September 29, 2025 • 40 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 Tim Karr, Senior Director of Strategy and Communications at 'Free Press,' a nonpartisan organization fighting for your rights to connect and communicate.
The pair examines how Trump and his FCC pressured media organizations to remove Jimmy Kimmel from the airwaves, but also discusses how Americans banded together to make their voices heard in opposition to the authoritarian style actions.
Then, Brad is joined by Ana Valdez, President & CEO of the Latino Donor Collaborative (LDC), which produces the annual U.S. Latino GDP Report.
The two examine the contributions made by Hispanic Americans, as well as their population and economic trends, in honor of Hispanic Heritage Month.
Brad and Ana also talk about the repercussions from the Supreme Court decision that allows ICE to resume arrests in Los Angeles based on appearance, language, or type of work.
Drawing on the LDC's data showing Latinos as one of America's fastest-growing economic engines, Ana also released a statement emphasizing that the Court's decision carries consequences far beyond immigration enforcement:
"This is not law enforcement; it is racial profiling.
That is not how the Fourth Amendment is supposed to work. The Constitution requires specific facts, not a checklist of skin color, language, and job site.
It also ignores economic reality. Latinos are not on the margins of this country; we are a major growth driver. Our GDP reached $4 trillion in 2023, making us the fifth-largest economy in the world if measured independently. Latino incomes and purchasing power are growing about twice as fast as the rest of the country, and Latino consumer spending topped $2.5 trillion last year. Targeting people who look or sound Latino undercuts the workforce and the businesses that keep the U.S. economy strong for everyone. Profiling this workforce is economic self-harm.
And it ignores the community reality. Most Latinos are fully part of the American fabric. Ninety-four percent of Latinos under 18 are U.S.-born, and nine out of ten Latinos overall are citizens or lawful residents. Treating Spanish speakers or brown people as presumptive suspects means punishing citizens on their way to work and parents on school runs, not just the undocumented.
Enforcement of immigration law cannot come at the cost of civil liberties and human dignity.
America's economic future depends on treating Latinos as full and equal participants in our society, not targets of suspicion."
The website for Free Press is www.FreePress.net and their handle on BlueSky is @freepress.bsky.social. Tim Karr's handle is @timkarr.bsky.social.
The website for the Latino Donor Collaborative is www.LatinoDonorCollaborative.org and their handle on X is @LDCLatino and Ana's handle is @LDCAna1.
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: Leon Neal / Getty Images; Randy Holmes / Disney)
Brad is first joined by Tim Karr, Senior Director of Strategy and Communications at 'Free Press,' a nonpartisan organization fighting for your rights to connect and communicate.
The pair examines how Trump and his FCC pressured media organizations to remove Jimmy Kimmel from the airwaves, but also discusses how Americans banded together to make their voices heard in opposition to the authoritarian style actions.
Then, Brad is joined by Ana Valdez, President & CEO of the Latino Donor Collaborative (LDC), which produces the annual U.S. Latino GDP Report.
The two examine the contributions made by Hispanic Americans, as well as their population and economic trends, in honor of Hispanic Heritage Month.
Brad and Ana also talk about the repercussions from the Supreme Court decision that allows ICE to resume arrests in Los Angeles based on appearance, language, or type of work.
Drawing on the LDC's data showing Latinos as one of America's fastest-growing economic engines, Ana also released a statement emphasizing that the Court's decision carries consequences far beyond immigration enforcement:
"This is not law enforcement; it is racial profiling.
That is not how the Fourth Amendment is supposed to work. The Constitution requires specific facts, not a checklist of skin color, language, and job site.
It also ignores economic reality. Latinos are not on the margins of this country; we are a major growth driver. Our GDP reached $4 trillion in 2023, making us the fifth-largest economy in the world if measured independently. Latino incomes and purchasing power are growing about twice as fast as the rest of the country, and Latino consumer spending topped $2.5 trillion last year. Targeting people who look or sound Latino undercuts the workforce and the businesses that keep the U.S. economy strong for everyone. Profiling this workforce is economic self-harm.
And it ignores the community reality. Most Latinos are fully part of the American fabric. Ninety-four percent of Latinos under 18 are U.S.-born, and nine out of ten Latinos overall are citizens or lawful residents. Treating Spanish speakers or brown people as presumptive suspects means punishing citizens on their way to work and parents on school runs, not just the undocumented.
Enforcement of immigration law cannot come at the cost of civil liberties and human dignity.
America's economic future depends on treating Latinos as full and equal participants in our society, not targets of suspicion."
The website for Free Press is www.FreePress.net and their handle on BlueSky is @freepress.bsky.social. Tim Karr's handle is @timkarr.bsky.social.
The website for the Latino Donor Collaborative is www.LatinoDonorCollaborative.org and their handle on X is @LDCLatino and Ana's handle is @LDCAna1.
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: Leon Neal / Getty Images; Randy Holmes / Disney)
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.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Live from our nation's capital, It's Deadline DC with Brad Bannon.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Welcome to Deadline d C with Brad Bannon. I'm Brad Bannon.
I'm a national Democratic and progressive strategist of political analyst
for news radio kN X in Los Angeles and a
weekly calumnist to The Hill in Washington, d C. If
(00:58):
you want to get my tea on Donald Trump's imperial presidency,
and I hope you do, you can check out my
columns in the Hill at muckrack dot com front Slash.
Brad Bannon Monday's on Deadline DC, I talked to the
people and to the players behind the politics and the
(01:19):
policies that drive our great nation forward or at least
keep it from going backwards. During Trump two point zero today,
we have a great show for you. In the first
half hour, Tim Carr, the senior director of Strategy and
Communications at Free Press, joins us to discuss Donald Trump's
(01:42):
suppression of the free press. Then, in the second half hour,
Na Valdez, who is the CEO and President of the
Latino Donor Council, joins US during Hispanic Heritage Month to
discuss the contribution Hispanics to American society. Before we get
(02:04):
to our first guest, Tim Carr, we're going to play
this clip by Jimmy Kimmel and his response to the
Federal Communication Commission.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
NCC has a tradition of meddling where they shouldn't under
many administrations. But it wasn't always like this. There was
an FCC commissioner back in twenty twenty two who worked
under Joe Biden who was spot on. He wrote, President
Biden is right. Political satire is one of the oldest
and most important forms of free speech. It challenges those
in power while using humor to draw more people into
(02:36):
the discussion. That's why people in influential positions have always
targeted it for censorship. You know who wrote that, FCC
Commissioner Brendan Carr, who later was appointed Chairman of the
FCC by this former crusader for free speech.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
If we don't have free speech, then we just don't
have a free country. People as that if this most
fundamental right is allowed to perish, then the rest of
our rights and liberties will topple, just like dominoes, one
by one.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
They'll go down.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
That was also in twenty twenty two, and I wonder,
how did that guy turn into this guy?
Speaker 5 (03:16):
Would you like to see replaced Kimmel on Late Night?
Speaker 4 (03:19):
A lot of people anybody could replace the guy had
no talent, Jimble.
Speaker 5 (03:24):
Look, he was fired. He had no talent.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
He's a whack job, but he had no talented.
