February 2, 2026 • 26 mins
(February 02, 2026)
What we learned after tracking every lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s policies. Layoffs are piling up… here are some of the biggest job cuts recently. Healthcare experts warn ‘people will die’ unless state steps up amid federal cuts.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Bill Handle Here, Good morning, on a February the second.
If you've missed any of the segments on the show,
you can go to the iHeartRadio app and we podcast
all of.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
It and you get to hear some of the crazy stuff.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
A quick story, some quick stories we're looking at that
are trending. A partial government shutdown is underway, but it's
not going to last very long.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
The vote will be today and tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
And the President has said, I said this yesterday, that
he is going to close the Donald J.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Trump Kennedy Center for.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Performing Arts for a couple of years while they are
renovating it. And he said he's falling apart, and no
one's refuting that, by the way, but I think a
lot of the problem is that no one's showing up either.
Tickets are not being used, the performances are half empty.
In many cases of performers are bailing out. Okay, let
me talk about AI, which we've done for ever since
(01:05):
it started.
Speaker 1 (01:06):
It's big news.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
But what happens with AI is you need data centers,
giant ones that are powering AI, which means these centers
are popping up over all over California, and there are
now fights in communities that don't want to live near them.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
This is NIMBI on a huge level.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
And this has become an increasing question because there is
a battle going on right now and it's a little wonky,
so I'll try to unwalk it. Unwonk it and Imperial County,
tiny little county that is poor, and a court fight
has erupted between the city and the county. And this
facility is going to be built, by the way, a
(01:54):
million square feet of.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
A computing center. Okay, think of.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
That, and it's going to be built on county ground,
unincorporated parts of the county, not in the city. Here
is the issue. And by the way, I've already been
zoned for development. But here is the problem. That's seventy
five acres of which this computing center is going to
(02:21):
basically fill up that the county wants and has already okayed.
The City of Imperial has gone to court and said nope,
we don't want it now. Can they stop it? Probably not.
Can they slow it down? Oh big time? Because here
is the lawsuit, and it's is just one of many.
(02:43):
This lawsuit says that there wasn't an environmental impact study
done as to how neighbors are going to be impacted
by the enormous amount of energy, the cooling towers, the
water that's neat and the neighbors. The city is saying
we don't want any part of it. The county and
(03:05):
the people who are building it, who have joined together,
I have said, but look at the jobs that we're creating,
look at the tax space we're creating. And in fact
that's absolutely true, except look at the downside. We know
the upside, not necessarily the upside of AI per se,
but the kind of computing that is necessary. By the way,
(03:29):
it's also used in navigation, it's also used in weather forecasting.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
I mean, it's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
AI is going to change the way well already has,
but it's going to change the way we live and
do business in a major, major way. We are just
at the tip of the barrel of monkeys. That on
the camel's hump. That where we're going to go with AI.
(03:56):
So Cornell University released a study twenty thirty the rate
of AI growth will actually put twenty four to forty
four million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
That's five to ten million cars. It would also use
up to one point one two five million cubic feet
of water meters of water, and that's used by ten
(04:20):
million Americans.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
That's a lot of people.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
And so the study also found that that amount of
impact can actually be reduced enormously just to a smarter
sighting and planning of the facility. Well, the folks who're
building it say, we've done exactly that. We're using reclaimed
water to cool the computer center, which needs enormous amount.
(04:47):
But they want to be changed to California's They don't
want to be chained to California's environmental laws, saying, come on,
is everything going to stop in California because of restraintictions.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
The answer is yes.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
The answer is absolutely yes, And anybody can stop a project.
You know how to stop a project for years and
years and years. You ask for an environmental impact study,
which has to be done with major projects. The impact
study comes out two years later, and then you appeal
it and bring in your own impact study that goes
(05:25):
the other way, and then you go to court and
then you appeal that decision, and all of a sudden,
whatever project is there has just been delayed five years.
And that's what's happening. And if we're going to go
forward with AI, if we're going to go forward with
this computer, these computer this computer growth, you've got to
(05:48):
have these massive centers. You can't do it any other way. So,
assuming we have to have it, what does that mean,
Because I'll tell you what it means. I want it
in your backyard. You can live next to one of these.
You can buy a property which, by the way, the
builder saying, you knew it was zoned for it was
(06:09):
zoned for business, this property next to you, and they're saying, yeah,
we knew it, but we didn't think it was going
to be that and that much. More than six hundred
cases have been filed against the Trump administration and President Trump.
