Native lampod is a production of iHeartRadio in partnership with Reason Choice Media.
Welcome home, y'all, Welcome home.
This is episode ten of Native LAMPI where we break down all things politics and culture. We're your hosts, Angela Rye, Tiffany Cross, and Andrew Gillham. What are we celebrating this week, y'all? T week we introduced an award, but we didn't win the award.
Andrew take the award home.
Yeah, that was that.
We were at south By Southwest.
For the iHeart Podcast Awards and got to present an award. But more importantly, we got to spend time together and I really I had such a great time with y'all.
We ate all the things that the food.
There is so good. Our last meal that we not the last supper, but the last meal we had that whatever it was. I'm not going to name check the spot, but I've been reflecting on that on that meal for a minute, y'all. So thank you so delicious name checking when they become sponsors.
Wow, check somebody real quick, who is a sponsored the gathering spot? Because they let us record here every week the spot.
Oh and I just shot y'all out too, I often find myself. I've been in probably more of your audiences Angela and live and in person that I have TIFFs. But both these women were on various panels asself By Southwest, and it is a good feeling to sit and watch y'all's brilliance on display. So keep being bad.
Thanks brother.
I will tell you, guys, we want to shout out y'all the NLP fam. You tune in every week, you've downloaded, you've subscribed, you've told your friend to tell a friend to tell a friend to tell a friend, and we want to ask you to tell them again to rate and review our show. We are so grateful for you again, welcome home. So here's the rundown for today. We had
a time this week at south By Southwest. We just talked about that a little bit, but one part we didn't talk about is how fine my co hosts are.
Y'all.
If you didn't see these carpet pictures and these pictures from the stage, this is the cue for the video team to put those pictures up because they fly.
Shout out to all of our new podcasts.
Man who we met in Austin, and thank you for the overwhelming love it was seen, felt, and heard, and on that note, feeling the love and I hope that she feels it. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Marcia Fudge announced earlier this week that she would be retiring after five decades of public service.
She served as a mayor.
I know hadn't counter spoke service, but she was the president of Delta's I'm not a Delta. I don't know how that keeps happening. But nonetheless, Marcia Fudge, we love you, we see you for a congresswoman. We know that your footprint and hamprint are all over this budget that we
will talk about later speaking of the budget. To shout out Shalanda Young during this Black Women's History or Black Women's history one now Women's Histryebruary, Who's another member of Joe Biden's cabinet, a Black woman in the cabinet, And this week we're going to talk about something that's near and dear to Shilanda.
It is the heartbeat of the work she does.
She's the Office of Management and Budget Director, and so of course she's had her hands directly on the budget that President Biden brought to Congress, the f y twenty twenty five budget, just a couple of days ago. On Tuesday, we will also be talking about that budget and contrast that with the priorities of then President Donald Trump and see where they may may be a little bit of discrepancies, because y'all stay in our dms with a lot of discrepancies.
And so because surprise, even though we're really not that surprised, as of Tuesday, both Joe Biden and Donald Trump became their respective parties nominees for president, and aco you says, oh hell na to a bipartisan bill that cleared the House banning TikTok in the United States, saying that's clearly
a violation of the First Amendment. And also Trump has now gone from ninety one and diamonds to eighty eight thanks to Judge McAfee who has thrown out charges for Donald Trump and some of his co defendants in that Fulton County racketeering case. And of course, we will be answering your questions all throughout this show in LPFAM, and we've got a Maryland Moseby update because woo, y'all do
not play about Maryland Moseby. And when I tell you we're great folcals, we don't play about her either, Let's get into it. Shout out to all of you have asked how you can engage. We'll be sure to tell you by the end of the end of the show. Stay with us. Okay, everyone, So here we are after a three hundred and fifty two to sixty five vote in the United States House Representatives. This don't happen on nothing but post offices these days, but that's what the
vote was on this TikTok band. Surprisingly, so they are trying to ban TikTok in the United States, and now the bill will head over to the Senate. I want to first here's some sound for Donald Trump, because you know, every now and then he got a conflict for several as you.
Know, I was at the point where I could have gotten it done if I wanted to. I sort of said, you guys, decide, you make that decision, because it's a tough decision to make. Frankly, there are a lot of people on TikTok that love it. There are a lot of young kids on TikTok who will go crazy without it. There are a lot of users. There's a lot of good and there's a lot of bad. With TikTok. But the thing I don't like is that without TikTok, you
can make Facebook bigger. And I consider Facebook to be an enemy of the people, along with a lot of the media.
Okay, Angelou, by the way, forgetting everything he said prior to that last point, which was Facebook meta whatever they're called. Now he didn't he just meet with Elon Musk. Maybe that a bug got drummed in his ear, right. I mean, this is all about his vengeance for Facebook mark that whole crew. But I also think it's partly a smart pedestrian move by him. I'll just say that, But I think it conflicts with he relected.
Himself in this actual we haven't showed that yet, right, so when.
People see that quick, they're gonna say kids himself the all time.
But in the previous his previous statement, y'all, when he was president of these United States, unfortunately he did seek he was the first one to throw out going after China and banning TikTok usage in the United States of America. That was his position as president when he could do something. Now he's citizen mister eighty one convicted with an eighty eight convicted.
Eighty eight and its let the people we wish well, Can I just say this is the danger to me with centering Donald Trump, because it's really not about him. I know we have to talk about him, but y'all know how I feel about it, Like, this is not a Donald Trump issue. This is a much bigger issue one. What the Congress, the lower chamber the House decided was that TikTok would have to essentially emancipate itself from a company called byte Dance.
Now that's why that matters.
Byte Dance is a Beijing based company, and we have a very complicated and sometimes beneficial bilateral relationship with China. Byte Dance is worth more than twenty million dollars and essentially they would have to sell. The Beijing based company would be compelled to share, to sell twenty percent of their stake. And the reason why is because, as rightfully so, there's a concern about TikTok sharing US based user data with China, and given our rocky relationship with our biggest
competitor on the global stage, that actually makes sense. There has been information from the US intelligence community that they are monitoring how we use TikTok from everything, not just to what we look at but our finger motions, our eye movement, And that might not matter if you think about a twelve year old using TikTok, But when that twelve year old is thirty five years old and they work for the NSA or the FBI or in the banking industry, and there is data that says I know
exactly who this person is because I've been tracking their every move since they were twelve years old.
Well, now we're looking at a national security issue.
So I think that's the bigger conversation here because it's not just about TikTok. It's really about our relationship with China. And we just saw I know, this is like foreign policy, which we don't pay a lot of attention to in this country because you know, as black folks, we're concerned about our mortgage payments and you know, sending our kids to school and raising responsible people. But foreign policy is
a really big issue. And when you look at our relationship with China, and you just saw President Shei of China on the global stage with President Vladimir Putin, who the world has considered a pariah given his international ambition and the attempted annexing of Ukraine.
This is a big deal.
If these two powers, these two nuclear powers, are joining hands on the world stage, and there's a Beijing based company where a significant portion of US users are interacting with it daily, potentially unwittingly compromising their own.
Data, that's a big deal. And that's why this matters.
The danger in centering Donald Trump is you are chasing the red herring instead of focusing on something that really is a bipartisan issue that impacts us all no matter what side of the how you sit on.