Speaker 4 (03:30):
More importantly than talented had because a lot of people
have no talented get ratings, but he had no ratings.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
Well I do.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Tonight the President of the United States made it very
clear he wants to see me and the hundreds of
people who work here fired from our jobs. Our leader
celebrates Americans losing their livelihoods because he can't take a joke.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Well, that, of course was Jimmy Kimmel, late night comedian
and a victim of the Trump campaign against a free
speech who fortunately won his battle, and we're going to
talk about that battle today and how he won it
(04:20):
with Tim Carr, who was senior director of Strategy and
Communications at Free Press. Tim, welcome back to Deadline DC
with Brad Bannon.
Speaker 5 (04:31):
Hi, Brad, it's great to be with you now.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Tim. We all know that ABC and it's the ABC
Broadcast Network and his parent company, Disney, gave Jimmy Kimmel
a time out lest ascally lasted only a few nights.
(04:56):
But first of all, how did Jimmy Kimmel get in
trouble with the FCC and Donald Trump in the first place.
Speaker 2 (05:06):
Well, I mean, I don't know the real reason, but
the reason that they stated, well.
Speaker 5 (05:12):
Actually I do know the real reason, but it wasn't
the reason.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
That The.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Real reason is that the Trump administration has this exerted
campaign to silence dissent and silence really anyone who's trying
to call the president to account. Now, they decided to
take what I thought was a fairly innocuous comment by
(05:40):
Jimmy Kimmel about the possible motivations of the killer of
Charlie Kirk as you know, the trigger in effect. Sorry
might be the wrong use of words, but to go
after after Kimmel, And unfortunately, the Trump administration had in
(06:03):
the FCC chairman Brendan Carr, a willing accomplice in their
efforts to censor dissenting voices. So Carr went on a
very conservative podcast and said, using somewhat mafiosa language, that
we could do this the easy way, the hard way,
basically signaling not only to ABC, which produces the Kimmel Show,
(06:25):
but to some of the broadcasters that erit, like Nextstar
in Sinclair, that they needed to do something to silence
Kimmel because of this supposedly horrible thing that he said.
And unfortunately they all of them, ABC and the two
of the largest broadcast companies, Next Star and Sinclair, you know,
(06:50):
jumped in and canceled the program. And as you've noted,
it only lasted a little while, but it was a
it was a very busy week, and it commanded headlines
in ways that I hadn't seen before. Of course, we
saw that Stephen Stephen Colbert lost his job as paramount
(07:13):
was trying to get the FCC to sign off on
its proposed merger with Skydance. That you saw some attention
in the press and the public, but nothing at the
scale that we saw around Jimmy Kimmel's suspension.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Let me ask you this question. Did Disney and ABC
decide to push Kimmel off the air because they were
scared of how Trump and the FEC chairman might react
to any large scale business track transactions they proposed for
(07:55):
the federal government. To improve. What was their motivation for
Kimmel off the air.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
I mean, it's a bit of a mystery why Bob Iger,
who's the top boss at Disney which owns ABC, made
this decision.
Speaker 5 (08:11):
He's not.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
Like a Rupert Murdoch's. His politics are not conservative in
that way that he would do this, you know, just
despite the left. It's a bit of a mystery, and
I think that ABC Disney has a lot to answer
for because you know, not only did he take the
program off the air.
Speaker 5 (08:33):
But he invited in.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
A major a hurricane of dissent and criticism, and it
was a really unwise move on ABC's part. Now it's
easier to understand why to those two large broadcasters Sinclair
and Next Star, decided to take Kimmel off their program.
They made those decisions before ABC. They are looking to
(09:00):
the FCC to bless In the case of Next Star.
Nextstar is trying to buy Tegna, which is a large
network of television stations, and in order to get that
deal approved, it requires the FCC to sign off on
it because it involves the transfer of broadcast licenses. Sinclair,
which is a history of right wing ideology in its
(09:22):
ownership and in the mandates that it sends out to
its more than one hundred and eighty five stations, also
has deals before the FCC. So there're have a long answer,
but it's much easier to understand why Next Star and
Sinclair did this. They did it for all the wrong reasons,
of course, but they had some sort of you know,
business a financial argument to make about getting these mergers approved.
(09:45):
ABC I think remains an open question. We've you know,
asked for Congress not only to call Chairman Carr to
answer some questions and hearing, but we also think that
the leaders of Disney, iiker leaders of Next Star and
Sinclair should also be called before Congress to answer questions
(10:07):
as to how this all happened, because it was a
bleatant violation of the First Amendment and the first No
Amendment limits on what the FCC can and certainly cannot.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Do used to anyway, Tim, We've got to take a
quick break here to let our radio listeners have a
little vacation that will last a couple of minutes, but
we will continue this interview with Tim Carr from Free
Press right after this very short break. We're going to
(10:39):
talk more about the Shimmy Kimmel, dismissal corporate prushuer on
freedom of speech, and who knows what else. When we
get back from with more of Deadline DC with Brad Bannon,
Welcome back to are a radio audience. Uh, this is
(11:03):
Deadline d C with Brad Bannon. And by the way,
for our radio listeners, if you'd like to watch Deadline
DC as well as listen to it, uh, you can
watch us at Twitter dot com, front Slash Brad Bannon,
at Facebook dot com front Slash, Deadline d C with
(11:25):
Brad Bannon, front Slash Videos, and at YouTube dot com
at Deadline d C. Our guest in this half hour
is Tim Carr from pre Press.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (11:39):
Tim, let's start off with this.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
You started to talk about this, but uh, why did
uh ABC fold uh and bring back himmels Cross closely
quickly after a few nights. Was it the public pressure
from your view to wild viewers.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
Yes, it was definitely public pressure. I mean they will
not claim that that's the reason, but they decided. I
mean there was such a massive public outcry against this
decision by ABC and by these broadcasters that you know,
people were threatening boycotts, They were threatening not to visit
their theme parks, and ABC I think decided to really
(12:23):
cut its losses. And you know, after they say, after
careful negotiation, they decided to.
Speaker 5 (12:31):
Bring Kimmel back.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Of course, they benefited because his return show just had
massive ratings. It was four times the numbers the viewers,
and of course they capitalize off of that from with advertising.
But yeah, no, they they I think realized that the
decision was wrong and were in full damage control. And
I think that's also true for the major broadcast conglomerates
(12:56):
that have a number of ABC affiliates. That was Next
Star in Sinclair, who had both decided to pull his
programming as well. You know, within days following ABC's decision
to restore Kimmel, they made a similar decision and are
now trying to make the story go away. This was
really a massive loss for the Trump administration and the FCC,
(13:19):
and it was a major embarrassment for these media industries
that have so thoroughly capitulated to the Trump administration in
this second term.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Okay, let me ask you this. Looking at this entire sorry, well,
let me let me ask you a question first. Now,
to put this in context, Kimmel essentially got in trouble
with ABC, Disney Sinclair and Next Star by repeating some
(13:49):
of the horrible things that Charlie Kirk said about women, blacks,
minorities in general. And essentially they were defending Charlie Kirks.
A Trump administration or whoever else was defending Charlie Kirk's
(14:10):
rights to free speech by taking awake Kimmels. What kind
of sense does that send and what kind of message
does that send?
Speaker 2 (14:19):
I mean, well, it's interesting that you let off this
program with incidents of Brendan Carr and President Trump flip
flopping on their commitments to the.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
First Yeah, I mean, their idea.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
The First Amendment is is it protects my rights.
