Host Erik Fleming leads a wide-ranging conversation with three experts: Les Leopold on labor and runaway inequality, Veronica Cardenas on immigration and humane legal support, and John Bonifaz on free speech, voting rights, and constitutional reform. The episode also includes a news roundup and calls for civic engagement.
Listeners will hear concrete policy ideas, personal stories, and practical resources to stay informed and get involved.
00:00:00 --> 00:00:06 Welcome. I'm Erik Fleming, host of A Moment with Erik Fleming, the podcast of our time.
00:00:06 --> 00:00:08 I want to personally thank you for listening to the podcast.
00:00:09 --> 00:00:12 If you like what you're hearing, then I need you to do a few things.
00:00:13 --> 00:00:19 First, I need subscribers. I'm on Patreon at patreon.com slash amomentwitherikfleming.
00:00:19 --> 00:00:24 Your subscription allows an independent podcaster like me the freedom to speak
00:00:24 --> 00:00:27 truth to power, and to expand and improve the show.
00:00:28 --> 00:00:32 Second, leave a five-star review for the podcast on the streaming service you
00:00:32 --> 00:00:35 listen to it. That will help the podcast tremendously.
00:00:36 --> 00:00:41 Third, go to the website, momenterik.com. There you can subscribe to the podcast,
00:00:42 --> 00:00:47 leave reviews and comments, listen to past episodes, and even learn a little bit about your host.
00:00:47 --> 00:00:51 Lastly, don't keep this a secret like it's your own personal guilty pleasure.
00:00:52 --> 00:00:57 Tell someone else about the podcast. Encourage others to listen to the podcast
00:00:57 --> 00:01:02 and share the podcast on your social media platforms, because it is time to
00:01:02 --> 00:01:04 make this moment a movement.
00:01:04 --> 00:01:10 Thanks in advance for supporting the podcast of our time. I hope you enjoy this episode as well.
00:01:12 --> 00:01:17 The following program is hosted by the NBG Podcast Network.
00:01:57 --> 00:02:03 Hello, and welcome to another moment with Erik Fleming. I am your host, Erik Fleming.
00:02:03 --> 00:02:07 And I'm really, really excited about this show.
00:02:07 --> 00:02:13 And because listeners, I want you to follow this instruction.
00:02:14 --> 00:02:20 I need you to open your political mind for this discussion, because I've got
00:02:20 --> 00:02:27 three guests who have been really, really dedicated to the work they are doing.
00:02:28 --> 00:02:37 And part of their work is challenging the norms that are out there and want
00:02:37 --> 00:02:41 us to do better in our political world.
00:02:41 --> 00:02:45 So I think that's really what I'm going to call this episode,
00:02:45 --> 00:02:51 Open Your Political Mind, because that's what they do for a living.
00:02:53 --> 00:02:58 And even if it's unintentional, just the work that they do. A couple of them
00:02:58 --> 00:02:59 I could definitely say is intentional.
00:03:00 --> 00:03:04 And one, just because of her dedication and her commitment and her experience,
00:03:05 --> 00:03:12 the conversation that we have, that we had, I should say, should open your mind
00:03:12 --> 00:03:15 about the issue that she works on.
00:03:15 --> 00:03:20 So that's my challenge for y'all today. I want y'all to open your political
00:03:20 --> 00:03:29 mind and, and really look at how we can do better in this country, you know,
00:03:29 --> 00:03:33 to get beyond this reality show garbage that we're dealing with right now.
00:03:33 --> 00:03:36 Right. Also to,
00:03:37 --> 00:03:41 Some of you all, by the time you hear this, will be recovering from Halloween
00:03:41 --> 00:03:44 and all that stuff. And that's all good.
00:03:46 --> 00:03:50 And we're fast track approaching now, the end of the year.
00:03:50 --> 00:03:55 It's getting close to the holiday season, Thanksgiving, Christmas and all that stuff.
00:03:56 --> 00:04:02 And I know some of y'all are like, we're 2025. It's been a long year. It seems like it.
00:04:02 --> 00:04:08 But, you know, we're chugging along as normal. So, and I hope that you enjoyed
00:04:08 --> 00:04:09 that extra hour of sleep.
00:04:10 --> 00:04:13 And I don't know how much longer we're going to have that.
00:04:15 --> 00:04:20 But Grace is going to touch on those things that she normally does.
00:04:20 --> 00:04:25 And the one other story that's kind of hitting that she'll touch on is Hurricane
00:04:25 --> 00:04:29 Melissa that hit the Caribbean pretty hard.
00:04:29 --> 00:04:38 Jamaica was the most devastated, you know, the most severe impact was Jamaica.
00:04:38 --> 00:04:42 It affected the island of Hispanola where Haiti and the Dominican Republic exist
00:04:42 --> 00:04:49 and Cuba and even the Bahamas and Turks and Caicos were impacted.
00:04:49 --> 00:04:56 But the storm really, really did its worst in Jamaica.
00:04:56 --> 00:05:03 And so the foresight of the Jamaican government preparing for the storm,
00:05:03 --> 00:05:06 because the storm took a very unusual path.
00:05:06 --> 00:05:09 It looked like it was heading straight to the Gulf of Mexico.
00:05:10 --> 00:05:14 Yes, I say Gulf of Mexico, by the way. Y'all can follow me.
00:05:15 --> 00:05:21 The lead and call it whatever you want to. I'm a Gen Xer, so I'm going to call it the Gulf of Mexico.
00:05:22 --> 00:05:28 It was headed toward the Gulf, and then it decided to make a right turn and
00:05:28 --> 00:05:31 go directly toward the island of Jamaica.
00:05:31 --> 00:05:34 And so, in its full force.
00:05:35 --> 00:05:41 So, you know, they haven't seen a storm of that magnitude since Gilbert.
00:05:42 --> 00:05:51 And that was in the 80s, I believe. So go to this website, supportjamaica.gov.jm.
00:05:52 --> 00:05:59 And if you want to contribute to help in their rebuilding efforts, please do that.
00:05:59 --> 00:06:05 Like I said, they had the foresight to create this website when they saw the right turn happen.
00:06:06 --> 00:06:09 Because, you know, it just looked like it was just going to be a lot of rain.
00:06:10 --> 00:06:16 But they got the full storm. I mean, Category 5, the whole nine yards.
00:06:17 --> 00:06:23 So, and it primarily went across the western part of the island, but the storm was so big.
00:06:25 --> 00:06:31 That it impacted the whole island. I mean, the storm was bigger than the island physically itself.
00:06:32 --> 00:06:36 The eye of the storm was about at least half the size of the island.
00:06:38 --> 00:06:43 So, yeah, supportjamaica.gov.jm. Please do that.
00:06:43 --> 00:06:48 If you want to contribute to other locales that were impacted,
00:06:48 --> 00:06:51 you can always go to International Red Cross, their website,
00:06:51 --> 00:06:53 and connect with them as well.
00:06:54 --> 00:07:02 And, you know, there are some people, United States and United Kingdom and some
00:07:02 --> 00:07:08 other countries have already can earmark resources and people to go down there and to,
00:07:08 --> 00:07:10 you know, try to help with the recovery.
00:07:11 --> 00:07:17 But whatever you can do to help, those folks will greatly appreciate it because,
00:07:17 --> 00:07:23 you know, Jamaica was, again, was the most hardest hit. But there were fatalities
00:07:23 --> 00:07:25 on other islands, as far as we know.
00:07:25 --> 00:07:30 We still haven't got an accurate count because they're really just in a position
00:07:30 --> 00:07:34 to start assessing damage because it was a slow-moving storm.
00:07:34 --> 00:07:37 So it literally took like a day to get across.
00:07:39 --> 00:07:42 So do what you can to help those people out.
00:07:42 --> 00:07:49 All right. So also, you know, I make my normal appeal to subscribe to the podcast.
00:07:49 --> 00:07:52 You can go to patreon.com slash a moment, Erik Fleming.
00:07:53 --> 00:07:59 Yeah. And I will go to moment, Erik.com and continue to show love to the podcast.
00:08:01 --> 00:08:05 And yeah, so enough of the housekeeping stuff. Let's go ahead and get this started.
00:08:05 --> 00:08:09 As always, we kick it off with a moment of news with Grace G.
00:08:15 --> 00:08:21 Thanks, Erik. Hurricane Melissa made history as the strongest storm ever to directly hit Jamaica,
00:08:22 --> 00:08:26 causing widespread devastation and power outages before weakening slightly and
00:08:26 --> 00:08:31 making its second landfall in eastern Cuba, resulting in multiple deaths across the region.
00:08:31 --> 00:08:35 A former sheriff's deputy was convicted by an Illinois jury of second-degree
00:08:35 --> 00:08:40 murder for the 2024 fatal shooting of Sonia Massey. The U.S.
00:08:40 --> 00:08:45 Department of Agriculture will not use its contingency funds to pay for November's
00:08:45 --> 00:08:48 SNAP benefits, which are lapsing due to the federal government shutdown.
00:08:49 --> 00:08:53 Becoming the latest focal points in a widening mid-decade redistricting conflict,
00:08:54 --> 00:08:58 Virginia Democrats convened a special session to counter Republican gains and
00:08:58 --> 00:09:03 Indiana's Republican governor is calling for a special session to weigh redrawing their map.
00:09:03 --> 00:09:07 The U.S. Border Patrol abruptly called off a planned immigration enforcement
00:09:07 --> 00:09:09 push in the San Francisco Bay Area.
00:09:10 --> 00:09:14 Civil rights groups have filed a lawsuit seeking to block the U.S.
00:09:14 --> 00:09:17 Justice Department's decision to close the Community Relations Service,
00:09:17 --> 00:09:20 which focused on reducing racial and ethnic tensions.
00:09:21 --> 00:09:25 New York Attorney General Letitia James pleaded not guilty to federal charges
00:09:25 --> 00:09:28 of allegedly lying on mortgage documents.
00:09:28 --> 00:09:32 California Governor Gavin Newsom stated that he is considering a run for U.S.
00:09:33 --> 00:09:37 President in 2028 and will decide after the 2026 midterm elections.
00:09:38 --> 00:09:42 Israel launched airstrikes in Gaza, killing at least 104 people,
00:09:42 --> 00:09:47 after accusing Hamas of violating a fragile ceasefire brokered by President Trump.
00:09:47 --> 00:09:53 Argentine President Javier Malay's party won a strong victory in midterm legislative
00:09:53 --> 00:09:58 elections, which strengthens his mandate to continue radical economic reforms.
00:09:59 --> 00:10:03 The Federal Reserve cut interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point.
00:10:03 --> 00:10:06 And the U.S. Senate failed to reach
00:10:06 --> 00:10:10 a consensus on a bill that would make daylight saving time permanent.
00:10:10 --> 00:10:14 I am Grace G., and this has been a Moment of News.
00:10:20 --> 00:10:28 All right. Thank you, Grace, for that moment of news. And now it's time for my guest, Les Leopold.
00:10:28 --> 00:10:32 After graduating from Oberlin College in Princeton University School of Public
00:10:32 --> 00:10:34 and International Affairs,
00:10:35 --> 00:10:39 Les Leopold co-founded and currently directs the Labor Institute,
00:10:39 --> 00:10:44 a nonprofit organization that designs research and educational programs on occupational
00:10:44 --> 00:10:48 safety and health, the environment and economics for unions,
00:10:49 --> 00:10:51 workers' centers, and community organizations.
00:10:52 --> 00:10:55 Les has been doing this work since 1975.
00:10:56 --> 00:11:02 In addition to Wall Street's War on Workers, he is the author of Defiant German, Defiant Jew,
00:11:03 --> 00:11:08 runaway inequality, how to make a million dollars an hour while financial elites
00:11:08 --> 00:11:12 get away with siphoning off America's wealth, the looting of America,
00:11:13 --> 00:11:16 how Wall Street's game of fantasy finance destroyed our jobs,
00:11:16 --> 00:11:19 pensions, and prosperity, and what we can do about it,
00:11:20 --> 00:11:23 and the man who hated work and loved labor,
00:11:23 --> 00:11:26 the life and times of Tony Mazzucci.
00:11:26 --> 00:11:31 Ladies and gentlemen, it is my distinct honor and privilege to have as a guest
00:11:31 --> 00:11:34 on this podcast, Les Leopold.
00:11:45 --> 00:11:50 All right, Les Leopold. How are you doing, sir? You doing good? I'm doing okay.
00:11:52 --> 00:11:55 Considering the political climate of the country and the world,
00:11:55 --> 00:11:57 I'm doing okay. Well, that's... I can't complain.
00:11:57 --> 00:12:00 Yeah, that makes two of us there, sir. So I greatly appreciate that answer.
00:12:01 --> 00:12:04 And it's really, really an honor to talk to you.
00:12:05 --> 00:12:10 I know that you have been, and you probably wouldn't label yourself as this,
00:12:10 --> 00:12:15 but you've been probably one of the most notable intellectuals when it comes
00:12:15 --> 00:12:19 to labor and economics in this country.
00:12:20 --> 00:12:25 And so it's really, really a distinction to have you to take the time to come on the podcast.
00:12:26 --> 00:12:30 I want to get this started. Normally, I do a couple of icebreakers before I get this started.
00:12:31 --> 00:12:34 And so the first icebreaker is a quote.
00:12:34 --> 00:12:42 So your quote is, for democracy to endure, our nation must provide stable livelihoods
00:12:42 --> 00:12:45 for working people. What does that quote mean to you?
00:12:45 --> 00:12:48 Well, I think that's a fact of life.
00:12:49 --> 00:12:53 You can't expect people in this country, the way we're set up,
00:12:53 --> 00:12:54 you don't have a job, you don't have anything.
00:12:56 --> 00:12:59 You're not at the bottom of the totem pole, you're off the totem.
00:12:59 --> 00:13:04 It's very hard to have self-respect in our society without a job.
00:13:04 --> 00:13:10 And there is absolutely no reason why everybody can't have a decent job and a decent wage.
00:13:11 --> 00:13:16 That's something we can do, but we don't do it. And that's a tragedy.
00:13:16 --> 00:13:18 And the longer we don't do it, the longer...
00:13:20 --> 00:13:25 People feel so insecure in their jobs when they go through mass layoff after mass layoff.
00:13:25 --> 00:13:29 The longer that exists, I think the more fragile democracy becomes.
00:13:29 --> 00:13:34 Because people say, hey, you know, I need to work. I need to earn a living.
00:13:34 --> 00:13:35 I need to earn a decent living.
00:13:36 --> 00:13:38 You know, otherwise, what's this all about?
00:13:39 --> 00:13:44 Right. And then so my next icebreaker is something I call 20 questions.
00:13:44 --> 00:13:48 So I need you to give me a number between 1 and 20.
00:13:49 --> 00:13:55 Seven. All right. What do you consider the best way to stay informed about politics,
00:13:56 --> 00:13:57 current events, et cetera?
00:13:58 --> 00:14:02 You know, that is a very good question and a very tough question.
00:14:03 --> 00:14:05 I can only tell you what I do.
00:14:06 --> 00:14:12 I'm fortunate. My wife is a professor, so she comes across things, shares them with me.
00:14:13 --> 00:14:16 I watch a little bit of TV news.
00:14:17 --> 00:14:23 You know, a little bit of CNN. I read the New York Times with a grain of salt.
00:14:24 --> 00:14:31 And I get a bunch of different articles sent to me via various news services,
00:14:31 --> 00:14:33 you know, Substack and other places.
00:14:34 --> 00:14:38 And but, you know, it's funny when you get to be a little bit older,
00:14:38 --> 00:14:40 when you get to be my age, Eric,
00:14:41 --> 00:14:48 What happens is you can sift through what sounds true and what doesn't sound
00:14:48 --> 00:14:54 true, and you don't BS yourself.
00:14:54 --> 00:14:59 In other words, you're questioning even your strongest beliefs.
00:14:59 --> 00:15:02 You kind of question them always because
00:15:02 --> 00:15:05 people on the other side of the political spectrum
00:15:05 --> 00:15:10 are lobbying stuff you know misinformation disinformation but you gotta you
00:15:10 --> 00:15:15 gotta you can't blow it all off you have to kind of think about what's coming
00:15:15 --> 00:15:20 at you you know and and make judgments constantly make judgments about what's
00:15:20 --> 00:15:22 real what's not real what's true what's not true.
00:15:24 --> 00:15:30 So your question's good. You have to have information coming your way from a variety of sources.
00:15:31 --> 00:15:33 And then you have to cut through the BS and try to figure out what's real and
00:15:33 --> 00:15:36 what's not real and constantly question yourself.
00:15:37 --> 00:15:42 Don't just blow things away because it upsets you a little bit or you don't like that person.
00:15:42 --> 00:15:45 Try to think about it a little bit. Because I think what happens is you get
00:15:45 --> 00:15:51 stronger in your beliefs, more confident that you have a story to tell when
00:15:51 --> 00:15:54 you start writing and talking to other people, et cetera,
00:15:54 --> 00:16:01 because you've considered the other people's point of view as opposed to just blowing them off.
00:16:01 --> 00:16:07 So it's a delicate balance. And it's an interesting question that I really do
00:16:07 --> 00:16:11 ask myself all the time. Am I getting enough diverse information to actually
00:16:11 --> 00:16:13 write about the things that I want to write about?
00:16:14 --> 00:16:20 And I hope that I do. But you need to be questioning yourself as much as taking information in.
00:16:20 --> 00:16:22 You got to question yourself so you don't get stuck in a rut,
00:16:23 --> 00:16:28 a bubble, you know, where you can't see what other people are thinking and feeling.
00:16:29 --> 00:16:34 Yeah. Talk to the listeners about what the Labor Institute is and why did you
00:16:34 --> 00:16:36 feel the need to create it?
00:16:37 --> 00:16:44 Wow. What it is, is an educational operation that designs programs for working
00:16:44 --> 00:16:47 people largely through trade unions, but not exclusively that way,
00:16:47 --> 00:16:49 on occupational health and safety,
00:16:50 --> 00:16:55 economics, and environmental labor type issues.
00:16:57 --> 00:17:04 And we're strictly educational. We don't work for candidates or anything like that.
00:17:04 --> 00:17:09 And we don't try to get involved in union politics. We just try to open up discussions
00:17:09 --> 00:17:15 and debates within unions, and we try to develop an informed working people.
00:17:16 --> 00:17:22 It's interesting. The start of it was back in, kind of grew out of an internship
00:17:22 --> 00:17:28 I had in 1974 with a guy named Tony Mazzocchi, who was a very progressive leader
00:17:28 --> 00:17:29 of the oil, chemical, and atomic workers.
00:17:29 --> 00:17:36 He's the guy, if you know the Karen Silkwood story at all, a woman who got killed
00:17:36 --> 00:17:42 because she was exposing health and safety problems at a nuclear facility in Oklahoma.
00:17:44 --> 00:17:48 Just as I was leaving my internship, she came in to talk to Mazzaki because
00:17:48 --> 00:17:51 he was helping her at that particular time.
00:17:53 --> 00:17:59 And Mazzaki said, you know what? I think the economy was sort of falling apart at that point.
