July 2, 2025 • 41 mins
President Trump is considering a truly unprecedented step against CNN after their latest controversial segment. Can he actually do it? I break it down in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, a legendary on-air crashout from a progressive pundit, the "Big Beautiful Bill" makes it through the Senate, and people freak out over the new "Alligator Alcatraz" immigration detention facility in Florida.
Send me a voicenote: https://www.speakpipe.com/bradvseveryone
Check out the merch: https://bp-shop.fourthwall.com/
Subscribe to my 2nd channel: https://www.youtube.com/@UCO76JR1mK5X5zbPJnv3NhsQ
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
They've crossed the line here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
This is out of control.
Speaker 3 (00:03):
I know.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
It's just simply disgusting, and any network that covers that
is disgusting as well. So I'm OVERDJ steps in here
and see if they cross that line.
Speaker 4 (00:10):
Crumb's feud with CNN is escalating to the point where
law enforcement may be getting involved. We're going to break
this down and so much more on today's episode of
the Bread Versus Everyone Podcast, where I take on the
craziest ideas from across the Internet, our media, and our politics,
(00:34):
all from my independent perspective. Thank you guys for bearing
with me in my new apartment as I try out
different shots in different angles. It was cool to have,
you know, the really awesome view as the background yesterday,
but then it's hard to get good lighting on my face,
which of course is my money maker. So anyway, guys,
(00:54):
I know you come here for the substance, not for
anything shallow like that. So let's let's talk about our
first story for today, which is a interesting, I guess
development where CNN is now in the crosshairs of federal
law enforcement, including top Trump administration officials, threatening to potentially
(01:14):
criminally prosecute them over some of their recent coverage where
they covered and explained what was going on with a
new app, like a mobile app called ice Block, where
people could report the presence of ice you know, so
immigration customs enforcement agents and alert other people to their presence.
Although the app says, don't interfere, don't do anything violent,
(01:38):
It just lets you know where they are. And people
are wondering why that information is being spread for any
reason other than, you know, trying to evade immigration enforcement. Anyway.
Here is CNN's coverage of that app that now has
the Department of Justice looking at potentially prosecuting the network
over it.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Take a look ices and mass deportations. 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 5 (02:18):
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 want people interfering with
those officers' activity, but he does want people to be
able to avoid them altogether if they want.
Speaker 6 (02:39):
So.
Speaker 5 (02:39):
You open 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. And what I
think is really interesting about this in this moment is
we've seen so many of the biggest leaders in tech
(03:01):
supporting President Trump, but Aaron is sort of an example
of the fact that there are people within the tech
industry who are really resistant to Trump's policies. I asked
him what he would say to those tech leaders who,
for example, were at the inauguration. Here's what he told me.
Take a listen.
Speaker 7 (03:18):
I understand that you have shared holders to report to you.
Speaker 8 (03:21):
I understand that you have employees that need their paychecks.
Speaker 9 (03:25):
But at what point do you say enough is enough?
Speaker 5 (03:30):
And John, I should say that I did not respond
when I asked them about this platform and about Aaron's
opposition to their activity.
Speaker 4 (03:37):
Love this guy's god complex where he's like really thinks
he's the new Rosa Parks because he is building an
app that helps people potentially evade immigration enforcement. Not quite
the same thing, but okay, anyway, So I am not
a fan of CNN. Y'all have seen me drag and
mock CNN and hosts and contributors many times. We're literally
(03:59):
going to do later this episode, y'all, because we have
another diabolical clip that's gone viral. But was anything really
so bad about that coverage? They kind of just reported
what was happening. They mentioned that it was controversial. They
asked Ice for comment, to which they didn't receive any,
so they can't include their perspective then if they don't
reply to them. So I mean, maybe they should have
(04:21):
been more critical of the app and included the perspective
of somebody who thinks it's potentially illegal. And we'll get
into that whether the app itself is legal or illegal.
It's in a murky territory, is what I would say.
But CNN's coverage here, I mean, I'm not nominating it
for a pulletzer, but it certainly wasn't a criminal act
(04:42):
simply broadcasting this or or was it that's what some
Trump administration officials are actually claiming. So Stephen Miller, who
was one of the White House's top advisors, wrote that
CNN is openly helping invaders and insurrectionists sabotage ICE what
(05:02):
they are reporting on an app that maybe the existence
of an app that you could say, maybe does that.
But are we supposed to believe the people who are
on the lookout for this kind of you know, ICE
enforcement wouldn't have gotten this app if CNN broadcasted it,
didn't broadcast about it. And regardless, I mean, you can
broadcast and cover things and you're not responsible for the
(05:24):
fact that people are drawn to them. Right, if you
cover a new drug craze on your news broadcast and
some people see it and go try it, you didn't
do a crime. That's not how reporting or journalism works.
But you know, maybe it's just Stephen Miller, Right, he's
a little bit of a loose cannon and I think
very much an extremist. But no, it's more than just him.
(05:45):
Here's Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome. Take a listen to
this cemetery.
Speaker 8 (05:50):
CNN yesterday pushed an app that lets you track.
Speaker 10 (05:53):
Where ICE agents are.
Speaker 7 (05:56):
Tom Holman was saying that perhaps CNN should be prosecuted
for that. Want your response, Yeah, we're working with the
Department of Justice to see if we can prosecute them
for that, because what they're doing is actively encouraging people
to avoid law enforcement activities operations, and we're going to
actually go after them and prosecute them with a partnership
(06:17):
of PAM if we can, because what they're doing, we
believe is illegal.
Speaker 4 (06:22):
So to be clear, guys, she's not talking about the
app developer, the you know app person who created this
app and who's encouraging people to report ICE. And I
mean clearly the idea there is so people can get
out of dodge and they don't get detained and deported.
She's not talking about going after him. They're talking about
going after CNN for reporting on it, which is their
(06:45):
First Amendment protected freedom of the press. That's just objectively
something they cannot do under our constitution, and for good reason.
We don't want the government locking up journalists just because
they do coverage. They're not satisfied. Even if you could
legitimately critique that coverage, that's still not okay. But I
also want to show you something from Fox News where
(07:08):
they are seemingly egging on the prosecution of one of
their competitors. So listen, I know that the networks are
competing with each other, but at the end of the day,
they're all journalists, and they're all political journalists who, depending
on who's in power, may or may not have a
friendly relationship with the federal government. So you would really
(07:29):
think that just for consistency's sake, or even their own
self interests, Fox News people would not be egging on
the prosecution of a news network simply for reporting on
the existence of something the administration viewses illegal or bad.
But that's kind of what's happening. Take a look at
this clip of Fox News host Lawrence Jones egging on
(07:53):
Tom Homan Trump's immigrations are to potentially prosecute CNN.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Tom.
Speaker 8 (07:59):
They've crossed the line on here.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
This is out of control.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
I know.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
It's just simply disgusting, and any network that covers that
is disgusting as well. So I'm hoping the DOJ steps
in here and see if they cross that line. I'm
impeding federal lawenforcement ofsuers. Look, Lawrence, you're not talking about
this pasult again, sis is up over five hundred percent.
Now you've got an app that's going to tell where
ICE operators are going to be. It's only a matter
of time for ICE stations are ambushed by some nut
(08:25):
like what happened in LA throwing them out top cocktail,
throwing bricks, and these officers. This is just disgusting at
every level. So I hope DOJ dives in this deeply.
Speaker 4 (08:35):
Sorry what I mean, Look, nobody wants federal law enforcement
officials assaulted. I certainly don't, though I will point out
that the increase in assaults on them that they keep
citing is likely because they're making more arrests. So I mean,
I'm not saying it's a good thing, but of course
it stands to reason that then they will have more
resistance of arrests and more assaults on them. It's just
(08:57):
part of I think, ramping up immigration andorsement, which is
what they want to do. Of Course, we don't want assaults,
we don't want at tax on federal law enforcement anything
like that, and I don't think they're crazy for worrying
about that. This app could be used this way, but
you can't prosecute CNN for reporting on the existence of
an app where people can report ICE officials locations one.
(09:21):
That app itself is what you should go after if
you think it's illegal. Even then, it actually might be
First Amendment protected, which we'll talk about. But regardless, CNN
has every right to do journalism and report on an
interesting and meaningful development, which is this app that's currently
on the app store. You can go download it, so
it's not like they're even reporting on some illicit black
(09:43):
market thing. Even then, though they would have a First
Amendment right to do that and be free from prosecution.
