Pay Up America: From Monster Healthcare Costs to the New 50-Yr Mortgage, David Cay Johnston 11/11/25

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's Tuesday, Mark Thompson Show. I'm o Kelly in for
Mark Thompson and what a glorious show we have scheduled
for you today. We have some serious conversations, were gonna
have some silly conversation. We're going to talk about real estate,
the unaffordability of America. That is a real thing. And
of course Customary were going to be joined by David K. Johnston,

(00:21):
Pulitzer Prize winning author and also Jefferson Graham in the
second hour, host of Photo Walks TV and former tech
writer for USA Today. Let's get with it as Customary
have to say hello and good morning, Slash, good afternoon
to the captains of the ship Kim McAllister, and also
Tony sort of an emough, how you doing, my friends

(00:42):
and family, welcome back. Tony stopped being shy. Let me
just stay off the top. This may surprise some people,
this may shock some people, This may even anger some people.

(01:04):
But we know that our president has been talking about
this idea of a federal program for fifty year mortgages, if.

Speaker 2 (01:15):
A long mortgage mode.

Speaker 1 (01:17):
Look, I don't have fifty years left on this earth. Okay,
I'm fifty five now getting ready to turn fifty six.
I don't want to live to be one hundred and
five hundred and six. I mean, look, people want to
have a long life, but I don't think I want
to live that long under a fifty year mortgage. But
let's listen to what the President and others have had
to say about this fifty year mortgage, and then I'm

(01:38):
going to piss you off of what I have to say. Afterword,
Go ahead, Tony.

Speaker 3 (01:42):
This morning new backlash as the Trump administration moves forward
with a plan to introduce fifty year mortgages, it looks to.

Speaker 1 (01:48):
Be like the President's looking for a quick fix to
a market that is fundamentally broken right now.

Speaker 3 (01:53):
Over the weekend, Trump's sharing this image comparing the proposal
to the thirty year mortgage policies champion by FDR nearly
a century ago. The move could potentially kickstart the now
stagnant real estate market. Homes are currently seeing the lowest
turnover rate in thirty years, and the median age of
first time home buyers just hit an all time high
of forty years old.

Speaker 1 (02:13):
It's really difficult to see right now for younger borrowers
how they are going to be able to afford.

Speaker 3 (02:18):
A home a longer fixed rate mortgage with lower monthly payments,
but would also create a higher total cost because of
all that interest over five decades. Take a four hundred
thousand dollars loan at six percent interest under a thirty
year mortgage, the monthly payment would be just shy of
twenty four hundred dollars. Under a fifty year loan, it
drops to just over twenty one hundred, a savings of

(02:38):
nearly three hundred dollars a month, But over time that
savings is erased by a much larger interest bill, because
while the total interest on a thirty year loan would
be about four hundred and sixty three thousand dollars, the
interest on a fifty year loan would total more than
eight hundred and sixty thousand. Many, including long time allies
of President Trump, are not on board with the idea,
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green saying it will ultimately reward the banks,

(03:02):
mortgage lenders, and homebuilders, while people pay far more in
interest over time and die before they ever pay off
their home in debt forever, in debt for life. And
the wine House has not yet explained how it would
get around the Dog Frank Act, which effectively bands mortgages
longer than thirty years.

Speaker 1 (03:20):
Okay, this is where I go ahead and piss everyone off.
I don't hate the idea of a fifty year mortgage.
I don't hate it now. I don't love it in
the way that it's being sold in positioned, but I
don't hate it. Hear me out, And I'd say this
as someone who has been in a fifty year mortgage.

(03:43):
I bought my first property in I was thirty six,
so we're talking about maybe nineteen years ago, so there
was like maybe two thousand and five, two thousand and
six ish, it's like two or three years right by
the crash, right before the crash. And if you remember
back then, they had all these exotic loan options. You
can get these adjustable rate mortgages and you know, you

(04:04):
pay interest only loans, these he locks, all that kind
of stuff. And it was a function of the of
the George Bush administration and their housing initiative, trying to
get everyone in home because we have this long standing
idea in America that home ownership was the path to
generational wealth, and it is still true to a certain degree.

(04:25):
But the entrance requirements, the entry fee is just so
much more. I remember my parents bought the house that
I grew up in. I was five years old and
was in Harbor City. My mother still lives in that
house to this day. Or bedroom house, I can't remember
all the square footage, but they bought it for fifty
four thousand dollars. And and in theory you could have

(04:46):
a one salary household and afford a house. That's no
longer the case. So the American dream is not really
accessible for gen Z in the way that it was
for the boomer generation. That's just the function of math
and capitalism and the unaffordable nature of America. You look

(05:06):
at the Brady Bunch House right there that was in
the late at that house I think was built in
the fifties, and we saw the show in the late
nineteen sixties. That house probably was purchased for thirty thousand
dollars and now it's probably on the market, I know
was recently sold or resold like two million dollars. Something
in my mind to be ridiculous. So how can someone
coming out of school twenty two years old, or or

(05:29):
just leaving their parents' house afford some sort of house.
My parents got their first house in la And in
the mid nineteen seventies, and they were both under the
age of thirty. That is almost impossible these days. So
let me get back to Donald Trump. The whole idea
of a fifty year mortgage. I do not hate. When
I bought my townhouse in two thousand and six, I

(05:52):
bought it for three hundred and forty thousand dollars. I'm
being completely transparent. Then we remember that we had the
housing crisis, the Great Risk Session, the economic collapse of
the banking industry, and then you had all of these
exotic mortgages. People who didn't necessarily confirm their income. They
didn't they couldn't financially afford those houses. Still inclusive of me,

(06:15):
but I was borderline, and they were all trying to
get out of those mortgages, or they let their mortgages
lapse during that time and just walked away from their properties.
And then all these exotic mortgages collapsed in on themselves.
We remember what happened, hopefully you remember, But in my
specific instance, my three hundred and forty thousand dollars townhouse

(06:38):
went to a value of about one hundred and fifteen
thousand dollars. No way in the world I was ever
going to be able to resell it, going to pay
it off, and I had a second mortgage on it
that was forgiven, and they reconstructed my first mortgage into
a fifty year mortgage. Now, the god Frank law only
applies to federal laws, but individual mortgaging companies private companies

(07:02):
are able to do that. What the fifty year mortgage
allowed me to do was to obviously have that lower
payment rate and I could stay in my house, and
then when I resold it, it was sold at that
one hundred and fifteen thousand dollars valuation. Long story short is,
the fifty year mortgage is not for the purpose of

(07:24):
people living in that house with that same mortgage for
fifty years in the way that a lot of people
will buy at a higher interest rate, and when interest
rates come down, they will refinance to a lower interest rate.
The fifty year mortgage as I see it, and Kim,
if you disagree or agree, please let me know. Same
with you, Tony, because we've all purchased property. It allows

(07:48):
a lower wall to climb over to at least get
into a house and enjoy the benefits of home ownership.
Is it a long term solution? Absolutely not. You don't
want to stay in that fifty year mortgage anymore than
you want to stay in that interest only loan mortgage
or the adjustable rate mortgage with that balloon payment coming.

(08:10):
But it did allow you, if you used it correctly,
to have the benefits of home ownership, the tax breaks.
You can still develop equity, and then at some later time,
as interest rates improve, maybe you can go into a
more conventional thirty year mortgage. I don't hate this now.

(08:30):
The other side is I don't know if it's actually
feasible as a government program, And if we use the
lessons of the past with the Great Recession, it probably
would set up the federal government for a tremendous economic
calamity if our economy should go south and a lot

(08:50):
of these people in these fifty year mortgages decide to
leave the federal government hanging. Did I miss any thank
him in that?

Speaker 2 (08:57):
I got two notes from him, a larger note and
one as a personal note. So if you say, listen,
the way to make America affordable is for you to
pay pay for longer, pay more for longer instead of
ever addressing the cost of things. Then I think we're

(09:21):
kind of only looking at one end. And while I,
as a homeowner or the bank owns it, mostly don't
want to see the price of.

Speaker 1 (09:27):
My house go down.

Speaker 2 (09:29):
I still feel like, you know, in my area, in
the North Bay of an hour north of San Francisco,
you can't buy a house for less than a million dollars.
It's it's it's nearly impossible. So for people like my kids,
how are they ever going to buy? I couldn't afford
my house today, so how are people ever going to

(09:49):
get in the market? And I don't know if a
fifty year loan is the whole answer. And also I
think it depends on what kind of a buyer you are.
There are smart buyers that are more like investors, that
don't necessarily get attached to a place, and you know,
they're okay with selling a house and moving up, moving up,
moving up. And then there's a sentimental sap like me

(10:11):
who bought the house right next to my mom with
plans to never leave it. So for me like that,
I guess you could refinance out of your fifty year mortgage,
but it just seems like, you know, I'm not the
person who's going to sell, So I would get stuck
with the eight hundred thousand dollars in interest, right because
I think I'm entering into a deal with a mortgage company.

(10:34):
I don't plan to default on my loan, and I
don't plan to ever, you know, I plan to pay
it off. And even if I did move to a
different house, I think I would be that if I
were ever in the financial position, I would be that
kind of investor that I would keep the one property
that I owned and rent it out and then move
to something else. I'm not really a seller. Does that

(10:57):
make sense?

Speaker 1 (10:57):
It makes perfect sense, But in your question is the answer,
because a fifty year loan is not for everyone. It's
not intended to be for everyone. Like, for example, if
you've noticed talking about the larger issue of the unaffordability
of America, if you try to buy a car these days,
they will offer you a seven year payment plan as

(11:20):
opposed to a customary five years. You know, they have
leases now for five years as opposed to three years.
They understand implicitly that people cannot pay what they used
to pay ten and fifteen years ago for the same items.
And this is what yes, you are going to pay
more in interest if you stay in that original loan.

(11:40):
And I'm a person who believes that if you should
become a homeowner at twenty five as opposed to forty,
it'll affords you certain advantages than the forty year old.
I think in terms of you are still developing equity,
probably at a lower rate, or definitely at a lower
rate because you pay more or interested in anything, but

(12:01):
you still have the tax benefits of home ownership. You
still have an asset if need be, that you can
borrow against in case of an emergency. We can't forget
about healthcare because we all know that we are one
health diagnosis away from being not only in the middle
of a medical emergency, but a financial emergency. And if
you were diagnosed with cancer and you need to find

(12:24):
fifty thousand dollars, well, I know that I could pull
it out of my house if I needed to, if
I had to. If I'm renting an apartment, that is
not an option. So it's not one size fits all.
I wonder about the viability of a federal plan for
fifty year loans, but I don't hate the idea. As
someone who was in a fifty year loan from a

(12:49):
private lending institution. That's awesome.

Speaker 2 (12:53):
I hear you, and I suppose if you if you're
just trying to get in. It's kind of like those
those loans, those adjustable rate mortgages, where you knew that
if you got that loan and that was your way
into the house, you better find a way to refinance
your way out of that before a balloon payment comes.

Speaker 1 (13:10):
Just right. Yes, yeah, same with this.

Speaker 2 (13:12):
If you got yourself locked into a fifty year loan,
then find some way out of it now.

Speaker 1 (13:19):
Yeah, I guess the alternative is to have that first
time buyer's program with some sort of credit or some
sort of special privileges which makes it financially easier. There
are a number of organizations like NAKA, and there are
other like FHA and VHA different loan programs which are

(13:41):
out there to help specifically qualified buyers or first time buyers,
and we should not go away from that. I'm just
saying that the fifty year aspect is not something that
I'm going to dismiss out of hand. It is not
the silver bullet, and it is not the solution. I
think it could be one of many solutions. To help
younger buyers or first time buyers, because I'm still of

(14:03):
the opinion that home ownership is the most dependable way
to ensure some degree of I can't even call a
generational wealth, but generational security where you can help the
generation after you. You can't do that leasing an apartment. You
just can't do it. Delette says, I bought my house
in Bodega Bay as a second home in nineteen eighty five.

