SCOTUS slaps down activist judges, The Big Beautiful Bill squeaks by, and CNN takes a criminal mistep while the President tours Aligator Alcatraz. It was a huge week for the Trump Administration as you will hear with our "did they really just say that" cuts.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Scotis slaps down activist judges, the Big Beautiful Bill squeaks by,
and CNN takes a criminal misstep while the President tours
alligator Alcatraz. It was a huge week for the Trump administration.
As you'll hear, whether did they really just say that
cuts from this week?
Speaker 2 (00:16):
I'm Nancy Shack cla alligator.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
I'm Ben Parker.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
This is a news bite.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
Well this was a big one, wasn't it. This was
a big decision this morning. The Supreme Court has delivered
a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers,
and the rule of law.
Speaker 5 (00:45):
On this vote, the Ya's are fifty, the Nays are fifty,
the Senate being evenly divided, the Vice President votes, and
the Affirmative the bill as amended is pasted.
Speaker 6 (00:56):
One tech developer is pushing back with an app designed
to try back ice activity in real time. It's called
ice block, And it's controversial to say the least.
Speaker 7 (01:05):
You know, the snakes are fast, but alligators, but we're
going to teach them how to run away from an alligator, Okay,
if they escaped prison.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Have you ever been eaten by an alligator?
Speaker 2 (01:17):
No, I've been to gatling I enjoyed gatling.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
You never got eaten. Nope, nope, nope. I would think
so far. I would think it would suck.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
I suspect it would, which is why they put a
deportation center right in the middle of the Everglades.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Alligator Alcatraz. That is a name that says it all,
don't you think, Because yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
The president explains what the premise is cut one O two.
Speaker 4 (01:44):
It's known as Alligator Alcatraz, which is very appropriate because
I looked outside and that's not a place I want
to go hiking anytime soon.
Speaker 8 (01:54):
But very soon, this facility will house some of the
most menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on
the planet. Was surrounded by miles of treacherous swampland, and
the only way out is really deportation, and a lot
of these people are self deporting back to their country
where they came from.
Speaker 3 (02:12):
Quite a few were mazed. That's actually the number.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
And then he had some he was at the airport,
and he had some words of advice for the future
inmates of Alligator Alcatraz one O seven.
Speaker 9 (02:22):
I love the alligator Alpha set the idea that adults
start they just getting finality over and.
Speaker 7 (02:30):
Thinking about it, I guess that's the concept.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
This is not a nice business.
Speaker 7 (02:34):
I guess that's the concept if you you know, uh,
the snakes are bass but alligators. But we're going to
teach them how to run away from an alligator. Okay,
if they escaped prison, how to run away, don't run
in a straight line rug like this, and you know what,
your chances go off about one percent.
Speaker 10 (02:53):
But that was not a good thing.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
That's that's actually sound advice. I think if somebody gets
out of Alligator and gets past the gators, they should
be given citizenship.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
Maybe. By the way, they they call regular Alcatraz, you know,
the one that's now closed in San.
Speaker 2 (03:09):
Francisco and soon to be reopened. As a matter of fact,
they're to reopen it.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Yes, well they call it the Rock, right, Yes, the nickname.
So do we need a fancy nickname or is alligator Alcatraz?
Speaker 1 (03:19):
Alligator Alcatraz stands on its own as one of the
greatest prison names of all time. Think about it, if
you if you name the prisons for the for the guards, I.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
Think it's great.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
We could do all sorts of of geographic or or
biological guards like you could have you know, shark Shashank
or you know, how about you know you could do
something like you know, if you're going to do polar birds,
or how about brown Bear box or brown Bear.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
You know, you could do it polar prison.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
You'd have to have it in the right place though,
like a polar prison would have to Beska, and yeah,
you have to be somewhere the polar bear. Alligator Alcatraz
couldn't have been in Alaska. Now. Also, I'm waiting for
and I think if there's a I'm not it. I'm
an idea. Man, I can't do the product. But yeah,
you know we need to come up with there's gotta
be There was Escape from Alcatraz, The Birdman of Alcatraz.
(04:12):
There's been all these Alcatraz movies, so now we need
an alligator Alcatraz movie. But I think if someone really
wants to hit available, well, well he's dead. He wasn't
Alcatraz by an alligator. But no, no, I think I
think what you could do here is you could combine
a couple of genres. Right, you have the prison genre
because of course it's alligator Alcatraz, and of course because
(04:32):
there'd be illegal immigrants, you could you'd hit the foreign market,
but also do a little horror throw that in right,
as everybody tries to escape from this prison that they've
nicknamed Alligator Alcatraz, people get eaten by an alligator. So
you have like that that kind of Jaws kind of
and a Conda. You have some of that horror movie
(04:56):
kind of aspect to it.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
So it's we're all on appro violent a form of
the Birdman of Alcatraz.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
By the way, if you want to do a good movie,
you don't even you don't even really have to have
all illegal immigrants. You could have just a variety of
of bad people in a prison surrounded by alligators.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
He's done.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
When when Alligator Alcatraz is done deporting people, President Trump
says he's happened to hind it over to Florida. And
they can have it movie. No, they can have it
as a prison. They can put their movies, they can
put their own prisons.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
I think they should do a movie first, and I
think what you could do to really up the fear
factor of the movie is not just people who try
to escape, but what you have is this this handful
of alligators who seem to be smarter than regular alligators.
And they're able to break into the prison. You know,
think like some of those zombie movies or movies where
(05:49):
they make it seem like the animal is smart enough
to to.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
How about anaconda they kept eating people.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Yeah, that's what I'm saying right out there. Yeah, so
you get the little alligator group and they figure out
a way to get into the prison.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
But they can't do it because they get those little
short arms.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
So they can't really, so they need to they need
to bring another group of critics who have longer arms
along with them, or you know.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
Well, Sarantosaurus rex has had short arms and they.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
Okay, but yeah, but they didn't really they're gone.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
So it's you know what I'm saying, asteroid was not
necessarily an asteroid. I think that was Darwinism. But the
liberals in particular things say this is an inhumane prison.
It's a hot you know, human swamp.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
How dare you put people there? Not true?
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Did you know that Alligator Alcatraz is air conditioned to
cut one hundred?
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Viewers at home should note, but this is air conditioned facility.
Speaker 9 (06:42):
So if any of the news claims are keeping them
out in the hot hum itself boarda that is wrong.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
It's probably sixty two the grees here to be on.
So hey, Biden wanted me in here. Okay, he wanted me.
Speaker 4 (06:53):
It didn't work out that way, but he wanted.
Speaker 11 (06:55):
Me in here.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
Well, it's another reason people wouldn't try to escape. It's nice.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
It's nice and cool inside, air conditioned. It's more than
my car can say at the moment. And it's But
I like President Trump turning everything back to Biden and
the fight he had with Biden United.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
He wanted to me to hear son of a bitch.
I mean, how many times do you hear a president
saying stuff like that? Not very often?
Speaker 3 (07:18):
Well, when the president's Trump, you hear more often than Lincoln. Perhaps, Wow.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
They The thing about it is the prisoners who go
there have an option of self deporting when they get there.
They don't have to stay there. They can self deport,
and so far it's effective. A lot of people are
self deporting rather than end up at Alligator Alcatraz. So
I think it's already serving its purpose. And I think
that what they're doing with Alligator Alcatraz is actually pretty humane.
(07:49):
When you think about it, you know, you're just showing
people what life could be, but you're not making them
stay there.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
They can go if they want.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Would you rather this is the first question, Like you
have a questionnaire when people go into prison, and you
know how they have to do that debrief or whatever
when you go to what you sent to prison? Would
you rather get eaten by an alligator or go back
to your home country? Yeah? And if you check go
back to my home country, you don't even have to
fill out the rest of the question.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
Yeah, there's a plant there plans right there. Yeah, So
I think what is much more criminal than alligator Alcatraz?
Although the liberals don't do not agree is what CNN
did this week. They promoted an app that outs ice
operations and agents cut ten c.
Speaker 6 (08:30):
One tech developer is pushing back with an app designed
to track ice activity in real time. It's called ice Block,
and it's controversial, to say the least. Santa Claire Duffy
is with us. Now, how does this work, Claire? And
what are the legal implications?