Y'all sound like authoritarians, y'all don't sound like free speech supporters.
Y'all sound nuts. Call me crazy, but I think top
officials the federal government should have a basic respect for
(10:03):
the First Amendment and the freedom of the press, even
for networks they hate, like CNN. I agreed with this
tweet from Mediaite editor in chief, where he wrote he
pointed out that the Fox News Chiron read CNN appears
to promote app tracking ICE agents. Aiden pointed out that
reporting on something is not promoting it. The CNN segment
in question even described the app as controversial. Aiden called
(10:26):
this a totally ridiculous attempt by Fox to criminalize the
work of a competitor. I mean, I have to agree
with him that this is totally hypocritical. And it's like, also,
you're already crushing CNN in the ratings so badly, like
so badly, you really have to kick them, well they're down.
But more importantly, right, there's a basic freedom of press
(10:48):
element here. Imagine something different, right, because when you're trying
to understand these kinds of issues, you should always try
to remove it from the issue where you may have
underlying biases like immigration enforcement. Even if you're a repub Again,
even if you're a conservative, even if you're a Trump
supporter and you want mass deportations, you support ICE, I understand,
we can. I have a slightly different view on that though,
(11:08):
I think some deportations are necessary, But we can talk
about all that, so separate it for that. Imagine this scenario.
Imagine that during peak COVID, California was and this is real,
arresting people on the beach for going outside when they
weren't supposed to, or arresting people for not wearing masks
or complying with mask mandates, and some resilient people started
(11:31):
to make an app where you could report the presence
of law enforcement doing COVID checks and so people could
kind of avoid them. Then imagine that Fox News reported
on the existence of this app, which hadn't been banned yet,
hadn't been adjudicated as illegal or anything like that, and
was literally in the app store, And then the Biden
(11:52):
administration suggested they might have their Department of Justice prosecute
Fox News, or you know, the California Department of Justice
under Gavin Newsom suggested they might prosecute Fox News for
obstructing justice by reporting on the existence of an app,
even favorably, reporting on it that may or may not
(12:13):
like to some extent, interfere with law enforcement operations. Fox
News hosts would call that dystopian censorship. They would call
that authoritarianism. They would call that an attack on the
First Amendment. And they would be right. But because it's Trump,
because it's CNN, and because it's a chance to like
own the Libs, they feel differently. That's not principled, that's
(12:35):
not consistent, that's not respectable or fair. Now, I think
the app itself is much mrcier territory. And if the
Trump administration was simply saying that they were going to
investigate the maker of this app, the ice block app
that allows people to like tag the locations of ice
(12:55):
agents theoretically so other people can see it and get
out of town if they don't want to get a rest.
Did presumably, you know, illegal immigrants. If they were just
going after the app itself, I thout just investigating the
app maker, I mean, okay, right, like that would be
something they were at least within the realm of normal
law enforcement to investigate. But going after CNN for covering
(13:17):
it is just vindictive many authoritarian petty behavior, and even
on the app itself. I mean, this would have to
be litigated in court. But there's an argument that actually
simply reporting the location of law enforcement doesn't meet the
threshold for obstruction of justice and is protected free speech,
so that would have to be litigated in court over this.
(13:40):
There is some precedent to this effect. For example, like
the Ways app that I use allows you to report
the police presence so people know a speeding check or
trap is coming up that hasn't been banned. That's not illegal.
In fact, some federal courts have even ruled that you
have a First Amendment right to flash your headlights at
some point to alert them of a speeding trap coming up.
(14:02):
You could argue that alerting people of the presence of
ice agents if you're not calling for violence, if you're
not interfering with them exactly, doesn't meet any sort of
threshold of obstruction of justice. You could argue that. But
at least, you know, I can see why they would
want to make that app illegal if they're trying to
do federal law enforcement. That would be a debate that'd
(14:23):
have to be had in court, but it's at least,
you know, debatable within the realm of normal law enforcement.
Want you to prosecute media you don't like is not
And the Trump administration needs to get a grip on
this stuff because they're disdain for freedom of the press
is really un American at times, and really I think
runs against the spirit and a letter of our First Amendment. Well,
(14:46):
what do you guys think? Do you agree with me?
Do you disagree with me and support the Trump administration
on this? Even if you do, I'm open to your feedback,
your criticism. I want to hear from you for sure,
So let me know what you think. In the comments.
Do hit that leg button while you're at it, make
sure some describe to the channel if you aren't yet,
and remember to send in your voice notes for my
voicemail Friday episodes, where I listen to your woke car stories,
(15:07):
your personal life situations, and give you my advice or
answer any questions you guys have for me. The link
to send one of those in is in the description. Okay, guys,
up next. I told you we're going to criticize CNN.
I don't have any soft spot in my heart for
CNN other than the one time they let me on
air and it got spicy and I haven't been invited
back yet, but hit me up. I will come on anyway. Guys.
(15:30):
Up next, we're going to react to perhaps the most
legendary and unhinged CNN crash out of all time, the
former congressman New York Congressman Jamal Bowman, who you may
remember as the dude who hold the fire alarm in Congress,
allegedly to attempt to disrupt a vote or something I
don't remember the exact details, and then ended up not
(15:53):
winning reelection. He was on the panel on CNN's News
Night Show with Abby Phillip and perhaps made one of
the craziest claims I've heard in a long time. Warning, guys,
this is unhinged.
Speaker 9 (16:07):
Is America catholic? You're not dealing with America's original sin
and its disease of hate and racism towards black and
brown people and sexism towards women and anti LGBTQ sentiment.
Speaker 11 (16:23):
We are not dealing with that. Your colleagues in a
Republican party do not hold each other accountable when it
comes to the racism that comes from the party on
a consistent basis. I mean and where you are about this.
Speaker 10 (16:39):
I'm a black man in America. The reason why heart
listen to what I'm saying, The reason why heart disease
and cancer and obesity and diabetes are bigger in the
black community is because of distress we carry from having
to deal with being called the N word directly or
indirectly every day. If your colleagues would listen and try
(17:01):
to learn and.
Speaker 11 (17:02):
Engage and grow and stop being so hateful, we could
have a better country. But unfortunately we're still here.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
Oh. Indirectly is crazy work? Is doing crazy work in
this context because Jamal Bowman, this former congressman actually just
suggested that the reason black people have higher rates of
health complications is because they are directly or indirectly called
(17:33):
the N word every day. Sir, what are you talking about? Like,
what are you actually talking about? Now? I could believe
that a very high profile black politician or political figure
who's very divisive could perhaps be called that online every day.
I get called slurs almost every day on the internet myself,
(17:54):
But that's not true for your average black person. That's
simply not true in America today, that they're being called
slurs on a daily basis, or being racially abused on
a daily basis. And to suggest that that is the
primary cause, like just blatant, in your face racism is
the blatant cause of health disparities between white and Black
(18:14):
Americans is just totally not true.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Now.
Speaker 4 (18:17):
I know, there's something called the minority stress model. I've
am very skeptical about the claims made there, But even
then that ties into much bigger picture issues than alleged
daily invocation of slurs against people that is not in
fact happening, is not in the room with us, And
(18:38):
I will just say that there's just objectively a lot
more to it than that. I mean, I am open
to the idea that part of the reason there's more
of these health issues among the black community is because
of systemic barriers they face. I think it's probably largely
a class distinction, right. They tend to have less money
(18:58):
and less resources and lower income than other groups, and
that probably correlates to lower access to healthcare and preventative
measures and healthy lifestyles and other things. And you could
argue that some of that definitely traces back to historical
racism or the inability to pass down wealth along the generations.
(19:20):
That is not an argument I'm closed off to, though.
I think it's complicated. But there's also a piece of
it for some of these conditions that may be genetic,
and there's a very large piece of it that is
lifestyle related. And another way of describing that is that
it's also choice related, related to the choices that people make.
(19:41):
So painting it off as if it's all just because
people are being called the N word on a daily
basis strikes me as absurd and totally missing any actual
issues or nuance to be had about this kind of conversation,
which makes it about part of the core for Jamal
Bowman this other story. He just really seems to see
(20:04):
racism everywhere, even when it isn't in fact the likely cause.
Take a look at this clip as well, from the
same conversation.
Speaker 11 (20:12):
I don't want to fight. I just want to chill.
I just want to know. I was in I was
walking down the street the other day. Some white dude bayhead.