00:17:59 --> 00:18:04 We had the Arab oil boycott. It looked like a big recession coming on.
00:18:04 --> 00:18:06 There was inflation and unemployment.
00:18:06 --> 00:18:08 He says, you know, working people need to know something about economics.
00:18:09 --> 00:18:13 Why don't you try to set up a course on economics for workers?
00:18:13 --> 00:18:16 I'll get the workers together for a couple of trial runs.
00:18:16 --> 00:18:21 You find the people that can put it together. I was not capable of doing that
00:18:21 --> 00:18:23 kind of class, but I was a pretty good organizer.
00:18:24 --> 00:18:28 And I got the crew together to do that. And it worked pretty well.
00:18:29 --> 00:18:32 And a guy I was working with, David Gordon, who was a pretty famous economist
00:18:32 --> 00:18:35 at the time, has now passed away, died at a young age, actually.
00:18:37 --> 00:18:40 Had some connections and was able to raise some money. We put together a little
00:18:40 --> 00:18:48 institute, and I always wanted to have a little, work in a little kind of a cooperative project.
00:18:48 --> 00:18:52 I'd seen a bunch of them as I was going through grad school,
00:18:52 --> 00:18:53 and I thought, you know, that looks interesting.
00:18:54 --> 00:18:58 And I didn't know what to do for a living. I really didn't know what to do for
00:18:58 --> 00:18:59 a living. I was totally at a loss.
00:19:00 --> 00:19:02 So I thought, okay, let's try this.
00:19:03 --> 00:19:06 And, you know, it was touch and go for a long time.
00:19:06 --> 00:19:11 I mean, we were, the biggest grants we had for a while was unemployment insurance.
00:19:11 --> 00:19:13 We go on unemployment insurance, go back to work.
00:19:14 --> 00:19:19 A couple of years later, back on unemployment insurance, back to work. And we got lucky.
00:19:20 --> 00:19:24 We got some, we picked up some union clients.
00:19:24 --> 00:19:27 We picked, we helped them get health and safety government money,
00:19:28 --> 00:19:32 which then some of it was funneled towards us to do health and safety.
00:19:32 --> 00:19:38 And what really put us on the map was we developed an educational technique
00:19:38 --> 00:19:40 that we call the small group activity method.
00:19:40 --> 00:19:44 It's a non-lecture technique where working people work in small groups of four
00:19:44 --> 00:19:50 or five, tackle information, and have discussions amongst themselves on questions they care about.
00:19:50 --> 00:19:54 And it allowed us to train working people as trainers.
00:19:55 --> 00:20:02 So we have a big relationship with the United Steelworkers. They have 181 health
00:20:02 --> 00:20:04 and safety trainers that use our methodology,
00:20:04 --> 00:20:09 workers who do the health and safety training, which is the way it had to be
00:20:09 --> 00:20:11 because they know a heck of a lot more health and safety than I do.
00:20:11 --> 00:20:15 As you know, as someone who works for a living, the people who are actually
00:20:15 --> 00:20:20 on the job know a heck of a lot more than kind of the outside experts that come in, right?
00:20:20 --> 00:20:25 They see what's going on in their workplace. So that put us on the map,
00:20:25 --> 00:20:28 and then that created room for me to start working on.
00:20:30 --> 00:20:35 More on the economic, educational issues. And it wasn't until Tony Mazzocchi
00:20:35 --> 00:20:39 died in 2002 that I tried to write anything.
00:20:42 --> 00:20:48 I'm on my eighth book now. But I didn't start writing until...
00:20:48 --> 00:20:51 I didn't have the confidence to write, and I didn't have a story to tell.
00:20:51 --> 00:20:53 And then all of a sudden, I realized I do have a story to tell.
00:20:54 --> 00:20:59 So that really changed my life. I am very privileged to be able to work someplace
00:20:59 --> 00:21:01 that supports my writing habit.
00:21:01 --> 00:21:05 So I've got a sub stack that comes out roughly every week.
00:21:05 --> 00:21:09 It's free, but people seem to be donating every now and then, which is nice.
00:21:10 --> 00:21:12 I don't take the money. It goes to these educational programs.
00:21:13 --> 00:21:19 And I just feel blessed that I have the space to try to, what I think is bring
00:21:19 --> 00:21:23 some important information to the public, especially to working people.
00:21:24 --> 00:21:32 Yeah. All right. All right, so let's get into some of the intersection between your work in politics.
00:21:32 --> 00:21:38 Why is the conventional wisdom of white working class populism wrong?
00:21:39 --> 00:21:42 Well, if you mean that white working class people are racist,
00:21:43 --> 00:21:49 sexist, xenophobic, and what Hillary Clinton called the deplorables, I check that out.
00:21:49 --> 00:21:55 And other people that I trust, even who are more statistically proficient than
00:21:55 --> 00:21:56 I am, checked it out as well.
00:21:56 --> 00:22:01 So what we did is there are these very, very large surveys, voter surveys.
00:22:01 --> 00:22:06 They're not polls. They're like these 50, 100.
00:22:06 --> 00:22:10 One of them attracts 500 voters over time.
00:22:11 --> 00:22:16 And they ask all kinds of questions. They ask 126 questions on social issues.
00:22:16 --> 00:22:20 We picked 25 of the most controversial ones.
00:22:20 --> 00:22:25 Like, you know, should gay and lesbian couples be able to adopt children?
00:22:25 --> 00:22:28 You know, is same-sex...
00:22:29 --> 00:22:36 Marriage wrong, always wrong, you know, cut, or, you know, black people just,
00:22:36 --> 00:22:41 you know, more lazy than, you know, Jews and others that came into this country, blah, blah, blah.
00:22:41 --> 00:22:47 You know, these really charge, you know, gun control, religious issues, et cetera, et cetera.
00:22:47 --> 00:22:55 And what we found, to my great surprise, actually, was in the last 20, 10, 20 years,
00:22:56 --> 00:23:01 there has been a remarkable transformation amongst people that we call white
00:23:01 --> 00:23:04 working class, and I define that two ways.
00:23:04 --> 00:23:09 Bottom two-thirds of the income distribution, plus no college degree,
00:23:09 --> 00:23:11 no two-year degree, no four-year degree.
00:23:11 --> 00:23:14 Maybe a little college, but pretty much high school graduates,
00:23:14 --> 00:23:16 and who define themselves as white.
00:23:18 --> 00:23:24 That's the group. So a couple issues that really blew my mind. Here's one question.
00:23:25 --> 00:23:29 Should gay and lesbian couples be legally
00:23:29 --> 00:23:31 permitted to adopt children 10 years ago
00:23:31 --> 00:23:38 only 38 percent of white working class people support that position now it's
00:23:38 --> 00:23:45 70 percent let me take another one which i i i find this one most amazing and
00:23:45 --> 00:23:50 and we've double checked this one which is they asked a question,
00:23:50 --> 00:23:51 and this is their wording,
00:23:52 --> 00:23:58 should illegal immigrants who have been here three years, paid their taxes,
00:23:58 --> 00:24:00 and have not committed a felony crime.
00:24:01 --> 00:24:06 Permitted to become citizens. So all this stuff about immigration,
00:24:06 --> 00:24:16 that one, you know, that one jumped from 32% 10 years ago, or in 2010,
00:24:17 --> 00:24:22 15 years ago, up to 62% in 2020.
00:24:22 --> 00:24:27 Now, we checked this again in a survey that we did with YouGov,
00:24:28 --> 00:24:33 and we did 3 voters in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.
00:24:34 --> 00:24:35 You know, key swing states.
00:24:36 --> 00:24:43 Used to be the blue wall. Now, Ohio, the blue is crumbled. And we asked exactly the same question.
00:24:43 --> 00:24:51 And it's now up to 63% as of 2025, April, April 2025.
00:24:51 --> 00:24:58 So what's going on here? What's going on, Center for Working Class Politics checked all 126.
00:24:58 --> 00:25:03 And what they found was that, yes, indeed, white working class people have gotten
00:25:03 --> 00:25:10 more liberal on all these issues, but not as liberal as middle class and upper middle class people.
00:25:11 --> 00:25:15 So what's happening is it's a relative thing. They look like they're deplorables
00:25:15 --> 00:25:21 compared to where the more highly educated, higher income people have gone.
00:25:21 --> 00:25:30 And so I think it's an enormous era, political era, to view people through that deplorable lens.
00:25:30 --> 00:25:33 Sure, you're going to run into people all over the place.
00:25:33 --> 00:25:38 And by the way, as you probably already know, at all levels of society,
00:25:38 --> 00:25:42 you're going to run into people who are racist and are xenophobic.
00:25:42 --> 00:25:47 And God knows sexism exists at the highest levels of corporate America.
00:25:47 --> 00:25:52 But to write off a whole, you know, two-thirds of the country,
00:25:52 --> 00:25:57 basically, as deplorable, is politically suicidal.
00:25:58 --> 00:26:03 And my experience with trade unions workers has been, you know,
00:26:03 --> 00:26:07 almost every contract, union contract, you probably know this from your work
00:26:07 --> 00:26:10 as well, has a big anti-discriminatory clause.
00:26:11 --> 00:26:16 You know, no worker shall be discriminated in age, race, sex,
00:26:17 --> 00:26:19 national origin, religion, and so on.
00:26:19 --> 00:26:27 And you can get virtually any working class voter person to say they believe
00:26:27 --> 00:26:29 in that anti-discriminatory clause.
00:26:29 --> 00:26:34 Where the argument may come over whether affirmative action is still a good
00:26:34 --> 00:26:36 thing or not. There's a lot of debates.
00:26:37 --> 00:26:41 And there's an enormous diversity of opinion amongst working people like there
00:26:41 --> 00:26:44 is in the country as a whole. So anyway, I'd like to put that one to bed.
00:26:45 --> 00:26:48 I'm not going to be able to because it crops up all the time.
00:26:49 --> 00:26:53 And I just keep reciting the facts. And hopefully, eventually,
00:26:53 --> 00:26:55 you know, if I had a bigger megaphone, it might penetrate.
00:26:55 --> 00:26:57 But, you know, I'm a small fish in a big pond.
00:26:58 --> 00:27:02 So what can the Democrats do to stop writing them all?
00:27:02 --> 00:27:06 What would you, if they did listen to you, what would you tell them?
00:27:07 --> 00:27:08 Oh, boy, that's a tough one, Eric.
00:27:09 --> 00:27:15 The other thing we found in our survey was that 70, we asked an open-ended question at the beginning.
00:27:16 --> 00:27:18 What's the first thing that comes to mind when you think of the Democratic Party?
00:27:20 --> 00:27:27 70% had negative things to say. And a very small percentage connected with woke stuff.
00:27:28 --> 00:27:36 So I think the problem with the Democratic Party is that it's trying to be a coalition between,
00:27:38 --> 00:27:44 at the top and working people. And they don't recognize that there's a conflict of interest.
00:27:45 --> 00:27:49 They think it's kumbaya, you know, that if we grow the pie, everybody can get more.
00:27:49 --> 00:27:53 It's okay for us to go and get billionaires, raise money for billionaires.
00:27:54 --> 00:27:57 It's okay to have what they call, you know, the money primary,
00:27:57 --> 00:28:00 where before even candidates run in primaries.
00:28:00 --> 00:28:04 I mean, you know the game very well in Atlanta, right? They got to raise the
00:28:04 --> 00:28:08 money. But it puts upper income people in control.
00:28:09 --> 00:28:14 I heard directly from Sean Fain, United Auto Workers president,
00:28:14 --> 00:28:20 that his speech at the Democratic Party convention was they tried to edit out
00:28:20 --> 00:28:26 stuff that they thought was too anti-corporate because the wealthy people didn't like it.
00:28:26 --> 00:28:31 So I think unless you can't bring working people in until you understand that
00:28:31 --> 00:28:35 they think that the Democratic Party is owned by elites and wealthy people.
00:28:36 --> 00:28:38 So that creates a problem.
00:28:40 --> 00:28:45 My colleague at the Center for Working Class Politics has been trying for the
00:28:45 --> 00:28:47 last, I don't know how many years now,
00:28:47 --> 00:28:51 trying to convince the Democratic Party that the best way to recruit working
00:28:51 --> 00:28:57 class people is to take a strong populist economic platform.
00:28:57 --> 00:29:00 And by that, so we tested out with them.
00:29:00 --> 00:29:05 We tested out in that large survey of 3 people, we tested out a new policy
00:29:05 --> 00:29:11 that if the government, any corporation that takes government money and has
00:29:11 --> 00:29:15 500 more employees shall not be permitted to do compulsory layoffs.
00:29:15 --> 00:29:21 All layoffs have to be voluntary based on buyouts, like they do with white-collar executives.
00:29:22 --> 00:29:25 Democrats did something like that, that would get the attention of working people
00:29:25 --> 00:29:30 that got unemployed due to the free trade agreements that Bill Clinton put into
00:29:30 --> 00:29:35 place and are signed and was so proud of, even though a lot of Democrats opposed it.
00:29:35 --> 00:29:42 So they have to change their tune on progressive populist planks that may be
00:29:42 --> 00:29:48 upsetting to the upper income donors that they seem appear, especially to working
00:29:48 --> 00:29:49 people, to appear beholden to.
00:29:50 --> 00:29:53 So it's sort of like which side of your own. Are you going to do stuff that's
00:29:53 --> 00:29:56 going to directly help working people, or are you going to try to say,
00:29:56 --> 00:29:57 oh, it's an opportunity society?
00:29:57 --> 00:30:01 All we should do is give everybody a fair chance at the starting line and then
00:30:01 --> 00:30:06 let the billionaires be billionaires because they're just growing the pie.
00:30:08 --> 00:30:11 Eric, it isn't going to be easy. It's going to take some work.
00:30:11 --> 00:30:15 It took 40 years to alienate working class people to the degree they're alienated
00:30:15 --> 00:30:17 now. It's going to take some time to change that. Okay.
00:30:18 --> 00:30:22 All right. In your book, Runaway Inequality, you wrote, the arc of capitalism
00:30:22 --> 00:30:24 does not bend toward justice.
00:30:24 --> 00:30:29 We must bend it. How can that be done through public policy?
00:30:30 --> 00:30:34 Yeah, I think we're seeing this play out now in real time.
00:30:35 --> 00:30:41 During the Cold War, the idea of democracy and capitalism working hand in hand
00:30:41 --> 00:30:47 to prevent communism and totalitarianism from spreading was incredibly successful.
00:30:48 --> 00:30:53 And you could see the communist authoritarian model collapsed.
00:30:53 --> 00:30:58 But there were a lot of theorists that were saying, you know,
00:30:58 --> 00:31:03 if you look closely at corporate design, they're not democracies, right?
00:31:04 --> 00:31:07 They're, you know, they're dictatorships.
00:31:07 --> 00:31:10 Unless there's a union there that sort of balances things off in general,
00:31:10 --> 00:31:12 the boss gets to tell you what to do.
00:31:12 --> 00:31:15 You know, they can fire you for any reason they want, as long as it doesn't
00:31:15 --> 00:31:19 violate discriminatory laws that are on the books. And you know how weak they
00:31:19 --> 00:31:23 are in many cases and what kind of effort it takes to try to beat them back.
00:31:23 --> 00:31:27 Okay. So there's attention there. And a guy like Peter Thiel,
00:31:28 --> 00:31:31 you know, the founder of PayPal and, you know, big supporter of Trump,
00:31:32 --> 00:31:37 he believes that there should be a kind of a technological.
00:31:38 --> 00:31:42 Like a dynasty. There should be a technological control of the country,
00:31:42 --> 00:31:44 that democracy doesn't work.
00:31:44 --> 00:31:53 And so what you're seeing is now the tension between capitalism and democracy
00:31:53 --> 00:31:57 is stretching the democratic order.
00:31:57 --> 00:32:03 You know, the idea of running roughshod over, I mean, look, we now have a president
00:32:03 --> 00:32:05 who doesn't even pay attention to Congress anymore.
00:32:05 --> 00:32:10 We have a Republican Party who doesn't even hold them accountable for taking away their powers.
00:32:11 --> 00:32:15 So there is, how does public policy change this?
00:32:15 --> 00:32:19 I think we have to go back to the lessons of the 30s, 40s, 50s,
00:32:19 --> 00:32:22 and 50s, even into the 60s.
00:32:22 --> 00:32:26 There was a balance, a growing balance between labor and capital.
00:32:26 --> 00:32:31 Unions were strong enough to tame capital. And the public policy that would
00:32:31 --> 00:32:36 make the most difference would be allowing people who want to be in unions to get into unions.
00:32:36 --> 00:32:40 A labor law reform, you know, it used to be one out of three private sector
00:32:40 --> 00:32:43 workers were in a labor union.
00:32:43 --> 00:32:45 That was in 1955. Now it's one out of 10.
00:32:46 --> 00:32:52 And as a result, that balance that allows, that tames corporate America, that tames.
00:32:54 --> 00:32:59 Tendency to be autocratic, that balance has fallen apart.
00:33:00 --> 00:33:04 And so public policies that would rebuild the power of working people to tame
00:33:04 --> 00:33:07 corporate power would be enormously helpful.
00:33:07 --> 00:33:12 And, you know, Northern Europe has done a much better job than that.
00:33:12 --> 00:33:14 You know, Sweden, 90% of the people are trade unions.
00:33:14 --> 00:33:18 And it's, I think, a more vibrant democracy.
00:33:19 --> 00:33:23 Every country's got problems. And nothing's perfect.
00:33:24 --> 00:33:26 Nothing ever will be perfect. And we have to live with imperfection.
00:33:26 --> 00:33:28 But I don't like the direction we're headed into.
00:33:29 --> 00:33:32 So I think your question is right. What policies would bring us back?
00:33:33 --> 00:33:38 I think a number one policy would be giving working people more power,
00:33:38 --> 00:33:41 detain the excesses of corporate America.
00:33:41 --> 00:33:46 Peter Thiel would have a different tune if whatever company he now owns,
00:33:46 --> 00:33:49 if the workers were unionized, he'd have to deal with them. His attitude towards
00:33:49 --> 00:33:50 democracy would change.
00:33:51 --> 00:33:55 Yeah. All right. So I'm going to try to combine a couple of questions.
00:33:56 --> 00:34:00 They're really two separate issues, but they kind of go along the same thing.
00:34:00 --> 00:34:04 According to the Institute for Policy Studies, the average gap between the top
00:34:04 --> 00:34:11 100 CEOs at low wage companies and their median workers is at a ratio of 632 to one.
00:34:12 --> 00:34:16 The Economic Policy Institute reported that the typical black worker earned
00:34:16 --> 00:34:22 24.4% less per hour than the typical white worker.
00:34:22 --> 00:34:28 So my question is, how do we get to this point? How do we let these gaps happen?
00:34:29 --> 00:34:31 And are there any ways that we can narrow them?
00:34:33 --> 00:34:38 Well, yeah, there are a lot of ways to narrow that, the overall wage gap between
00:34:38 --> 00:34:39 the top and the average worker.