Speaker 12 (08:46):
Yeah, John, I talked with Joshua Aaron, who is the
longtime tech worker who developed this platform, and he said
he really wants it to be an early warning system
for people about the location of Immigrations and Customs enforcement officers.
So he says he does not people interfering with those
officers' activity, but he does want people to be able
to avoid them altogether if they want. So you open
(09:08):
the app. It looks like a map, and users can
tap the map to report an ICE sighting in their area,
and then everybody who uses the platform within five miles
of that siding will get a push alert. This is
a free iPhone app. It is anonymous. Errand says he
doesn't collect any user data.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
Can you say obstruction? That's obstruction of justice?
Speaker 1 (09:28):
What they did that is actually criminal what they just
did putting out there an app that obstructs law enforcement.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
I'm going to play Devil's Advocate for a second because
I like to do that for fun. True, and I
agree with you. Look, ICE is doing their job and
they should be let to do their job. However, there
are apps and GPS systems that will alert you where
there are police on the highway, so if you're speeding,
you can slow down and not get a ticket. I
don't know if it's all that much different than that.
(09:56):
I know ICE, what ICE does and writing a traffic
ticket or two.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Nice friends in this particular situation. One, those are misdemeanors
we're talking about. This is federal Uh, this is their
different crime. This is felonies. It's a whole different thing.
One and Two, I don't see CNN going out there
and pushing an app on how to avoid a speed trap.
So that's what we're talking about here. This app is
actually obstruction of justice, which to to out an ICE
(10:24):
operation and agents is obstruction of justice and also exposes
those agents in the operation to horrific violence which has
been happening. Did you know that violence against ICE agents
is up seven hundred seven hundred seven zero zero percent.
I believe that's why this is a felony and CNN
(10:48):
is promoting it. That's actually the criminal application here is
the fact that they are assisting in obstruction by the
way and aiding criminalsalking about robbing a bank.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
And I was wondering where the app is to tell
me which bank is furthest from the police. Yeah, so
I could.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
I think that might be useful to you.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
But this is Tritian McLaughlin, she's the Assistant Secretary Department
of Homeland Security, to explain why this is bad ten A.
Speaker 11 (11:19):
I don't know exactly how the app works, but I
know that the Department of Homeland Security and the ICE
director to Tim Lyons, is worried about this, concerned and
can you tell us your thoughts about this. Do you
think that it is meant to at least give people
heads up so that they can get away from ICE,
but also concerned for the ICE men and women in uniform.
(11:40):
In addition to.
Speaker 13 (11:41):
That data, absolutely, our ice enforcement officers are seeing a
five hundred percent increase and assaults against them. And a
lot of this is because politicians like AOC like Governor
Tim Walls, like Gavin Newsom demonize our ice enforcement officers
and give them free passes and examples like these. These
apps are absolutely obstructing justice. What our ice enforcement officers
(12:04):
are doing is enforcing the rule of law. If these rioters,
these activists, and these politicians don't like the law, they
should change it. Don't go after our ice law enforcement.
It's disgusting, it's wrong, and it is an American.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
So Secretary of Homeland Security Christy Noans says, well, We're
just going to bring the DOJ into this. Cut one
O six.
Speaker 14 (12:25):
This is President end and am Secretary of CNN yesterday
forced an app that lets you trap where ice agents are.
Tom Holman, we're saying that perhaps he eventually prosecuted that
their Russan law.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
For your response, yeah, we're working with the Department of Justices. See,
we can't prosecute them with.
Speaker 14 (12:42):
That because what they're doing is actively at encouraging people
into avoid law enforcement at.
Speaker 13 (12:49):
Activities operations, and we're going to actually go after them
and crossing them by the mergers of the family getanity
because of what they're doing.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
The need is a legal I think if the board
at CNN is indicted for criminal conspiracy obstruction of justice,
they should do their time at Alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
That's that's my feeling of the whole thing.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
Don't listen, don't worry. I want to give comfort to
those who might get breaking the law. Yeah, I want
to give some comfort to those people. More than likely
you can find a judge who will overturn anything that
Trump administration does. So maybe I'm just saying I maybe
it's maybe they got pretty Maybe.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
So, while Trump was focused on Alligator Alley and CNN's
criminal activity, the the the Congress was very busy and
the Vice President was casting a tie breaking vote on
Capitol Hill, Cut twenty five A.
Speaker 5 (13:50):
On this vote, the ya's are fifty, the na's are fifty,
the Senate being evenly divided, the Vice President votes, and
the affirmative the bill as a mint is past.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
That would be the big beautiful bill to you, Ben
So just.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
On that particular day there, because the ya's were fifty
and the naves were fifty.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Yep.
Speaker 3 (14:11):
Then the Vice President just on that.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Day, who is the President of the Senate.
Speaker 3 (14:15):
Right, was yay d Vans Yeah, yay.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Yeah, ok, yeah, exactly exactly he was.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
This happened after a marathon Senate session on a big
beautiful bill which will basically fund a majority of President
Trump's agenda that had senators, really Democrat senators in particular,
really put out about how much work they had to do.
Cut eleven. This is Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. Do
you get any clues on the floor about what time
(14:42):
the Senate rat?
Speaker 15 (14:44):
Oh my god, I just want to go home. I've
already I've missed our entire trip to the beach. My
family is going to be back before we leave. On
that so and again I'm going to vote. Know, there's
no drama. The votes are gone. In fact, the only
interesting votes are going to be on the margin, whether
that's Collins or Johnson and those But all the Democrats,
(15:06):
we all know how that's going to go.
Speaker 3 (15:08):
And I think I don't.
Speaker 15 (15:10):
Think it's really helpful to put people here to when
someone gotly up or him again, thank you, sir.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
You know, here's the thing. I happen to like John Fetterman.
He cracks me up a lot. But you know, here's
but somebody needs to explain him. That is your job.
You have a very cushy job. Nobody even makes you
get dressed for your job. You come us in shorts
and swats half the time. Your job is to vote.
Your job is to be there. So you had to
work a few extra days in July. Give me a
(15:40):
bleep and break. But this is the attitude that we
were getting from the senators. And it was so infuriating
to members of the public that this guy up in
the gallery, the Senate Gallery, lost his cookies. He just
became crazed watching this kind of behavior down below.
Speaker 2 (15:57):
And this is what happened. Cut number four.
Speaker 10 (16:02):
Sergeant Arms, the sergeant of Arms, restore order, the sergeant
the sergeant of Arms or restore order in the galley.
The sergeant of Arms or restore order. The Sergeant of
Arms are restored order in the galley. Sergeant of Arms
(16:25):
restore order in the galley.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
I think that's how most of us feel about the
Senate right now.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
By the way, maybe maybe I'm wrong, maybe there's multiple meanings,
but I always thought in the in the Senate, and
I've been up to our our state house here. Uh
you know, it's it's called the gallery. He was calling
it the galley, which is why it makes food.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
Yeah, he meant he was just misspeaking.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
It's the gallery. I worked, I worked in the Senate.
I worked, I worked actually on the Senate floor.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
It is.
Speaker 1 (16:55):
It is, in fact, a gallery, and you're not supposed
to say anything. There's all sorts of rules for people
in the gallery. You wouldn't believe the rules that you have.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
Some of them you would not like. It is written
out that you will not.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Lower food in a basket from the gallery to the
floor of the Senate.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
You cannot do if people doing that, well apparently they
did at one point, so that's why.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
So you can tell if you read the rules, which
which I as a page was bound to do. You
can see where people have done stuff and why they
just said, okay, fine, put this role in there so
it stops them so you cannot lower food. You know,
no senator can carry a cane or a crutch onto
the floor of the Senate, so if in fact they
need help, it was the pages that had to help
(17:36):
them in because one senator just what once took a
cane and beat the crap out of the one. So,
I mean, you can see all the rules, the very
strange rules for the both the House and Senate floor,
and they are specifically tailored to things that have happened.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
Well, I've always said, and sometimes you'll see like a
weird sign somewhere and you'll be like, well, they had
to put that sign up because somebody did that. I
saw a sign in a restroom one time which I
thought was pretty bizarre, no cleaning dishes in the sink,
thinking somebody must have been doing their dishes in the
bathroom sink at one time, so they had to put up.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
I signed a lease once for an apartment and one
of the addendums was I will not store explosives or
weaponry in in the uh in the storage unit for
the apartment. I'm like, which means of course that someone did.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Someone did.
