September 8, 2025 • 42 mins
The guest host for today's show is Brad Bannon. Brad runs Bannon Communications Research, a polling, message development and media firm which helps labor unions, progressive issue groups and Democratic candidates win public affairs and political campaigns. His show, 'Deadline D.C. with Brad Bannon,' airs every Monday from 3-4pm ET.
Brad is first joined by CNN Military Analyst Cedric Leighton.
Col. Leighton (USAF-Ret.) provides his expert analysis on Venezuela and the Trump administration's ill-considered attack on the purported drug boat and what that might mean for how the current regime uses our military. The two also posit the political and diplomatic implications of Trump's “name change” from the Department of Defense to the Department of War.
Col. Leighton also breaks down the significance of Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean Dictator Kim Jong Un joining Xi Jinping in a show of strength as China unveiled new weapons at a huge military parade.
Finally, the Colonel gives the latest updates on the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.
Then, Brad is joined by Sarah Jones, the Editor-in-Chief of PoliticusUSA.
The two examine the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) again handing President Trump a bleak set of jobs numbers, just one month after he fired the agency's commissioner over weak employment data. They also detail the specific damage the President's tariffs have done on the U.S. economy, as well as a new report from Goldman Sachs estimating that 86% of the tariff revenue collected so far has been paid by American businesses and consumers.
Additionally, the pair talks about the latest news surrounding the Epstein files.
Finally, they discuss the chilling implications as Trump continues working to turn the military into his own police force, which he seeks to unleash in predominantly Democratic-led American cities.
Col. Cedric Leighton is the Founder and President of Cedric Leighton Associates, a strategic risk and leadership consultancy serving global companies and organizations. He founded the company in 2010, after serving in the US Air Force for 27 years as an Intelligence Officer and attaining the rank of Colonel. His website is www.CedricLeighton.com and his handle on BlueSky is @CedricLeighton. bsky.social.
Sarah Jones' handle on BlueSky is @politicussarah.bsky.social and the website for PoliticusUSA is www.PoliticusUSA.com.
Brad writes a political column every Sunday for 'The Hill.'
He's on the National Journal's panel of political insiders and is a national political analyst for WGN TV and Radio in Chicago and KNX Radio in Los Angeles. You can read Brad's columns at www.MuckRack.com/Brad-Bannon. His handle on BlueSky is @bradbannon.bsky.social.
(Image Credit: AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Brad is first joined by CNN Military Analyst Cedric Leighton.
Col. Leighton (USAF-Ret.) provides his expert analysis on Venezuela and the Trump administration's ill-considered attack on the purported drug boat and what that might mean for how the current regime uses our military. The two also posit the political and diplomatic implications of Trump's “name change” from the Department of Defense to the Department of War.
Col. Leighton also breaks down the significance of Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean Dictator Kim Jong Un joining Xi Jinping in a show of strength as China unveiled new weapons at a huge military parade.
Finally, the Colonel gives the latest updates on the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.
Then, Brad is joined by Sarah Jones, the Editor-in-Chief of PoliticusUSA.
The two examine the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) again handing President Trump a bleak set of jobs numbers, just one month after he fired the agency's commissioner over weak employment data. They also detail the specific damage the President's tariffs have done on the U.S. economy, as well as a new report from Goldman Sachs estimating that 86% of the tariff revenue collected so far has been paid by American businesses and consumers.
Additionally, the pair talks about the latest news surrounding the Epstein files.
Finally, they discuss the chilling implications as Trump continues working to turn the military into his own police force, which he seeks to unleash in predominantly Democratic-led American cities.
Col. Cedric Leighton is the Founder and President of Cedric Leighton Associates, a strategic risk and leadership consultancy serving global companies and organizations. He founded the company in 2010, after serving in the US Air Force for 27 years as an Intelligence Officer and attaining the rank of Colonel. His website is www.CedricLeighton.com and his handle on BlueSky is @CedricLeighton. bsky.social.
Sarah Jones' handle on BlueSky is @politicussarah.bsky.social and the website for PoliticusUSA is www.PoliticusUSA.com.
Brad writes a political column every Sunday for 'The Hill.'
He's on the National Journal's panel of political insiders and is a national political analyst for WGN TV and Radio in Chicago and KNX Radio in Los Angeles. You can read Brad's columns at www.MuckRack.com/Brad-Bannon. His handle on BlueSky is @bradbannon.bsky.social.
(Image Credit: AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Leslie Marshall Show, a true democracy in talk radio
of for and by you, the people. Live from our
(00:32):
nation's capital, It's Deadline DC with Brad Bannon.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Bye. I'm Brad Bannon, host of Deadline DC with Brad Bannon.
I'm a national Democratic and progressive strategist of political analyst
for news radio kN X in Los Angeles and a
weekly columnist for The Hill in Washington, d C. To
get my take on Donald Trump's imperial present and see
(01:00):
you can read by columns in The Hill at muckrack
dot com front Slash. Brad Bannon. Monday's here on Deadline DC,
I talked to the people and players behind the politics
and policies that drive our great nation forward or at
least keep it from going backwards. During Trump two point zero,
(01:24):
We've got a really good show for you today. In
the first half hour, CNN military analyst Colonel Cedric Layton,
US Air Force retired joins us to discuss Donald Trump's
handling of military policy, which I think is pretty scary. Then,
in the second half hour, Sarah Jones, editor in chief
(01:47):
of Politicus USA, joins us to discuss the Epstein files
cover up and the new devastating job job data. Before
we get to our guests, we're going to play this
clip from Donald Trump where he talks about changing the
name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
We've been talking about this Department of War. So we
won the First World War, we won the Second World War,
we won everything before that and in between, and then
we decided to go woke. Can we changed the name
to Department of Defense. So we're going Department of War.
And I'd like to ask our Secretary of War to
(02:31):
say a few words. Pete Heck said, I think it's
a much more appropriate name, especially in light of where
the world is right now. We have the strongest military
in the world. We have the greatest equipment in the world.
We have the greatest manufacturers of equipment by far.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
That was, of course, the President sounding a tone which
I find very concerning. He's sounding very militaristic these days,
even more so than usual, and it makes me wonder
where he's heading. And that scares me just wondering about it.
(03:07):
Our guests in this half hour to help us along,
here is Cedric Layton, the CNN military analyst and a
retired colonel in the US Air Force. Welcome back to Deadline,
d C. Colonel Layton, how are you doing today.
Speaker 4 (03:23):
I'm doing well bred. Thanks so much for having me again.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Let me ask you this, what was you now you
served in the Air Force? What I think twenty six.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
Years that's right?
Speaker 2 (03:35):
And what is your What was your reaction when you
heard Donald Trump say that he was going to change
the name to the Department of War.
Speaker 4 (03:47):
Well, I certainly normally don't like to go back to
the future, although I do love history. But in this
particular case, I think that changing the name from the
Department of Defense to the Department of War, I really
is evoking the wrong thing. He mentioned that the name
of the Department of Defense was a quote woke unquote term.