00:34:39 --> 00:34:44 You know, the numbers we have are a little higher than that's even higher than the 632.
00:34:44 --> 00:34:50 We take the top 100 and compare it to the median worker across the country.
00:34:50 --> 00:34:56 So, you know, there's a lot of, they have tremendous wealth extraction gains.
00:34:56 --> 00:35:00 The trick is to get the money before they get it. because trying to get it after
00:35:00 --> 00:35:03 they get it through taxing, et cetera, is very hard.
00:35:03 --> 00:35:08 You can do some of that, but they can hide the money. They don't have to cash in.
00:35:08 --> 00:35:11 They can keep their stocks and bonds, take loans out against them,
00:35:11 --> 00:35:14 and never have to pay capital gains and all this kind of stuff.
00:35:14 --> 00:35:15 They have so many tricks.
00:35:16 --> 00:35:21 You and I can't even begin to fathom. They're paying their accountants and lawyers
00:35:21 --> 00:35:23 $200 an hour for a reason.
00:35:24 --> 00:35:28 They're hiding their money from the tax collector. That's an age-old problem
00:35:28 --> 00:35:32 that goes back thousands of years. Filthy people do that.
00:35:32 --> 00:35:38 Okay. So getting it beforehand would be anything you could do to increase the
00:35:38 --> 00:35:41 minimum wage would have a tremendous impact.
00:35:42 --> 00:35:49 If you could get the minimum wage up to $15, $20 an hour or higher even, that would help. Okay.
00:35:50 --> 00:35:56 Eliminating stock buybacks, which is when a company basically squeezes the workforce,
00:35:57 --> 00:36:02 takes the cash, buys back its own shares, boosts the price of the stock artificially.
00:36:02 --> 00:36:04 This used to be called stock manipulation.
00:36:04 --> 00:36:09 It was basically illegal until 1982 when the Reagan administration deregulated it.
00:36:10 --> 00:36:15 And it stayed, you know, now 60, it used to be two, a limit was 2% of corporate
00:36:15 --> 00:36:16 profits could go to these stock buybacks.
00:36:16 --> 00:36:21 Now it's 60%. It's pathetic. You could just eliminate that, say, you know, back to 2%.
00:36:22 --> 00:36:26 And another one is this whole leverage buyout thing where, I mean,
00:36:26 --> 00:36:31 I don't know, Eric, how did you and I miss this game? You go, you buy up a company.
00:36:31 --> 00:36:36 Look, watch, this is what they do. They, they, they set up a fund with other people's money.
00:36:37 --> 00:36:43 Then buy up a company with debt, and then they place the debt on the company that they bought.
00:36:43 --> 00:36:46 So now they own a company more or less for free. Then they milk the company
00:36:46 --> 00:36:51 for all it's worth, four or five years, you know, a much higher percentage of
00:36:51 --> 00:36:52 those companies go under, unemployed everybody.
00:36:52 --> 00:36:59 They've walked off, you know, with billions and tens of billions across the economy.
00:37:00 --> 00:37:07 In 1986, Dan Rostenkowski, who was head of the Ways and Means Committee and
00:37:07 --> 00:37:09 a Democrat out of Chicago,
00:37:09 --> 00:37:15 out of your hometown, he said, hey, we can't let them do this because what they're
00:37:15 --> 00:37:21 doing is that money is tax deductible when they put all that debt on the company.
00:37:22 --> 00:37:26 Why don't we just say everything over $500 is going to get taxed?
00:37:27 --> 00:37:30 Oh, they went nuts. They jumped all over him.
00:37:30 --> 00:37:34 They claimed he caused a crash in the stock market. But that's the kind of stuff you have to do.
00:37:34 --> 00:37:39 You've got to stop the extraction, the wealth extraction, and also make it a
00:37:39 --> 00:37:42 huge number of people want to be in unions.
00:37:43 --> 00:37:48 Like 70% of young people now think that under 30 think unions are a great thing,
00:37:48 --> 00:37:49 but they can't get into them.
00:37:50 --> 00:37:57 So that's another way of what we call pre-distributional change in the gap.
00:37:57 --> 00:38:02 Now, the more difficult question you ask is what accounts for the wage gap between.
00:38:04 --> 00:38:07 And white, or black, brown, and white. There's probably three tiers,
00:38:07 --> 00:38:08 and it's been there for a long time.
00:38:09 --> 00:38:14 Between, you know, when unions were growing, that gap up until the late 60s
00:38:14 --> 00:38:20 was actually shrinking dramatically because more and more people of color were
00:38:20 --> 00:38:24 getting into trade unions, and they were getting out of the professions.
00:38:24 --> 00:38:29 See, it's not, there's some, you know, people working side by side getting paid
00:38:29 --> 00:38:32 different amounts based on their color.
00:38:32 --> 00:38:35 There's not a lot of that that goes on anymore what it
00:38:35 --> 00:38:38 is you've got an excess of people
00:38:38 --> 00:38:41 of color in the low-income jobs and not
00:38:41 --> 00:38:47 in the more middle and higher income jobs so but that's changing it especially
00:38:47 --> 00:38:54 in unions my wife teaches apprentices at an electrical worker union electrical
00:38:54 --> 00:38:58 worker apprentices in new york they have to get a two-year degree to become
00:38:58 --> 00:39:01 journeyman And you now look,
00:39:01 --> 00:39:05 that used to be 20 years ago, 30 years ago, that was a lily white union.
00:39:05 --> 00:39:10 And, you know, the people who got on the job get paid well.
00:39:11 --> 00:39:17 Now, 40% of her class is, those classes now, and 800 people go through this
00:39:17 --> 00:39:19 program every year, are people of color.
00:39:19 --> 00:39:22 So that's a great way to start narrowing the gap.
00:39:23 --> 00:39:27 But actually, I hate to keep coming back to this, but the more you can promote
00:39:27 --> 00:39:29 unionism, the more you'll close the gap.
00:39:29 --> 00:39:34 Because the people who are in unions and the low-income jobs have seen a dramatic increase.
00:39:36 --> 00:39:39 In their pay, you know, service employees in the National Union in California,
00:39:39 --> 00:39:42 the home health care workers got, you know, 70 of them got,
00:39:42 --> 00:39:45 most of them are people of color, got a huge increase.
00:39:46 --> 00:39:49 So I think that, I think those are the kinds of changes.
00:39:49 --> 00:39:55 And again, it all comes back to rebalancing the power between corporations and working people.
00:39:55 --> 00:40:03 And I think the days of overt discrimination in unions are over.
00:40:03 --> 00:40:10 I think my union, United Steelworkers, just elected a black woman as president.
00:40:10 --> 00:40:15 Communication Workers Union, which is a pretty white union, just elected a black
00:40:15 --> 00:40:18 man as president of the union.
00:40:18 --> 00:40:26 So, you know, the world has changed for the better, but we have to empower where
00:40:26 --> 00:40:27 the most important people.
00:40:29 --> 00:40:36 In that gap can take place. And it can happen until we force it the rest of the way.
00:40:36 --> 00:40:42 You know, used to be 40% gap, now it's 24%. You know, it should be going down,
00:40:42 --> 00:40:47 down, down every year as we unionize and pass minimum wage laws for the lower
00:40:47 --> 00:40:50 income workers, because that's where the problem is.
00:40:50 --> 00:40:54 We still have a disproportionate number of people of color in the low income
00:40:54 --> 00:40:57 jobs. Yeah. And you won't get any argument with me about unions.
00:40:57 --> 00:41:01 My dad was amalgamated transit. My mom was asked me.
00:41:02 --> 00:41:06 I was a teamster at one time in my life, as well as UFCW.
00:41:06 --> 00:41:11 So you got the whole family there. You got the whole AFL there. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:41:11 --> 00:41:16 So we believe in unions. And growing up in Chicago, I mean, that's almost like
00:41:16 --> 00:41:18 a rite of passage to have a union job.
00:41:18 --> 00:41:24 So last question, do you think American voters have figured out that President
00:41:24 --> 00:41:26 Trump has given him false economic hope?
00:41:26 --> 00:41:30 And will that realization show up in the midterm elections?
00:41:31 --> 00:41:37 You know, I would like to think yes, but what I'm worried about is the Democrats
00:41:37 --> 00:41:40 shooting themselves in the foot, right? Because it's always a comparative thing.
00:41:41 --> 00:41:46 So I'm not happy about this shutdown, government shutdown.
00:41:46 --> 00:41:51 I think the strategy is going to backfire on the Democrats and some surveys
00:41:51 --> 00:41:56 are already showing it. believe it or not, support for the Republican Party
00:41:56 --> 00:41:59 has actually gone up, not down, during the shutdown.
00:42:00 --> 00:42:06 So I'm worried about that negative image of the Democratic Party.
00:42:06 --> 00:42:10 You know, we found out in a survey, I'm sorry to have to keep going back,
00:42:10 --> 00:42:12 but it's really fresh information.
00:42:12 --> 00:42:16 I don't think anybody's ever done this before. In those four states.
00:42:17 --> 00:42:21 Run a Democrat versus an Independent saying exactly the same thing,
00:42:22 --> 00:42:26 exactly the same messages, the Democrat starts 8% behind.
00:42:27 --> 00:42:33 In Ohio, it's 16%. The only state where it's roughly even is in Pennsylvania,
00:42:33 --> 00:42:38 for reasons we're not sure exactly why. We're still investigating that.
00:42:38 --> 00:42:41 But there's a huge penalty for just being a Democrat.
00:42:41 --> 00:42:50 The image of a Democrat is so tarnished in those states that I worry that the
00:42:50 --> 00:42:55 anti-Trump thing isn't going to carry over as much as people hope.
00:42:55 --> 00:42:57 Then you've got, that's one problem.
00:42:57 --> 00:43:00 Second problem is you've got the gerrymandering that's going on.
00:43:00 --> 00:43:03 The Republicans are basically violating tradition.
00:43:04 --> 00:43:07 Instead of every 10 years redistricting, now they're redistricting.
00:43:08 --> 00:43:12 Now the Supreme Court is letting them blow apart minority districts,
00:43:12 --> 00:43:16 minority-majority districts that allow the representation of people of color
00:43:16 --> 00:43:19 that are blowing those apart. So that's another problem.
00:43:19 --> 00:43:26 On the plus side, though, is all congressional races are really about who's running.
00:43:27 --> 00:43:32 And if in the purple districts or the sling districts, there are just strong
00:43:32 --> 00:43:36 candidates, and if those candidates dare to run against their own party,
00:43:36 --> 00:43:39 If the Democrats would be, given our survey.
00:43:39 --> 00:43:43 The Democrats would be very wise to run against the Democratic establishment.
00:43:43 --> 00:43:47 They say, hey, I'm going to clean up. I'm going to get those billionaires out
00:43:47 --> 00:43:48 of the Democratic Party.
00:43:48 --> 00:43:52 I'm going to fight for working people every single day. This is what I'm going to do.
00:43:52 --> 00:43:57 And one issue that I think, not only my pet issue about these mass layoffs,
00:43:57 --> 00:44:04 but the one issue that I think they could use to get ahead is they should do it right now.
00:44:04 --> 00:44:11 They should put a bill in that says no trading in stocks and bonds by congressional,
00:44:12 --> 00:44:14 any public official in Congress.
00:44:16 --> 00:44:18 Families and put criminal penalties on it if
00:44:18 --> 00:44:24 you do it because that will right now the democrats have been you know mansi
00:44:24 --> 00:44:28 pelosi wouldn't let that come to a vote i mean her attitude was what's wrong
00:44:28 --> 00:44:33 with that you know and the rest of us would say obviously what's wrong with
00:44:33 --> 00:44:37 it you have all this inside information you're trading we don't even have stocks
00:44:37 --> 00:44:38 and bonds to trade and you,
00:44:39 --> 00:44:44 what what's going on here so i would if i were running for office i would bring
00:44:44 --> 00:44:45 that up every single day.
00:44:45 --> 00:44:51 I'm going to change the Democratic Party, and I'm going to force the Republicans also to support this.
00:44:53 --> 00:44:56 It's such an obvious which side are you on kind of thing. So I'm hoping there
00:44:56 --> 00:44:58 are candidates with some guts.
00:44:59 --> 00:45:04 And these races, congressional races, really are, like people will say,
00:45:05 --> 00:45:08 Congress sucks, but I like my congressman.
00:45:08 --> 00:45:14 The difference between the national perception and the local perception is great.
00:45:14 --> 00:45:20 So there's hope for the Democrats and there are problems on the Democrats.
00:45:20 --> 00:45:27 I'm not a great pronosticator, but right now I don't like what the Democrats
00:45:27 --> 00:45:29 are doing right now to distinguish themselves.
00:45:29 --> 00:45:36 I don't understand why they didn't just let these tremendous increases in Obamacare
00:45:36 --> 00:45:41 premiums, just let them happen. let the Republicans own it say hey.
00:45:42 --> 00:45:46 What they've done to you. Your premiums just went up threefold, fourfold.
00:45:47 --> 00:45:53 Why did they think that they would get points for trying to stop it by shutting
00:45:53 --> 00:45:56 down the government? Anyway, that's just me.
00:45:57 --> 00:46:00 I'm hoping I'm wrong and that I'm just being misreading it.
00:46:00 --> 00:46:07 I don't think I am. Well, no, I mean, your validation is, and at this point,
00:46:07 --> 00:46:12 30 days into a shutdown, I think, You know, those are always the legitimate concerns.
00:46:12 --> 00:46:15 How long can the protests happen? Right.
00:46:16 --> 00:46:21 When does it get to a point where it's a it's a it's a point of no return as
00:46:21 --> 00:46:25 far as getting the benefit out of taking that stand? So that's legit.
00:46:25 --> 00:46:30 And then also to highlight the point you were making about the stocks,
00:46:30 --> 00:46:36 that's why Raphael Warnock is a senator in Georgia as opposed to Kelly Loeffler.
00:46:36 --> 00:46:39 Kelly Loeffler was literally married to the New York Stock Exchange.
00:46:41 --> 00:46:43 And so and so it was like
00:46:43 --> 00:46:47 you know and she got caught up in some insider trading
00:46:47 --> 00:46:52 because it's like that's her pillow talk literally and so rafael was able to
00:46:52 --> 00:46:56 play that and he got and and people in georgia didn't matter whether it was
00:46:56 --> 00:47:02 in downtown atlanta or downtown millageville people responded to that and that's
00:47:02 --> 00:47:06 how he got in there so there's a lot of legitimacy in what you're saying.
00:47:07 --> 00:47:15 And I really am glad that you and others are out there at least trying to let
00:47:15 --> 00:47:16 people know what's going on.
00:47:16 --> 00:47:21 If people want to be able to reach out to you more, you mentioned your subset,
00:47:21 --> 00:47:26 kind of talk about the title of that and how else can people reach out to you.
00:47:26 --> 00:47:30 I know your latest book is called Wall Street's War on Workers,
00:47:30 --> 00:47:33 which some of the questions I got came from that.
00:47:35 --> 00:47:40 This is the time where you make your pitch and tell people how they can reach out. Okay, great.
00:47:40 --> 00:47:44 So you can follow me. I mean, you can get my Substack for free. You can sign up.
00:47:45 --> 00:47:50 I think if you go to Les Leopold at Substack, you'll find it.
00:47:51 --> 00:47:54 And I try to get that going.
00:47:54 --> 00:47:58 I'm actually working on a new book now, which I hope, Eric, you'll have me on
00:47:58 --> 00:48:00 again when it should be out in a few months.
00:48:01 --> 00:48:06 Right now, the working title is, the billionaires have two parties, we need one of our own.
00:48:08 --> 00:48:13 It's really designed to, how do we deal with the fact that the Democratic Party
00:48:13 --> 00:48:19 is virtually dead in 130 congressional districts across the country where they lose by 25% or more?
00:48:20 --> 00:48:24 You know, they're not a viable institution. And you know some of those districts.
00:48:25 --> 00:48:26 My God, you know some of those districts.
00:48:26 --> 00:48:31 And I think a challenge could be made in those districts if we can't carry the
00:48:31 --> 00:48:34 baggage the Democratic Party do. But anyway, that'll be a controversial book.
00:48:36 --> 00:48:39 So if you want to reach me directly just send
00:48:39 --> 00:48:42 a message to you can get me at leslieopold at
00:48:42 --> 00:48:45 aol.com i'm not afraid to answer email
00:48:45 --> 00:48:48 hopefully i won't be trolled and that
00:48:48 --> 00:48:53 but check out my sub stack it seems to be a nice community of people who are
00:48:53 --> 00:48:57 are reading it and then when the new book's together i'll make sure everybody's
00:48:57 --> 00:49:01 sub stack knows how to get a hold of it and hopefully i'll get back on with
00:49:01 --> 00:49:05 eric and we can talk about it well one of the rules is that once you have been on the show,
00:49:06 --> 00:49:08 you have an open invitation to come back.
00:49:08 --> 00:49:13 So if you're writing a new book, we'll definitely make sure that we'll get you on to talk about that.
00:49:14 --> 00:49:17 Again, Leslie Leopold, it's really been an honor to talk to you.
00:49:18 --> 00:49:21 And I'm glad that we've had this chance to interact.
00:49:21 --> 00:49:26 And I definitely want to get you back on any way I can.
00:49:26 --> 00:49:28 So again, thank you for coming on this time.
00:49:29 --> 00:49:32 Thank you for having me. Actually, the honor is mine. It's really,
00:49:32 --> 00:49:36 It's really great to have met you, and I look forward to working with you again
00:49:36 --> 00:49:37 in the future. All right, guys.
00:49:58 --> 00:50:04 All right, and we are back. And so now it's time for my next guest, Veronica Cardenas.
00:50:06 --> 00:50:10 Veronica Cardenas Esquire is an award-winning immigration attorney,
00:50:10 --> 00:50:15 entrepreneur, and first-generation Latina committed to bringing humanity and
00:50:15 --> 00:50:16 justice to immigration law.
00:50:17 --> 00:50:21 As the daughter of Colombian and Peruvian immigrants and a proud mother of three,
00:50:21 --> 00:50:26 she understands firsthand the challenges and resilience that define the immigrant experience.
00:50:27 --> 00:50:31 Nearly 13 years as an assistant chief counsel for U.S.
00:50:32 --> 00:50:36 Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Veronica advised DHS stakeholders,
00:50:37 --> 00:50:40 trained prosecutors, and worked with agencies like the U.S.
00:50:40 --> 00:50:45 Department of Justice and USCIS to navigate complex immigration cases.
00:50:46 --> 00:50:50 However, after witnessing the injustices within the system, she made the bold
00:50:50 --> 00:50:56 decision to resign in 2023 and fully dedicate herself to defending and empowering immigrants.
00:50:56 --> 00:51:01 She is the founder of Cardenas Immigration Law, where she provides strategic,
00:51:01 --> 00:51:06 human-centered legal representation and humanigration, a mentorship program
00:51:06 --> 00:51:12 that educates immigration attorneys on how to serve their clients with both expertise and empathy.