He looked me, called me a piece of shit to
my face, said I'm going to get what's coming to me.
Why I deal with that dog in Yonkers.
Speaker 3 (20:27):
New York.
Speaker 10 (20:27):
Can I tell yourself, I'm not making that up.
Speaker 4 (20:29):
So this is very telling to me because he, at
least this is my reading of his comments here, is
suggesting that this is like some random racist white dude
saying this to him because he is just a random
black person. I think a much more likely explanation is
that this person doesn't like Jamal Bowman, knows who he is,
(20:52):
knows about his unhinged left wing politics, and said something
you know, rude to him. But his jumps to I
must be being racially discriminated against as a black man.
I mean, at some point there is like a victim
mentality here that is so overwhelming not to say there's
no real victimization or racism against black people. Of course
(21:14):
there is, but you start to see it where it
doesn't exist, if you're so obsessed with identity and victimhood
and play it constantly, playing the victim like this. I mean,
it's really it's remarkable, and I almost feel bad for
people like him because it's got to be a miserable
way to go through life. But we should really collectively
stop indulging it, Stop indulging these silly stretches and these Oh, well,
(21:39):
it's your truth that you experienced racism. Well maybe how
about what the facts say. Forget your truth, forget your experience,
what actually happened. I think that should be maybe more important,
and people should get more comfortable questioning the legitimacy of
other people's experiences and truth. Just because you feel something
doesn't make it real, doesn't make it valid. And I'm
(22:02):
sick of coddling these people's feelings, these woke left wing
people who see victimhood and oppression around every corner and
we're supposed to just NodD along. It actually discredits the
legitimate conversations about inequality we should be having. If you
ask me, Okay, guys, up next, we're going to talk
about the so called Big Beautiful Bill, the massive tax
(22:25):
cut and spending bonanza legislation that just passed the Senate
and now goes back to the House after many changes
were made to potentially be passed and await President Trump's signature.
Here's some reporting from CNBC with the latest on the
Big Beautiful Bill.
Speaker 12 (22:43):
The President's big tax and spending Bill, now on its
way back to the House of Representatives, this after passing
the Senate by the slimmest of margin. Similely Wilkins is
in Washington, DC this morning, staying up like all day,
all night, never.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
Stops for you.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
Well about maybe it will stop today, Andrew, I mean,
we're going to see here. But if it's going to
pass the House today, then Speaker Mike Johnson he's going
to have to change a couple no's to yess before
starting on this vote for the megabill. Remember, in the House,
if you have full attendance, Johnson can only lose three
Republicans and still get the bill passed. But right now
they're roughly about a dozen members that are either planning
(23:23):
to vote, know or have some really serious concerns with
this bill. Now, some of these members, they're Republicans from
more centrist districts who worry they could lose reelection next
year over Medicaid and snapcuts. Others are, of course, your
fiscal hawks. They've been frustrated for a while with this
bill that adds more than three point four trillion dollars
to the debt over the next ten years. That's a
(23:45):
number updated just last night by the Congressional Budget Office.
Some members are annoyed that some of the clean energy
tax credits are still in the measure. The Senate measure
remembers does allow wind and solar programs to get some
tax credits if they start instruction in the next year.
I chatted a bit with Congressman Tim Burchett. He told
me he's in the I'm not sure column and needs
(24:07):
more time, but he thinks that it's not just him.
He thinks more time in general is needed to hash
out disagreements with the bill, and he's skeptical that Republicans
are even going to be able to agree to a
procedural rule vote.
Speaker 4 (24:20):
This massive legislation really is a cluster, and if I
was to tell you everything that's in it, we'd be
here a very very long time. Frankly, the people in
Congress don't know everything that's in it. They keep discovering
tiny items that someone slipped in there and no one
noticed and being like, wait, take that out, or wait,
(24:41):
I don't want that, because we have very serious people
who run our country. But here's an overview from Washington
Post chief economic supporter Jeff Stein, who you know, Listen,
I'm a little suspect of wapaw, I understand, but he
does pretty good work on this stuff, and he goes
through what's in this exactly. So he says that two
points five trillion of the cost of this legislation goes
(25:03):
to extending or increasing the prior GOP tax cuts with
broad reach. So this is the kind of what you
think of as the middle and working class tax cuts
the GOP past of in twenty seventeen in Trump's first term.
He then says about one trillion of the bill's costs
goes to tax cuts that benefit the top one percent,
(25:24):
and then about half a trillion dollars goes to his
Trump's twenty twenty four campaign grab bag of random deduction,
so deductions for seniors, no tax on tips, deductions for
car interest payments. That's an odd one to me, but
what do I know. Nobody listens to me anyway. Then
(25:44):
there is half a trillion dollars for business tax breaks,
expensing r and d, et cetera. That is really important
to long term, long term economic growth. Guys that businesses
and corporations can write off their investments as an expense.
And then and there's also funding for immigration enforcement in
the military budget, which is about four hundred billion dollars.
(26:06):
Then he says there are major safety netcuts targeting Medicaid
and food stamps, such as work requirements, cost sharing, paperwork requirements.
That saves about one point three trillion, So whereas those
other numbers that we talked about were costs, that's a
plus one point three. In the same vein, they cut
a bunch of clean energy subsidies from the Biden administration primarily,
(26:30):
and that gives you about plus five hundred billions, So
some savings, they are significant savings. And then there's a
total deficit hit of about an additional three trillion dollars.
So my take on this is pretty simple. I think
some of these things need to get done, need to
get funded. For example, the middle income tax cuts, the
(26:50):
working class tax cuts that Trump passed in his first term,
those are really important, and people if you don't pass
some legislation extending those, those hit the old rates hit
back in effect, and people will see a tax hike.
We don't want that. In the same way, I think
the business expensing and other provisions are important. Obviously, Americans
(27:11):
do want more border security funding. But I think some
of these tax breaks for the rich, these special loopholes
and subsidies, and even just the top marginal tax cut rate,
we could probably go without at this point if you
care about the debt and deficit the way fiscal hawks
say that they do. And I feel the same way
(27:32):
about some of these special carve outs where it's like, oh,
no tax on tips. Well, I really don't think we
should be randomly prioritizing or write offs for your car
interest payments. These seem extremely niche, and it would be
better to just cut rates across the board rather than
carve out special little exemptions and deductions here for unique things. Anyway,
(27:55):
I understand why Republicans are probably going to ultimately pass
this bill because there are parts of it that need
to get passed, But at the same time, it's really
not okay to just pass legislation that will explode the
national debt and rest assured. Republican politicians are lying to
you when they say this won't add to the debt.
(28:15):
They're either using fake, cooked up numbers that rely on
totally unreasonable frameworks or growth estimates. There's lots of good
stuff in it that needs to pass in my view,
but it will add significantly to the national debt and
the annual deficit. That's just the truth, and I don't
think that's responsible to pass something that big of an
(28:36):
explosion of the debt. Here's a statement from Maya McGuinness,
who's the president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
The level of blatant disregard we just witnessed for our
nation's fiscal condition and budget process is a failure of
responsible governing. These are the very same lawmakers who for
years have bemoaned the nation's massive debt, voting to put
(28:57):
another four trillion on the credit card. And it took
a bill that already borrowed way too much and took
it from bad to worse. The Senate expanded the House's
tax breaks, watered down its offsets, introduced new special interest
giveaways and added another trillion dollars onto the price tag.
The Senate bill would add six hundred billion to the
(29:17):
deficit in twenty twenty seven alone, pushing deficits above seven
percent of GDP, drive debt to new record highs, and
accelerate the insolvency of Social Security and Medicare. Claims that
it reduces the deficits rely on phony baselines, fantastical economic assumptions,
and arbitrary expirations. If made permanent, the Senate bill would
(29:38):
cost more than the Cares Act, the American Rescue Plan,
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Chips Act combined. Wow.
So what she's saying with that is that those big
wasteful COVID era spending plans and early Biden administration spending legislation.
According to their analysis, this bill adds more to the
debt than all of those combined. Which wow. They conclude
(30:01):
the Senate Reconciliation Bill fails almost every test of fiscal responsibility.
Instead of worrying about arbitrary deadlines or sparing the Senate
another vote rama, fiscal conservatives should stand up for what's
right and reject the Senate plan to explode our debt.