(04:10):
Harry Truman, who was the president at the time when
the Department of Defense was established back in the late
nineteen forties, he kin doesn't fit the bill as far
as I'm concerned for being a woke president or a
woke individual at all. So my reaction to the change
(04:30):
in the name is, first of all, I think it's unnecessary. Secondly,
I think it evokes too many offensive connotations and it
sends the wrong message because in a post World War
two era. There is the need, yes, to be tough
from a military standpoint, but also to send the message
(04:53):
that the United States, at least up until this point,
is not in offensive power. It is not by design
in aggressive power, but it will defend its interests and
the interests of interests of its allies. And interestingly enough,
no other country in the world at the moment is
using the title of either Ministry of War or Department
(05:15):
of War to denote the organization that runs its military services.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Okay, let me ask you this. He also said at
some point last week that the United States would have
won all the wars at fought since World War Two
if we had been less woke. What did he mean
by that? Because I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty
(05:41):
stupid to me. What was your reaction.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
Well, I find it offensive to the veterans of the
Korean War, the veterans of the Vietnam War, the veterans
of our fights in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is
I think a born out of a major misunderstanding of
what American history and world history is all about. The
(06:04):
one big conflict that we actually won in the post
World War two era was the Cold War, and he
should be looking at that as being the signature achievement
of not only the Department of Defense, but also the
Department of State, various presidents that were involved from both parties,
(06:26):
and that was really the most important thing. Basically, what
that meant was that it proved that the policy of
containment was actually one that did work. It did not
require offensive military actions in the Grand Scheme. In the extreme,
it did not require us to use nuclear weapons against
the Soviet Union. We came close a few times, but
(06:49):
we were able to manage that particular effort, and it
was something that really showed that the instruments of government
could actually work quite well together. And the fact that
he's in essence casting aspersions on the veterans of a
lot of the wars that we had that fails to
(07:10):
really take into account how difficult those conflicts were. For example,
in Korea, would we if we had gone into China
when the Chinese came to the aid of the North Koreans.
That would have resulted in a calamitous situation. We chose
not to do that. We chose to limit our efforts
because we knew that taking on China was not something
(07:32):
that we could do in the early nineteen fifties, and
we didn't want to do that with Vietnam. A lot
of mistakes were made in Vietnam. It was not a
quote unquote good war. Not that any war is really good,
but it was not. You know, there were many things
that were wrong and how that war was run. But
the fact of the matter is is that there were
many people who served honorably in that war, tried their
(07:54):
best under difficult circumstances, won a lot of battles, but
strategically there was a failure there. And that failure was
something that you know, a lot of people hang their
hat on and saying, you know, we're not doing a
good job in the military. But they failed to understand
the nuances and the complexity of the world that we
were in, and they failed to they basically lose sight
(08:16):
of the fact that we won the major conflict with
the Soviet Union and caused the demise of communism. That
was a major victory.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Okay, let's try this, boy. It was a big week
for Donald Trump and the military, really bad and big
week for the military and Donald Trump last week. Last week,
US Navy jets attacked and sunk a fishing troller in
(08:47):
the Caribbean, which was the Navy claim was a drug
running ship. You know, I don't have any sympathies for
drug cartails or drug runners. But still, the use of
the US force fatal force in this case instead of
(09:09):
just chopped stopping the ship and taking it I find
disturbing for some reason.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Your take, yeah, I would agree. It's you know, military
force should be proportionate to the threat at hand. There's
nothing wrong with intercepting drug traffickers. And if they were
drug traffickers, that's great. They should be intercepted, not necessarily eliminated.
If they're not posing a threat to American military forces
or others. The vessel needs to be boarded, the people
(09:38):
need to be taken into custody, and then intelligence operations
need to be engaged in order to determine who these
people are, what they're doing, and whether or not they
actually are running drugs or posing another threat to the
United States and its citizens. But none of that was
done and a huge intelligence opportunity was lost. In addition to,
(09:58):
of course, the legal concerns you correctly raise.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Okay, our guest in this half hour is sin and
military analyst Colonel Cedric Layton, US Air Force retired. We've
been talking about Donald Trump's Trump's use of military force
in this half hour. In the next half hour, our
(10:23):
guests will be Sarah Jones, editor in chief of politicals USA.
We're going to talk about the new disappointing job numbers
with Sarah and also discuss the continued fouled cover up
of the Donald Trump's involvement in the Epstein sex saga.
(10:45):
But for now, we're going to take a very quick
break for our radio listeners, our TV are online visual
visitors will continue this interview right after this very short break.
(11:11):
Welcome back to Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. My guess
in this half hour as CNN Military analyst Colonel Cedric Layton,
US Air Force retired. Colonel Layton, I want to ask
you about another thing that happened last week. Last week,
there was a summit meeting of Asian leaders in Peking
(11:36):
the Prime Minister of India was there. Of Vladimir Putin
was there. The North Korean dictator was there. I found
this very disturbing, like I do pretty much everything else
about what the president does. Could you explain the significance
of this Asian Conference last week.
Speaker 4 (11:57):
Yeah, Brad, this was one of the most significant conferences,
and actually there were two things that were going on.
The main conference was of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which
is a Chinese led effort of various nations in Central
and Eastern Asia that is designed to basically serve as
(12:17):
an economic model for them and in essence allow China
to exercise its power. The other big thing that was
a key visual was the military parade, and so there
were several factors involved here. The fact that Prime Minister
Modi of India, as you mentioned, was there was a
(12:39):
very significant development because China and India have almost gone
to war several times in recent years over territory in
the Himalayas. China and India are not natural friends. Both
of them, however, are allied with Russia to a certain extent.
(13:00):
And what drove Prime Minister Modi into the arms of
China's president She was the tariffs that Trump imposed on
India because of its purchasing of Russian oil and gas.
Now one can make an argument that the Indians should
(13:21):
certainly curtail their purchases of Russian oil and gas because
that feeds directly into Russia's coffers, which then support the
war in Ukraine and Russia's offensive actions there. The problem
is that for many decades, and I was one of
the people involved in this. For many decades, since at
least the nineties, we've been trying to cultivate a good
(13:45):
relationship with India. India is the world's largest nominal democracy.
It is also the country with the world's largest population,
now having surpassed China. It is a rising power, it
is economic powerhouse that is rapidly developing, and it would
be an ideal nation to use to counter any offensive
(14:09):
activities that the Chinese might want to undertake. But the
current administration basically threw all that away by imposing these
tariffs in a way that really offended the Indians. And
that effort has basically caused not only a problem on
(14:29):
the economic side of things, but it has ruptured military
relations between the US and India, and it has also
caused difficulties for trade relations in addition to what is
obvious with the tariffs. So all of the efforts that
have been put into place since the Clinton administration and
possibly before that to cultivate India have basically been thrown
(14:52):
by the wayside. What the Chinese did was they basically
showcased a lot of their new weaponry, things like laser weapons,
intercontinentibilistic missiles, drones, both air drones as well as under
sea drones. So the Chinese are showcasing a modern military
that is then forcing their neighboring countries to at least
(15:16):
pay attention to what the Chinese are doing and potentially
ally themselves with the Chinese in effort to protect their
localized sovereignty. So that is one of the major issues
and appears to be at the moment at least a
failure of the Trump administration to appreciate the nuances of
the relationship, of the difficult relationship with a country like India.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Yeah, you know, I was on a panel last week
that was aired on the Times of India news channel,
and the Indians on a panel were furious about Donald
Trump's imposition of a fifty percent tariff on Indian goods.
And you know, one of the other panelists, you know,
(16:01):
Trump is you know, India is the best friend that
the United States has in Asia and he's trying to
drive us away. And my response was, well, he's trying
to drive our allies in Europe a way too, so
it shouldn't be as a surprise.
Speaker 4 (16:19):
Yeah, and unfortunately, Yeah, that seems to be a part
for the course, there is a lack of understanding in
this administration of not only these specific relationships, but there
seems to be a desire in an effort to go
America first, there seems to be a desire to upend
all those relationships, and that's going to create a world
(16:40):
that is going to be an exceedingly dangerous place if
these trends are not reversed.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
Okay, one last question, colonel, because as usual, running out
of time before I get through my entire agenda with you.
But what gives us an update of what's happening in
the Ukraine? I read Western Post article last week that
quoted an anonymous Trump official said, well, we weren't able
(17:08):
to bring them together, so we're going to let Russia
and Ukraine fight it out. Now, what's going on there exactly?