Speaker 1 (18:25):
I also had in the same apartment there was a
note that I will not throw my Christmas tree off
the balcony that was in there too, and I'm like, okay, wow,
someone did that.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
So someone did that.
Speaker 3 (18:35):
And you say, somebody did. And of course some of
the ones, the old ones. You know, if you look
at back, like the lowering food, that might have been
something from a long time ago. You'll see town Boston
has a bunch of things on the on the on
the rules, things about things you can't do with your
horse on a Sunday and all this other stuff. And
you're like, well, somebody did that once one time. That's
why they had to stop it. By the way, and
we we spoke with one of the senators who wasn't
(18:57):
happy with the with that big beautiful bill. Well, actually,
to be honest with you, both Massachusetts Senators Ed Markey
and Elizabeth Warren were not happy, as you would of
course expect.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
Yes, so you know, Liz or what it's worth Liz.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
As her friends call her, you know, obviously was.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
Just a color Pocahontas. But everybody has their own, their
own nickname for list.
Speaker 3 (19:19):
Was twisted in a pretzel. At the end of the vote.
Speaker 16 (19:22):
When the Republicans won, they cheered. They cheered or taking
away healthcare from around seventeen million people. They cheered over
giving huge tax breaks to a handful of billionaires.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
How dare they cheer when they win something? How dare
they cheer?
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Has nobody ever cheered on her side of the aisle
when something passed that they wanted to.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Have can of point out what she's talking about?
Speaker 1 (19:48):
And I heard this actually on our station, and I
thought I need to have a word with somebody, because
the news story said they're taking It was from the network,
not from the local that that the bill took away
medicare from eleven million. Americans know it took away from
people who are here a i e. Illegal aliens are
(20:10):
no longer those are not Americans. Just want to point
out illegal aliens are not the equivalent of Americans. They
don't pay taxes generally speaking, some may do, but you
know what the hell, they don't pay taxes. They're not citizens.
They're not entitled to the things that American citizens are
entitled to. And nobody is taking away Medicare or Medicaid
from American citizens. That is the misnomer that's being put
(20:35):
out there about them from the bill.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
I disagree with a lot of the stuff that come
that is said, including being upset about about people cheering
when a bill passes. It happens. It's I mean, I
don't care if you like the bill. I don't like
the bill. Some people cheer when a bill gets passed
in the Senator, in the House or in wherever. Okay,
but you know, I disagree with what they're saying. However,
(20:59):
I get it. Look, you're opposed to the bill, Marky
Warren and the whole slew of the Democratic Party don't
like Donald Trump. They're going to say and do anything
they can to try to turn people against.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
You have to be to go.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
I think, I think, I think we know how desperate
the Republicans are because Democrats, I'm sorry they were The
Republicans are desperate. The Democrats really are. But yeah, no, Look,
obviously we know the party that's in power, and whoever
the party is in power, the other party is always
going to try to lab a few hand grenades here
and there and and and disrupt what what the other
(21:38):
party is trying to do. But yeah, and the thing
that bothers me more than just trying to dismantle, uh,
what the other party is doing. Look, if you disagree
with me, you're going to try to say things that
to either change my mind or to put people against me.
Here's the here's the problem lying, and that's has become
a huge problem. It's one thing to say say, hey,
(22:01):
your bill is going to do this, this, and this.
As long as what you said is true, then people
can make up their mind and say, oh, but to
your point on the Medicaid, Look if if if half
a million Americans we're gonna lose Medicaid coverage legal Americans citizens,
then you say that it's true, everybody goes, oh, that's
(22:23):
not good. And then you can argue whether that's fine
because it's not that many or whatever. But when you
just throw out numbers that sound scary as hell, seventy
three billion people are gonna lose many, Yeah, okay, slow down,
sailor you're you know, you're you're working.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
People are gonna because you said is being dismantled. Fourteen
million people are not going to die because you said's
being okay, But you said how are we responsible for
people in Europe doing whatever?
Speaker 2 (22:50):
We're not?
Speaker 1 (22:51):
You know, fund turn to Europe, they're now just what
up five percent GDP for NATO. If you got people
that need desk for help but they're gonna die in
your county, help them. That is your job, not my job.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
And please. I hear this a lot, with a lot
of different things, so I don't want to get deep
into the weeds. But when when when I start hearing
because you did this whatever, this is, ten million people
are going to die right away? I go, how do
you know? I mean, look, might some people die? Sure? Well, exactly.
(23:25):
They throw out numbers because of course they have their
their own bean counters will go, well, justy'll get this,
and these people will.
Speaker 1 (23:31):
Get that's all those numbers ever are fear Mont correct?
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Correct? You know what? This show could kill one hundred
people if they're listening to it and they happen to
have a heart attack. I mean, you can throw out
numbers of any sort to scare the Bejesus out of people,
but it really doesn't mean squat Diddley Diddley.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
I don't hear it often.
Speaker 3 (23:55):
No, Well, yeah, I think I just made it up.
It's good.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Sure, all right, So the big beautiful Bill was not
the only winning moment that President Trump had this week. Scotis,
the Supreme Court of the United States came down with
a landmark decision sixty three, slapping down activist judges who
have tried to stop the election mandate from last November,
(24:20):
otherwise known as the Trump administration cut number one.
Speaker 4 (24:23):
Well, this was a big one, wasn't it. This was
a big decision, an amazing decision, one that we're very
happy about this morning. The Supreme Court has delivered a
monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and
the rule of law in striking down the excessive use
(24:43):
of nationwide injunctions to interfere with the normal functioning of
the executive branch. The Supreme Court has stopped the presidency itself.
That's what they've done. And really it's been an amazing
period of time this last hour.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Yeah, it was very very exciting. It's a huge decision.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
It basically stops all these people of trying to do
the nationwide injunctions against anything that like deporting illegal immigrants.
And it's been very interesting to see the last response.
There are some who are rational look at it and say,
regardless of what your politics are, the decision itself was
a very sound This is David Brooks on PBS Cut
(25:25):
twenty five.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 17 (25:26):
I think the patchwork argument is the best argument that
people in favor of the national in junction have. That
where the Constitution's going to be interpret it differently in
different regions, that doesn't seem to make sense. Nonetheless, I
hate to say I think the Court decided rightly on
the national injunctions. I remember back in the Biden administration
there was a judge in Amoralo, Texas who decided to
ban an abortion pill, and I thought it was just
crazy that a single judge can set national policy on
(25:49):
a fraud issue that should be settled by democracy, and
Democrats were rightly outraged. Now, I am all in favor
of judges stopping what the Trump administration is doing, but
you've got to be consistent for both bar and I
think if people want to challenge what the Trump administration
is doing, or any administration, they can file class action lawsuits.
But we should not have this shopping where the liberals
(26:10):
go to a Northern California liberal judge, conservatives go to
an Amarillo Texas judge and they can set national policy
through one person. That just doesn't seem to make sense.
Speaker 3 (26:18):
I agree with him totally. I said that from the beginning.
And I know there's people who obviously, as you mentioned, right,
the liberals, their heads exploded when the Supreme Court came
out sixty three and they were very harsh, many of
them on the Supreme Court and how it's a Trump
court and blah blah blah blah blah, and look, you're
going to have disagreements with how the Supreme Court rules.
Here's the deal, and this guy set it right. I mean,
(26:40):
hit it right on the head. You can't have a
judge sitting in one chair in one town, in one
state setting the policy for the entire country.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
It just no.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
It creates an imperial judiciary, which you cannot have.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
You weren't the judge is not elected to be the president.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
And I states that was an executive power that the
judges were usurp.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
But you know, he was rational. David Brooks is being
very rational.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
But then you have people like Ali mistel Over an
MSNBC who this is how he framed his argument against
this ruling. Imagine Trump wants to murder you cut nineteen.
Speaker 9 (27:14):
Imagine Donald Trump wants to do something illegal to you,
ali Velshi.
Speaker 3 (27:19):
Imagine that he wants to murder you.