To me, this is exactly right. Republicans my whole lifetime
have claimed to care about fiscal responsibility as our nation
(30:24):
is driven off the cliff into financial crisis and just
mounting piles of debt. And now that they're in power
with very slim majorities, I will admit, which makes it
hard to tough to make tough cuts or controversial changes.
But to go past something this fiscally irresponsible, I think
is a betrayal of the public and of the promises
(30:44):
that President Trump campaigned on. We were told he would
balance the budget, and now that was always a ridiculous claim,
but he said that over and over again. So much
for any of that, I suppose. I guess we were
lied to and our futures are being mortgaged. So today's
a day that ends in why in Washington, DC? I
(31:05):
hate it here. Okay, up next, we're going to talk
about another controversy involving Trump, Florida, Ron DeSantis, the immigration crisis,
and so much more. And this is all the hubbub
and alarmism about what's being called Alligator Alcatraz, the new
(31:26):
federal immigration detention facility that apparently is like in a
remote location and has crocodiles, So they're calling it Alligator
Alcatraz because it will be really hard to escape from. Shocker,
it is leading to widespread panic from the media, from
TikTok and so much more. But before we get into that,
(31:46):
I just want to watch this clip from Fox News
where they're actually on site with Governor DeSantis and he
walks them through it. Let's take a look at that clip.
Speaker 6 (31:54):
Joice right now, is Governor Ron DeSantis here in the
Great State of Florida. You came up with this idea
in the last couple of weeks, right for Alcatras or
Alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 8 (32:05):
Explain it, Well, when you want to have deportation of
illegal aliens, there's a process the DHS has to go
through to vet, to process, and then to stage them
for removal. And you know, we've got jails and our
sheriffs and police are working. The State of Florida is
all in on President Trump's mission, and obviously you have
ice operations, but that's not enough and so there needs
(32:29):
to be more ability to intake process and then deport.
So this answers that this is going to be able
to have more than three thousand illegals. It can be
processed through here. We've got a massive runway right behind
us where any of the federal assets. If they want
to fly these people back to their home country, they
can do it one stop shop.
Speaker 6 (32:49):
And you've thought of everything. Okay, so there are four
gigantic tents. Let's come on over here, governor. And people
are thinking, okay, you're in the middle of the aberglaze.
It's hot. That would explain you've got this bank of
air conditioners here.
Speaker 8 (33:02):
Yeah, So I mean this is going to be Illegals
will come in, they'll be processed, There'll be places for
them to be housed. You'll have an ability for food,
you'll be an ability for them to consult legal rights
if they have that, because there is a process that's
involved with this. So this is really everything. This is
going to be a self contained little area. And then
(33:23):
of course you also have stuff for the staff that
work here. So we've got laundry facilities, we've got showers,
we've got obviously there you see the shower in bath
facilities there. You're not going to be anything that they're
hurting for anything. They'll be ac they'll be things that
everybody needs. There's medical view. So it's being done right,
it's being.
Speaker 4 (33:43):
Done by the book. So I don't know about you guys,
but I'm just not that horrified by this at first glance.
And we will go into more details about it. But
there's air conditioning, you know, there's facilities that are clean
and orderly. It doesn't look like a you know, star
hotel or even a three star hotel. But it doesn't
(34:03):
look like torturous conditions or like inhumane or anything. And
I guess we won't really know until it's in operation,
but it looks like it's set up to be an
okay place to store people temporarily while their immigration cases
are being heard and they're then being deported. Yet it
is prompting like this insane meltdown. Here is disgraced x
(34:28):
MSNBC host and political activist Joy Reid calling it a
concentration camp for brown and black people. Yes, seriously, take
a listen.
Speaker 13 (34:41):
I had to forget about it, but Ron DeSantis is
still governor of Florida. He took the Comfy Couch hosts
on a tour of the concentration camp that he's building
in Florida in order to round up people, brown people,
and throw them in a camp because he doesn't want
them in Florida. Surprise, surprise, the economy of Florida is
(35:02):
going to be severely harmed by rounding up brown people who,
by the way, all over this country Latinos are afraid
to go to work. Anybody who is perceived or looks
Latino is afraid to go to work.
Speaker 4 (35:13):
I'm sorry, I have been very critical of some of
the immigration stuff going overboard, violating civil liberties. But this
is absurd. It is not a concentration camp. And that
is a wild accusation in term to just throw around
willy nilly and kind of offensive to the many victims
of actual concentration camps. And I'm sorry, but this is
(35:34):
like ridiculous. This Oh, just brown and black people are
being rounded up and putting camps. No illegal immigrants are.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Now.
Speaker 4 (35:42):
May there be some mistakes, maybe some people are apprehended wrongly. Yes,
that is a serious problem, and that's why you have
to have a fair due process. However, to suggest that
this camp, I mean, even with the mistakes, illegal immigrate
they are going to be the ones in this camp,
not random brown and black people. There might be an
(36:04):
example of an error or a person mistakenly put there
who has to wait days before they get out or whatever.
And that's horrible, and I totally think that's wrong, and
that's why we need to have some liberty's protections and
access to your attorneys and hearings and other things. But like,
to actually suggest that DeSantis is just going to be
putting random brown and black people in there is absurd.
(36:25):
It's not true. To suggest that he doesn't want brown
people in this state in Florida is absurd. It's not true.
And people like this just sound de lulu. Similarly, I mean,
here is Tim Wallace's daughter, the progressive failed the vice
presidential nominee and governor of Minnesota. Here's his daughter, who
is a TikTok activist going on a little rant about
(36:47):
alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 14 (36:48):
Take a listen to this Alligator Alcatraz? Are we serious
right now? These people are literally super villains at this point.
They're just like making up the crulest ways they can
torture people they don't like because of their skin color
where they're from. Wake up America. Seriously, we're supposed to
(37:11):
be celebrating the fourth of July. Alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 4 (37:15):
Now it's not just young people on TikTok or random
crazy journalists doing this. Members of Congress are engaging in
this kind of extreme alarmist rhetoric. Here is congre Congressman
Maxwell Alejandro Frost. He wrote, Alligator Alcatraz is a cruel spectacle.
DHS and Florida officials are building it to brutalize, starve,
(37:39):
and harm immigrants, and they don't care who lives or dies.
Those are very serious accusations that seem just totally unsubstantiated.
We saw the facilities. Nobody's being starved. They're going to
be fed. They're going to be detained in tension facilities
(38:01):
that won't be fun, but they're not going to be
brutalized either. That just seems baseless. Now, of course, if
that were to be true, I would think that was
horrible and I would totally condemn whoever was involved in it,
to Santis, Trump, what have you. But that hasn't happened.
I don't really see reason to believe it will happen
at this facility, and until it does, throwing around these
(38:22):
kinds of accusations just makes you look alarmisted and like
you're smearing your political opponents in really wild ways in
a way that's just unsubstantiated. Now, none of this is
to say that like there's no legitimate criticisms to be had.
For example, here is Benny Johnson, the far right YouTuber
and influencer, showing the merch items that the State of
(38:47):
Florida provided him with from Alligator Alcatraz. Take a look
at this.
Speaker 15 (38:51):
I just want everyone to know that there's official Alligator
Alcatraz merch there. It is provided to us by the
State of Florida. And uh yeah, would you rock this trip?
Speaker 14 (39:08):
Look at that?
Speaker 4 (39:10):
Is he like trying to be cringe? I hope he's trying,
cause if not, yikes. But similarly, the Department of Homeland
Security posted this on their official government x account and
it's in presumably AI picture of a bunch of alligators
wearing ice hats around a prison. And I'm sorry, y'all,
(39:31):
but like this is just so unseerious. Why are we
trolling and selling merch about federal law enforcement and immigrant
detention facilities? No matter what your views are on these issues,
they're actually very serious with human lives at stake and
people being you know, deprived of their liberty and freedom.
(39:54):
And call me old fashioned. Call me a sour puss,
call me a buzzkill, whatever you want. I just think
there should be a level of seriousness with which government
officials in particular treat these topics that I do not
see represented in the Alligator Alcatraz merch or memes posted
on official federal agencies social media feeds. Wow. If you
(40:20):
showed me this stuff like five years ago, I would
have been like, that's ridiculous. Agencies are never going to
be posting AI memes. But welcome to twenty twenty five.
I guess all right, guys, that'll be it for this
episode of the braad Versus Everyone Podcast. Thank you guys
so much for tuning in. Please do make sure you subscribe.