(14:26):
I paid one hundred and seventy seven thousand dollars for it.
You cannot buy a house here in Bodega Bay for
less than a million. You can buy a house in
another state. Well, but not everyone, you know, but that
I believe that's a luxury. You know, I live in California.
I live in Los Angeles. I live in Los Angeles County.
My professional career is here. Now, I guess I can

(14:49):
go ahead and move to Mississippi and get a palatial estate.
But for the millions of people who don't have that
option and don't have either a home which already has
equity that you can sell, I don't know if that's
a viable option, but yes, And here's while I'm always
on my soapbox regarding capitalism. We all love capitalism, but

(15:13):
these are some of the unfortunate realities concerning capitalism. What
a house costs in nineteen seventy five is less than
what it costs today. And what the house costs today,
regardless of our misgivings, is going to be less than
what it costs twenty thirty years from now. Land is
finite and not making any more of it, and it's

(15:35):
always going to be more and more expensive, and you're
going to have landlords. We have a rising population, and
we're all gonna need housing. And here in California, let
me get on my soapbox for real, we've voted against
rent control, rent control it least twice, maybe three times,
where we have actively contributed to this financial situation that

(16:00):
we see here, at least in California. I can't speak
for other states. This unaffordability of housing here in California,
where we want to be able to make as much
money as possible, and we can and do in many respects,
but the unintended consequences is that includes people who are
selling real estate, that includes people who are landlords and

(16:22):
adds to the unaffordability of housing. Specifically here in California
and around the United States. You can go to Alabama
and the houses what they cost now is much more
than what it costs twenty thirty years ago. That's what
it's always going to be. And to your point, Kim,
I don't know if there is an answer to that
that is fundamentally baked into capitalism where if I want,

(16:45):
I can sell my house for two million dollars. I
lived three miles from sofar stadium. In other words, it's
appreciating in value because we've had a football stadium, we
have the into it domed where the Clippers play, a
basketball arena, all built in the past five six years.
So I've gained it equity just by sitting here in

(17:06):
my studio right now. Are you going to tell me
that I can't sell my house for more?

Speaker 2 (17:12):
And if you never had that fifty year mortgage allegedly
right how you got in, then you would never have
that opportunity to build equity and build personal wealth.

Speaker 1 (17:22):
Hello, yeah, hello. And then to be transparent, when I
bought that three hundred forty thousand dollars townhouse, it was
devalued and reset to one hundred and fifteen thousand. It
was later sold for I'm trying to remember four hundred
and something thousand. That's how you developed generational wealth and

(17:46):
grow youth. But you have to be able to get
in the market. So I am more sympathetic than most
when it comes to home ownership and first time home ownership.
I supported George Bush and his housing iniative because I
grew up in a household where that was always drilled
into me. Home ownership was the key to generational wealth.

(18:07):
So I don't hate this and I don't dismiss it
out of hand.

Speaker 2 (18:11):
Yeah, I can see that it would be a good
tool for people to get in, but I still feel
like they're not addressing a whole another piece of the pie,
which is the you know, as we talk about million
dollar homes, million dollar homes that shouldn't be million dollar homes, right,
have no business paying on million dollars for this house,

(18:32):
and I never would. But it doesn't take into accountability
the making homes more affordable on the other end, not
just on the you know, the fifty year mortgage end,
but the actual price of the home.

Speaker 1 (18:49):
I don't know how you do about that, because are
you going to federalize lumber? You know, are you going
to federalize the builders. Are you going to have a
federal system of houses built by the federal government which
specifically are created to offset that. We have it on
a lower level with Section eight housing, but it's not

(19:12):
actually being built by the federal government. We'd have to
fundamentally transform the idea of home ownership and also wealth
creation through home ownership. Right now, it's incentivized for you
to sell your house at a higher value than when
you bought it. Sure, and I don't know how you

(19:32):
disincentivize that because I'm going to get as much as
I can for this house.

Speaker 2 (19:37):
Well you have city, Yeah, that's true, and who's going
to sell it for less? Just to be you know,
be nice to the next generation.

Speaker 1 (19:43):
Right.

Speaker 2 (19:44):
But on the other hand, you've got programs now in
various cities and counties where you know, you have to have,
if you're a developer, a certain portion of the homes
that you build or the town homes that you build
or whatever it is, have to meet the qualifications for
for homes.

Speaker 1 (20:00):
Yes, So I mean, I.

Speaker 2 (20:02):
Don't know if you can expand on that to help people.
But it just seems like we're not attacking both sides.

Speaker 1 (20:08):
Of the problem. You're right, and it's not an either
or proposition, it's a both. And there are people who
don't even think about owning a home. We're just talking
about affordability of a residence, a domicile, some place to live. Well,
when we say that there's a housing shortage, we're not

(20:28):
talking about the physical edifices or the structures. We're talking
about the affordability housing shortage, where there's enough places for
people to live, but there are not enough places to
live that people can afford. And that's the complexity of
the conversation. And I don't think American greed is ever
going to overcome that. And since everything is profit motive motivated,

(20:54):
including healthcare, we got to go to that next. This
is that hamster wheel, that treadmill that I think will
never get off of because what was affordable in nineteen
seventy five will never be affordable again. And that's inclusive
of groceries. Now, the cost of eggs may not have
quintupled in the past twenty years, but damn near close,

(21:17):
you know. And we were talking before the show about insurance.
You know, we had these fires here in California and
the cost of insurance which you have to have, is
going to double, if not triple for some people. And
our houses didn't even burn down. Yeah, you know, but
you're paying into this insurance pot which is going to

(21:38):
care for everyone. And we pay for insurance inclusive of
car insurance in the event that something might happen, and
oftentimes does not happen, and if it does happen to
someone else or there's fraud elsewhere, we are left holding
the bag and we have to pay more to compensate

(21:58):
for either the fraud or the legit legitimate disasters or
accidents which do happen. All of this is connected. This
is a systemic issue. It's not just a housing issue.
You know. It's groceries, it's gas, it's it's insurance, it's
it's everything that we need as far as necessities. I'm
not talking about the cost of cruises or air travel

(22:21):
going up. I'm just talking about the things that are
essential to you and me that we have to have,
as in a roof over our head. And I'm not
even talking about a five bedroom, four bedroom, a bathroom,
free car garage. I'm just talking about shelter.

Speaker 2 (22:39):
Sean says good news on the affordability front. Fifty percent
of the food for seventy five percent of the price.
Excellent bargain. If you're enumerate the contrition, you know he's
not wrong. And it's so funny.

Speaker 1 (22:53):
We always talk about something being on sale. You can
go to your favorite department store, big box retail and
they promise you something is on sale, but in actuality,
those prices were marked up before and they now brought
it back to something which is lower than the original price,
and it's still above the what they paid for the

(23:17):
wholesale price. But it gives you the illusion or the
feeling that you are saving money, but you're still getting
less than whatever you had before. Look at the packaging
of food they call the shrinth flation, where you're getting
smaller packages, less food for the same quoted price. You know,

(23:37):
the bag of potato chips still may be a dollar fifty,
but it's mostly air, and it's a smaller package of
mostly air.

Speaker 2 (23:47):
I don't really see the price of groceries has come down.
Wasn't that the whole point of the last election. People
were voting on the price of eggs, and I don't
think that prices have really changed that much.

Speaker 1 (23:58):
Well, there are two lies. One, I don't believe that
they were voting on the price of eggs. I think
they were voting because they didn't want that black woman
to become president. That's first and foremost. That was a
ruse of lost ability as far as choosing one candidate
over the other. And we've seen since prices have not
come down, and we've seen an explosion and ice rays

(24:21):
and all things unrelated to the affordability of America, that
that was a farce. That wasn't the genuine reasons where
people were concerned about the future of the country. But
it is a real issue. You know, the cost of
groceries is never going to go down. I always use
I remember this as a child, and I'm weird, so

(24:43):
I'm self aware. But I used to buy these Hostess
donuts which were six in a pack, okay, And I
remember as a child they were like thirty five cents,
and I saw when it got to fifty cents, and
I loved them and I always eat them. And I
saw it I got to seventy five cents and a dollar,

(25:03):
and I realized as a child that prices only move
in one direction the economy, and affordability only moves in
one direction. The cost of healthcare only moves in one direction.
What it costs for that knee exam that MRI in
nineteen ninety five is far less than what it costs today.

(25:28):
What it costs to go in and see the doctor,
your your primary care physician in two thousand and nine
or twenty ten with the inception of Obottomacare is less
than what it is today. And those realities are never
going to change now. I don't know how much those
hostess doing us are right now. They're probably like maybe
three or four dollars. But the point is it only

(25:52):
moves in one direction, and it will never go back.
I'll give you a perfect example everyone. I hope everyone
watching today is as a fan of thrifty ice cream.
I love thrifty ice cream. I love that I used
to be able to buy thrifty ice cream for like
fifteen cents, and then they had thrifty ice cream and

(26:16):
write eight and leave that comment for Louise Up. I
come right back to that. I got something to say
about that, okay, but thrifty ice cream is never going
back to fifteen cents. And I remember my father would
take me out for thrifty ice cream, and I loved it.
The cost of making thrifty ice cream probably is not
fundamentally different or more expensive today than it was back

(26:38):
in nineteen seventy seven or so. But because of all
these other forces of distribution and marketing, whatever, it costs
more to sell the same product in as many places,
and you have shareholders with profit incentives, and you have revenues,
earnings calls. All that figures into everything costs more now

(27:02):
than then, and it's never going back. So when we
talk about the affordability of housing, it's inclusive of the
unaffordability of health care and unaffordability of groceries. It's all
different branches on the same tree of trying to survive
in America. Now, let me talk to Luis. Louis says, yes,
Mo Harris was a terrible candidate, not because she was

(27:25):
not qualified, but because she was unelectable in red and
purple states, and that's exactly what played out. Agreed, disagree
what I mean, She was not a terrible candidate. I
believe that America was not willing to elect a black
woman president, not a woman, not a black woman, and

(27:50):
I think that put a ceiling on her candidacy, because
it wasn't a discussion of debate of who was more sane.
It wasn't a discussion or debate of who as serious
as a candidate and not necessarily prone to outlandish outbursts
and getting us into a war all the stuff that
we're seeing right now. It wasn't a It was a

(28:12):
It was an unseerious conversation in comparison of two people
in the way that Joe Biden had a horrible first
debate with Donald Trump. And I think a reasonable person
can acknowledge that we should acknowledge how absolutely bonkers and
that ish crazy Trump was in a debate with Kamala Harris.
A reasonable person can acknowledge that reality thereating a cap yes, yes,

(28:41):
and America conspiracy theories aside still chose Donald Trump. And
that is more a statement on America than actually Kamala
Harris or Donald Trump like for example. And always relate
everything to relationships in sports, because there are an analogies
and comparisons all over that you may see. As a man,

(29:04):
you will see and I'll talk about men because we're
so stupid, we are we are very transparent. A man
will date and often marry relative to looks. We are
visually oriented, and we'll see a man and he will
date the proverbial and literal stripper. And there's an old saying,
you don't marry the stripper because it doesn't make usually

(29:26):
make a good wife, helpmate, spouse. And a man will
disregard all common sense and pursue that which is not
good for him or a good helpmate. And I see
America in that same way. America chose Donald Trump against

(29:48):
all good reason, common sense. You can put up the resumes,
you can you can see that Donald Trump was at
best a game show host. He was a narcissist, he
was a racist back in the nineteen seventies, he was
a misogynist. All that was out there for everyone to see.
And you saw what he did with COVID and how

(30:10):
he performed after getting the job undeserved, unqualified, and yet
and still America chose him again despite all that. And
it just says that America is stupid. Not that Kamalae
Harris was unqualified.

Speaker 2 (30:29):
But mo her laugh, I know, you know her laugh,
mo her cackle, and you know she just seemed like
she just wasn't so nice. And you know she's had
She just there's something about her mo there's just something
to stop it.

Speaker 1 (30:43):
Yeah, just call it what it is. And I think
that's a good place for me. Tony play the sounder.
I'm changing subjects. I guess I'm not gonna get the sounder.

Speaker 2 (30:57):
No, I Tony went away. But you know, before we
change topics, I do want to throw this out here
because it is in regards to the unaffordability of America.
Luis writes, extended payments for cars, homes equals typical US solution.
Create a problem, create a money making industry around the problem,
rather than a solution. And thank you Louise for the contributing.