Well, Donald Trump isn't the only one that might have a little bit of a conflict here. Joe Biden says that if Congress passes this TikTok band, he'll sign it.
We're gonna roll that sound. And then there's one other flag I have for y'all. You still cabandoned the clock.
I'm not milky.
They're very passed. It all fun.
And so here's the thing, though, I don't know how y'all feel about this, but people have pointed out this hypocrisy. I think we're all walking hypocrites about something. But of course, Joe Biden is running for president. So can you run for president these days without greening a TikTok account. He certainly did, and they made their first post during the Super Bowl this year, And so I'm curious to know if you all think that any if there should be
any like, hey, well what about this over here? Obviously he can do it from his phone, so there's no real national security threat there, But I'm wondering if you all think that there's like, hey, if you going to sign the band, don't use the thing.
No.
Look, I would applause the Biden administration for meeting voters where they are. The reality is a significant portion of young people are on TikTok, and so jim z ers who are just coming into this process, you want to say, hey, I'm engaging you. And quite frankly, if you're eighteen years old voting for the first time, I'm not sure how closely you're monitoring foreign policy see issues, not saying that you aren't, but that's probably not the leading issues that's
driving your vote. So I don't necessarily think that's hypocrisy.
Look, I have a.
Challenge with Meta and how they conduct a lot of their practices. Yet I'm definitely on Instagram, Native Land is on Instagram. I think it's really hard to navigate the society without participating in some sort of social media.
It's a necessarily problem, necessary evil.
Because social media has democratized who has a voice in this society, and as black folks, we have been so summarily left out of that process.
Social media is.
Integral to how we organize, how we activate, and how we communicate with each other.
So I don't know that I would blame.
By them, but more than one thing can be true at one time. The democratization that's being experienced by so many of us through these platforms is good. But then you get to a point where these platforms become so powerful, have so much because just like we're talking about China and the information that they're colecting about our movements, what we put into the public space, even what we haven't put into the public space, that's happening in the backframe,
these companies have access to all of it. So what happens when a Facebook becomes so or meta, becomes so incredibly powerful. It starts to sort of develop this posture in our society similar to Wall Street, that they're just too big to fail. So then you can't pass legislation, you can't prosecute you can't hold them accountable because going after that bohemoth then shakes the foundation of other parts
of our society. So my problem with all of them is that I just don't think our regulators, especially as I think about, you know, artificial intelligence now and I'm getting email saying, hey, try AI with that email composition and try AI. You know, these ads are popping up when I know good and well that they're all so
underregulated right now. From the President on down through Congress, they have basically said that these the wise kids out out of you know, California, have come to them and said, if you regulate us now, we will never get to the kinds of levels of innovation that could potentially be experienced for the health of our country and for the
world if you regulate us too early. And by and large that argument has been accepted on the Hill, and so they have been slow walking any regulation regarding these folks. And I'm just not sure how much of our lives are being put at risk for the corporate entities and the corporate bohemans to go out there and figure out the best way to advertise the next thing they want to sell to us.
Well, seris how you feel about it because you asked the question.
But I'm wondering if you ask the question because you feel like maybe it is hypocrisy, or but how do you feel about the TikTok ban in general?
Yeah, what I think is that is complex.
I think it's interesting to see both of you agreed with Donald Trump on a point around meta they do. Like when Instagram and Facebook, I was like, oh God, like there it was no antitrust law, no soup for them. They just were able to kind of merge. I think one of the things that's fascinating to me is Congress banned the ability for any congressional office, any federal office from using TikTok on a federal device in December of twenty twenty two, so they're just having the rest of
the country catch up. I think the other thing that's worth noting is that there are content creators. So I'm about to be a hypocrite too, Like I was acknowledging the hypocrisy because I am too on this, But there are content creators who are raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars on TikTok that has become their bread and butter, And I'm like, oh, my god. They if we just
eliminate that platform for them, what happens? And I think acou that's I don't think that their point is one that round economics, but their point is one around like, how are you choosing to regulate this platform for free speech purposes? I understand national security issues, I'm sure they do and have considered all of that, and yet and still they're like, this is going a bridge too far.
So it looks like there's gonna be some type of aco U suit based on this if it passes the Senate and gets to Joe Biden's desk, it is going to be challenging.
And Angela, if I could just add, I know we've talked on this a minute, but it's really important. There are countless multi national companies that are operating in the United States but are headquartered elsewhere in our paying taxes and s andcounting companies that were started in the United States and for taxation purposes and greed, they have lifted their corporate headquarters out of here and have settled in some other tax friendly, non existing country around. So where
does if we start at this place? And I probably am more in the line of where the Aclu is here. Even though I don't have a TikTok, I don't use it, but my wife shows me videos and stuff, and so I laugh at stuff. So I guess I'm complicit. But if we start down this road, where does it go next? Which enemy of the state does Congress then decide is a national security risk? And therefore we're going to shut such and such down so that they can't collect data.
That same information is being collected right here by domesticated companies, and they're selling that shit elsewhere anyway. They're selling it outside the United States, it's selling it globally. So in some ways this feels like a red herring that TikTok's been picked out, and I understand. And by the way you name the company that owns it, the truth is that it's likely owned by the government.
That it's likely.
That's been the question.
That is a key question they have asked, does the government and in China it is not America.
But they are not. Then they're not the only one. You can go you can go to to to where anywhere in the Middle East, in fact, the in the Middle East. You can't own a company if you are not if you are not a what's the uh Jordanian or a KUWAITI I've been to cutter cutter frosts. You can't own a company and cutter more than fifty percent of it if you are not a Qutarian. So there, we don't have that regulation here in the United States. So I'm just saying this is Atari.
I don't think it's Kutran.
No. I was thinking, no, no, no, no. I was thinking, how do you take your Katar if.
You're from Qatartarian or.
Because of the sentence structure. But you're right, it could be just an.
We don't okay.
A CLU is the American Civil Liberties Union. They are not a government entity, and they are the people who are bringing forth the suit. They bring forth a lot of suits on issues like this, so we'll have to keep our eyes.
Member.
Well there. They have some.
Controversial takes too, so they're an interesting organization. I just wanted to be clear for everywers about that.
Thank you know. That's good. Okay, we got to pay the bills.
We'll be back right after this with an update on presidential politics. Well this is actually a former presidential politics update, but in Fulton County, Judge McAfee is thrown out six of the charges again Donald Trump and some of his co defendants, including two counts of solicitation in one count
of false statements. In writings, this is in regard to a phone call where he says that the prosecution needs to get a lot more specific in their allegations and their charges that they are pursuing against Donald Trump and the eighteen code defendants. What do y'all got about that?
I'm questions, I'm confused or what that means?
What?
So six charges were thrown out, that's what you're saying. What were those charges? And my biggest question, because I think this is the most important question, the recording of him saying find me eleven thousand votes? Do any of those charges render that recording mood?
I don't think so. I don't think so.
Then then to me, that's the most important thing.
Honestly, Yeah, no, you hit at it. So the six charges as understand and that have been dropped by the judge. He very specifically states Georgia law which requires years that any charges that are bought in an indictment must be very specific and provide a certain level of background information facts evidence in the In the in the allegation, and in this case, he determined that six of at least
six of them did not meet that standard. He also goes on to say, however, that the federal system, the federal court system, has a way for you to get that information without dropping charges. But unfortunately in this state. He knows this because he's a formal federal judge and federal prosecutor. But in this state of Georgia, and remember this is a Georgia, State of Georgia case, not a federal United States case. So the federal I mean, the
Georgia constitution and Georgia law takes precedents here. And so he's saying, based off of what precedence is in Georgia regarding this issue, I've got to let these six charges go. And by the way, prosecution, you can refile these charges any now if you bring this additional evidence, that this additional information that then meets the standard of Georgia law.