Speaker 5 (14:36):
But not yours to free speech.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
And so there was this concerted effort in the wake
of Kirk's tragic a murder to canonize him, to make
him this sort of all American free speech champion, which
(14:57):
he wasn't. He called for the silence scene people that
he didn't like. He said worse things than that, And
there is a history for anybody who wants to look
it up. And I think that Jimmy Kimmel was just
sort of commenting on the debate around Kirk and unfortunately
it's not ended there.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
There have been others who've.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
Commented online about Charlie Kirk's I would say toxic legacy,
who have been fired, who have who These aren't people
of the statue of Jimmy Kimmel, people who've just been
fired from their their day to day jobs for saying
something in social media. So there is this kind of
like hypocrisy around the First Amendment, which where you have
(15:43):
the right sort of wrapping themselves in this idea that
they're the victims and they're the ones who are being censored,
when in fact, this is the most sensorial regime, sensorial
administration that we've seen. I think it even even more,
even worse than the Nixon administration. For at least fifty,
possibly eighty.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Years, the Trump administration has attack we're talking about the
First Amendment in this case, freedom of press, but the
Trump has attacked you know, many fundamental constitutional rights. For instance,
(16:24):
the Supreme Court a couple of weeks ago upheld Trump's
right through the Immigration and Customs Enforcement to target people
Latinos based on their appearance, which to me is going
to be a violation of the due process clause in
the fourteenth Amendment. My question to you, Tim, is the
(16:48):
audience won in this case. They stood up for Kimmel
and ABC Disney next to our Sinclair were forced to
put them back on the air. Does this say anything
larger about how progressives can respond to Crump's constitutional attacks
when their rates are being taken away.
Speaker 6 (17:09):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Absolutely. And it's not just progressives. I think we saw
Senator Cruz and Senator Paul also heavily critical of the
FCC for taking this action.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
And I think.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
In the twenty plus years that I've been doing this work,
I have never seen such a strong public response in
defense of the First Amendment. But the problem that is
is that this was not We did not win the war.
We won a battle. There are continuing and ongoing threats
to free speech from this administration. There is a pattern
(17:41):
of collusion between the White House and the SEC to
intimidate the media companies to tow the line and follow
the Trump agenda. So the hope is that we can
keep this great mobilization of public dissent and public defense
at the First Amendment together, so the next time this
has happened, we can call on this this massively engaged
(18:04):
audience to speak out in similar ways.
Speaker 5 (18:09):
And that's the big challenge.
Speaker 2 (18:10):
And the problem is is that we're going to see
another outrage. It's all it's inevitable with this administration. It
didn't start with Kimmel, and it certainly won't end with him.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
Could you talk to him about the executive order that
the President signed, I believe Friday.
Speaker 5 (18:27):
Sure.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
So he signed in an executive order that vaguely calls
for it calls for a crackdown. It's not vague about that,
but he's against whom is where he's vague. He said
it should be a crackdown against domestic terrorists. And the
problem is is that the Trump administration's definition of domestic terrorists.
(18:53):
There's largely anybody who doesn't agree with the Trump administration.
It's very vaguely termed. He's empowered local police forces to
go after whom they believe to be domestic terrorists. He's
talked about this sort of non entity called antifa, which
means anti fascist.
Speaker 5 (19:13):
By the way, Yeah, it does to be to crack
down a him.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
So when you have these sort of vague terms, it
basically gives leeway to law enforcement to basically do whatever
they want.
Speaker 5 (19:27):
It gives leeway to the.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
Trump administration and his allies with the Department of Justice
at the sec of him.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
I'm going to have to stop you there, but I
hope you can come back some time to talk more
about this very important issue. We'll be back with more
of Deadline DC right after this message with Anna Valbez,
who was CEO of the Latino Don't Have Hook collaborative.
(19:58):
Welcome back to Deadline with Brad Bannon. My guest in
this half hour is Anna Valdez, who is the CEO
and president of the Latino doing a collaborative. Anna is
here to talk about the contributions that Hispanics make to
(20:19):
American society and culture. But we're going to start off
first with this clip from Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia talking about
Hispanic heritage. Monks.
Speaker 6 (20:33):
Hi, everyone, it's Sylvia Garcia, your friend and congressoman. We're
watching outrageous brast attacks on DACA recipients by the fella
in the White House and his thugs at Ice and
Chrissy Noam. She's made it crystal clear she doesn't give
a damn about the roll of Wall. Hell, she doesn't
even know what due process is. That's why this week
(20:54):
Representative Deliramdez Andlai rallied ninety five members of Congress to
demand an end to this lawless cruelty. Dreamers are Americans
in every way that matters. They grew up here, build
lives here, and call their country home. They didn't break
any laws, but Donald Trump and Christie Noam want to
(21:15):
brand them as criminals, pretending their legal protections don't even exist.
We know who the real criminals are. It's the Ice
agents abducting parents in the front of their kids and
tearing families apart. Who stead is Bredness and aki est
Bay East Timien is Sukasa. I'm boy then said Morabo Boyos.
(21:44):
So let's be clear, Christine Noam, this Hispanic Heritage Month
we want will not be silent, we will not be afraid,
we will not back down, and we are here to stay,
Stay safe, stay proud of who you are. God.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
That was Congress Gooman Sylvia Garcia talking sending a message
to the Trump administration during Hispanic Heritage Month. Our guest
in this half hour is Anna Valdez, who is the
president and CEO of the Latino Donor Collaborative. Welcome to
(22:22):
Deadline Dcanna Glad to have you.
Speaker 7 (22:25):
Thank you, Brad. It's a nunner. I'm excited to share
the numbers that we create and to share my thoughts
and just converse with you.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
Well, that's why we wanted you on the show today.
First of all, you know, I'd like to talk about
for you to talk about the contributions that Latinos and
Hispanics have made to American society. But before that, let
me ask you what the Latino Donor Collaborative is.
Speaker 7 (22:54):
Absolutely so, Brad. We are a think tank and what
we do is produce information and then distributed about the
economic impact of Latinos in the United States. And the
good news is my job is easy because I deliver
good news uh the country.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
You can stay some of that here on Deadline seats.
Speaker 7 (23:17):
There you go, there you go. And you know what,
when you talk about you know, to like invite me
to share the contributions, they start from the very beginning,
actually before the beginning, Brad. As you know states and
I'm gonna say it on purpose with the Mexican with
a Spanish accent. States like Colorado, Arizona, California, Mexico, Florida,
(23:41):
Montana on all those are Spanish words and they are
Spanish words because they were Mexico before they were the
United States. So populations there have been there more than
you know, almost five hundred years, and so that's they
start write things like cowboys. They were buccutos, and then
(24:01):
of course when the Unit States took over those areas, uh,
they became cowboys. But there are many contributions, things like
the u c l A was was founded originally by
a Latino. Beverly Hills was founded by Latino.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
So all those Los Angeles which is also or Spanish
words as San Francisco, San Diego, and probably a lot of.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
Others, absolutely most of them Albuquerque and you know all
those and in Arizona is the same, right, so in
all those cities, San Antonio, Uh, those cities were just
purely Mexican anyway, long story short, So they started there.
And then when you ask me what are the contribution
contributions today, one of our reports is called the Latino GDP,
(24:48):
which measures the impact in productivity and uh consumption right
of Latinos, And I kind of I got to tell
you that we've been measuring it for eight years and
this last year it turns out that Latinos contributed with
four trillion dollars to the GDP of the United States.
(25:09):
To put it in perspective, Brad, we actually Latinos would
be the fifth largest economy if they were an economy
by themselves. And I'm talking only about Latinos that live
in the United States. Obviously, these numbers don't include Latin America.
