5/12/25: Stephen Miller Plots Ending Habeas Corpus, Trump Claims Massive Drug Cost Reduction, Kanye New Song, Mayor Arrested By ICE

Krystal and Emily discuss Stephen Miller plot to suspend Habeas Corpus, Trump claims sweeping drug cost reduction, Kanye's new song, Mayor arrested by ICE speaks out.

 

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com

 

Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of this show.

Speaker 1 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.

Speaker 1 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com.

Speaker 2 (00:33):
So in recent comments to reporters, Stevin Miller floated suspending
habeas corpus. Really take a listen to how he lays
this out here, because I think there are some several
significant things he says.

Speaker 3 (00:45):
Let's take a listen.

Speaker 4 (00:46):
Well, the Constitution is clear and that, of course is
the supreme law of the land that the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a
time of invasion. So it would say that's an option we're
actively looking at. Look, a lot of it depends on
whether the courts do the right thing or not. At
the end of the day, Congress passed the body of
law known as the Immigration Nationality Act, which stripped Article

(01:10):
three courts. That's the judicial branch of jurisdiction over immigration cases.
So Congress actually passed is called jurisdiction stripping legislation. It
passed a number of laws that say that the Article
three courts aren't even allowed to be involved in immigration cases.
Many of you probably don't know this. I'll give you
a good example. Are you familiar with the term Temporary
protect the Status or TPS. Right, So, by statute, the

(01:34):
courts are stripped of jurisdiction from overruling a presidential determination
or a secretarial determination on TPS when the Secretary of
Home Insecurity makes that determination. So when Secretary Nome terminated
TPS for the illegals that Biden flew into the country,
when courts stepped in, they were violating explicit language that
Congress had enacted saying they have no jurisdiction. So it's

(01:57):
not just the courts aren't just at war with the
executive branch. The courts are at war these radical rogue
judges with the legislative branch as well too, So all
of that will inform the choice that the president ultimately makes.

Speaker 5 (02:08):
Yes, christ I just want to say Stephen Miller is
at war with the Trump administration there because the Trump
administration stopped the invasion.

Speaker 3 (02:15):
Oh, yes, true.

Speaker 5 (02:16):
It's an amazing Yeah, it's an amazing contradiction.

Speaker 3 (02:19):
So are we being invaded or are we not being invaded?

Speaker 5 (02:21):
They are justifying this threat of habeas corpus on the
idea that we are under invasion. Right, They're also touting
that they have completely shut down the southern border. So
these two things are absolutely in contradiction. I was supposed
to have be on the New media pool duty yesterday,
but they called a lid. Yeah, and that was like
the top question that I was going to ask, Like

(02:41):
which one is true? Did you stop the invasion or
can we have habeas corpus because we're being invated?

Speaker 2 (02:46):
That is a fantastic question. And I mean the key
line there, which squares the circle, so.

Speaker 3 (02:52):
To speak, is or whatever, Yeah, got you know what
I'm saying?

Speaker 2 (02:56):
Got it anyway? Is he says it depends on whether
the do the right thing or not. So also the invasion,
apparently that would justify this depends on whether.

Speaker 3 (03:06):
Or not they like the court's decisions.

Speaker 2 (03:09):
In terms of the last thing that he lays out
there about the court stripping position provisions, et cetera. You know,
my reading, based on other people who understand this stuff
way better than I do, is that he's really playing
fast and loose with the facts there, and that yes,
there are court stripping provisions basically that push immigration law
into immigration courts, but appeals into federal courts, as you

(03:31):
would expect, and that is the process that's been playing
out in the court system that we've seen. But you know,
when you hear him say this, of course there's a
question of, well, is this just Steven Miller doing Steven
Miller's stuff and you know, trying to make a spectacle
or raise some threat, But they're not really that serious
about it. On the contrary, CNN at least has reporting
that Trump has been directly involved in these discussions himself.

Speaker 3 (03:54):
We can put this up on the screen.

Speaker 2 (03:55):
He's been personally involved in discussions inside the administration of
potentially suspending habeas corpus lego, procedure that allows people to
challenge their detention in court. While Trump has not explicitly
mentioned habeas corpus in public. It was what he was
referencing last month when he commented on steps he could
take to combat nationwide injunctions against his actions on deportations.
According to one of the people familiar with the talks,

(04:18):
and we actually have that sound of Trump sort of
vaguely alluding to what Stephen Miller is laying out explicitly here.

Speaker 3 (04:27):
Let's go ahead and take a listen to that.

Speaker 6 (04:28):
You mentioned this last night in your speech and home.
We're basically an unprecedented situation. There's a lot of abuses
of nationwide injunctions, so we're seemingly designed to sort kill
your power, specifically when it comes to deporting these idegal,
violent aliens that came in or the previous administration. Have
you spoked your team couplays to mitigate this and continue to.

Speaker 7 (04:49):
Deliver femare Yeah, Well, there are ways to mitigate it,
and there's some very strong ways. There's one way that's
been used by three very highly respected presidents, but we
hope we don't have to go that route. But there
is one way that has been used very successfully by
three presidents, all highly respected, and hopefully we don't have
to go that way, but there are ways of mitigating it.

Speaker 2 (05:12):
So I believe Emily the three presidents he's referring to
are Abraham Lincoln most famously. I would say, Grant during
reconstruction to try to get the violence of the KKK
under control.

Speaker 3 (05:24):
And then George W.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Bush wouldn't necessarily say highly respect to that one during
the we're.

Speaker 8 (05:30):
Also taking the Iraq war plans.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
That's true, so I guess there we're rehabbing George W.

Speaker 3 (05:35):
Bush with this administration.

Speaker 2 (05:36):
But yeah, so during the war on terror and effectively, look,
what they want to be able to do is say
whoever they want to designate as you know, a quote
unquote terrorists, whether that's a cartel association or a tattoo
or just because they say so, or perhaps someone who
harbors ill will against a tesla, or who said the

(05:57):
wrong thing with regard to Palestine or Israel, or who
dared to protest and a hands off protest or something
like that against the Trump administration. I'm not making these
examples up, by the way. These are all groups that
have been floated as domestic terrorists by the Trump administration,
by Trump administration officials that they can just snatch them
up and imprison them indefinitely without them being able to

(06:19):
challenge that imprisonment as unlawful. That's what they are contemplating here,
and I think most immediately they're contemplating it in the
context of the of Immigration and obviously their plan to
use the Alien Enemies Act to effectively get around any
sort of court challenges and just ship people into these
foreign goologs where they've never been heard, where they can

(06:40):
never be heard from. Again, that has been in large
part blocked by the courts. They're very unhappy with the
court decisions, and so now this is the next path
to try to effectuate this same lawless outcome via you know,
a different legal patina that they're going for.

Speaker 5 (06:57):
Yeah, and I think some of this is van Miller
trying to ratchet up pressure on judges. I think, of course,
whenever you see Trump or top officials, someone as powerful
as Stephen Miller flirting with this stuff in public, you
have to absolutely take it seriously.

Speaker 8 (07:12):
If I had to.

Speaker 5 (07:13):
Guess, I would say that Steven Miller's strategy here is
ratcheting up pressure on judges, and that he is not
entirely serious about doing this.

Speaker 8 (07:22):
Because of what we were mentioning.

Speaker 5 (07:23):
Earlier just that it would make it, you know, it
would make it appears that there's an ongoing invasion during
the Trump administration, which is going to become an increasing
problem for their immigration crackdown period. As you mentioned, that's
what they're justifying some of these deportations with the idea
that there's an invasion that is being orchestrated trend by
the Venezuelan government through trend at raguall which even I

(07:46):
think John Hudson had this in the Washington Post, even
the Trump administration's own intelligence underminds that's not being orchestrated
by the government of Venezuela.

