Victorious Pennsylvania Progressives Shun the Democratic Party Playbook


AARON MATE: It’s The Real News. I’m Aaron Mate. That is talk of a blue wave in 2018, with
Democrats looking to take midterm races across the country. But blue, like any color, has different shades. And one of those shades, you could say, is
bold, for bold progressive; the bold progressives who are challenging races across the country,
inspired by Bernie Sanders. One of the states where they have won a key
victory is Pennsylvania, where earlier this month, four progressive women candidates to
the state General Assembly swept the Democratic primary. They were endorsed by the leftist group the
Democratic Socialist of America, or DSA. One of them joins me now. Kristin Seale is running for the state General
Assembly in the Philadelphia area. Welcome, Kristin. On your website you call yourself a bold progressive. Explain the message that you brought to voters,
and how you think that contributed to your victory. KRISTIN SEALE: Absolutely. Thanks for having me. I think that I brought a progressive platform
to voters. The DSA canvas, which is a really big part
of how we notched this win, was based around a Medicare for All message. We went to the doors also to listen to voters
in the district about what’s affecting their health and lives, what’s working for them
and what’s not. And so I think that the combination of bringing
a social security net message with some really strong active listening about what people
want and need is, is really the message. You know, I, I stand for a lot of left progressive
issues, and it really starts with making sure that working families and struggling families
are acknowledged and that we’re doing what we need to do to support these people in our
communities, some of which are myself and my family. AARON MATE: So your background, as I understand
it, is in public health. And from what I know your area is the only
one in Pennsylvania that doesn’t have a public health department. Is that right? KRISTIN SEALE: That’s correct. We live in a really interesting County in
Pennsylvania. We have had a Republican war machine that
has controlled every level of office in this county since the Civil War. And one of the effects of that is that we
are currently the only county in Pennsylvania without a public health department. That’s got incredible impact on the health
and lives of people in my community, including we’ve got an outsized, you know, opioid epidemic
is huge in this state, and it’s, we’ve barely scratched the surface of the supports necessary
to help families that are suffering and prevent excess death. But in my community we have a completely outsized
rate of overdose deaths from opiate addiction, as well as a completely outsized rate of children,
infant mortality, of children born to women of color. We’ve got a lot of work to do, and that’s
one of the places we can start. AARON MATE: I know on the issue of health
care you backed single payer. I’m wondering also, as a former delegate for
Bernie Sanders, if you’ve struggled with the issue that many progressives in the Democratic
Party have raised, which is whether or not to try to work within the Democratic party
system. KRISTIN SEALE: Right. So, I have come around to a big tent way of
thinking. I am convinced that there is a place for us
in the Democratic Party. And I know that we don’t see eye to eye with
everyone in the party, but I do work every day to build bridges between parties and between
people. So I feel like there are ways that we are,
even in this cycle in primaries, I think we see across the country, dragging the message
to the left. There are things that we adopted as platform