It's just basically Latinos in the United States. And so
(25:30):
you know, they have tremendous contributions. They they according to
the Department of Labor, seventy eight percent of all the
new workforce in this country in the next ten years
will come from the Latino community. And that has a
lot to do with its youth. It's a very young community.
It's demographics, and it also has to do with the
(25:51):
apport mobility. Latinos are graduating from college in record numbers,
and they're buying houses, they are starting businesses, and that
is a story that you usually don't hear in media.
Speaker 6 (26:05):
Uh.
Speaker 7 (26:06):
You know, there's a huge myth of who Latinos are,
and it's very far away and very removed from the
reality of who Latinos are.
Speaker 1 (26:15):
Let me ask you this. My great grandparents were immigrants
to this country, the Bannons and Ryans came from Ireland.
The Lea Counts and pre Courts came from French Canada, Quebec.
And I remember when I was a little kid, my
(26:35):
grandfather used to who was the first generation born in
the United States, Uh, talked to me about discrimination against
Irish Catholics and the need uh there he said, especially
when he was looking for a job the first time,
Uh he found all these signs that said no Irish
need apply. Uh. And that's series, you know, that's stuck
(26:58):
with him all through his life. And I'm wondering, is
the current discrimination against Hispanics and the Latinos. Is this
just another wave of anti immigrant hysteria fueled up by
the president, or is this something new in American culture?
Speaker 7 (27:20):
Well, you know, rather like your grandfather. I mean, there's
been discrimination against a lot of different communities, right, the
Italian community, the Jewish community, obviously, against the African American
communities in its inception. I think that there is a tradition, unfortunately,
of a specific segment of Americans right being you know,
(27:45):
prejudiced against anybody that is new. Unfortunately, I just feel
and I just don't feel the numbers say that the
tradition against Latinos has been constant of you know, rejection.
As I said, Latinos were here much before it was America.
(28:07):
Even Spaniards were here much before British people came in.
And so it's been waves of immigration and then waves
of rejection, and then waves of immigration and they waves
of rejection. We are working on a paper that talks
about those waves in different states in different conditions. But
(28:27):
I gotta say, when you have a Supreme Court justice
that is actually revising, if you may, the Fourth Amendment
to make sure that specifically the Latino community is targeted
because of the color of their skin, because of their accent,
(28:47):
because of their language, because of the way they work. Right,
because they're also going to specific workplaces where you know
people are you know, are are working. I think that's
just barbaric. I mean, and again, we can't be political
at the Latino don a collaborative. We're just stating a
(29:10):
social fact today. This you know, even in horrible wars
or you know, situations in different countries that we've heard
through history, the Supreme Court justice has maintained itself neutral
because they don't want to be part of that. In
this case, We're seeing just a targeting in all kinds
(29:34):
of powers, right, So I do believe that this is different.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Yeah, I just think there's that questioned is the right word.
I don't understand how the Supreme Court can legitimize some
of the tactics and actions that are being taken to,
you know, throughout the court and mass Latinos to discriminate
(30:02):
against them and hiring and firing. There's something fundamentally wrong here,
and that's one of the reasons why I wanted you
to I wanted to have you on the show. But
we've got to take a sherry short break now to
give our radio listeners a break. But we are going
to continue with this interview on Deadline DC with Honor Valdez,
(30:29):
who is the President and CEO of the Latin Donor Collaborative.
So don't go anywhere. We've got a lot more for
you on Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. We'll be right
back after this very quick break. Welcome back to our
(30:50):
radio audience. This is Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. Our
guest in this half hour is Honor Valdez, who is
the SEA and President of the Latin Dona Cooperative. Let
me ask you this. I've heard even from the President unfortunately,
(31:14):
about Latino's taking away American jobs, doing all, you know,
committing crimes, and it seems to me that there needs
to be more focus on the Latino community and the
contributions they're making to the United States rather this drumbeat
(31:37):
of criticism I hear from Washington. So how do you
think we can turn that around or how is the
latin going to cooperative trying to turn this around?
Speaker 7 (31:50):
Absolutely? Well, first of all, Brad, it's so interesting because
they say Latinos are really lazy, right, So I don't
understand how we can be lazy and take their jobs
away to start with. Right, It's like this incoherence between
what we're supposed to be all negative, which actually contradict
you know itself. So and then again with criminality, Latinos
(32:12):
are one of the two communities with the lowest criminality
in this country. So yes, again stereotypes that are false.
But what are we doing? So we're creating this data
because again we go to resource allocators that are basically
evaluated and valued based on their bottom line, and we
tell them you got to start including Latinos so that
(32:35):
we change this and I don't know if you've heard,
and I'm sure you have, but in the Wall Street
Journal and the New York Times and Barns I am
Bloomberg CEOs. Lately, since this violent movement against Latinos started
this year, we've heard CEOs from c from Coke, for example,
(32:57):
Coca Cola saying please stop it because our sales went
down three point three and we tie them directly to
Latinos not purchasing our drinks. Constellation brands with Modello saying
please stop it. Our trend has been positive since we
bought Modelo Villere seven years ago, and now Latinos are
(33:21):
not gathering. They're not going out because they're afraid, and
that takes a toll in consumption. The same with Target,
the same with Walmart, the same with many other t mobile.
We just had a a presentation with with Jack in
the Box saying the Latino consump consumer is not coming out.
(33:42):
We need you know that consumption. So we're bringing the
numbers to show that this is not good for Americans
because it's bad for the economy. Forget about you know
the bad precedent in civil you know rights, or the
bad president in what's right to do right, it's not
(34:04):
right to racially profile a community, especially from a country
like in the United States. But it is really bad
for business. We have kids writing to us saying why
is this happening? If we are contributing and my parents
build the fit largest economy in the world, why is
this happening? And so, Brad, I think the lesson here
(34:26):
is what's good for America. It's good for all communities.
And when you're targeting one community in such an aggressive way,
this is not good for anybody. And remember this, and
I'm going to close with this to your question. Obviously,
you know when you imagine, you know, when you deport
(34:47):
half of the people that are working in a construction job,
or in a field, or in a meatpacking or in
a dairy you know, productive production, or when you close
a business that was founded by Latino because there are
problems in terms of deportation. You don't only affect those people.
(35:08):
You affect the rest of the people that are in
the construction site, in the factory, the accountant, the CEO,
the consumers of the product. So this is extending two
places that Americans don't want to see, you know, impacted,
for example, the and just the Federal Reserve of Dallas
(35:29):
about three weeks ago presented a report that says that
the economy this year has slowed down in a way
that just by August the GDP was had gone down
almost one percent point eight percent just the first part
of the year. Brad, the GDP of the Neited States
(35:50):
needs to continue growing so we can continue being the
number one economy in this world. If we actually start
seeing decree on our competitiveness, that's not good for anybody.
Speaker 1 (36:05):
Let me ask you mentioned racial profiling. A few weeks ago,
the Supreme Court issued a ruling backing up, you know,
very draconian anti immigrant policies from the administration that basically
said racial profiling is okay, it doesn't violate the Constitution.
(36:29):
How do they you know, how do you think that
could possibly true? I mean, it seems like a gross
violation of the due process clause in the fourteenth Amendment
to me, you know, do they how did they come
up with? Maybe I'm asking that's the wrong question. You
probably it's not, you know, but it just bothers the
(36:53):
heck out of me because it seems like a gross
constitution amendment. You know what effected these mass deportations going
to have on the American economy. That's what I wanted
to ask you.