Speaker 1 (31:20):
Spot on spot on. And if you notice, every quote
unquote proposed solution in no way inconveniences the moneymakers. This
doesn't inconvenience the banks, This doesn't inconvenience to federal government.
It allows this. In the ABC report, we started with,
yes you will be paying more interests. Yes you will

(31:43):
be paying more over the life of that fifty year mortgage.
Ostensibly if you were to keep it for fifty years,
and there is no loser as far as the federal government,
assuming this is like a federal loan and the interest
you pay the original homeowner not going to be a loser.
No one loses in the sense of the people who
are making money, and so they're trying to solve this

(32:05):
problem while not inconveniencing anyone. I'm all for helping someone,
and that's why I err on the side of I
don't hate it, but it doesn't mean I love it,
because it does not fundamentally address or solve the problem.
It helps some people, and I'm all about helping some people,
but it doesn't solve the problem in the way that

(32:26):
we talk about SNAP or we talk about any other
federal subsidies. It doesn't solve the problem, but it does
help some people. And I would rather help some people
than help nobody. Tony, thank sonya supposed to say? Thanks
ton Okay, all right? Can I get Can I get
the cool sounder Mark Thompson Show with the little gospel music.

(32:49):
I don't know if I have it. Tony should have
it the Mark Thompson Show.

Speaker 2 (32:56):
He had an internet connectivity issue, so I don't have
any I don't.

Speaker 1 (33:02):
I have that conspiracy. I know everybody's working against me.
There it is.

Speaker 2 (33:12):
Again.

Speaker 1 (33:13):
I'll take it I'll take it, but talking about how
America views women, and I think that's a good way
where I can segue to Marjorie Taylor Green. Marjorie Taylor Green,
I would like him to, and I don't want to
offend anyone, but damn it, I'm just gonna say it.
He reminds me of an Alzheimer's patient. He reminds me

(33:35):
of somewhat cognitive decline. And if you have ever dealt
with someone, they will have with those issues. They will
have moments of lucinity. They will have moments in which
they seem completely normal. They will have you believe, at
least for that momentary conversation, that all is right in
the world, and they seem like, oh my gosh, I
can't believe that you have Alzheimer's because you sound just

(33:58):
like you always have. That's what I look at when
I see Marjorie Taylor Green. She is sounding sensible in
this particular moment, but then if you keep talking to her,
you realize that she's still incredibly insane, crazy with a
capital K in a clinical sense. But here's what people
are not telling you. Have you noticed for all the

(34:21):
insults that Marjorie Taylor Green has all the criticism that
she's had for Donald Trump, the president and the man,
and also the Trump administration, there have been no insults
lobbed back her way. There have been no comments about
nasty women. There have been no comments or criticisms of

(34:43):
Marjorie Taylor Green by the President that I believe is
intentional and that should be highlighted. And in my work,
I've never had a chance to interview Marjorie Taylor Green,
but I have interviewed and Culture, and there's a relation here.
And Culture is very similar in the rhetoric, her views

(35:04):
on the legal immigration and all that. So you know
that she is super far right. You would think that
she's in exact alignment with all things Donald Trump. If
you research what and Culture has had to say about
Donald Trump. She has been vulgar, She has been insulting,

(35:25):
She has been downright nasty my word, to Donald Trump
just about every step of the way, insulting him as
a man, insulting him as a president, insulting him as
a person. All all of that just very inflammatory. But
she will not find any negative response from Donald Trump

(35:47):
regarding a culture or anything. She said, you don't have
to take my word for it. You can look forward,
you will not find any criticism of and culture. And
most of the times when an culture says something very
disrespectful about Donald Trump, he doesn't even acknowledge it. I
believe it's because that there are certain individuals who know

(36:08):
things about this man, and he knows that they know
about this about him. That keeps him from going off
because what is his what is his pattern? When someone
criticizes him, he tries to insult them as as deeply
as possible, talk about their low IQ, being stupid, being nassd.

(36:34):
He has nothing to say about that regarding and culture.
And also Marjorie Taylor Green for example, Tony, if you're back,
let's see that Marjorie Taylor that Donald Trump answered to
the question of Marjorie Taylor Green.

Speaker 2 (36:50):
So he isn't back, But I think I can pull
it off. Let me try to do it here. Here's
what he says.

Speaker 4 (36:58):
But I have to view the presidency as a worldwide situation.
Dot we could have a world that's on I don't
know what happened to Mantres, a nice woman, but I
don't know what happens. He's lost away, I think, But
I have to view the presidency as a worldwide situation
dot locally. I mean, we could have a world that's

(37:19):
on fire, where wars come to our shores very easily
if you had a bad president. We had a horrible president,
and we ended up with Russia Ukraine, and we ended
up with other disasters too. Don't forget I put out
eight wars. Nine to come and think I'll get the
other one taken care of. But I put out eight wars,
and look at the damage that Russia Ukraine has done

(37:41):
to us as a country.

Speaker 5 (37:42):
I mean, we spent three hundred and fifty billion.

Speaker 4 (37:44):
We're not spending any money anymore. Now they pay us
through NATO. You know, I got NATO to go from
two percent to five percent. Well that's very important. When
you're president, you really sort of have to watch over
the world because you're going to be dragged into it.
Otherwise you're going to be dragged into a world war.
I think if I weren't president, first of all, that
war would have never happened. If I was president and

(38:07):
weren't president, that war could have led to World War three.

Speaker 5 (38:11):
Won't.

Speaker 1 (38:11):
It's not going to anymore.

Speaker 4 (38:12):
But when I first got in, I said, Wow, this
situation could lead to World War three. And I got
NATO together, I got everybody together. But with all of that,
I passed a great, big, beautiful bill which is the
biggest tax cuts in the history of our country. So
when somebody like Marjorie Taylor Green who's now catering to
the other side, I don't know what you know. I
guess she's got some kind of an accurate but I'm

(38:33):
surprised at her. But when somebody like Marjorie goes over
and starts making statements like that, it shows she doesn't know.
I don't devote a lot of my time.

Speaker 1 (38:44):
You notice there were no insults there. There were no
sharp barbs about Marjorie Taylor Green and insulting her looks
or you knew nicknames or no nickname, none of that.
And that is intentional. I can't tell you exactly why,
but I know that there's certain people he's hands off with.

(39:06):
And part of the reason why Marjorie Taylor Green and
I use and culture as an example, feel free to
criticize him without worrying about a call for a primary
challenge or some sort of ugly response that he usually

(39:26):
only reserves for women. Specifically, there's a theme as far
as his disrespect of women, and it doesn't necessarily need
to be someone who's a Democrat. I mean, he's done
it to other Republican women, he's done it to the
wives of Republican men, but he doesn't do it to
Marjorie Taylor Green, and that to me is significant in

(39:48):
this moment where he allows no criticism from anyone much
less doesn't respond with the level of civility and kindness,
you know. The worst he says that she's lost her way. Yeah,
and then you point, you reminded me of this, Kim,
And then you know, she has her moment of lucidity,

(40:10):
and then she goes back into her crazy.

Speaker 2 (40:14):
It's almost like someone was whispering in her ear when
when she you know, they sometimes they'll say, if you
don't feel it yourself on an issue, you don't really
understand it. So it started with her realizing that she
was going to have to pay more for her adult
children to have health care. Right that had aged out
of their college. You know, you can stay on your

(40:34):
parents' health care for a certain amount of time. And
when she realized how much health care was going to
cost for her children, she realized, oh, America's got a problem.
I suddenly understand. And then it was like someone whispered
in her ear. Oh, if you now that you're on
board with this, let me let me share some more
facts with you. Now that you seem okay and you know,

(40:57):
you seem receptive to actually hearing the fact for Americans
and what we're dealing with, let's talk. And it's almost
like that happened because she's still crazy. She hasn't completely
turned the crazy corner. She's now on the backs of
the Trump pardons for all of his co defendants in
the coup. She's asking to please free Tina Peters. Do

(41:22):
you remember who Tina Peters is?

Speaker 1 (41:24):
Tina Peters is one of those people who's probably more
crazy than Marjorie Taylor Green. Tina Peters, that was that
former clerk of Mason County's She was a part of
the Stop the Steal movement and prosecutors the Last at

(41:44):
one point that she stole a county employee security bash
to help a man associated with Mike Lindell my Pillow
gain access to the county's voter systems. So she is
reaching back to Tina Peters and the steal Mike Lindell
my pillow to remind you, I'm still Marjorie Taylor Green.

(42:06):
I'm still the cooke that you always knew me to be.

Speaker 2 (42:10):
So here's a woman who's elected, who's serving as the
county clerk, who it is convicted of right allowing this
guy to use a security badge and get into county
offices and pose as a county employee to take copies
of the election system's hard drive before and after a

(42:31):
software upgrade. She's basically supposed to ensure that the people
of her county have a voice in the vote, and
she does the exact opposite. She cheats, she helps people
not have a voice. And Marjorie Taylor Green says, free
Tina Peters.

Speaker 1 (42:50):
And just to remind you, I'm still Marjorie Taylor Green.
You know, don't let the Trump criticism fool you. I'm
still that woman. Now let me if Tony's not back,
because I need my Mark Thompson's sound or harp or something.
I'm changing subjects.

Speaker 2 (43:08):
Okay, hold on, I haven't I haven't wait wait, it's coming.

Speaker 1 (43:12):
All right, the Mark Thompson Show Home. I waited all
week for that. Yeah, let's talk about the air traffic
controllers talking about Indeed, yes, we know the President has
threatened air traffic controllers due to the shutdown. Many are
not coming back to work, many have retired, many have

(43:37):
called in sick. And we know how that's impacted you,
how it's impacted me, how it's impacted air travel as
we know it. I know that I'm not in any
rush to travel anywhere. I know that I don't feel
comfortable traveling right now because of what has been going
on with the shutdown. And I know the Senate has

(44:00):
voted to in the shutdown, but we are still far
from back to normal, and our air travel is far
from back to normal. And I can't help but think
when I see that the President has threatened to dock
the pay of air traffic controllers who are calling in
sick for a shutdown, that I would have to say

(44:20):
he has a significant role in He's saying, you have
to get back to work now. No they don't. No
one has to go back to work and work for free. Now,
you can reopen the government and you can restore their
back pay, but you can't threaten people. I mean, this

(44:40):
is straight out of the Ronald Reagan playbook. Because I remember,
I'm old enough to remember. Cam can't speak for you.
I'm old enough to remember when the air traffic controllers
went on strike and then then President Ronald Reagan said, okay,
f y'all, I'm firing y'all. This is reminiscent on that.
So but Trump said on a post on truth Social

(45:01):
the air traffic controllers who quote didn't take any time
off during the shutdown were great patriots worthy of a
ten thousand dollars bonus. I don't know where that money's
supposed to come from. But those who had to call out,
he said, should pay a price for it. For those
quote now I'm quoting the president for those that did
nothing but complain and took time off, even though everyone

(45:22):
knew they would be paid in full shortly into the future.
I am not happy with you. You didn't step up
to help the USA close quote. You know, the molder
of consensus, that great American patriot, Donald Trump. And of
course he blames the Democrats, and you know, YadA YadA, yadah,
blah blah blah. It's the same random capitalization, exclamation points

(45:45):
and you know, rantings of a crazy man. Kim, I
think you're mute.

Speaker 2 (45:54):
My apologies. Yes, you're trying to show the truth social
post right here. So yeah, he's going to recommend the
ten thousand dollars bonus for each person who's an air
traffic controller who didn't call him sick during the shutdown,
and for everybody else. As you mentioned, mo, I am
not happy with you. You did not step up to
help the USA against what he says in caps is

(46:15):
the fake Democrat attack that was only meant to hurt
meant to hurt our country. You will have a negative mark,
at least in my mind against your record.

Speaker 1 (46:25):
Who is this guy? Look? I have two fathers, okay,
my father who are cremated, my father thou art in heaven.
I don't know who this man is thinking that he
can tell me or anyone else. I'm not happy with you,
or you know, I'm angry at you.

Speaker 2 (46:47):
You have a negative mark, as if that's going to
follow you through through your life to the pearly gates.