(06:31):
The New York Times has been tracking every single one,
and that since he's returned to office in January twenty
twenty five. He's been in office one year, six hundred cases,
and if you extrapolate times four, you're going to see
twenty four hundred cases. There hasn't been anything close to
(06:52):
what this president is going through in terms of lawsuits.
As a matter of fact, I don't think in eight
years of any other president.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
See there have been this many.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
Cases filed literally over the entire tenure of other presidents.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
And so who is filing?
Speaker 2 (07:10):
Who are the folks immigrants challenging their removal from the country,
States asking the courts to unfreeze billions of dollars in
congressionally approved appropriated funds, schools and universities arguing against the
attempts by the administration and sometimes successful attempts around speech
(07:32):
and research on their campuses and dealing with their DEI
programs or sometimes non DEI programs that just sound like
DEI programs. The Times itself is sued over the restrictions
that the Defense Department is imposed on reporters covering the military.
For example, Pete headsec Has said to The New York Times,
(07:54):
you are not going to have your reporters there. And
by the way, you can't publish anything unless I give
you the okay to publish. I mean, that's kind of
insane or where do you think that went? Now, there's
sixty six hundred and seventy seven active status judges in
the federal judiciary.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
We're talking about district court judges.
Speaker 2 (08:14):
They're on the front lines of this clash between two
branches of government. The two branches that they're in clash
with is their branch, the judiciary and the president. Is
there any clash between Congress and the presidency.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Absolutely not. President Trump owns the Republican Party straight out.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
Mike Johnson, the Speaker of Speaker of the House, has
said outright, my job as speaker is to further Donald
Trump's agenda straight out. Wait a second, aren't you supposed
to aren't there checks and balances. Aren't you supposed to
look at what's appropriate.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Nope.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
If the president wants it, the president gets it, and
he's in the majority, so that is a little problematic.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
And so.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
The judiciary is really looking at the rising threats to
their safety. That's the other thing, and that is if
you go against Donald Trump, you will get death threats.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
That's a given. You've heard that over and over again. Now.
Speaker 2 (09:20):
Is that to say that the president is encouraging death threats?
Speaker 1 (09:23):
No, not at all. Is that to say that.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
The followers of Donald Trump are all crazy people?
Speaker 1 (09:30):
No, but there are enough out there for sure.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
So what's happening is people have complained, those who are
arguing against the against Supreme Court because the Supreme Court
likes overriding rulings. This is judiciary going against their own court,
Supreme Court, because the rulings happen on what's called the
(09:57):
emergency docket, where the White House requests the Supreme Court
to rule immediately on a given topic, for example, whether Ice,
whether the Ice attempts or ICE operations can continue on
while the underlying case is being heard arguing that what
(10:20):
Ice is doing is unconstitutional. Okay, we'll hear it at
some other point. It's on the docket, but you're allowed
to do it right now until we hear it. And
the Court has done that over and over again. Wow,
without ruling on the final merits, which are going to
be coming down in the next few weeks on some
of them and coming down in June on others. And
(10:42):
so the president, how does the president do of these? Well,
of the five hundred and nine active cases going on
the administration, the policy has been halted one hundred and
forty nine times, about thirty percent the seventy percent of
active cases, the policies remain in effect. As I just said,
(11:05):
due to the emergency docket situation. Appeals court judges and
not district courts. The next level of Appeals Court have
actually treated Trump more favorably than the district courts. The
judiciary that's most against Donald Trump is the district court judges,
which is the bottom rung. Appeals Court is a next
(11:27):
step up before the Supreme Court. So it's district court judges,
Appeals Court judges, Supreme Court, and then there's some other
things in bank. Do you want the entire appeals court?
I thinkst twenty seven or twenty nine members of the
Appeals Court, and usually it's a three judge panel. And
so fifty one percent of the time the Appeals Court
has been in favor of President Trump. In twenty four cases,
(11:52):
the Supreme Court started to contemplate the Trump agenda, mostly
considering whether even the issue temporary orders allowing it to
take an effect. Out of twenty four Trump's succeeded twenty
one times, but all of that was on the emergency docket.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
Now, is the Court going to go against Trump?
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Well, in a couple of areas, it looks that it
looks like it's not going to be in favor of Trump.
And the way you know which way the court goes
is by way of the questioning.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
When you see when you hear can't see.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
When you hear questions by the justices towards one side
or the other, you can generally tell which way it's going.
In two cases, the Court took a pretty skeptical tone.
One involved reshaping the entire economy by unilaterally imposing tariffs.