Speaker 9 (27:21):
Imagine that he and Stephen Miller released an entire policy
explaining about how they can murder Canadian journalists who are
working in America because they're taken the jobs from real
American journalists. Right, So he's going to murder you. So you,
ali Velshie, you go to court in the Southern District
of New York. Can you say, like, I don't think
this murder thing is constitutional. It's clearly illegal. It's clearly constitutional.
(27:45):
Donald Trump shouldn't be able to have a plan to
murder me. And the court says, you're right, ali Velshie,
there's no way Donald Trump is allowed to murder you.
We're gonna have an injunction, we're gonna stay the executive
order saying that he's gonna murder Canadian journalist. And so
you're like great, awesome, and you go home and then
Pat Caernan shows up and.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
He's like what about me?
Speaker 9 (28:05):
And the court way, I can't help you because ali
Velshi is the one who sued. So Pat Cairnan, if
you don't want to be murdered. You have to launch
your entire own lawsuit in the Southern District of New
York again to make sure that Donald Trump doesn't murder you.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
That has nothing even close to resembling what the decision
was by the Supreme Court. But notice the fear mongering
in there. Donald Trump will now have the power to
murder people. That's what they're doing. They're so freaked out
by the fact that they've lost this power to derail
something that is in fact.
Speaker 2 (28:40):
Legal. You know, the Trump administration was elected. President Trump
was elected. Majority of Americans picked him. He's the one
that won.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
So you know, if you don't like it, put somebody
else up who can beat the Republican Party in four
years or in three and a half years. Don't you
know you can't. You don't go out there and monger,
which is what in fact they've been doing, which is horrific.
And I do want to point out something that drove
me crazy about the Supreme Court decision.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
It was six to three.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
Three hyperliberal justices Kagan Sodo Mayor and Katanji Jackson Brown
were the dissenters. And by the way, the opinion was
written by Amy Conen Barrett and she bitch slapped Katanji
Brown's descent, which was the descent was ludicrous, just ludicrous
(29:32):
and not worthy of a Supreme Court justice, and she
bitch slapped her. But that's not the point I want
to point out. Justice Kagan was wrote a descent to
this opinion saying how, no, we need the national junction.
The national junction is important. And this is this is
a complete turnaround, point eighty from something that Justice Slena
Kagan said out loud in public in twenty twenty two
(29:56):
speaking at Northwestern University where she at that time, which is,
you know, three years ago national injunctions were bad cut
twenty four.
Speaker 18 (30:04):
That can't be right that one district court, whether it's
in you know, in the Trump years, people used to
go into the northern district of California and in the
Biden years they go to Texas. And it just can't
be right that one district judge can stop the nationwide
policy in its tracks and leave it stop for the
(30:25):
years that it takes to go through normal process.
Speaker 3 (30:30):
I agree with her. Yeah, unfortulation changed her mind because
it wasn't her president.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
Is she completely ignored what she used to believe, which
makes me believe that she's acting now as a political
activist and not as a justice of the Supreme Court.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
And how angry do people get? I mean again, it
depends what side of the AI your on. We hear
it all the time, we see it all the time,
we talk about it all the time. But how angry
do people get when they think, or maybe rightfully so,
think that one of the conservative justices is acting on
behalf of the president as a police operative. How many
times do we listen? Obviously, if Kagan only three years ago,
(31:05):
when Joe Biden was in office, didn't like this, you know,
one judge decision making fain, why does she now think
it's okay at twenty twenty five when Donald Trump is president?
And that's the question, that's the problem. And by the way,
I'll say this and I'll stand by it even in
ten years. Look if Amy Cony Barrett or someone else,
(31:27):
if I thought that they were acting as a political
activist for a president, I would say that's wrong. I
agree with this decision because I agree listen, I agree
with this two correct. I agree with that that guy
David Brooks, I agree with Elena Kagan, I agree with
Amy Cony Barrett this time. So I'm consistent. Some people, unfortunately,
(31:51):
are not. No, no, I'm not saying I've never been inconsistent,
but I hate inconsistency because it drives well, it drives
me to hypocrisy, it drives me crazy. So I agree
twenty twenty two, Elena Kagan, I agree with you, David Brooks,
I agree with you, Cody Barrett in twenty twenty five,
I agree with you. So I'm I agree with what
I agree with forever.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
National junction is bad Bafinically, I think it was the
correct decision, and I thought Elena Kagan was correct when
she said it back in twenty twenty two, and she's
still correct that she said it back in twenty twenty two.
But somewhere alongli she lost her way and became not
a Supreme Court justice anyway.
Speaker 3 (32:26):
She lost her well, she lost her way because Joe
Biden's not the president anymore. Yeah, I hate to say that. Yeah,
and maybe that's not the entire truth, but yeah, it's it.
I mean, it sounds like a political thing to me.
Speaker 14 (32:38):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
So we end every week with a truth ortrol, and
this week, of course not of course, but you know,
ninety five percent of our truth ortrolls are Donald Trump
because he is the King troller. He was speaking to
reporters on the White House lawn before he got on
the plane to Alligator Alcatraz, and he was asked about
the possibility of deporting Elon Musk cut one O eight.
(33:05):
I gotta a point.
Speaker 7 (33:08):
I don't know as they watch the tech A love
who might have to put doze on Elon? You know,
you know, dose is dose is the monster that has
that might have to go back and eat Elon would
not be terrible.
Speaker 8 (33:22):
He gets a lot of subs to this Peter.
Speaker 7 (33:24):
But Elon's very upset that the ev mandate is gonna
be terminated. And you know what, when you look at it,
who wants not everybody wants an electric car. I don't
want an electric car. I want to have baby gasoline,
maybe electric, maybe a hybrid, maybe someday a hydrogen. If
you have a hydrogen car, it has one problem if
(33:45):
it blows up, you know.
Speaker 3 (33:46):
So I'm gonna give that with the Peter.
Speaker 7 (33:48):
I'm gonna let Peter touch it up. Hydrogen cars and
when they blow up, it's serious.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Yeah, I want to I want a solar powered car myself.
But yeah, so the question is you know you're deporting people,
should elon who's been opening his mouth again, and he
has a right to open his mouth and be critical,
just but saying yeah, maybe we'll deport him. I don't know,
do you think he's serious or do you think he's trolling?
Speaker 3 (34:13):
By the way, a couple of things I wanted to
point out. He said he didn't want an electric car.
Then he kind of backtracked on because he.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
Got the White House exactly on the rose Guard.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
But the other thing, the other thing he said, which
by the way, is true, I think Hindenberg hydrogen.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
Yeah, but here he said it's serious when they blow up.
Speaker 3 (34:30):
Well, I just want to point out, no matter what
the car is filled with, it's pretty serious. When they
blow up gas gas cars that blow up that that's
pretty serious.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
But they don't usually create a fireball that reaches, you know,
within a ten mile scores.
Speaker 3 (34:45):
So it's a little worse when hydro at worse.
Speaker 1 (34:48):
Yes, by the way, there is burns to be had
in both moments.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
I agree with you.
Speaker 3 (34:51):
I like the I do like the idea of a
hydrogen car if they can make it safe safe.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
Yeah, I want to sellar powered car. I want to
or so car they have.
Speaker 1 (35:00):
The salt is now, you know, seawater is what's something
we have a lot of, and I think that we could.
You know that that's me to be the way of
the future batteries. Actually it's what they are.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
I mentioned the Hindenburg, and obviously the Hindenburg disaster was
kind of what did in airships anyway. But I've always
thought I want airships back. I mean not with hydrogen
blowing up and stuff. I really would like I know
they have a few glimps around, but I want to
take a few trips on an airship. I think that'd
be cool.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
I don't disagree with you. I think it'd be very cool.
I think the problem is that the Hindenburg really ruined it.
Speaker 3 (35:35):
For first, don't use hydrogen and don't get a spark
near the hydrogen.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
Yes, exactly, exactly right.
Speaker 1 (35:41):
So well, thank you everybody for listening this week. We
upload new episodes every single Monday, so you can check
back next week and see what new offerings we have.
You can contact Ben and I on x at news
Buy three or on Facebook at Newsbyite. Have a wonderful week,
Stay out of alligator. I'll go say alligator ally, say
out of alligator. Alcatraz. I'm Nancy Shack.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
Watch out for exploding hydrogen. I'm Ben Parker.