Speaker 2 (07:55):
So I mean, and a Trump, a Trump appointed judge
said the same, said effectively like this is a preposterous
invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.

Speaker 3 (08:05):
It fails on every level.

Speaker 8 (08:06):
Yeah, yep.

Speaker 5 (08:07):
The last thing I wanted to say on this is
I think it is fair to point out that there
have been some real abuses, abuses of the Universal Injunctions,
and there's been at executive functions. Jackline and Goldsmith has
been following this in a really interesting way and a
very critical way that is very critical of Donald Trump. Basically,
you know, we were talking about this in our earlier

(08:28):
corruption block. In general, there has been just a lot
of norm sliding since twenty sixteen, as everyone kind of knows,
or maybe backsliding norm backsliding is one way to put it.
And it is true that some of this so, for example,
administrative stays. He writes, the practice of administrative stays against
executive action, according to Christopher Moore, was basically unheard of

(08:49):
before twenty twenty two. And he says that the Trump
administration arguments against single federal judges in joining programs on
a universal basis are entirely legitimate, meaning there have been
a lot of cases in this second Trump administration where
judges are acting alone on a national basis with these
universal injunctions in ways that are inappropriate. That said, obviously,

(09:11):
he goes on to say, some of this is because
the Trump administration itself is doing some unprecedented as taking
some unprecedented steps.

Speaker 8 (09:19):
So I think we're in one of those situations.

Speaker 5 (09:21):
Where it's like the answer to Trump's craziness might also
be crazy. It's just sort of a question of how
do you get out of the doom spiral? And that's
pretty like that that feels. I guess I feel very
pessimistic about.

Speaker 3 (09:33):
That, Crystal. I indeed I do as well. Emily, I
do as well.

Speaker 2 (09:37):
Yeah, it reminds me of you know, one of the
talking points that Trump administration officials and defenders like to
say is like, no president has faced, no presential administration
has faced more lawsuits. It's like, well, yeah, because they
haven't done as much illegal shit, just like wildly in less,
you know, in one hundred days or less as you
all have. So there's a logical reason why you're facing

(09:58):
so much trouble with the courts. And it's on immigration,
it's on a lot of the DOGE activity has been
enjoined and you know ultimately will likely be struck down.
You can see that there is has been with this administration,
I think, and intentionally you talked about this as well.
They just decided they don't really care about the law.
They're going to do what they want to do and

(10:19):
then let the courts have to clean up the mess exactly.

Speaker 3 (10:21):
And so then when the courts come.

Speaker 2 (10:22):
In, are like, you can't do that, and you know,
you can't just shut down the CFPB, you can't just
shut down USAID. You can't just decide that you don't
like this program, so you're not going to spend the
money that was congressionally appropriated. You can't just ship people
to foreign gulog no due process. You can't admit that
you wrongfully deported this person and then be like, we're
not going to do anything about it. Though when they
come in to clean up the mess, you don't get

(10:44):
to kick and scream about it, because your whole plan
was We're going to break a lot of laws and
then force the courts to have to come in and
clean up the mess afterwards. So, you know, I think
that is a kind of ratcheting up that is that
they I'm sure anticipated was going to come as a
result here, And so I think the significance of the
Miller comments like, I think you have to take these

(11:05):
things very seriously at this point because of the way
the Trump administration has conducted themselves, and clearly they do
have a goal of getting around normal due process and
normal checks that have existed, you know, in this country
since the founding and you know, going back to like
the you know, magne Karta in terms of legal principles.

Speaker 5 (11:26):
And pulling out all of the documentary my pocket man.

Speaker 8 (11:33):
You should sell Breaking Points branded pocket magnet.

Speaker 5 (11:35):
Oh gosh, Soccer would love that. We shouldn't even speak
it into existence because.

Speaker 3 (11:39):
He'll be our baby gift to him.

Speaker 5 (11:42):
That. By the way, if you're not following executive functions,
shout out to them. They're pretty Trump critical, but I
do find them pretty helpful.

Speaker 8 (11:49):
And just one more point from Goldsmith, who writes he's
argued the.

Speaker 5 (11:52):
Administration has a legitimate complain about universal injunctions administrative states
that should ultimately be resolved by Supreme Court of Congress.
There is a pattern of mostly democratic point at district
judges and joining Trump initiatives, just as there was a
similar and indeed more extreme in terms of percentages mirrored
pattern during the Biden years. But to know whether the
twenty twenty five pattern reflects real or systemic bias, we
would need to assess a whole slew of issues. And

(12:12):
this is I'm just gonna list this out so we
know what to keep our eye on going forward. The
influence of plaintiff forum shopping, the profile of judges who
denied relief, and the abundant evidence that Trump two point
zero is not taking legal compliance seriously. So those are
the things to follow, I think going forward in this
broader narrative of the universal injunctions in the.

Speaker 3 (12:31):
Stays yeah, because I mean some things.

Speaker 2 (12:33):
Yeah, their extraordinary actions have required extraordinary actions as well.
And even so the courts can't really can't really keep up.
You aren't really a match for and in the Trump
administration to that point has just in many instances said yeah,
we got this ruling against us, We're still not really
going to comply, like we'll do a little bit, or

(12:55):
we'll pay some lip service, or we'll sort of like
pretend that we're that we read it a different way, etc.
But you know, in many and many of them, not
the high profile like Kilmar Bargo Garcia, but some of
the decisions that have gone against Doge, for example, where
they say, okay, you have to reinstate this money and
then they just don't.

Speaker 8 (13:13):
Well yeah, and you're right, you mentioned this just really
quickly as we wrap up.

Speaker 5 (13:16):
That's part of the strategy here is to throw as
many novel legal theories at the wall and see what sticks.

Speaker 8 (13:23):
That's very much the Alien Enemies Act.

Speaker 5 (13:25):
A lot of people in Trump circles would say, listen,
what we're doing is taking this action while it works
its way through the courts, and if the courts go
one way. Trump has said this many times, we'll follow
the courts. And that's because, as dangerous as it is
to even tell that line, the reason they're doing that
is so that they can get as much done as
quickly as possible. So it's not just a messaging flood

(13:46):
zone strategy visa Vi Bannon, but it's actually just about
trying as many different strategies as they can to get
things done while the courts go through the process. Otherwise
they feel like they won't have enough time to take
as many ramatic actions. Dose is a really good example
of this, just folding the CFPB for example, Well, it's
basically done like that, that's already happened. Yeah, So, I

(14:08):
mean it's under they've kind of like truncated it and
moved it and to formally close it have to go
through Congress.

Speaker 8 (14:15):
But now the overtime window has just been exploded.

Speaker 5 (14:17):
So when the CFPB, if it goes to the Reconciliation
Bill that they're getting rid of it, it's less of
a fight because we've gone through five months now without
the CFPB.

Speaker 2 (14:26):
Creative facts on the ground, yeap, just really quick. I
wanted to get this in the show because this is
just wild. Put this up on the screen. So Trump
has by and large suspended refugee resettlement, with one very
specific example, which is white South Africans are not only
being granted refugee status by Trump, but they're also being

(14:48):
given you know, funds and plane tickets and all sorts
of assistants to relocate here. So you know, this is
a Elon Musk Steven Miller project. You've ever seen one.
So you know, the refugees fleeing wars and persecution from
any other place around the world, Nope, even ones who
had been you know, absolutely vetted people, you know, people

(15:10):
in Afghanistan for example, who had helped our own troops
during the war there at grave risk to themselves. And
now you've got the Taliban back in power, their refugee
resettlement applications being torn up even though they're vetted, ready
to go, that's not happening.

Speaker 3 (15:25):
But white South Africans they're.

Speaker 2 (15:28):
Being you know, given the green light and the red
carpet rolled out for them to come here.