The Constitution says only Congress can impose tariffs. Trump has
(12:55):
said he can impose tariffs outside of what Congress is
hours are court has to decide that. Also, this one,
I don't even know why the Court is hearing this.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
This one stuns me, truly.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And that is Trump signed an executive order revoking birthright
citizenship in straight out violation of the fourteenth Amendment that says,
on its face, anybody born in the United States is
a citizen of the United States, and Trump is arguing
(13:34):
that does not extend to anybody born who is born
of an illegal migrant. I don't even know where you
go on that one. I don't think there's much interpretation.
I mean, there's plenty of interpretation of the Second Amendment
and the First Amendment, plenty of interpretation the Tenth Amendment
giving States rights that the federal government doesn't have. Plenty
(13:56):
of those. Then the women given the right to vote,
for example. Now, whether you agree with that or not,
as you know what side I'm on. I thought that
women given the right to vote was the worst day
in the history of the United States, the day that
was ratified.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
But there is no discussion. What are you going to
how is that interpreted? Either they are or they're not.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
And the birthright citizenship the court's hearing it.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
I don't understand it.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
I do not get it all right. A couple of
things we're looking at. There's a partial government shut down.
It's happened, but it's going to end very quickly where
we probably won't even notice it. And educators in La
Unified School District have voted to authorize a strike months
(14:46):
of stalled contract talks, and that's the union said this
time for a strike. We're gonna see more and more
of these strikes coming up, just simply because the way
the economy is going now. Talking about the economy, layoffs
s are piling up and workers are feeling increasingly anxious
about the job market. And this has a lot to
(15:09):
do with politics, I mean a lot. We know that
prices are going to affect the midterms big time.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
Inflation is going to be a big one.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
My immigration, assuming it doesn't change, is going to affect
the midterms. Now, the fact that layoffs are coming hot
and heavy. Is that going to affect the midterms? Are
the politicians going to be blamed? Read the Republicans going
to be blamed for the fact that the layoffs are
(15:40):
coming like crazy? Amazon slash sixteen thousand jobs last Wednesday,
corporate jobs three months after laying off fourteen thousand. Why
because Amazon is saying they're restructuring. Why because of AI primarily,
And that's going on across the board. And who gets
(16:01):
blaming for it? Well at this point, I don't know.
And if I go through the list of the companies
that are laying off, it's pretty dramatic. Ups claiming or
cutting thirty thousand jobs this year, Tyson Foods closing.
Speaker 1 (16:21):
A plant thirty two hundred people.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
The job losses in Lexington, Nebraska, third of the population
of the entire town of eleven thousand HP between and
four thousand and six thousand employees part of a wider initiative,
including adopting a Verizon laying off more than thirteen thousand
(16:45):
in November. Why restructure structuring Nestley, the biggest food company
in the world, sixteen thousand jobs globally. Novo Nord Dusk,
the company that makes the fat pills Ozempic and Wagovi
one thousand jobs, eleven percent of its workforce. Intel expected
(17:06):
to end or did end seventy five thousand.
Speaker 1 (17:11):
Coworkers or core workers through layoffs and attrition.
Speaker 2 (17:16):
And that's down from ninety nine thousand that were bailed
at the end of twenty twenty four, so fifteen percent
workforce reduction. Procter and Gamble seven thousand jobs.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Over the next two years.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
Microsoft first one six thousand last year, then another nine
thousand same year. General Motors seventeen hundred jobs, sky Dance
to Paramount a thousand, that's no big deal, Target eighteen hundred,
no big deal. And then we Oconnoco Phillips twenty six
(17:49):
hundred and thirty two hundred. Lufthansa is shedding four thousand jobs.
And what is going on? Well, people are sweating bullets.
Is your job? Is your job safe? And you know
a lot of people are saying no, their job is
not safe. AI is changing a lot of stuff and
(18:10):
some jobs, matter of fact, shouldn't be safe. You know
people should be worried about their jobs. Will Cole Schreiber.
Why because we can get AI to do the traffic
much more successfully and much more accurate than, for example,
will another job.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Thank you, of course it is, but it's true.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Another job that is that I think at risk is Kno,
because the board can be operated by AI.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Yet another job.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
Here would be Amy, where the news certainly can be
gathered by AI and produced with voice not voice recognition.
I guess yeah, and Anne has going to have a
real problem. So the only person left is going to
be me, and I'm fine with this. I have to
(19:02):
tell you I have no problem with AI coming.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
In a would against you.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
The last thing you need to replace me with is
AI fact checking.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
You'd never you'd never be able to do this show
with an act. Okay, so let me ask you fact
I am protected. Cono. Do you have a contract, No,
you're gone, Amy. Do you have a contract? Okay? So
when is your contract up? Can I ask this year? Oh?