Speaker 7 (37:03):
Well, and you know what to the beginning of your question, Brad,
there were three strongly dissents in the Supreme Court justice.
Speaker 1 (37:12):
And including the Hispanic Supreme Court justice.
Speaker 7 (37:17):
Yes, son, of course, the Supreme Court justice. And so
when you see this so heavily political divide in a
Supreme Court justice, it's just not right. It's not good
for anybody, because eventually there will be a democratic majority
in the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1 (37:36):
And reported I hope right.
Speaker 7 (37:39):
I mean, well, I can't answer that because I can't
do you know, but but I understand what you're saying.
So this is not good for anybody. This is not right.
We were an example, uh in the world because of
our fairness, our democratics. Ways are you know, the separation
between the three powers right now? There don't seem to
(38:01):
be a separation between the three powers. Right now. We
are seeing, you know, foreign countries saying what is happening
in a country that used to be your example. I'm
going to give you another example that also undermines that.
Just recently, we've seen the administration questioning data data that
has been done for decades, and data in which the
(38:25):
value of our dollar is based, and because of that,
the value of many other coins in this world are based.
When we start messing up with the impartiality of our numbers,
we start looking for trouble in terms of the power
of our coin, of our central bank, of our banks,
(38:45):
private banks, and of our leadership in general.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Yeah, it's just, you know, I don't under you know, honestly,
I don't understand. And you know, people complain about inflation,
but we're making it more expensive to build new homes.
It just makes no sense to me. We're looking for
(39:09):
a growing workforce of which Latinos make up a major part,
to pay social security benefits in the future. There's nothing
rational about this. It's this blind hatred, it seems to me,
which is being exploited by high political officials. Anna, thanks
very much for joining us today on Deadline DC. We
(39:32):
appreciate you taking the time out of your busy schedule
to make disappearance, and we hope you'll come back sometime
to talk to us again. That's it for Deadline DC today.
I want to thank our guest on a lot is Valdez,
(39:53):
who is the president and CEO of The Latino doing
a cooperative and Tim carr In the first calp Ouer,
who is the senior director of strategy and Communications at
Free Press. I also want to thank our intrupt executive
producer Mark Grimaldi, who makes this mess go and cur
(40:18):
regularly every week. Miss the next Deadline DC with the
best and very best and aggressive progressive must see online TV.
Miss it at your own peril, because we're coming back
with a vengeance.
The Leslie Marshall Show, A true democracy in talk radio
of for and by you, the people.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Live from our nation's capital, It's Deadline DC with Brad Bannon.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Welcome to Deadline d C with Brad Bannon. I'm Brad Bannon.
I'm a national Democratic and progressive strategist of political analyst
for news radio kN X in Los Angeles and a
weekly calumnist to The Hill in Washington, d C. If
(00:58):
you want to get my tea on Donald Trump's imperial presidency,
and I hope you do, you can check out my
columns in the Hill at muckrack dot com front Slash.
Brad Bannon Monday's on Deadline DC, I talked to the
people and to the players behind the politics and the
(01:19):
policies that drive our great nation forward or at least
keep it from going backwards. During Trump two point zero today,
we have a great show for you. In the first
half hour, Tim Carr, the senior director of Strategy and
Communications at Free Press, joins us to discuss Donald Trump's
(01:42):
suppression of the free press. Then, in the second half hour,
Na Valdez, who is the CEO and President of the
Latino Donor Council, joins US during Hispanic Heritage Month to
discuss the contribution Hispanics to American society. Before we get
(02:04):
to our first guest, Tim Carr, we're going to play
this clip by Jimmy Kimmel and his response to the
Federal Communication Commission.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
NCC has a tradition of meddling where they shouldn't under
many administrations. But it wasn't always like this. There was
an FCC commissioner back in twenty twenty two who worked
under Joe Biden who was spot on. He wrote, President
Biden is right. Political satire is one of the oldest
and most important forms of free speech. It challenges those
in power while using humor to draw more people into
(02:36):
the discussion. That's why people in influential positions have always
targeted it for censorship. You know who wrote that, FCC
Commissioner Brendan Carr, who later was appointed Chairman of the
FCC by this former crusader for free speech.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
If we don't have free speech, then we just don't
have a free country. People as that if this most
fundamental right is allowed to perish, then the rest of
our rights and liberties will topple, just like dominoes, one
by one.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
They'll go down.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
That was also in twenty twenty two, and I wonder,
how did that guy turn into this guy?
Speaker 5 (03:16):
Would you like to see replaced Kimmel on Late Night?
Speaker 4 (03:19):
A lot of people anybody could replace the guy had
no talent, Jimble.
Speaker 5 (03:24):
Look, he was fired. He had no talent.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
He's a whack job, but he had no talented.
Speaker 4 (03:30):
More importantly than talented had because a lot of people
have no talented get ratings, but he had no ratings.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
Well I do.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Tonight the President of the United States made it very
clear he wants to see me and the hundreds of
people who work here fired from our jobs. Our leader
celebrates Americans losing their livelihoods because he can't take a joke.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Well, that, of course was Jimmy Kimmel, late night comedian
and a victim of the Trump campaign against a free
speech who fortunately won his battle, and we're going to
talk about that battle today and how he won it
(04:20):
with Tim Carr, who was senior director of Strategy and
Communications at Free Press. Tim, welcome back to Deadline DC
with Brad Bannon.
Speaker 5 (04:31):
Hi, Brad, it's great to be with you now.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Tim. We all know that ABC and it's the ABC
Broadcast Network and his parent company, Disney, gave Jimmy Kimmel
a time out lest ascally lasted only a few nights.
(04:56):
But first of all, how did Jimmy Kimmel get in
trouble with the FCC and Donald Trump in the first place.
Speaker 2 (05:06):
Well, I mean, I don't know the real reason, but
the reason that they stated, well.
Speaker 5 (05:12):
Actually I do know the real reason, but it wasn't
the reason.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
That The.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Real reason is that the Trump administration has this exerted
campaign to silence dissent and silence really anyone who's trying
to call the president to account. Now, they decided to
take what I thought was a fairly innocuous comment by
(05:40):
Jimmy Kimmel about the possible motivations of the killer of
Charlie Kirk as you know, the trigger in effect. Sorry
might be the wrong use of words, but to go
after after Kimmel, And unfortunately, the Trump administration had in
(06:03):
the FCC chairman Brendan Carr, a willing accomplice in their
efforts to censor dissenting voices. So Carr went on a
very conservative podcast and said, using somewhat mafiosa language, that
we could do this the easy way, the hard way,
basically signaling not only to ABC, which produces the Kimmel Show,
(06:25):
but to some of the broadcasters that erit, like Nextstar
in Sinclair, that they needed to do something to silence
Kimmel because of this supposedly horrible thing that he said.
And unfortunately they all of them, ABC and the two
of the largest broadcast companies, Next Star and Sinclair, you know,
(06:50):
jumped in and canceled the program. And as you've noted,
it only lasted a little while, but it was a
it was a very busy week, and it commanded headlines
in ways that I hadn't seen before. Of course, we
saw that Stephen Stephen Colbert lost his job as paramount
(07:13):
was trying to get the FCC to sign off on
its proposed merger with Skydance. That you saw some attention
in the press and the public, but nothing at the
scale that we saw around Jimmy Kimmel's suspension.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Let me ask you this question. Did Disney and ABC
decide to push Kimmel off the air because they were
scared of how Trump and the FEC chairman might react
to any large scale business track transactions they proposed for
(07:55):
the federal government. To improve. What was their motivation for
Kimmel off the air.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
I mean, it's a bit of a mystery why Bob Iger,
who's the top boss at Disney which owns ABC, made
this decision.
