. We thought Hillary Clinton was
(13:33):
all the way up. But Hillary Clinton did some stuff
that a lot of people didn't like. I'm one of them.
You know, the Democratic establishment did some stuff that.
Speaker 3 (13:43):
A lot of people didn't like. I'm one of the
people that didn't like that.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
When they, as Dave Chappelle famously stated, karate kicked Bernie Sanders'
legs out from under him.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
And that didn't feel fair.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
It didn't feel like it represented the people and the
wishes of the people, certainly the people that you know,
I was running with. So, you know, that lack of
support and that last moment, I think that could have
cost the race. Now, she still won the popular vote,
meaning that most of the people that voted in that
election voted for a woman, right, And then you know,
(14:21):
obviously later I think that while we did run another
woman in you Know twenty twenty four. I think that
election famously was decided by voter apathy more than a
woman's inability to get people.
Speaker 3 (14:44):
Off the couch.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
It was issues that were relevant to a lot of
the voting base, issues that we've delineated on this show
many times, issues like you know, Palestine, issues like you know,
you know, trans writes, things like this, And with Democrats
trying to appeal to both sides, they were they made
themselves vulnerable to both sides. Again, this is a conversation
(15:05):
we've had before, but I think that those things better
explain the results of those elections than the fact that
it was a woman, Right, And so for Jasmine Crockett
to say that the donors are putting their backing behind
the safest white boy, you know, it's it's not impossible
(15:27):
for white men to lose elections. You know, white men
have lost elections since the beginning of elections in this country, right,
So that's no guarantee. You know, there's other factors that
go into elections, and so that's I think that Democrats
are kind of I don't know, I just it feels
(15:47):
like kind of premature to just write women off right
now because you know, being able to study. Especially Kamala
Harris's campaign. It wasn't a perfect campaign, but it was
about as solid as a person can run. It was just,
you know, not choosing a side. You know you're vulnerable
from the tax on all fronts, and you know that results,
(16:07):
in my estimation, a lot of voter apathy. Those are
my thoughts. Man, You know, talk to me about yours
qu first and foremost. God bless your heart.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
I envy the level of hope and optimism that you
have in this country. Still I don't, but I envy
that you do. You think a black person or a
woman could win the presidency in this country today?
Speaker 3 (16:38):
God bless your heart.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
I think you're conflating whether or not women are qualified
and capable with whether or not this country.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
Will elect them.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
The worst presidential candidate in history, or at least in
our lifetime, has won twice against two of the most
well qualified, reputable women candidates or candidates period. I don't
even have to use the word women human candidates, two
of the most qualified, well established political veteran candidates ever.
(17:15):
A celebrity reality TV star, proven essay, proven racist, proven bigot, proven.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
Misogynists proven not our opinions.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Fact won twice because contrary to what people want to believe,
this country has not yet shown that it will elect
a woman to be the leader of the free world.
Not because we don't think they're capable. Of course they are.
They're the most capable, the most sympathetic, the most qualified.
That has shown us to not matter. With one they
(17:48):
made up a scandal, They made up a scandal about
emails while this guy was on camera Anna hot mic
talking about grabbing women by the pre election that guy
won against a woman, and this time the voter apathy thing,
well enough, people were not apathetic when it came to
the white supremacist agenda that won, the misogynist, sexist, bigoted,
(18:12):
white supremacist the agenda that won, and that is showing
itself true in every news cycle since the day he won.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
So I won't conflate the ideas.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Of course women are capable and qualified and can do
probably a better job. But will this country elected them
and give them the opportunity to do so. I'm not
hopeful for that. I have no evidence that would make
me think so.
Speaker 3 (18:38):
None.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
Well, it looks like we're going to have to wait
a good while because if this is the takeaway the
Democrats have that women are not capable of winning elections,
and it's going to be a long time before it
gets revisited. And I feel like that that takeaway will
(19:03):
last longer than Trump's lifetime. You know, I think that
it's possible that any number of ways to explain this,
it could do that, you know, could could explain it.
Speaker 3 (19:14):
You know, the power of Trump.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
You know, Trump resonated and activated an element of white
supremacy or whatever that they want to call it. But
you know, white people that feel like they got their
guy finally to do their bidding right that listens to them,
you know, not the George Bushes and all them people,
but the people that listen to them on the ground. Somehow,
this billionaire, they've made him into that that figure for them.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
But that's what I mean, the same country that would
make him into their figure. But see that that would
be the same.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Country that would say, yes, a woman can run this.
So here's I think the distinction here is that.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Donald Trump won in twenty sixteen, Donald Trump one in
twenty twenty four. Donald Trump lost in twenty twenty right,
so Donald Trump is not immune what was the difference,
But I think that makes my point. Sure, the difference
is COVID. The difference is that you know, he there
(20:16):
are circumstances. But that's my point, that there are circumstances.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
In order to nuance point.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
You can't leave out that obvious truth that he ran
against a white man.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
You can't.