Speaker 4 (17:16):
Well, that would be one of the craziest things to
do and one of the most counterproductive things. But basically,
the Russians are exerting maximum pressure since their meeting in
Beijing with President she and the parade the Russians have
thrown a record number of drones and missiles against Ukrainian targets,
and what they're wanting to do is break the will
(17:38):
of the Ukrainian population. They are so far not succeeding
in doing that. The Europeans have said that they would
provide a military force once there's a ceasefire in Ukraine
between Russia and Ukraine. The problem is is that we
won't reach a ceasefire because the Russians think that they
(17:58):
can win this war, and they have to be taught
that they cannot win this war. And really what needs
to happen is a preemptive military as well as economic
actions against Russia to tell them that their moves are
not going to result in their ability to in essence,
conquer Ukraine and eliminate its government.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
Yeah, it's every thing that Trump administration seems to do
in terms of international policy and domestic policy is counter productive.
That seems to be their motto. One last question, what's
going on in Gaza right now? I guess the Israelis
(18:41):
have renewed their attacks on the city.
Speaker 4 (18:44):
Yes, In fact, what they're doing is they're conducting offensive operations,
are beginning to conduct offensive operations to capture the entire
city and move about a million gozens away from their
homes in Gaza City. That is something that is not
going to help them get the hostages back, and it's
(19:04):
also creating some major difficulties in terms of negotiating a
final settlement or even an interim settlement, even a cease
fire to this war between Hamas and Israel.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Okay, Colonel Layton, thank you very much again for joining
us on Deadline d C with Brian Bannon. I'm sure
we're going to ask you to come back soon because
there's a lot happening in the world. We're going to
take a quick break now. I want to thank Colonel
(19:41):
Layton and advance our next guest, Sarah Jones, editor in
chief of Politicus USA. She'll be joining us in a
moment right after this very quick break, so don't go anywhere.
This is Deadline DC. Welcome back to Deadline DC with
(20:08):
Brad Bannon. Our guests in this half hours are good friends,
Sarah Jones, editor in chief of Politicus USA. Before we
get to Sarah, we're going to play this clip about
the administration's response to the devastating job figures that came
(20:29):
out Friday, seeing that the nation had only added twenty
one thousand new jobs and there were more people looking
for jobs than there were jobs available.
Speaker 5 (20:41):
The President said that these tariffs are going to spark
a manufacturing renaissance, he called it. But since he announced
them in April, the US has actually lost forty two
thousand manufacturing jobs. Are these numbers proof that the tariffs
are failing to produce the manufacturing jobs that President trumped? Again?
Speaker 4 (21:02):
Christen, it's been a couple of months, and with.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
The manufacturing sector, as you know, you know, we can't
snap our fingers and have factories belts.
Speaker 5 (21:11):
So, mister secretary, you know the economy did add nearly
half a million manufacturing jobs under former President Biden. In
this case, since April, again, you're actually losing manufacturing jobs.
Hasbro says they're going to have to increase their prices.
Goldman sacks as eighty six percent of the tariff revenue
collected so far has been paid by American businesses and consumers.
(21:31):
So just bottom line, mister secretary, do you acknowledge that
these tariffs are attacks on American consumer?
Speaker 4 (21:36):
No?
Speaker 2 (21:37):
I don't, Okay, I guess he doesn't have to because
the Trump administration is famous or infamous for not dealing
with reality. Our best here today to talk about the
Trump economy and other matters and the ever ongoing Epstein
(21:59):
Files scandal, is Sarah Jones, editor in chief of Politicus USA. Welcome, Sarah,
Welcome back to Deadline DC.
Speaker 6 (22:10):
Thanks so much for having me, Brad. I'm really glad
to be here.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
Oh We're always glad to have you here too. Okay,
let me. Let's your reaction to last week's job numbers.
Job growth was in potential last month, christ about you know,
jobs are down, prices are up. It's Trump in trouble.
Speaker 6 (22:32):
Well he should be in trouble.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
But I think yes, I think when this all this
economic data and it is starting to hit people, and
Republicans are even aware of that because now they're thinking, oh,
you know, we might have to do something about the
Obamacare subsidies if we don't want to lose the midterms.
Because notably, a lot of this stuff from the one
(22:54):
big beautiful bill that's going to really hurt people won't
kick in until after the midterms, so people might not
be aware of everything. They are aware of the tariffs
right now, and I think in terms of this job's
report to things. You know, Number one, can we trust
this job's report from you know? After Trump has had
all this up people, it's firing people and replacing people
(23:16):
with people to give him numbers? Is this about lowering
the interest rates, which he has been pushing them to do.
Speaker 6 (23:23):
On the other hand, the.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Fact that that jobs are those job numbers were so bad,
it does kind of break my heart for all of
the people who People can't afford that right now, like
groceries are too expensive, gas is too expensive, People can't
pay their bills, and so to lose jobs.
Speaker 6 (23:44):
In this economy, and I don't know what kind of support.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
They're going to get. You know, they're gonna what about
if they have kids? Do they have snap after? You know,
it's just all of these questions that come up. I
don't see this as good news for Donald Trump, and
I think it's going to be increasingly bad news for him.
And that we're just talking before we came on about
the poll numbers and so on the economy, on the tariffs.
(24:07):
He's underwater and that's just we are too early into
his presidency for numbers like this, and he his whole
presidency is very clearly not about average Americans. Everything he's
doing is about enriching the oligarchs that he surrounds himself with.
(24:29):
And so I think that is and that kind of
corruption does tie directly into the Epstein situation. So it's
all if I were to put a label on his
presidency so far, I think that Epstein's scandal, even if
he has nothing to even if he's not on the
list and he did nothing criminal, which there's no indication
(24:50):
that he has, but the cover up of it and
all of the questions about why he is out there
whipping against Republicans to tell not to vote for this
discharge petition so these files can be released, that question,
that corruption that's underlining that question really does explain this
(25:12):
presidency so far.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
Well, let me ask you. I'm writing a piece to
The Hill, which if you'd like to read, will probably
be online on Wednesday. You can read it at muckrack
dot com, front slash Brad Bannon. Anyway. It's a reaction
to the devastating job numbers on Friday. As I said before,
(25:38):
prices the way up. Jobs are down, and my thought
is that God knows there are a million reasons to
hate Donald Trump. We've probably talked about, you know, a
thousand of them on the show, maybe more than that.
But my theory is, and I'm pretty secure in this,
(26:01):
that if any single thing will be bring Donald Trump down,
will bring the Republican Congress down, it's the increases in prices,
because that's where you know, you can talk about, you know,
Trump's egregious ignorance of the Constitution, but democracy is sort
(26:24):
of fundable concept. But trying to bake go to the
grocery store and buy state to grill on Labor Day weekend.
I was in the grocery store last week and the prices,
I can't believe how much higher than they are. And
there's very little social safety net anymore for people who fall.
(26:46):
The social safety net was ripped to shreds earlier in
the years with the Big Bad Bill. And my advice
to my clients is to focus on the economy, especially inflation,
because that will bring Trump and a Republican Congress down
more than anything else, despite all the other reasons to
(27:08):
hate him.
Speaker 1 (27:09):
What do you think, Well, I think there's a lot
of truth to that, and I myself have been experiencing
these prices. It's absolutely been shocking and I've spent a
lot of my free time going through everything about what
can I cut, and I just it's heartbreaking for people
who are out there who are retired, who are on
social security, people who worked hard their whole lives, people
(27:32):
who don't have a social safety net anymore to think about.
You know, they're not looking at how can I make
all these cuts that can afford my groceries. They're thinking,
do I have to pick between my rent and my groceries?