Speaker 2 (36:04):
This is newspite
Scotis slaps down activist judges, the Big Beautiful Bill squeaks by,
and CNN takes a criminal misstep while the President tours
alligator Alcatraz. It was a huge week for the Trump administration.
As you'll hear, whether did they really just say that
cuts from this week?
Speaker 2 (00:16):
I'm Nancy Shack cla alligator.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
I'm Ben Parker.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
This is a news bite.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
Well this was a big one, wasn't it. This was
a big decision this morning. The Supreme Court has delivered
a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers,
and the rule of law.
Speaker 5 (00:45):
On this vote, the Ya's are fifty, the Nays are fifty,
the Senate being evenly divided, the Vice President votes, and
the Affirmative the bill as amended is pasted.
Speaker 6 (00:56):
One tech developer is pushing back with an app designed
to try back ice activity in real time. It's called
ice block, And it's controversial to say the least.
Speaker 7 (01:05):
You know, the snakes are fast, but alligators, but we're
going to teach them how to run away from an alligator, Okay,
if they escaped prison.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Have you ever been eaten by an alligator?
Speaker 2 (01:17):
No, I've been to gatling I enjoyed gatling.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
You never got eaten. Nope, nope, nope. I would think
so far. I would think it would suck.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
I suspect it would, which is why they put a
deportation center right in the middle of the Everglades.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Alligator Alcatraz. That is a name that says it all,
don't you think, Because yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
The president explains what the premise is cut one O two.
Speaker 4 (01:44):
It's known as Alligator Alcatraz, which is very appropriate because
I looked outside and that's not a place I want
to go hiking anytime soon.
Speaker 8 (01:54):
But very soon, this facility will house some of the
most menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on
the planet. Was surrounded by miles of treacherous swampland, and
the only way out is really deportation, and a lot
of these people are self deporting back to their country
where they came from.
Speaker 3 (02:12):
Quite a few were mazed. That's actually the number.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
And then he had some he was at the airport,
and he had some words of advice for the future
inmates of Alligator Alcatraz one O seven.
Speaker 9 (02:22):
I love the alligator Alpha set the idea that adults
start they just getting finality over and.
Speaker 7 (02:30):
Thinking about it, I guess that's the concept.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
This is not a nice business.
Speaker 7 (02:34):
I guess that's the concept if you you know, uh,
the snakes are bass but alligators. But we're going to
teach them how to run away from an alligator. Okay,
if they escaped prison, how to run away, don't run
in a straight line rug like this, and you know what,
your chances go off about one percent.
Speaker 10 (02:53):
But that was not a good thing.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
That's that's actually sound advice. I think if somebody gets
out of Alligator and gets past the gators, they should
be given citizenship.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
Maybe. By the way, they they call regular Alcatraz, you know,
the one that's now closed in San.
Speaker 2 (03:09):
Francisco and soon to be reopened. As a matter of fact,
they're to reopen it.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Yes, well they call it the Rock, right, Yes, the nickname.
So do we need a fancy nickname or is alligator Alcatraz?
Speaker 1 (03:19):
Alligator Alcatraz stands on its own as one of the
greatest prison names of all time. Think about it, if
you if you name the prisons for the for the guards, I.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
Think it's great.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
We could do all sorts of of geographic or or
biological guards like you could have you know, shark Shashank
or you know, how about you know you could do
something like you know, if you're going to do polar birds,
or how about brown Bear box or brown Bear.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
You know, you could do it polar prison.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
You'd have to have it in the right place though,
like a polar prison would have to Beska, and yeah,
you have to be somewhere the polar bear. Alligator Alcatraz
couldn't have been in Alaska. Now. Also, I'm waiting for
and I think if there's a I'm not it. I'm
an idea. Man, I can't do the product. But yeah,
you know we need to come up with there's gotta
be There was Escape from Alcatraz, The Birdman of Alcatraz.
(04:12):
There's been all these Alcatraz movies, so now we need
an alligator Alcatraz movie. But I think if someone really
wants to hit available, well, well he's dead. He wasn't
Alcatraz by an alligator. But no, no, I think I
think what you could do here is you could combine
a couple of genres. Right, you have the prison genre
because of course it's alligator Alcatraz, and of course because
(04:32):
there'd be illegal immigrants, you could you'd hit the foreign market,
but also do a little horror throw that in right,
as everybody tries to escape from this prison that they've
nicknamed Alligator Alcatraz, people get eaten by an alligator. So
you have like that that kind of Jaws kind of
and a Conda. You have some of that horror movie
(04:56):
kind of aspect to it.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
So it's we're all on appro violent a form of
the Birdman of Alcatraz.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
By the way, if you want to do a good movie,
you don't even you don't even really have to have
all illegal immigrants. You could have just a variety of
of bad people in a prison surrounded by alligators.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
He's done.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
When when Alligator Alcatraz is done deporting people, President Trump
says he's happened to hind it over to Florida. And
they can have it movie. No, they can have it
as a prison. They can put their movies, they can
put their own prisons.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
I think they should do a movie first, and I
think what you could do to really up the fear
factor of the movie is not just people who try
to escape, but what you have is this this handful
of alligators who seem to be smarter than regular alligators.
And they're able to break into the prison. You know,
think like some of those zombie movies or movies where
(05:49):
they make it seem like the animal is smart enough
to to.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
How about anaconda they kept eating people.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Yeah, that's what I'm saying right out there. Yeah, so
you get the little alligator group and they figure out
a way to get into the prison.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
But they can't do it because they get those little
short arms.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
So they can't really, so they need to they need
to bring another group of critics who have longer arms
along with them, or you know.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
Well, Sarantosaurus rex has had short arms and they.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
Okay, but yeah, but they didn't really they're gone.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
So it's you know what I'm saying, asteroid was not
necessarily an asteroid. I think that was Darwinism. But the
liberals in particular things say this is an inhumane prison.
It's a hot you know, human swamp.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
How dare you put people there? Not true?
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Did you know that Alligator Alcatraz is air conditioned to
cut one hundred?
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Viewers at home should note, but this is air conditioned facility.
Speaker 9 (06:42):
So if any of the news claims are keeping them
out in the hot hum itself boarda that is wrong.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
It's probably sixty two the grees here to be on.
So hey, Biden wanted me in here. Okay, he wanted me.
Speaker 4 (06:53):
It didn't work out that way, but he wanted.
Speaker 11 (06:55):
Me in here.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
Well, it's another reason people wouldn't try to escape. It's nice.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
It's nice and cool inside, air conditioned. It's more than
my car can say at the moment. And it's But
I like President Trump turning everything back to Biden and
the fight he had with Biden United.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
He wanted to me to hear son of a bitch.
I mean, how many times do you hear a president
saying stuff like that? Not very often?
Speaker 3 (07:18):
Well, when the president's Trump, you hear more often than Lincoln. Perhaps, Wow.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
They The thing about it is the prisoners who go
there have an option of self deporting when they get there.
They don't have to stay there. They can self deport,
and so far it's effective. A lot of people are
self deporting rather than end up at Alligator Alcatraz. So
I think it's already serving its purpose. And I think
that what they're doing with Alligator Alcatraz is actually pretty humane.
(07:49):
When you think about it, you know, you're just showing
people what life could be, but you're not making them
stay there.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
They can go if they want.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Would you rather this is the first question, Like you
have a questionnaire when people go into prison, and you
know how they have to do that debrief or whatever
when you go to what you sent to prison? Would
you rather get eaten by an alligator or go back
to your home country? Yeah? And if you check go
back to my home country, you don't even have to
fill out the rest of the question.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
Yeah, there's a plant there plans right there. Yeah, So
I think what is much more criminal than alligator Alcatraz?
Although the liberals don't do not agree is what CNN
did this week. They promoted an app that outs ice
operations and agents cut ten c.
Speaker 6 (08:30):
One tech developer is pushing back with an app designed
to track ice activity in real time. It's called ice Block,
and it's controversial, to say the least. Santa Claire Duffy
is with us. Now, how does this work, Claire? And
what are the legal implications?
Speaker 12 (08:46):
Yeah, John, I talked with Joshua Aaron, who is the
longtime tech worker who developed this platform, and he said
he really wants it to be an early warning system
for people about the location of Immigrations and Customs enforcement officers.