Speaker 5 (15:32):
Yeah. And part of the reason is that the Trump
administration feels as though this is a really clear cut
contrast with some of the BS asylum claims. So it's
not that they aren't sympathetic stories, but they are economic
cases that people have claimed asylum come much of the
unit ST's words claimed asylum, and in some cases I
think this is probably true with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, but

(15:53):
who knows. We actually asked his attorney about this a
month or two ago about the legitimacy of his asylum
claim that he made in twenty nineteen.

Speaker 8 (16:00):
So the administration feels like they have a perfect juxtaposition here.

Speaker 5 (16:04):
Of people who in South Africa it is a deeply
uncomfortable thing to think about, or talk about or explore.
There is still high levels of racial violence, and that's
where they think they have this clear cut case. And
they're trolling with this because there's a Tucker did an
interesting interview actually a couple months back with a South

(16:27):
African civil rights activist names Ernest Rhetz, if I'm pronouncing
that correctly, and you Tucker asked him about this, and
he was like, South Africans, they don't want to leave.
So that's why I think this is a troll from
the administration to say, here's what a real asylum case
looks like versus here's what the economic migrant asylum case

(16:47):
looks like.

Speaker 8 (16:48):
And South Africans are fighting for a reason.

Speaker 5 (16:51):
It's because they don't like their family settled that land
hundreds of years ago, if you listen to their point
on it, So they feel like it would be the
opposite of what they want to do to flee to
the United States. So it's just a troll basically, Yeah, okay,
it's it's I mean, it's so.

Speaker 2 (17:07):
The numbers are that white South Africans make up roughly
seven percent of the South African population and own roughly
seventy three percent of the individually held land, and their
claim is that they are the victims of such egregious
racial discrimination that their claims should go beyond those of

(17:29):
like I said, the you know interpreters who worked for
US in Afghanistan, or people who are fleeing Democratic Republic
of Congo or Venezuela or correct, Yeah, that's that's right,
which you know Republicans five seconds ago would have had
a very different take on that view. And so all
refugee resettlements shut down except for this group of white

(17:50):
South Africans, who Steve Bannon says are the most racist
people on the planet, according to Steve Bannon, just quoting him.

Speaker 8 (17:57):
Just quoting, just quoting Steve.

Speaker 3 (18:00):
Yes.

Speaker 2 (18:00):
So anyway, that Steven Miller project is ongoing. One more
piece here, which is, you know, the some of this
is breaking through with the public in terms of their
views of Trump. We can put this up on the screen.
This was a poll that was taken in the context
of Trump's first one hundred days that we didn't get
a chance to cover, but I wanted to, you know,
make sure to highlight here you have a majority of
Americans now fifty two percent who say that Trump is

(18:22):
a dangerous dictator whose power should be limited before he
destroys American democracy. That was the question here, and I
think this was commissioned by Axios. So fifty two percent
of all Americans, eighty seven percent of Democrats, fifty six
percent of Independence and even seventeen percent of Republicans, which
is actually a little bit higher than I would have expected.
Along racial lines, there's some racial divide here. The highest

(18:43):
numbers are among Americans sixty seven percent, than Latino sixty
three percent, Asian Americans, Pacific Islander fifty eight percent, and
white Americans forty five percent. So even among white people,
you're getting pretty close to a majority who say this
guy is a dangerous dictator. And you know what I've
been saying, Emily is I think as his popularity declines,

(19:06):
I think you will see more and more aggressive authoritarian
tactics to shut down dissent. Now, I think what we're
seeing this week, and this is very we see this
around our show. You've got the China quote unquote deal,
You've got whatever is going on in Gaza, you've got
the prescription drug thing we're about to talk about. Like,
I get the sense he realizes that his popularity is plummeting,

(19:27):
and he needs to do some stuff, make some announcements,
make some things happen, get some good pr get some
good headlines to try to stem the you know, the
the tide in terms of his plummeting approval rating. But
in any case, you know, even as people of course
have responded to typically respond most to their own direct
material interests, people are also, you know, in America, pretty

(19:51):
opposed to dictators who threaten democracy.

Speaker 3 (19:54):
We're at least.

Speaker 2 (19:56):
Theoretically ideally committed to having a demic product system here.
It's something that people take a lot of pride in
this country. And so I do think because his actions
have been so extraordinary, so authoritarian, and so rapid, that
the flip side of the what is Bannon called the
days of Thunder, the flood, the zone strategy of doing

(20:18):
so much at one time, you don't get to have
that boiling frog effect where it's just ratcheting, ratcheting, ratcheting.

Speaker 3 (20:24):
This hit people over the head.

Speaker 2 (20:26):
And you know, I think there's a genuine, deep concern
among a lot of people about the direction that he's
taken the country in.

Speaker 7 (20:34):
Well.

Speaker 5 (20:35):
Yeah, and so this poll was February to March and
it was by the Public Religion Research Institute. It as
part of this like gargantuan poll. It's a very interesting
poll actually if you read all of it. And I
mean that's why I kind of thought the Bukeli stuff
was just playing with fire for the Trump administrator. Like
I think they had this idea that the Cali stuff
made them look cool. And I think to most Americans

(20:57):
it's like there's nothing cool about Bukele, Like he's so sad,
Like it's it's such a ridiculous thing.

Speaker 8 (21:05):
That he's doing. I call himself a cool dictator.

Speaker 5 (21:07):
Maybe it flies in Latin America does not fly in
the United States like it just it doesn't hit the
same way here. Now, the poll juxtaposed that question that
you just read with so dangerous dictator. Also that he's
a strong leader restoring America's greatness was the other option,
that he's a strong leader who should be given the
power he needs to restore America's greatness. And then I

(21:28):
think there was like a skip option. So it was
fifty two to forty four in that question. Interestingly, in
that poll, he had a forty three percent approval rating,
which means that there's probably some overlap of people who
approve of the job he's doing and also see him.

Speaker 2 (21:42):
As a Well, that's why I was noting the Republican
numbers seventeen percent saying he's a dangerous dictator. I'm sure
he probably, you know, is a Republican approval rating is
probably ninety percent.

Speaker 8 (21:54):
It's probably pretty hard.

Speaker 2 (21:55):
So there's probably you know, some percentage in there that
are like, yeah, he's a dictator, but hey.

Speaker 3 (22:00):
You do what you gotta do.

Speaker 8 (22:01):
Yeah, that's probably true.

Speaker 2 (22:03):
Yeah, Well, I mean that's that unfortunately, is what we've
learned throughout history is when democracy is unable to deliver benefits,
then guess what.

Speaker 3 (22:13):
People start to become curious. And I do think that's
where we are.

Speaker 8 (22:17):
It feels like desperate times.

Speaker 5 (22:18):
And I mean, if we don't even talk about this enough,
nobody talks about this enough. How useless Congress has become
just utterly useless. This is even if you're look at you,
if you were a Republican right now, you're looking at
Republicans holding the presidency, the House, and the Senate, and
all they can do is muster a reconciliation bill because
they're not confident in their numbers. There's no way for
them to build consensus to pass major pieces of legislation.

(22:40):
They have punted so much of their responsibilities to administrated
agencies and to the president itself.

Speaker 8 (22:44):
I mean, just to try to take back tariff power.
They couldn't even get.

Speaker 5 (22:47):
That pass, in part because Democrat was like traveling overseas
and didn't even care enough about the freaking vote.

Speaker 8 (22:54):
So Congress is just it's a really dangerous situation.

Speaker 5 (22:58):
How much or how how atrophied the political process of
like republican government is.