planks in 2016 with the participation of Bernie delegates and Sanders and Ellison before the
convention that I think have really built some progressive values into the heart of
the Democratic message in a way that we never done before. AARON MATE: And you are running as an openly
out LGBTQ candidate. That’s a big part of your platform, rights
for LGBTQ people. And you’re also running in a district which
has never elected a female representative. Can you talk about just the history you’re
making on that front? KRISTIN SEALE: Absolutely. So, I would be the first Democrat and the
first woman to hold this seat in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in the General Assembly. I would also be the first out queer woman
to ever hold a seat. There is currently one out gay legislator
in that body, so we’re really excited about the idea that there would be more than one
person in the current LGBTQ caucus that’s an actual out LGBTQ legislator. We’re working really hard to build that bench
cross the state. I currently hold a school board seat, and
I have a friend that made excellent news, Tyler Titus in Erie, winning a school board
seat. The first transgender person to win a school
board seat, in what is a very conservative area of our state. So I think that both our history making identity
politics and our progressive values are really resonating with voters in this state in a
way that is surprising people. AARON MATE: Finally, as I mentioned in the
intro, you were part of this wave of four female progressive candidates backed by the
DSA. Can you talk about that overall group, which
has grown national attention, and what you think all your victories say about the viability
of progressive candidates in key states like Pennsylvania? KRISTIN SEALE: Absolutely. I, we’re talking about my friends Elizabeth
Fiedler, Sara Innamorato, and Summer Lee. Ssummer And Sara are in the western part of
the state, which couldn’t be more different than where Elizabeth and I are. Elizabeth is in Philadelphia, and I’m in the
Philadelphia suburbs. People know Summer’s district, Braddock, I
think because of John Fetterman, to a degree. And both Sara, Elizabeth, and Summer and I
have one thing in common, which is all of us have some kind of an organizing background. So part of what I think you’re seeing is that
all of us had a grassroots mentality and are the kind of people that went directly out
to the electorate, to community and to the voters, to find out how we could serve them
through servant leadership. And I think that something that’s different
about the four of us that maybe hasn’t been seen in previous cycles is that we’re very
committed to being authentically ourselves. And I really think that’s what voters are
responding to, that sincerity and authenticity, that standing on principle and standing firm,
not just for our values but for the things that our voters are telling us, our constituents
in the future, that they need to happen in order to fulfill their human potential, basically,
in order for them to actually have the rights that are due to them. I think that we’ve done outreach in a really
direct way to people that lets them know that we’re here for them and we’re ready to serve
them. AARON MATE: And Kristin, finally, your website,
if people want want more information? KRISTIN SEALE: Absolutely. It is KristinSeale.com, two Is, no Es in my
first name. Or you can find it at ServeThe168th.com. AARON MATE: Kristin Seale, running for the
state General Assembly in Pennsylvania, thanks so much for joining us. KRISTIN SEALE: Thank you for having me. AARON MATE: And thank you for joining us on
The Real News.

The Democratic Party’s Future is Progressive


wife’s so we were talking before about with the