Speaker 1 (46:52):
He says, it's just like a gold star. Do I do?
I get a progress report at the end of the day,
and here if before I get too far a field,
he's promising these air traffic controllers ten thousand dollars. I
don't know how that's supposed to happen. I don't know
where the money's coming from. I happen to know a
little bit about Civics. Power of the purse rings got

(47:13):
to come through Congress. Same for any two thousand dollars
check that he's promising to all Americans. And it's so
weird to be. It's strange because for a number of
election cycles, presidential election cycles, we heard that the Democrats
always want free stuff, and this guy never stops promising

(47:34):
free money, never stops. If he's not promising free money,
he's trying to sell you things for you to spend
your money for his benefit. It's one or the other.

Speaker 2 (47:46):
You want to buy a Bible, No, I.

Speaker 1 (47:48):
Don't want to buy a Bible. I don't want to
buy some gold shoes. I don't want to buy a
meme coin. I don't want to buy anything that has
any do with him.

Speaker 2 (47:56):
Now, then says, if you want to leave service in
the near future, please do not hesitate to do so
with no payment or severance of any kind. You will
quickly be replaced by true patriots who will do a
better job. In the brand new state of the art,
equipment that we are ordering. So it's like he doesn't

(48:16):
understand that what he has here is a shortage of
air traffic controllers. And instead of pissing people off and
saying if you don't like it, there's the door. You know,
maybe try to keep these people and realize that you
just made them work without pay, get second jobs to
afford their families, instead of trying to screw around with people.

Speaker 1 (48:36):
Or how about this. If you're angry or disappointed that
people are not going to work or calling in sick
or retiring early, if you have an issue with that,
don't threaten their jobs. All you going to do is
push them further out quicker. If I was considering retirement
and in the meantime I've been calling in sick, well, hell,

(48:59):
I might as well just go and retire, or I
might as well just go and get another job anyhow,
because you, as the president, obviously don't have my back.
You as the president, helped create this situation. You played
a role in it, and now you're saying I'm the
bad guy because I need to provide for my family.
You're promising two thousand dollars to Americans because you obviously

(49:21):
acknowledge that people are suffering, people are hurting, people are
in a financial situation. So you're promising two thousand dollars,
so you're aware on some level. And then you're saying, well,
air traffic controllers, you need to get your ass back
to work. You can't call in sick. I thought you
just acknowledged that we're all hurting. In the meantime, the
first of November rolled around. What does that mean? That

(49:43):
means my car payment is due, that means my mortgage
is due, that means my rent is due. I can't
spend ten hours at a job which is not paying me,
as opposed to calling in sick, which I have a
right to do by law, and also get paid at
a later date, and then also not necessarily forsake my family.

(50:05):
And maybe I can drive for Uber for ten hours
at a time, which I know some people are doing.
Did you see that.

Speaker 2 (50:11):
Clip of Steven A. Smith, who was hosting a round
table or some type of panel discussion with Republicans on stage,
and it's got this air traffic controller stands up and
he says, listen, I have to pay tuition to send
my kid to school. I guess child goes to private
school or something I have to pay. I have to
you know, I have obligations to meet from my children.

(50:34):
And so I'm about he said, I'm exhausted, and I'm
about to go drive around in an uber so that
I can make money to send my child to school.
That's what these folks are dealing with. And here's Donald
Trump saying, if you didn't come to work, you're the
bad guy. I mean, it just the poor leadership, poor

(50:55):
poor leadership.

Speaker 1 (50:56):
But that goes back to what I was saying about
Kamala Harris. I could chose him and thought that he
was either gonna be different or a better option than
Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris, all she needed to do for
me was be sane, because I don't want someone who's
insane becoming president. And told I know you got that

(51:20):
Steven H. Smith video, So go ahead and play that.
It's just a point of reference and context so we
can see Steven Smith, a Smith acting ask you know
what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna take a break walk off. Hello.

Speaker 6 (51:34):
My name is Jack Chris, and I'm from Dallas, Texas,
and I'm an air traffic controller for the Federal invation of.

Speaker 1 (51:40):
Man Kish and been there sixteen years.

Speaker 6 (51:48):
I've also been through the Obama shutdown and also the
Trump shut down in the previous And my question is,
under the current political climate, do you think that this
shutdown could actually be longer than the previous shutdowns due
to the external pressures political pressures that we're having an
effect right now Because I am actually driving door Dash

(52:09):
when I get off work just to come up make
sure I can pay for my daughter's tuition.

Speaker 1 (52:14):
I don't think.

Speaker 7 (52:16):
Washington understands how ticked off we truly are. We're listening
to this kind of stuff while a young man walked
up to the microphone and said that he had to
leave here to go and work on door Dash to
help pay for his daughters to issue. Meanwhile, everybody up
here get paid, but he ain't.

Speaker 1 (52:39):
Is this kind of stuff right here? That's how you know.

Speaker 7 (52:45):
And I'm not accusing any of you directly or personally
a feelings this way. I'm just talking about the apparatus
that is Washington, the nation's capital. This is why you
have so many Americans excuse my language, so pissed off
at Washington, because somehow, some way you get to have
these conversations engage in specific elements of it to talk

(53:06):
about what we need to do to get things better.

Speaker 8 (53:09):
Our debt is thirty seven point eight trillion. Somehow, some way,
the taxpayer has been paying this, been throwing money because
we all look at our check and has been going
to the government. And somehow, some way, you're supposed to
be doing something constructive and productive enough to make.

Speaker 1 (53:27):
Sure that we don't have that kind of deficit. It
isn't happening.

Speaker 8 (53:31):
A government shutdown is going on right now. A man
has to work on door dash when he's really an
air traffic controller that.

Speaker 1 (53:41):
We applaud it. And we're up.

Speaker 7 (53:43):
Here talking about how much some money is gonna couse
and the only person that don't have a check coming
is him.

Speaker 1 (53:50):
You know what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna take a break. Okay,
Intellectually I can't agree with the point he was making,
thing about the misplaced blame and the ineffective nature of
our federal government. But Steven day Smith is so freaking
performative with the whole walking off stage and the yelling

(54:14):
and the screaming, the histrionics, that he his own point
folded in on itself because he kept making it about him.
The issue is accurate where you have air traffic controllers,
going back to the story, who deserve to be paid
and obviously serve in a role which not only crosses

(54:37):
our national security interests, but also our aviation in general
as far as just travel interests. It should be sacril
sainct as far as protecting just that industry, and we don't.
And then you have the president further defecate on those

(54:58):
air traffic controllers, astizing them, criticizing them, belittling them, telling
them right for making necessary decisions. I mean, do you
actually think the air traffic controllers care what the president
may think about them while they are trying to make
sure that there is the proverbial food on the table,

(55:21):
that they have the means to provide for their family.
Not at all. That's why I think that this country
is just an unseerious nation. We are not even dealing
with the elephant in the room. Sorry to use so
many cliches, but you know, you have the president who's
not in his right mind, who's not in good health,

(55:41):
who is trying to tell the air traffic controllers you,
I don't think highly of you, or I think poorly
of you because you're calling in sick because you will
not work for free for the benefit of the government,
and that's supposed to supersede their own needs. It's it's
not even funny. To me, is beyond ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (56:02):
It's the inability, yet again, to have any empathy, to
be able to put yourself in someone else's shoes. I
look at that guy and I think, all right, I'm
in his shoes. I got to send my kid to school.
If I call him sick, I can take a DoorDash
shift and I'm able to send my child to school
this month, or however the tuition and if I if

(56:24):
I don't take the DoorDash shift and I go to
my other job where I'm not getting a paycheck, then
she doesn't go to school.

Speaker 1 (56:31):
So what's the choice.

Speaker 2 (56:32):
The choice is make the money to send the kid
to school, Right, That's what I'm doing as a parent.

Speaker 1 (56:37):
Yeah, the president doesn't know your name, so it's not personal.
It's not.

Speaker 2 (56:42):
President would never have to have the you know, either
this or that moment. The president, you know, has never
had a moment in his life where he had to
worry about money, even when he was filing bankruptcy. He
had a mansion to live in, so there was never
a moment where Trump ever had to consider, if I
do this, my kid goes to school, and if I don't,

(57:03):
she doesn't. A complete lack of empathy, a complete lack
of being able to put yourself in someone else's shoes
and realize people are having to make some very hard decisions.

Speaker 1 (57:12):
It's more than a lack of empathy. I say, it's
a lack of dignity, decency, and decorum. And let's not forget.
And I should have started with this. This is veteran's day.
You talk about people who make these sacrifices for the country,
and if not for some private donors, our military servicemen
and women wouldn't be getting paid either. So this is

(57:36):
a lack of understanding the sacrifices that people make on
a daily basis. For someone who is so concerned about
the cost of groceries and the cost of real estate,
he misses the stuff which is right in front of him.
He would have gained more by saying nothing. If he
could have just said thank you, air traffic controllers, those

(57:59):
of you who are making these sacrifices, he would have
gained so much more by just saying that than as
opposed to belittling them for making decisions that he's never
had to make in his life. To your point, he
is a broken man. He is incapable of exhibiting any dignity, decency,

(58:22):
or decorum, or empathy. And we knew that when he
was running for president the first time. And again it
goes back to Kamala Harris. America still chose him despite
all of these deficiencies. They would rather have all of
these deficiencies than have that black woman as president. And
I personally believe that Kamala Harris never had any chance
of winning. I just because I am more critical of

(58:44):
America and I am I'm more realistic about the history
of America. And although I can point to Barack Obama
and say, hey, America can surprise us every now and then,
the response to Barack Obama being elected president twice twice
led us to Donald Trump. And since we're in the
era of Trump, there's no room for a Kamala Harris

(59:06):
right now. Maybe fifteen twenty years from now, it wouldn't
be her, would be someone else, but there's no room
for her now.

Speaker 2 (59:12):
There was no room for a Hillary Clinton.

Speaker 1 (59:14):
Women knew.

Speaker 2 (59:15):
Women knew the night Hillary Clinton didn't get elected, it
was a giant collective slap in the female face. We
all knew it, and we all felt it that night,
and we felt it again. I allowed myself to hope.
I remember Mark saying, you know, I vote for a
ham sandwich over Trump. We saw what he did before,
and so I thought, well, you know, maybe America is

(59:37):
ready for a woman. Maybe since we had Obama, America
is even ready for a black woman. I mean, I
know I am, so let's do it. And still another
collective slap in the female face of America. So we're
not ready. We're not ready, and so the Democrats have
to come up with some kind of candidate that ticks
all the boxes just to you know, be able to

(01:00:00):
out do this whole Maga movement. We've got to pick
somebody who's what white male Christian comes from a red state,
like an Andy Basher. Maybe correct, I'll.

Speaker 1 (01:00:12):
Stop you when you're wrong, but you know what, that's
what we think I would love to bring in now.
Our next guest, David K. Johnson, Pulitzer Prize winning author
and investigative journalist, founder of DC Report, professor of Rochester
Institute of Technology and frequent guests here on the Mark
Thompson Show. David K. Johnston is a pleasure. This is

(01:00:33):
the first time I've had a chance to talk to you.
I've seen you any number of times in your other
media appearances, but I'm actually tickled to be able to
talk to you. Now. How are you, sir? Do you
not hear me?

Speaker 5 (01:00:49):
I can hear you?

Speaker 1 (01:00:50):
Okay?

Speaker 5 (01:00:53):
Well, thank you. Greetings. By the way, I thought you
were quite spot on about the chances that Kamala Harris
would have in the next election. We should recognize that
she lost by one and a half percentage points, which
is a very narrow margin. But yeah, that would not
be the person to run. And my guess is, at

(01:01:15):
this stage of the game, most likely candidate for the
Democrats in twenty twenty eight is named Gavin Newsom.

Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
If you were to prognosticate, and there's no way to know,
he can't, uh, David, can you not hear me? Okay? Okay? Tony,
do you know what might be going on here? Hey, David,
can you hear me?

Speaker 5 (01:01:40):
I can hear you. I can't hear okay.

Speaker 1 (01:01:42):
The second time this has happened, What Okay, here, let
me try something here remote try tried now talking Test
one two three, you can repay in Moe. Try talking. Yeah,
I'm talking. We just can't hear each other for some reason.
All right, Kim, I'm gonna call you in for a second. Kim,

(01:02:03):
I want you to continue the conversation. I'm going to
reboot my system.

Speaker 5 (01:02:08):
I can hear you, Kim.