Speaker 4 (19:32):
You're gone, Neil contract. I don't do contracts by history cost. Okay,
then your history and contract? No, I know, I'm okay,
there you are there you are job attrition.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
All right?
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Uh This is a story of how you're not going
to survive, and it has to do with the Affordable
Care Act Obamacare. As we know, Obamacare expired on December
thirty first of last year, so it's only been gone
for a month, and that means the federal money that
(20:12):
Obamacare gave to people. And this was during COVID is
when all of these additional moneies were thrown into the pile.
And those additional moneies have disappeared, and therein lies this
huge controversy of the federal government cutting Obamacare. Well, the
(20:32):
federal government let the increased lapse. I mean, that's more realistic.
And so this is a double hit for those people
that received and do receive Obamacare. The federal government still
has say in money that goes to these individuals. It's
just not the same. And it has said to the states,
(20:56):
you take over. If there is an issue of insurability,
it ain't our problem, it is yours. And California, of
course is getting nailed the worst as you would imagine.
And California is now looking at billions of dollars to
maintain the terms the Affordable Care Act, and the deficit
is going to be eighteen billion dollars this fiscal year,
(21:18):
so it's got to come from someplace. And as I said,
it's even more complicated than that because the government is
set up. This is a federal government has set up
some newly imposed red tape where only people that are
eligible are who are not eligible are who now are
receiving able body men who are not involved in childcare,
(21:42):
able bodied people I think between the ages of eighteen
and it was now it's forty five or it used
to be fifty four, and just made it more difficult.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
There are more requirements.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
So not only are fewer people are eligible, but the
ones that are eligible have to every six months submit
that they have met the requirements under the new federal
guidelines and the promise. The problem is, as people who
are looking at this is this is complicated stuff, and
(22:15):
there are a lot of people that just don't have
the wherewithal you ever made an application to a governmental agency.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
For anything, I mean, it can be overwhelming.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
And so California, which is hit the most, has to
not only make up if it wants to maintain the
terms of the Affordable Care Act the benefits that are given.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
But also help people apply.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
And this is where the experts are saying, wait a minute,
this is way too difficult. I mean, the bottom line
is that the administration in terms of safety net issues
is not a big fan. They are not a fan
of people who don't have the wherewithal, don't have the money,
don't have the ability to pay. And in terms of healthcare,
(23:03):
and we know our system is broken. I'm going to
end with the same story that I always talk about
health care and you tell me that this is the
greatest healthcare in the world.
Speaker 1 (23:13):
Lindsay and I last summer were in Italy.
Speaker 2 (23:17):
We're in Palermo, the capital of Sicily, and Lindsay has
some lung issues where she snorts this, you know, the
nebulizer thing to clear her lungs. She had an attack.
We went to the emergency room in Palermo, Italy. The
(23:37):
weight to get in was about forty seconds from the
time we walked in the door to see a doctor.
The first thing they did was run an IV. That
was within a minute before doing anything. They ran an
IV to see if they had to do a blood test,
to see if they had to send some saline down
to hydrate her. They put a nebulizer in within three
(24:00):
minutes because she had trouble breathing, you know over the
mask that has medicine and water and vapor that she
breathed and the doctor thought she should see an ent
because there may be blockage, there may be an issue.
So he refers us to an eent right your nose
and throat specialists, who is upstairs. We walk up the stairs,
(24:22):
we walk into the office and the doctor with a
scope shoves it down her lungs to look from the
time we walked in to the time we walked out,
and this is world class medicine. We got was one
hour and fifteen minutes and we have the best healthcare
(24:44):
in the world.
Speaker 1 (24:46):
Tell that story.
Speaker 3 (24:47):
We get people from other countries laughing, saying that was
for a small thing. If you have anything that is real,
it's the most horrible system.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
I do you know what I say?
Speaker 2 (25:00):
You win Once no, my daughter in Spain.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
We were in Madrid when my daughter a little.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
One, and guy was swinging around on those rails that
people stand in line to get on airplanes kind of thing,
and there was a little piece sticking out. She was
swinging herself and she got this huge cut on her
head and had to go to the doctor. Uh they
had a hospital. This is a Madrid or International. They
had a hospital, full hospital in the airport, ambulance service
(25:32):
in the airport who took her uh to the.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
Emergency room and she was sewn up. We made the plane.
We made the plane. The European emergency rooms are great.
Speaker 3 (25:43):
That's what you've learned.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
I have so we have the best system in the world.
We're done, guys. That's it. We're done.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's just I think we have a broken system, and
I do think it's to be single payer.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
I do think that.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
Always have some from the day I started broadcasting, We're done, guys.