Speaker 5 (08:11):
He's not.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
Like a Rupert Murdoch's. His politics are not conservative in
that way that he would do this, you know, just
despite the left. It's a bit of a mystery, and
I think that ABC Disney has a lot to answer
for because you know, not only did he take the
program off the air.
Speaker 5 (08:33):
But he invited in.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
A major a hurricane of dissent and criticism, and it
was a really unwise move on ABC's part. Now it's
easier to understand why to those two large broadcasters Sinclair
and Next Star, decided to take Kimmel off their program.
They made those decisions before ABC. They are looking to
(09:00):
the FCC to bless In the case of Next Star.
Nextstar is trying to buy Tegna, which is a large
network of television stations, and in order to get that
deal approved, it requires the FCC to sign off on
it because it involves the transfer of broadcast licenses. Sinclair,
which is a history of right wing ideology in its
(09:22):
ownership and in the mandates that it sends out to
its more than one hundred and eighty five stations, also
has deals before the FCC. So there're have a long answer,
but it's much easier to understand why Next Star and
Sinclair did this. They did it for all the wrong reasons,
of course, but they had some sort of you know,
business a financial argument to make about getting these mergers approved.
(09:45):
ABC I think remains an open question. We've you know,
asked for Congress not only to call Chairman Carr to
answer some questions and hearing, but we also think that
the leaders of Disney, iiker leaders of Next Star and
Sinclair should also be called before Congress to answer questions
(10:07):
as to how this all happened, because it was a
bleatant violation of the First Amendment and the first No
Amendment limits on what the FCC can and certainly cannot.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Do used to anyway, Tim, We've got to take a
quick break here to let our radio listeners have a
little vacation that will last a couple of minutes, but
we will continue this interview with Tim Carr from Free
Press right after this very short break. We're going to
(10:39):
talk more about the Shimmy Kimmel, dismissal corporate prushuer on
freedom of speech, and who knows what else. When we
get back from with more of Deadline DC with Brad Bannon,
Welcome back to are a radio audience. Uh, this is
(11:03):
Deadline d C with Brad Bannon. And by the way,
for our radio listeners, if you'd like to watch Deadline
DC as well as listen to it, uh, you can
watch us at Twitter dot com, front Slash Brad Bannon,
at Facebook dot com front Slash, Deadline d C with
(11:25):
Brad Bannon, front Slash Videos, and at YouTube dot com
at Deadline d C. Our guest in this half hour
is Tim Carr from pre Press.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (11:39):
Tim, let's start off with this.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
You started to talk about this, but uh, why did
uh ABC fold uh and bring back himmels Cross closely
quickly after a few nights. Was it the public pressure
from your view to wild viewers.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
Yes, it was definitely public pressure. I mean they will
not claim that that's the reason, but they decided. I
mean there was such a massive public outcry against this
decision by ABC and by these broadcasters that you know,
people were threatening boycotts, They were threatening not to visit
their theme parks, and ABC I think decided to really
(12:23):
cut its losses. And you know, after they say, after
careful negotiation, they decided to.
Speaker 5 (12:31):
Bring Kimmel back.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Of course, they benefited because his return show just had
massive ratings. It was four times the numbers the viewers,
and of course they capitalize off of that from with advertising.
But yeah, no, they they I think realized that the
decision was wrong and were in full damage control. And
I think that's also true for the major broadcast conglomerates
(12:56):
that have a number of ABC affiliates. That was Next
Star in Sinclair, who had both decided to pull his
programming as well. You know, within days following ABC's decision
to restore Kimmel, they made a similar decision and are
now trying to make the story go away. This was
really a massive loss for the Trump administration and the FCC,
(13:19):
and it was a major embarrassment for these media industries
that have so thoroughly capitulated to the Trump administration in
this second term.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Okay, let me ask you this. Looking at this entire sorry, well,
let me let me ask you a question first. Now,
to put this in context, Kimmel essentially got in trouble
with ABC, Disney Sinclair and Next Star by repeating some
(13:49):
of the horrible things that Charlie Kirk said about women, blacks,
minorities in general. And essentially they were defending Charlie Kirks.
A Trump administration or whoever else was defending Charlie Kirk's
(14:10):
rights to free speech by taking awake Kimmels. What kind
of sense does that send and what kind of message
does that send?
Speaker 2 (14:19):
I mean, well, it's interesting that you let off this
program with incidents of Brendan Carr and President Trump flip
flopping on their commitments to the.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
First Yeah, I mean, their idea.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
The First Amendment is is it protects my rights.
Speaker 5 (14:36):
But not yours to free speech.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
And so there was this concerted effort in the wake
of Kirk's tragic a murder to canonize him, to make
him this sort of all American free speech champion, which
(14:57):
he wasn't. He called for the silence scene people that
he didn't like. He said worse things than that, And
there is a history for anybody who wants to look
it up. And I think that Jimmy Kimmel was just
sort of commenting on the debate around Kirk and unfortunately
it's not ended there.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
There have been others who've.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
Commented online about Charlie Kirk's I would say toxic legacy,
who have been fired, who have who These aren't people
of the statue of Jimmy Kimmel, people who've just been
fired from their their day to day jobs for saying
something in social media. So there is this kind of
like hypocrisy around the First Amendment, which where you have
(15:43):
the right sort of wrapping themselves in this idea that
they're the victims and they're the ones who are being censored,
when in fact, this is the most sensorial regime, sensorial
administration that we've seen. I think it even even more,
even worse than the Nixon administration. For at least fifty,
possibly eighty.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Years, the Trump administration has attack we're talking about the
First Amendment in this case, freedom of press, but the
Trump has attacked you know, many fundamental constitutional rights. For instance,
(16:24):
the Supreme Court a couple of weeks ago upheld Trump's
right through the Immigration and Customs Enforcement to target people
Latinos based on their appearance, which to me is going
to be a violation of the due process clause in
the fourteenth Amendment. My question to you, Tim, is the
(16:48):
audience won in this case. They stood up for Kimmel
and ABC Disney next to our Sinclair were forced to
put them back on the air. Does this say anything
larger about how progressives can respond to Crump's constitutional attacks
when their rates are being taken away.
Speaker 6 (17:09):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Absolutely. And it's not just progressives. I think we saw
Senator Cruz and Senator Paul also heavily critical of the
FCC for taking this action.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
And I think.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
In the twenty plus years that I've been doing this work,
I have never seen such a strong public response in
defense of the First Amendment. But the problem that is
is that this was not We did not win the war.
We won a battle. There are continuing and ongoing threats
to free speech from this administration. There is a pattern
(17:41):
of collusion between the White House and the SEC to
intimidate the media companies to tow the line and follow
the Trump agenda. So the hope is that we can
keep this great mobilization of public dissent and public defense
at the First Amendment together, so the next time this
has happened, we can call on this this massively engaged
(18:04):
audience to speak out in similar ways.
Speaker 5 (18:09):
And that's the big challenge.
Speaker 2 (18:10):
And the problem is is that we're going to see
another outrage. It's all it's inevitable with this administration. It
didn't start with Kimmel, and it certainly won't end with him.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
Could you talk to him about the executive order that
the President signed, I believe Friday.