Speaker 2 (01:02:09):
Just fine, all right, then I'll be your translator. Go on.
All right.

Speaker 5 (01:02:14):
So, anyway, I think if as of this stage that
Davin Newsom, you know who's now calling Donald the nodder
in chief or something like that, is the most likely candidate.
He's got a solid economic track record for his state,
and he's shown an ability to stand up smartly to Donald.

(01:02:36):
The other logical candidate is a guy JB. Pritzker. I
don't know how much his weight would turn off some people.
He's not nearly as big as William Howard Taft, who
was president one hundred and fifteen years ago. Under twenty
years ago, and Andy Basheer is just not a well

(01:02:57):
known person around the country. But you know, we've elected
presidents from small states. Bill Clinton as an example.

Speaker 2 (01:03:05):
Yeah, I mean, who knows. I just you know, there's
you say, Gavin Newsom, but I kind of look at
Kamala Harris being from California and that having you know,
been something they could people could hold against her as well.
So maybe Gavin Newsom isn't going to be the one.
He'll be seen as a you know, too liberal from

(01:03:25):
from California, two out of touch, from a from a
wealthy blue state. I don't know if that's a ding
against him or not.

Speaker 5 (01:03:34):
Maybe, but if you look at what happened last week
in the voting, and not just the big races Virginia,
New Jersey, and New York City, clearly there's a great
deal of anger among people, including Republicans who supporters who said, hey,
I signed up for various things with Donald Trump, but

(01:03:55):
not for this, Not for toddlers and diapers being put
in zip tizes, not for grabbing children on their way
to school, not for saying we're going to go to
war in Venezuela, and certainly not for all of this
profiteering and you know, Trump wanting to put his visage
on both sides of a coin, so there is no
heads and tails, there's just heads, and that's going to

(01:04:19):
be the important issue is effectively. I believe standing up
to Donald Trump, combined with the Democrats, have to come
up with a message along the lines of this is
what we'll do for you economically, and you know they
were the things they've got handed to them. I mean,
Donald Trump has now literally gone to court to not

(01:04:42):
provide food to people. He's got after Governor Tony Evers
of Wisconsin for using state money to make sure people
got their full snap benefits and say no, you have
to take that back. The Democrats have a long history
of snatching defeat from the jaws victory. But if they
can't overcome this, then they ought to pack it in

(01:05:04):
and go away. It should be relativelyazy. And all of
us assumes Donald is alive in November of twenty eight.
I hope he lives a very long life to see
what's going to happen after he's out of the White House,
assuming we are able to overcome his dictatorship. And I
don't think JD. Vance is electable. I think that he
has a snowball's chance in hell of being elected.

Speaker 1 (01:05:27):
Let's see if you can hear mo now, David, can
you hear me now? By chance?

Speaker 2 (01:05:30):
Yeah?

Speaker 5 (01:05:31):
I hear you now?

Speaker 1 (01:05:31):
Clear, all right, all right, maybe that's just me my system.
I don't know if you covered this yet, but earlier,
as in like yesterday, we saw these presidential pardons more
symbolic than substantive, handed out by Donald Trump, basically sending,
I think, a message to his supporters that everything done

(01:05:52):
in service and support of me, even though illegal. I
have your back. What was your read on that?

Speaker 5 (01:05:59):
Oh, that's exactly the right place. There are two standards
of justice here, one for people who Donald likes or
who give money to Donald, and one for everybody else,
I mean Donald Donald Trump remembers spent a decade of
his life involved up to his eyeballs with one of
the biggest cocaine traffickers and marijuana traffickers in America. He

(01:06:20):
did extraordinary favors for him that make absolutely no sense whatsoever,
unless they were in business together, and in that case,
everything makes perfect sense. And that's all explained in my
book The Making of Donald Trump, that came out in
twenty sixteen, and I wrote about it for years before that.
But Trump has always affiliated himself with criminals. He has

(01:06:41):
always gone out of his way gratuitously to do business
with criminals. And look who he's pardoned. He says, we
have to kill all these men in boats who we
think are drug traffickers. Some of them are clearly fishermen
that have nothing to do with drug business. And yet
who is he pardoned. He pardons the Silk Road guy,

(01:07:02):
the biggest facilitator of money laundering for drug traffickers in
the world. He's pardoned numerous people who were drug traffickers.
He just find pardoned the Binance guy after he put
a fortune in the hands of the Trump family. He's
clearly selling pardons. The problem with this is there's no

(01:07:23):
enforcement mechanism in the Constitution except for impeachment. So long
as the Republicans control that House, there can't be an impeachment.
And at some point we're almost certain to get the
Epstein files unless Pam Bondi has been stupid enough to
destroy them. When that happens, two things should happen. One

(01:07:48):
is Donald Trump will say, oh, it's fake, it's ais.
He can't believe these pictures of men. Don't pay any
attention to them. The second thing that should happen is
a fair number of Republicans who know perfectly well that
Trump is bad for the country, but are afraid of
losing their office, especially Senate Republicans, need to be pressured
to remove him from office.

Speaker 1 (01:08:12):
Do you actually believe that Donald Trump would not When
I say Donald Trump, the Trump administration would not go
as so far as deleting some of the Epstein files
or the more embarrassing or incriminating files. And I say
that as in running parallel to the idea of a

(01:08:33):
commutation or a pardon for Gilaine Maxwell.

Speaker 5 (01:08:36):
Well, he's never going to pardon Glaine Maxwell, let's be clear,
because she would then lose her Fifth Amendment rights against
self incrimination and could be called by state prosecutors, civil litigants,
or Congress and if she refused to answer a question,
she could be jailed and prosecuted for that. He's going
to grant her clemency because she retains her Fifth Amendment privileges.

(01:08:59):
So on the broader question of destroying documents, I wouldn't
put anything past these people. I've been reading up on
the rules of federal criminal procedure to make sure I
have them correctly, because I teach law, but I'm not
a lawyer. And two things I'm struck by. One I've
mentioned on this show before the estate of Jeffrey Epstein

(01:09:22):
is entitled to the return of everything that was taken
that isn't contraband, and to copies of those things that
may be now that there is no crime to be prosecuted,
because the statute of limitations have run, I see no
reason for the government to not return the files. And

(01:09:43):
if the Epstein estate were to go to court, I
think the courts would uphold their entitled to them. With
one exception, when there's no possibility for prosecution, the government,
for the efficiency and economy of the judicial system, can
destroy records, and so I hope when Pam Bondi or
cash Hotel next appears before congressional committee, the first question

(01:10:05):
from a Democrat is will you guarantee that you will
not destroy any of the Epstein files? That should be
the first question, and if they start dodging it, then
people should be very concerned about this behavior.

Speaker 1 (01:10:19):
But you have to know, given what they've demonstrated right
now that they're not concerned with consequences they have gone
before Congress.

Speaker 5 (01:10:29):
No, I think it's a real danger here that they
may do this, But at a minimum, you know, you
do what you can do. So if you're journalists, you know,
we do our best to make a record. That's what
we do. And if you remember a Congress you want
to make a record, you know, we've asked, We've put
them on notice. There may be in the civil litigation

(01:10:49):
by the Florida lawyer who represents many of the young women.
And remember the estimate is there are roughly one thousand
young women who were trafficked.

Speaker 1 (01:10:57):
Yes, that.

Speaker 5 (01:10:59):
A preservation order. If you're in litigation, it's a standard
practice that you get an order that says, you know,
you must retain and preserve all emails, financial records, ledger sheets, checks,
you know, invoices, stuff like that, and that already many
may have been obtained. But even if it is, these

(01:11:21):
people are so lawless, they're so arrogant. I mean, could
turn down a third of the White House.

Speaker 1 (01:11:27):
Yeah. I tend to be pessimistic and cynical, but I
try to be more I'll say Christian life. When I
discussed the health of this president, and you made mention
of his health struggles in the moment that I was away,
but I did want to ask you. I have of
the opinion that I am not sure that this president,

(01:11:49):
given what we see regarding as health is not even
a lock to make to the year twenty twenty seven.

Speaker 5 (01:11:57):
Yeah, no, I mean I've known Donald now for thirty
seven more than thirty seven years. He's not in good health.
If you notice when he falls asleep, it's usually about
an hour and a half after meal time, which is suggestive.
I'm not a doctor, but it's suggestive that he's diabetic,
which would make perfect sense. He doesn't exercise, he sits
all the time, and he's grossly overweight. And if you

(01:12:19):
believe he only weighs two hundred and thirty five pounds,
you know, I have a bridge I want to sell
you in Brooklyn. He is clearly showing signs of significant
cognitive decline, the zigzag when he walked in Alaska, when
he met Putin, and then the way he wandered off
like a doddering dementia patient in Japan until the new

(01:12:41):
Prime Minister went over and took him by the arm
and brought him back. And we've seen plenty of footage
of him in the Oval office where he's clearly not
connected with what's going on around That, combined with the
swelling in the ankles and whatnot, and the fact that
Donald has never exercised. He's written a golf cart when

(01:13:02):
he was a young man, I mean he was a
high school athlete, but not since then, suggest strongly that
his health may end his life before his term ends.
I want Donald stay alive because if we get out
of this, I want him to have to live through
what's going to follow, what should have followed after his

(01:13:24):
first term if Merrick Garland, instead of being a boy scout,
had aggressively said day one as Attorney General, you go
investigate this and yet going instead of dilly dallying and
waiting because like Robert Muller, he's a boy scout. This
is not a time for boy scouts. This is a
time for serious, aggressive prosecutions of people. And clearly this

(01:13:48):
is bothering some people. We just saw General resign. He
hasn't spoken publicly, but people around him have all indicated
to well known highly competent military failed as reporters that
he left because of the illegal orders to murder people
in the Caribbean in the Eastern Pacific. We know that

(01:14:08):
some of these people were merely fishermen. And you know,
Im Kelly, I watched an interview or heard it on
the radio, someone defending the killing of these people, saying, well,
if they were fishermen, why are they out there in
the middle of the night. Oh, I don't know. Because
fish in the Caribbean in the daytime swim down to

(01:14:29):
where the sun doesn't shine so they don't get eaten
by predators, and at night they come up to the
surface to feed on jellyfish, plankton and other things. That's
why you go on fishing in the middle of the night.
The ability of people who are Trump believers to pretzel
the facts and to come up with some justification is extraordinary.

(01:14:50):
And look at all of the ships and marines that
we have marshaled off the coast of Venezuela. This from
the president who wants to know Bill Peace Prize.

Speaker 1 (01:15:01):
Yes, I want to connect this because if for the
reasons that you've highlighted and elucidated that the president should
die in office, what are the political implications? Does that
automatically mean the end of MEGA and its hold on
Republican members of Congress? Where does it go from there?
If we go down that path.

Speaker 5 (01:15:23):
You know, there are people in America who believe and
will tell you Hitler got it right. We saw them
in Charlottesville six years ago, and I'm sorry nine years ago.
Almost there will be Trumpism will be around one hundred
years after you and I are in our graves. He
has unleashed something that's always been here. I mean, nobody

(01:15:46):
ever went broke underestimating the depth of racism in this country,
and those of us who thought, as I certainly did,
that we had made enormous progress post World War Two
in civil rights, gender rights, et cetera. Donald just showed
it's a veneer and he just peeled off the top
and here's all the rotten wood underneath it. I mean,

(01:16:08):
we literally have a Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh who
said authorities can stop you based on the color of
your skin. That's how deep and self willfully, wilfully blind
Brett Kavanaugh is to allow this. So when if Trump

(01:16:30):
were to die before his term runs out, Jad Dancer
automatically becomes president, I'm certain he's not electable because, among
other things, to the Maga crowd, his wife is unacceptable.
She's East Indian and to them not white. And he
has no charisma or charm or anything else. You know,

(01:16:52):
he's a spineless mouse. So all the Democrats have to
do were Trump to die, which I hope he doesn't,
is to run someone who is electable, and that's almost
certainly going to be a white male. Like it or not.
I mean, remember, politics is the art of the possible.