And that is a horrible tragedy in this country where
we have all of these billionaires now and the wealth
(27:54):
disparity just exploding, and now we're going to have all
of these people. It just kind of reminds me of
the stories out of Russia about so how many people
can't afford to eat.
Speaker 6 (28:04):
And I think some of that.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
Is deliberate to weaken people to you know, when people
have to worry about food, they can't worry about whether
Donald Trump is violating their constitutional rights, so there's less
pushback when people are worried about their survival. And I
do think some of that is intentional. But in terms
(28:26):
of whether it's the Epstein scandal or the money or
you know, the inflation and the prices of everything. I
think you're right about that. I'm always a little worried
about the focus on the Epstein thing, because, yeah, everyone
says this is the thing that the Republican voters really
care about, and yet that poll came out today from
(28:47):
CNN where he's gained a point in approval from Republicans
while he is whipping against releasing the Epstein files. I
do talk to Trump voters very often here, and many
of them are they want these released. But again, they
want them released because they think that they're going to
(29:09):
get Democrats. They don't if Donald Trump is on this list,
that's going to be like, they won't believe it.
Speaker 6 (29:16):
Number one. So you know, I think you're absolutely right.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
I think that the price of living, the cost of
living going up this much is going to be a
big problem.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Trump's lowest job rating on an issue in the New
YUK of Pull national poll Wretched Voters was on inflation,
where only thirty two percent of the voters approved of
his handling of inflation. And what was interesting, they also
asked voters in the UK of survey what was the
(29:50):
most important What was the biggest thing you were worrying
about inflation was number one, and there were actually more
Republicans who cancerned about inflation than Democrats.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
War So.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
The economy, Donald Trump is cruising towards a bruisin if
the economy doesn't start picking up. And remember this is
the guy who promised several times showing the campaign this
last year they would bring prices down on day one
of the second term. Well it's been eight months now
and prices a skill skyrocketing. So I think we've got
(30:29):
big problems. Our guest in this half hour is Sarah Jones,
who is the editor in chief of Politicus USA. We're
discussing the economy. We're going to take a quick break now.
When we get back, we'll move over to discussing the
(30:50):
ongoing Epstein file sex scandal. We'll be back with more
Deadline DC after this very quick break. Welcome back to
Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. Our guest in this half
(31:11):
hour is Sarah Jones, editor in chief of Politicus USA.
Let me ask you something else about the use of
federal forces in the city. One Trump administration officials said
last week that the Democrats can complain all they want
(31:32):
about us sending federal troops to Washington, d C. And
Chicago and wherever else. But they're falling into a trap
because they're criticized. What they're really doing is criticizing the
president's efforts to fight crime. What do you make of that.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
Well, I think Republicans are really pushing that line because
they want to pretend that they're fighting crime. Obviously they're
not fighting crime. That's not the goal of why they
are deploying troops against United States citizens. They want that
to be what sticks in everyone's minds, and they do
want to hold they want to run against Democrats saying
you didn't care about crime in your city when you
(32:14):
look at what's actually happening though, like DC that just
take that as an example, they had a what is it,
thirty year low in violent crime before he deployed these troops.
And when you deploy troops against United States citizens in
the streets, you're inciting violence. You know, it eggs people,
(32:35):
It riles people up, It eggs them on to when
they're already protesting these ice rays and having people kidnapped
off the streets. Then you have these troops in the
streets and people get like the guy that through the
sandwich at the truth, you know, and this is what
he wants. That isn't in my book worthy of this
(32:55):
kind of response. But they took that to martyr themselves
because that's what they want. And I think that JB. Pritzker,
the governor of Illinois, has done a really good job
of prepping his his state to say, don't fall for this,
you know, don't take debit because they want you to
give them a justification for more violence. So if they
(33:17):
want to incite more violence, then they're clearly not working
against crime. And if they, and they already have, they
have defunded not well, I say, cut funding so much
to all these gun prevention programs, which people you know
that has been the cause of the lower crime rates.
(33:37):
Now this how long did it take me to say
that that's the problem Democrats have. So let's flip it
up and say, if I were a strata, just what
would I say to them? Why are you letting Red
states run guns up into our city? If you care
about crime, why aren't you stopping Red states from running
their guns into our cities. We took here and we
(34:01):
cut gun violence here, and now you aren't doing your job.
Speaker 6 (34:05):
That's what I would say. If I was a strategist.
Speaker 2 (34:08):
Okay, By the way, I want to welcome back our
radio listeners.
Speaker 4 (34:13):
If you miss us.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
During the audio breaks for radio, you can watch us
online at Twitter dot com front Slash Brad Bannon or
at Facebook dot com front Slash Deadline d C with
Brad Bannon front Slash videos, or on YouTube at Bannon Deadline.
(34:40):
Let's try that again at Twitter at Deadline DC. Okay,
we finally got to it, Sarah. The Epstein files. The
one of the president's most defenders went to ridiculous links
last week to de Donald Trump, and he said, this
(35:03):
was the Speaker of the House of Representative is Michael
Johnson who said that actually Donald Trump was an FBI
informant who infiltrated the Epstein sex ring to bring it
to justice. It just shows you to me how ludicrous
these explanations are. Getting what you know before in the
(35:27):
first segment, you said something about your leary of using
the Epstein files. Why is that?
Speaker 1 (35:34):
Well, first of all, I mean I don't know how
to stop laughing about when Johnson said, I are you insane?
How desperate? And that all that does is make me
question more what are you hiding? Why Are you humiliating
yourself to this level to hide something for this guy?
(35:54):
So it I'm not I'm all for going after the
Epstein files and releasing the Epstein files. And I think
it's so important to stay centered on the victims and
the survivors and what they need from our government after
so many decades where they have been mistreated. I am
(36:18):
leary of the way that it seems like so many
people in the political sphere are saying, Oh, this is
going to take care of Donald Trump. Now, I'm sorry,
I know it looks that way. I talked to Trump
voters all the time. They do care about this. I
would not rely on this to take care of Donald Trump.
(36:39):
I think eventually some things are going to come out
that are going to look really bad for him. He
was very close friends with Epstein for over a decade.
His names are all over the files that DOJ told
him that they've redacted those Why what does is he involved?
(37:05):
Was he involved in the money? There's there's so many
threads to follow that have nothing to do with the
horrific crimes against children and young girls that you know,
and and a lot of this involves all these different
modeling agencies and Trump had modeling agencies, you just and
he brought in a lot of girls from Eastern Europe
(37:27):
and that is where a lot of the trafficking took place.
Speaker 6 (37:29):
So you see all these.
Speaker 2 (37:30):
Threads out.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
Exactly and you and you see all these threads, right,
they haven't been braided together yet.
Speaker 6 (37:38):
We don't know what it means.
Speaker 1 (37:40):
I do. I think right now, I think the pressure
of the Epstein files is definitely undermining him in the
public's eye. So in terms of the public, yes, it
is very undermining, and I think it should be pursued
just for the fact of justice. James is not going
to get to the bottom of anything if he can
(38:02):
help it. So for people to think that the House
is going to do anything under Republican leadership, that isn't
you know, Massy or Marjorie Taylor Green, I have to say,
I am no Marjorie Taylor Green fan.
Speaker 6 (38:14):
But I do think that she is.
Speaker 1 (38:18):
Authentic about her offer to read the list names on
the House floor to protect the victims from being sued.
And I think she actually cares about this issue, maybe
because she was already kicked out of Trump World, and
maybe this is part of her revenge. I don't know,
but I do think she is genuine on some level
about it and a representative massy.
Speaker 6 (38:39):
I mean, these are people I don't.