Ken Republican governor, also widely known voter suppressionists, can he pardon Donald Trump for any or all of these state charges?
Is that even a possibility?
Yes?
Absolutely?
Do you all think that he would?
Absolutely?
Because even though Trump has.
Been, of course antagonistic to him because he's a child and throws to timber tantrums.
Yet and still some people still, you know, drink drink his kool aid.
So I got to measure this obviously obvious voter suppressionist and to his own end, he was a candidate on the on the ballot, and demand was trying to square it up so he had the best chance of winning possible.
You know, long before that. He's been doing it a long time.
No, no, no, for sure, but he's at his own He's had as Secretary of State and as a candidate for governor. He put all this stuff in place. My point is, though he also ran for reelection without endorsing Donald Trump, being critical of him, ascended into office because there was a constituency of Republicans in Georgia that would
still elevate him to that post. What I am thankful for, however, is that because these are state charges, if Donald Trump, God help us all, were elected, you know, president of the United States, he couldn't direct his Department of Justice to then suddenly, you know, just drop charges because these charges are being bought at a state level according to its state laws and state Constitution, and the prisons that you would go to are not state prison are not
federal prisons, they are state prisons, and those and those decisions can't be vacated by president simply because he happens to be at issue in those charges.
But the one caveat I'd offer is he might not be able to do that sitting in the oval, but he could still escape a conviction and even being tried if when the Supreme Court hears the presidential immunity case in April and they make a decision in June or July that says he's immune from all these things relating to January sixth related. If the presidential immunity stands and it's becomes exhaustive and expansive.
He may not ever have to face a state charge.
So that's you're right, Angela.
Andel, You've been on that that immunity case, that it scares me.
It frightens me that especially.
I'm gonna tell you guys, the thing that really scared me was, and I can understand how they got there, but in the Colorado.
Case, nine to zero.
Decided to leave him.
Nine to zero unanimous Supreme Court decision to ensure that Donald Trump was able to stay on the ballot in the Republican primary in Colorado, doing it.
To ensure that that he would make it in time on that particular ballot.
The fact that they would say that he did not violate this particular clause in the Constitution around insurrection, that it would be a violation of the equal protection clause to remove him.
Like these are the things where I'm like, Okay, if they're going to be.
Strict, you know, strict upholders of the Constitution, how will they expand constitutional protections? And I think that we could be in a place, you know, I don't know if we would be nine zero because folks are there are some folks at least hopefully with Sonya Soto mayor Elena Kagan and with Katanji Brown Jackson, where they would realize the danger outweighs. What you would hope that this country, like we understand what the documents are supposed to mean,
that they are supposed to be living and breathing. That does not mean that you should let this dude take us out and die like behind trying to protect the document that like some of these things, you just got to look beyond the plane four corners of the document, because if you looked at it just as it was, that didn't even apply to us. So we were not considered human beings in that document. So what am I
really talking about? Evolved that thing based on who's in front of you and what's going on, and it did.
All I got to say.
She didn't concern me as much, and partly because I think I could see this working a completely different way with a different candidate, you know, under consideration.
So I did get that.
I take real, you know, issue with an individual state, Let's say, I don't know Alabama, Mississippi deciding whether or not Barack Obama could be on a ballot, right, And so when you have a federal election where the results should be determined by the whole of us, the collective of US got it gets back to the fundamental argument of the Articles of Confederation versus a United States Constitution.
The Articles didn't last because an individual state could then trump the power of the federal settled on a federalist system because we didn't want individual states who were a part of the Union to be able to trump and bigfoot over the rest of US. Now, by the way, so many, by the way, it's happening in a presidential election where you have the little states being able to bigfoot over the majority of Americans. I'm just saying, I
don't want to court standing ratestive yest. It's completely, completely, completely I think what makes this different, this, this particular case around immunity different is if the court, and they possibly can because they did it in Bush v. Gore. They basically said, we're making this decision, this is why
we're making this decision. And by the way, and making this decision, this should never be used as precedents, which means never ever use our decision and this case as a foundation for making the same conclusion in another like case. They said it. The Supreme Court said, as in every other case, Angela, you can agree or you can at
least confirm this. When the Supreme Court makes a decision, it becomes the law of the land, and it set precedents for like cases until the Supreme Court reverses itself in a future decision. And bushby Gored they said this should never be president's and never reversible. I only make that point to say this would be such a departure from the federal assistants say the president could basically assassinate his political opponent as president, kill his opponent as president
and cannot be prosecuted. You have to draw it out to his logical conclusion. If you say he can if presidential immunity applies to anyone who is president and they cannot be prosecuted for the actions that they take while being president, take its to its furthest conclusion. Can he assassinate his opponent as president and never ever have to pay a consequence for that? The court goes that direction. They are saying that.
Yeah, but that is it sounds hyperbolic to people. But what you just said, Andrew, that is a legitimate question to ask you already even said he has said he could shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue. Elected Angela, my question for you because you name check three Supreme Court justices with Kagan, Sodomayor, and Jackson. And the reason why Angela name checked those judges is because they are Democratic appointed members of Scotis. Scotus is the Supreme Court of the
United States. So when you hear that term, that's what that means. Those are the three left leaning Democratic appointed Justice John Roberts also a justice who was Republican appointed has surprised us sometimes, so I'm asking you precisely. So I'm asking this the question for you, but also to make a point to our viewers. The right prioritizes justices.
In a way the left does not.
The reason being this is not a criticism of the left. We have so much on our plate. We're under attack on every possible front, so it's hard to do this. My question to you, Angela, as an attorney, given the makeup of this court and we've had some surprises, there is it possible. Well, I shouldn't even ask what is your prediction on the immunity case, because I know we should talk about this later. I know we'll have a
bigger episode on it. But if on the top of your head today, if you could predict how this court might rule in this community.
Case, what do you predict?
Six? Three?
So you think that it will go right down party lines? The three I do?
Well, you know what, I'll say, maybe maybe, maybe five four to your point around John Roberts. And the only reason why is because he's not Trump appointed. I think all of the Trump appointees are out there, they're like diehard Trump supporters. They're gonna always side with him, and he got three appointments. Who am I missing Alito? And I think Alito, No, I'm not, I'm missing what's his name?
There's Thomas Tondo.
I'm missing. I'm missing I'm missing Tom. I'm missing Thomas. He's always gonna be with Trump because his wife basically, she don't have to.
I don't know. She don't have to.
He don't have to recuse himself because he doesn't want to because the same rules don't apply, which is a whole We should that should be a mine? Why should why should there be lifetime appointments?
Like should there be?
Okay, so will we talk about that today or no? You just saying in the future.
I think we should ask the viewers what they think. But I do like the idea. Maybe not right now because we still got a whole budget to get into.
But before we get into the budget, we had a question about this too, because we know this man, say he could shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue.
We don't know how the judges are going to rule. Part of this is if you crazy, should you get your head check? What's the question to say? Let's hear it.