So he says he does not people interfering with those
officers' activity, but he does want people to be able
to avoid them altogether if they want. So you open
(09:08):
the app. It looks like a map, and users can
tap the map to report an ICE sighting in their area,
and then everybody who uses the platform within five miles
of that siding will get a push alert. This is
a free iPhone app. It is anonymous. Errand says he
doesn't collect any user data.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
Can you say obstruction? That's obstruction of justice?
Speaker 1 (09:28):
What they did that is actually criminal what they just
did putting out there an app that obstructs law enforcement.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
I'm going to play Devil's Advocate for a second because
I like to do that for fun. True, and I
agree with you. Look, ICE is doing their job and
they should be let to do their job. However, there
are apps and GPS systems that will alert you where
there are police on the highway, so if you're speeding,
you can slow down and not get a ticket. I
don't know if it's all that much different than that.
(09:56):
I know ICE, what ICE does and writing a traffic
ticket or two.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Nice friends in this particular situation. One, those are misdemeanors
we're talking about. This is federal Uh, this is their
different crime. This is felonies. It's a whole different thing.
One and Two, I don't see CNN going out there
and pushing an app on how to avoid a speed trap.
So that's what we're talking about here. This app is
actually obstruction of justice, which to to out an ICE
(10:24):
operation and agents is obstruction of justice and also exposes
those agents in the operation to horrific violence which has
been happening. Did you know that violence against ICE agents
is up seven hundred seven hundred seven zero zero percent.
I believe that's why this is a felony and CNN
(10:48):
is promoting it. That's actually the criminal application here is
the fact that they are assisting in obstruction by the
way and aiding criminalsalking about robbing a bank.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
And I was wondering where the app is to tell
me which bank is furthest from the police. Yeah, so
I could.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
I think that might be useful to you.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
But this is Tritian McLaughlin, she's the Assistant Secretary Department
of Homeland Security, to explain why this is bad ten A.
Speaker 11 (11:19):
I don't know exactly how the app works, but I
know that the Department of Homeland Security and the ICE
director to Tim Lyons, is worried about this, concerned and
can you tell us your thoughts about this. Do you
think that it is meant to at least give people
heads up so that they can get away from ICE,
but also concerned for the ICE men and women in uniform.
(11:40):
In addition to.
Speaker 13 (11:41):
That data, absolutely, our ice enforcement officers are seeing a
five hundred percent increase and assaults against them. And a
lot of this is because politicians like AOC like Governor
Tim Walls, like Gavin Newsom demonize our ice enforcement officers
and give them free passes and examples like these. These
apps are absolutely obstructing justice. What our ice enforcement officers
(12:04):
are doing is enforcing the rule of law. If these rioters,
these activists, and these politicians don't like the law, they
should change it. Don't go after our ice law enforcement.
It's disgusting, it's wrong, and it is an American.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
So Secretary of Homeland Security Christy Noans says, well, We're
just going to bring the DOJ into this. Cut one
O six.
Speaker 14 (12:25):
This is President end and am Secretary of CNN yesterday
forced an app that lets you trap where ice agents are.
Tom Holman, we're saying that perhaps he eventually prosecuted that
their Russan law.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
For your response, yeah, we're working with the Department of Justices. See,
we can't prosecute them with.
Speaker 14 (12:42):
That because what they're doing is actively at encouraging people
into avoid law enforcement at.
Speaker 13 (12:49):
Activities operations, and we're going to actually go after them
and crossing them by the mergers of the family getanity
because of what they're doing.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
The need is a legal I think if the board
at CNN is indicted for criminal conspiracy obstruction of justice,
they should do their time at Alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
That's that's my feeling of the whole thing.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
Don't listen, don't worry. I want to give comfort to
those who might get breaking the law. Yeah, I want
to give some comfort to those people. More than likely
you can find a judge who will overturn anything that
Trump administration does. So maybe I'm just saying I maybe
it's maybe they got pretty Maybe.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
So, while Trump was focused on Alligator Alley and CNN's
criminal activity, the the the Congress was very busy and
the Vice President was casting a tie breaking vote on
Capitol Hill, Cut twenty five A.
Speaker 5 (13:50):
On this vote, the ya's are fifty, the na's are fifty,
the Senate being evenly divided, the Vice President votes, and
the affirmative the bill as a mint is past.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
That would be the big beautiful bill to you, Ben
So just.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
On that particular day there, because the ya's were fifty
and the naves were fifty.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Yep.
Speaker 3 (14:11):
Then the Vice President just on that.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Day, who is the President of the Senate.
Speaker 3 (14:15):
Right, was yay d Vans Yeah, yay.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Yeah, ok, yeah, exactly exactly he was.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
This happened after a marathon Senate session on a big
beautiful bill which will basically fund a majority of President
Trump's agenda that had senators, really Democrat senators in particular,
really put out about how much work they had to do.
Cut eleven. This is Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. Do
you get any clues on the floor about what time
(14:42):
the Senate rat?
Speaker 15 (14:44):
Oh my god, I just want to go home. I've
already I've missed our entire trip to the beach. My
family is going to be back before we leave. On
that so and again I'm going to vote. Know, there's
no drama. The votes are gone. In fact, the only
interesting votes are going to be on the margin, whether
that's Collins or Johnson and those But all the Democrats,
(15:06):
we all know how that's going to go.
Speaker 3 (15:08):
And I think I don't.
Speaker 15 (15:10):
Think it's really helpful to put people here to when
someone gotly up or him again, thank you, sir.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
You know, here's the thing. I happen to like John Fetterman.
He cracks me up a lot. But you know, here's
but somebody needs to explain him. That is your job.
You have a very cushy job. Nobody even makes you
get dressed for your job. You come us in shorts
and swats half the time. Your job is to vote.
Your job is to be there. So you had to
work a few extra days in July. Give me a
(15:40):
bleep and break. But this is the attitude that we
were getting from the senators. And it was so infuriating
to members of the public that this guy up in
the gallery, the Senate Gallery, lost his cookies. He just
became crazed watching this kind of behavior down below.
Speaker 2 (15:57):
And this is what happened. Cut number four.
Speaker 10 (16:02):
Sergeant Arms, the sergeant of Arms, restore order, the sergeant
the sergeant of Arms or restore order in the galley.
The sergeant of Arms or restore order. The Sergeant of
Arms are restored order in the galley. Sergeant of Arms
(16:25):
restore order in the galley.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
I think that's how most of us feel about the
Senate right now.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
By the way, maybe maybe I'm wrong, maybe there's multiple meanings,
but I always thought in the in the Senate, and
I've been up to our our state house here. Uh
you know, it's it's called the gallery. He was calling
it the galley, which is why it makes food.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
Yeah, he meant he was just misspeaking.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
It's the gallery. I worked, I worked in the Senate.
I worked, I worked actually on the Senate floor.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
It is.
Speaker 1 (16:55):
It is, in fact, a gallery, and you're not supposed
to say anything. There's all sorts of rules for people
in the gallery. You wouldn't believe the rules that you have.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
Some of them you would not like. It is written
out that you will not.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Lower food in a basket from the gallery to the
floor of the Senate.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
You cannot do if people doing that, well apparently they
did at one point, so that's why.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
So you can tell if you read the rules, which
which I as a page was bound to do. You
can see where people have done stuff and why they
just said, okay, fine, put this role in there so
it stops them so you cannot lower food. You know,
no senator can carry a cane or a crutch onto
the floor of the Senate, so if in fact they
need help, it was the pages that had to help
(17:36):
them in because one senator just what once took a
cane and beat the crap out of the one. So,
I mean, you can see all the rules, the very
strange rules for the both the House and Senate floor,
and they are specifically tailored to things that have happened.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
Well, I've always said, and sometimes you'll see like a
weird sign somewhere and you'll be like, well, they had
to put that sign up because somebody did that. I
saw a sign in a restroom one time which I
thought was pretty bizarre, no cleaning dishes in the sink,
thinking somebody must have been doing their dishes in the
bathroom sink at one time, so they had to put up.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
I signed a lease once for an apartment and one
of the addendums was I will not store explosives or
weaponry in in the uh in the storage unit for
the apartment. I'm like, which means of course that someone did.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Someone did.