Speaker 2 (23:03):
Although, to be honest with you, I don't know that
that is really necessary. Like we've talked about this in
the context of immigration. This will be a good transition
to the prescription drug piece. Yes, Democrats were ready to
capitulate on all kinds of immigration things, like if they
have wanted to work through a congressional process to accomplish something,
especially in the very early days of Trump's term, they
certainly could have done it. You know, I think it's

(23:25):
just easier to put on an executive order. Then he
doesn't have to negotiate.

Speaker 3 (23:28):
He can just be a king.

Speaker 2 (23:30):
He can just issue his proclamations and then you know,
kick it to the courts and make the courts stop him.
And so I think he just prefers that to the
messiness of having to get in the weeds or god forbid,
work with some Democrats on something that he would want
to get done.

Speaker 8 (23:44):
And they don't want to take votes. I mean, Congress
doesn't want to take votes.

Speaker 5 (23:47):
They don't want to be held accountable when it's easier
to go through the president, So it just better.

Speaker 2 (23:52):
It's mutually reinforcing. They don't have to take any tough
votes and he can just do whatever he wants. Right.

Speaker 8 (23:58):
Trade war, trade wars, actual wars, all of that.

Speaker 5 (24:02):
I mean, we're just completely like Biden kept the Trump
tariffs and that didn't go through Congress. The same thing
with like we've had an AMF for however long that
bipartisan presidents have used three or whatever. Yeah, mutually, it
is mutually reinforcing. Yeah, huge news yesterday. That could turn
out to be ultimately kind of nothing or it could

(24:23):
turn out to be I guess.

Speaker 8 (24:25):
Sort of significant. And part of that depends on Congress.

Speaker 9 (24:27):
Crystal.

Speaker 3 (24:28):
Yeah, as we were saying, so we can put.

Speaker 8 (24:30):
The first element on the screen.

Speaker 5 (24:31):
This is Donald Trump on Sunday afternoon talking about prescription
drug prices, untrue, social and I'm going to read this.
For many years, the world has wondered why prescription drugs
and pharmaceuticals in the US were so much higher in
price than they were in any other nation, sometimes being
five to ten times more expensive than the same drug
manufactured in the exact same laboratory or plant by the

(24:52):
same company.

Speaker 8 (24:53):
Question Mark, question mark, question mark.

Speaker 5 (24:54):
After a few lines of all caps there, If you
didn't get it from my voice, I'll just let you
know that's what it is. Now.

Speaker 8 (25:00):
How we're going to lowercase.

Speaker 5 (25:01):
It was always difficult to explain, and very embarrassing because
in fact there was no correct or rightful answer.

Speaker 8 (25:05):
Rightful.

Speaker 5 (25:05):
Interesting, the pharmaceutical drug companies would say for years that
it was research and development costs, and that all of
these costs were and would be for no reason whatsoever
borne by the quote suckers of America alone, campaign contributions
can do wonders.

Speaker 8 (25:17):
But not with me, he says, and not with the
Republican Party. Interesting.

Speaker 5 (25:22):
On the same day Crystal as the Cutter plane announcement. Yeah,
so we could go to the next sled. Yeah, so,
he says. Therefore, I'm pleased to announce that tomorrow morning.
So today in the White House at nine am, I
will be signing one of the most consequential executive orders
in our country's history. Prescription drug and pharmaceutical prices will
be reduced almost immediately by thirty to eighty percent.

Speaker 8 (25:42):
They will rise throughout the world.

Speaker 5 (25:44):
In order to equalize and for the first time in
many years, bring fairness to America. I will be instituting
a most Favored Nations policy, whereby the US will pay
the same price as the nation that pays the lowest
price anywhere in the world. Our country will finally be
treated fairly, and citizens of healthcare costs will be reduced
by numbers never even thought of before. So Chrystal, this

(26:05):
is a fairly significant announcement. I think, probably more significant
if a if momentum builds in Congress to actually codify this.
So Roe tweeted actually late last night eleven thirty eight pm.
I'm willing to introduce the Trump EO exactly as written
as legislation to be bipartisan and get something done for

(26:27):
the American people. Any Republicans willing to co sponsor, Let's
then get Speaker Johnson to call a vote on it.
So Congressman Conna, obviously a Democrat in the House of Representatives,
now calling on Republicans to take that EO text and
pass it through Congress, pass it through the Senate, and
make it law because an EO can get again, as
Roe says, challenged by big Pharma. So that I think

(26:49):
the likelihood of this actually becoming law probably depends on
whether Republicans are willing to get this through Congress, and
that seems highly unlikely, especially the Senate.

Speaker 8 (26:58):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (26:58):
Well, I mean my top line reaction is that this
is probably fake, an attempt to generate positive headlines to
distract from the fact that the big beautiful bill entails
giving a giant tax cut to the rich paid for by,
you know, cuts to.

Speaker 3 (27:12):
Healthcare for poor people. So that's my big day. And
the reason I say that, I would love to be
proved wrong. By the way. The reason I say that.

Speaker 2 (27:19):
Is because he did almost six exact same executive order
in his first term and it got immediately blocked by
multiple courts. So maybe something will be different, maybe there's
a different legal strategy. I it's nine oh nine now
as we're as we're recording this. I don't know if
he's released it yet, but we haven't seen all the details.
But the way he describes it in this Truth Social

(27:40):
is pretty much identical to the executive order in the
first Trump administration, which immediately got blocked isstruck down. We
also know that he had been talking to the Republicans
about including something like this in the reconciliation bill and
they all balked at it. So you know, the Republicans
are not willing to go along with it, and he

(28:01):
hasn't shown in the past that he was actually like
committed to following through in order to get something accomplished.
And what I mean by that is, look, if you're
going to if you are going to do something like this,
it really can't be done through executive It does have
to go through Congress. So if he wants to accomplish this,
he would take row up on his offer here. He
would you know, steamroll Republicans and make this as much

(28:23):
of a priority as it would take, it being as
much of a priority as something like his immigration policy is.

Speaker 3 (28:29):
And I see no signs of that.

Speaker 2 (28:30):
So until improven otherwise, I have to think that this
is an attempt to grab headlines and distract from many
of the very indefensible and unpopular things that are happening
with this reconciliation villain, with his administration in general.

Speaker 5 (28:43):
This sparked another billionaire on billionaire war, by the way
civil war in the billionaire class, because it seems as
though Bill Ackman popularized this idea in Trump circles.

Speaker 8 (28:52):
He was kind of bragging about that it was.

Speaker 5 (28:55):
He posted an idea that looks a lot like this
on March seventh of twenty twenty four, kind of took
a victory lap. Yesterday, Then Mark Cuban jumped on and
said the manufacturers aren't the big problem, Bill. They could
sell brand meds for far, far less and in some
cases lower than other countries today. If you take the
big PBMs, so pharmacy benefit managers out of the middle,

(29:16):
and you are proud of the problem, Bill, I'll bet
you've signed a pharmacy benefits deal with a big PBM tomorrow.
Call them and ask for a list of your claims
and the net drug price paid for each. Ask them
for a net price list after rebates that you can verify.
Let me know how long they laugh at you. He
goes on to say the issues that CEOs have no
clue about their pharmacy or health care benefits, so they
work with the PBMs that cause this mess, assuming their

(29:36):
consultants are doing the right thing by them. He said,
this EO can have a huge impact, but it has
to be built around transparency and removing the middleman. So
the PBMs are obviously a part of this problem. Actually,
there's there's going to be some conservative backlash this. We've
seen that before too, because it's price fixing and they're
in the park pocket of big pharma. There will be

(29:57):
some completely ideological and sincere conservative disagreement with this because
they see it as price fixing, and we don't need
to open up that can of worms necessarily.

Speaker 8 (30:08):
But whether this.

Speaker 5 (30:10):
Actually gets through Congress, that's the problem is Republicans partially
are in the pocket of big pharma like many Democrats,
and then partially also are have this this ideological aversion
to anything that looks like price fixing. So good luck
with that, Mike Johnson and Roe sadly.