00:51:12 --> 00:51:17 A recognized thought leader and media contributor, Veronica has been featured
00:51:17 --> 00:51:25 in Business Insider, HuffPost, The Hill, ABC, MSNBC, Business Insider, and many more.
00:51:25 --> 00:51:30 Her mission is clear, to reshape the immigration system through advocacy,
00:51:30 --> 00:51:36 mentorship, and education, because immigration is not just about policies, it's about people.
00:51:36 --> 00:51:40 Ladies and gentlemen, it is my distinct honor and privilege to have as a guest
00:51:40 --> 00:51:43 on this podcast, Veronica Carcassio.
00:51:54 --> 00:51:59 All right, Veronica Cardenas. How you doing, ma'am? You doing good?
00:52:00 --> 00:52:04 I'm doing well today. How about you? I'm doing lovely, even more so because
00:52:04 --> 00:52:07 I've got someone with your expertise and passion,
00:52:07 --> 00:52:13 on the show to talk about your experience dealing with immigration law,
00:52:13 --> 00:52:15 especially during this time.
00:52:15 --> 00:52:19 So I'm really, really glad that you were able to make the time to do this.
00:52:19 --> 00:52:25 So I do a couple of things I call icebreakers to kind of start the interview.
00:52:25 --> 00:52:29 And the first icebreaker is a quote I want you to respond to.
00:52:30 --> 00:52:34 It says, immigration isn't just about policies, it's about people.
00:52:34 --> 00:52:38 Every immigrant story deserves to be heard, valued, and fought for.
00:52:39 --> 00:52:40 What does that quote mean to you?
00:52:40 --> 00:52:44 That that is the foundation of what immigration should be.
00:52:44 --> 00:52:52 And we have strayed so much from that to, you know, the way that we call immigrants,
00:52:53 --> 00:52:58 categorizing them by numbers and trying to just fit them into a policy. Yeah.
00:52:58 --> 00:53:06 Yeah. And I definitely understand that because when we when we get into bureaucracies
00:53:06 --> 00:53:10 and you've worked for the federal government, so you understand, you know,
00:53:10 --> 00:53:16 it's easy to try to lump human beings into a file folder,
00:53:16 --> 00:53:20 right, instead of dealing with them on a case by case basis.
00:53:20 --> 00:53:25 So I'm glad that you have that sensitivity to deal with that.
00:53:25 --> 00:53:29 Now, the other icebreaker is what I call 20 questions.
00:53:30 --> 00:53:33 So I need you to give me a number between 1 and 20.
00:53:34 --> 00:53:41 All right. What do you consider the best way to stay informed about politics, current events, etc.?
00:53:44 --> 00:53:49 Read the news, watch the news, listen to podcasts.
00:53:50 --> 00:53:55 But the best way to stay informed if it's an issue you care so deeply about
00:53:55 --> 00:53:57 is to try to get that information firsthand.
00:53:58 --> 00:54:02 Because when you read it through someone else's experience, you're losing a
00:54:02 --> 00:54:04 part of that feel factor.
00:54:04 --> 00:54:10 And for example, if it's immigration specific, right, go to an immigration court
00:54:10 --> 00:54:11 hearing, sit in that hearing.
00:54:12 --> 00:54:20 Because then you can feel what it really is like to be a person in their in those shoes.
00:54:20 --> 00:54:25 And that's the only way I think change is going to happen. So try to get that
00:54:25 --> 00:54:26 information firsthand.
00:54:27 --> 00:54:32 Yeah. So why did you decide to practice immigration law? What motivated you
00:54:32 --> 00:54:35 to go into this specific area? Yeah.
00:54:35 --> 00:54:41 Think at the time it was much of a conscious choice. I went to law school because
00:54:41 --> 00:54:45 I was an English major in undergrad and I didn't want to graduate yet.
00:54:45 --> 00:54:49 And so I was like, what can I do to add some more years in school?
00:54:49 --> 00:54:54 And when I went to law school, I feel like that was the first time that I was
00:54:54 --> 00:54:56 really met with Crossroads.
00:54:57 --> 00:54:59 I had to, I almost failed my first year.
00:55:00 --> 00:55:03 And my, it was, it was in writing, legal writing.
00:55:03 --> 00:55:07 And my professor was like, you have to decide if you're going to continue pushing
00:55:07 --> 00:55:12 a car off a cliff, like a $50 car off the cliff, or if you're just going
00:55:12 --> 00:55:14 to give up and try to find something else to do.
00:55:15 --> 00:55:20 And at that point, you know, my parents supported me in every way that they
00:55:20 --> 00:55:22 could, but they weren't paying for me to go to law school.
00:55:23 --> 00:55:25 So I really had to think about that decision.
00:55:26 --> 00:55:30 And I decided I'm going to do this no matter what it takes.
00:55:31 --> 00:55:35 And so at that point, I was just, you know, studying, doing extra help,
00:55:35 --> 00:55:38 doing everything I could to make sure that my grades were where they needed
00:55:38 --> 00:55:40 to be so that I could continue going to law school.
00:55:40 --> 00:55:47 And through that process, I came across a friend who was working as an intern,
00:55:47 --> 00:55:52 in the office of the principal legal advisor, which are the attorneys for ICE.
00:55:52 --> 00:55:54 And he got me an internship there.
00:55:55 --> 00:56:00 I graduated around 2010 when there was a recession. There were no jobs.
00:56:01 --> 00:56:04 And so I came into my third year without a job.
00:56:05 --> 00:56:10 And it happened that at that year, my third year, because Homeland Security
00:56:10 --> 00:56:16 was still fairly new after it was created in 2001, they didn't yet have their own honors program.
00:56:16 --> 00:56:23 And so the year that I graduated was the year that they started the honors program, I applied, I got in.
00:56:23 --> 00:56:27 And so I was just happy to be working with the federal government and happy that I had a job.
00:56:28 --> 00:56:33 Yeah. Yeah. I understand. How complex is the immigration system?
00:56:33 --> 00:56:37 And do you think that level of complexity is fair?
00:56:39 --> 00:56:44 That is an excellent question. And I think the level of complexity is on purpose
00:56:44 --> 00:56:50 to make the system so difficult for people who want to follow the rules,
00:56:50 --> 00:56:52 like it sets them up for failure.
00:56:52 --> 00:56:56 And so every time I hear the public say, well, they should just do it the legal
00:56:56 --> 00:57:00 way. They should just wait online. Like, I wish it were that simple.
00:57:01 --> 00:57:05 People don't have a basic understanding of immigration law. They think,
00:57:05 --> 00:57:08 oh, I can just apply, wait and get it.
00:57:09 --> 00:57:12 And it's not that way. People don't understand that for asylum,
00:57:12 --> 00:57:18 it was something that was created after World War II, when America closed its
00:57:18 --> 00:57:20 doors to Jews who were fleeing persecution.
00:57:21 --> 00:57:26 And we said at that moment, no, you can't come in, because there were no asylum laws.
00:57:27 --> 00:57:29 And so the U.S.
00:57:29 --> 00:57:35 Joined many other countries in deciding that this was such a horrendous point
00:57:35 --> 00:57:42 in history that each country has to do their job in taking refugees from other
00:57:42 --> 00:57:43 countries when it's necessary.
00:57:44 --> 00:57:50 And the only way to claim asylum is literally being on U.S. soil.
00:57:50 --> 00:57:55 You can't claim asylum from the country where you're facing persecution.
00:57:56 --> 00:58:00 So that is a very big misunderstanding of asylum laws.
00:58:01 --> 00:58:08 So what else do you think average Americans get wrong about immigrants?
00:58:10 --> 00:58:13 Illegal part you know the first question that you the first statement
00:58:13 --> 00:58:17 you asked is like you know people versus policy
00:58:17 --> 00:58:19 unfortunately based on the
00:58:19 --> 00:58:23 color of your skin and where you were born your identity is
00:58:23 --> 00:58:26 political because no one
00:58:26 --> 00:58:29 americans don't have americans don't
00:58:29 --> 00:58:33 think to say maybe that person is allegedly illegal
00:58:33 --> 00:58:36 right like proven like you're innocent until
00:58:36 --> 00:58:39 proven guilty and immigration law that
00:58:39 --> 00:58:43 same level of understanding is
00:58:43 --> 00:58:47 not extended people are just guilty you're just illegal because
00:58:47 --> 00:58:54 you were born somewhere and so understanding that there is a pathway because
00:58:54 --> 00:58:59 you overstayed a visa or because you entered the united states that is only
00:58:59 --> 00:59:03 a fraction of the picture there's a whole big other picture which shows what
00:59:03 --> 00:59:06 is the defense to that which is U.S.
00:59:06 --> 00:59:12 Immigration law. And that's the part where I think Americans lose track of,
00:59:12 --> 00:59:14 lose sight of, maybe don't really understand.
00:59:14 --> 00:59:19 And so for them, it's an open and shut case. You came in, you overstayed your
00:59:19 --> 00:59:20 visa, now you're illegal.
00:59:21 --> 00:59:29 So you, excuse me, you were with Homeland Security as, I mean, security. Yeah.
00:59:29 --> 00:59:31 As a prosecutor.
00:59:31 --> 00:59:36 And in 23, you decided, yeah, enough of that.
00:59:37 --> 00:59:41 As somebody that was in the system and was dealing with a lot of those cases
00:59:41 --> 00:59:44 from the government standpoint, what made you decide that?
00:59:46 --> 00:59:50 No, I don't want to do that. I want to help people just go around.
00:59:50 --> 00:59:52 What kind of changed your mind?
00:59:53 --> 00:59:57 Yeah, the system, I started in 2010 under Obama.
00:59:58 --> 01:00:03 And I was in New York City, where a lot of the cases that were going forward
01:00:03 --> 01:00:05 through the immigration courts, they were winning their cases.
01:00:06 --> 01:00:13 There was prosecutorial discretion. Obama had ran on, were prosecuting felons,
01:00:13 --> 01:00:16 not families, not children, not mom and pops.
01:00:17 --> 01:00:21 And that was true in New York City. I can only speak because every jurisdiction is different.
01:00:21 --> 01:00:24 But where I was at the time, that was the case.
01:00:24 --> 01:00:29 We were closing out cases for people who didn't have relief because they also
01:00:29 --> 01:00:30 should not have been deported.
01:00:31 --> 01:00:36 And cases were being granted to those who should be granted cases.
01:00:36 --> 01:00:40 And I know a lot of people say, well, on the flip side, Obama deported over
01:00:40 --> 01:00:42 2 million people. And that's true.
01:00:42 --> 01:00:47 And it's not a perfect system. It was never a perfect system, but it was more humane.
01:00:47 --> 01:00:52 At least we were able to consider a person, not just for one snapshot in time
01:00:52 --> 01:00:58 of how they crossed into the U.S., but what life have they built here? Do they have children?
01:00:58 --> 01:01:02 What equities? Do they have businesses, right? We could take that person as a whole.
01:01:03 --> 01:01:07 Once Trump came into office, that's when everything changed.
01:01:07 --> 01:01:12 And now it was a one size fits all. So it didn't matter if a person was 15 years
01:01:12 --> 01:01:17 old, crossed the border at two years old with his family, he was being treated
01:01:17 --> 01:01:21 the same way as someone who was like a drug trafficker.
01:01:23 --> 01:01:31 That just felt very unfair. It also felt during that time that the cases were already prejudged.
01:01:31 --> 01:01:37 The law was built to deny. And so judges couldn't decide on the merits of each
01:01:37 --> 01:01:40 case. They couldn't consider that person as a whole.
01:01:40 --> 01:01:45 And at the same time, trial attorneys, the prosecutors, we no longer had that
01:01:45 --> 01:01:46 discretion that we once had.
01:01:47 --> 01:01:51 Every case had to go forward, whether it was a 16-year-old without a lawyer
01:01:51 --> 01:01:55 or, you know, the drug trafficker. They were being treated the same.
01:01:55 --> 01:02:03 And at that point is when it really, it really was painful to be in a position where you had to say,
01:02:03 --> 01:02:11 I'm opposing relief in every case, because I didn't feel like legally that was the right thing to do.
01:02:11 --> 01:02:17 And that lasted four years. It was very difficult to work in that administration.
01:02:18 --> 01:02:24 I Feel like when I started My career in 2010 straight out of law school.
01:02:24 --> 01:02:29 I was so young my mindset at the time was I'm going to work for the government.
01:02:29 --> 01:02:33 I'm going to eventually become a judge And then i'll retire get my pension.
01:02:33 --> 01:02:38 That was my plan When trump became president working at the under that administration,
01:02:38 --> 01:02:43 it kind of threw a wrench in my plan and I tried to hold on because you know,
01:02:43 --> 01:02:50 you think of your years of service This will pass And then after that administration
01:02:50 --> 01:02:58 biden came in and covet hit and You know the world shut down for me,
01:02:58 --> 01:03:04 it was reevaluating what's important and I felt like.
01:03:05 --> 01:03:12 Matter how the system would change, it could not change to the place where it
01:03:12 --> 01:03:16 was before under Obama, because Trump had already done too much damage.
01:03:17 --> 01:03:21 And that's when I really realized that change is not going to come from the
01:03:21 --> 01:03:23 inside, it's going to come from the outside.
01:03:23 --> 01:03:26 And I want to be on the side of change.
01:03:27 --> 01:03:33 Yeah. During my brief time being an immigration law paralegal,
01:03:33 --> 01:03:42 you know, I I went, you know, I went down to New Orleans with our attorney to sit in on cases.
01:03:42 --> 01:03:50 You know, I had to go to Gina, Louisiana, to actually tour the detention facility, all that stuff.
01:03:50 --> 01:03:55 But the thing that bothered me was when we had to look in the Department of
01:03:55 --> 01:04:00 State and look into the visa thing and just see that, you know,
01:04:00 --> 01:04:02 a lot of people just became,
01:04:02 --> 01:04:07 made me realize that a lot of people had filed their documents like they were supposed to,
01:04:07 --> 01:04:12 but because they didn't fall into a certain category, they got caught up in the quota.
01:04:13 --> 01:04:20 And so it's like, you know, you could have filed, and this was in the early
01:04:20 --> 01:04:21 2000s when I was doing it.
01:04:21 --> 01:04:30 So let's just say you filed in 2007 and the State Department hadn't gotten to
01:04:30 --> 01:04:32 the year 2004 yet, right?
01:04:32 --> 01:04:37 So, you know, it's like there's a lot of people that file their paperwork,
01:04:37 --> 01:04:43 but for whatever reason, their case hasn't even been heard yet.
01:04:43 --> 01:04:51 Their application hasn't even been reviewed yet. So how can we fix that problem? How can we...
01:04:52 --> 01:04:55 But, you know, because there were some countries that was like maybe two or
01:04:55 --> 01:04:58 three years and other countries that were like 10. So how do we fix that?
01:04:59 --> 01:05:04 Yeah. And when I think about the immigration problem, it's a balance.
01:05:04 --> 01:05:09 It's a scale. On one side, you have the pathways to relief, like people who
01:05:09 --> 01:05:12 are married, people who have children here,
01:05:13 --> 01:05:21 like people who can adjust based on family or work or a humanitarian purpose.
01:05:21 --> 01:05:25 And then on the other side of that scale, you have deportation proceedings.
01:05:25 --> 01:05:31 In a perfect world, one where immigration actually means something,
01:05:31 --> 01:05:38 those scales need to be balanced. People who have a means to lawfully stay in the U.S.
01:05:39 --> 01:05:43 Should be able to go through that without having a deportation process,
01:05:43 --> 01:05:49 just come snatch them up and say, too bad, you don't have relief right now.
01:05:50 --> 01:05:52 That has to be balanced. That has to be changed.
01:05:54 --> 01:05:58 Are ways to do that. And Biden did try some ways to do that,
01:05:58 --> 01:06:05 like offering people who are married to a lawful permanent resident or U.S.
01:06:06 --> 01:06:11 Citizen to temporarily stay here with protection while USCIS,
01:06:12 --> 01:06:15 which is the agency in charge of that, or the Department of State,
01:06:16 --> 01:06:17 figures out the visa issue.
01:06:18 --> 01:06:23 Because the visa issue and the allotment of those visas, I think what you said
01:06:23 --> 01:06:25 was like really good. It was like the quota problem.
01:06:26 --> 01:06:31 That has been an issue that has not been updated since like the 60s.
01:06:31 --> 01:06:34 And so we're really running on an outdated system.
01:06:35 --> 01:06:41 No politician has wanted to touch immigration because of the reality that illegal
01:06:41 --> 01:06:45 immigration pays. everyone benefits from illegal immigration.
01:06:46 --> 01:06:52 They're here when there's work shortages, when people don't want to pay full price for things.
01:06:52 --> 01:06:56 You find someone who could do it for a fraction of the cost,
01:06:57 --> 01:06:59 pay them under the table, that saves.
01:07:00 --> 01:07:05 And then when there's times like this where someone is coming into office and
01:07:05 --> 01:07:09 now everybody's upset with immigration or they're upset about the price of things.
01:07:09 --> 01:07:14 They're upset that with the economy, immigration saves the day again saying,
01:07:14 --> 01:07:15 okay, it's their problem.
01:07:15 --> 01:07:17 Now we're going to be tough on immigration.
01:07:18 --> 01:07:22 And being tough on immigration also raises poll numbers in the past.
01:07:22 --> 01:07:26 Like right now we're seeing that the way that this administration has been dealing
01:07:26 --> 01:07:27 with enforcement is not favored,
01:07:27 --> 01:07:37 but every presidency has not had the focus to really solve the issue because
01:07:37 --> 01:07:40 it wasn't an issue that America wanted to solve.
01:07:41 --> 01:07:46 Obama tried, like Obama tried with, and so many people with the DREAMers Act,
01:07:46 --> 01:07:49 people who've been brought to this country who have studied here since they
01:07:49 --> 01:07:52 were young, at least give them a pathway.
01:07:52 --> 01:07:54 If we're going to carve it for someone, carve it for the children.
01:07:54 --> 01:07:57 And that failed in Congress.
01:07:58 --> 01:08:02 Yeah. And even, you know, you said study is like, you know, some of them have
01:08:02 --> 01:08:06 joined the military and have served and defended our country.
01:08:06 --> 01:08:13 And it would just seem like that would be a no brainer to reward somebody who
01:08:13 --> 01:08:16 at least signed up for for service to the country.
01:08:17 --> 01:08:20 But I guess we can go down the weeds on that one.
01:08:21 --> 01:08:25 In my bed in The Guardian, you stated that the government is sanctioning a culture
01:08:25 --> 01:08:31 of fear where teachers, neighbors, and even classmates feel justified in weaponizing deportation.
01:08:31 --> 01:08:36 So do you think the level of force being shown to enforce a misdemeanor charge
01:08:36 --> 01:08:38 of being undocumented is excessive?
01:08:39 --> 01:08:43 And what are some ways for citizens and immigrants to stand up against it?
01:08:44 --> 01:08:49 Yeah, I definitely think that the use of force right now is excessive.