Speaker 5 (18:27):
Sure.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
So he signed in an executive order that vaguely calls
for it calls for a crackdown. It's not vague about that,
but he's against whom is where he's vague. He said
it should be a crackdown against domestic terrorists. And the
problem is is that the Trump administration's definition of domestic terrorists.
(18:53):
There's largely anybody who doesn't agree with the Trump administration.
It's very vaguely termed. He's empowered local police forces to
go after whom they believe to be domestic terrorists. He's
talked about this sort of non entity called antifa, which
means anti fascist.
Speaker 5 (19:13):
By the way, Yeah, it does to be to crack
down a him.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
So when you have these sort of vague terms, it
basically gives leeway to law enforcement to basically do whatever
they want.
Speaker 5 (19:27):
It gives leeway to the.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
Trump administration and his allies with the Department of Justice
at the sec of him.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
I'm going to have to stop you there, but I
hope you can come back some time to talk more
about this very important issue. We'll be back with more
of Deadline DC right after this message with Anna Valbez,
who was CEO of the Latino Don't Have Hook collaborative.
(19:58):
Welcome back to Deadline with Brad Bannon. My guest in
this half hour is Anna Valdez, who is the CEO
and president of the Latino doing a collaborative. Anna is
here to talk about the contributions that Hispanics make to
(20:19):
American society and culture. But we're going to start off
first with this clip from Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia talking about
Hispanic heritage. Monks.
Speaker 6 (20:33):
Hi, everyone, it's Sylvia Garcia, your friend and congressoman. We're
watching outrageous brast attacks on DACA recipients by the fella
in the White House and his thugs at Ice and
Chrissy Noam. She's made it crystal clear she doesn't give
a damn about the roll of Wall. Hell, she doesn't
even know what due process is. That's why this week
(20:54):
Representative Deliramdez Andlai rallied ninety five members of Congress to
demand an end to this lawless cruelty. Dreamers are Americans
in every way that matters. They grew up here, build
lives here, and call their country home. They didn't break
any laws, but Donald Trump and Christie Noam want to
(21:15):
brand them as criminals, pretending their legal protections don't even exist.
We know who the real criminals are. It's the Ice
agents abducting parents in the front of their kids and
tearing families apart. Who stead is Bredness and aki est
Bay East Timien is Sukasa. I'm boy then said Morabo Boyos.
(21:44):
So let's be clear, Christine Noam, this Hispanic Heritage Month
we want will not be silent, we will not be afraid,
we will not back down, and we are here to stay,
Stay safe, stay proud of who you are. God.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
That was Congress Gooman Sylvia Garcia talking sending a message
to the Trump administration during Hispanic Heritage Month. Our guest
in this half hour is Anna Valdez, who is the
president and CEO of the Latino Donor Collaborative. Welcome to
(22:22):
Deadline Dcanna Glad to have you.
Speaker 7 (22:25):
Thank you, Brad. It's a nunner. I'm excited to share
the numbers that we create and to share my thoughts
and just converse with you.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
Well, that's why we wanted you on the show today.
First of all, you know, I'd like to talk about
for you to talk about the contributions that Latinos and
Hispanics have made to American society. But before that, let
me ask you what the Latino Donor Collaborative is.
Speaker 7 (22:54):
Absolutely so, Brad. We are a think tank and what
we do is produce information and then distributed about the
economic impact of Latinos in the United States. And the
good news is my job is easy because I deliver
good news uh the country.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
You can stay some of that here on Deadline seats.
Speaker 7 (23:17):
There you go, there you go. And you know what,
when you talk about you know, to like invite me
to share the contributions, they start from the very beginning,
actually before the beginning, Brad. As you know states and
I'm gonna say it on purpose with the Mexican with
a Spanish accent. States like Colorado, Arizona, California, Mexico, Florida,
(23:41):
Montana on all those are Spanish words and they are
Spanish words because they were Mexico before they were the
United States. So populations there have been there more than
you know, almost five hundred years, and so that's they
start write things like cowboys. They were buccutos, and then
(24:01):
of course when the Unit States took over those areas, uh,
they became cowboys. But there are many contributions, things like
the u c l A was was founded originally by
a Latino. Beverly Hills was founded by Latino.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
So all those Los Angeles which is also or Spanish
words as San Francisco, San Diego, and probably a lot of.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
Others, absolutely most of them Albuquerque and you know all
those and in Arizona is the same, right, so in
all those cities, San Antonio, Uh, those cities were just
purely Mexican anyway, long story short, So they started there.
And then when you ask me what are the contribution
contributions today, one of our reports is called the Latino GDP,
(24:48):
which measures the impact in productivity and uh consumption right
of Latinos, And I kind of I got to tell
you that we've been measuring it for eight years and
this last year it turns out that Latinos contributed with
four trillion dollars to the GDP of the United States.
(25:09):
To put it in perspective, Brad, we actually Latinos would
be the fifth largest economy if they were an economy
by themselves. And I'm talking only about Latinos that live
in the United States. Obviously, these numbers don't include Latin America.
It's just basically Latinos in the United States. And so
(25:30):
you know, they have tremendous contributions. They they according to
the Department of Labor, seventy eight percent of all the
new workforce in this country in the next ten years
will come from the Latino community. And that has a
lot to do with its youth. It's a very young community.
It's demographics, and it also has to do with the
(25:51):
apport mobility. Latinos are graduating from college in record numbers,
and they're buying houses, they are starting businesses, and that
is a story that you usually don't hear in media.
Speaker 6 (26:05):
Uh.
Speaker 7 (26:06):
You know, there's a huge myth of who Latinos are,
and it's very far away and very removed from the
reality of who Latinos are.
Speaker 1 (26:15):
Let me ask you this. My great grandparents were immigrants
to this country, the Bannons and Ryans came from Ireland.
The Lea Counts and pre Courts came from French Canada, Quebec.
And I remember when I was a little kid, my
(26:35):
grandfather used to who was the first generation born in
the United States, Uh, talked to me about discrimination against
Irish Catholics and the need uh there he said, especially
when he was looking for a job the first time,
Uh he found all these signs that said no Irish
need apply. Uh. And that's series, you know, that's stuck
(26:58):
with him all through his life. And I'm wondering, is
the current discrimination against Hispanics and the Latinos. Is this
just another wave of anti immigrant hysteria fueled up by
the president, or is this something new in American culture?
Speaker 7 (27:20):
Well, you know, rather like your grandfather. I mean, there's
been discrimination against a lot of different communities, right, the
Italian community, the Jewish community, obviously, against the African American
communities in its inception. I think that there is a tradition, unfortunately,
of a specific segment of Americans right being you know,
(27:45):
prejudiced against anybody that is new. Unfortunately, I just feel
and I just don't feel the numbers say that the
tradition against Latinos has been constant of you know, rejection.
As I said, Latinos were here much before it was America.
(28:07):
Even Spaniards were here much before British people came in.
And so it's been waves of immigration and then waves
of rejection, and then waves of immigration and they waves
of rejection. We are working on a paper that talks
about those waves in different states in different conditions. But
(28:27):
I gotta say, when you have a Supreme Court justice
that is actually revising, if you may, the Fourth Amendment
to make sure that specifically the Latino community is targeted
because of the color of their skin, because of their accent,
(28:47):
because of their language, because of the way they work. Right,
because they're also going to specific workplaces where you know
people are you know, are are working. I think that's
just barbaric. I mean, and again, we can't be political
at the Latino don a collaborative. We're just stating a
(29:10):
social fact today. This you know, even in horrible wars
or you know, situations in different countries that we've heard
through history, the Supreme Court justice has maintained itself neutral
because they don't want to be part of that. In
this case, We're seeing just a targeting in all kinds
(29:34):
of powers, right, So I do believe that this is different.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Yeah, I just think there's that questioned is the right word.