exception of Chris the there was a great night for progressive
politics I think a couple weeks ago from DiBlasio and I agree with you that
McCollum did he also ran on Medicaid expansion he did run a progressive
campaign but there’s no question raising the minimum wage raising minimum
wage and render a deal reading a statement you know but he’s a very his record and
who he is and what he represents as a pretty transactional fundraising
guy is something that to say the least skeptical progresses are going to be
skeptical love that I think just average voters who are not you know
maybe genuinely more in the middle are genuinely kinda looking for the types of issues that you know some
like Elizabeth Warren would raise are gonna have some allergy him that’s
probably why in some ways it was so close I mean you know that election
could have been a blowout considering who is running against writes all along comes david fromm I who is you know and his own quest the
kind of %uh stay politically relevant parts could use part good moderation
says unsmarmy right to respect on gun safety on
immigration things and pipeline into just each party
time just seems to be trolling the last and I think this is a great example he
has a new column which does troll the left the day but i think
is important to address cuz he’s basically said look liberals and progressives are going to
be excited about the Blasio they’re excited about Elizabeth Warren’s rising
influence and everything but Terry McAuliffe and kind of corporate friendly
transactional Democrats in the future the party I a large checking ok but it’s okay your back okay Blasio and then we have
no idea and then basically from said look that’s what liberals are excited
about but the real future the Democratic Party is Terry McAuliffe and kinda
transactional corporate friendly democrats I don’t buy
it but I i United I want you take I want you take a
nap well here’s why don’t buy either yeah I a not because there isn’t
a large faction New Democrats thankfully be more
right wing socially you know nineteenth century and
Heath Bell I am it is there’s two things I think
that are important in there are there to discuss one year’s that I i think obviously a
number eloquent arguments have been made I am
it when you look at some other people that are getting elected now you start
to look at a at you know the victories applause 01
Elizabeth Warren in some other voices you know you got people like shared
brown and Tom Harkin you were in you know the swing state Midwest to the
strongest voices on protecting Social Security the culture is culture the party has
changed it is moved to the left there are things
he used to be able to argue for and there was no one even controversial
or leasing only was among certain segments like the way you to be for the free trade deals and
only labor would fight with you now huge number a mouth basin members
the house and senate already walking away for the new free trade deal with another
they may not get past is just to say that with a party and really is a different place in addition
to that you know the overall electorate is in a different
place has moved to the left the electrical younger it’s getting it’s getting more mixed ethnically
racially it’s becoming more female is becoming more urban is becoming more education all the
things we know arm in so where we say to you is it doesn’t
really know what Terry McAuliffe personally believes doesn’t really matter to me I would do I
care what some reason somebody’s horny do I care
what they do he felt to win that race in Virginia he had to
run as an hour now progressed sprite arm and show DiBlasio I believe in