01:08:50 --> 01:08:53 We are seeing you know
01:08:53 --> 01:08:56 I try to take small doses of the
01:08:56 --> 01:09:03 videos the media because I see this every day in my day-to-day and it's I didn't
01:09:03 --> 01:09:07 I didn't really actually realize how much it was infecting me until one day
01:09:07 --> 01:09:12 a client was telling me how scared he was to show up for an interview because
01:09:12 --> 01:09:15 he thought he was going to be detained and the chances of him being detained were high,
01:09:16 --> 01:09:23 and so It's hard not to take on other people's fear And it's hard not to let that affect you.
01:09:23 --> 01:09:27 You know, I can't like switch it off and then go home to my family and be like nothing happened.
01:09:28 --> 01:09:34 When I wrote that that was like I think just as trump was coming in or during like early trump,
01:09:35 --> 01:09:39 And I see that yes, there was a lot of people turning in on each other,
01:09:40 --> 01:09:45 But now I see that there's also a lot of good and americans like Like,
01:09:45 --> 01:09:50 you know, running human chains so that when people exit schools,
01:09:50 --> 01:09:54 they're not going to be picked up or their children are not going to be separated in those places.
01:09:55 --> 01:10:02 So I do have a lot of hope for America now. And we see in Chicago that.
01:10:03 --> 01:10:10 Like chief officer there who's having to go to court every day at 6 p.m.
01:10:10 --> 01:10:15 To tell the federal judge that the use of force is appropriate because they
01:10:15 --> 01:10:19 were throwing like tear gas at
01:10:19 --> 01:10:24 children when they were on the way to a Halloween parade at their school.
01:10:25 --> 01:10:35 They are shooting pellets at pastors they are pulling people out of cars where
01:10:35 --> 01:10:38 with such force that their ribs are broken.
01:10:39 --> 01:10:43 And when I see comments to those stories like, well, why didn't that person
01:10:43 --> 01:10:46 just get out of the car? Why didn't they just walk away?
01:10:46 --> 01:10:51 That is the wrong question to ask. The question to ask is,
01:10:51 --> 01:11:03 why does ICE or CBP, no other federal agency has that level of like a hall pass to be like,
01:11:04 --> 01:11:07 no, any other agency does that. there's an investigation being opened.
01:11:08 --> 01:11:11 There's looking into how did this happen?
01:11:12 --> 01:11:16 ICE has had a hall pass for so long that they don't feel like they have to justify that.
01:11:16 --> 01:11:22 And so holding them to these standards, this federal judge, this decision is
01:11:22 --> 01:11:24 something that we should all be looking at.
01:11:24 --> 01:11:30 She ordered CDP and ICE to wear cameras on them because also like the stories
01:11:30 --> 01:11:35 don't match up, where there was this one man who dropped off his children at
01:11:35 --> 01:11:38 school and he was driving, he was shot to death in his car.
01:11:38 --> 01:11:42 And CBP said that, or ICE had said that he tried to run them over,
01:11:42 --> 01:11:45 but now evidence is showing that that's not true.
01:11:45 --> 01:11:51 And so America does need to be curious right now and to see what is the truth.
01:11:51 --> 01:11:57 And the way that we do that collectively is by filming when we see some injustice happen.
01:11:58 --> 01:12:02 Film it and post it because one person can be filming from another angle,
01:12:03 --> 01:12:07 you film from another angle, and then in the end, all those angles are important
01:12:07 --> 01:12:10 if that person brings forward a case in federal court.
01:12:10 --> 01:12:15 I know New York has also started to do that and they have a database where people
01:12:15 --> 01:12:20 can post their footage or post it on social media because these are real-time
01:12:20 --> 01:12:25 accounts and even if they're not used in a federal court, at least our children,
01:12:25 --> 01:12:29 the people that come after us will be able to see what happened during this time.
01:12:31 --> 01:12:37 So I'm still trying to wonder how the Border Patrol is actually in Chicago,
01:12:37 --> 01:12:41 because I was under the impression that the Border Patrol cannot,
01:12:41 --> 01:12:48 their jurisdiction was no more than 100 miles from the American border.
01:12:48 --> 01:12:54 And Chicago is not a border city. How are they even getting around that?
01:12:55 --> 01:12:58 Yeah. And that is an excellent point. And I think that's something we're all
01:12:58 --> 01:13:01 thinking about and wondering.
01:13:01 --> 01:13:04 CBP is supposed to be stationed at the borders and at the airport.
01:13:05 --> 01:13:10 They are in charge of anything coming in and leaving the U.S. That is their job.
01:13:11 --> 01:13:14 This administration and and because
01:13:14 --> 01:13:17 that's their job they have a great authority
01:13:17 --> 01:13:20 they can arrest without a warrant like
01:13:20 --> 01:13:23 we're all discussing ice's you know administrative warrant
01:13:23 --> 01:13:26 they don't even need that they can search anyone even
01:13:26 --> 01:13:29 an american citizen they can go through their phone they can search the
01:13:29 --> 01:13:33 authority that they have at the border is so great and
01:13:33 --> 01:13:37 there's little oversight if they you know
01:13:37 --> 01:13:39 violate someone's rights the fact that they're going
01:13:39 --> 01:13:43 to get sued or reprimanded is very low and
01:13:43 --> 01:13:48 so the trump administration is bringing that culture like we've already seen
01:13:48 --> 01:13:53 the damage from ice but cbp is another level and they're bringing that to our
01:13:53 --> 01:13:59 backyards to our schools to our churches to me this is intentional and i we
01:13:59 --> 01:14:03 don't know exactly yet how this administration plans to use this,
01:14:03 --> 01:14:11 but I feel from everything that I've been seeing is that this administration is trying to.
01:14:12 --> 01:14:19 Those authorities that CBB can exercise at the border into the U.S.,
01:14:19 --> 01:14:25 where there is going to be this, I can arrest you and nothing will happen because of X, Y, Z.
01:14:25 --> 01:14:32 We are also seeing this in new immigration cases, where people who have been living in the U.S.
01:14:32 --> 01:14:36 For 20 years are really getting stopped. They're Amazon drivers.
01:14:36 --> 01:14:39 The trucks are getting stopped. They're being asked for identification.
01:14:39 --> 01:14:43 When they show a license, they're like, no, I need to see your papers. Do you have a passport?
01:14:44 --> 01:14:48 Do you have a green card? I need to see it. And then if they don't produce it,
01:14:48 --> 01:14:49 they're being arrested.
01:14:49 --> 01:14:55 We know that there's over 146 hundred people that have been arrested,
01:14:55 --> 01:14:58 American citizens who have been arrested and caught up in this.
01:14:58 --> 01:15:02 And so it's unclear how they're doing it.
01:15:02 --> 01:15:07 We're pushing back in federal courts, but federal courts take time to issue decisions.
01:15:08 --> 01:15:15 Yeah. What are your thoughts on the H-1B visas, the fees being raised?
01:15:17 --> 01:15:21 That that is very sad because
01:15:21 --> 01:15:24 there's a lot of people that would qualify for that where
01:15:24 --> 01:15:27 employers would love to sponsor them and now
01:15:27 --> 01:15:30 because of the fees they can't do that or they're
01:15:30 --> 01:15:34 not willing to do that and so that means that there's a whole class of people
01:15:34 --> 01:15:40 now who would have otherwise had status are now going to be left in limbo and
01:15:40 --> 01:15:47 either self-deport or try to find another way to adjust their status.
01:15:47 --> 01:15:54 So have you lost any clients because of the fees being raised or y'all working through?
01:15:56 --> 01:16:04 I don't do H-1Bs, but I have had a lot of referrals from people who would have
01:16:04 --> 01:16:07 had an H-1B, but now their employer doesn't want to sponsor them.
01:16:07 --> 01:16:09 They've been living in the U.S.
01:16:09 --> 01:16:13 For years, and now they're trying to find an alternative. I got you.
01:16:14 --> 01:16:19 All right. So So what would you who would you like to have a one on one meeting
01:16:19 --> 01:16:21 with concerning immigration?
01:16:21 --> 01:16:25 Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem or President Trump?
01:16:25 --> 01:16:30 And what would you say to them to try and relax their hardline position?
01:16:31 --> 01:16:35 That was a really interesting question, and I had to think about this one.
01:16:36 --> 01:16:43 And I feel when there's an issue of values, you can't change people's minds.
01:16:44 --> 01:16:50 If I were to walk into a conversation with any of them, they would just be talking
01:16:50 --> 01:16:54 to talk because they like to be right and they like to hear themselves talk.
01:16:54 --> 01:17:00 They don't care about Americans. They don't care about humanity.
01:17:01 --> 01:17:04 Wasn't known the one that like killed the dog
01:17:04 --> 01:17:08 killed her dog yeah like you
01:17:08 --> 01:17:13 know to be sitting in a room with someone who can be so heinous for me is just
01:17:13 --> 01:17:21 it would be a waste of my time and it would drain my energy and instead i feel
01:17:21 --> 01:17:26 like the people that i would want to talk to are college students,
01:17:26 --> 01:17:31 are Americans who are on the fence, because I've had people come to me like
01:17:31 --> 01:17:33 with all these rates that are going on in warehouses.
01:17:34 --> 01:17:37 There was this one person who was writing a story and she called me and she
01:17:37 --> 01:17:40 was like, I'm trying to understand this.
01:17:40 --> 01:17:47 They had a warrant for one person. They arrested 596 people. How does that happen?
01:17:48 --> 01:17:52 And she was really trying to understand because when she called DHS,
01:17:52 --> 01:17:55 DHS told them we had a tip.
01:17:55 --> 01:17:58 All of these people are working illegally. We needed to arrest anybody.
01:17:58 --> 01:18:03 And then when she asked if they had a warrant, this was during the early stages
01:18:03 --> 01:18:06 where Trump was like, we're only going after the worst of the worst.
01:18:07 --> 01:18:12 Like I think one person who they had a warrant had a crime. No one else had a crime.
01:18:12 --> 01:18:17 And so she was really trying to understand. And those are the people I want to talk to,
01:18:17 --> 01:18:22 The people who are really trying to understand and make sense of this because
01:18:22 --> 01:18:25 they hear one thing and then they're seeing all the stuff that's going on and
01:18:25 --> 01:18:28 they don't know what where the truth is.
01:18:29 --> 01:18:31 Those are the people that I want to speak to.
01:18:32 --> 01:18:35 So before I get to my last question, I do want to ask you this.
01:18:35 --> 01:18:40 So when you, during the 24 campaign, immigration came up a lot.
01:18:40 --> 01:18:45 And, you know, the president said, you know, certain groups of immigrants were
01:18:45 --> 01:18:49 eating animals and pets, actually.
01:18:50 --> 01:18:54 And, you know, they had a whole convention where everybody was sitting in the
01:18:54 --> 01:18:56 aisle saying mass deportation now. Wow.
01:18:57 --> 01:19:01 As somebody that does this work for a living and having worked on both sides,
01:19:01 --> 01:19:04 what was your gut reaction to that?
01:19:04 --> 01:19:07 Did that make you angry? Did that make you more resolved?
01:19:08 --> 01:19:15 How did you approach it where, you know, now to be in the state where you are?
01:19:15 --> 01:19:18 What was your thought process during that whole campaign?
01:19:19 --> 01:19:26 I felt like I saw 10 steps ahead. I knew where this type of attitude was going to lead us.
01:19:26 --> 01:19:30 And that's why I took to writing and I started to write about this issue because,
01:19:31 --> 01:19:32 history does repeat itself.
01:19:33 --> 01:19:38 And when we look past history in the U.S., every time there's this sentiment
01:19:38 --> 01:19:43 of blaming, of animosity towards the other, right?
01:19:43 --> 01:19:48 We've had different races, different countries be recycled through who the other
01:19:48 --> 01:19:51 is and who's going to be the scapegoat at this point.
01:19:53 --> 01:20:00 A lot of anger, a lot of violence, a lot of divisiveness within our nation.
01:20:00 --> 01:20:05 And so I knew at that point that we were heading here, if this administration
01:20:05 --> 01:20:14 was going to win, especially because what he had started in the first term, a lot of the things,
01:20:15 --> 01:20:18 a lot of the decisions, we were like, this is so illegal.
01:20:18 --> 01:20:22 Like he would like the Muslim ban the first one he wrote. It took them like
01:20:22 --> 01:20:23 three tries to get it right.
01:20:24 --> 01:20:28 The first one, when I read it, I was still working at Homeland Security and
01:20:28 --> 01:20:29 I was like, this can't be real.
01:20:30 --> 01:20:35 Like we didn't even get like an inbox, you know, an email saying, Hey, this just passed.
01:20:35 --> 01:20:39 Stop people at the airports. Cause it was just like, it just hit.
01:20:39 --> 01:20:42 And agents are like, what is this? What do we do with this council?
01:20:43 --> 01:20:46 And I'm like, this seems illegal.
01:20:46 --> 01:20:49 Like, what am I supposed to tell people to do?
01:20:49 --> 01:20:52 Like based on an unlawful something that just
01:20:52 --> 01:20:55 sounded so unlawful it did get struck down but I
01:20:55 --> 01:20:58 could see where we were going and I could see that this administration
01:20:58 --> 01:21:01 was going to push the boundaries as far as they could which
01:21:01 --> 01:21:05 is what's happening so I didn't think
01:21:05 --> 01:21:12 that it would be so bad so fast it's been a rough few months every day something
01:21:12 --> 01:21:19 changes and so having a community where you can lean on has been very helpful
01:21:19 --> 01:21:22 because no one's getting through this alone.
01:21:22 --> 01:21:26 Like you need to lean on your community right now, whatever issue is important
01:21:26 --> 01:21:28 to you, that's affecting you.
01:21:28 --> 01:21:34 Like there's so many, right? Like LGBTQ plus people just lost SNAP benefits.
01:21:34 --> 01:21:40 Like there's parts of this administration that's going to touch people in different ways.
01:21:40 --> 01:21:46 For me, it's, it's immigration, but just lean on your community and stand with each other right now.
01:21:46 --> 01:21:49 All right. So I want to close this out on something positive.
01:21:50 --> 01:21:55 Talk to the audience about the concept of humanigration and the work that you're
01:21:55 --> 01:21:56 doing around that concept.
01:21:58 --> 01:22:02 So when I was at ICE, I saw that people who are going through the system,
01:22:02 --> 01:22:05 because it's so complex, really didn't understand it.
01:22:05 --> 01:22:09 Even when they had lawyers, they, you know, people don't generally know how to testify.
01:22:10 --> 01:22:14 People don't generally understand what the judge wants, especially when you
01:22:14 --> 01:22:14 don't speak that language.
01:22:15 --> 01:22:19 There's an interpretation going, but sometimes you may not even understand that
01:22:19 --> 01:22:20 because it's moving so fast.
01:22:21 --> 01:22:26 And so, you know, like a regular first hearing, master calendar hearing can
01:22:26 --> 01:22:29 last two minutes. and all that time is talking. So it's very complicated.
01:22:30 --> 01:22:34 So I wanted to create a system where people who were going through the process
01:22:34 --> 01:22:35 could actually understand it.
01:22:35 --> 01:22:39 We could slow it down so that they understood what was required of them.
01:22:39 --> 01:22:46 And then also through that, I started to come across lawyers who needed mentorship, who needed help.
01:22:46 --> 01:22:49 And so that's how Humanigration was born.
01:22:50 --> 01:22:55 I mentor new lawyers who are looking to make the transition and even older lawyers,
01:22:56 --> 01:22:58 veteran lawyers, who just want to work in community.
01:22:58 --> 01:23:02 We have a large community now. We talk to each other.
01:23:03 --> 01:23:07 We help each other, you know, because it is a very difficult field.
01:23:07 --> 01:23:09 Things are moving so fast.
01:23:09 --> 01:23:17 So it's been great. Like I've had a lot of good connections through that mentorship program.
01:23:17 --> 01:23:23 Now, have you been, have you encountered people who say were licensed lawyers
01:23:23 --> 01:23:27 in other countries and for some reason they're now admitted to the bar.
01:23:27 --> 01:23:33 Have you been working with those individuals to kind of help out with.
01:23:34 --> 01:23:39 Not necessarily your firm, but, you know, kind of helping them get along?
01:23:39 --> 01:23:44 Because we had situations like that in Mississippi where we had people who went
01:23:44 --> 01:23:45 to law school in Mexico and for
01:23:45 --> 01:23:49 some reason they couldn't pass the bar and then they get hired by a firm.
01:23:50 --> 01:23:55 And so their job is paralegal, but they're just as qualified as any other attorney
01:23:55 --> 01:23:57 that we're working with at the firm.
01:23:57 --> 01:24:02 Have you encountered that and you incorporating them into this process? Yeah.
01:24:02 --> 01:24:06 I generally work with either lawyers or people who are going through the process.
01:24:07 --> 01:24:10 But with lawyers in the law firms, like a lot of lawyers are like,
01:24:10 --> 01:24:12 well, can you train staff, right?
01:24:12 --> 01:24:16 Because the paralegals need to know what's going on in court so that their applications
01:24:16 --> 01:24:19 can be stronger. So the statements can be stronger.
01:24:19 --> 01:24:24 And so, yes, we work with like the whole firm and anyone who wants to join.
01:24:24 --> 01:24:29 We the classes are through a three month time period. We meet every Fridays.
01:24:29 --> 01:24:34 And so it's like for an hour and a half, you know, you're with a group of like 12 people.
01:24:35 --> 01:24:40 Everyone's learning, asking questions. So it is good to learn in community like that.
01:24:41 --> 01:24:47 So is this a nonprofit separate from your firm or is this incorporated in what your firm does?
01:24:48 --> 01:24:52 Yeah, it's a it's a for profit, but it's separated from my firm.
01:24:52 --> 01:24:57 So my firm is Cardenas Immigration Law and then the educational platform is Humanigration.
01:24:58 --> 01:25:03 So right now I'm also starting to do videos about like the whole court process
01:25:03 --> 01:25:08 so that people can like go to YouTube and look at that video and find out like
01:25:08 --> 01:25:10 I have a master calendar.
01:25:10 --> 01:25:12 What does that even mean? What questions am I going to be asked?
01:25:12 --> 01:25:15 And it'll give you like a breakdown about that.
01:25:15 --> 01:25:18 Or if you're preparing for like your trial date, your merits,
01:25:18 --> 01:25:20 how do I prepare for that?
01:25:20 --> 01:25:26 What evidence do I need? So if people want to get plugged into what you're doing,
01:25:26 --> 01:25:32 either at the law firm or with Humanigration, or just want to reach out to you, how can they do that?
01:25:33 --> 01:25:38 They could visit Humanigration.com. There I have all my contact information.
01:25:38 --> 01:25:41 Also, they could follow me on Instagram at Humanigration.
01:25:42 --> 01:25:47 Contact info is all on there. Well, Veronica Cardenas, again,
01:25:47 --> 01:25:50 I've stated before, you're doing the Lord's work.
01:25:50 --> 01:25:57 As somebody that tries to be balanced. I've had people who have been Border
01:25:57 --> 01:26:01 Patrol agents, not proponents of...