My name is Bruno Compost from Los Angeles, California. My question is, why is it so much harder to get a job as a ups driver than it is to become president of the United States. I know that if I went to apply somewhere for a job, if I had ninety one indictments and I had a long list of trials coming up, I know for a fact I wouldn't be hired. So how does a man get to run this country with so many indictments, so many trials coming up, evidence that he's a racist in citing a riot.
I just don't understand. Please help me. I love you, guys.
I love you friend, Bruno, Bruno, you guys. Please let me get at this. Let me tell you sorry, go for it.
People on the lease right me tell.
You something I have been saying this. I used to get reprimanded on air for this. I think if attorneys have to do uh, we have to. We have to we have to abide by the rules of professional conduct. We have to pass a professional responsibility exam, the npr E. We have to ensure that we aren't nuts to be able to practice law. There are folks, you have to do some of some mental evaluations to do certain jobs in this country. I think some of it should apply
even more to law enforcement. You have to do some of this to get a clearance, a security clearance. I had to do so much to get a security clearance.
When I worked on the Homeland Security Committee. Are you kidding me? There are touching not just top secret. You guys are gonna laugh.
But I didn't even want to get the SCI clearance that's the one that goes through the CIA for approval, because you know, I was raised by an activists.
I was like, I'm good on this.
I'm scared EI.
I don't know.
But it's the clearance you have to get to go through the security clearance through the CIA, CIA proof.
It's the highest security clearance you can get as a staffer on the Hill.
Okay, I wouldn't do that one. I only got my TS top secret clearance. Now Donald Trump is touching documents that are impacting lives, like international classified information. He don't have to get his hand check. Like, please tell me how you're justifying this. We are paying you with our taxpayer dollars. We are we have to actually ensure your health care. You're covered by everything that we do in this land. But you don't have to get your head check.
It shouldn't just be a physical it should be a mental health evaluation every single year. I actually think that it should apply to members of Congress too. Maybe we would have missed out on George Santos. It's as he ready to run again by the way he walked around the house for they're ready to change the rules. It was like, you know what what we said, we wanted to allow members to be able to roam these floors after they get removed. They were like, what is that,
How does that really apply to somebody was expelled? Yo, Well, like, this is something that we have to address. Is crazy, It is crazy.
Yeah.
Well, first of all, thank you Angela for breaking down because so many people don't understand how this works, especially on Capitol Hill. That's why I such a privilege to have you break these things down since you worked there for so long. I just want to remind people. In twenty seventeen, I believe it was one day after dismissing James Comy, who was the head of the FBI at that point, Donald Trump was in the Oval office with two members of an adversarial government, two members of the
Russian government. He was there with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov Sergey Lavrov and UH ambassador Sergey Kisliak. He had them in the Oval office. The conclusion that came out of that was that he actually revealed highly classified information to two members of a foreign government with whom we
have a very adversarial relationship. I just talked about President Putin literally holding hands with President She on the world stage, and this man is up for re election with the support of at least seventy five million people.
This is where you know.
It is not about patriotism. It is not about political divides. There are people who could literally see this country turn to ashes before they saw someone who looked like us running it.
That is what this is about. This is not patriotism.
These are members of a cult who is willing to turn this country over to a man who is a proven trader.
That should tell you where we are in this country.
I'll just say, having gone through a process of having to fight back and beat back lies through an indictment as a regular average citizen who finds themselves on the other side of that system off of an accusation, having banks closed their doors on you, having credit cards canceled on you, having your your passport stripped from you, having DS a global entry, all the other stuff, all that's
stripped away from you off of an accusation. So before you ever get to a guilty or innocence, someone's claim against you. And it just goes to show how the justice system is, which is supposed to be blind, and it's supposed to apply to all of us the same way. That that's a hoax, that if you're powerful enough, if you are connected enough, if you're Donald Trump, and and and and and that crew, the law doesn't work the
same way for you. And in his case, with all of the delay delays that we're seeing in these four cases that are before him, this man may even be
able to escape justice in some ways. He has it so many other points in his life, and we're only now seeing the reckoning, And unfortunately the reckoning only he seems to be happening in the civil cases, but in the criminal cases where I think this man is most liable, most responsible, and not because I'm just guessing at it, but because we all laid witness to many of the crimes that he committed out loud, we saw them with
our own eyes. Yet there's a strong possibility that none of these cases is going to get tried prior to the election, and if you were to stand the opportunity to be re elected, he could summarily dismiss and suspend with two of the cases that have the greatest consequences attached to them. And so, you know, I take the question, Bruno, and I understand it. I'm simply saying that this is a reconfirmation that all men are equal, doesn't mean all men are equal.
Thank you, Bruno for that question.
While we love that question. We absolutely love that question.
All right, everybody, We're going to get to this break after that hot headed moment about getting some mental some folks with some sense in office.
We'll be right back after this break.
My name is Monte White, originally from Inkster, Michigan. What up though? Now from Maryland and not the following question. In the last twelve hours, we've seen Trump unofficially win the Republican nomination for president. We've seen Mitch McConnell's spinelessly throwa is support behind Trump despite the insults and barbs
they thrown at each other. And we've seen Nicki Hayley suspend her campaign without supporting anybody but like this shall fall in line like the rest of the Republicans already have so solely, but surely, it seems like the Republican Party is slowly beginning to coalesce around Trump. Some influential Democrats have been leading and supporting symbolic demonstrations like voting uncommitted at the Democratic primaries to influence President Biden to
act in the Palestine Israel crisis. So my question for you is, do you believe that Democrats as a whole will now begin to coalesce around the president, knowing that Trump is unofficially officially the Republican nominee or will these demonstrations continue, and if they do, is there a point where will be too late for Democrats to throw their support behind President Biden to any real meaningful effect.
Nice, heay, welcome home, Antie. We appreciate your question.
I love this, y'all because we honestly get a number of questions every week about it's lesser two evils, or you know, how are Biden and Trump different? And it feels almost like we're it's like Groundhog's Day, like we haven't are having to keep answering. I am not disparaging the question or I'm just saying that we are answering this a lot, and so because we're answering a lot, it must mean that people still need to understand the difference.
That is something that we all understand. We sometimes can get wonkish. Tiffanyil regularly be like, what's that acronym mean? I just said something about a SCI clearance and she's like, what is that? I'm like, I don't know. It's a sensitive compartmentalized information.
I had to look it up by it.
But the point is like, we are regularly in this, but because this is the work that we do and have done for many, many years, we do get into spaces where we're like, oh, this is obvious or that's obvious, that it isn't necessarily so. So today what we're doing, hopefully Monty and answering your question as well as some of the others, is showing what some of those distinctions are. Now that we have well, I think we've been knowing who are nominees would be in the respective parties for
the general. We know very clearly now as per the numbers that they are going to advance to the General so long as their party conventions say the same. We want to make sure that we're drawing a contrast and that it's really clear with Biden's release of Silanda's budget this past Tuesday, as well as being able to reflect on someone who was a president lost reelection is now so it's now eligible to run for another another four
year term. What are the biggest distinctions. One of the things that I wanted to call attention to is Congressman Leeber used to say, who is my boss on Capitol Hill and the chair of the CBC when I worked there. The Congressional Black Caucus still present in what districts Missouri for but sometimes you know, are redistricting those Yeah, those numbers can change Missouri. Yes, Kansas City and a Pathety mayor and a former Kansas City mayor, yeah, and a
former HOOT official. Anyway, we have run through these people's whole resumes. But he says the measure of a person or a nation's heart can be divulged by examining the details of a budget they craft. And because he's a pastor, tip you know, he said based on Matthew six twenty one, So right, He's like, I got a biblical.