Speaker 2 (30:26):
Yeah, well, and I mean on the merits, like, it
is absolutely unjustifiable that Americans pay so much more for
prescription drugs than discussing anywhere around the world. Trump is
right that we are expected to put the bill for
their overhead and their quote unquote research and development. Now,
the other thing that this is wildly at odds with

(30:48):
the rest of the Trump administration plan is every single
new drug molecule has been developed over the past several
decades has been funded by public research.

Speaker 3 (30:58):
It has not come out of industry, come out.

Speaker 2 (31:00):
Of public research dollars, the very dollars that are being
completely slashed and gutted by the Trump administration currently. So
the actual innovation that has pushed for an advanced science
that is under assault and that would inherently actually push
more into the into private industry, and you know, we

(31:21):
would have to rely more on private industry. And a
lot of the quote unquote R and D that private
industry does is more about trying to extend their patents,
you know, reformulate something they already know works and is
popular in order to extend their patent life. That is
what a lot of their research and development funds ultimately
go into. And yes, the American taxpayer and the you know,

(31:46):
American consumer have been forced to front that research and
development through these extraordinarily high prescription drug prices. You know,
the place where it's most egregious is with Medicare where
we're banned, have been banned from negotiating negotiating with drug
makers to lower drug prices. That's something the Biden administration
took some tepid steps in the direction of fixing. I

(32:08):
believe this is part of the Inflation Reduction Act where
they had a list it wasn't all drugs, but a
list of certain top drugs that now Medicare is going
to negotiate on, and that is you know, a small
but quite significant win. Those are the sorts of things
that you would need to do to actually get this
under control, so we'll see where things where it goes
from here. But you know, color me skeptical until I
still see some actual, you know, actual commitment to this

(32:31):
and action beyond what again he did in the first
Trump administration with literally zero effect.

Speaker 5 (32:37):
Fair enough, should we move on to Kanye. I know
you're tramping at the bit to get to the segment.

Speaker 3 (32:41):
Yeah, So, Kanye of Us is out with a new album.

Speaker 2 (32:48):
I believe the album title is cuck Leave is the
name of the album title, and one track in particular
has garnered quite a lot of attention because it is
the whole chorus of the track is basically just Hyle Hitler.

Speaker 8 (33:07):
It's n word, Kamayle Hitler.

Speaker 3 (33:09):
Yes, that is uh, that is the course of the track.

Speaker 2 (33:12):
Now, Spotify and Apple and a bunch of other you know,
a bunch of other outlets have banned distribution of it.
They've really tried to block it, but it hasn't matter
because it's gotten millions and millions of views on Twitter
and other places where it's been allowed to go. So
we have a little bit of a censored version of
the video just so you can get a taste of

(33:33):
what this is all about.

Speaker 3 (33:34):
Let's go ahead and take a listen.

Speaker 8 (33:42):
I don't understanding things I say.

Speaker 5 (33:49):
I don't understanding things I say.

Speaker 2 (33:52):
Some of the other lyrics Emily, according to Grock are man,
these people took my kids from me, then they closed
my bank account. I got so much anger in me,
got no way to take it out. Think I'm stuck
in the matrix where the fs my nitrous of referring
to nitrous oxide. Yes, I am a cook. I like
when people f on my b word the shit that

(34:13):
I'm posting on Twitter. They're telling me, hey, don't say that.
How Edwards can see me in public. I'm driving an
off road maybox, so get some you know, classic wealth
poorn in there as well. With all the money and fame,
I still can't get my kids back. With all the
money and fame, I still don't get to see my children.
So I became a Nazi. Yeah, bitch, I'm the villain.
That is some of the sampling of kin the lyrics

(34:36):
of someone who's clearly like, I mean, I don't know
what to say. He's clearly in the midst of a
mental break, has been for a while surrounded with people
who are not going to intervene and you know, in
a way that is incredibly destructive to himself obviously, his
his family, his kids, his relationships. Apparently the only people

(34:58):
who surrounded with are you know, yes, men who just
will will hype him up and tell him everything he
does is great and glorious and brilliant and with you know,
damaging impacts on society as well.

Speaker 5 (35:08):
I think you have to say, can you read the
last lyric by the way, those last two lines.

Speaker 2 (35:13):
With all the money and fame, I still don't get
to see my children. So I became a Nazi? Yeah,
bitch on the villain.

Speaker 8 (35:17):
Yeah, this is like profoundly sad. Yeah.

Speaker 5 (35:20):
The point of the song, so like there's been this
understandable reaction to the song is though it's like Kanye
West embracing, which he's done in other formats, by the way,
white supremacy and like.

Speaker 3 (35:33):
Being an overt Nazi, being an overt celebrating Hitler.

Speaker 5 (35:36):
Yes, right, what he's saying in this particular song is
that and this is very Kanye West and just an
absolute torture genius and extremely profoundly sad. He's saying that
he's been pushed into this basically because he's so desperate.
This is a cry for help that he is nobody
is helping him, basically, and so he is now turning

(35:58):
to the most taboos object in this country and in
the broader West, just to just to get attention from
his family and just to get help from his family.
And it's like one of the saddest things to witness.
And John Legend has said that he's like, this is
they used to be friends, and he's like, this is
incredibly sad to watch.

Speaker 8 (36:19):
I think we all feel it the same way. It's
incredibly sad to watch.

Speaker 5 (36:22):
And the song is interesting to me because it's his
turn into extreme extreme right wing like fascist, race science,
disgusting nazi bullshit.

Speaker 8 (36:39):
I think I have no idea what he believes.

Speaker 5 (36:41):
I don't think he has any idea what he believes
because he's so he's in the throes of like this,
this horrible mental illness. It's crazy that it also sounds
like subconsciously at the very least, he's starting to grapple
with the fact that this is a cry for help,
and that is just is incredibly sad.

Speaker 2 (37:00):
The song concludes with the sample from a nineteen thirty
six Adolf Hitler speech, If you consider the work I'm
doing to be right. If you think I have been diligent,
that I have worked, that I've advocated for you this year,
that I've spent my time honestly in the service of
my people, then cast your vote. If so, then stand
up for me like I have stood up for you.
So including a you know, well sampling from Hitler himself

(37:23):
into the song. I mean, I don't know, I struggle
to have as much empathy as you do at this point, Emily,
because it's not like there haven't been people who have
tried to get him to He obviously needs medication, yeah,
like he needs to be probably institutional and not nitrous.

Speaker 9 (37:43):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (37:44):
And you know, there's it's very it's a very it's
a very difficult situation. But even in the throes of
mental illness, there is still some level of agency. I mean,
if you're able to pen a song that people would
you know, part as some sort of cry for help,
then there's obviously some level of agency there. So you know,

(38:07):
get yourself on a trajectory where people who actually care
about you, where you listen to them, where you stop
damaging them, and that's where you know it's I saw
I think it was Ken Klippenstein who said something to
that is another really difficult aspect of this story, which
is there are, understand for very good reasons, you know,
a lot of a lot of guardrails in place against

(38:31):
people being institutionalized against their will. Yeah, right, and I
totally get that, right, and we understand where that comes from, and.

Speaker 3 (38:37):
We really respect it.