If you aren't yet, do hit that like button before
(40:40):
you go comment with your thoughts. I take the time
to read the comments. I really do love hearing what
you guys have to say. And with that, guys, do
sending your voice notes your voice note Friday, and we'll
talk again real soon.
Speaker 6 (41:00):
Yeah,
They've crossed the line here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
This is out of control.
Speaker 3 (00:03):
I know.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
It's just simply disgusting, and any network that covers that
is disgusting as well. So I'm OVERDJ steps in here
and see if they cross that line.
Speaker 4 (00:10):
Crumb's feud with CNN is escalating to the point where
law enforcement may be getting involved. We're going to break
this down and so much more on today's episode of
the Bread Versus Everyone Podcast, where I take on the
craziest ideas from across the Internet, our media, and our politics,
(00:34):
all from my independent perspective. Thank you guys for bearing
with me in my new apartment as I try out
different shots in different angles. It was cool to have,
you know, the really awesome view as the background yesterday,
but then it's hard to get good lighting on my face,
which of course is my money maker. So anyway, guys,
(00:54):
I know you come here for the substance, not for
anything shallow like that. So let's let's talk about our
first story for today, which is a interesting, I guess
development where CNN is now in the crosshairs of federal
law enforcement, including top Trump administration officials, threatening to potentially
(01:14):
criminally prosecute them over some of their recent coverage where
they covered and explained what was going on with a
new app, like a mobile app called ice Block, where
people could report the presence of ice you know, so
immigration customs enforcement agents and alert other people to their presence.
Although the app says, don't interfere, don't do anything violent,
(01:38):
It just lets you know where they are. And people
are wondering why that information is being spread for any
reason other than, you know, trying to evade immigration enforcement. Anyway.
Here is CNN's coverage of that app that now has
the Department of Justice looking at potentially prosecuting the network
over it.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Take a look ices and mass deportations. 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 5 (02:18):
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 want people interfering with
those officers' activity, but he does want people to be
able to avoid them altogether if they want.
Speaker 6 (02:39):
So.
Speaker 5 (02:39):
You open 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. And what I
think is really interesting about this in this moment is
we've seen so many of the biggest leaders in tech
(03:01):
supporting President Trump, but Aaron is sort of an example
of the fact that there are people within the tech
industry who are really resistant to Trump's policies. I asked
him what he would say to those tech leaders who,
for example, were at the inauguration. Here's what he told me.
Take a listen.
Speaker 7 (03:18):
I understand that you have shared holders to report to you.
Speaker 8 (03:21):
I understand that you have employees that need their paychecks.
Speaker 9 (03:25):
But at what point do you say enough is enough?
Speaker 5 (03:30):
And John, I should say that I did not respond
when I asked them about this platform and about Aaron's
opposition to their activity.
Speaker 4 (03:37):
Love this guy's god complex where he's like really thinks
he's the new Rosa Parks because he is building an
app that helps people potentially evade immigration enforcement. Not quite
the same thing, but okay, anyway, So I am not
a fan of CNN. Y'all have seen me drag and
mock CNN and hosts and contributors many times. We're literally
(03:59):
going to do later this episode, y'all, because we have
another diabolical clip that's gone viral. But was anything really
so bad about that coverage? They kind of just reported
what was happening. They mentioned that it was controversial. They
asked Ice for comment, to which they didn't receive any,
so they can't include their perspective then if they don't
reply to them. So I mean, maybe they should have
(04:21):
been more critical of the app and included the perspective
of somebody who thinks it's potentially illegal. And we'll get
into that whether the app itself is legal or illegal.
It's in a murky territory, is what I would say.
But CNN's coverage here, I mean, I'm not nominating it
for a pulletzer, but it certainly wasn't a criminal act
(04:42):
simply broadcasting this or or was it that's what some
Trump administration officials are actually claiming. So Stephen Miller, who
was one of the White House's top advisors, wrote that
CNN is openly helping invaders and insurrectionists sabotage ICE what
(05:02):
they are reporting on an app that maybe the existence
of an app that you could say, maybe does that.
But are we supposed to believe the people who are
on the lookout for this kind of you know, ICE
enforcement wouldn't have gotten this app if CNN broadcasted it,
didn't broadcast about it. And regardless, I mean, you can
broadcast and cover things and you're not responsible for the
(05:24):
fact that people are drawn to them. Right, if you
cover a new drug craze on your news broadcast and
some people see it and go try it, you didn't
do a crime. That's not how reporting or journalism works.
But you know, maybe it's just Stephen Miller, Right, he's
a little bit of a loose cannon and I think
very much an extremist. But no, it's more than just him.
(05:45):
Here's Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome. Take a listen to
this cemetery.
Speaker 8 (05:50):
CNN yesterday pushed an app that lets you track.
Speaker 10 (05:53):
Where ICE agents are.
Speaker 7 (05:56):
Tom Holman was saying that perhaps CNN should be prosecuted
for that. Want your response, Yeah, we're working with the
Department of Justice to see if we can prosecute them
for that, because what they're doing is actively encouraging people
to avoid law enforcement activities operations, and we're going to
actually go after them and prosecute them with a partnership
(06:17):
of PAM if we can, because what they're doing, we
believe is illegal.
Speaker 4 (06:22):
So to be clear, guys, she's not talking about the
app developer, the you know app person who created this
app and who's encouraging people to report ICE. And I
mean clearly the idea there is so people can get
out of dodge and they don't get detained and deported.
She's not talking about going after him. They're talking about
going after CNN for reporting on it, which is their
(06:45):
First Amendment protected freedom of the press. That's just objectively
something they cannot do under our constitution, and for good reason.
We don't want the government locking up journalists just because
they do coverage. They're not satisfied. Even if you could
legitimately critique that coverage, that's still not okay. But I
also want to show you something from Fox News where
(07:08):
they are seemingly egging on the prosecution of one of
their competitors. So listen, I know that the networks are
competing with each other, but at the end of the day,
they're all journalists, and they're all political journalists who, depending
on who's in power, may or may not have a
friendly relationship with the federal government. So you would really
(07:29):
think that just for consistency's sake, or even their own
self interests, Fox News people would not be egging on
the prosecution of a news network simply for reporting on
the existence of something the administration viewses illegal or bad.
But that's kind of what's happening. Take a look at
this clip of Fox News host Lawrence Jones egging on
(07:53):
Tom Homan Trump's immigrations are to potentially prosecute CNN.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Tom.
Speaker 8 (07:59):
They've crossed the line on here.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
This is out of control.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
I know.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
It's just simply disgusting, and any network that covers that
is disgusting as well. So I'm hoping the DOJ steps
in here and see if they cross that line. I'm
impeding federal lawenforcement ofsuers. Look, Lawrence, you're not talking about
this pasult again, sis is up over five hundred percent.
Now you've got an app that's going to tell where
ICE operators are going to be. It's only a matter
of time for ICE stations are ambushed by some nut
(08:25):
like what happened in LA throwing them out top cocktail,
throwing bricks, and these officers. This is just disgusting at
every level. So I hope DOJ dives in this deeply.
Speaker 4 (08:35):
Sorry what I mean, Look, nobody wants federal law enforcement
officials assaulted. I certainly don't, though I will point out
that the increase in assaults on them that they keep
citing is likely because they're making more arrests. So I mean,
I'm not saying it's a good thing, but of course
it stands to reason that then they will have more
resistance of arrests and more assaults on them. It's just
(08:57):
part of I think, ramping up immigration andorsement, which is
what they want to do. Of Course, we don't want assaults,
we don't want at tax on federal law enforcement anything
like that, and I don't think they're crazy for worrying
about that. This app could be used this way, but
you can't prosecute CNN for reporting on the existence of
an app where people can report ICE officials locations one.
(09:21):
That app itself is what you should go after if
you think it's illegal. Even then, it actually might be
First Amendment protected, which we'll talk about. But regardless, CNN
has every right to do journalism and report on an
interesting and meaningful development, which is this app that's currently
on the app store. You can go download it, so
it's not like they're even reporting on some illicit black
(09:43):
market thing. Even then, though they would have a First
Amendment right to do that and be free from prosecution.
Y'all sound like authoritarians, y'all don't sound like free speech supporters.