Speaker 1 (18:25):
I also had in the same apartment there was a
note that I will not throw my Christmas tree off
the balcony that was in there too, and I'm like, okay, wow,
someone did that.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
So someone did that.
Speaker 3 (18:35):
And you say, somebody did. And of course some of
the ones, the old ones. You know, if you look
at back, like the lowering food, that might have been
something from a long time ago. You'll see town Boston
has a bunch of things on the on the on
the rules, things about things you can't do with your
horse on a Sunday and all this other stuff. And
you're like, well, somebody did that once one time. That's
why they had to stop it. By the way, and
we we spoke with one of the senators who wasn't
(18:57):
happy with the with that big beautiful bill. Well, actually,
to be honest with you, both Massachusetts Senators Ed Markey
and Elizabeth Warren were not happy, as you would of
course expect.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
Yes, so you know, Liz or what it's worth Liz.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
As her friends call her, you know, obviously was.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
Just a color Pocahontas. But everybody has their own, their
own nickname for list.
Speaker 3 (19:19):
Was twisted in a pretzel. At the end of the vote.
Speaker 16 (19:22):
When the Republicans won, they cheered. They cheered or taking
away healthcare from around seventeen million people. They cheered over
giving huge tax breaks to a handful of billionaires.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
How dare they cheer when they win something? How dare
they cheer?
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Has nobody ever cheered on her side of the aisle
when something passed that they wanted to.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Have can of point out what she's talking about?
Speaker 1 (19:48):
And I heard this actually on our station, and I
thought I need to have a word with somebody, because
the news story said they're taking It was from the network,
not from the local that that the bill took away
medicare from eleven million. Americans know it took away from
people who are here a i e. Illegal aliens are
(20:10):
no longer those are not Americans. Just want to point
out illegal aliens are not the equivalent of Americans. They
don't pay taxes generally speaking, some may do, but you
know what the hell, they don't pay taxes. They're not citizens.
They're not entitled to the things that American citizens are
entitled to. And nobody is taking away Medicare or Medicaid
from American citizens. That is the misnomer that's being put
(20:35):
out there about them from the bill.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
I disagree with a lot of the stuff that come
that is said, including being upset about about people cheering
when a bill passes. It happens. It's I mean, I
don't care if you like the bill. I don't like
the bill. Some people cheer when a bill gets passed
in the Senator, in the House or in wherever. Okay,
but you know, I disagree with what they're saying. However,
(20:59):
I get it. Look, you're opposed to the bill, Marky
Warren and the whole slew of the Democratic Party don't
like Donald Trump. They're going to say and do anything
they can to try to turn people against.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
You have to be to go.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
I think, I think, I think we know how desperate
the Republicans are because Democrats, I'm sorry they were The
Republicans are desperate. The Democrats really are. But yeah, no, Look,
obviously we know the party that's in power, and whoever
the party is in power, the other party is always
going to try to lab a few hand grenades here
and there and and and disrupt what what the other
(21:38):
party is trying to do. But yeah, and the thing
that bothers me more than just trying to dismantle, uh,
what the other party is doing. Look, if you disagree
with me, you're going to try to say things that
to either change my mind or to put people against me.
Here's the here's the problem lying, and that's has become
a huge problem. It's one thing to say say, hey,
(22:01):
your bill is going to do this, this, and this.
As long as what you said is true, then people
can make up their mind and say, oh, but to
your point on the Medicaid, Look if if if half
a million Americans we're gonna lose Medicaid coverage legal Americans citizens,
then you say that it's true, everybody goes, oh, that's
(22:23):
not good. And then you can argue whether that's fine
because it's not that many or whatever. But when you
just throw out numbers that sound scary as hell, seventy
three billion people are gonna lose many, Yeah, okay, slow down,
sailor you're you know, you're you're working.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
People are gonna because you said is being dismantled. Fourteen
million people are not going to die because you said's
being okay, But you said how are we responsible for
people in Europe doing whatever?
Speaker 2 (22:50):
We're not?
Speaker 1 (22:51):
You know, fund turn to Europe, they're now just what
up five percent GDP for NATO. If you got people
that need desk for help but they're gonna die in
your county, help them. That is your job, not my job.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
And please. I hear this a lot, with a lot
of different things, so I don't want to get deep
into the weeds. But when when when I start hearing
because you did this whatever, this is, ten million people
are going to die right away? I go, how do
you know? I mean, look, might some people die? Sure? Well, exactly.
(23:25):
They throw out numbers because of course they have their
their own bean counters will go, well, justy'll get this,
and these people will.
Speaker 1 (23:31):
Get that's all those numbers ever are fear Mont correct?
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Correct? You know what? This show could kill one hundred
people if they're listening to it and they happen to
have a heart attack. I mean, you can throw out
numbers of any sort to scare the Bejesus out of people,
but it really doesn't mean squat Diddley Diddley.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
I don't hear it often.
Speaker 3 (23:55):
No, Well, yeah, I think I just made it up.
It's good.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Sure, all right, So the big beautiful Bill was not
the only winning moment that President Trump had this week. Scotis,
the Supreme Court of the United States came down with
a landmark decision sixty three, slapping down activist judges who
have tried to stop the election mandate from last November,
(24:20):
otherwise known as the Trump administration cut number one.
Speaker 4 (24:23):
Well, this was a big one, wasn't it. This was
a big decision, an amazing decision, one that we're very
happy about this morning. The Supreme Court has delivered a
monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and
the rule of law in striking down the excessive use
(24:43):
of nationwide injunctions to interfere with the normal functioning of
the executive branch. The Supreme Court has stopped the presidency itself.
That's what they've done. And really it's been an amazing
period of time this last hour.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Yeah, it was very very exciting. It's a huge decision.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
It basically stops all these people of trying to do
the nationwide injunctions against anything that like deporting illegal immigrants.
And it's been very interesting to see the last response.
There are some who are rational look at it and say,
regardless of what your politics are, the decision itself was
a very sound This is David Brooks on PBS Cut
(25:25):
twenty five.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 17 (25:26):
I think the patchwork argument is the best argument that
people in favor of the national in junction have. That
where the Constitution's going to be interpret it differently in
different regions, that doesn't seem to make sense. Nonetheless, I
hate to say I think the Court decided rightly on
the national injunctions. I remember back in the Biden administration
there was a judge in Amoralo, Texas who decided to
ban an abortion pill, and I thought it was just
crazy that a single judge can set national policy on
(25:49):
a fraud issue that should be settled by democracy, and
Democrats were rightly outraged. Now, I am all in favor
of judges stopping what the Trump administration is doing, but
you've got to be consistent for both bar and I
think if people want to challenge what the Trump administration
is doing, or any administration, they can file class action lawsuits.
But we should not have this shopping where the liberals
(26:10):
go to a Northern California liberal judge, conservatives go to
an Amarillo Texas judge and they can set national policy
through one person. That just doesn't seem to make sense.
Speaker 3 (26:18):
I agree with him totally. I said that from the beginning.
And I know there's people who obviously, as you mentioned, right,
the liberals, their heads exploded when the Supreme Court came
out sixty three and they were very harsh, many of
them on the Supreme Court and how it's a Trump
court and blah blah blah blah blah, and look, you're
going to have disagreements with how the Supreme Court rules.
Here's the deal, and this guy set it right. I mean,
(26:40):
hit it right on the head. You can't have a
judge sitting in one chair in one town, in one
state setting the policy for the entire country.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
It just no.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
It creates an imperial judiciary, which you cannot have.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
You weren't the judge is not elected to be the president.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
And I states that was an executive power that the
judges were usurp.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
But you know, he was rational. David Brooks is being
very rational.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
But then you have people like Ali mistel Over an
MSNBC who this is how he framed his argument against
this ruling. Imagine Trump wants to murder you cut nineteen.
Speaker 9 (27:14):
Imagine Donald Trump wants to do something illegal to you,
ali Velshi.
Speaker 3 (27:19):
Imagine that he wants to murder you.
Speaker 9 (27:21):
Imagine that he and Stephen Miller released an entire policy
explaining about how they can murder Canadian journalists who are
working in America because they're taken the jobs from real
American journalists. Right, So he's going to murder you. So you,
ali Velshie, you go to court in the Southern District
of New York. Can you say, like, I don't think
this murder thing is constitutional. It's clearly illegal. It's clearly constitutional.