Speaker 1 (38:40):
Agree with on a lot of their policies, but it
is kind of really nice to see a Republican care
about these victims. But I also have to say when
I hear when I hear people in that party, like
like Nancy May said, oh, you know, the president has
always cared about women and protected them. The president was
(39:05):
found liable for sexual assault against.
Speaker 6 (39:08):
A woman.
Speaker 1 (39:11):
The last yes, the way, and by the way, just lost.
Speaker 6 (39:17):
That appeal yet again.
Speaker 1 (39:20):
The way that and I think there's twenty six credible
accusations against him, The way that people that his supporters
and too many Republican lawmakers live in this bubble where
they act like this guy cares about women. He does
not care about women, and he is himself a sexual predator.
(39:41):
So maybe he's not involved in the Epstein Island crimes,
maybe he had nothing to do with those things, but
he is a sexual predator found by a jury of
his peers. So that is you know, that was a
civil case and he was found liable. Look away from that,
(40:02):
when we look at all these threads and say, what's
going on here? Why are you guys covering this up?
You know they're going to so much effort. He's saying
it's a hostile act to release these. It only has
to go through through Comer, according to Trump. Now, why
would it only have to go through Comer. Why wouldn't
you want everything released?
Speaker 2 (40:20):
Yeah, it's getting out of hand. What I fear and
we'll have to talk about this next time you're on
the show. Is that to distract Americans from the economic problems,
the high prices, the dearth or jobs and whatever is
going to come out and eventually will come out from
(40:43):
the Epstein files, He's going to resort to some military adventure,
more race baiting, and god knows what. Sarah, thank you
very much for joining us today. It's always a pleasure
to have on you on the show, and I'm sure
you will be back before you have a chance to
(41:05):
link this half hour from your mind and memory. Next week,
I want to thank Sarah. I want to thank Cedric
Layton from CNN. I want to thank our indubitable executive producer,
Mark Grimaldi for putting this together so it doesn't look
(41:26):
like the message really is behind the scenes. Next week
we are guests will be Randy Randy Ryan Garden, who
is the president of the American Federation of Teachers. She
has a new book, Why Fascists Hate Teachers, and I'm
(41:47):
looking forward to having Randy on to discuss that, mainly
because my daughter is a teacher and fascist do hater.
We'll be back next week with more Deadline DC with
Brad Bannon.
The Leslie Marshall Show, a true democracy in talk radio
of for and by you, the people. Live from our
(00:32):
nation's capital, It's Deadline DC with Brad Bannon.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Bye. I'm Brad Bannon, host of Deadline DC with Brad Bannon.
I'm a national Democratic and progressive strategist of political analyst
for news radio kN X in Los Angeles and a
weekly columnist for The Hill in Washington, d C. To
get my take on Donald Trump's imperial present and see
(01:00):
you can read by columns in The Hill at muckrack
dot com front Slash. Brad Bannon. Monday's here on Deadline DC,
I talked to the people and players behind the politics
and policies that drive our great nation forward or at
least keep it from going backwards. During Trump two point zero,
(01:24):
We've got a really good show for you today. In
the first half hour, CNN military analyst Colonel Cedric Layton,
US Air Force retired joins us to discuss Donald Trump's
handling of military policy, which I think is pretty scary. Then,
in the second half hour, Sarah Jones, editor in chief
(01:47):
of Politicus USA, joins us to discuss the Epstein files
cover up and the new devastating job job data. Before
we get to our guests, we're going to play this
clip from Donald Trump where he talks about changing the
name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
We've been talking about this Department of War. So we
won the First World War, we won the Second World War,
we won everything before that and in between, and then
we decided to go woke. Can we changed the name
to Department of Defense. So we're going Department of War.
And I'd like to ask our Secretary of War to
(02:31):
say a few words. Pete Heck said, I think it's
a much more appropriate name, especially in light of where
the world is right now. We have the strongest military
in the world. We have the greatest equipment in the world.
We have the greatest manufacturers of equipment by far.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
That was, of course, the President sounding a tone which
I find very concerning. He's sounding very militaristic these days,
even more so than usual, and it makes me wonder
where he's heading. And that scares me just wondering about it.
(03:07):
Our guests in this half hour to help us along,
here is Cedric Layton, the CNN military analyst and a
retired colonel in the US Air Force. Welcome back to Deadline,
d C. Colonel Layton, how are you doing today.
Speaker 4 (03:23):
I'm doing well bred. Thanks so much for having me again.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Let me ask you this, what was you now you
served in the Air Force? What I think twenty six.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
Years that's right?
Speaker 2 (03:35):
And what is your What was your reaction when you
heard Donald Trump say that he was going to change
the name to the Department of War.
Speaker 4 (03:47):
Well, I certainly normally don't like to go back to
the future, although I do love history. But in this
particular case, I think that changing the name from the
Department of Defense to the Department of War, I really
is evoking the wrong thing. He mentioned that the name
of the Department of Defense was a quote woke unquote term.
(04:10):
Harry Truman, who was the president at the time when
the Department of Defense was established back in the late
nineteen forties, he kin doesn't fit the bill as far
as I'm concerned for being a woke president or a
woke individual at all. So my reaction to the change
(04:30):
in the name is, first of all, I think it's unnecessary. Secondly,
I think it evokes too many offensive connotations and it
sends the wrong message because in a post World War
two era. There is the need, yes, to be tough
from a military standpoint, but also to send the message
(04:53):
that the United States, at least up until this point,
is not in offensive power. It is not by design
in aggressive power, but it will defend its interests and
the interests of interests of its allies. And interestingly enough,
no other country in the world at the moment is
using the title of either Ministry of War or Department
(05:15):
of War to denote the organization that runs its military services.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Okay, let me ask you this. He also said at
some point last week that the United States would have
won all the wars at fought since World War Two
if we had been less woke. What did he mean
by that? Because I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty
(05:41):
stupid to me. What was your reaction.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
Well, I find it offensive to the veterans of the
Korean War, the veterans of the Vietnam War, the veterans
of our fights in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is
I think a born out of a major misunderstanding of
what American history and world history is all about. The
(06:04):
one big conflict that we actually won in the post
World War two era was the Cold War, and he
should be looking at that as being the signature achievement
of not only the Department of Defense, but also the
Department of State, various presidents that were involved from both parties,
(06:26):
and that was really the most important thing. Basically, what
that meant was that it proved that the policy of
containment was actually one that did work. It did not
require offensive military actions in the Grand Scheme. In the extreme,
it did not require us to use nuclear weapons against
the Soviet Union. We came close a few times, but
(06:49):
we were able to manage that particular effort, and it
was something that really showed that the instruments of government
could actually work quite well together. And the fact that
he's in essence casting aspersions on the veterans of a
lot of the wars that we had that fails to
(07:10):
really take into account how difficult those conflicts were. For example,
in Korea, would we if we had gone into China
when the Chinese came to the aid of the North Koreans.
That would have resulted in a calamitous situation. We chose
not to do that. We chose to limit our efforts
because we knew that taking on China was not something
(07:32):
that we could do in the early nineteen fifties, and
we didn't want to do that with Vietnam. A lot
of mistakes were made in Vietnam. It was not a
quote unquote good war. Not that any war is really good,
but it was not. You know, there were many things
that were wrong and how that war was run. But
the fact of the matter is is that there were
many people who served honorably in that war, tried their
(07:54):
best under difficult circumstances, won a lot of battles, but
strategically there was a failure there. And that failure was
something that you know, a lot of people hang their
hat on and saying, you know, we're not doing a
good job in the military. But they failed to understand
the nuances and the complexity of the world that we
were in, and they failed to they basically lose sight
(08:16):
of the fact that we won the major conflict with
the Soviet Union and caused the demise of communism. That
was a major victory.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Okay, let's try this, boy. It was a big week
for Donald Trump and the military, really bad and big
week for the military and Donald Trump last week. Last week,
US Navy jets attacked and sunk a fishing troller in
(08:47):
the Caribbean, which was the Navy claim was a drug
running ship. You know, I don't have any sympathies for
drug cartails or drug runners. But still, the use of
the US force fatal force in this case instead of
(09:09):
just chopped stopping the ship and taking it I find
disturbing for some reason.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Your take, yeah, I would agree. It's you know, military
force should be proportionate to the threat at hand. There's
nothing wrong with intercepting drug traffickers. And if they were
drug traffickers, that's great. They should be intercepted, not necessarily eliminated.