Basis for this, but I think it's so true.
Even Michael Lomax, who ran the UNCF, used to say that you it's not about the numbers in the budget, really, you can really determine where priorities lie. And speaking of lies, it's interesting that Donald Trump would utilize the budget and say that he's doing these grandiose things for black people, because what in the hell do we have to lose in these budget documents and be lying, he would just be te a whole story like I've done more for
HBCUs than any president in history. It has been fact checked by PolitiFact over and over again.
That is not a thing.
But I think the truth of it is there are some places where some of these budgets kind of intersect. The whole purpose of this is every year the sitting president goes before Congress, they give the State of the Union address. In that State of the Union, they list their key priorities kind of like a road map like we do at the beginning of the show, of what they're going to do this year, what they're asking Congress to join them in meeting the needs of the American people.
Here's what I want to do.
Shortly thereafter, there's a budget proposal that is hundreds of pages that is broken up by department, you know, Department of Interior, Agriculture Justice HUD, which is Housing in Urban development over like, through and through, as well as some of the agencies like the Minority Business Development Agency, which they just decided should be the white Minority Business Development Agency.
But that's the court case for another day. So you see all of these priorities that are presented with numbers attached to them, from PEIL grants to SNAP to affordable housing to a farmer debt relief, and you see what they're what presidents, what they would use as pay force? How are they going to pay for these initiatives for
these projects? The pay force normally come from taxes, and we see in this administration how they plan to use taxing the rich to pay for some of the programs because a number of federal programs had to be cut under the Trump administration because of the number of tax cuts and credits that were given to the rich. So that said, I want to allow and move over it
because I've been talking for five minutes. Sorry, y'all, I want to share this stage with my co hosts because I just kissed the mic because I think it's so important for you guys to talk about some of the priorities. You've seen some of the things where you're like, this is good, but I think we need to be, you know, prioritizing this in a different way. One of the things that frustrates me is the attention to the border and how much money they want to spend on the border.
On a bipartisan level, this is an issue that goes far exceeds Donald Trump and Joe Biden's administrations. But I want you guys to talk about some of the things that you've seen in the budget documents and what you hope to see.
Well.
Can I just hop in and I hate to be a wet blanket here, but I just want our viewers to understand how this process works, and one this budget, like most presidential budgets, has very little chance of becoming law. What this does instead, to Angela's point, is post State of the Union address. It's saying here's where my priorities lie. So I appreciate you landing that out for us.
Angela. I have more questions than I do answers here.
Before I kick it to you, Andrew, because I don't have a lot to say about the budget itself.
I will tell you.
When we were Angela and Andrew and I were talking about this before we started recording. One thing that I care because Angela said, I want you awt to you know, look at this budget and see you know what matters to you. And I read probably eight papers every day before the sun comes up. I don't watch a lot of cable news. I feel better for having I feel smarter for having read things. And what I have not read even when I google it is what is in
this in President Biden's budget. When it comes to SNAP benefits, Snap is food assistance. It's a food assistance program. I it's not because it's not in there. It is because people have not written about it. What that says to me is the Beltway press is incestuous, and it is often talking to each other, for each other and about each other. That creates a disconnect with voters who are out there, who are not waking up looking at CNBC every day or reading the op ed pages of the
Journal or Financial Times. They are figuring out how to struggle. And this is why, to Angelo's point, they do not feel connected with this budget. They don't always understand what the president has instituted in a budget that Congress has to vote on and pass, which rarely happens, and how it impacts their everyday life, the fact that no one has thought about, well, there are millions of people who receive snap benefits? How does this budget impact them so much?
That it is not written about anywhere since the State of the Union. I found that quite telling. That's what I care about. I have members in my family who get SNAP benefits. When I was younger, I you know, we got snap benefits called welfare at the time. If you old enough like we are, you remember government cheese.
Right.
Andrew's raising his hand and he got it too, so we all understand that. So that is the key thing that I care about. And unfortunately I did not find that, and I'm not as smart as Angela and Andrew to comb through hundreds of pages of it.
Andrew, I want to hear your priorities.
But my question to you is, and angel because you worked on Capitol Hill, and I told Angela I was going to ask this question earlier because these guys have more government experience than I do. The President's budget is one part of it. Then Congress has to vote on it, and then the money is issued to states. If you have a Republican governor, and I'm using Mississippi as an example, Governor Tate Reeves, who gets this big pot of money, Yeah,
he gets to decide where it goes. So in a state like Mississippi where you have a city like Jackson, Mississippi, where they literally had no clean drinking water and it's still a very flimsy drinking water system in place, Now that's infrastructure money that Tate Reeves gets to say, I'm gonna put this money elsewhere and not in the blackest part of my state. Andrew, do I have that correct? And that's how it goes. And because you were a mayor running for governor, how does that money trickle to
the governor? And then how does the governor trickle that money to you?
Yeah? Your point as well, taking Tiffany, and the truth is is a lot of us get it confused, and for good reason because for us, look, we put money in through taxes and we hear about all the money being generated, but we get real lost in the process when that stuff so it's to come back down to us. And so it's important to know how, and it's really as a mayor. It was one of my biggest criticisms
about the budgeting process. I brought it up numerous times and visits to the White House and talking to at that time Obama administration officials and so on. It's a big, big issue for a lot of us at the local level that we can have problems. That's in Jackson, Mississippi and our very own communities. But unfortunately, the way Washington, DC Congress sends down the money is they send the money down to the states that then be distributed by
the states into local governments underneath their jurisdiction. Well, when those grants come to the states, they largely come as what we know as block grants, which is a category of money safe for housing and it's intended to impact housing for your entire state. But what happens is when it gets to the state level, the state then decides, based off of its priorities, where exactly then they want this money to go at what levels and so on and so forth. As it also include there's also, by
the way, something called categorical grants. These are really the two forms of granting that local governments and states kind of deal with. Categorical is a very specific, detailed place that you would like money to go within this category. The government doesn't send enough of those down. They largely like to deal with block because it's a big sum of money that can then labor later to be decided
on its distribution at the local level. Well, in a state like mine, where you got a governor, Republican governor who loves to take punitive measures against what we call blue cities inside of red states and those are more democratically voting cities that likely didn't vote for him, is he likes to penalize withhold redirect resources to more friendly
and more conservative parts of the state. And I'm willing to bet that that attitude is true and more states with more governors than we'll ever hear admitted by those by those respective governors.
To make a quick question here, Andrew, yeah, yeah, because I'm just making this connection that because the blue states pay more into the system, but red states benefit more, do I have.
Any And then once you become once you get into the red state, then the red cities or the red counties tend to end up absorbing more of their share of the pot than what they contribute into the pot.
And who lives in those blue spots.