Speaker 1 (26:00):
To the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Catch my show Monday through Friday, six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Bill Handle Here, Good morning, on a February the second.
If you've missed any of the segments on the show,
you can go to the iHeartRadio app and we podcast
all of.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
It and you get to hear some of the crazy stuff.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
A quick story, some quick stories we're looking at that
are trending. A partial government shutdown is underway, but it's
not going to last very long.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
The vote will be today and tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
And the President has said, I said this yesterday, that
he is going to close the Donald J.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Trump Kennedy Center for.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Performing Arts for a couple of years while they are
renovating it. And he said he's falling apart, and no
one's refuting that, by the way, but I think a
lot of the problem is that no one's showing up either.
Tickets are not being used, the performances are half empty.
In many cases of performers are bailing out. Okay, let
me talk about AI, which we've done for ever since
(01:05):
it started.
Speaker 1 (01:06):
It's big news.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
But what happens with AI is you need data centers,
giant ones that are powering AI, which means these centers
are popping up over all over California, and there are
now fights in communities that don't want to live near them.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
This is NIMBI on a huge level.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
And this has become an increasing question because there is
a battle going on right now and it's a little wonky,
so I'll try to unwalk it. Unwonk it and Imperial County,
tiny little county that is poor, and a court fight
has erupted between the city and the county. And this
facility is going to be built, by the way, a
(01:54):
million square feet of.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
A computing center. Okay, think of.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
That, and it's going to be built on county ground,
unincorporated parts of the county, not in the city. Here
is the issue. And by the way, I've already been
zoned for development. But here is the problem. That's seventy
five acres of which this computing center is going to
(02:21):
basically fill up that the county wants and has already okayed.
The City of Imperial has gone to court and said nope,
we don't want it now. Can they stop it? Probably not.
Can they slow it down? Oh big time? Because here
is the lawsuit, and it's is just one of many.
(02:43):
This lawsuit says that there wasn't an environmental impact study
done as to how neighbors are going to be impacted
by the enormous amount of energy, the cooling towers, the
water that's neat and the neighbors. The city is saying
we don't want any part of it. The county and
(03:05):
the people who are building it, who have joined together,
I have said, but look at the jobs that we're creating,
look at the tax space we're creating. And in fact
that's absolutely true, except look at the downside. We know
the upside, not necessarily the upside of AI per se,
but the kind of computing that is necessary. By the way,
(03:29):
it's also used in navigation, it's also used in weather forecasting.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
I mean, it's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
AI is going to change the way well already has,
but it's going to change the way we live and
do business in a major, major way. We are just
at the tip of the barrel of monkeys. That on
the camel's hump. That where we're going to go with AI.
(03:56):
So Cornell University released a study twenty thirty the rate
of AI growth will actually put twenty four to forty
four million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
That's five to ten million cars. It would also use
up to one point one two five million cubic feet
of water meters of water, and that's used by ten
(04:20):
million Americans.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
That's a lot of people.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
And so the study also found that that amount of
impact can actually be reduced enormously just to a smarter
sighting and planning of the facility. Well, the folks who're
building it say, we've done exactly that. We're using reclaimed
water to cool the computer center, which needs enormous amount.
(04:47):
But they want to be changed to California's They don't
want to be chained to California's environmental laws, saying, come on,
is everything going to stop in California because of restraintictions.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
The answer is yes.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
The answer is absolutely yes, And anybody can stop a project.
You know how to stop a project for years and
years and years. You ask for an environmental impact study,
which has to be done with major projects. The impact
study comes out two years later, and then you appeal
it and bring in your own impact study that goes
(05:25):
the other way, and then you go to court and
then you appeal that decision, and all of a sudden,
whatever project is there has just been delayed five years.
And that's what's happening. And if we're going to go
forward with AI, if we're going to go forward with
this computer, these computer this computer growth, you've got to
(05:48):
have these massive centers. You can't do it any other way. So,
assuming we have to have it, what does that mean,
Because I'll tell you what it means. I want it
in your backyard. You can live next to one of these.
You can buy a property which, by the way, the
builder saying, you knew it was zoned for it was
(06:09):
zoned for business, this property next to you, and they're saying, yeah,
we knew it, but we didn't think it was going
to be that and that much. More than six hundred
cases have been filed against the Trump administration and President Trump.
(06:31):
The New York Times has been tracking every single one,
and that since he's returned to office in January twenty
twenty five. He's been in office one year, six hundred cases,
and if you extrapolate times four, you're going to see
twenty four hundred cases. There hasn't been anything close to
(06:52):
what this president is going through in terms of lawsuits.