If they're not posing a threat to American military forces
or others. The vessel needs to be boarded, the people
(09:38):
need to be taken into custody, and then intelligence operations
need to be engaged in order to determine who these
people are, what they're doing, and whether or not they
actually are running drugs or posing another threat to the
United States and its citizens. But none of that was
done and a huge intelligence opportunity was lost. In addition to,
(09:58):
of course, the legal concerns you correctly raise.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Okay, our guest in this half hour is sin and
military analyst Colonel Cedric Layton, US Air Force retired. We've
been talking about Donald Trump's Trump's use of military force
in this half hour. In the next half hour, our
(10:23):
guests will be Sarah Jones, editor in chief of politicals USA.
We're going to talk about the new disappointing job numbers
with Sarah and also discuss the continued fouled cover up
of the Donald Trump's involvement in the Epstein sex saga.
(10:45):
But for now, we're going to take a very quick
break for our radio listeners, our TV are online visual
visitors will continue this interview right after this very short break.
(11:11):
Welcome back to Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. My guess
in this half hour as CNN Military analyst Colonel Cedric Layton,
US Air Force retired. Colonel Layton, I want to ask
you about another thing that happened last week. Last week,
there was a summit meeting of Asian leaders in Peking
(11:36):
the Prime Minister of India was there. Of Vladimir Putin
was there. The North Korean dictator was there. I found
this very disturbing, like I do pretty much everything else
about what the president does. Could you explain the significance
of this Asian Conference last week.
Speaker 4 (11:57):
Yeah, Brad, this was one of the most significant conferences,
and actually there were two things that were going on.
The main conference was of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which
is a Chinese led effort of various nations in Central
and Eastern Asia that is designed to basically serve as
(12:17):
an economic model for them and in essence allow China
to exercise its power. The other big thing that was
a key visual was the military parade, and so there
were several factors involved here. The fact that Prime Minister
Modi of India, as you mentioned, was there was a
(12:39):
very significant development because China and India have almost gone
to war several times in recent years over territory in
the Himalayas. China and India are not natural friends. Both
of them, however, are allied with Russia to a certain extent.
(13:00):
And what drove Prime Minister Modi into the arms of
China's president She was the tariffs that Trump imposed on
India because of its purchasing of Russian oil and gas.
Now one can make an argument that the Indians should
(13:21):
certainly curtail their purchases of Russian oil and gas because
that feeds directly into Russia's coffers, which then support the
war in Ukraine and Russia's offensive actions there. The problem
is that for many decades, and I was one of
the people involved in this. For many decades, since at
least the nineties, we've been trying to cultivate a good
(13:45):
relationship with India. India is the world's largest nominal democracy.
It is also the country with the world's largest population,
now having surpassed China. It is a rising power, it
is economic powerhouse that is rapidly developing, and it would
be an ideal nation to use to counter any offensive
(14:09):
activities that the Chinese might want to undertake. But the
current administration basically threw all that away by imposing these
tariffs in a way that really offended the Indians. And
that effort has basically caused not only a problem on
(14:29):
the economic side of things, but it has ruptured military
relations between the US and India, and it has also
caused difficulties for trade relations in addition to what is
obvious with the tariffs. So all of the efforts that
have been put into place since the Clinton administration and
possibly before that to cultivate India have basically been thrown
(14:52):
by the wayside. What the Chinese did was they basically
showcased a lot of their new weaponry, things like laser weapons,
intercontinentibilistic missiles, drones, both air drones as well as under
sea drones. So the Chinese are showcasing a modern military
that is then forcing their neighboring countries to at least
(15:16):
pay attention to what the Chinese are doing and potentially
ally themselves with the Chinese in effort to protect their
localized sovereignty. So that is one of the major issues
and appears to be at the moment at least a
failure of the Trump administration to appreciate the nuances of
the relationship, of the difficult relationship with a country like India.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Yeah, you know, I was on a panel last week
that was aired on the Times of India news channel,
and the Indians on a panel were furious about Donald
Trump's imposition of a fifty percent tariff on Indian goods.
And you know, one of the other panelists, you know,
(16:01):
Trump is you know, India is the best friend that
the United States has in Asia and he's trying to
drive us away. And my response was, well, he's trying
to drive our allies in Europe a way too, so
it shouldn't be as a surprise.
Speaker 4 (16:19):
Yeah, and unfortunately, Yeah, that seems to be a part
for the course, there is a lack of understanding in
this administration of not only these specific relationships, but there
seems to be a desire in an effort to go
America first, there seems to be a desire to upend
all those relationships, and that's going to create a world
(16:40):
that is going to be an exceedingly dangerous place if
these trends are not reversed.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
Okay, one last question, colonel, because as usual, running out
of time before I get through my entire agenda with you.
But what gives us an update of what's happening in
the Ukraine? I read Western Post article last week that
quoted an anonymous Trump official said, well, we weren't able
(17:08):
to bring them together, so we're going to let Russia
and Ukraine fight it out. Now, what's going on there exactly?
Speaker 4 (17:16):
Well, that would be one of the craziest things to
do and one of the most counterproductive things. But basically,
the Russians are exerting maximum pressure since their meeting in
Beijing with President she and the parade the Russians have
thrown a record number of drones and missiles against Ukrainian targets,
and what they're wanting to do is break the will
(17:38):
of the Ukrainian population. They are so far not succeeding
in doing that. The Europeans have said that they would
provide a military force once there's a ceasefire in Ukraine
between Russia and Ukraine. The problem is is that we
won't reach a ceasefire because the Russians think that they
(17:58):
can win this war, and they have to be taught
that they cannot win this war. And really what needs
to happen is a preemptive military as well as economic
actions against Russia to tell them that their moves are
not going to result in their ability to in essence,
conquer Ukraine and eliminate its government.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
Yeah, it's every thing that Trump administration seems to do
in terms of international policy and domestic policy is counter productive.
That seems to be their motto. One last question, what's
going on in Gaza right now? I guess the Israelis
(18:41):
have renewed their attacks on the city.
Speaker 4 (18:44):
Yes, In fact, what they're doing is they're conducting offensive operations,
are beginning to conduct offensive operations to capture the entire
city and move about a million gozens away from their
homes in Gaza City. That is something that is not
going to help them get the hostages back, and it's
(19:04):
also creating some major difficulties in terms of negotiating a
final settlement or even an interim settlement, even a cease
fire to this war between Hamas and Israel.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Okay, Colonel Layton, thank you very much again for joining
us on Deadline d C with Brian Bannon. I'm sure
we're going to ask you to come back soon because
there's a lot happening in the world. We're going to
take a quick break now. I want to thank Colonel
(19:41):
Layton and advance our next guest, Sarah Jones, editor in
chief of Politicus USA. She'll be joining us in a
moment right after this very quick break, so don't go anywhere.
This is Deadline DC. Welcome back to Deadline DC with
(20:08):
Brad Bannon. Our guests in this half hours are good friends,
Sarah Jones, editor in chief of Politicus USA. Before we
get to Sarah, we're going to play this clip about
the administration's response to the devastating job figures that came
(20:29):
out Friday, seeing that the nation had only added twenty
one thousand new jobs and there were more people looking
for jobs than there were jobs available.