(27:45):
Donald Trump shouldn't be able to have a plan to
murder me. And the court says, you're right, ali Velshie,
there's no way Donald Trump is allowed to murder you.
We're gonna have an injunction, we're gonna stay the executive
order saying that he's gonna murder Canadian journalist. And so
you're like great, awesome, and you go home and then
Pat Caernan shows up and.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
He's like what about me?
Speaker 9 (28:05):
And the court way, I can't help you because ali
Velshi is the one who sued. So Pat Cairnan, if
you don't want to be murdered. You have to launch
your entire own lawsuit in the Southern District of New
York again to make sure that Donald Trump doesn't murder you.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
That has nothing even close to resembling what the decision
was by the Supreme Court. But notice the fear mongering
in there. Donald Trump will now have the power to
murder people. That's what they're doing. They're so freaked out
by the fact that they've lost this power to derail
something that is in fact.
Speaker 2 (28:40):
Legal. You know, the Trump administration was elected. President Trump
was elected. Majority of Americans picked him. He's the one
that won.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
So you know, if you don't like it, put somebody
else up who can beat the Republican Party in four
years or in three and a half years. Don't you
know you can't. You don't go out there and monger,
which is what in fact they've been doing, which is horrific.
And I do want to point out something that drove
me crazy about the Supreme Court decision.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
It was six to three.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
Three hyperliberal justices Kagan Sodo Mayor and Katanji Jackson Brown
were the dissenters. And by the way, the opinion was
written by Amy Conen Barrett and she bitch slapped Katanji
Brown's descent, which was the descent was ludicrous, just ludicrous
(29:32):
and not worthy of a Supreme Court justice, and she
bitch slapped her. But that's not the point I want
to point out. Justice Kagan was wrote a descent to
this opinion saying how, no, we need the national junction.
The national junction is important. And this is this is
a complete turnaround, point eighty from something that Justice Slena
Kagan said out loud in public in twenty twenty two
(29:56):
speaking at Northwestern University where she at that time, which is,
you know, three years ago national injunctions were bad cut
twenty four.
Speaker 18 (30:04):
That can't be right that one district court, whether it's
in you know, in the Trump years, people used to
go into the northern district of California and in the
Biden years they go to Texas. And it just can't
be right that one district judge can stop the nationwide
policy in its tracks and leave it stop for the
(30:25):
years that it takes to go through normal process.
Speaker 3 (30:30):
I agree with her. Yeah, unfortulation changed her mind because
it wasn't her president.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
Is she completely ignored what she used to believe, which
makes me believe that she's acting now as a political
activist and not as a justice of the Supreme Court.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
And how angry do people get? I mean again, it
depends what side of the AI your on. We hear
it all the time, we see it all the time,
we talk about it all the time. But how angry
do people get when they think, or maybe rightfully so,
think that one of the conservative justices is acting on
behalf of the president as a police operative. How many
times do we listen? Obviously, if Kagan only three years ago,
(31:05):
when Joe Biden was in office, didn't like this, you know,
one judge decision making fain, why does she now think
it's okay at twenty twenty five when Donald Trump is president?
And that's the question, that's the problem. And by the way,
I'll say this and I'll stand by it even in
ten years. Look if Amy Cony Barrett or someone else,
(31:27):
if I thought that they were acting as a political
activist for a president, I would say that's wrong. I
agree with this decision because I agree listen, I agree
with this two correct. I agree with that that guy
David Brooks, I agree with Elena Kagan, I agree with
Amy Cony Barrett this time. So I'm consistent. Some people, unfortunately,
(31:51):
are not. No, no, I'm not saying I've never been inconsistent,
but I hate inconsistency because it drives well, it drives
me to hypocrisy, it drives me crazy. So I agree
twenty twenty two, Elena Kagan, I agree with you, David Brooks,
I agree with you, Cody Barrett in twenty twenty five,
I agree with you. So I'm I agree with what
I agree with forever.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
National junction is bad Bafinically, I think it was the
correct decision, and I thought Elena Kagan was correct when
she said it back in twenty twenty two, and she's
still correct that she said it back in twenty twenty two.
But somewhere alongli she lost her way and became not
a Supreme Court justice anyway.
Speaker 3 (32:26):
She lost her well, she lost her way because Joe
Biden's not the president anymore. Yeah, I hate to say that. Yeah,
and maybe that's not the entire truth, but yeah, it's it.
I mean, it sounds like a political thing to me.
Speaker 14 (32:38):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
So we end every week with a truth ortrol, and
this week, of course not of course, but you know,
ninety five percent of our truth ortrolls are Donald Trump
because he is the King troller. He was speaking to
reporters on the White House lawn before he got on
the plane to Alligator Alcatraz, and he was asked about
the possibility of deporting Elon Musk cut one O eight.
(33:05):
I gotta a point.
Speaker 7 (33:08):
I don't know as they watch the tech A love
who might have to put doze on Elon? You know,
you know, dose is dose is the monster that has
that might have to go back and eat Elon would
not be terrible.
Speaker 8 (33:22):
He gets a lot of subs to this Peter.
Speaker 7 (33:24):
But Elon's very upset that the ev mandate is gonna
be terminated. And you know what, when you look at it,
who wants not everybody wants an electric car. I don't
want an electric car. I want to have baby gasoline,
maybe electric, maybe a hybrid, maybe someday a hydrogen. If
you have a hydrogen car, it has one problem if
(33:45):
it blows up, you know.
Speaker 3 (33:46):
So I'm gonna give that with the Peter.
Speaker 7 (33:48):
I'm gonna let Peter touch it up. Hydrogen cars and
when they blow up, it's serious.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Yeah, I want to I want a solar powered car myself.
But yeah, so the question is you know you're deporting people,
should elon who's been opening his mouth again, and he
has a right to open his mouth and be critical,
just but saying yeah, maybe we'll deport him. I don't know,
do you think he's serious or do you think he's trolling?
Speaker 3 (34:13):
By the way, a couple of things I wanted to
point out. He said he didn't want an electric car.
Then he kind of backtracked on because he.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
Got the White House exactly on the rose Guard.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
But the other thing, the other thing he said, which
by the way, is true, I think Hindenberg hydrogen.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
Yeah, but here he said it's serious when they blow up.
Speaker 3 (34:30):
Well, I just want to point out, no matter what
the car is filled with, it's pretty serious. When they
blow up gas gas cars that blow up that that's
pretty serious.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
But they don't usually create a fireball that reaches, you know,
within a ten mile scores.
Speaker 3 (34:45):
So it's a little worse when hydro at worse.
Speaker 1 (34:48):
Yes, by the way, there is burns to be had
in both moments.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
I agree with you.
Speaker 3 (34:51):
I like the I do like the idea of a
hydrogen car if they can make it safe safe.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
Yeah, I want to sellar powered car. I want to
or so car they have.
Speaker 1 (35:00):
The salt is now, you know, seawater is what's something
we have a lot of, and I think that we could.
You know that that's me to be the way of
the future batteries. Actually it's what they are.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
I mentioned the Hindenburg, and obviously the Hindenburg disaster was
kind of what did in airships anyway. But I've always
thought I want airships back. I mean not with hydrogen
blowing up and stuff. I really would like I know
they have a few glimps around, but I want to
take a few trips on an airship. I think that'd
be cool.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
I don't disagree with you. I think it'd be very cool.
I think the problem is that the Hindenburg really ruined it.
Speaker 3 (35:35):
For first, don't use hydrogen and don't get a spark
near the hydrogen.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
Yes, exactly, exactly right.
Speaker 1 (35:41):
So well, thank you everybody for listening this week. We
upload new episodes every single Monday, so you can check
back next week and see what new offerings we have.
You can contact Ben and I on x at news
Buy three or on Facebook at Newsbyite. Have a wonderful week,
Stay out of alligator. I'll go say alligator ally, say
out of alligator. Alcatraz. I'm Nancy Shack.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
Watch out for exploding hydrogen. I'm Ben Parker.
Speaker 2 (36:04):
This is newspite
Popular Podcasts
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.