(01:17:12):
So in the past few days there's been a lot
of criticism of Barack Obama, why didn't you get us
universal health care? Because he couldn't. He couldn't get that
through Congress, so he got the best thing he could
through Congress. And in the upcoming elections where Texas has
tried to destroy the districts of black, black Democrats, notably

(01:17:33):
Congresswoman Crockett, Well, you may have to run a white person,
male or female, or a Latino to get that seat,
but be focused on the immediate crisis right now, because
we can't fix anything if we don't save our democracy.
You've got to be very practical about all of this,

(01:17:53):
and practicality makes you make, you know choices you don't
want to make. I think like a military leader in
World War Two who had to sacrifice a bunch of
soldiers knowing they would die in order to achieve a
different goal so we'd win the war. It's the same fundamental,
terrible choice you have to make to get somewhere else.

(01:18:15):
Serious strategic thinking and doing the work. That's what matters.
Doing the work, get people registered and get them to
the polls.

Speaker 1 (01:18:25):
In the case of saving democracy, we know that this.
In the past forty eight hours or so, there have
been eight Democrats who defected to reopen the government, and
they've given wide and various sundry reasons as far as
why they defected. From where I sait, the Democrats did
not get anything. As we talk about health care and

(01:18:45):
the unaffordability of it. Are the Democrats as a party
doing what they need to do could be doing in
this moment to save democracy and push back against the
Trump administration.

Speaker 5 (01:18:56):
Yeah, I'm going to totally disagree with you about this, Okay, okay, okay.
Yours is the most widely held view of this. I
had no question about that. But let me suggest, first
of all, it was only five Democrats because three of
them had already said we want to go with the
Republicans and pass the continuing resolution even though it didn't
meet the standard of continue resolution because it induced new

(01:19:19):
cuts to the Affordable Care Act as a result of this, though,
is this settlement the Republicans have agreed to put more
money into Snap. That is a big thing. To get
one more dollar for Snap. When Donald Trump has gone
to court to kill Snap benefits to people, that's a

(01:19:39):
big victory and it shows a schism within the Republicans. Secondly,
John Thune from South Dakota, the Republican majority leader, agreed
he would hold a vote on continuing the Obamacare or
Affordable Care Act tax credits. Now he's now in a box.
If they have the vote, it allows the Democrats to say, hey,

(01:20:01):
you've voted to take healthcare away from seventeen million people,
many of them working poor people who have jobs. And
if he backs out of the deal and doesn't hold
a vote, and I'm sure Trump will pressure him to
do that, Oh, you guys are such cowards. You can't
even trust your word. You didn't keep your word.

Speaker 1 (01:20:19):
They would have to jump in there. They don't care
about their word not mattering.

Speaker 5 (01:20:24):
No, it's the voters though. That gives the Democrats something
to take to the voters, and they need to be
able to take to the voters. This man is not
helping you, he is hurting you. And if you will
elect us, we'll actually help you. And so I now
it may turn out that the Democrats are unable to
turn this into something to benefit themselves because they're just

(01:20:47):
terrible at messaging. You know, the people in the Lincoln Project,
the Republican consultants, who I know a little bit personally.
They you know, they're trying to tell the Democrats here's
how to do this, and Democrats won't listen to them.
But they should because they're very good at how to
market and how they're very good tricking and deceiving people.
In this case, they're being straightforward with folks. But I

(01:21:11):
think there's a very good chance here that what's happened
with the vote, with the opening up the government, will
benefit the Democrats. There's one other issue in this. When
did the ball start to change? When did we start
to see movement in the Senate to get over the
sixty vote filibuster and get some Democrats and independence to
come across. When people with means were affected with the

(01:21:35):
reducing of flights by just four percentage points, that's not
a big huge cut. Donald Trump could have kept the
planes flying. All he had to do is say we
are going to take military air controllers and send them
to civilian airports, and they're going to fill in, so
we have a full complement of air traffic controllers and

(01:21:55):
every flight's going to go. He didn't do that, just
as he said, I want you to not provide food care,
food or healthcare to poor people. And so the people
who move, the five senators who moved, they include a
senator from Nevada, at least one of them. And Nevada

(01:22:17):
is a city that's almost entirely dependent on air traffic
for its business. So is Orlando, Florida, with all those
amusement parks. You cut flights to those places, or many
people afraid they won't have a flight, business just goes
to hell and handbasket. Americans buy and large don't care
that much about the poor or the working poor, but
they sure care about themselves. And Corporate America cares. We

(01:22:40):
need to get our salesperson to this place, and what
do you mean we can't get a flight for that person.
So that's when things begin to move. And to some degree,
you got to say, well, with people around Trump, vicious
and evil as they are, they understand the levers of
power in this country, and they understood aviation like food,
was a lever they could weaponize.

Speaker 1 (01:23:00):
Let's say everything you're saying is true, and I don't
necessarily have all the data to dispute, but let's say
everything you are saying right now is true and accurate.
I on the outside can say, well, what's the point
of the shutdown at all? If you knew that it
was a certain point that you were going to cave
where you couldn't go any further because you and your
constituents in Nevada and other places New Hampshire would not

(01:23:21):
allow this to go on for a long time.

Speaker 5 (01:23:23):
That is a really great question, and I would say
the answer to that is if the Democrats hadn't said
we will not go along with taking away healthcare from
seventeen million people, we'd be a lot more critical of
them than we are. You have to draw a line somewhere,
and the Democrats have been trying since nineteen forty eight
to get universal health care, which would, by the way,

(01:23:46):
save over a trillion dollars a year for this country.
It would have enormous beneficial consequences. Racism and punishing the
poor are very expensive things to do. But do those
people you know who don't want to live in the
Donald Trump's magical Make America White Again? Society, they'll bear

(01:24:09):
that price, or they don't know what it is, they
don't care. So the Democrats, I think, did the right
thing by saying we're not going to go along, even
though at the end of the day, right at the beginning,
anybody who understood this knew that Donald Trump would never
sign a bill continuing the extra tax credits for the

(01:24:30):
poor and the working poor in this country. And you've
got to sort of admire the evil duplicity here of
the Heritage Foundation people. The affordable character was their idea.
It's just like car insurance. Everybody has to have car
insurance because otherwise you get what are called free riders,
people who don't buy insurance and their accidents and the

(01:24:50):
rest of us have to pick up the cost. So
is their idea. They now disown it. Oh no, that
isn't what we did at all. Nonsense. This is their idea,
universal insurance. They couldn't kill it with a vote. They
wouldn't be able to kill it if it came to
a vote because it would be very damaging to some
of the senators or congress people. So they found a
back doorway to do it. Oh, we'll take away the

(01:25:11):
extra subsidies for seventeen million people. That will shrink the
number of people. That means that the unit cost of
healthcare every time you go to the doctor, or a
prescription is written, or the cost per bed in the
hospital will go up dramatically. My health insurance, as a
professor at Rochester in study technology, will be up seventeen

(01:25:32):
percent next year. We've seen people on TV and on
the radio who say, well, I've got my notice and
my bill is going to go from two hundred a
months to fourteen hundred a month. That's seven hundred percent,
not seventeen seven hundred, and it means we can't have healthcare.
And so they found a back door way to kill
the Affordable Care Act. And if they succeed, here's what

(01:25:54):
the future is going to be. Only people who work
for fairly large profitable corporations or who are wealthy are
going to be able to afford quality healthcare. It's as
simple as that.

Speaker 1 (01:26:08):
We've discussed that here in David K. Johnson. I'm sorry
that my time is running short with you, but if
I were to make an assumption, I think that you
have more belief and faith in our federal government than
I do. I don't believe that the Republicans care about
health care and how it disenfranchises people. I don't think

(01:26:29):
they care about the increasing costs.

Speaker 5 (01:26:32):
Most of them don't. I mean, there are some who do,
but most of them are not. And all of them
would rather cower to Donald than stand up and do
the right thing. But you know, I'm an incurable optimist.
Nobody in this day and age, as I did, has
eight children. Less you're incurable optimists. As My two youngest
daughters heard me on the radio one day and they

(01:26:52):
started tittering to each other, and I said, you know,
when I got off the radio, I said, what's that?
They said, did you just get asked dad if you
get shot by a fire squad? And I said, yeah,
I'm the second round, and they erupted and laughter. One
of them said, you're even more optimistic than we thought.

Speaker 1 (01:27:07):
Look, I hope that you are correct as far as
what the Democrats. No, no, no, no, no, that the Democrats
are pursuing the correct course of action here. I don't
know if I have the evidence to support that as
of now. We'll see how it plays out. We'll see
in the coming weeks and months.

Speaker 5 (01:27:25):
Yeah, we'll see. I mean, it's the Democrats are absolutely
capable of turning this into mud. Maybe they can shine
up a golden nugget out of this and we'll see.
And it's been great to be with you. Take care,
Professor David K. Johnson, A pleasure to speak to you
first time. Hopefully it's not the last time. Thank you, sir.

Speaker 1 (01:27:42):
I hope bye, and there he goes. I thoroughly enjoyed
speaking to him. I've seen a many number of times
as you have on MSNBC and other outlets, and that
was not for sure I disagreed with. I'll say the
optimistic outlook and read of what the Democrats did in

(01:28:04):
ending the shutdown. Look, I'm the first person that will
tell you I may get some things wrong, but I'm
going to least show you my math as far as
how I came to the conclusion, Kim, where do you
come out on that?

Speaker 9 (01:28:15):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (01:28:16):
Where do I come out on? What is it?

Speaker 1 (01:28:17):
Then? I will say the rosier picture that David K.
Johnston presented as far as what the Democrats did and why.

Speaker 2 (01:28:24):
Well, you caught me while I was writing news and
so I'm looking at all these stories and my picture
is not rosy. I'm looking at you know, trauma after
trauma after trauma, and the possibility of untangling after you
hear David K. Johnston talking about a post Trump America
and how he, you know, wants to make sure that

(01:28:45):
Trump is alive to see what happens afterward, and that
hopefully that what should have happened last time will happen
this time and people will be held accountable.

Speaker 1 (01:28:53):
I don't think. I don't think it's going to happen.

Speaker 2 (01:28:55):
I don't ever see him being held accountable. I you know,
last time, we try to help the nation, try to
hold him accountable. I heard people in my own family say,
you know, it's just time to turn the page. Why
go backward, just go forward. It's what you have, someone

(01:29:15):
who's trying to invade the capital to keep America's voice
from being heard, and we're just gonna lay down and
accept it. Where's the patriotism? No, I'm not optimistic. I
want to be optimistic, and my lot in life is
to be an optimistic person, always looking for the silver lining.
And the best silver lining I can muster is perhaps

(01:29:38):
a hope that we even have a post Trump America.

Speaker 1 (01:29:41):
There's something And you said, I think highlights the disconnected.
I would make a distinction between hope and optimism. Hope
there's usually a lack of evidence to support I hope X,
Y or Z happens, you know, or you're hoping against hope. Optimism,
to me signifies that there might be enough evidence to
suggest that it could happen. As we talk about, you know,

(01:30:04):
politics is about possibilities. It's possible certain things could happen.
But if we use the past as an indicator, and
if the past is prologue, then no, Donald Trump is
not going to be held accountable at any point in
his life. He will probably I'm not saying I'm hopeful
of this, but he will probably die in office and
will we will be left holding the bag of all

(01:30:25):
the things that he's done. I am not optimistic that
with his death, if it should lead to that that
MAGA is going to disassemble in some way, they may
not coalesce behind a single person like they have with
Donald Trump. But I do agree with him that MAGA
is here to stay and never left. And because of
Donald Trump, MAGA knows that it's comfortable to be full

(01:30:49):
fledged MAGA with all the racism, sexism, islamophobia, and homophobia
that come along with it. I don't know if America
is going to be able to undo anything that this
president has done, either legislatively or socio politically.

Speaker 2 (01:31:06):
I mean, if you just take one thing, look at
all the people that have been appointed to the courts.
I mean, this is we're going to be in a
world of hurt for years and years and years, especially
for people like me who, you know, I don't know,
deserve rights to decide what we do with our own bodies.
I just look at it, and I think we're never

(01:31:28):
getting out of it.