Speaker 5 (20:41):
The President said that these tariffs are going to spark
a manufacturing renaissance, he called it. But since he announced
them in April, the US has actually lost forty two
thousand manufacturing jobs. Are these numbers proof that the tariffs
are failing to produce the manufacturing jobs that President trumped? Again?
Speaker 4 (21:02):
Christen, it's been a couple of months, and with.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
The manufacturing sector, as you know, you know, we can't
snap our fingers and have factories belts.
Speaker 5 (21:11):
So, mister secretary, you know the economy did add nearly
half a million manufacturing jobs under former President Biden. In
this case, since April, again, you're actually losing manufacturing jobs.
Hasbro says they're going to have to increase their prices.
Goldman sacks as eighty six percent of the tariff revenue
collected so far has been paid by American businesses and consumers.
(21:31):
So just bottom line, mister secretary, do you acknowledge that
these tariffs are attacks on American consumer?
Speaker 4 (21:36):
No?
Speaker 2 (21:37):
I don't, Okay, I guess he doesn't have to because
the Trump administration is famous or infamous for not dealing
with reality. Our best here today to talk about the
Trump economy and other matters and the ever ongoing Epstein
(21:59):
Files scandal, is Sarah Jones, editor in chief of Politicus USA. Welcome, Sarah,
Welcome back to Deadline DC.
Speaker 6 (22:10):
Thanks so much for having me, Brad. I'm really glad
to be here.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
Oh We're always glad to have you here too. Okay,
let me. Let's your reaction to last week's job numbers.
Job growth was in potential last month, christ about you know,
jobs are down, prices are up. It's Trump in trouble.
Speaker 6 (22:32):
Well he should be in trouble.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
But I think yes, I think when this all this
economic data and it is starting to hit people, and
Republicans are even aware of that because now they're thinking, oh,
you know, we might have to do something about the
Obamacare subsidies if we don't want to lose the midterms.
Because notably, a lot of this stuff from the one
(22:54):
big beautiful bill that's going to really hurt people won't
kick in until after the midterms, so people might not
be aware of everything. They are aware of the tariffs
right now, and I think in terms of this job's
report to things. You know, Number one, can we trust
this job's report from you know? After Trump has had
all this up people, it's firing people and replacing people
(23:16):
with people to give him numbers? Is this about lowering
the interest rates, which he has been pushing them to do.
Speaker 6 (23:23):
On the other hand, the.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Fact that that jobs are those job numbers were so bad,
it does kind of break my heart for all of
the people who People can't afford that right now, like
groceries are too expensive, gas is too expensive, People can't
pay their bills, and so to lose jobs.
Speaker 6 (23:44):
In this economy, and I don't know what kind of support.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
They're going to get. You know, they're gonna what about
if they have kids? Do they have snap after? You know,
it's just all of these questions that come up. I
don't see this as good news for Donald Trump, and
I think it's going to be increasingly bad news for him.
And that we're just talking before we came on about
the poll numbers and so on the economy, on the tariffs.
(24:07):
He's underwater and that's just we are too early into
his presidency for numbers like this, and he his whole
presidency is very clearly not about average Americans. Everything he's
doing is about enriching the oligarchs that he surrounds himself with.
(24:29):
And so I think that is and that kind of
corruption does tie directly into the Epstein situation. So it's
all if I were to put a label on his
presidency so far, I think that Epstein's scandal, even if
he has nothing to even if he's not on the
list and he did nothing criminal, which there's no indication
(24:50):
that he has, but the cover up of it and
all of the questions about why he is out there
whipping against Republicans to tell not to vote for this
discharge petition so these files can be released, that question,
that corruption that's underlining that question really does explain this
(25:12):
presidency so far.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
Well, let me ask you. I'm writing a piece to
The Hill, which if you'd like to read, will probably
be online on Wednesday. You can read it at muckrack
dot com, front slash Brad Bannon. Anyway. It's a reaction
to the devastating job numbers on Friday. As I said before,
(25:38):
prices the way up. Jobs are down, and my thought
is that God knows there are a million reasons to
hate Donald Trump. We've probably talked about, you know, a
thousand of them on the show, maybe more than that.
But my theory is, and I'm pretty secure in this,
(26:01):
that if any single thing will be bring Donald Trump down,
will bring the Republican Congress down, it's the increases in prices,
because that's where you know, you can talk about, you know,
Trump's egregious ignorance of the Constitution, but democracy is sort
(26:24):
of fundable concept. But trying to bake go to the
grocery store and buy state to grill on Labor Day weekend.
I was in the grocery store last week and the prices,
I can't believe how much higher than they are. And
there's very little social safety net anymore for people who fall.
(26:46):
The social safety net was ripped to shreds earlier in
the years with the Big Bad Bill. And my advice
to my clients is to focus on the economy, especially inflation,
because that will bring Trump and a Republican Congress down
more than anything else, despite all the other reasons to
(27:08):
hate him.
Speaker 1 (27:09):
What do you think, Well, I think there's a lot
of truth to that, and I myself have been experiencing
these prices. It's absolutely been shocking and I've spent a
lot of my free time going through everything about what
can I cut, and I just it's heartbreaking for people
who are out there who are retired, who are on
social security, people who worked hard their whole lives, people
(27:32):
who don't have a social safety net anymore to think about.
You know, they're not looking at how can I make
all these cuts that can afford my groceries. They're thinking,
do I have to pick between my rent and my groceries?
And that is a horrible tragedy in this country where
we have all of these billionaires now and the wealth
(27:54):
disparity just exploding, and now we're going to have all
of these people. It just kind of reminds me of
the stories out of Russia about so how many people
can't afford to eat.
Speaker 6 (28:04):
And I think some of that.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
Is deliberate to weaken people to you know, when people
have to worry about food, they can't worry about whether
Donald Trump is violating their constitutional rights, so there's less
pushback when people are worried about their survival. And I
do think some of that is intentional. But in terms
(28:26):
of whether it's the Epstein scandal or the money or
you know, the inflation and the prices of everything. I
think you're right about that. I'm always a little worried
about the focus on the Epstein thing, because, yeah, everyone
says this is the thing that the Republican voters really
care about, and yet that poll came out today from
(28:47):
CNN where he's gained a point in approval from Republicans
while he is whipping against releasing the Epstein files. I
do talk to Trump voters very often here, and many
of them are they want these released. But again, they
want them released because they think that they're going to
(29:09):
get Democrats. They don't if Donald Trump is on this list,
that's going to be like, they won't believe it.
Speaker 6 (29:16):
Number one. So you know, I think you're absolutely right.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
I think that the price of living, the cost of
living going up this much is going to be a
big problem.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Trump's lowest job rating on an issue in the New
YUK of Pull national poll Wretched Voters was on inflation,
where only thirty two percent of the voters approved of
his handling of inflation. And what was interesting, they also
asked voters in the UK of survey what was the
(29:50):
most important What was the biggest thing you were worrying
about inflation was number one, and there were actually more
Republicans who cancerned about inflation than Democrats.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
War So.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
The economy, Donald Trump is cruising towards a bruisin if
the economy doesn't start picking up. And remember this is
the guy who promised several times showing the campaign this
last year they would bring prices down on day one
of the second term. Well it's been eight months now
and prices a skill skyrocketing. So I think we've got
(30:29):
big problems. Our guest in this half hour is Sarah Jones,
who is the editor in chief of Politicus USA. We're
discussing the economy. We're going to take a quick break now.
When we get back, we'll move over to discussing the
(30:50):
ongoing Epstein file sex scandal. We'll be back with more
Deadline DC after this very quick break. Welcome back to
Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. Our guest in this half
(31:11):
hour is Sarah Jones, editor in chief of Politicus USA.