As a matter of fact, I don't think in eight
years of any other president.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
See there have been this many.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
Cases filed literally over the entire tenure of other presidents.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
And so who is filing?
Speaker 2 (07:10):
Who are the folks immigrants challenging their removal from the country,
States asking the courts to unfreeze billions of dollars in
congressionally approved appropriated funds, schools and universities arguing against the
attempts by the administration and sometimes successful attempts around speech
(07:32):
and research on their campuses and dealing with their DEI
programs or sometimes non DEI programs that just sound like
DEI programs. The Times itself is sued over the restrictions
that the Defense Department is imposed on reporters covering the military.
For example, Pete headsec Has said to The New York Times,
(07:54):
you are not going to have your reporters there. And
by the way, you can't publish anything unless I give
you the okay to publish. I mean, that's kind of
insane or where do you think that went? Now, there's
sixty six hundred and seventy seven active status judges in
the federal judiciary.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
We're talking about district court judges.
Speaker 2 (08:14):
They're on the front lines of this clash between two
branches of government. The two branches that they're in clash
with is their branch, the judiciary and the president. Is
there any clash between Congress and the presidency.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Absolutely not. President Trump owns the Republican Party straight out.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
Mike Johnson, the Speaker of Speaker of the House, has
said outright, my job as speaker is to further Donald
Trump's agenda straight out. Wait a second, aren't you supposed
to aren't there checks and balances. Aren't you supposed to
look at what's appropriate.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Nope.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
If the president wants it, the president gets it, and
he's in the majority, so that is a little problematic.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
And so.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
The judiciary is really looking at the rising threats to
their safety. That's the other thing, and that is if
you go against Donald Trump, you will get death threats.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
That's a given. You've heard that over and over again. Now.
Speaker 2 (09:20):
Is that to say that the president is encouraging death threats?
Speaker 1 (09:23):
No, not at all. Is that to say that.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
The followers of Donald Trump are all crazy people?
Speaker 1 (09:30):
No, but there are enough out there for sure.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
So what's happening is people have complained, those who are
arguing against the against Supreme Court because the Supreme Court
likes overriding rulings. This is judiciary going against their own court,
Supreme Court, because the rulings happen on what's called the
(09:57):
emergency docket, where the White House requests the Supreme Court
to rule immediately on a given topic, for example, whether Ice,
whether the Ice attempts or ICE operations can continue on
while the underlying case is being heard arguing that what
(10:20):
Ice is doing is unconstitutional. Okay, we'll hear it at
some other point. It's on the docket, but you're allowed
to do it right now until we hear it. And
the Court has done that over and over again. Wow,
without ruling on the final merits, which are going to
be coming down in the next few weeks on some
of them and coming down in June on others. And
(10:42):
so the president, how does the president do of these? Well,
of the five hundred and nine active cases going on
the administration, the policy has been halted one hundred and
forty nine times, about thirty percent the seventy percent of
active cases, the policies remain in effect. As I just said,
(11:05):
due to the emergency docket situation. Appeals court judges and
not district courts. The next level of Appeals Court have
actually treated Trump more favorably than the district courts. The
judiciary that's most against Donald Trump is the district court judges,
which is the bottom rung. Appeals Court is a next
(11:27):
step up before the Supreme Court. So it's district court judges,
Appeals Court judges, Supreme Court, and then there's some other
things in bank. Do you want the entire appeals court?
I thinkst twenty seven or twenty nine members of the
Appeals Court, and usually it's a three judge panel. And
so fifty one percent of the time the Appeals Court
has been in favor of President Trump. In twenty four cases,
(11:52):
the Supreme Court started to contemplate the Trump agenda, mostly
considering whether even the issue temporary orders allowing it to
take an effect. Out of twenty four Trump's succeeded twenty
one times, but all of that was on the emergency docket.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
Now, is the Court going to go against Trump?
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Well, in a couple of areas, it looks that it
looks like it's not going to be in favor of Trump.
And the way you know which way the court goes
is by way of the questioning.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
When you see when you hear can't see.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
When you hear questions by the justices towards one side
or the other, you can generally tell which way it's going.
In two cases, the Court took a pretty skeptical tone.
One involved reshaping the entire economy by unilaterally imposing tariffs.
The Constitution says only Congress can impose tariffs. Trump has
(12:55):
said he can impose tariffs outside of what Congress is
hours are court has to decide that. Also, this one,
I don't even know why the Court is hearing this.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
This one stuns me, truly.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And that is Trump signed an executive order revoking birthright
citizenship in straight out violation of the fourteenth Amendment that says,
on its face, anybody born in the United States is
a citizen of the United States, and Trump is arguing
(13:34):
that does not extend to anybody born who is born
of an illegal migrant. I don't even know where you
go on that one. I don't think there's much interpretation.