Speaker 1 (01:31:30):
And I believe when I say credit blame, however we
want to parse it, that portion goes to Mitch McConnell,
and also credit the Republicans for having this thirty year
plan as far as remaking the Supreme Court, the concentration
on federal appointees, and the way that the Democrats weren't.
I still have a bone to pick with President Obama

(01:31:52):
by not fighting harder for that Supreme Court pick that
was stolen by Mitch McConnell, which was originally supposed to
be Merrik Arlan, whether it was him ultimately as a
Scotist justice or anyone else. I just believe this was
a fundamental mistake. And then we saw what happened with
Ruth Bader Ginsburg and how Mitch McConnell did a one
to eighty and all of a sudden, oh, we can

(01:32:12):
confirm a justice right at the end of someone's turn.
But those are things I think the Democrats did to themselves,
not having the long enough vision to see where all
this was headed. I don't think anyone could have foreseen
that the beneficiary, if you will, of all that would
be Donald Trump, the absolute worst person at the controls,

(01:32:35):
with that much control, that much power, and that much
lack of self control to not cater to his worst impulses.
You know, a sane president with this much power isn't
as as destructive to America as this president has been.

(01:32:58):
So it's a confluence of all those things, think, which
explains why we're in the mess that we're in. And
there are a number of people that we can point
fingers at, but I'll save that for later in the week.
Right now, I think if you are ready, we need
to have an update on the news.

Speaker 2 (01:33:13):
Let's do it. I've prepared for you.

Speaker 1 (01:33:18):
Tony was our sounder. Here we come.

Speaker 2 (01:33:28):
On the Mark Thompson Show with Moe Kelly. I'm Kim
McAllister and this report is sponsored by Coachella Valleycoffee dot Com.
President Trump is saying thank you to the US veterans.
Speaking at the Veterans Day Observant ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery.
The President said the country will never forget what they
have done to make this country safe, sovereign and free.

(01:33:50):
Vice President JD. Vance, who is a Marine corvette served
in Iraq, also spoke at the ceremony. The President earlier
later wreath at the tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Travel
disruptions are on the rise across the United States as
shutdown related issues persist. Flights have been cut by the
FAA since Friday due to shutdown related staffing issues. Reductions

(01:34:13):
increase to six percent today, they will increase to ten
percent by Friday. Meanwhile, the House could vote as soon
as tomorrow afternoon on a spending measure that would end
the government shutdown. Senate voted last night and the record
breaking shutdown and reopened federal agencies by passing their bipartisan
bill after eight Democrats joined Republicans to break the stalemate.

(01:34:36):
The bill includes what They're calling mo a mini bus
of three full year appropriations measures, providing full funding for
snap benefits through next September and keeping most of the
government running on a short term basis through January thirtieth.
President Trump says the White House's East wing quote looked

(01:34:57):
like hell before it was demolished. President made the comment
during a recent interview with Fox News. Trump emphasized the
three hundred million dollar ballroom project will be funded by
private donors, implying there will be zero money spent by
the government. Oh, there's always a cost.

Speaker 4 (01:35:14):
MO.

Speaker 2 (01:35:14):
Isn't there three hundred million from where? And what do
we owe Thempreme The Supreme Court is being asked by
President Trump to overturn his verdict in his sex abuse
and defamation civil case. Trump was ordered to pay writer E.
Gene Carroll five million dollars after a jury found him

(01:35:34):
liable for sexual abuse in twenty twenty three. The case
involved allegations of Trump's sexually assaulting Carol in a dressing
room in the nineties. He later called her allegations a
hoax and a con job. Now he's taking that case
to the Supreme Court. A senior federal judge in Massachusetts
is resigning his post in protest of President Trump. US

(01:35:56):
District Judge Mark L. Wolfe, who was appointed by former
President Reagan, wrote in the Atlantic that he is stepping
down because he no longer can bear to be restrained
by what judges can say publicly or do outside the courtroom.
The article also reflected on Wolfe's time as a judge
and sounded the alarm on what he said was today's
existential threat to democracy and the rule of law. While

(01:36:20):
wolf is issuing his resignation, president Trump cannot replace him
with an appointee of his choosing, as former President Obama
already filled Wolf's seat with Judge Indira Talwane. In twenty thirteen,
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green doing a little pushback on President
Trump's notion that she has lost her way. President's criticism

(01:36:42):
comes as Green's public disapproval of the GOP on multiple issues,
including the Affordable Care Act, subsidy extensions, and the Epstein files,
has grown more frequent. Green defending herself, asserting she has
not lost her way. She added she is one hundred
percent America first and only. She also pushed her America

(01:37:02):
First agenda with a Post on x calling for non
stop meetings at the White House on domestic policy, not
foreign policy, and foreign country leaders. Trump administration is moving
to open California's coast to offshore oil drilling for the
first time in decades. A draft five year plan reviewed
by The Washington Post outlines six proposed lease sales between

(01:37:28):
twenty twenty seven and twenty thirty off the California coast,
along with new drilling areas in the now Gulf of
America and Alaska. The plan would reverse long standing restrictions
and expand oil development into regions that have been off
limits since the nineteen eighties. Here in California, leaders are
already vowing to fight this move, citing environmental risks and

(01:37:50):
the state's commitment to clean energy. Still, this proposal faces
review and public comment. Disconcerting for Californias very much so.
We have not heard the end of the name Pelosi
in politics. Christine Pelosi is running for state Senate, The
daughter of longtime congresswoman and former Speaker of the House,

(01:38:11):
Nancy Pelosi, made the announcement today yesterday rather, the fifty
nine year old will be running for the San Francisco
area state Senate seat currently held by Democrat Scott Wiener,
who is running to replace Nancy Pelosi. Wiener's term not
up till twenty twenty eight, but he's running for Nancy
Pelosi's congressional seat, which she will vacate in early twenty

(01:38:32):
twenty seven. And lastly, here we go again, mo, Come
on now, a Republican state lawmaker is proposing a new
plan to split California in two oh come on, I
know how many of these have there been? Right status.
James Gallagher of East Nicholas first introduced this resolution in August.

(01:38:55):
He brought it up to the Shasta County Board of
Supervisors this month, two days after the Democratic backed Prop
fifty past. Gallagher's proposal calls for creating a new state
comprised of the thirty five inland counties, including most of
northern California and the Sierra Nevada, the Central Valley, and
the Inland Empire. Shasta County would be part of the

(01:39:17):
new state. Many of the counties included in the proposed
new state voted no on Prop fifty. If the plan
is approved, it would be the first time a state
gets split into since the Civil War.

Speaker 1 (01:39:29):
Not happening, No, not happening.

Speaker 2 (01:39:31):
I mean, we've seen this over and over again. It's
like they have the same old, tired idea. What was
the last time they proposed the state of Jefferson.

Speaker 1 (01:39:41):
Yeah, I remember speaking to billionaire Tim Draper. He had
a plan to split up California in the six different parts.
It's not ever going to happen. Yes, the state is
unwieldy in many respects, but the state is not going
to secede. They're not going to divvy it up. They're
not going to form North California in South California or

(01:40:02):
West California, East California. It's just not going to happen.

Speaker 2 (01:40:07):
There.

Speaker 1 (01:40:07):
It is.

Speaker 2 (01:40:08):
Tony's got the map up. That's what it would look like.
Where would you be? Would you be in the blue
or the yellow?

Speaker 1 (01:40:13):
I would be in the blue?

Speaker 2 (01:40:15):
Thank got too.

Speaker 1 (01:40:17):
Yeah, it's political theater. It's not going anywhere, No, it isn't.

Speaker 2 (01:40:22):
This report sponsored by Coachella Valleycoffee dot Com. It is
the best coffee, the best tea, hands down, the best tea.
Absolutely love it. Coachella Valleycoffee dot Com is the website.
There are copious notes and tasting descriptions under each coffee
and tea offered on the website so you know exactly

(01:40:43):
what you're getting. It is all organic. The folks at
Coachella Valley Coffee Cliff and his team do give back
to women owned farms. This is a great business all
the way around, and the product is absolutely amazing. If
you do find something that you want after kicking around
at Coachella Valley Coffee dot com, please use our exclusive
checkout code to save yourself ten percent off mark T

(01:41:06):
No spaces at checkout. Mark T is the secret code,
and that is Coachella Valleycoffee dot Com. I'm Kim McAllister
and this is the Mark Thompson Show.

Speaker 1 (01:41:17):
The Mark Thompson Show. You know, I have this hankering
that talks a little bit about tech. Oh, it is
Tech Tuesday. It is Tech Tuesday. And who better to
speak to about all things tech than Jefferson Graham, host
of Photo Walks TV, former tech writer for USA Today,
and my first conversation with him. Jefferson Graham, I know

(01:41:37):
you've been patient. Thank you for waiting, Thanks for coming
on today. How are you stir?

Speaker 9 (01:41:41):
I thought you were gonna want to talk to me
about my new state?

Speaker 1 (01:41:45):
You know, not yet, not yet in East California.

Speaker 9 (01:41:51):
No, No, I'm in southern but I got to ask you.

Speaker 1 (01:41:56):
Go ahead. You may not know me, but I am,
and I just say I'm all about the ecology of tech.
I am a Google adherent. I have a Google Pixel phone,
I use Google Chrome. All of my devices are within
that Google matrix. That's part of the reason why I've

(01:42:17):
never been an Apple person. Because Google is affordable. They
focus more on the software than they do the hardware. Apple, conversely,
is more about the hardware than the software. What do
you find in your work as far as why people
may choose one ecosystem over the other.

Speaker 9 (01:42:34):
Well, first of all, I've been to disagree with you
about Apple right now, it's all about the software and
the hardware Apple. Do you know what the number two
division at Apple is? Because it's not Mac computers, it's
not iPads, it's not Apple watches. Okay, it's not air pods.
It's something called services iCloud, Apple Music, the constant nag

(01:43:01):
messages for you to delete things or to buy buy
more storage, buy more storage. They're they're bringing in like
twenty billion dollars plus a quarter. I so, like, you know,
nearly one hundred billion dollars a year on software, So
that's out.

Speaker 1 (01:43:19):
So outside of the iPhone, which obviously is their their
their top product, why would they then still further try
to develop these these augmented reality headsets or these other
hardware products.

Speaker 9 (01:43:35):
Well, they're trying to find the next iPhone, right because
it's been going on for twenty years, almost eighteen years,
and it's you know, every every product has a cycle
that will eventually go away. So they say they've been
predicting for like ten years that the phone is eventually
going to go away and we're going to be switching

(01:43:56):
to glasses. I'm a skeptic. I don't believe it, but
you know, they they played a bet on that stupid
thirty five hundred dollars head set that went nowhere, and
it was, you know, one of the biggest bus they've
ever had. Meanwhile, Facebook has glasses they're selling for three
to five hundred dollars and people are buying them as
fast they can get them. So you know, you know,

(01:44:20):
they put their toes in the sand and they try
a bunch of different things to see what clicks. But
fifty percent of their revenues or comes in from the iPhone,
would you.

Speaker 1 (01:44:30):
Attribute this to a lack of vision of Tim Cook
or maybe luck on the part of Steve Jobs? Who
do you actually?

Speaker 9 (01:44:40):
Tim Cook has done an amazing, amazing job. They sell
a lot more iPhones under Tim Cook than they ever
sold the Steve Jobs, so he's done something right. There's
I think it's two billion people have iPhones and that
is a big, big base to sell more products to.
You walk into their stores and they're always crowded, so

(01:45:02):
they're doing something right. As far as that next hot
thing they have, you know, the AirPods were with the
last one that they came up with, and they haven't
done anything since. They're trying you know, this iPhone Air.
Have you heard about the iPhone Air?

Speaker 1 (01:45:20):
I heard about it and I heard it wasn't selling.

Speaker 9 (01:45:22):
Well, right, it's a bust. It's another bust. But they
tried the world's thinnest iPhone. Oh boy, well, you know
the old iPhone wasn't so thin. I mean, it wasn't
so thick. It's fine, both of them fit in your pocket.
So it's a bust. They're apparently cutting back on orders
and rejiggering what they expected out of this phone. Now,

(01:45:44):
one of the things about this phone that was a
mess is that it only has one camera lens, and
if you buy the entry level iPhone for seven ninety nine,
it has two. This one for one thousand dollars has one.
Now does take a lot of logic to figure out
which would you rather have? Joe consumer, Marry consumer, would

(01:46:06):
you like to have one lenser too? Well, you're going
to want to have too. So for me as a photographer,
it's a non starter. I can you know, I don't
even want to use it because you don't get the
ultra wide lens and I use that all the time.