Y'all sound nuts. Call me crazy, but I think top
officials the federal government should have a basic respect for
(10:03):
the First Amendment and the freedom of the press, even
for networks they hate, like CNN. I agreed with this
tweet from Mediaite editor in chief, where he wrote he
pointed out that the Fox News Chiron read CNN appears
to promote app tracking ICE agents. Aiden pointed out that
reporting on something is not promoting it. The CNN segment
in question even described the app as controversial. Aiden called
(10:26):
this a totally ridiculous attempt by Fox to criminalize the
work of a competitor. I mean, I have to agree
with him that this is totally hypocritical. And it's like, also,
you're already crushing CNN in the ratings so badly, like
so badly, you really have to kick them, well they're down.
But more importantly, right, there's a basic freedom of press
(10:48):
element here. Imagine something different, right, because when you're trying
to understand these kinds of issues, you should always try
to remove it from the issue where you may have
underlying biases like immigration enforcement. Even if you're a repub Again,
even if you're a conservative, even if you're a Trump
supporter and you want mass deportations, you support ICE, I understand,
we can. I have a slightly different view on that though,
(11:08):
I think some deportations are necessary, But we can talk
about all that, so separate it for that. Imagine this scenario.
Imagine that during peak COVID, California was and this is real,
arresting people on the beach for going outside when they
weren't supposed to, or arresting people for not wearing masks
or complying with mask mandates, and some resilient people started
(11:31):
to make an app where you could report the presence
of law enforcement doing COVID checks and so people could
kind of avoid them. Then imagine that Fox News reported
on the existence of this app, which hadn't been banned yet,
hadn't been adjudicated as illegal or anything like that, and
was literally in the app store, And then the Biden
(11:52):
administration suggested they might have their Department of Justice prosecute
Fox News, or you know, the California Department of Justice
under Gavin Newsom suggested they might prosecute Fox News for
obstructing justice by reporting on the existence of an app,
even favorably, reporting on it that may or may not
(12:13):
like to some extent, interfere with law enforcement operations. Fox
News hosts would call that dystopian censorship. They would call
that authoritarianism. They would call that an attack on the
First Amendment. And they would be right. But because it's Trump,
because it's CNN, and because it's a chance to like
own the Libs, they feel differently. That's not principled, that's
(12:35):
not consistent, that's not respectable or fair. Now, I think
the app itself is much mrcier territory. And if the
Trump administration was simply saying that they were going to
investigate the maker of this app, the ice block app
that allows people to like tag the locations of ice
(12:55):
agents theoretically so other people can see it and get
out of town if they don't want to get a rest.
Did presumably, you know, illegal immigrants. If they were just
going after the app itself, I thout just investigating the
app maker, I mean, okay, right, like that would be
something they were at least within the realm of normal
law enforcement to investigate. But going after CNN for covering
(13:17):
it is just vindictive many authoritarian petty behavior, and even
on the app itself. I mean, this would have to
be litigated in court. But there's an argument that actually
simply reporting the location of law enforcement doesn't meet the
threshold for obstruction of justice and is protected free speech,
so that would have to be litigated in court over this.
(13:40):
There is some precedent to this effect. For example, like
the Ways app that I use allows you to report
the police presence so people know a speeding check or
trap is coming up that hasn't been banned. That's not illegal.
In fact, some federal courts have even ruled that you
have a First Amendment right to flash your headlights at
some point to alert them of a speeding trap coming up.
(14:02):
You could argue that alerting people of the presence of
ice agents if you're not calling for violence, if you're
not interfering with them exactly, doesn't meet any sort of
threshold of obstruction of justice. You could argue that. But
at least, you know, I can see why they would
want to make that app illegal if they're trying to
do federal law enforcement. That would be a debate that'd
(14:23):
have to be had in court, but it's at least,
you know, debatable within the realm of normal law enforcement.
Want you to prosecute media you don't like is not
And the Trump administration needs to get a grip on
this stuff because they're disdain for freedom of the press
is really un American at times, and really I think
runs against the spirit and a letter of our First Amendment. Well,
(14:46):
what do you guys think? Do you agree with me?
Do you disagree with me and support the Trump administration
on this? Even if you do, I'm open to your feedback,
your criticism. I want to hear from you for sure,
So let me know what you think. In the comments.
Do hit that leg button while you're at it, make
sure some describe to the channel if you aren't yet,
and remember to send in your voice notes for my
voicemail Friday episodes, where I listen to your woke car stories,
(15:07):
your personal life situations, and give you my advice or
answer any questions you guys have for me. The link
to send one of those in is in the description. Okay, guys,
up next. I told you we're going to criticize CNN.
I don't have any soft spot in my heart for
CNN other than the one time they let me on
air and it got spicy and I haven't been invited
back yet, but hit me up. I will come on anyway. Guys.
(15:30):
Up next, we're going to react to perhaps the most
legendary and unhinged CNN crash out of all time, the
former congressman New York Congressman Jamal Bowman, who you may
remember as the dude who hold the fire alarm in Congress,
allegedly to attempt to disrupt a vote or something I
don't remember the exact details, and then ended up not
(15:53):
winning reelection. He was on the panel on CNN's News
Night Show with Abby Phillip and perhaps made one of
the craziest claims I've heard in a long time. Warning, guys,
this is unhinged.
Speaker 9 (16:07):
Is America catholic? You're not dealing with America's original sin
and its disease of hate and racism towards black and
brown people and sexism towards women and anti LGBTQ sentiment.
Speaker 11 (16:23):
We are not dealing with that. Your colleagues in a
Republican party do not hold each other accountable when it
comes to the racism that comes from the party on
a consistent basis. I mean and where you are about this.
Speaker 10 (16:39):
I'm a black man in America. The reason why heart
listen to what I'm saying, The reason why heart disease
and cancer and obesity and diabetes are bigger in the
black community is because of distress we carry from having
to deal with being called the N word directly or
indirectly every day. If your colleagues would listen and try
(17:01):
to learn and.
Speaker 11 (17:02):
Engage and grow and stop being so hateful, we could
have a better country. But unfortunately we're still here.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
Oh. Indirectly is crazy work? Is doing crazy work in
this context because Jamal Bowman, this former congressman actually just
suggested that the reason black people have higher rates of
health complications is because they are directly or indirectly called
(17:33):
the N word every day. Sir, what are you talking about? Like,
what are you actually talking about? Now? I could believe
that a very high profile black politician or political figure
who's very divisive could perhaps be called that online every day.
I get called slurs almost every day on the internet myself,
(17:54):
But that's not true for your average black person. That's
simply not true in America today, that they're being called
slurs on a daily basis, or being racially abused on
a daily basis. And to suggest that that is the
primary cause, like just blatant, in your face racism is
the blatant cause of health disparities between white and Black
(18:14):
Americans is just totally not true.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Now.
Speaker 4 (18:17):
I know, there's something called the minority stress model. I've
am very skeptical about the claims made there, But even
then that ties into much bigger picture issues than alleged
daily invocation of slurs against people that is not in
fact happening, is not in the room with us, And
(18:38):
I will just say that there's just objectively a lot
more to it than that. I mean, I am open
to the idea that part of the reason there's more
of these health issues among the black community is because
of systemic barriers they face. I think it's probably largely
a class distinction, right. They tend to have less money
(18:58):
and less resources and lower income than other groups, and
that probably correlates to lower access to healthcare and preventative
measures and healthy lifestyles and other things. And you could
argue that some of that definitely traces back to historical
racism or the inability to pass down wealth along the generations.
(19:20):
That is not an argument I'm closed off to, though.
I think it's complicated. But there's also a piece of
it for some of these conditions that may be genetic,
and there's a very large piece of it that is
lifestyle related. And another way of describing that is that
it's also choice related, related to the choices that people make.
(19:41):
So painting it off as if it's all just because
people are being called the N word on a daily
basis strikes me as absurd and totally missing any actual
issues or nuance to be had about this kind of conversation,
which makes it about part of the core for Jamal
Bowman this other story. He just really seems to see
(20:04):
racism everywhere, even when it isn't in fact the likely cause.
Take a look at this clip as well, from the
same conversation.
Speaker 11 (20:12):
I don't want to fight. I just want to chill.
I just want to know. I was in I was
walking down the street the other day. Some white dude bayhead.
He looked me, called me a piece of shit to
my face, said I'm going to get what's coming to me.
Why I deal with that dog in Yonkers.
Speaker 3 (20:27):
New York.
Speaker 10 (20:27):
Can I tell yourself, I'm not making that up.