Speaker 2 (38:39):
But also you look at what he's doing to himself,
let alone to his kids who now don't have the
benefit of a relationship with their dad, who you know,
I'm sure, I mean, obviously that's a really important thing
for any kid in the estrangement from his family. And then,
you know, even as you and others can can parse

(39:00):
since how this is a cry for help or whatever,
we also have to acknowledge that the way it's being
landing in society is just as a celebration of Hitler totally,
and because he has so much fame and power in
Cachet and the torture Genius blah blah blah. That is
that furtherre's a lot of extremely ugly, racist, horrific ideologies
where you know, it's just like, oh, this is now,

(39:21):
this is now on the table. I think it's also
a demonstration of the of the doom loop spiral that
society is in as well, where there's rewards just for
saying the most provocative thing you possibly can. And I
think that's part of what's going on here very intentionally
with Kanye as well, is like this is the ultimate
third rail. There is nothing more horrific that people can

(39:45):
imagine than the intentional extermination of millions of people just
for who they are, Jewish people, just for who they are.
And so for you to overtly embrace that, then you're
going to instantly win the race in terms of who
can be the most outrageous and the most provocative. And
I think he understands that too. So it is also
a reflection not just of you know him in throes

(40:08):
of mental illness, but is also a reflection of the
things that are rewarded in our society.

Speaker 5 (40:14):
Right and increasingly, No, I think that's your I mean,
he absolutely has agency on the point that you just
made let's roll E three on the screen, because that's
how this is what we have video basically of how
this is landing with some people who I think you
know there, Crystal. This is one of many examples of
music that geez, people are doing like just full listening

(40:36):
to the song, doing just full Nazi salutes. If you're
if you're listening to this and not watching that was
a video.

Speaker 3 (40:42):
Of there's a Roman salute. Simily they're throwing their heart
out to Kanye West.

Speaker 5 (40:47):
You know, is this a throwback to another debate that
we add But yeah, definitely not Roman salutes in this case,
one hundred percent not Roman salutes in this case because.

Speaker 8 (40:57):
They are literally saying Hile Hitler, singing Hail Hitler. I
imagine they're dropping the N word in there as well.

Speaker 2 (41:04):
And yeah, it's it's, which is also something that's being
apparently celebrated on the right currently, at least as aimed
at at five year old autistic children.

Speaker 5 (41:13):
Well, and this is to your point that, yes, Kanye
West absolutely has agency, and the people around him who
are indulging this have agency as well. And the reason
that he is able to make these music videos and
produce this music is because there are people around him
who think that they can continue profiting off of this

(41:34):
extremely sad situation, both monetarily and by you know, the
actual like proximity to.

Speaker 8 (41:43):
Fame that they have with Kanye.

Speaker 3 (41:44):
Well, in his spell in a way.

Speaker 2 (41:46):
Yeah, you know, who believe that he really is the
victim of this elaborate conspiracy and he really is this
you know, this world historic genius and it's eccentricity not
mental illness. You know, I don't know anything about him person,
I've never been around him or whatever, but you know,

(42:07):
he may be one of these people who's able to
create this sort of like reality distortion field around him,
where you couple that the you know, those sort of
like powers of persuasion into distort reality with the personal
self interest of wanting to be close to someone who
is rich and famous, and you end up with a

(42:28):
crew of enablers who are you know, in it for
what they can get out of effectively exploiting a person
who is deeply mentally ill in a way that is
very damaging to him himself, his family and the culture.

Speaker 8 (42:40):
Yeah, and the culture. Yeah, I think that's an important point.

Speaker 5 (42:42):
Though.

Speaker 8 (42:43):
The last time I'll say is I mean, the.

Speaker 5 (42:47):
Song is obviously awful, it's out there now, and I
can't dismiss that it's also such a horrible insight into
the mind of Kanye West, which is that in this
sense in the song, there's this recognition and you mentioned this.
This is this recognition that this is the ultimate taboo
and that this is an awful or that this is

(43:09):
an extreme place to find yourself. That's the like he's
acknowledging that and clearly conscious of it in the song.
And I mean, how sad is it that in some
sense he recognizes other people want to hear this for
reasons that are different from his own in the song,

(43:29):
which is I can't get my kids, so now I'm
going full Nazi. There are other people out there who
are just like they just care about the full Nazi part. Yeah,
And that's just like, I mean again, like he does
have agency. I don't want to dismiss that at all,
but it's just so sad that there's room right now

(43:50):
for that to be powerful, for that to be something
that gets a lot of attention views that people see
something so cathartic in gravitating towards like overt racism and
Holocaust denial and whatever else they're going towards. I mean,
maybe not Holocaust denial, Holocaust celebration. And it depends on

(44:11):
who you're talking to in those like fringe fringe awful circles,
whether they're outright denihialists or celebrationists. But yeah, it's it's
it's in the song. It's like baked into his sort
of admission here that he's going full Nazi.

Speaker 8 (44:28):
Is this idea that other people are they want that
and he can sort of get some type of attention
for doing it.

Speaker 3 (44:36):
Yeah, no, that's true.

Speaker 2 (44:37):
But it's like, listen, if you want to see your kids,
take your mads and get well, yeah, you're gonna have
a much better chance at seeing your kids. And if
they you know, if you have the chance to see them,
about them having an actual.

Speaker 3 (44:48):
Like healthy relationship with you as well.

Speaker 8 (44:50):
Horrible.

Speaker 3 (44:51):
Yeah, all right, guys.

Speaker 2 (44:53):
I was able yesterday to speak with the mayor of Newark,
who also, by the ways, running for governor of New Jersey.
He's in a pretty packed Democratic primary against some leading
lights of the Democratic Party like Josh Gottheimer.

Speaker 3 (45:04):
That's one example. In any case, I do get in
a question to him.

Speaker 2 (45:09):
At the very end about that race for New Jersey
governor governor. He was arrested on Friday. He and three
Democratic members of Congress had gone to this ice facility.
Apparently the Democratic members there arrived there first. There is
a law in place that was passed during or after
the first Trump administration to permit any member of Congress
going to inspect a federal facility. So they were availing

(45:32):
themselves over that opportunity in the law to conduct to
this inspection and oversight. He joined them, he's told to leave,
he does leave, and then he's arrested for alleged trespassing.
He denies that he did anything wrong or broke the
law in any way. In the context of him being arrested,
I'll show some of the video in this segment. There
was a we'll just call it a very chaotic scene

(45:55):
that plays out.

Speaker 6 (45:56):
Now.

Speaker 2 (45:56):
The Trump administration is threatening also those Democratic members of
Congress with arrest as well. So in any case, I
had a chance to record this interview. The mayor was
on his way to I think a Mother's Day event
or something of that nature, but got some good insights
on his side of the story, at least of what unfolded.
Let's go ahead and take a listen to that. Mayor

(46:20):
Ross Baraka of Newark, New Jersey, was arrested by mass
federal agents on Friday after attempting to accompany three members
of Congress. Democratic members on an inspection of an ice
facility that it opened over his objections and which he
says is operating illegally in his city. I'm going to
let the mayor lay out the timeline of exactly how

(46:42):
these events unfolded, what his goals were for this action
on this day, what occurred, what led to his arrest.
But I can show you right now a quite chaotic
scene that unfolded outside of this ice facility as they
did attempt and eventually successfully did arrest mayor of Newark
ross Baraka. He was released several hours early later, and

(47:04):
he was charged with trespassing.

Speaker 3 (47:07):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (47:08):
The mayor says that these charges are false, that he
did nothing wrong. Here take a look. So the mayor

(47:41):
is there at the center in the red is representative
of Lamonica mckiv. Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman is also there
in the midst eighty eight year old woman in the
center of this action. So the Trump administration claimed that
these members attempted to storm the ice facility. This is

(48:01):
not backed up by the video evidence and the eyewitness
accounts on the scene. They have also now said that
they are looking at potential charges against the members of
Congress who were there to perform that oversight on that day,
So in order to get a breakdown of everything that unfolded,
the plans for the day, what the timeline was, the

(48:24):
differences between what actually happened and what the administration is
claiming unfolded. Is the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, and
New Jersey golubminatorial candidate Ross Braka. I want to start
off by getting your reaction to Trisia McLaughlin. She is
the Trump Administration's Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at DHS

(48:45):
and her characterization of the events that unfolded leading up
to your arrest. Let's go ahead and take a listen
to that.