01:26:02 --> 01:26:10 Immigration, but I have a soft spot for people who are trying to do the right
01:26:10 --> 01:26:16 thing and get people in the right way and to help them navigate through this process,
01:26:16 --> 01:26:19 which has gotten much worse in this current time we're in.
01:26:19 --> 01:26:24 So like I said, again, you're doing the Lord's work, and it's really an honor
01:26:24 --> 01:26:28 to meet you, and it's even more of an honor for you to come on the podcast. I appreciate it.
01:26:29 --> 01:26:31 I appreciate that so much. Thank you so much for the invite.
01:26:32 --> 01:26:33 All right, guys, we're going to catch.
01:26:53 --> 01:26:59 All right, we are back. And so now it is time for my next guest, John Bonifaz.
01:26:59 --> 01:27:06 John Bonifaz is a constitutional attorney and the co-founder and president of Free Speech for People.
01:27:07 --> 01:27:12 Mr. Bonifaz previously served as executive director and general counsel of the
01:27:12 --> 01:27:17 National Voting Rights Institute, an organization he founded in 1994 and as
01:27:17 --> 01:27:21 the Legal Director of Voter Action, a national election integrity organization.
01:27:22 --> 01:27:27 He has been at the forefront of key voting rights and democracy campaigns in
01:27:27 --> 01:27:29 the United States for more than three decades.
01:27:29 --> 01:27:35 Mr. Bonifaz, work has included pioneering a series of court challenges,
01:27:35 --> 01:27:40 applying political equality principles that have helped to redefine the campaign
01:27:40 --> 01:27:44 finance question as a basic voting rights issue of our time,
01:27:44 --> 01:27:49 helping to lead key election protection cases across the country and helping
01:27:49 --> 01:27:56 to lead historical legal challenges under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to
01:27:56 --> 01:27:59 insurrectionists seeking to run for re-election.
01:27:59 --> 01:28:04 He is the co-author with former American University law professor and now Congressman
01:28:04 --> 01:28:08 Jamie Raskin of two seminal law review articles.
01:28:10 --> 01:28:15 At Yale Law and Policy Review in 1993 and one at Columbia Law Review in 1994,
01:28:15 --> 01:28:21 and of the wealth primary campaign fundraising in the Constitution,
01:28:21 --> 01:28:25 which all argue that the current campaign finance system violates the equal
01:28:25 --> 01:28:28 protection rights of non-wealthy candidates and voters.
01:28:29 --> 01:28:37 Mr. Bonifaz is the co-author with Ron Fine and Ben Clements of The Constitution
01:28:37 --> 01:28:41 Demands It, the case for the Impeachment of Donald Trump, published in 2018,
01:28:42 --> 01:28:44 with a foreword by John Nichols.
01:28:44 --> 01:28:50 Mr. Bonifaz is also the author of Warrior King, published by Nation Books in 2004,
01:28:51 --> 01:28:55 with a foreword by the late Congressman John Conyers Jr., with chronicles the
01:28:55 --> 01:29:00 2003 case in which he served as lead counsel challenging the U.S.
01:29:01 --> 01:29:06 Military invasion of Iraq as illegal under the War Powers Clause of the U.S.
01:29:06 --> 01:29:12 Constitution. Mr. Bonifaz has also served as co-counsel in international human
01:29:12 --> 01:29:14 rights and environmental litigation,
01:29:15 --> 01:29:20 including litigation to hold the Chevron Texaco Oil Company accountable for
01:29:20 --> 01:29:24 its widespread destruction of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
01:29:24 --> 01:29:31 Mr. Bonifaz is a 1992 cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School and a 1999 recipient
01:29:31 --> 01:29:33 of a MacArthur Foundation Fellowship.
01:29:33 --> 01:29:38 Ladies and gentlemen, it is my distinct honor and privilege to have as a guest
01:29:38 --> 01:29:41 on this podcast, John Boniface.
01:29:52 --> 01:29:57 All right. John Bonifaz. Bonifaz. How you doing, sir? You doing good?
01:29:58 --> 01:30:02 I'm doing well. Thanks so much for having me, Eric. Well, it's an honor to have
01:30:02 --> 01:30:10 you on and especially to talk about a lot of the issues that your organization is diving into.
01:30:10 --> 01:30:15 I checked out your website and stuff and I said, yeah, it's pretty, pretty.
01:30:16 --> 01:30:18 Well, I won't say radical, but pretty aggressive.
01:30:19 --> 01:30:23 That was a pretty aggressive agenda. Kind of reminds me of me when I was in
01:30:23 --> 01:30:28 the legislature. I used to introduce like 150 bills a year when I was in the
01:30:28 --> 01:30:31 legislature. So I like people to have ideas.
01:30:32 --> 01:30:37 So, John, we're going to start off the interview like I normally do with guests,
01:30:38 --> 01:30:40 with what we call an icebreaker segment.
01:30:40 --> 01:30:45 So the first part of the icebreaker segment is that I need you to respond to a quote.
01:30:45 --> 01:30:50 Okay. All right. So here's your quote. The pressing question before the nation
01:30:50 --> 01:30:57 today is whether it is we the people or we the corporations and big money interests.
01:30:57 --> 01:31:03 This is not a Democratic issue or Republican issue. This is a deeply American issue.
01:31:03 --> 01:31:08 Whatever our political differences may be, we all share the common vision of
01:31:08 --> 01:31:12 government of, by, and for the people. What's your thoughts on that comment?
01:31:13 --> 01:31:17 Well, I agree. That is a pressing issue for our nation today.
01:31:18 --> 01:31:22 And no question, since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United,
01:31:22 --> 01:31:28 the FEC, the day of that ruling, we launched Free Speech for People in January 2010.
01:31:28 --> 01:31:33 That was a ruling sweeping away, a century of press, and barring corporate money
01:31:33 --> 01:31:37 in elections, equating corporations as people with political speech rights.
01:31:37 --> 01:31:43 Since that ruling, that question has become even more relevant because now corporations
01:31:43 --> 01:31:47 through their general treasury funds can dominate our elections,
01:31:47 --> 01:31:51 can pour hundreds of millions of dollars into our elections.
01:31:51 --> 01:31:57 And that has become a threat to the integrity of our political process and our democracy.
01:31:57 --> 01:32:03 So one major fight on our hands is to overturn that ruling via constitutional
01:32:03 --> 01:32:10 amendment that would overturn not just Citizens United, but a prior ruling known as Buckley v.
01:32:10 --> 01:32:16 Vallejo in 1976 by the Supreme Court, which equated money as speech and allowed
01:32:16 --> 01:32:22 for this system of unlimited campaign spending by the wealthy interests to drown
01:32:22 --> 01:32:24 out the voices of ordinary voters.
01:32:24 --> 01:32:29 So this is a fight for our democracy, no question about it But there are also
01:32:29 --> 01:32:33 many other fights today that we're facing As a result of the corruption,
01:32:34 --> 01:32:38 abuse of power coming out of the White House And as a result of voter suppression
01:32:38 --> 01:32:42 and voter intimidation schemes around the country All right,
01:32:42 --> 01:32:45 so now the second part of the Icebreaker is called 20 questions.
01:32:46 --> 01:32:49 So I need you to give me a number between 1 and 20,
01:32:50 --> 01:32:54 You mean the number of questions I'll take? No, no, just give me a number Thank you.
01:32:55 --> 01:33:06 Five. Okay. What do you think we should decide at the local or state levels
01:33:06 --> 01:33:08 versus the federal level?
01:33:08 --> 01:33:11 Well, I certainly think that state and
01:33:11 --> 01:33:17 local governments have a power and responsibility to run their elections.
01:33:17 --> 01:33:20 That's the way our system works. It's a decentralized system.
01:33:21 --> 01:33:27 But I also think that there needs to be overall guarantees from the federal
01:33:27 --> 01:33:32 government, from the Constitution, that there will be a fair election process,
01:33:32 --> 01:33:35 that no voters will be blocked from casting their vote,
01:33:35 --> 01:33:38 and that votes will be counted as cast.
01:33:38 --> 01:33:45 So I think it's a meeting of different interests here between what state localities
01:33:45 --> 01:33:50 have a right duty to run in terms of their elections, but also what the federal
01:33:50 --> 01:33:51 government has a right to do.
01:33:51 --> 01:33:55 Now, when it comes to mobilizing the military into our cities,
01:33:55 --> 01:33:58 we're seeing a direct attack on state and local authorities,
01:33:58 --> 01:34:04 where this idea that now the federal government, through this Trump administration,
01:34:04 --> 01:34:10 can send troops into American cities to address law enforcement matters is contrary
01:34:10 --> 01:34:16 to what the Constitution allows and contrary to the federalism system that we
01:34:16 --> 01:34:20 have of states having the ability to run their own localities and their jurisdictions.
01:34:21 --> 01:34:26 Yeah. Why did you decide to start free speech for people, especially when you
01:34:26 --> 01:34:29 had already founded the National Voting Rights Institute?
01:34:30 --> 01:34:33 Right. Well, I started Free Speech for People with another attorney,
01:34:34 --> 01:34:37 Jeff Clements, in 2010 on the day of the Citizens United ruling.
01:34:37 --> 01:34:41 By the time I had started that, the National Voting Rights Institute,
01:34:41 --> 01:34:49 which I had founded in 1994, had merged in 2007 with an organization called Demos,
01:34:49 --> 01:34:54 based down in New York, which is a progressive think tank that works a lot on democracy issues.
01:34:54 --> 01:34:59 So I was no longer working at the National Voting Rights Institute.
01:34:59 --> 01:35:00 It had already merged with Demos.
01:35:01 --> 01:35:07 And this new organization, they said, was spurred by what the Supreme Court
01:35:07 --> 01:35:11 did in Citizens United by going over the cliff, declaring that corporations
01:35:11 --> 01:35:14 are people with political speech rights.
01:35:14 --> 01:35:20 We have since expanded our work to address threats to voting rights and threats
01:35:20 --> 01:35:23 to our democracy coming out of a corrupt White House.
01:35:23 --> 01:35:28 But we remain dedicated as well to challenging big money in politics.
01:35:29 --> 01:35:34 Defines, give your definition of free speech as laid out in the First Amendment.
01:35:35 --> 01:35:41 Free speech is certainly a guarantee that all of us have the right to have our
01:35:41 --> 01:35:45 voices heard without any restriction from the federal government.
01:35:46 --> 01:35:51 So long as we're not inciting violence, inciting an insurrection, we have that right.
01:35:51 --> 01:35:57 But it is also true that we have the right not to have our voices drowned out
01:35:57 --> 01:35:58 in the political process.
01:35:58 --> 01:36:03 So the free speech right does not extend to the ability to drown out other people's
01:36:03 --> 01:36:09 voices. The Supreme Court actually said that in 1949 in a case known as Kovacs v. Cooper.
01:36:09 --> 01:36:15 So the First Amendment guarantees free speech for all, but with the understanding
01:36:15 --> 01:36:22 that there are limitations with respect to creating danger in our society and inciting violence.
01:36:22 --> 01:36:27 And in our view, with respect to ensuring that every voice can be heard in the
01:36:27 --> 01:36:31 political process and not be drowned out by big money interests. Yeah.
01:36:31 --> 01:36:36 Yeah. And it's important, you know, to to remind folks that,
01:36:37 --> 01:36:41 well, from my perspective, that free speech means that you can say what you
01:36:41 --> 01:36:44 want to say, but I can respond in kind. Correct.
01:36:44 --> 01:36:50 And you can't and you can't censor me because my response may not jive with yours.
01:36:50 --> 01:36:54 I think that's that's a big misunderstanding that's going on now.
01:36:54 --> 01:37:01 Yes. In the in the political dialogue. So you kind of alluded to your motivation
01:37:01 --> 01:37:04 for starting this organization based off Citizens United.
01:37:04 --> 01:37:09 How much damage do you think it has done and can that damage be repaired?
01:37:10 --> 01:37:15 Done enormous damage to invite corporations now to come in with their general
01:37:15 --> 01:37:21 treasury funds and swamp our elections. I do think the damage can be repaired
01:37:21 --> 01:37:24 through a constitutional amendment, ultimately.
01:37:24 --> 01:37:29 That is what's necessary. But short of the amendment, we can do other things
01:37:29 --> 01:37:36 to chip away at the ruling and allow for other voices to be heard that don't
01:37:36 --> 01:37:39 have the resources of multinational corporations.
01:37:39 --> 01:37:45 First, multinational corporations by and large have foreign investors and those
01:37:45 --> 01:37:51 foreign investors are now able to subvert existing federal law that bars foreign
01:37:51 --> 01:37:54 nationals from spending money directly or indirectly in our elections.
01:37:54 --> 01:37:56 And they're able to do that through the corporate form.
01:37:56 --> 01:38:01 So we have been advancing legislation all across the country and in Congress
01:38:01 --> 01:38:06 that would ban multinational corporate spending in our elections based on their
01:38:06 --> 01:38:07 level of foreign investment,
01:38:08 --> 01:38:12 effectively saying that foreign-influenced corporate spending is no longer allowed.
01:38:12 --> 01:38:17 That was a loophole created by Citizens United, and we believe it can be closed with this legislation.
01:38:17 --> 01:38:21 It's already become the law in cities like Seattle, San Jose,
01:38:21 --> 01:38:25 and Portland, Maine, and it's advancing in a number of state legislatures.
01:38:26 --> 01:38:29 Thing we can do is to deal with the problem of super PACs.
01:38:29 --> 01:38:33 Now, people think super PACs came directly out of Citizens United,
01:38:33 --> 01:38:36 but actually they came out of a D.C.
01:38:36 --> 01:38:42 Circuit Court of Appeals ruling known as SpeechNow VFEC two months after Citizens United.
01:38:42 --> 01:38:49 And there we see 15 years of history of how unlimited donations to independent
01:38:49 --> 01:38:54 expenditure committees, super PACs, have effectively created more corruption,
01:38:54 --> 01:38:56 more appearance of corruption in our political process.
01:38:56 --> 01:39:02 So there's a whole campaign now to abolish super PACs. We're part of that campaign.
01:39:02 --> 01:39:07 Professor Larry Lessig at Harvard Law School is helping to lead it as well through
01:39:07 --> 01:39:08 his group Equal Citizens.
01:39:09 --> 01:39:13 And there's a case pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
01:39:13 --> 01:39:18 coming out of the state of Maine, which passed a law banning super PACs in their elections.
01:39:18 --> 01:39:23 And that case could very well be a case that ultimately gets us to the place
01:39:23 --> 01:39:26 of reversing the prior ruling from the D.C.
01:39:26 --> 01:39:31 Circuit that's created super PACs and allows us to abolish them nationwide.
01:39:32 --> 01:39:36 Yeah. Why is it important to expand the U.S. Supreme Court?
01:39:37 --> 01:39:43 Well, the U.S. Supreme Court, you know, in the modern day has nine justices,
01:39:43 --> 01:39:48 but there's nothing in the Constitution that requires that that number stay the same.
01:39:48 --> 01:39:51 You know, and in fact, it used to have less.
01:39:51 --> 01:39:58 So we have advocated for that. But we also advocate for term limits for justices.
01:39:58 --> 01:40:04 We believe it's necessary to have a term limit that is meaningful and allows
01:40:04 --> 01:40:07 for other justices to be appointed.
01:40:07 --> 01:40:10 And this has been legislation pending in the Congress that we fully endorse.
01:40:11 --> 01:40:18 Yeah. So one of the arguments that I agree with in expanding the court is that.
01:40:19 --> 01:40:24 Traditionally, when the court has been expanded, it's to make sure that it matches
01:40:24 --> 01:40:27 the federal judicial districts throughout the country.
01:40:28 --> 01:40:31 It appealed the Court of Appeals.
01:40:31 --> 01:40:38 Yes, exactly. And so if there's 11 Court of Appeals, then there should be 11
01:40:38 --> 01:40:42 justices and one justice should be assigned to each court.
01:40:42 --> 01:40:47 If it's 13, then it should be 13 justices. That's the way I look at it,
01:40:47 --> 01:40:54 because you've got right now nine and you've got at least two justices that
01:40:54 --> 01:40:57 have multiple districts they're responsible for. Yeah.
01:40:58 --> 01:41:05 So, you know, it makes sense to me. But the politics of well,
01:41:05 --> 01:41:08 the politics in general have dictators like,
01:41:08 --> 01:41:13 you know, if if the Democrats want it and the Republicans are against it,
01:41:13 --> 01:41:15 Republicans want it, the Democrats are against it.
01:41:15 --> 01:41:20 And somehow, some ways should be, I think that should be legislation,
01:41:20 --> 01:41:26 that each justice should be responsible for a court of appeals.
01:41:26 --> 01:41:31 Therefore, it would automatically make sure that the court has to expand.
01:41:32 --> 01:41:36 Is definitely the argument for it, and that is what has been presented in the
01:41:36 --> 01:41:39 Judiciary Act that has been introduced in Congress.
01:41:39 --> 01:41:43 I think it's critical, though, to note that right now we're dealing with an
01:41:43 --> 01:41:47 existential crisis for our democracy, and that's because of somebody in the
01:41:47 --> 01:41:49 Oval Office who wants to be a dictator.
01:41:49 --> 01:41:54 And that person, in our view, should not have the ability to expand the Supreme Court.
01:41:54 --> 01:41:58 In fact, that person needs to be impeached and removed from public office.
01:41:58 --> 01:42:02 We've launched an entire campaign around this, impeachtrumpagain.org.
01:42:02 --> 01:42:07 More than 1 million people all across the country have signed on demanding impeachment
01:42:07 --> 01:42:11 proceedings against this lawless president, Donald Trump, and we have documented
01:42:11 --> 01:42:16 in detail 25 distinct grounds for his impeachment and removal.
01:42:16 --> 01:42:20 So before we get to a broader solution of expanding the court,
01:42:20 --> 01:42:23 we need to deal with this existential crisis here and now.
01:42:24 --> 01:42:29 This president is engaged in multiple abuses of power. We have cited them on
01:42:29 --> 01:42:31 our site. I'll just give a few examples.
01:42:31 --> 01:42:35 Committing treason by levying war against the United States,
01:42:35 --> 01:42:40 individual states, and their people, sending the military into our nation's
01:42:40 --> 01:42:43 cities to try to squash dissent.
01:42:44 --> 01:42:51 Disappearing people from our streets, sending them to foreign torture prisons, removing U.S.
01:42:51 --> 01:42:55 Residents, detaining, arresting, and removing them without due process of law,
01:42:55 --> 01:43:00 attacking the United States Congress by freezing trillions of dollars of public
01:43:00 --> 01:43:03 funds that have been duly appropriated by the U.S.
01:43:03 --> 01:43:08 Congress, attacking the judiciary, refusing to follow court orders,
01:43:08 --> 01:43:13 federal court orders from all across the country, usurping judicial authority.
01:43:13 --> 01:43:18 The list goes on with respect to the lawlessness coming out of this White House,
01:43:18 --> 01:43:21 and that existential crisis needs to be confronted here and now.