Let me ask you something else about the use of
federal forces in the city. One Trump administration officials said
last week that the Democrats can complain all they want
(31:32):
about us sending federal troops to Washington, d C. And
Chicago and wherever else. But they're falling into a trap
because they're criticized. What they're really doing is criticizing the
president's efforts to fight crime. What do you make of that.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
Well, I think Republicans are really pushing that line because
they want to pretend that they're fighting crime. Obviously they're
not fighting crime. That's not the goal of why they
are deploying troops against United States citizens. They want that
to be what sticks in everyone's minds, and they do
want to hold they want to run against Democrats saying
you didn't care about crime in your city when you
(32:14):
look at what's actually happening though, like DC that just
take that as an example, they had a what is it,
thirty year low in violent crime before he deployed these troops.
And when you deploy troops against United States citizens in
the streets, you're inciting violence. You know, it eggs people,
(32:35):
It riles people up, It eggs them on to when
they're already protesting these ice rays and having people kidnapped
off the streets. Then you have these troops in the
streets and people get like the guy that through the
sandwich at the truth, you know, and this is what
he wants. That isn't in my book worthy of this
(32:55):
kind of response. But they took that to martyr themselves
because that's what they want. And I think that JB. Pritzker,
the governor of Illinois, has done a really good job
of prepping his his state to say, don't fall for this,
you know, don't take debit because they want you to
give them a justification for more violence. So if they
(33:17):
want to incite more violence, then they're clearly not working
against crime. And if they, and they already have, they
have defunded not well, I say, cut funding so much
to all these gun prevention programs, which people you know
that has been the cause of the lower crime rates.
(33:37):
Now this how long did it take me to say
that that's the problem Democrats have. So let's flip it
up and say, if I were a strata, just what
would I say to them? Why are you letting Red
states run guns up into our city? If you care
about crime, why aren't you stopping Red states from running
their guns into our cities. We took here and we
(34:01):
cut gun violence here, and now you aren't doing your job.
Speaker 6 (34:05):
That's what I would say. If I was a strategist.
Speaker 2 (34:08):
Okay, By the way, I want to welcome back our
radio listeners.
Speaker 4 (34:13):
If you miss us.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
During the audio breaks for radio, you can watch us
online at Twitter dot com front Slash Brad Bannon or
at Facebook dot com front Slash Deadline d C with
Brad Bannon front Slash videos, or on YouTube at Bannon Deadline.
(34:40):
Let's try that again at Twitter at Deadline DC. Okay,
we finally got to it, Sarah. The Epstein files. The
one of the president's most defenders went to ridiculous links
last week to de Donald Trump, and he said, this
(35:03):
was the Speaker of the House of Representative is Michael
Johnson who said that actually Donald Trump was an FBI
informant who infiltrated the Epstein sex ring to bring it
to justice. It just shows you to me how ludicrous
these explanations are. Getting what you know before in the
(35:27):
first segment, you said something about your leary of using
the Epstein files. Why is that?
Speaker 1 (35:34):
Well, first of all, I mean I don't know how
to stop laughing about when Johnson said, I are you insane?
How desperate? And that all that does is make me
question more what are you hiding? Why Are you humiliating
yourself to this level to hide something for this guy?
(35:54):
So it I'm not I'm all for going after the
Epstein files and releasing the Epstein files. And I think
it's so important to stay centered on the victims and
the survivors and what they need from our government after
so many decades where they have been mistreated. I am
(36:18):
leary of the way that it seems like so many
people in the political sphere are saying, Oh, this is
going to take care of Donald Trump. Now, I'm sorry,
I know it looks that way. I talked to Trump
voters all the time. They do care about this. I
would not rely on this to take care of Donald Trump.
(36:39):
I think eventually some things are going to come out
that are going to look really bad for him. He
was very close friends with Epstein for over a decade.
His names are all over the files that DOJ told
him that they've redacted those Why what does is he involved?
(37:05):
Was he involved in the money? There's there's so many
threads to follow that have nothing to do with the
horrific crimes against children and young girls that you know,
and and a lot of this involves all these different
modeling agencies and Trump had modeling agencies, you just and
he brought in a lot of girls from Eastern Europe
(37:27):
and that is where a lot of the trafficking took place.
Speaker 6 (37:29):
So you see all these.
Speaker 2 (37:30):
Threads out.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
Exactly and you and you see all these threads, right,
they haven't been braided together yet.
Speaker 6 (37:38):
We don't know what it means.
Speaker 1 (37:40):
I do. I think right now, I think the pressure
of the Epstein files is definitely undermining him in the
public's eye. So in terms of the public, yes, it
is very undermining, and I think it should be pursued
just for the fact of justice. James is not going
to get to the bottom of anything if he can
(38:02):
help it. So for people to think that the House
is going to do anything under Republican leadership, that isn't
you know, Massy or Marjorie Taylor Green, I have to say,
I am no Marjorie Taylor Green fan.
Speaker 6 (38:14):
But I do think that she is.
Speaker 1 (38:18):
Authentic about her offer to read the list names on
the House floor to protect the victims from being sued.
And I think she actually cares about this issue, maybe
because she was already kicked out of Trump World, and
maybe this is part of her revenge. I don't know,
but I do think she is genuine on some level
about it and a representative massy.
Speaker 6 (38:39):
I mean, these are people I don't.
Speaker 1 (38:40):
Agree with on a lot of their policies, but it
is kind of really nice to see a Republican care
about these victims. But I also have to say when
I hear when I hear people in that party, like
like Nancy May said, oh, you know, the president has
always cared about women and protected them. The president was
(39:05):
found liable for sexual assault against.
Speaker 6 (39:08):
A woman.
Speaker 1 (39:11):
The last yes, the way, and by the way, just lost.
Speaker 6 (39:17):
That appeal yet again.
Speaker 1 (39:20):
The way that and I think there's twenty six credible
accusations against him, The way that people that his supporters
and too many Republican lawmakers live in this bubble where
they act like this guy cares about women. He does
not care about women, and he is himself a sexual predator.
(39:41):
So maybe he's not involved in the Epstein Island crimes,
maybe he had nothing to do with those things, but
he is a sexual predator found by a jury of
his peers. So that is you know, that was a
civil case and he was found liable. Look away from that,
(40:02):
when we look at all these threads and say, what's
going on here? Why are you guys covering this up?
You know they're going to so much effort. He's saying
it's a hostile act to release these. It only has
to go through through Comer, according to Trump. Now, why
would it only have to go through Comer. Why wouldn't
you want everything released?
Speaker 2 (40:20):
Yeah, it's getting out of hand. What I fear and
we'll have to talk about this next time you're on
the show. Is that to distract Americans from the economic problems,
the high prices, the dearth or jobs and whatever is
going to come out and eventually will come out from
(40:43):
the Epstein files, He's going to resort to some military adventure,
more race baiting, and god knows what. Sarah, thank you
very much for joining us today. It's always a pleasure
to have on you on the show, and I'm sure
you will be back before you have a chance to
(41:05):
link this half hour from your mind and memory. Next week,
I want to thank Sarah. I want to thank Cedric
Layton from CNN. I want to thank our indubitable executive producer,
Mark Grimaldi for putting this together so it doesn't look
(41:26):
like the message really is behind the scenes. Next week
we are guests will be Randy Randy Ryan Garden, who
is the president of the American Federation of Teachers. She
has a new book, Why Fascists Hate Teachers, and I'm
(41:47):
looking forward to having Randy on to discuss that, mainly
because my daughter is a teacher and fascist do hater.
We'll be back next week with more Deadline DC with
Brad Bannon.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
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.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.