Speaker 1 (20:25):
And that even if you don't agree with the point
they're making while making your point, leaving out that part
to a.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
Listen, yeah, I didn't.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
I know that point well made, well made, understood, right,
But again I think that the point is better made
when we look at the fact that Hillary Clinton won
the popular vote.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
Right.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
If Hillary Clinton did not win the popular vote, right,
then okay, totally get it understood. Women have to wait
another fifty years before they get another shot.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Right. They didn't though they didn't wait another fifty years,
they were ready to.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Right. But see the thing is with again adding in
that the extra nuance, the extra color, like the COVID stuff,
and you know, all all the rest of it when
you add in why Kamala Harris lost. In my estimation,
this is not this is just me guessing, but the
voter apathy shape that election more than the fact that
(21:22):
Kamala Harris was a woman. Now you have two examples,
and in perpetuity, or at least for the next fifty years,
in my you know, hypothetical example, women have to suffer
or women get relegated to kind of the back of
the bus in a manner of speaking, and they don't
get a chance to kind of pursue this because the
(21:42):
Democratic Party is now afraid that women lack the capacity
to win elections.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
And I think that that's wrong.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
I think that I agree that that's wrong, but I
don't think the reasoning is flawed.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
I do. I do I think the reasoning is flawed
because if I take a coin, person, you think, hold on,
watch this. If I take a coin, and I know
it's not a coin toss, right, but I think that
we've made a point that Hillary Clinton won the popular election.
Joe Biden won the election in twenty twenty, right, So
(22:14):
you know, the elections can go either way. It's not
decided on just is this a woman, or just is
this a white man, or just is the you know,
it's not decided on It's decided by the voters and
the issues and all that other type of stuff, right,
there's nuance, there's there's political forces, there's COVID, there's diseases,
there's all kinds of stuff that influence elections. Right, there's wars,
(22:35):
the stuff in Palestine that effect you know, so all
this stuff, right, it's not a coin toss. But for
the sake of argument, if I was making a decision
based on the fact that sometimes it goes this way
and sometimes it goes that way, if I flipped a
coin twice and both times it landed on heads, if
I was to say, Okay, every time for the next
(22:56):
fifty years that I flip a coin, it's going to
land on heads. So I'm not going to flip a
coin anymore, that's just the wrong approach. Like, no, there's
still a chance, and the chance is evidenced by the
fact that again Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and
Kamala Harris lost under a set of circumstances that would
have been difficult for them to given the party stance,
(23:17):
not the fact that she was a woman. To say
that women are just kind of shut out of this
process and have that mentality, I know they're not saying that,
but them that mentality can be very cancerous, not just
for Democrats, but for Republicans too, because they are looking
(23:38):
at it over here and they're basing their conclusions on
what the conclusions Democrats are arriving at, and then that
affects the people.
Speaker 3 (23:45):
People are like, look, man, we tried to run a
woman and didn't work. So you know, no, there was
more to it.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Than that, right, And that's the thing I'm trying to say, Like,
I get and you're not wrong. I think the bigger
point here is that women are qualified. But I worry
that this being the lesson the Democrats take from it,
could be problematic for women and girls, you know, for
the rest of everyone's lifetime conceivably, because if that's the
(24:10):
lesson that that's what you choose to take from this,
then you know, I feel like that's and I know
we're not talking about democrats in this one story, we're
talking about donors. But I just I worry that that
people are putting the blame on the wrong And I
learned this from you Q believe it or not, because
you're like, yo, they ran a solidk, they did the
(24:31):
best they could, that woman was qualified, you blah blah blah.
To stand the third it racism is strong Okay, we
have to acknowledge that, and you know there are external
factors that shape outcomes. In Commala's case, specifically, my belief
is that it was Palestine, that little bit that would
have been the difference those people motivated and then motivating
(24:55):
other people, that would have been it.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
I think you allow Palestine to be the singular issue. Well,
I think running as a black woman because Donald Trump
had a public Donald Trump had a public stance on Palestine.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
Two.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
It's not like we weren't sure until he won. We
knew he said it out loud. But about that to
be your singular issue when you just don't want to
elect someone. So I don't want to spend two hours
talking about this topic. We can agree to disagree and
move on. There's nuance and lots of unpacks. So we
probably should do a whole show on this topic, just
get breaken down and spend a lot more time on it.
But I don't want to give America a pass on
(25:30):
its racist, sexist history, not that that's not the truth.
So I won't just concede that well, it couldn't have
been that, because no, that definitely played a part Donald
Trump winning both times against women when he's the grossest
candidate we've ever had. America shows up and shows it
tells us who it is. Barack Obama won. That didn't
(25:51):
change my mind that this country's racist. He won twice.
This country still is.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
What it is.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
Its history is what it is, The truth is what
it is. So you know, I love to unpack this more,
but we could go back in four four hours.
Speaker 3 (26:05):
On this topic.
Speaker 2 (26:07):
All right, Well, then the last story this from the
Black Information Network. Author Stephen King is facing backlash after
dragging Haitians into a joke he made about President Donald Trump.