01:43:23 --> 01:43:25 This wasn't a planned question, but since you brought that up,
01:43:26 --> 01:43:35 have you had any response from members of Congress to those grounds for impeachment?
01:43:36 --> 01:43:39 And if so, why hasn't there any?
01:43:39 --> 01:43:46 Well, I know why it hasn't happened now, but is there a plan based on the conversations
01:43:46 --> 01:43:49 that you've had? Yeah, there absolutely is a plan.
01:43:49 --> 01:43:54 And our plan is to keep building this case because we know it will only grow
01:43:54 --> 01:43:57 as it does on a daily basis with these multiple abuses of power.
01:43:57 --> 01:44:01 The answer to your question is yes. We've been in contact with many members
01:44:01 --> 01:44:04 of Congress, one of whom, Congressman Al Green of Houston, Texas,
01:44:05 --> 01:44:07 has championed this in the United States Congress.
01:44:07 --> 01:44:13 We helped him draft articles of impeachment that he introduced in June of this year in the U.S.
01:44:13 --> 01:44:19 Congress that dealt with the illegal and unlawful bombing of Iran without any
01:44:19 --> 01:44:21 authorization under the War Powers Clause.
01:44:21 --> 01:44:28 So that particular article of impeachment was voted on by the House,
01:44:28 --> 01:44:30 full House, because he forced a floor vote.
01:44:31 --> 01:44:34 Any member of Congress, regardless of whether they're on the Judiciary Committee,
01:44:35 --> 01:44:39 can invoke what is known as House Rule 9 for a privileged resolution.
01:44:39 --> 01:44:41 And this is considered to be a
01:44:41 --> 01:44:45 privileged resolution, any matter on impeachment. So he forced that vote.
01:44:45 --> 01:44:50 78 of his colleagues voted with him to advance those articles of impeachment.
01:44:50 --> 01:44:56 And one additional one, Congressman Andre Carson, Indiana, joined the very next day.
01:44:56 --> 01:45:01 So we're up to 80 members of Congress now who support impeachment proceedings
01:45:01 --> 01:45:08 against this president. That is quadruple the number that was there before that vote.
01:45:08 --> 01:45:10 Only 20 were on record. Now they're 80.
01:45:11 --> 01:45:15 And I think the numbers will only continue to grow as this president continues
01:45:15 --> 01:45:18 to trample on the Constitution and the rule of law.
01:45:21 --> 01:45:27 Why is your organization pushing for constitutional amendments instead of federal
01:45:27 --> 01:45:29 legislation to handle some of these issues?
01:45:29 --> 01:45:35 Well, in some of these issues, what's required is to overturn the Supreme Court.
01:45:35 --> 01:45:39 So that's why a constitutional amendment is required. In some of them,
01:45:39 --> 01:45:44 it's required to amend the Constitution to reverse something that's already in the Constitution.
01:45:44 --> 01:45:49 So, for example, the Electoral College, which is an antiquated relic dating
01:45:49 --> 01:45:52 back to protecting the slave states, is in the Constitution.
01:45:52 --> 01:45:57 We support an amendment to overturn that and abolish the Electoral College and
01:45:57 --> 01:46:01 have the president only elected by popular vote.
01:46:01 --> 01:46:06 In addition, we do not have a right to vote formally in our U.S. Constitution.
01:46:06 --> 01:46:11 We're only one of 11 industrialized democracies in the world that does not have
01:46:11 --> 01:46:15 an affirmative, guaranteed right to vote. in our Constitution.
01:46:15 --> 01:46:19 Newer democracies, like South Africa's democracy, they draw up a Constitution
01:46:19 --> 01:46:21 with help, actually, from U.S.
01:46:21 --> 01:46:26 Experts they put into the Constitution an affirmative right to vote. We don't have that.
01:46:26 --> 01:46:28 So that's an amendment that is required.
01:46:28 --> 01:46:33 The amendment to overturn Citizens United and Buckley-Vallejo is needed because
01:46:33 --> 01:46:36 federal legislation can't overturn a Supreme Court ruling, you know,
01:46:36 --> 01:46:38 like that is interpreting the Constitution.
01:46:38 --> 01:46:42 It needs to be done via a constitutional amendment.
01:46:42 --> 01:46:48 So these are amendments that we support as well as others on our site at freespeechforpeople.org.
01:46:48 --> 01:46:51 We have a whole section of the site devoted to democracy amendments,
01:46:51 --> 01:46:56 and we think they're critical to advancing, you know, our democracy forward
01:46:56 --> 01:46:58 and expanding the electorate.
01:46:58 --> 01:47:02 So since you mentioned the Constitution.
01:47:03 --> 01:47:06 Of the ones that you're pushing. So the People's Rights Amendment,
01:47:06 --> 01:47:10 that's the one that's going to directly impact Citizens United. Is that correct?
01:47:11 --> 01:47:16 It is, but it's also going to directly impact the overall fabricated doctrine
01:47:16 --> 01:47:17 of corporate constitutional rights.
01:47:17 --> 01:47:24 So the story behind Citizens United is that it was part of a long road of trying
01:47:24 --> 01:47:29 to get corporations to have constitutional rights dating back to the early 1970s
01:47:29 --> 01:47:34 by then Lewis Powell before he became a justice on the Supreme Court,
01:47:34 --> 01:47:39 writing a memorandum that set out, private memorandum, never supposed to see the light of day,
01:47:39 --> 01:47:45 for the business community setting out why he thought corporations should be
01:47:45 --> 01:47:49 granted these constitutional rights to go against regulations that were enacted
01:47:49 --> 01:47:52 during that time that are designed to protect the public interest.
01:47:52 --> 01:47:58 And that road that we've been on for decades now of granting corporations these
01:47:58 --> 01:48:04 constitutional rights is a dangerous road and one that undermines our democracy and our republic.
01:48:04 --> 01:48:10 And so the People's Rights Amendment is designed to overturn that entire fabricated
01:48:10 --> 01:48:11 doctrine of corporate constitutional rights.
01:48:12 --> 01:48:16 Corporations are not people. They are artificial creatures of the state.
01:48:16 --> 01:48:20 They do not have the same abilities like you and I.
01:48:20 --> 01:48:22 They don't breathe. They don't bleed.
01:48:23 --> 01:48:28 They don't send their children off into war, and they actually have state-based
01:48:28 --> 01:48:30 privileges that you and I do not have.
01:48:31 --> 01:48:36 Limited liability, perpetual life, the ability to aggregate wealth and distribute
01:48:36 --> 01:48:42 wealth, and for those reasons, we must not treat them as people with constitutional rights.
01:48:42 --> 01:48:47 So you're saying Mitt Romney was wrong when he said that? He was wrong, absolutely.
01:48:49 --> 01:48:53 Is the right-to-vote amendment designed to supersede the 15th,
01:48:53 --> 01:48:56 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments?
01:48:56 --> 01:49:00 No, not at all. But I appreciate you asking that question. Those amendments
01:49:00 --> 01:49:07 guarantee the right-to-vote in the effort to stop discrimination for certain groups of voters.
01:49:08 --> 01:49:14 What the right-to-vote amendment would do would extend that to make it an affirmative right-to-vote.
01:49:14 --> 01:49:17 So right now, when we go into court, as we do with free speech or people,
01:49:17 --> 01:49:22 to challenge voter suppression laws and challenge voter intimidation,
01:49:22 --> 01:49:28 we rely on existing amendments like the Equal Protection Clause out of the 14th Amendment.
01:49:29 --> 01:49:30 Sometimes the 15th Amendment.
01:49:30 --> 01:49:34 We also rely on federal legislation like the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
01:49:34 --> 01:49:40 What we don't have as a tool is an affirmative right to vote in our Constitution,
01:49:40 --> 01:49:46 and that would strengthen our ability to take on voter suppression and voter intimidation.
01:49:46 --> 01:49:49 Justice Scalia famously said in Bush v.
01:49:50 --> 01:49:54 Gore, the 2000 ruling that stopped the vote counting in the state of Florida
01:49:54 --> 01:49:56 and handed the presidency to George W.
01:49:56 --> 01:50:01 Bush, he said in that ruling, there is no individual right to vote for the electors
01:50:01 --> 01:50:05 of the United States. And sadly, he was right.
01:50:05 --> 01:50:09 There is no individual right to vote for the electors because they're chosen
01:50:09 --> 01:50:11 by, you know, the states.
01:50:11 --> 01:50:17 The states go ahead. You vote for your presidential choice in the states and
01:50:17 --> 01:50:19 then the states go ahead and assign the electors.
01:50:19 --> 01:50:25 But underlying that was the clear challenge to all of us that we need to have
01:50:25 --> 01:50:27 an affirmative right to vote.
01:50:27 --> 01:50:30 We need to abolish the Electoral College, but we need to have that affirmatively
01:50:30 --> 01:50:35 stated in the Constitution that everyone has that right to vote once they become eligible.
01:50:36 --> 01:50:41 Wouldn't passage of the amendment to abolish the Electoral College skew the
01:50:41 --> 01:50:45 political process in favor of one political party? Yeah.
01:50:46 --> 01:50:51 Think so. What it would do is it would ensure that the process is democratic,
01:50:51 --> 01:50:55 small d, that we're ruling the country based on popular vote,
01:50:55 --> 01:51:00 not based on this antiquated system that, again, was designed to protect the slave states.
01:51:00 --> 01:51:05 Yeah. I mean, that's kind of the general argument now.
01:51:05 --> 01:51:12 It's like a lot of people feel that the Republicans would never get a president if it was popular vote.
01:51:12 --> 01:51:20 I tend to agree with you that it all depends on what time of existence we live in, right?
01:51:20 --> 01:51:24 Because, you know, 30 years ago, well, I'll go back even further.
01:51:24 --> 01:51:27 I'll say 60 plus years ago, John F.
01:51:27 --> 01:51:33 Kennedy might not have won based if it was strictly a popular vote,
01:51:33 --> 01:51:37 you know, because of the dynamics of that time.
01:51:37 --> 01:51:41 And it would have given Nixon more hope, I'll put it that way,
01:51:41 --> 01:51:44 if we didn't have an electoral college.
01:51:45 --> 01:51:50 Would the nobody is above the law amendment give clarity to.
01:51:51 --> 01:51:55 Give more clarity than the 14th Amendment concerning insurrections,
01:51:55 --> 01:51:58 and how exactly is that a free speech issue?
01:51:58 --> 01:52:04 Yeah, great question. So look, the Nobody Above the Law Amendment is designed
01:52:04 --> 01:52:07 to deal with another Supreme Court ruling that was issued, Trump v.
01:52:07 --> 01:52:14 United States, which was issued last year and which provides presidential immunity
01:52:14 --> 01:52:16 for official acts. It was a disaster
01:52:16 --> 01:52:19 of a ruling, one of the worst Supreme Court rulings in its history.
01:52:19 --> 01:52:24 It now effectively places the president of the United States above the law when
01:52:24 --> 01:52:27 it comes to engaging in official acts.
01:52:27 --> 01:52:33 It's critical to note that there is further litigation to be had here on what
01:52:33 --> 01:52:36 it means to engage in official acts.
01:52:36 --> 01:52:41 We argue in letters to state and local prosecutors in various different states,
01:52:41 --> 01:52:43 including California, Illinois, New York,
01:52:44 --> 01:52:47 Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, that when it comes to some of the president's
01:52:47 --> 01:52:52 actions, like extortion of some of the leading law firms in the country,
01:52:52 --> 01:52:58 or like kidnappings, that those are not official acts and that he's not immune under Trump the U.S.
01:52:59 --> 01:53:01 But ultimately, we do have to overturn that ruling.
01:53:01 --> 01:53:05 And yes, you're correct that it would.
01:53:06 --> 01:53:12 Effectively deal with what we saw from the insurrection, where he was left without
01:53:12 --> 01:53:18 any criminal liability from that ruling, despite the fact Jack Smith, the special counsel,
01:53:19 --> 01:53:21 said he was going to go back to the district court and demonstrate.
01:53:21 --> 01:53:23 They did not involve official acts.
01:53:24 --> 01:53:29 He, of course, had his case dismissed and he resigned before Trump took power.
01:53:29 --> 01:53:34 But we have to get back to the point that the rule of law applies to everyone,
01:53:34 --> 01:53:38 including the president of the United States, and not allow this exception,
01:53:39 --> 01:53:42 this dangerous exception the court Drew and Trump the U.S.
01:53:43 --> 01:53:50 Yeah, John, I agree with what you're saying. The only thing I disagree with is the...
01:53:51 --> 01:53:57 I think the Dred Scott decision was worse than the presidential immunity from my perspective.
01:53:58 --> 01:54:00 Well, I said one of the worst.
01:54:01 --> 01:54:05 I agree with you. Dred Scott was the worst. Okay. But this is one of the worst. Okay.
01:54:06 --> 01:54:09 Since you put the qualifier in there, I'll retract my argument. Yeah.
01:54:11 --> 01:54:15 Have you considered an amendment to change Congress to a parliamentary system?
01:54:16 --> 01:54:21 We have not come out with a position on that, but we're certainly open.
01:54:21 --> 01:54:22 Into exploring that point.
01:54:22 --> 01:54:26 I think there's a strong argument that the U.S.
01:54:26 --> 01:54:31 Senate, as it is set up today, is not consistent with principles of democracy.
01:54:31 --> 01:54:38 You know, it gives people in Wyoming the same number of seats as people in California,
01:54:38 --> 01:54:41 despite huge differences in the population of those two states.
01:54:41 --> 01:54:46 And yet, you know, in order to nominate, in order to confirm judges on the federal
01:54:46 --> 01:54:50 courts and the Supreme Court, each of those senators has an equal vote.
01:54:51 --> 01:54:56 So, you know, we're looking at a situation here where effectively people in
01:54:56 --> 01:55:02 Wyoming have a greater say than the people of California, given the basis of
01:55:02 --> 01:55:05 their population, with respect to the federal judiciary.
01:55:05 --> 01:55:07 And that, we think, is not right.
01:55:07 --> 01:55:12 So I do think that there's reasons to explore that question further,
01:55:12 --> 01:55:14 we have not formally taken a position, however.
01:55:15 --> 01:55:21 Yeah, because I, you know, they patterned it sort of off the House of Commons,
01:55:21 --> 01:55:26 House of Lords in England, and, you know, where the House of Lords,
01:55:26 --> 01:55:31 you know, is set aside, and on the nomination stuff,
01:55:32 --> 01:55:38 yeah, I can, I know the argument about Wyoming being equal, but in a situation
01:55:38 --> 01:55:42 where you're actually talking about nominations, that might be okay that.
01:55:44 --> 01:55:48 Island or Wyoming would have the same impact as Texas and California.
01:55:49 --> 01:55:55 But when it comes to, you know, legislation, as far as like taxation and all that stuff,
01:55:56 --> 01:56:03 I can see that's why the initial concept was that the ideas for taxes would
01:56:03 --> 01:56:05 come from the people's house.
01:56:06 --> 01:56:12 And that the generation or the monitoring of the revenue and paying of the debt
01:56:12 --> 01:56:15 would fall under the Senate. Yes.
01:56:15 --> 01:56:18 Yes. So, I mean, you know, I understand all that.
01:56:19 --> 01:56:26 But I entertain that parliamentary because usually that comes out of the House of Representatives.
01:56:26 --> 01:56:36 And then whoever has the majority would then pick their leader to be the president as opposed to, you know,
01:56:36 --> 01:56:44 and then have a different standard to elect who the speaker would be to preside over. the house.
01:56:44 --> 01:56:48 But I mean, it's and I'm not trying to.
01:56:49 --> 01:56:53 A debate with you about it here, but I just, I wanted the listeners to hear
01:56:53 --> 01:56:58 that there are, people have thought about it and there are discussions about it.
01:56:58 --> 01:57:03 A lot of us that are political junkies used to stay up late to watch the House
01:57:03 --> 01:57:09 of Commons on C-SPAN and be entertained by the way that they would handle stuff.
01:57:10 --> 01:57:15 And, you know, since we're having discussions about the Electoral College and
01:57:15 --> 01:57:21 how we choose a president and stuff, I mean, that needs to be on the table, I think.
01:57:21 --> 01:57:25 I agree. I agree, Eric. And, you know, look, I think other reforms need to be
01:57:25 --> 01:57:28 on the table too. For example, proportional representation.
01:57:28 --> 01:57:31 You know, we have a system right now where we draw these districts.
01:57:31 --> 01:57:33 We have gerrymandering happening.
01:57:33 --> 01:57:37 Obviously, there are fights around this even before the Supreme Court today
01:57:37 --> 01:57:38 coming out of Louisiana.
01:57:39 --> 01:57:43 But, you know, there's a whole other system that could be in place here.
01:57:43 --> 01:57:47 And the state of California may face a ballot measure in the not-too-distant
01:57:47 --> 01:57:53 future in 2028 or 2030, led by a number of organizations we've signed on to
01:57:53 --> 01:57:58 endorse this effort, which would set up proportional representation for their state legislature.
01:57:58 --> 01:58:02 And in that kind of system, you invite more parties to the table,
01:58:02 --> 01:58:06 more political parties emerge, because then they're given a guarantee if they
01:58:06 --> 01:58:11 get 10 percent, 20 percent of the vote, They get a certain number of seats in that legislature.
01:58:12 --> 01:58:15 And I think you'd have more voices and you'd actually probably have more participation
01:58:15 --> 01:58:20 because more people would come out when they see more opportunities and choices
01:58:20 --> 01:58:23 on the ballot than the two party system we have today. Yeah.
01:58:23 --> 01:58:26 And I think that's the other argument about the parliamentary system,
01:58:26 --> 01:58:34 because I remember when South Africa first started having parliamentary elections under the new regime,
01:58:35 --> 01:58:41 I guess, for lack of a better term, they had like 20 political parties that ran.
01:58:41 --> 01:58:44 And I think at least eight of them got seats in Parliament.
01:58:45 --> 01:58:50 So, you know, a lot of people do not like the binary system that we have.
01:58:50 --> 01:58:52 And given more choices...
01:58:54 --> 01:58:58 People might be more engaged to participate because that's the ultimate goal
01:58:58 --> 01:59:02 is to get more people to participate. I agree.
01:59:02 --> 01:59:09 Well, John, look, John Boniface, I see that we could have conversations for a long, long time.
01:59:10 --> 01:59:16 And we probably would have a set date for us to sit and have coffee and tea
01:59:16 --> 01:59:19 and talk about all the things that's going on.
01:59:19 --> 01:59:25 But I'm limited in time for this thing. But if people want to continue to engage
01:59:25 --> 01:59:29 with you and the organization and all that stuff, how can people do that?
01:59:30 --> 01:59:35 Absolutely. They can go to our website, freespeechforpeople.org, sign up to get updates.
01:59:35 --> 01:59:39 We have a number of take action items on the site, but also we email our list
01:59:39 --> 01:59:41 about various activities we're engaged in.
01:59:41 --> 01:59:45 And we welcome people joining us. And, of course, we welcome people joining
01:59:45 --> 01:59:50 us at impeachtrumpagain.org where people can sign our petition and have their
01:59:50 --> 01:59:53 voice heard on that critical question today. Yeah.