Speaker 5 (48:52):
Thanks Victor for having me.

Speaker 10 (48:53):
I'm glad I can be here to actually give viewers
the facts. What happened as that these members of Congress,
including the mayor as well, and a mob of protesters
as there was a bus full of detainees going through
the gate, they stormed the gate and actually entered the
first security checkpoint. This put law enforcement at risk, and
this actually put the detainees as well at risk. If

(49:15):
any official, including these members of Congress, want to enter
the facility and take a tour DHS is more than accommodating.
But just because you're a member of Congress does not
mean you can break the law, trespass, put law enforcement
at risk, and storm the detention facility. I haven't yet
to hear anyone on this network actually talk about who

(49:35):
is in this detention facility. There are members of MS thirteen,
known terrorists, murderers, child rapists, there are some of the
worst of the worst in.

Speaker 8 (49:44):
This detention facility.

Speaker 10 (49:46):
And I'm still very confused why these Democrats are so
held then on getting these heinous actors out of this
facility when we have the proper permitting. And actually in
that press conference, those members of Congress actually noted the
great conditions of this facility that are ice enforcement officers
so bravely operate.

Speaker 2 (50:05):
So, Mayor what is your response to her allegation there
that you and these members of Congress stormed the facility.

Speaker 11 (50:13):
Either she's misinformed because she wasn't there, or she just
flat out lying. I mean, it's insane how these people
behave like they lie over and over again, and they
figured if they lie enough people to believe it, it's
the truth. The reality is nobody stormed the gate when
I got there. The members of Congress who are already inside,

(50:34):
they were in a booth. They didn't go all the
way in, but they were in a booth. Uh so
they were They were there waiting over an hour for
Homeland Security officials to come to give them a scheduled
visit that they had through the building. So number people
have to storm. They were invited there right, So that
that right there is a flat out line. You know,

(50:57):
all of this stuff about being assault a salting people,
all of it is wrong. I mean, either she's misinformed
or she's just lying.

Speaker 2 (51:03):
So you arrived, the members of Congress are already there
inside the gates, and then what happens from.

Speaker 9 (51:08):
There, they're already in a booth.

Speaker 11 (51:10):
I don't even see them because they're in the building
in a waiting area, waiting to get the tour.

Speaker 9 (51:18):
There are people outside who are there every day.

Speaker 11 (51:20):
You know, the protesters outside who are there every single day,
by the way, they're there today as well. So I
mean outside of the Congress, people, outside of media, protesters there,
they're going to be there and they have a right
to be there, right outside of the gate. I arrived
there waiting for the press conference that are supposed to
happen after that. She alluded to, there's a scheduled press
conference they're supposed to happen at one point thirty outside

(51:42):
of that gate. But obviously it didn't happen at that
time because these people never arrived when they were supposed to.

Speaker 2 (51:49):
They charge you, obviously with trespassing, which I know you dispute.
So can you lay out for us you know what
happened in terms of your entry and you know an
exit from the facility.

Speaker 9 (52:02):
I didn't break any law.

Speaker 11 (52:03):
I was first of all, if I'm on the property,
somebody let me in the property or invited me in
the property. That that's what happened. I walked in there.
I didn't kick, push, shove, run. I stat in there
with ICE agents for over an hour. ICE agents were
in there with me for over an hour. They didn't
do anything for me. They didn't say anything. Then asked
me to go.

Speaker 9 (52:23):
I just sat there.

Speaker 11 (52:25):
It wasn't until the special agent in charge showed us
we probably would give it. Was given orders to approach me,
and that's what he did. He approached me. The congress
people responded trying to stop him from harassing me. I
left the gate. You know, told me to get out.
I left, I left, it went out. They came outside

(52:48):
of the gate and proceeded to try to arrest me
outside of the gate after I already left the property.
The Congress people and uh, you know people that were
standing by got engaged in it because I mean they
were being very very very aggressive, you know.

Speaker 9 (53:05):
So obviously if you come outside of the gate, that's
what's going to happen. And that's what they did.

Speaker 11 (53:09):
They took me and these are the ones that dragged
me back onto the property and cuffs.

Speaker 9 (53:14):
No, they cuffs me and dragged me back into the
property and arrested me for a trespassing So.

Speaker 2 (53:21):
I'm sure you know, Mayor that the administration is now
threatening those members of Congress who were there with you
with arrest as well, and they are sharing some body
camera footage that they claim shows some of these members
of Congress in their view, assaulting.

Speaker 9 (53:38):
His offers.

Speaker 3 (53:39):
Masses were there. Let me just go ahead and show
you a little bit of that.

Speaker 2 (54:01):
So it's clearly it's extremely chaotic that's represented of mackivor
and the Red Relieve. Can you just tell us what
we're looking at there and what from your perspective, was.

Speaker 11 (54:10):
Them assaulting me, grabbing me, trying to lock me up
them they were holding on to me.

Speaker 9 (54:18):
Uh, so they were pushing them off of me. Uh
if you see the whole video.

Speaker 11 (54:22):
There's several videos out there with all kinds of viewpoints.
Several people were thrown to the ground, Several several bystanders
were thrown to the ground by agents. They were pushed,
they were shoved. If you see people being pushed, it
is them pushing the Congress people. And you can hear
people in the background saying, don't touch them, keep your
hands off of them. You're not supposed to touch them.

(54:44):
They're members of Congress, mayor.

Speaker 2 (54:46):
One thing that I think has disturbed a lot of
people is the use of masks by these federal agents
in this situation and many others that we've seen with
ICE arresting immigrants across the country. What do you what
do you make of the significance of this wide spread
use of masking to obscure the face of these federal agents.

Speaker 11 (55:03):
That's pretty strange, and it makes it feels like they're
on a like real military uh, you know, special obsmission.

Speaker 9 (55:11):
I don't know what's happening there.

Speaker 11 (55:13):
The excuse is that ICE agents are under attack, and uh,
you know, they have to hide their identity because they're
under attack. I mean, our police officers in Newark can't
go to places like this, like they have to always
be visible. The body camera footage has to always be on.
They have to be visible, and they face harrowing and

(55:36):
difficult and dangerous situations.

Speaker 9 (55:38):
All the time.

Speaker 4 (55:39):
Right.

Speaker 11 (55:40):
You know, I don't understand why this is happening, but
I mean the reality is their behavior and the things
that they're doing to people, in my mind is extra
legal and beyond the constitution.

Speaker 3 (55:55):
What is your objection to this ICE facility in Newark?

Speaker 11 (56:00):
Our issue was with GEO. It's not even with ICE.
It's not an ICE facility. First of all, it's GEOS
facility that they changed in the process of trying to
change because a contract that just got from ICE to
Howse some detainees, same kind of contract they gave to
El Salvador.

Speaker 9 (56:21):
They've given to these people here locally sixty three.

Speaker 11 (56:24):
Million dollars over a billion dollars over a period of
time to house detainees. Our contention is that they need
a certificate of occupancy. They argue that they have one
They have one from twenty years ago, which we think
is outdated and it needs to be updated, updated to
explain what the use of the property is. Now inspectors
have to go in the building and inspect everything from

(56:46):
fire code inspections to health inspections to electrical inspections.

Speaker 9 (56:50):
Now they're playing with that and not allowing people in.
We went up there, We go there regularly.