Warren really believe that but in the end you know yeah it did about one examples I can’t
think I love you know you mean politicians change all the time you know
lyndon johnson originally was a segregationist accuser best civil rights legislation is
a century you know Hilarie truman originally came up a with local machine type the mob in Kansas
City internet mean arm these do you know that in the end look at the kennedys for
example turned on them Abu they can mean deep what you how you get
there and what you choose one sure their nests can be very interesting looking forward by Hillary Clinton who
obviously is very tight DLC but is a pretty smart politician and
I think these is that that really in the end the energy in the democratic party is
towards having a progressive front and do progressive
thanks and the question is you know which which there will be
people that were much more moderate before that you will certainly see
moving to the left we’ve already seen it and we saw in that McAuliffe campaign ideas exactly right in some ways the
most validating thing progressive politics and where we’re
going is the fact someone like Terry McAuliffe who is always savvy positioning self is positioning
himself there I think you exactly right click schachter not just largest quickly a not just
position himself there in New York Massachusetts living in
Virginia totally cliff Schecter so good having you on and
crashed

Legal Trouble Permeates North Carolina Republican Party | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC


>>>I COULD WARN YOU THIS NEXT>>>I COULD WARN YOU THIS NEXT SEGMENT IS A LITTLE BLUE. SEGMENT IS A LITTLE BLUE. NOT IN THE SENSE OF BLUE VERSUS NOT IN THE SENSE OF BLUE VERSUS RED POLITICS BUT IN THE SENSE OF RED POLITICS BUT IN THE SENSE OF PG-13 SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO CLEAR PG-13 SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO CLEAR THE LITTLE KIDS OUT OF THE ROOM. THE LITTLE KIDS OUT OF THE ROOM. OKAY. OKAY. THE STORY BEGINS IN 1996 WITH A THE STORY BEGINS IN 1996 WITH A HOTLY CONTESTED REPUBLICAN HOTLY CONTESTED REPUBLICAN PRIMARY FOR GOVERNOR OF NORTH PRIMARY FOR GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA. CAROLINA. ONE OF THE CANDIDATES RUNNING IN ONE OF THE CANDIDATES RUNNING IN THAT PRIMARY WAS THIS GUY, THAT PRIMARY WAS THIS GUY, CONGRESSMAN ROBIN HAYES. CONGRESSMAN ROBIN HAYES. NOW, PART OF WHAT MADE THAT NOW, PART OF WHAT MADE THAT PRIMARY CONTENTIOUS WAS THAT PRIMARY CONTENTIOUS WAS THAT HAYES’ OPPONENT ACCUSED HIM OF HAYES’ OPPONENT ACCUSED HIM OF BEING SO CONSERVATIVE THAT HE BEING SO CONSERVATIVE THAT HE WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO WIN THE WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. GENERAL ELECTION. AMONG THE THINGS THEY POINTED TO AMONG THE THINGS THEY POINTED TO AS THE FACT THAT AS A U.S. AS THE FACT THAT AS A U.S. CONGRESSMAN, HE WAS A FERVENT CONGRESSMAN, HE WAS A FERVENT BACKER OF ABSTINENCE SEX-BASED BACKER OF ABSTINENCE SEX-BASED EDUCATION. EDUCATION. ONE OF THE LAWMAKERS NOTED THAT ONE OF THE LAWMAKERS NOTED THAT HAYES HAD DENOUNCED PROGRAMS HAYES HAD DENOUNCED PROGRAMS TEACHING CHILDREN ABOUT BIRTH TEACHING CHILDREN ABOUT BIRTH CONTROL SAYING THEY WERE, QUOTE, CONTROL SAYING THEY WERE, QUOTE, BASED ON LUST. BASED ON LUST. INSTEAD HE HAD PUSHED FOR A INSTEAD HE HAD PUSHED FOR A CURRICULUM CALLED CHOOSING THE CURRICULUM CALLED CHOOSING THE BEST. BEST. NOW, CHOOSING THE BEST WAS AND NOW, CHOOSING THE BEST WAS AND STILL IS PRETTY OUT THERE. STILL IS PRETTY OUT THERE. A NARRATOR ON ONE OF THE A NARRATOR ON ONE OF THE PROGRAMS EDUCATIONAL VIDEOS PROGRAMS EDUCATIONAL VIDEOS TELLS STUDENTS THAT IF THEY HAVE TELLS STUDENTS THAT IF THEY HAVE SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE THEY, QUOTE, SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE THEY, QUOTE, JUST HAVE TO BE PREPARED TO DIE. JUST HAVE TO BE PREPARED TO DIE. DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT $200, JUST BE PREPARED TO DIE. $200, JUST BE PREPARED TO DIE. BUT WHAT’S EVEN MORE SHOCKING IS BUT WHAT’S EVEN MORE SHOCKING IS THAT THE PROGRAM CONGRESSMAN THAT THE PROGRAM CONGRESSMAN ROBIN HAY’SES WAS ADVOCATING FOR ROBIN HAY’SES WAS ADVOCATING FOR TOLD THEM TO PREVENT DISEASE BY TOLD THEM TO PREVENT DISEASE BY RUBBING THEIR GENITALS WITH RUBBING THEIR GENITALS WITH LYSOL AFTER SEX. LYSOL AFTER SEX. AT A FORUM ONE OF THE OPPONENTS AT A FORUM ONE OF THE OPPONENTS DUBBED HIM THE LYSOL MAN. DUBBED HIM THE LYSOL MAN. ONE OF THEM SHOWED HAYES ONE OF THEM SHOWED HAYES DISSOLVING TO SHOW A BOTTLE OF DISSOLVING TO SHOW A BOTTLE OF DISINFECTANT. DISINFECTANT. FOR HIS PART HE SAID HE NEVER FOR HIS PART HE SAID HE NEVER ADVOCATED CHOOSING THE BEST ADVOCATED CHOOSING THE BEST SUGGESTS BUT THE LYSOL MAN NEVER SUGGESTS BUT THE LYSOL MAN NEVER BECAME GOVERNOR. BECAME GOVERNOR. HE DID, HOWEVER, BECOME THE HE DID, HOWEVER, BECOME THE NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN PARTY NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN PARTY CHAIRMAN AND THIS WEEK HE WAS CHAIRMAN AND THIS WEEK HE WAS INDICTED, CHARGED WITH BRIBERY INDICTED, CHARGED WITH BRIBERY AND OTHER CRIMES THAT OFFICIALS AND OTHER CRIMES THAT OFFICIALS SAY WERE RELATED TO A SCHEME TO SAY WERE RELATED TO A SCHEME TO AID A MAJOR POLITICAL DONOR IN AID A MAJOR POLITICAL DONOR IN THE STATE. THE STATE. NOW, THAT DONOR, AN INSURANCE NOW, THAT DONOR, AN INSURANCE EXECUTIVE NAMED GREG LINDBERGH, EXECUTIVE NAMED GREG LINDBERGH, HAS DONATED MOSTLY BUT NOT SOULY HAS DONATED MOSTLY BUT NOT SOULY TO REPUBLICANS. TO REPUBLICANS. HE WAS ALSO CHARGED THIS WEEK HE WAS ALSO CHARGED THIS WEEK ALONG WITH TWO OTHER MEN, ONE OF ALONG WITH TWO OTHER MEN, ONE OF WHOM WAS A FORMER COUNTY WHOM WAS A FORMER COUNTY REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN IN NORTH REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN IN NORTH CAROLINA. CAROLINA. THEY ARE ACCUSED OF TRYING TO THEY ARE ACCUSED OF TRYING TO BRIBE THE NORTH CAROLINA BRIBE THE NORTH CAROLINA INSURANCE COMMISSIONER WITH $2 INSURANCE COMMISSIONER WITH $2 MILLION IN CAMPAIGN MILLION IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, QUOTE, TO GET HIM CONTRIBUTIONS, QUOTE, TO GET HIM TO TAKE ACTIONS FAVORABLE TO ONE TO TAKE ACTIONS FAVORABLE TO ONE OF LINDBERGH’S COMPANIES. OF LINDBERGH’S COMPANIES. THOSE FAVORABLE ACTIONS INCLUDED THOSE FAVORABLE ACTIONS INCLUDED THE REMOVAL OF ONE OF HIS THE REMOVAL OF ONE OF HIS SUBORDINATES, AN INSURANCE SUBORDINATES, AN INSURANCE REGULATOR IN CHARGE OF REGULATOR IN CHARGE OF OVERSEEING LINDBEH’S FIRM. OVERSEEING LINDBEH’S FIRM. THEY WERE CAUGHT BECAUSE IT THEY WERE CAUGHT BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT THAT THE INSURANCE TURNS OUT THAT THE INSURANCE COMMISSIONER THEY WERE TRYING TO COMMISSIONER THEY WERE TRYING TO BRIBE WAS ACTUALLY WORKING WITH BRIBE WAS ACTUALLY WORKING WITH THE FBI AND WAS SECRETLY THE FBI AND WAS SECRETLY RECORDING THEIR CONVERSATIONS. RECORDING THEIR CONVERSATIONS. BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE. BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE. I’M NOT DONE. I’M NOT DONE. THE INDICTMENT REFERS TO SOMEONE THE INDICTMENT REFERS TO SOMEONE AS PUBLIC OFFICIAL A, WHOSE PAC AS PUBLIC OFFICIAL A, WHOSE PAC TOOK $150,000 FROM THESE GUYS TOOK $150,000 FROM THESE GUYS WHO WERE TRYING TO GET THE WHO WERE TRYING TO GET THE INSURANCE REGULATOR FIRED. INSURANCE REGULATOR FIRED. THAT PUBLIC OFFICIAL A TURNED