Speaker 4 (20:29):
So this is very telling to me because he, at
least this is my reading of his comments here, is
suggesting that this is like some random racist white dude
saying this to him because he is just a random
black person. I think a much more likely explanation is
that this person doesn't like Jamal Bowman, knows who he is,
(20:52):
knows about his unhinged left wing politics, and said something
you know, rude to him. But his jumps to I
must be being racially discriminated against as a black man.
I mean, at some point there is like a victim
mentality here that is so overwhelming not to say there's
no real victimization or racism against black people. Of course
(21:14):
there is, but you start to see it where it
doesn't exist, if you're so obsessed with identity and victimhood
and play it constantly, playing the victim like this. I mean,
it's really it's remarkable, and I almost feel bad for
people like him because it's got to be a miserable
way to go through life. But we should really collectively
stop indulging it, Stop indulging these silly stretches and these Oh, well,
(21:39):
it's your truth that you experienced racism. Well maybe how
about what the facts say. Forget your truth, forget your experience,
what actually happened. I think that should be maybe more important,
and people should get more comfortable questioning the legitimacy of
other people's experiences and truth. Just because you feel something
doesn't make it real, doesn't make it valid. And I'm
(22:02):
sick of coddling these people's feelings, these woke left wing
people who see victimhood and oppression around every corner and
we're supposed to just NodD along. It actually discredits the
legitimate conversations about inequality we should be having. If you
ask me, Okay, guys, up next, we're going to talk
about the so called Big Beautiful Bill, the massive tax
(22:25):
cut and spending bonanza legislation that just passed the Senate
and now goes back to the House after many changes
were made to potentially be passed and await President Trump's signature.
Here's some reporting from CNBC with the latest on the
Big Beautiful Bill.
Speaker 12 (22:43):
The President's big tax and spending Bill, now on its
way back to the House of Representatives, this after passing
the Senate by the slimmest of margin. Similely Wilkins is
in Washington, DC this morning, staying up like all day,
all night, never.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
Stops for you.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
Well about maybe it will stop today, Andrew, I mean,
we're going to see here. But if it's going to
pass the House today, then Speaker Mike Johnson he's going
to have to change a couple no's to yess before
starting on this vote for the megabill. Remember, in the House,
if you have full attendance, Johnson can only lose three
Republicans and still get the bill passed. But right now
they're roughly about a dozen members that are either planning
(23:23):
to vote, know or have some really serious concerns with
this bill. Now, some of these members, they're Republicans from
more centrist districts who worry they could lose reelection next
year over Medicaid and snapcuts. Others are, of course, your
fiscal hawks. They've been frustrated for a while with this
bill that adds more than three point four trillion dollars
to the debt over the next ten years. That's a
(23:45):
number updated just last night by the Congressional Budget Office.
Some members are annoyed that some of the clean energy
tax credits are still in the measure. The Senate measure
remembers does allow wind and solar programs to get some
tax credits if they start instruction in the next year.
I chatted a bit with Congressman Tim Burchett. He told
me he's in the I'm not sure column and needs
(24:07):
more time, but he thinks that it's not just him.
He thinks more time in general is needed to hash
out disagreements with the bill, and he's skeptical that Republicans
are even going to be able to agree to a
procedural rule vote.
Speaker 4 (24:20):
This massive legislation really is a cluster, and if I
was to tell you everything that's in it, we'd be
here a very very long time. Frankly, the people in
Congress don't know everything that's in it. They keep discovering
tiny items that someone slipped in there and no one
noticed and being like, wait, take that out, or wait,
(24:41):
I don't want that, because we have very serious people
who run our country. But here's an overview from Washington
Post chief economic supporter Jeff Stein, who you know, Listen,
I'm a little suspect of wapaw, I understand, but he
does pretty good work on this stuff, and he goes
through what's in this exactly. So he says that two
points five trillion of the cost of this legislation goes
(25:03):
to extending or increasing the prior GOP tax cuts with
broad reach. So this is the kind of what you
think of as the middle and working class tax cuts
the GOP past of in twenty seventeen in Trump's first term.
He then says about one trillion of the bill's costs
goes to tax cuts that benefit the top one percent,
(25:24):
and then about half a trillion dollars goes to his
Trump's twenty twenty four campaign grab bag of random deduction,
so deductions for seniors, no tax on tips, deductions for
car interest payments. That's an odd one to me, but
what do I know. Nobody listens to me anyway. Then
(25:44):
there is half a trillion dollars for business tax breaks,
expensing r and d, et cetera. That is really important
to long term, long term economic growth. Guys that businesses
and corporations can write off their investments as an expense.
And then and there's also funding for immigration enforcement in
the military budget, which is about four hundred billion dollars.
(26:06):
Then he says there are major safety netcuts targeting Medicaid
and food stamps, such as work requirements, cost sharing, paperwork requirements.
That saves about one point three trillion, So whereas those
other numbers that we talked about were costs, that's a
plus one point three. In the same vein, they cut
a bunch of clean energy subsidies from the Biden administration primarily,
(26:30):
and that gives you about plus five hundred billions, So
some savings, they are significant savings. And then there's a
total deficit hit of about an additional three trillion dollars.
So my take on this is pretty simple. I think
some of these things need to get done, need to
get funded. For example, the middle income tax cuts, the
(26:50):
working class tax cuts that Trump passed in his first term,
those are really important, and people if you don't pass
some legislation extending those, those hit the old rates hit
back in effect, and people will see a tax hike.
We don't want that. In the same way, I think
the business expensing and other provisions are important. Obviously, Americans
(27:11):
do want more border security funding. But I think some
of these tax breaks for the rich, these special loopholes
and subsidies, and even just the top marginal tax cut rate,
we could probably go without at this point if you
care about the debt and deficit the way fiscal hawks
say that they do. And I feel the same way
(27:32):
about some of these special carve outs where it's like, oh,
no tax on tips. Well, I really don't think we
should be randomly prioritizing or write offs for your car
interest payments. These seem extremely niche, and it would be
better to just cut rates across the board rather than
carve out special little exemptions and deductions here for unique things. Anyway,
(27:55):
I understand why Republicans are probably going to ultimately pass
this bill because there are parts of it that need
to get passed, But at the same time, it's really
not okay to just pass legislation that will explode the
national debt and rest assured. Republican politicians are lying to
you when they say this won't add to the debt.
(28:15):
They're either using fake, cooked up numbers that rely on
totally unreasonable frameworks or growth estimates. There's lots of good
stuff in it that needs to pass in my view,
but it will add significantly to the national debt and
the annual deficit. That's just the truth, and I don't
think that's responsible to pass something that big of an
(28:36):
explosion of the debt. Here's a statement from Maya McGuinness,
who's the president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
The level of blatant disregard we just witnessed for our
nation's fiscal condition and budget process is a failure of
responsible governing. These are the very same lawmakers who for
years have bemoaned the nation's massive debt, voting to put
(28:57):
another four trillion on the credit card. And it took
a bill that already borrowed way too much and took
it from bad to worse. The Senate expanded the House's
tax breaks, watered down its offsets, introduced new special interest
giveaways and added another trillion dollars onto the price tag.
The Senate bill would add six hundred billion to the
(29:17):
deficit in twenty twenty seven alone, pushing deficits above seven
percent of GDP, drive debt to new record highs, and
accelerate the insolvency of Social Security and Medicare. Claims that
it reduces the deficits rely on phony baselines, fantastical economic assumptions,
and arbitrary expirations. If made permanent, the Senate bill would
(29:38):
cost more than the Cares Act, the American Rescue Plan,
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Chips Act combined. Wow.
So what she's saying with that is that those big
wasteful COVID era spending plans and early Biden administration spending legislation.
According to their analysis, this bill adds more to the
debt than all of those combined. Which wow. They conclude
(30:01):
the Senate Reconciliation Bill fails almost every test of fiscal responsibility.
Instead of worrying about arbitrary deadlines or sparing the Senate
another vote rama, fiscal conservatives should stand up for what's
right and reject the Senate plan to explode our debt.
To me, this is exactly right. Republicans my whole lifetime
have claimed to care about fiscal responsibility as our nation
(30:24):
is driven off the cliff into financial crisis and just
mounting piles of debt. And now that they're in power
with very slim majorities, I will admit, which makes it
hard to tough to make tough cuts or controversial changes.