Speaker 11 (56:54):
We're in court about this, and they have a right
to dispute what we're saying if they don't think they
need a stificant occupies if we think they do. In America,
these things are settled in courts of law, and that's
where we're at. We're in a dispute with the court.
Ice doesn't settle that. The President doesn't settle that Homeland security,
nor ICE settles that judges settle these things. These are

(57:16):
disputes that are settled by judges, not by authoritarianism. And
so while we're going through this, they make a decision
to go forward anyway to do what they want to
do despite our effort to get this redress in court,
which we believe is beyond the scope of their capacity,
and they don't have the right to do this. So
we're pushing back against this, and it's that's a terrible precedent.

(57:38):
We allow them to do this. Anybody could come in
here and set up whatever the heck they want and
say they don't need to listen to the city's laws.
We allow these people to do it. So we're going
back and forth with them about this. ICE has interceded
and have decided to do what they're doing today.

Speaker 2 (57:54):
Mayor, I'm sure you know that for years, activists have
contended that ICE is a lawless roguauate and sy that
should be abolished.

Speaker 3 (58:02):
Do you agree with that?

Speaker 11 (58:04):
Well, I think that there is some use for homeland security. Obviously,
there is use for us to have law enforcement. But
at the end of the day, I think what they're
being weaponized to do is wrong. I think what the
President has weaponized these agencies to do, it is far
beyond their scope.

Speaker 9 (58:24):
Right now.

Speaker 11 (58:26):
They weaponized to attack anybody that speaks out against the
president of the United States, anybody that's against the policies
of the United States, whether they're documented or not, whether
they have a student VIZA, you know, whether they have
a green card or whether they're undocumented. And frankly, they're
not just this lie about the places everybody's every place
is filled with like child rapists and murderers.

Speaker 9 (58:47):
And gang members. It's just a flat out lie.

Speaker 11 (58:49):
These people are attacking everybody, right, everybody in America that's
going through the process to become documented is not documented.

Speaker 9 (58:57):
Yet and sometimes it takes seven, eight, nine years. So
in that process, any of.

Speaker 11 (59:02):
These people are eligible to be deported, they will come
and grab these people and deport them, which we think
is unfair, unconstitutional, lacking of due process, you know, and.

Speaker 9 (59:16):
You know, should we pushed back against.

Speaker 11 (59:18):
And people all over the country are and so my
position against Ice, my contention was ICE, and and really
my contention with the you know, with the Trump immigration
policy is different than my contention with GO. Those are
two different issues, right, and we have the right to
fight those issues on different fronts.

Speaker 2 (59:35):
Last question I have for you, Mayor, I know you're
you're busy, and I appreciate you taking the time today,
is you're running for governor and you have a pretty
crowded Democratic primary field that you're up against. You know,
do you think that you would interface with the Trump
administration as governor of New Jersey in a different way
than your primary opponents would do you think that that's

(59:57):
an aspect that sets you apart.

Speaker 11 (01:00:00):
Clearly. You know, everybody is saying that they are gonna
do are gonna fight Donald Trump. That's the buzzword of
today because he's become so rogue. I mean, violating the Constitution,
undermining people's democratic rights, taking away medicaid, you know, attacking
social security, veterans benefits, attacking diversity, equity inclusion.

Speaker 9 (01:00:18):
I mean, it's just all out attack on working people.
You know.

Speaker 11 (01:00:22):
Obviously, Uh, we're gonna have to defend ourselves in New Jersey,
and I'm gonna do that. We're gonna have to unite
with other states that are pushing back to do that, and.

Speaker 9 (01:00:31):
We're gonna do that, clearly.

Speaker 11 (01:00:32):
But we're also trying to build a democracy in New Jersey,
one that you know, all Americans can be proud of
and and and obviously, uh, we we think that if
if the President of the United States supports that, then fine,
If he doesn't, doesn't our ideas and a thing that
we create will be opposed to that. I mean, we're
not building a New Jersey that's centered around Donald Trump

(01:00:55):
or what he's for and what he's against.

Speaker 9 (01:00:57):
Building a New Jersey.

Speaker 11 (01:00:58):
That's democratic, and that's a you know, supportive and available
of what we believe in in this state and create
a pathway for all New Jersey ins.

Speaker 2 (01:01:07):
All right, Maya ross Broka, thank you so much for
taking the time.

Speaker 3 (01:01:09):
I appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (01:01:10):
All right, guys, that is the show, Emily Pleasure. Three
lady shows in a row, discounting Friday. I mean Friday,
we had Ryan in, but Friday's like a little bit different.

Speaker 3 (01:01:20):
So I'm talking about the main shows.

Speaker 5 (01:01:21):
Yeah, main shows, three in a row. So you guys
will get your fix of the normal man woman dynamic.
I guess tomorrow and Wednesday, because Ryan and I will
be in on Wednesday, and Crystal, I'm really excited to
watch you host with Tim Miller tomorrow.

Speaker 2 (01:01:35):
Yeah, I'm looking forward to It'll be interesting. I get
some questions for him. I'm actually listening to his book
to hear his explanation of his major ideological transition. And
you know, he did a fair amount of self assessment
about his sort of like culpability in the trends that
led to where we are now.

Speaker 8 (01:01:53):
So SPI's a lot of tea in that book too.

Speaker 3 (01:01:55):
Yeah, that's a lot of definitely.

Speaker 2 (01:01:57):
So I'm probably is a Republican reading like on the
right reading it, you probably picked up on even more
of the tea or some of the interpersonal dynamics.

Speaker 5 (01:02:04):
Well, yeah, I mean it's a really interesting book and
I've actually recommended it to people before who want insight
in how Washington operates. And people can dispute Tims and
maybe I'll talk to the talk to him about this tomorrow,
but they can dispute Tim's motivation for writing this, and
he might actually even come out and say this. But
you know, as soon as he was kind of i
guess ostracized because of his views on Donald Trump and

(01:02:25):
could no longer kind of operate in that space, he
wrote the tell all about it, and you know, again
question the motivations by all means. But I think for
Tim he did have a pretty sincere conversion away from
the GOP orthodoxy that he really was aggressively pushing and
making money off.

Speaker 8 (01:02:44):
Of for a long time here in DC.

Speaker 5 (01:02:46):
So what you get in that book is a glimpse,
a really really i think detailed and a granular glimpse
of how the sausage is made here by consultants and oh, lobbyists,
and all of that.

Speaker 3 (01:02:58):
Yeah, well, he talks about how the.

Speaker 2 (01:03:02):
Compartmentalization that he was able to deploy as a gay
man who was working for politicians who were anti gay
in the context of a party that was overall very
anti gay. It still is that that compartmentalization is in
some ways the very same skill that other operatives who

(01:03:23):
previously may have been, you know, disgusted with Trump and
opposed to what he stood for, et cetera, how they're
able ultimately to just sort of cope with it and
go along with it. So it's somewhat at least, you know,
so far few chapters into the book, it's so much
self deprecating about how he recognizes in the Trump justification
the very same justifications that he was using in the

(01:03:43):
context of working for John McCain or John Huntsman or
other Republican politicians or for this group that basically would
like fund AstroTurf, you know, organizations to bolster whatever conservative
billionaires wanted them to do.

Speaker 5 (01:04:00):
No, and I knew t him back then, and you know,
even just talking to him now, I'm really excited for
this episode tomorrow because he's he's i think has a
lot to say about it like he's willing to talk
about it, and I think that's really helpful because it's
very rare that you get someone who's fully willing to
kind of uh divorce themselves from the previous, their previous

(01:04:22):
life in Washington. And he's also like really funny, so
it'll be it's it's a he's a good messenger for
the past.

Speaker 3 (01:04:30):
Life, excellent explaining it all.

Speaker 2 (01:04:32):
I'm looking forward to Thank you guys so much for
watching it. Thank you so much for sure supporting the show.
If you are premium subscriber, we're going to switch over
and do a premium a m A. If you want
to be part of those in the future, make sure
to subscribe at Breakingpoints dot com. I'll see you back
here tomorrow