You know who, you know who who you know who's where. That's for damn sure. And then the one very clear example I'd like to give for folks, because many of us no benefited no about Obamacare or the Affordable Healthcare Act, Well, there was also the expansion of Medicaid and Medicaid that was included as part of how it was that the president was one to get health care into the hands
of the people who need it the most. This is a huge issue for most Americans who are coming out of pocket, you know, with money that they don't have just to ensure to their livelihood. Well, if you're in a state like mine, Florida, guess who didn't expand medicaid in the state. It was the state of Florida and
many other red states. And so there's a Federal Health Care Act where the federal government says, we're going to pay for one hundred percent of the cost of expansion of this program, and then after a number of years, we'll pay ninety percent and you state of filling the
blank state of Florida, you'll pay ten percent. So we had money that was free money coming to us from the federal government that never got into the hands of the people that it was intended because the governors decided that they would not extend, expand those programs to include those people. That's very clear example of federal money coming down to a state to of a specific purpose and a governor and a government deciding that money ain't getting there,
not at all. In fact, we won't even take it. You hold on to it and go give it to I don't know anybody else but us. I.
Yeah, I really appreciate that breakdown. I think it's so important. Andrew, like we talk about all the time, we all have approached our political careers in different facets, and state and local is something that I don't know well at all, Like it is a complete blind spot. So I deeply appreciate that. And even around snap TIF, I was like,
how is there nothing in here? I was going back through all the articles and that was like, there's nothing on snap We went back through, there's one hundred and eighty eight pages for this year's budget or for twenty five. Me and Lolo our researcher. Shout out to Lolo and Nick who's always keeping us sometimes. I was I was like, well, I just five me anyway, But Lolo is saying she
couldn't find anything. And what they did in this budget is they say, if you want to see a change in SNAP, you got to pass you got to reauthorize the Farm Bill. And so there's that Pece. I don't know why they didn't break that out in this budget. And that's a great question we can ask the administration. I'm sure they'd be happy to answer.
Well for not even posing that, you know, but well, here we are, here, we are, we have.
We want to know what your proposers as well, because you count what counts.
Yeah, that's their very true.
Yes, well, we're asking the question. We just want to know what is the increase for SNAP benefits. We know it is going to be much different than what Donald Trump did, which was please pull that number. I think it was an eighty five million dollar cut in SNAP. Lolo, please fact check. Did I say cut?
No, no, no, no, no, Angela, you said it just a million.
I just want to make sure eighty five million dollars and cuts to SNAP, Lolo, if you can fact check me on that.
But I wanted to say to do a tiffany really quick.
I'm calling this doing a Tiffany, SNAP is the supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, So I want to make sure we're clear on that.
Tiff said, food stamps, that's a very similar thing. It is support.
So based on what Lolo found, Donald Trump's cuts to SNAP benefits again food stamps was slashing that by fifteen billion dollars, along with reductions in federal crop insurance subsidies. But for some reason, farmers has thought that he was on their side.
He is not. Nationwide, Andrew, go ahead with the video, I know you were going to.
I'm sorry, can I get fact check something really quickly? This is according because I like to site facts and sources so people know it's not us saying this. This is according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Donald Trump's twenty twenty one budget proposes to cut the SNAP benefits by more than one hundred and eighty billion dollars nearly thirty percent over the next ten years by radically restructuring how benefits are delivered, taking SNAP away from millions of adults who are not working more than twenty hours per week. During the Trump administration, they considerably reduced this.
Not only they reduced it, they started applying more restrictions on who could get SNAP benefits, which made it like almost impossible for people. And I'll just say to somebody in my family who gets SNAP benefits, it's not enough. I have to supplement that food income every single month. They expect you to live off two hundred dollars a month sometimes, and you have to consider it's not just food. It is deodorant, it is toothpaste, it's toilet paper, paper, basic needs for life.
This is what snapcover.
Sorry, Andrew, I'll just say, Angela, you were going in the direction with your comments that that farmers thought that Republicans loved them and that the president would love them. But you saw the cut that was proposed that in that department's budget. And I'll tell you, the farmers are still getting their subsidies, in fact, are getting enhanced subsidies.
What was what cover was from that budget. The cut that we see represented from the Trump administration and Agriculture has to do with the fact that SNAP benefits, food subsidy programs, after school fool lunches, during school lunches, weekend feeding programs, all of that is caught up in the budget for agriculture. Agriculture isn't sitting inside housing in urban development. Those food subsidy programs and benefits are within that department's budget.
And so when we see cuts to them and you think, oh, well, they're trying, you know, I thought he was on the side of the big farmers, and of this he is. Those subsidies for those farmers are still there. What is gone is the subsidies for working people, poor families who depend on those services in order to eat, in order
to live. When we when we What is great about this video, and I'm so glad that we're getting to talk a bit about the budget, is that for those who are deluded into believing that this that that Donald Trump in any way offers something to our states, to our communities, to our households, to us as individuals in line with being greater than what you have received under Democrat administrations, and I'll be more specific under Joe Biden, just look at the Just look at where they are
proposing to take away in order to give. And what you will notice in Trump's budget is that all the give was to the wealthiest one percent, and it was paid for because the federal government didn't have the money
to do it. In future years. It is paid for by taking away from affordable housing, from food subsidy programs, from child assistance programs, from the child tax credit, from the earned income tax credit, all those things get slashed, while he then puts money into the bank accounts of the wealthiest one percent, the people who needed the least. And so I love if we get an opportunity, either in poster or now, to just play that so that viewers who are seeing this get to see it.
We need to play it because there's some parts of this that you need to read.
One other flag for you, all regarding snap is during the Trump administration, they also proposeed the elimination of food stamps for seven hundred thousand people. And fortunately that's where the judicial system was on our side and they prevented the Donald Trump administration for implementing that rule. So Andrew, at this point, you want to go ahead show people how the budget works. And then I do still have one thing I want to get to on HBCUs.
Indeed, I'll read them as quickly as bussibly.
This is all according to now this the outlet.
Fifteen point six billion he proposes for customs in butter protection an increase of seven percent, by the way, two billion for the wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for. Y'all remember that nine point nine billion for immigration and Customs enforcement, an increase of twenty three percent over their previous budget. What one trillion for infrastructure spending up virten years,
including two hundred billion but nationally significant projects. And the cuts to pay for that budget were four hundred and sixty five billion dollars for medicare providers, seven hundred billion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade, workforce requirements, food stamps, housing assistants came with new requirements, seventy billion in cuts to federal disability insurance, one hundred and seventy
billion dollars cutting student loan forgiveness. The budget calls for extending Trump's tax cuts, you know, the ones to the top one percent till twenty twenty three, at the cost of one point four trillion dollars. He proposed to pay for that trillion plus with a negative nine percent negative nine percent down in that from for the Department of Agriculture, negative eight percent down. So it moved quickly because there's a lot of information that when you're dealing with the budgets,
the size of the United States, right. But the beauty is is for folks who want to say Donald Trump gave us this, and I got more money, and I got a check in the mail, and I got a this that had his name on it. The real, the truth, the what really went down is what is being reflected here, which is that all those things that you think he did for us, in fact, he was taking away right before our eyes. The man is a trickster, that's all I'm saying.
Well, and the point that he made that you that we're going really fast, so wludos to you, Andrew. But he cut the CDC budget by No. Nine percent in February of twenty twenty.
We know what happened. In March of twenty twenty, there was a global pandemic.
Angela.
I'm curious about your because I know this is something that was really important to you about saying that the budget reflects priorities.