On Wednesday, May seventh, King, a vocal critic of the
Republican Party, made his controversial joke in a Threads post,
calling back to Trump's false claims of Haitian immigrants eating
pets in Springfield, Ohio. Quote why did Donald J. Trump
cross the road? King wrote, in an apparent reference to
(26:29):
the why did the Chicken cross the road joke? He
goes on to say, to see Haitians eating pets on
the other side. King's comment sparked backlash across the aisle,
with some social media users calling for a boycott of
King's books and others saying he took the joke too
far quote, this is not the way to be an ally.
You can punch up without kicking down. At the same time,
(26:49):
one person commented, there's still time to delete this. Another
person commented despite the backlash, King doubled down on his
joke and a follow up post on May.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
Eleven, quote, the joke was about Trump.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
If you don't get that, you should see a doctor
and get your sense of humor checked. Goes on to say,
anyone else noticed, how all of a sudden, no one's
eating your cats and dogs anymore. No one's performing sex
change operations in schools, or aborting babies after birth anymore.
The price of eggs doesn't matter, and a recession isn't
a bad thing, just a necessary growing pain. The author
(27:21):
again caught heat for his response to the backlash quote.
Rather than seeing you made a mistake and being an
adult about it, you're doubling down as most white men do.
Speaker 3 (27:31):
How predictable, one person wrote.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
A different person says, quote, it wasn't just a bad joke,
but it was a racist one. I thought you were
a writer, and a writer of your merit would have
more self awareness. You're not above criticism, do better, so
I didn't love this. It felt like like maybe it
was It wasn't like a funny joke, It wasn't anything
(27:55):
like that, but you know, he made his point. He's like,
this is what the joke was intended to illuminate. You know,
everybody is kind of stopped focusing on all of the
quote unquote issues that plagued the Biden administration, not because
the things have stopped, but because you know, Trump's in office.
(28:15):
In other words, all these stories were made up and
they were sensationalized. But you know, now that Trump is
in office, there's nothing there's really nothing to see here.
These problems aren't as big as they once were, and
you know, people kind of piling on to you know,
Stephen King, the person who's been very critical of the
(28:36):
Trump administration and provided a lot of how would I
say it, a lot of insightful political, original political thoughts
in so far as Donald Trump and as presidencies plural
are concerned. You know, I think that it's attacking people
(29:00):
is just kind of the culture, the online culture. So
even if people are saying something that you just kind
of like didn't really get it or missed the mark
or whatever, to attack that person and to say, you
know whatever, I just you know, we just people are
not perfect. People are not always going to hit the
mark according to you and your sensibilities. And I think
attacking people just is, especially when they've shown that they
(29:25):
kind of are on the same side as you.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
We get to nowhere.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Obviously the opposition is well fortified and they are, for
the most part, in lock in lockstep, and for us
to bicker over little stuff like this feels like it
feels foolish if we're trying to accomplish anything else, you know.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
So those are my early thoughts. What about yours.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
I think if you and I were still on Twitter,
we could have quote tweeted this tweet said my bad comma,
it was a joke about Trump, and then erase the
if you don't get that, you should see a doctor part,
because you don't get to tell people that are offended
that they can't be offended.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
So you don't have to insult people because they didn't
get the joke. You went on to explain it, which
is great, but you had to insult the people first,
which is why somebody pointed out a white person would
do this. You're our ally until it's uncomfortable for you,
and then you get to stand up and insult us
because we got our feelings hurt. If I'm a Haitian person,
I can be offended by that joke, and if you
(30:33):
really have the sensibilities or ballayship that you pretend to
have and are not just an anti Trump person, because
you can be anti Trump and not pro black, right,
So an anti Trump person that was also an ally
would have said, my bad, the joke was about Trump.
Anyone else noticed how, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. And then those
people could have said okay, and everybody moves on.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
But his's doubling.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
Down because he can't dare be wrong and can't dare
apologize to the people that.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Were hurt, like who are you?
Speaker 1 (31:01):
You and I have had to say sorry to people
and we weren't even wrong, but we you know, a
user or a listener sent us a message or an
email and wrote us a letter, and we had to
take the semantic that we got wrong and apologize even
though the point we were trying to make was correct,
because we're not above reproach, we're not above being corrected,
(31:22):
you know, So you could have just simply said my bad.
You didn't have to write a heartfelt apology. You could
have made the same points instead of insulting the people
who are offended by it. You know, sometimes I don't
have a sense of humor when somebody's making a racist
joke about me.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
My bad Stephen. Yeah, that's more than there. Well, lesson learned.
And you know, I know it's not said as widely
these days, but once upon a time, there was something
that was said widely in circles that you and I
run in Q and I feel like, you know, bringing
(31:54):
it back might be a little necessary, just because you know,
we work in these circles.
Speaker 3 (31:58):
But maybe people should say less don't forget.
Speaker 2 (32:04):
These and other news stories can be found at binnews
dot com. This has been a production of the Black
Information Network. Today's show is produced by Chris Thompson. Have
some thoughts you'd like to share, use the red microphone
talkback that you're on the iHeartRadio app. While you're there,
be sure to hit subscribe and download all.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Of our episodes.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
I'm your host ramses Jah on all social media.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
I am Qward on all social media as well, and
Speaker 2 (32:28):
Join us tomorrow as we share our news with our
voice from our perspective right here on the Black Information
Network Daily podcast
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
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
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.