Speaker 1 (01:46:19):
How is Apple doing on the world stage? We know
that Samsung has been eating up some market share. We
know there's an ongoing debate of whether Apple is going
to continue to have as products made in China. How
are they perceived outside the United States?

Speaker 9 (01:46:34):
Well, primarily in Asia and Latin America, it's mostly Android
except for Japan and the You know, Samsung sells a
lot of phones over there. India is another place. Europe
you'll see a lot more iPhones. But you know, the
companies are neck and neck in terms of both of

(01:46:56):
them are selling about two hundred million phones per year
and no other consumer product is anywhere like that. Now
you mentioned Google. By the way, I do have a
little Google News today, Google Photos, which is used for
your editing or storing your photos as an app on

(01:47:16):
Android and iPhone. They're gonna be you know, AI thing
is AI is the big thing. So they're going to
have a new thing where you're going to be able
to speak to it and say, hey, Google, please remove
those classes, please color in my hair, please do this,
please do that, using your voice and using conversational requests

(01:47:36):
for edits. They say it's rolling out soon to phones
across the country, and what that means is that could
be six months to a year.

Speaker 1 (01:47:46):
But I have a Google Pixel, so I get all
the updates first. And I do like the photograph photography
capabilities of Google phones. Are they still the I will
say the industry standard as far as photography Android phones
as opposed to Apple.

Speaker 9 (01:48:05):
I'm getting killed by spam calls all day long, so
I apologize for that. No, that was super Mario Brothers. Yes,
that's the reason for that is when you will go
into a crowded place and everybody's phone rings at the
same time, well they all have the same ringtones. They're
all the same. So I put on mine and you

(01:48:26):
definitely know it. And I'm not confused. Your question was.

Speaker 1 (01:48:31):
A photography and how at least in recent years Google
slash Android were perceived to be superior. Is that still
the case. I don't know that it is.

Speaker 9 (01:48:43):
In some cases in your corner, they're considered to be superior.
In this corner, they are not. In this corner. The
iPhone camera still is the best camera, and particularly for video,
it's the best camera for me. When I because I
have a pixel, it's right over there. The colors get

(01:49:05):
altered and tweaked in a sort of a wish fulfillment.
My blue is bluer and my green is greener, sort
of like tricks cereal, you know, orange orange and red red,
lemon red or tomato red.

Speaker 5 (01:49:20):
And I don't.

Speaker 9 (01:49:21):
I can't find a button in there to bring it
back down to earth. So for me, it's the iPhone.
For others, some people love what they're getting on the pixel,
and some people love what they're getting on the Android.
Now I just spoke, I'm sorry the Galaxy. I just
spoke to a friend who's in South Africa and he
was telling me about his safari and that he brought

(01:49:41):
a big camera with him, but he's not even using
it because his Samsung Galaxy pictures were so great and
I said, well, send them to me. I want to
see them. And they are really great. I mean, they're amazing.
I'm going to do a whole episode based on his
Safari photos that he took on his phone, because they'll
they'll knock you out.

Speaker 1 (01:49:58):
You mentioned this is where the industry may be headed,
and I'm always curious about where an industry is headed.
I think about photography and these phones and what it
may mean for the movie industry. You see more and
more things being shot on an iPhone or a less
conventional method of creating content. What does this mean? You've

(01:50:21):
mentioned like how a meta is using glasses. Where do
you see the industry going big picture?

Speaker 9 (01:50:28):
Well, first of all, I have a weekly series on
YouTube and Script's News. It's called Photo Walks TV. I
do every episode on an iPhone, so whole thing is
shot on an iPhone.

Speaker 1 (01:50:39):
I do it.

Speaker 9 (01:50:40):
I also augment it with a GoPro and with some
drone footage, but ninety five percent is done on the phone.
And the reason I do it on the phone is
it's I don't have to lug heavy well. First of all,
for travel photography, there's no question you want to shoot
on the phone because you don't have to lug big gear.
You're the quality you get mostly and you're mostly shooting

(01:51:01):
daytime stuff. The quality in daytime is amazing. And uh,
people don't get uncomfortable around you when you've got the
big camera. They they they're so used to seeing these
phones everywhere that they're they're just not their back is
not up and so that's that's why I do it.

(01:51:21):
They recently a filmmaker made a movie It's twenty eight Days,
and I think it was more of a gimmick that
that he just said I could do it that way.
Now television, broadcast TV, local television, you're seeing more and
more newscasts the reporters are all doing on the iPhone
for the same reason. It's just easier and they don't

(01:51:42):
have to log big, heavy camera gear, and they're always
ready and it's always in their pocket. I was with
a congressional reporter for Scripts News in Washington, DC recently.
I met him at the Capitol and he say, just
pulls that thing out all day long, because if they
have to, you know, must with the with the big
camera and get the lighting set and the lens set

(01:52:02):
and all that sort of stuff. It just takes time
when they're approaching a senator or a congressman walking down
the hall.

Speaker 1 (01:52:08):
Jefferson Graham, I've enjoyed this conversation with you, but I'm
running out of time. I did, though, want to ask
your thoughts, since you mentioned broadcast television, how we consume
quote unquote linear TV. There are a number of options
out there. I've been with slang TV for the past
I don't know, maybe fifteen years or so. But you
may have Fubo, you may have YouTube TV. There are

(01:52:29):
a number of places in which you can get broadcast
quote unquote television or streaming content? Where is that going
these days? From where you sit?

Speaker 9 (01:52:39):
Everything you mentioned is too expensive for my pocketbook. Fubo
I think is fifty to sixty dollars a month. Slaying
is used to be twenty five. What are you paying
forty bucks forty five something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:52:52):
I have the Max because I have the Blue plus
Orange and all the different packages.

Speaker 9 (01:52:55):
But your point, I can see it's too I cut
the cord. I have none of them, and I have
more stuff to watch than I could ever watch for
the rest of my life. And I bought an antenna.
The antennas of today are much digil better. Yeah, twenty
five dollars and they have digital tuners in there, and
I can watch all the local TV I want on

(01:53:16):
the antenna. YouTube proper, not YouTube TV, but regular YouTube
dot com has so many clips. You can keep yourself
busy for hours and hours and hours and if you want,
if there's a sum show you want to see, get Netflix,
watch it, then cancel, same thing Hulu, Disney, watch it,
cancel and then wait for something else to come out.

Speaker 1 (01:53:38):
Jefferson Graham, get out of my head, because I've been
at a heerent of cutting the cord for at least
fifteen years, and I have my digital antenna, and I've
gone through all the iterations of watching and what people
don't know. And you know, of course, with digital antenna
you get HD quality for free, yeah, for free. And
they have these subchannels which are just there full of

(01:54:00):
content that I think people just kind of miss out
on because they don't know what's there. And that's why
we have these conversations.

Speaker 5 (01:54:06):
Yeah.

Speaker 9 (01:54:06):
The shocker to me, just very quickly is that when
I got the antenna, I got a better picture quality
than I had with cable.

Speaker 1 (01:54:14):
Yes, absolutely, because I used to have Direct TV and
they wanted to charge for eight d HD. And then
when I got the digital antenna, it's like, wait a minute,
it's free and it's better a higher resolution. Absolutely, Jeffson.
I can do this with you all day, all night long,
but I can't. Jefferson Graham. We have to do this
sometime soon in the future. Hopefully we'll get to talk

(01:54:35):
again anytime. Thank you so much, Jefferson. Jefferson Graham. I
can talk tech all day all night. I just can't
do it. Unfortunate because I got like time constraints. What
Jim keeps me on a very short leash.

Speaker 2 (01:54:48):
I know, it's the way it goes. I am. I'm
a streamer, and so I've been struggling with the Disney
Plus thing. When they asked Kimmel, I was I was
gonna cancel, but I have kids and Disney Plus and
it's like, oh, free speech, what do you do? So yeah,

(01:55:10):
I have cut the cord.

Speaker 1 (01:55:12):
I've cut the cord, but it is now, to Jefferson
Grant's point, has become more expensive because the alternatives are
expensive and over themselves. You can't like, yeah, I got Peacock,
I have NETFLIXS, I have Hulu, I have Disney, I
have Paramount Plus. And after a while you have to
make it HBO you have to HBO Max. You have

(01:55:32):
to make a choice at a certain point.

Speaker 2 (01:55:34):
Because you can't possibly have them all, at least I don't.
It's slim pickens over here. But recently my husband looked
at what we were doing, and they have you different
packages all the time, and he just reduced a price
on one which came with britt Box, and I've been
loving brit Box.

Speaker 1 (01:55:53):
I do love how if there's an urge I have
to see an older movie, I know I can find it.
I know, like I've wanted to see the movie came
on in the early nineteen eighties called Scanners, an old
sci fi movie. I could find it thanks to the
way nonlinear TV is set up now. And I do
enjoy that. I'm less impressed by newer offerings and more

(01:56:16):
like just listening to old school radio or something like that.
When I have the desire to watch something old, I
know I can find it thanks to these different streaming services,
even the free ones like toob, which is great.

Speaker 2 (01:56:28):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:56:28):
Who he's a great one.

Speaker 2 (01:56:30):
Yeah, it's a even more of a selection than the
old video store. Walking through the video store on a
Friday night, you just know everything's at your fingertips, so
there is some convenience there. So we have some people
to think, including Jim Slayton, who throws in a ten says,
I'm changing the old long tailed cat in the rocking
chairs analogy to this. I'm nervous as a MAGA politician

(01:56:53):
at a town hall meeting.

Speaker 1 (01:56:55):
Are they nervous?

Speaker 2 (01:56:56):
I don't know. They seem to be getting yelled at
quite a bit.

Speaker 1 (01:56:59):
They are getting yelled at.

Speaker 2 (01:57:01):
We'll move to thank you Jim. We'll move to our
favorite McAllister, Lucy McCallister, who throws down a twenty. Really
appreciate your contribution, Lucy, You're awesome. Richard Delamator popping in
with a couple, says Fetterman pissed me off yesterday. W TF. Yeah,
I fished a lot of people. It's Joan Hollywood with
the five. Thank you, Joan Hollywood, thanks for the mo

(01:57:23):
love and mojoy. Thank you Joan mm hmm, and Delamator
back with another couple. America I've had it with you.

Speaker 1 (01:57:30):
You have made your bed. Yeah, but we're all have
from to sleep in it. That's the difference.

Speaker 2 (01:57:34):
I don't want to sleep in this one. I don't know.
It's getting uncomfortable.

Speaker 1 (01:57:39):
Mo oh, it's been uncomfortable. Change the sheets, yes, got
bed bugs at everything.

Speaker 2 (01:57:48):
I need a fresh pillow, not on my pillow.

Speaker 1 (01:57:53):
Throwback call back to Mike Lindell. This has been a
wonderful opportunity. Uh Kim. It's one thing to watch the show.
It's another thing to participate and host and be able
to talk to people like David K. Johnson question. You
will have that conversation up later on on YouTube. It's
a cutout. So it's been great. We still got another

(01:58:13):
three days ago, and Mark is he's somewhere gallivanting around
the world, supposedly not working, but we keep hearing from him.

Speaker 2 (01:58:21):
We here checking in Tomorrow. John Rothman will be on
the show, our presidential historian, and we will save the
planet with It's the Planet Stupid, and Belinda Weymouth and
of course more mo Kelly, Really, you're gonna invite me back.
You keep coming back. I'm gonna invite you back, even
when Mark comes back. You guys.

Speaker 1 (01:58:40):
Sound close, sounds like a day. Thank you Tony as well,
and thank you when I am here, thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:58:48):
Thanks Tony.

Speaker 1 (01:58:49):
Still we had our tech issues today, but it happens
all right, all.

Speaker 2 (01:58:53):
Right, everybody, have a great rest of your day. Thank you, Mikelly,
see you tomorrow

Speaker 9 (01:59:00):
And

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Ruthie's Table 4

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Pay Up America: From Monster Healthcare Costs to the New 50-Yr Mortgage, David Cay Johnston 11/11/25

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Ruthie's Table 4

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Pay Up America: From Monster Healthcare Costs to the New 50-Yr Mortgage, David Cay Johnston 11/11/25

Stuff You Should Know