I mean, there's plenty of interpretation of the Second Amendment
and the First Amendment, plenty of interpretation the Tenth Amendment
giving States rights that the federal government doesn't have. Plenty
(13:56):
of those. Then the women given the right to vote,
for example. Now, whether you agree with that or not,
as you know what side I'm on. I thought that
women given the right to vote was the worst day
in the history of the United States, the day that
was ratified.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
But there is no discussion. What are you going to
how is that interpreted? Either they are or they're not.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
And the birthright citizenship the court's hearing it.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
I don't understand it.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
I do not get it all right. A couple of
things we're looking at. There's a partial government shut down.
It's happened, but it's going to end very quickly where
we probably won't even notice it. And educators in La
Unified School District have voted to authorize a strike months
(14:46):
of stalled contract talks, and that's the union said this
time for a strike. We're gonna see more and more
of these strikes coming up, just simply because the way
the economy is going now. Talking about the economy, layoffs
s are piling up and workers are feeling increasingly anxious
about the job market. And this has a lot to
(15:09):
do with politics, I mean a lot. We know that
prices are going to affect the midterms big time.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
Inflation is going to be a big one.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
My immigration, assuming it doesn't change, is going to affect
the midterms. Now, the fact that layoffs are coming hot
and heavy. Is that going to affect the midterms? Are
the politicians going to be blamed? Read the Republicans going
to be blamed for the fact that the layoffs are
(15:40):
coming like crazy? Amazon slash sixteen thousand jobs last Wednesday,
corporate jobs three months after laying off fourteen thousand. Why
because Amazon is saying they're restructuring. Why because of AI primarily,
And that's going on across the board. And who gets
(16:01):
blaming for it? Well at this point, I don't know.
And if I go through the list of the companies
that are laying off, it's pretty dramatic. Ups claiming or
cutting thirty thousand jobs this year, Tyson Foods closing.
Speaker 1 (16:21):
A plant thirty two hundred people.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
The job losses in Lexington, Nebraska, third of the population
of the entire town of eleven thousand HP between and
four thousand and six thousand employees part of a wider initiative,
including adopting a Verizon laying off more than thirteen thousand
(16:45):
in November. Why restructure structuring Nestley, the biggest food company
in the world, sixteen thousand jobs globally. Novo Nord Dusk,
the company that makes the fat pills Ozempic and Wagovi
one thousand jobs, eleven percent of its workforce. Intel expected
(17:06):
to end or did end seventy five thousand.
Speaker 1 (17:11):
Coworkers or core workers through layoffs and attrition.
Speaker 2 (17:16):
And that's down from ninety nine thousand that were bailed
at the end of twenty twenty four, so fifteen percent
workforce reduction. Procter and Gamble seven thousand jobs.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Over the next two years.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
Microsoft first one six thousand last year, then another nine
thousand same year. General Motors seventeen hundred jobs, sky Dance
to Paramount a thousand, that's no big deal, Target eighteen hundred,
no big deal. And then we Oconnoco Phillips twenty six
(17:49):
hundred and thirty two hundred. Lufthansa is shedding four thousand jobs.
And what is going on? Well, people are sweating bullets.
Is your job? Is your job safe? And you know
a lot of people are saying no, their job is
not safe. AI is changing a lot of stuff and
(18:10):
some jobs, matter of fact, shouldn't be safe. You know
people should be worried about their jobs. Will Cole Schreiber.
Why because we can get AI to do the traffic
much more successfully and much more accurate than, for example,
will another job.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Thank you, of course it is, but it's true.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Another job that is that I think at risk is Kno,
because the board can be operated by AI.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Yet another job.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
Here would be Amy, where the news certainly can be
gathered by AI and produced with voice not voice recognition.
I guess yeah, and Anne has going to have a
real problem. So the only person left is going to
be me, and I'm fine with this. I have to
(19:02):
tell you I have no problem with AI coming.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
In a would against you.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
The last thing you need to replace me with is
AI fact checking.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
You'd never you'd never be able to do this show
with an act. Okay, so let me ask you fact
I am protected. Cono. Do you have a contract, No,
you're gone, Amy. Do you have a contract? Okay? So
when is your contract up? Can I ask this year? Oh?
Speaker 4 (19:32):
You're gone, Neil contract. I don't do contracts by history cost. Okay,
then your history and contract? No, I know, I'm okay,
there you are there you are job attrition.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
All right?