One thing when you were explaining to me.
Earlier is that you worked on Capitol Hill for a number of years executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus, and you were explaining to me that staffers would be given the responsibility of looking at the budget, taking a section and looking at it and explaining.
To the member. So I'm keenly curious to hear how you feel about this budget.
Yeah, so yes.
I worked on the Homeland Security Committee, and every committee staff goes and takes their the Department of Homeland Security for example, for US, and we combed through it to see if it's in alignment with our chair or the ranking member, if you're not in the majority of the committee. And I think for me, the frustration I have is the heightened priority to securing the border when there are so many deep needs in the community.
TIF and Andrew y'all went in deep.
About snap, I mean alone the other priorities for kids in K through twelve HBCUs, which is a place I think that there's a highlight we can actually talk about in a clear distinction we can draw. You know, Donald Trump has been has been known to say that he saved HBCUs when President Obama wouldn't give them long term funding,
which is preposterous. And one of the things I do want to do is just take a moment to highlight just a couple of points in this year's budget from the Biden Administration for institutional capacity alone, not just for HBCUs but also other minority serving institutions. There is a proposal of three hundred and twenty nine million more than where levels currently are for institutional that's for institutional capacity
of those schools. Additionally, for R and D that's research and development, they proposed another one hundred million, and for STEM education at these schools one point four billion dollars. The one thing that I think is a highlight, because we have been talking about people in our communities in need, they are offering or proposing. I have to make sure I say that because even with Trump's budget is a proposal. Those things aren't automatically appropriated, which is another important word.
This is authorization.
There's authorization language, there are bills that propose these priorities, and then there are bills that fund these priorities. So it's not appropriated yet. But they offer two years propose I keep saying, offer two years of subsidized tuition at HBCUs for families earning one hundred and twenty five thousand dollars or less. That is fantastic, and I think it's great for them because they've been very consistent in providing
student relief for tuition related payments. We've seen it with student loan debt relief and now here with subsidized tuition. Of course, there's pail grants, there's a proposed increase in pal and that kind of thing. But yeah, I wanted to get into this because I think we often talk about policy as.
Like this big, like this high floaty concept.
But there's a clear way to determine if people are supporting priorities that you're aligned with or not, and that is looking at what they've proposed in the budget, going beyond what they stayed in the State of the Union, seeing what each of their cabinet secretaries and those departments they oversee have pushed forward as their proposal recommendations, and how that's different from the administrations that preceded them, and even how it's different from their prior year budget.
I just got to say where we're talking tuitions. The Biden budget also proposes a new program to ensure affordable care, affordable childcare, and I y'all know how I am about child Carey.
Yes, sixty dads.
And to all dads and moms who are struggling with what it means. I mean, you almost feel like you hit the lottery when your kids are out of childcare because they naturally going to a public system where you're not paying is well, it'll catch in the summer, but you're not paying that monthly expense that that that you're so used to. So let me just finish that point,
which is a program to us. You're investing four hundred billion dollars over the next ten years to cap the costs for families and expand childcare subsidies and tax credits for those businesses. And the reason why, like I said, during the pandemic, they increased that amount threefold. They went from three hundred dollars with nobody takes a child and care for them for a month outside of their parents
care for three hundred dollars a month. Nobody's doing that, okay, So they to take that up to nine hundred dollars, so that for each child, the benefit, the tax benefit that came to us what was it, I think four times a year. They ended up factoring it into sort of waiting for you to file your taxes and get
that in one fell swoop. Every four months you were getting to check from the federal government for your as a part of the child tax Credit, so that you didn't have to wait till the end to the beginning of the next year to then reap the benefit of it. That you got to reap the benefit of it every four months because we're paying these expenses every single day. Yeah, and that we're being then reimbursed come the end of
the you know, come the next year. I can't underscore enough what it means for families and families with children. How prioritizing families but after they are born, by the way, is such a critical value to this administration. And it shows up here, It shows up in their healthcare proposals, it shows up in the school assistance, and in many of the other programs. This is our money getting returned
to us. It's not a gift, unlike what it is for the for the corporate community who is experiencing the tremendous tax breaks under the Trump administration, that isn't money that they've earned. That's our money being then distributed to them.
As a case and Andrew on that point.
Prior to Donald Trump being in office, corporations were taxed that a rate of thirty five percent. Under Donald Trump, they dropped down to twenty one percent, and Joe Biden is still not raising them to the levels pre Trump. He's raising them by seven percent to twenty eight percent in this proposed budget. I do want to run this quick clip. I'm speaking of corporations being taxed because Biden is planning to pay for most of this by increasing the taxes of the rich.
You know, there are one thousand billionaires in America. You know what the average federal taxes for those billionaires. No, they're making great sacrifices eight point two percent. That's far less than the vast majority of Americans pay. No, billionaires should pay a lower federal tax rate than a teacher, or sanitation worker or a nurse. I propose a minimum tax for billionaires of twenty five percent, just twenty five percent.
What it's forty percent effectively for.
The rest of us.
But about that, and they still have it anyway, that's the story for anotherday. But they still have it hired for us. This has been an illuminating conversation. I didn't I didn't even know we were going to do such a deep dive on Snap, But based on the questions that we get every week from our listeners, where we find relief is something that's abundantly important to us all, not just in our community, but especially in our community. We know that when America catches the cold, we might
have COVID. We used to say pneumonia, might be COVID, orry punks something.
Yeah, yeah, all of it.
Yeah, Okay, right after this break, we'll get into one more listener question, and of course we have a Maryland Mo's we update.
Hey, David Lampard, this is Tony from Dallas.
Question for you.
The Biden Harris administration recently released a new campaign video Sensor, around the story of a white female doctor in Texas who left the state due to the abortion whites fan Now, my question to you is, why do you think the same amount of attention is not being focused on black and brown disaffective voters as it pertains to voting rights
and affirmative action restoration. Similar stories could be told, such as the current legal battle that's happening with Aaron Simones, the Fearless Fun, and the weaponization of the civil rights at nineteen eighty six.
That's perfect for you, Angela, because you just you were just with the Fearless Fun this week, I think, but i'd been here, I says frustrations about this all the time, so I'd love for you to jump on that.
I yeah, I think we all talk about this both on and we always joke now y'all that we anytime we're in conversation, we're like having a podcast. We were doing it at south By, Like we're standing in the lobby talking and folks, it's so MANI podcasts. I think for me, I definitely share the frustration. It feels like there's not a real sense of urgency around on the equity pieces, around an agenda that ensures our survival and
liberation in this country. I do think it's very dangerous for us to start finding ways to separate ourselves from others. There are black women who are more impacted by an abortion ban and reproductive justice issues, and folks who are less fortunate, lower income than white women. And I think if there's a way for us to bring people in by focusing on those issues, we've got to do that. But we can also walk in chew gum at the same damn time. We better figure out how to Arian
Simone who shout out to I'm an honorary rattler. I've told you all that.
But arian Simone is killing it.
I was on a panel with her yesterday, a round table discussion that Congressman Maxine Waters held on Capitol Hill.
I'm getting into it.
Oh sorry, my bad.