But to go past something this fiscally irresponsible, I think
is a betrayal of the public and of the promises
(30:44):
that President Trump campaigned on. We were told he would
balance the budget, and now that was always a ridiculous claim,
but he said that over and over again. So much
for any of that, I suppose. I guess we were
lied to and our futures are being mortgaged. So today's
a day that ends in why in Washington, DC? I
(31:05):
hate it here. Okay, up next, we're going to talk
about another controversy involving Trump, Florida, Ron DeSantis, the immigration crisis,
and so much more. And this is all the hubbub
and alarmism about what's being called Alligator Alcatraz, the new
(31:26):
federal immigration detention facility that apparently is like in a
remote location and has crocodiles, So they're calling it Alligator
Alcatraz because it will be really hard to escape from. Shocker,
it is leading to widespread panic from the media, from
TikTok and so much more. But before we get into that,
(31:46):
I just want to watch this clip from Fox News
where they're actually on site with Governor DeSantis and he
walks them through it. Let's take a look at that clip.
Speaker 6 (31:54):
Joice right now, is Governor Ron DeSantis here in the
Great State of Florida. You came up with this idea
in the last couple of weeks, right for Alcatras or
Alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 8 (32:05):
Explain it, Well, when you want to have deportation of
illegal aliens, there's a process the DHS has to go
through to vet, to process, and then to stage them
for removal. And you know, we've got jails and our
sheriffs and police are working. The State of Florida is
all in on President Trump's mission, and obviously you have
ice operations, but that's not enough and so there needs
(32:29):
to be more ability to intake process and then deport.
So this answers that this is going to be able
to have more than three thousand illegals. It can be
processed through here. We've got a massive runway right behind
us where any of the federal assets. If they want
to fly these people back to their home country, they
can do it one stop shop.
Speaker 6 (32:49):
And you've thought of everything. Okay, so there are four
gigantic tents. Let's come on over here, governor. And people
are thinking, okay, you're in the middle of the aberglaze.
It's hot. That would explain you've got this bank of
air conditioners here.
Speaker 8 (33:02):
Yeah, So I mean this is going to be Illegals
will come in, they'll be processed, There'll be places for
them to be housed. You'll have an ability for food,
you'll be an ability for them to consult legal rights
if they have that, because there is a process that's
involved with this. So this is really everything. This is
going to be a self contained little area. And then
(33:23):
of course you also have stuff for the staff that
work here. So we've got laundry facilities, we've got showers,
we've got obviously there you see the shower in bath
facilities there. You're not going to be anything that they're
hurting for anything. They'll be ac they'll be things that
everybody needs. There's medical view. So it's being done right,
it's being.
Speaker 4 (33:43):
Done by the book. So I don't know about you guys,
but I'm just not that horrified by this at first glance.
And we will go into more details about it. But
there's air conditioning, you know, there's facilities that are clean
and orderly. It doesn't look like a you know, star
hotel or even a three star hotel. But it doesn't
(34:03):
look like torturous conditions or like inhumane or anything. And
I guess we won't really know until it's in operation,
but it looks like it's set up to be an
okay place to store people temporarily while their immigration cases
are being heard and they're then being deported. Yet it
is prompting like this insane meltdown. Here is disgraced x
(34:28):
MSNBC host and political activist Joy Reid calling it a
concentration camp for brown and black people. Yes, seriously, take
a listen.
Speaker 13 (34:41):
I had to forget about it, but Ron DeSantis is
still governor of Florida. He took the Comfy Couch hosts
on a tour of the concentration camp that he's building
in Florida in order to round up people, brown people,
and throw them in a camp because he doesn't want
them in Florida. Surprise, surprise, the economy of Florida is
(35:02):
going to be severely harmed by rounding up brown people who,
by the way, all over this country Latinos are afraid
to go to work. Anybody who is perceived or looks
Latino is afraid to go to work.
Speaker 4 (35:13):
I'm sorry, I have been very critical of some of
the immigration stuff going overboard, violating civil liberties. But this
is absurd. It is not a concentration camp. And that
is a wild accusation in term to just throw around
willy nilly and kind of offensive to the many victims
of actual concentration camps. And I'm sorry, but this is
(35:34):
like ridiculous. This Oh, just brown and black people are
being rounded up and putting camps. No illegal immigrants are.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Now.
Speaker 4 (35:42):
May there be some mistakes, maybe some people are apprehended wrongly. Yes,
that is a serious problem, and that's why you have
to have a fair due process. However, to suggest that
this camp, I mean, even with the mistakes, illegal immigrate
they are going to be the ones in this camp,
not random brown and black people. There might be an
(36:04):
example of an error or a person mistakenly put there
who has to wait days before they get out or whatever.
And that's horrible, and I totally think that's wrong, and
that's why we need to have some liberty's protections and
access to your attorneys and hearings and other things. But like,
to actually suggest that DeSantis is just going to be
putting random brown and black people in there is absurd.
(36:25):
It's not true. To suggest that he doesn't want brown
people in this state in Florida is absurd. It's not true.
And people like this just sound de lulu. Similarly, I mean,
here is Tim Wallace's daughter, the progressive failed the vice
presidential nominee and governor of Minnesota. Here's his daughter, who
is a TikTok activist going on a little rant about
(36:47):
alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 14 (36:48):
Take a listen to this Alligator Alcatraz? Are we serious
right now? These people are literally super villains at this point.
They're just like making up the crulest ways they can
torture people they don't like because of their skin color
where they're from. Wake up America. Seriously, we're supposed to
(37:11):
be celebrating the fourth of July. Alligator Alcatraz.
Speaker 4 (37:15):
Now it's not just young people on TikTok or random
crazy journalists doing this. Members of Congress are engaging in
this kind of extreme alarmist rhetoric. Here is congre Congressman
Maxwell Alejandro Frost. He wrote, Alligator Alcatraz is a cruel spectacle.
DHS and Florida officials are building it to brutalize, starve,
(37:39):
and harm immigrants, and they don't care who lives or dies.
Those are very serious accusations that seem just totally unsubstantiated.
We saw the facilities. Nobody's being starved. They're going to
be fed. They're going to be detained in tension facilities
(38:01):
that won't be fun, but they're not going to be
brutalized either. That just seems baseless. Now, of course, if
that were to be true, I would think that was
horrible and I would totally condemn whoever was involved in it,
to Santis, Trump, what have you. But that hasn't happened.
I don't really see reason to believe it will happen
at this facility, and until it does, throwing around these
(38:22):
kinds of accusations just makes you look alarmisted and like
you're smearing your political opponents in really wild ways in
a way that's just unsubstantiated. Now, none of this is
to say that like there's no legitimate criticisms to be had.
For example, here is Benny Johnson, the far right YouTuber
and influencer, showing the merch items that the State of
(38:47):
Florida provided him with from Alligator Alcatraz. Take a look
at this.
Speaker 15 (38:51):
I just want everyone to know that there's official Alligator
Alcatraz merch there. It is provided to us by the
State of Florida. And uh yeah, would you rock this trip?
Speaker 14 (39:08):
Look at that?
Speaker 4 (39:10):
Is he like trying to be cringe? I hope he's trying,
cause if not, yikes. But similarly, the Department of Homeland
Security posted this on their official government x account and
it's in presumably AI picture of a bunch of alligators
wearing ice hats around a prison. And I'm sorry, y'all,
(39:31):
but like this is just so unseerious. Why are we
trolling and selling merch about federal law enforcement and immigrant
detention facilities? No matter what your views are on these issues,
they're actually very serious with human lives at stake and
people being you know, deprived of their liberty and freedom.
(39:54):
And call me old fashioned. Call me a sour puss,
call me a buzzkill, whatever you want. I just think
there should be a level of seriousness with which government
officials in particular treat these topics that I do not
see represented in the Alligator Alcatraz merch or memes posted
on official federal agencies social media feeds. Wow. If you
(40:20):
showed me this stuff like five years ago, I would
have been like, that's ridiculous. Agencies are never going to
be posting AI memes. But welcome to twenty twenty five.
I guess all right, guys, that'll be it for this
episode of the braad Versus Everyone Podcast. Thank you guys
so much for tuning in. Please do make sure you subscribe.
If you aren't yet, do hit that like button before
(40:40):
you go comment with your thoughts. I take the time
to read the comments. I really do love hearing what
you guys have to say. And with that, guys, do
sending your voice notes your voice note Friday, and we'll
talk again real soon.
Speaker 6 (41:00):
Yeah,
Popular Podcasts
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.