01:59:53 --> 01:59:59 And I'm glad you put that other website out there again so people can jot that
01:59:59 --> 02:00:01 down. John, it's been fun, man.
02:00:02 --> 02:00:07 I kind of, you know, kind of picked up on your trail a little bit and linked
02:00:07 --> 02:00:09 in and saw what you were doing.
02:00:09 --> 02:00:13 I was like, oh, yeah, I got it. Even if he doesn't want to be on the podcast,
02:00:13 --> 02:00:19 I just want to talk to him because he sounds like my kind of guy because I like people that have ideas.
02:00:20 --> 02:00:25 I think the only way that we can progress as a nation is that we have positive,
02:00:25 --> 02:00:27 constructive ideas to make it better.
02:00:27 --> 02:00:31 We've managed to get here, be here for about 249 years.
02:00:31 --> 02:00:38 So I think if we want to get to the next 250, get to our 500th birthday,
02:00:38 --> 02:00:44 we've got to have people like you pushing the envelope and continue to have
02:00:44 --> 02:00:47 us think about how we can be better.
02:00:47 --> 02:00:50 So I thank you for your work, and I thank you for coming on the podcast.
02:00:51 --> 02:00:53 Thank you so much, Eric. It's been a pleasure talking to you.
02:00:53 --> 02:00:56 Thank you. All right, guys. And we're going to catch you all on the other side.
02:01:07 --> 02:01:12 All right. And we are back. So I want to thank Leslie Uppold,
02:01:12 --> 02:01:20 Veronica Cardenas and John Bonifaz for coming on the program and doing their
02:01:20 --> 02:01:23 best to open our minds. Right.
02:01:23 --> 02:01:28 You know, a lot of those names, if any of those names are, you know,
02:01:28 --> 02:01:32 may not be household names to you, but they caught my attention.
02:01:33 --> 02:01:40 And these are people who are doing the work, and some have been doing it for a long, long time.
02:01:40 --> 02:01:51 Les has been out there since 1975 trying to advocate the value of unions and
02:01:51 --> 02:01:54 the strength of labor, of unions.
02:01:56 --> 02:01:59 To benefit the economy.
02:02:00 --> 02:02:05 The basic premise, if you treat workers right, if you respect their rights,
02:02:05 --> 02:02:09 then the economy will be right. You know what I'm saying?
02:02:10 --> 02:02:16 And just get us off of this greed track, which is hard to do because we're human beings.
02:02:17 --> 02:02:24 But in order for the country to continue to thrive and thrive even more in the
02:02:24 --> 02:02:28 biblical sense to live more abundantly, Then we got to get off this greed track.
02:02:29 --> 02:02:35 And Les has been out there doing the work to make that happen.
02:02:36 --> 02:02:47 And, you know, and then we got Veronica Cardenas, who is really one of those people that,
02:02:47 --> 02:02:54 you know, is utilizing the experience that she's had, personal and professional,
02:02:55 --> 02:02:59 to fight for the dignity of human beings.
02:02:59 --> 02:03:01 And she's doing it through immigration law.
02:03:02 --> 02:03:12 And I think that's very, very important that she wants to get our minds fixed
02:03:12 --> 02:03:14 on the fact that we're dealing with people.
02:03:14 --> 02:03:19 Because a lot of times when we get into politics and we start dealing with issues,
02:03:20 --> 02:03:25 we get caught up in the language and the fights and all that stuff,
02:03:25 --> 02:03:31 and we forget that any piece of legislation, any law that is passed impacts people.
02:03:31 --> 02:03:35 And a lot of times it's a life or death situation.
02:03:36 --> 02:03:40 And, you know, a lot of the elected officials lose sight of that.
02:03:40 --> 02:03:47 And having been an elected official, I know what the trap looks like. Right.
02:03:48 --> 02:03:53 And so we just have to stay grounded. And Veronica is one of those people that
02:03:53 --> 02:03:57 is doing her part to make sure that on this particular issue on immigration,
02:03:57 --> 02:04:02 that we stay grounded and be reminded that we're dealing with people.
02:04:02 --> 02:04:10 So her organization, Humanigration, is a valuable tool for her contemporaries
02:04:10 --> 02:04:15 to get them in the mindset, too, and not get caught in the trap that elected officials do.
02:04:16 --> 02:04:22 And just remember that that person coming before you as a potential client is a human being.
02:04:23 --> 02:04:33 It's not just another case, right? And then John Boniface for his energy and
02:04:33 --> 02:04:37 his intellect and his creativity, right?
02:04:37 --> 02:04:43 And dealing with issues that will help get us to be a more perfect union, right?
02:04:43 --> 02:04:54 To try to eliminate the growing engine that I call the political-industrial complex, right,
02:04:54 --> 02:05:02 as far as the money goes in campaigns and try to get that back down to a reasonable level.
02:05:03 --> 02:05:07 Rich people are always going to have influence and sway because they have money,
02:05:07 --> 02:05:13 but it shouldn't be as corrupt as it is now. Right.
02:05:14 --> 02:05:19 And, you know, and just, you know, just talking about exploring different ways
02:05:19 --> 02:05:24 of how we can govern, how we can get more people engaged, how it can be more representative.
02:05:25 --> 02:05:29 Right. I'm all down with that. And I appreciate John for.
02:05:31 --> 02:05:41 Being part of the collective that wants to put ideas to paper and push them
02:05:41 --> 02:05:46 so that we can be a more perfect union.
02:05:47 --> 02:05:52 All right, so, you know, I just, I guess, guys,
02:05:53 --> 02:06:07 we've got to continue to try and be patient but persistent at the same time, right?
02:06:08 --> 02:06:18 So we need to be persistent about our concerns and our protestations toward
02:06:18 --> 02:06:25 this government and the way that they are making a complete shitshow of it, right? Right.
02:06:26 --> 02:06:35 It's it's become apparent that the only value that corporate or mainstream media,
02:06:35 --> 02:06:38 however you want to label it, is to get us the information.
02:06:41 --> 02:06:45 And, you know, and we hope that the information is accurate.
02:06:46 --> 02:06:50 Right. When they offer it. But we've got to we've got to realize that we've
02:06:50 --> 02:06:54 got to gather the information and then we've got to act upon it.
02:06:56 --> 02:07:04 And I know that the bare minimum is to go vote for change, but we really need
02:07:04 --> 02:07:10 to show that we are engaged in this process a little bit more.
02:07:10 --> 02:07:15 Again, I don't want you to be political junkies like me, but we got to raise
02:07:15 --> 02:07:18 our level up a little bit. We got to raise our intensity a little bit.
02:07:20 --> 02:07:24 The current administration is banking on the fact that they're going to inundate
02:07:24 --> 02:07:29 you with so much BS that you will just say, screw it and not care.
02:07:29 --> 02:07:33 That's what they want to do. They want to keep constantly throwing out confusion
02:07:33 --> 02:07:37 and chaos so that you would be disengaged.
02:07:37 --> 02:07:42 And the reality is that now more than ever, you need to be more focused.
02:07:43 --> 02:07:48 You need to really, really pay attention because they're coming for all of us.
02:07:49 --> 02:07:53 All of us is not in that little bubble that they have. They're coming for all of us.
02:07:55 --> 02:08:00 And it may hit you immediately. It may hit you a few months down the road.
02:08:00 --> 02:08:02 It may even hit you a couple of years down the road.
02:08:03 --> 02:08:09 But it's going to hit you because their intent is total control,
02:08:09 --> 02:08:12 total domination, complete power.
02:08:12 --> 02:08:17 That's all they care about. and they want to be entertaining in the process.
02:08:18 --> 02:08:21 Because that's all the president really knows how to do.
02:08:22 --> 02:08:27 You would think that having been in the position before that he would probably
02:08:27 --> 02:08:33 be more sensitive to the fact of the power that he can wield,
02:08:34 --> 02:08:39 but it looks like it's had the reverse effect and he's totally corrupted and
02:08:39 --> 02:08:46 he's just going to do what he wants to do And he's got the people in place to make it so.
02:08:46 --> 02:08:51 Not the folks that could kind of like put the guardrails on,
02:08:52 --> 02:08:55 just say, no, sir, that's not a good idea.
02:08:55 --> 02:08:57 Maybe you shouldn't go down that route.
02:08:58 --> 02:09:02 He's got nobody that'll do that. As a matter of fact, he's just allowing these
02:09:02 --> 02:09:07 people to just be as destructive and creative and visceral and vocal as they can be.
02:09:09 --> 02:09:15 To us. Those of us that's not in that circle, doesn't matter if you're a Democrat
02:09:15 --> 02:09:18 or a Republican, doesn't matter if you're a libertarian or green,
02:09:18 --> 02:09:22 doesn't matter if you're independent or agnostic, right?
02:09:23 --> 02:09:27 You need to be engaged because it's going to impact you.
02:09:27 --> 02:09:32 And there are some folks that say, well, you know, we've always been conservative. No, sir.
02:09:32 --> 02:09:37 If you understand the history of the United States, every state has had a conservative
02:09:37 --> 02:09:39 moment and a progressive moment.
02:09:39 --> 02:09:44 Now, wherever you are in the current spectrum, that's where you are.
02:09:44 --> 02:09:49 But understanding your history that you've been the opposite at some point, right?
02:09:50 --> 02:09:53 You know, everybody looks at Montana. Oh, it's just a red state,
02:09:53 --> 02:09:57 blah, blah, this, that, that Montana was the first state to elect a woman to Congress.
02:09:57 --> 02:09:59 They were the first state to give women the right to vote.
02:10:01 --> 02:10:01 One of them.
02:10:04 --> 02:10:10 You know, Kansas, the reason why they were able to defeat legislation that would
02:10:10 --> 02:10:15 have made abortion illegal in that state is because it was already in their
02:10:15 --> 02:10:19 constitution that abortion was legal,
02:10:19 --> 02:10:22 that a woman had a right to choose. It was already in there. Right.
02:10:23 --> 02:10:27 So they were trying to repeal that right.
02:10:28 --> 02:10:31 And the folks said, no, no, no, because it's their history.
02:10:32 --> 02:10:40 So, you know, when you see a president trying to punish states because he didn't
02:10:40 --> 02:10:43 win that state in the election, he didn't get their electoral votes.
02:10:43 --> 02:10:50 It's like, so you're disregarding the people that voted for you in that particular
02:10:50 --> 02:10:53 state. You're punishing them, right?
02:10:54 --> 02:10:59 Because the law impacts everybody, not just particular individuals.
02:10:59 --> 02:11:05 And you can't pass laws just to deal with individuals. You can deal with organizations,
02:11:05 --> 02:11:08 but you can't deal with individuals, right?
02:11:11 --> 02:11:17 So, you know, that's why you can't be vindictive when you're president or whether
02:11:17 --> 02:11:19 you're governor or when you're mayor.
02:11:20 --> 02:11:25 Can't be vindictive about that. It's like you represent everybody now.
02:11:26 --> 02:11:30 The welfare of the entire nation is under your purview, Mr.
02:11:30 --> 02:11:37 President. So if you're hell-bent on punishing people in California because
02:11:37 --> 02:11:41 California didn't vote for you, then you're also punishing the people that are
02:11:41 --> 02:11:44 Trump supporters in California, right?
02:11:46 --> 02:11:51 But SNAP benefits and the poorest states in the nation voted for you.
02:11:52 --> 02:11:56 Mississippi comes to mind right away. Poor state in the nation.
02:11:57 --> 02:12:01 And you want to allow the SNAP benefits to end, right?
02:12:02 --> 02:12:07 I mean, that's the kind of thinking that we don't need.
02:12:07 --> 02:12:11 We need people to understand that all of us are in this thing together.
02:12:12 --> 02:12:17 You know, any president that gets 100% of the vote is a president that ran unopposed.
02:12:18 --> 02:12:27 And that I don't think has ever happened. So, you know, you've got to represent
02:12:27 --> 02:12:32 the people that didn't even vote for you. You've got to care about them.
02:12:32 --> 02:12:38 The government has to care about people that didn't vote Republican in this case.
02:12:39 --> 02:12:44 If the situation was reversed, which it has been, do you got to care about the Republicans?
02:12:45 --> 02:12:47 If you're a Democrat, you got to care about the Republicans.
02:12:47 --> 02:12:49 See, we're all in this thing together.
02:12:51 --> 02:12:57 It doesn't matter how frustrating your Thanksgiving dinner arguments will get or, you know, whatever.
02:12:57 --> 02:13:00 Whatever social setting you're in and you have these debates,
02:13:01 --> 02:13:02 that's all well and good.
02:13:02 --> 02:13:05 And then you go to the voting booth and you make your choice.
02:13:05 --> 02:13:12 And now when you get sworn in, you take an oath to protect everybody,
02:13:12 --> 02:13:14 to defend the Constitution.
02:13:15 --> 02:13:21 That's what you do. You don't take an oath to defend the Constitution and try to destroy it.
02:13:23 --> 02:13:27 Oath to serve the American people and then try to harm them.
02:13:28 --> 02:13:33 So, ladies and gentlemen, I just need y'all to be more engaged.
02:13:33 --> 02:13:38 I know it's hard. We all got jobs. We all got lives to live.
02:13:38 --> 02:13:41 We got issues that we got to deal with.
02:13:41 --> 02:13:47 But the reality is a lot of the stuff that's happening in Washington or happening
02:13:47 --> 02:13:53 at your respective state capitals, it's determining about the life that you're trying to live.
02:13:54 --> 02:13:57 They're impacting the decisions that you have to make.
02:13:57 --> 02:14:00 So you've got to pay attention.
02:14:01 --> 02:14:07 And especially to my black brothers and sisters. I know it's frustrating.
02:14:07 --> 02:14:12 I know it's hard to say, well, you know, the system is against,
02:14:13 --> 02:14:17 I mean, you know, it's hard to get engaged in a system that you think is against
02:14:17 --> 02:14:21 you and was designed to hold you down and all that.
02:14:22 --> 02:14:26 But I'm I just need to remind you that the position you're in now,
02:14:26 --> 02:14:31 where you are really free to make a choice in every state in the United States,
02:14:31 --> 02:14:35 was not the case 60 years ago.
02:14:35 --> 02:14:38 It was not the case 100 years ago.
02:14:39 --> 02:14:46 To be apathetic was fought and died for, right?
02:14:46 --> 02:14:49 Just like the right to be engaged.
02:14:50 --> 02:14:56 So, you know, we have to get focused, you know.
02:14:57 --> 02:15:03 Like, for example, I think we all should be about reparations.
02:15:04 --> 02:15:07 We can disagree on how it's going to be distributed and all that stuff.
02:15:07 --> 02:15:09 I think we should be about reparations.
02:15:11 --> 02:15:16 But I think we also need to make sure that we have a country that's going to
02:15:16 --> 02:15:20 give us reparations in order to continue to have the discussion.
02:15:20 --> 02:15:24 Because if we say, well, let it burn, okay.
02:15:25 --> 02:15:27 Well, you're going to burn too.
02:15:27 --> 02:15:32 You're not going to be spared if the country burns down. If anything,
02:15:33 --> 02:15:38 we're going to be impacted first because other folks have resources,
02:15:38 --> 02:15:42 primarily money, to stave off the pain for a little while.
02:15:42 --> 02:15:48 But if white folks are making $100 and you're making five, right,
02:15:48 --> 02:15:53 or they're worth $100 and you're worth five, if the country burns,
02:15:53 --> 02:15:57 who's going to fall first, the $5 person or the $100 person, right?
02:15:58 --> 02:16:04 What you need to be doing is to try to get us to 25, try to get us to 50, try to get us to 100.
02:16:06 --> 02:16:10 And engaging whatever way you can to make sure that we get to that point.
02:16:10 --> 02:16:14 Even reparations won't get us there, but it'll get us a lot closer.
02:16:15 --> 02:16:21 Right? And it's going to take time. That's why it's about persistence and about
02:16:21 --> 02:16:28 patience. because you can't fix 400 years of damage in one election.
02:16:28 --> 02:16:37 But if you're consistent and persistent and focused and disciplined,
02:16:38 --> 02:16:39 that change is going to come.
02:16:40 --> 02:16:43 Anytime that you give up, that's a setback.
02:16:45 --> 02:16:48 And I don't care if you're a conservative or liberal and you're black.
02:16:49 --> 02:16:54 Your overall goal should be the uplift of people, your people,
02:16:55 --> 02:16:59 not catering to the other folks' agenda.
02:16:59 --> 02:17:03 We have to have an agenda. We have to have a focus.
02:17:03 --> 02:17:10 Whatever political ideology you have has to be based on the argument that this
02:17:10 --> 02:17:11 is going to uplift black people.
02:17:12 --> 02:17:20 The MAGA agenda, the Project 2025 is not in the benefit of black people in no chapter whatsoever.
02:17:21 --> 02:17:22 None. Not one word.
02:17:24 --> 02:17:27 To that. 900 something plus pages. It's not about us.
02:17:28 --> 02:17:34 We need to have a project 2026 and 27 and 28 for us, right?
02:17:34 --> 02:17:37 I mean, that's just real talk.
02:17:38 --> 02:17:44 And even though we're pushing this agenda for us, the bottom line is,
02:17:44 --> 02:17:49 and most people understand that when we push for stuff, it's beneficial to everybody.
02:17:50 --> 02:17:52 History has borne that out.
02:17:52 --> 02:17:57 Movements have started because of the movements that we created, right?
02:17:57 --> 02:18:06 The strategies that are used were strategies that we invented or we reimagined, right?
02:18:06 --> 02:18:11 So keep that in mind as,
02:18:11 --> 02:18:17 you know, this episode is about opening your political mind and putting ideas
02:18:17 --> 02:18:22 in your head and helping you envision things in a different way,
02:18:22 --> 02:18:29 I just need to constantly remind us that our focus should be about our community.
02:18:30 --> 02:18:33 And history has borne out that when we look out for our community,
02:18:34 --> 02:18:36 we're really looking out for the nation.
02:18:37 --> 02:18:43 And a lot of times people have said that black people have been the conscience of America.
02:18:44 --> 02:18:49 And we need to fulfill that obligation. We need to maintain that tradition.
02:18:50 --> 02:18:53 And, you know, I'm doing my part.
02:18:54 --> 02:18:59 There's others that are doing their part, whether it's through podcasts or through public service.
02:18:59 --> 02:19:04 But as a collective community, we've got to do that. It's up to us.
02:19:05 --> 02:19:09 Nobody's going to come save us. Not even another black president.
02:19:09 --> 02:19:11 Nobody's going to save us, but us.
02:19:13 --> 02:19:16 And we have to accept that and we have to.
02:19:19 --> 02:19:24 All right. That's all I got. Support Jamaica.gov.jm.
02:19:25 --> 02:19:32 That's support Jamaica.gov.jm if you want to contribute to the rebuild of that island.
02:19:33 --> 02:19:38 And yeah, just stay engaged, y'all. We can do this.
02:19:38 --> 02:19:42 We can do this. All right, guys. Until next time.