I was on a round table discussion yesterday that Congressman Maxine Waters held on Capitol Hill talking about the attacks on DEI at the hands of MAGA Republicans, and Arianne Simone, who is the co founder of the Fearless Fund, sat to my right and tore it down. She talked about the lack of access to venture capital. She talked about the ways in which black women are the highest growing rate of entrepreneurs in this country, but the lowest funded. She talked about the fact that many of us are
not in position to fund these companies. They have created such a big din in this through the Fearless Fund, and who came after them, Ed Bloom And if it's not Ed Bloom's America First legal right, Well, we have to be very aware of those attacks and we cannot play footsye with them. Another sister on the panel, God forgive me for not remembering her name. She's a brilliant attorney at the Lawyer's Committee. She said something and I'll
never forget it. I even tweeted it yesterday. She said we should not do the opponent's work for them, and what that means even in campaigning, what that means in a state of the union. Address what that means when Kamala is sitting with governors from all over the country and they are doing what she says needed to be done, we need to be telling them take it a step further on equity, be boulder in your anti racist policies, ensure that we're represented in an affirmative action.
Make them. Sue you.
I got a program for professional professional development program with one hundred students from all over this country.
They are black, Sue me. I wish you would bring it. That's the point.
So we need a campaign that says that against democracy and all the attacks that we're facing on voting rights, and all the attacks that we're facing on reproductive justice, and all the attacks that we're facing on livable wage, on a federal job guarantee, everything across the board. We need to stand shoulder to shoulder, unashamed and clear, flat footed, ten toes down on business and say here we are deal with it.
If you don't like it. Sue us. But it is going to be liberty and justice for all if I got something to do with it. So I rack with this brother's question.
I love that, and I love that you were on the hearing yesterday or the roundtable. The round table and that was your mentor, Congressman Maxine Waters. I love that you were participating in that, and forgive me areas and over, I literally have only called her a fearless fund So I'm happy that you actually said she's fearless.
Yeah, clearly, So shout out to you for doing your work.
Sorry, she's fearless, she's a rat leer, and she's a delta. I did want to mention that Angela one beautifully beautifully stated too. I want to nominate Maxine Waters to be heading up the campaign's outreach funds to outreach efforts to include as the brother evoked in his question around reproductive rights, Angela, your point is well taken. We don't have to choose between all the problem with this is that our fights are so manifold. We got to have battlefront. We got
battlefront set up on every part of this landscape. And what the other side wants us to do is negotiate our way out of what we all know we deserve by pitting our issues against each other. And I believe the attorney was getting at, don't do the pont has worked for them is oftentimes and all of us have been in these conversations where we're in rooms with people of like mine and we're finding each other negotiating against ourselves to get what we believe it is going to
be acceptable. The other side is just putting out what they want where they want to go, and they're like, I did you just like ange what I'm saying so beautiful point.
I don't want to say what I want to say beautiful.
Beautiful point and a and and better than a point. It's a way of being, y'all. It's a way of it.
It is embody, that embody, that boldness. Tiff they number five three on a strong good day and tough and.
Look she looked at the pictures.
They were like they were like, I didn't know Tiffany was so shortific Like I didn't know I was either.
Well people sometimes people say, wow, Angela is tall, like you.
Were like five uh these five inch platforms she had online and the people, Maybe that's what we need to tell them.
Do we need to tell them to put their platforms on? Do we need to tell them to put their platforms on in March for this agenda?
But you know, deeper on the insight is deeper than any of us know. This is all part of the vestiges yesday slavery. It's part of the vestiges of a system that isn't designed and built for us, because you're oftentimes often questioning yourself about what's possible, Should we pursue that, should we go with what's you know, more acceptable? Am I in the right place? Am I qualified to be in the right you know?
So the legacy is normally like, oh, you can't ask for that. It's not It's not them, it's.
It is.
It needs to be a believer. The belief is built out of a lived experience that has taught you time and time again about what you just do.
Yeah, can can I just say why Arion Simon's work is so important? And this is old data now, But in twenty sixteen, the Center for Global Policy Solutions said discrimination and bias in favor of funders funding companies run by white men cause the United States to lose out on over one point one million minority owned businesses and forfeit more than nine million potential job opportunities.
So when you hurt us, you hurt yourself.
Hurting yourself, don't hurt yourself like yance.
Listen here, Okay, Well on that taking making those women's lemonade, because that is only the thing that Haryan Simone could do. This Women's History Month that I've reclaimed as Black Women's History Month, we are going to talk about another Black women's history maker. Just briefly, as we segue into calls to action, I just want to acknowledge again our dear
sister Marilyn Moseby. You all know that she's been raped across the coals in these two criminal trials, both of which she should have never even had to sit for. You all have responded boldly, and it really I mean I was kind of caught on my heels because I was like, well, we would go rev up to the call to action, But y'all are like, now I got a call action for y'all.
What we're doing next?
We write it down as our friend Jamail will readily respond with anytime there is a call to action.
And I think there are two things for you all to do.
And the immediate one is Maryland has a GoFundMe that folks have set up for her, just helped to pay some of the monthly bills. You all know that she's got two young daughters. We are not the recipients of that fund. We are not holding that fun. There are people out here in this country who do that regularly. You won't ever catch us doing that, no shade, but maybe a little bit. And then I would also say that we where's my Oh. The other thing is there
will soon be a petition made available. But until that petition is up, there will be a rally on March twenty third in Baltimore, and we'll make sure to get those details up and available for you all in the credits for this show as well as on our Native lamp Pod page, which we hope you are following on social at Native lamppod.
And with that, I wanted to refer to my co hosts for their calls to action.
Andrew, you go, I'll go last.
You know I'm co signing every day on the Maryland most reactions.
Okay, yes, yeah, Well, thank you for that, Andrew, and for always sharing your testimony. When we talked talked through this reminding people because, like I say, not too many people square up against the federal government and live to tell about it. So it's just we You went through what you didn't deserve, and Maryland is going through what she didn't deserve. So I love how you're passin committed to that, and I of course echoed that call to action.
My last call to action I would say is if you are a fan of Native Land Pod, I would ask you to share this episode. Specifically, Angela had the genius idea to say, let's talk about the budget, and this conversation went a lot of different directions. The most important thing is connecting how the budget impacts your everyday life.
A lot of people have that question. So if you know someone who says things like you know, Trump gave more to HBCUs, Angela breaks that down and with facts and references and cite sources on why that's not true. We try to communicate with you in a way that's very digestible and confidence because that's how we talk to each other. And so often the cable news platforms are not considering you the beltwegh media, they are not considering you.
We consider you, you center everything we talk about, and so if you have someone in your family who's not clear on things, we try to break these things down, share this episode with them, Post this episode on your social media, tell your friends to listen, talk about it in your group chats. Because Antela was the first person to say this to me, but I think it's so important. None of us here are trying to build individual brands. We are trying to build community. So Welcome home, y'all.
Invite more people into this home because you get knowledge, you get seen, and hopefully, collectively we make sure this here democracy serves us as well.
Before we end this show, I just want to remind everyone to leave us a review and subscribe to Native Lampod where available on all platforms and YouTube. New episodes drop every Thursday around ten am ish and then we have.
A YouTube that drops later on in the day.
You can also follow us on social media. We are Angela Raie, Tiffany Cross, and Andrew Gillum. Welcome home, y'all. There are two hundred and thirty five.
Days until the election.
Welcome Home.
Native Lampod is a production of iHeartRadio in partnership with Reasoned Choice Media. For more podcasts, from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.