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Uh This is a story of how you're not going
to survive, and it has to do with the Affordable
Care Act Obamacare. As we know, Obamacare expired on December
thirty first of last year, so it's only been gone
for a month, and that means the federal money that
(20:12):
Obamacare gave to people. And this was during COVID is
when all of these additional moneies were thrown into the pile.
And those additional moneies have disappeared, and therein lies this
huge controversy of the federal government cutting Obamacare. Well, the
(20:32):
federal government let the increased lapse. I mean, that's more realistic.
And so this is a double hit for those people
that received and do receive Obamacare. The federal government still
has say in money that goes to these individuals. It's
just not the same. And it has said to the states,
(20:56):
you take over. If there is an issue of insurability,
it ain't our problem, it is yours. And California, of
course is getting nailed the worst as you would imagine.
And California is now looking at billions of dollars to
maintain the terms the Affordable Care Act, and the deficit
is going to be eighteen billion dollars this fiscal year,
(21:18):
so it's got to come from someplace. And as I said,
it's even more complicated than that because the government is
set up. This is a federal government has set up
some newly imposed red tape where only people that are
eligible are who are not eligible are who now are
receiving able body men who are not involved in childcare,
(21:42):
able bodied people I think between the ages of eighteen
and it was now it's forty five or it used
to be fifty four, and just made it more difficult.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
There are more requirements.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
So not only are fewer people are eligible, but the
ones that are eligible have to every six months submit
that they have met the requirements under the new federal
guidelines and the promise. The problem is, as people who
are looking at this is this is complicated stuff, and
(22:15):
there are a lot of people that just don't have
the wherewithal you ever made an application to a governmental agency.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
For anything, I mean, it can be overwhelming.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
And so California, which is hit the most, has to
not only make up if it wants to maintain the
terms of the Affordable Care Act the benefits that are given.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
But also help people apply.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
And this is where the experts are saying, wait a minute,
this is way too difficult. I mean, the bottom line
is that the administration in terms of safety net issues
is not a big fan. They are not a fan
of people who don't have the wherewithal, don't have the money,
don't have the ability to pay. And in terms of healthcare,
(23:03):
and we know our system is broken. I'm going to
end with the same story that I always talk about
health care and you tell me that this is the
greatest healthcare in the world.
Speaker 1 (23:13):
Lindsay and I last summer were in Italy.
Speaker 2 (23:17):
We're in Palermo, the capital of Sicily, and Lindsay has
some lung issues where she snorts this, you know, the
nebulizer thing to clear her lungs. She had an attack.
We went to the emergency room in Palermo, Italy. The
(23:37):
weight to get in was about forty seconds from the
time we walked in the door to see a doctor.
The first thing they did was run an IV. That
was within a minute before doing anything. They ran an
IV to see if they had to do a blood test,
to see if they had to send some saline down
to hydrate her. They put a nebulizer in within three
(24:00):
minutes because she had trouble breathing, you know over the
mask that has medicine and water and vapor that she
breathed and the doctor thought she should see an ent
because there may be blockage, there may be an issue.
So he refers us to an eent right your nose
and throat specialists, who is upstairs. We walk up the stairs,
(24:22):
we walk into the office and the doctor with a
scope shoves it down her lungs to look from the
time we walked in to the time we walked out,
and this is world class medicine. We got was one
hour and fifteen minutes and we have the best healthcare
(24:44):
in the world.
Speaker 1 (24:46):
Tell that story.
Speaker 3 (24:47):
We get people from other countries laughing, saying that was
for a small thing. If you have anything that is real,
it's the most horrible system.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
I do you know what I say?
Speaker 2 (25:00):
You win Once no, my daughter in Spain.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
We were in Madrid when my daughter a little.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
One, and guy was swinging around on those rails that
people stand in line to get on airplanes kind of thing,
and there was a little piece sticking out. She was
swinging herself and she got this huge cut on her
head and had to go to the doctor. Uh they
had a hospital. This is a Madrid or International. They
had a hospital, full hospital in the airport, ambulance service
(25:32):
in the airport who took her uh to the.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
Emergency room and she was sewn up. We made the plane.
We made the plane. The European emergency rooms are great.
Speaker 3 (25:43):
That's what you've learned.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
I have so we have the best system in the world.
We're done, guys. That's it. We're done.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's just I think we have a broken system, and
I do think it's to be single payer.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
I do think that.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
Always have some from the day I started broadcasting, We're done, guys.
Speaker 1 (26:00):
To the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Catch my show Monday through Friday, six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.