I don't understand how the Supreme Court can legitimize some
of the tactics and actions that are being taken to,
you know, throughout the court and mass Latinos to discriminate
(30:02):
against them and hiring and firing. There's something fundamentally wrong here,
and that's one of the reasons why I wanted you
to I wanted to have you on the show. But
we've got to take a sherry short break now to
give our radio listeners a break. But we are going
to continue with this interview on Deadline DC with Honor Valdez,
(30:29):
who is the President and CEO of the Latin Donor Collaborative.
So don't go anywhere. We've got a lot more for
you on Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. We'll be right
back after this very quick break. Welcome back to our
(30:50):
radio audience. This is Deadline DC with Brad Bannon. Our
guest in this half hour is Honor Valdez, who is
the SEA and President of the Latin Dona Cooperative. Let
me ask you this. I've heard even from the President unfortunately,
(31:14):
about Latino's taking away American jobs, doing all, you know,
committing crimes, and it seems to me that there needs
to be more focus on the Latino community and the
contributions they're making to the United States rather this drumbeat
(31:37):
of criticism I hear from Washington. So how do you
think we can turn that around or how is the
latin going to cooperative trying to turn this around?
Speaker 7 (31:50):
Absolutely? Well, first of all, Brad, it's so interesting because
they say Latinos are really lazy, right, So I don't
understand how we can be lazy and take their jobs
away to start with. Right, It's like this incoherence between
what we're supposed to be all negative, which actually contradict
you know itself. So and then again with criminality, Latinos
(32:12):
are one of the two communities with the lowest criminality
in this country. So yes, again stereotypes that are false.
But what are we doing? So we're creating this data
because again we go to resource allocators that are basically
evaluated and valued based on their bottom line, and we
tell them you got to start including Latinos so that
(32:35):
we change this and I don't know if you've heard,
and I'm sure you have, but in the Wall Street
Journal and the New York Times and Barns I am
Bloomberg CEOs. Lately, since this violent movement against Latinos started
this year, we've heard CEOs from c from Coke, for example,
(32:57):
Coca Cola saying please stop it because our sales went
down three point three and we tie them directly to
Latinos not purchasing our drinks. Constellation brands with Modello saying
please stop it. Our trend has been positive since we
bought Modelo Villere seven years ago, and now Latinos are
(33:21):
not gathering. They're not going out because they're afraid, and
that takes a toll in consumption. The same with Target,
the same with Walmart, the same with many other t mobile.
We just had a a presentation with with Jack in
the Box saying the Latino consump consumer is not coming out.
(33:42):
We need you know that consumption. So we're bringing the
numbers to show that this is not good for Americans
because it's bad for the economy. Forget about you know
the bad precedent in civil you know rights, or the
bad president in what's right to do right, it's not
(34:04):
right to racially profile a community, especially from a country
like in the United States. But it is really bad
for business. We have kids writing to us saying why
is this happening? If we are contributing and my parents
build the fit largest economy in the world, why is
this happening? And so, Brad, I think the lesson here
(34:26):
is what's good for America. It's good for all communities.
And when you're targeting one community in such an aggressive way,
this is not good for anybody. And remember this, and
I'm going to close with this to your question. Obviously,
you know when you imagine, you know, when you deport
(34:47):
half of the people that are working in a construction job,
or in a field, or in a meatpacking or in
a dairy you know, productive production, or when you close
a business that was founded by Latino because there are
problems in terms of deportation. You don't only affect those people.
(35:08):
You affect the rest of the people that are in
the construction site, in the factory, the accountant, the CEO,
the consumers of the product. So this is extending two
places that Americans don't want to see, you know, impacted,
for example, the and just the Federal Reserve of Dallas
(35:29):
about three weeks ago presented a report that says that
the economy this year has slowed down in a way
that just by August the GDP was had gone down
almost one percent point eight percent just the first part
of the year. Brad, the GDP of the Neited States
(35:50):
needs to continue growing so we can continue being the
number one economy in this world. If we actually start
seeing decree on our competitiveness, that's not good for anybody.
Speaker 1 (36:05):
Let me ask you mentioned racial profiling. A few weeks ago,
the Supreme Court issued a ruling backing up, you know,
very draconian anti immigrant policies from the administration that basically
said racial profiling is okay, it doesn't violate the Constitution.
(36:29):
How do they you know, how do you think that
could possibly true? I mean, it seems like a gross
violation of the due process clause in the fourteenth Amendment
to me, you know, do they how did they come
up with? Maybe I'm asking that's the wrong question. You
probably it's not, you know, but it just bothers the
(36:53):
heck out of me because it seems like a gross
constitution amendment. You know what effected these mass deportations going
to have on the American economy. That's what I wanted
to ask you.
Speaker 7 (37:03):
Well, and you know what to the beginning of your question, Brad,
there were three strongly dissents in the Supreme Court justice.
Speaker 1 (37:12):
And including the Hispanic Supreme Court justice.
Speaker 7 (37:17):
Yes, son, of course, the Supreme Court justice. And so
when you see this so heavily political divide in a
Supreme Court justice, it's just not right. It's not good
for anybody, because eventually there will be a democratic majority
in the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1 (37:36):
And reported I hope right.
Speaker 7 (37:39):
I mean, well, I can't answer that because I can't
do you know, but but I understand what you're saying.
So this is not good for anybody. This is not right.
We were an example, uh in the world because of
our fairness, our democratics. Ways are you know, the separation
between the three powers right now? There don't seem to
(38:01):
be a separation between the three powers. Right now. We
are seeing, you know, foreign countries saying what is happening
in a country that used to be your example. I'm
going to give you another example that also undermines that.
Just recently, we've seen the administration questioning data data that
has been done for decades, and data in which the
(38:25):
value of our dollar is based, and because of that,
the value of many other coins in this world are based.
When we start messing up with the impartiality of our numbers,
we start looking for trouble in terms of the power
of our coin, of our central bank, of our banks,
(38:45):
private banks, and of our leadership in general.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Yeah, it's just, you know, I don't under you know, honestly,
I don't understand. And you know, people complain about inflation,
but we're making it more expensive to build new homes.
It just makes no sense to me. We're looking for
(39:09):
a growing workforce of which Latinos make up a major part,
to pay social security benefits in the future. There's nothing
rational about this. It's this blind hatred, it seems to me,
which is being exploited by high political officials. Anna, thanks
very much for joining us today on Deadline DC. We
(39:32):
appreciate you taking the time out of your busy schedule
to make disappearance, and we hope you'll come back sometime
to talk to us again. That's it for Deadline DC today.
I want to thank our guest on a lot is Valdez,
(39:53):
who is the president and CEO of The Latino doing
a cooperative and Tim carr In the first calp Ouer,
who is the senior director of strategy and Communications at
Free Press. I also want to thank our intrupt executive
producer Mark Grimaldi, who makes this mess go and cur
(40:18):
regularly every week. Miss the next Deadline DC with the
best and very best and aggressive progressive must see online TV.
Miss it at your own peril, because we're coming back
with a vengeance.
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.