THAT PUBLIC OFFICIAL A TURNED AROUND AND MADE MULTIPLE CALLS AROUND AND MADE MULTIPLE CALLS TO TRY TO GET THE INSURANCE TO TRY TO GET THE INSURANCE REGULATOR AXED. REGULATOR AXED. THAT OFFICIAL IS NOT CHARGED. THAT OFFICIAL IS NOT CHARGED. HE IS REFERENCED IN THE HE IS REFERENCED IN THE INDICTMENT. INDICTMENT. POLITICO IS NOW REPORTING THAT POLITICO IS NOW REPORTING THAT THAT OFFICIAL APPEARS TO BE THAT OFFICIAL APPEARS TO BE CURRENT REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN CURRENT REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN MARK WALKER WHICH COULD BECOME A MARK WALKER WHICH COULD BECOME A HEADACHE FOR REPUBLICANS IN D.C. HEADACHE FOR REPUBLICANS IN D.C. SO IN ONE FELL SWOOP YOU HAVE SO IN ONE FELL SWOOP YOU HAVE THAT MAJOR REPUBLICAN DONOR THAT MAJOR REPUBLICAN DONOR INDICTED, ALONG WITH THE INDICTED, ALONG WITH THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NORTH CAROLINA CHAIRMAN OF THE NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN PARTY WHO IS A FORMER REPUBLICAN PARTY WHO IS A FORMER CONGRESSMAN AS WELL AS A PUBLIC CONGRESSMAN AS WELL AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL A WHO APPEARS TO BE A OFFICIAL A WHO APPEARS TO BE A CURRENT REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN CURRENT REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN FROM NORTH CAROLINA. FROM NORTH CAROLINA. AND THAT’S ON TOP OF THE AND THAT’S ON TOP OF THE CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION HAVING TO CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION HAVING TO BE RERUN IN NC 9 BECAUSE OF BE RERUN IN NC 9 BECAUSE OF APPEAR ILLEGAL VOTE BUYING AND APPEAR ILLEGAL VOTE BUYING AND BALLOT STUFFING SCHEME TO BALLOT STUFFING SCHEME TO BENEFIT THE REPUBLICAN BENEFIT THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE. CANDIDATE. THAT’S ON TOP OF THE RECENT THAT’S ON TOP OF THE RECENT COURT RULING THAT THE STATE COURT RULING THAT THE STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY ILLEGALLY REPUBLICAN PARTY ILLEGALLY RIGGED CONGRESSIONAL MAPS TO RIGGED CONGRESSIONAL MAPS TO BENEFIT THEMSELVES. BENEFIT THEMSELVES. I KNOW WE DO TALK ABOUT BLUE I KNOW WE DO TALK ABOUT BLUE VERSUS RED POLITICS, BUT WHAT’S VERSUS RED POLITICS, BUT WHAT’S GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN NORTH GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN NORTH CAROLINA IS MORE LIKE RED VERSUS CAROLINA IS MORE LIKE RED VERSUS RED. RED. ONE KEY STATE’S REPUBLICAN PARTY

Joe: Exhaustion With President Donald Trump Really Matters | Morning Joe | MSNBC


CHANCE TO DECIDE. WE’LL LEARN A LOT ABOUT WHAT WE’LL LEARN A LOT ABOUT WHAT KIND OF COUNTRY WE ARE. KIND OF COUNTRY WE ARE. I REALLY HOPE THE DEMOCRATS CAN I REALLY HOPE THE DEMOCRATS CAN COME ONE A CANDIDATE WHO WILL COME ONE A CANDIDATE WHO WILL COMPELLINGLY MAKE THE CASE FOR COMPELLINGLY MAKE THE CASE FOR BRINGING A COUNTRY BACK TO SOME BRINGING A COUNTRY BACK TO SOME KIND OF SANITY. KIND OF SANITY. AND I THINK THIS DAILY CARNIVAL AND I THINK THIS DAILY CARNIVAL THAT TRUMP RUNS IS EXHAUSTING THAT TRUMP RUNS IS EXHAUSTING FOR PEOPLE. FOR PEOPLE. PEOPLE ARE JUST KIND OF SICK OF PEOPLE ARE JUST KIND OF SICK OF IT BUT THEY GOT INTO THE SPIRIT IT BUT THEY GOT INTO THE SPIRIT OF POLITICS. OF POLITICS. THEY THINK ALL POLITICS IS LIKE THEY THINK ALL POLITICS IS LIKE THIS AND SOMEONE NEEDS TO SHOW THIS AND SOMEONE NEEDS TO SHOW IT ISN’T. IT ISN’T.>>JOE, I THINK DAVID IGNATIUS>>JOE, I THINK DAVID IGNATIUS IS TIRED OF HEARING US TALK. IS TIRED OF HEARING US TALK. JUST ENDLESSLY TALKING, HE’S JUST ENDLESSLY TALKING, HE’S GETTING A LITTLE — MUST BE GETTING A LITTLE — MUST BE EXHAUSTING. EXHAUSTING.>>>STILL AHEAD ON “MORNING>>>STILL AHEAD ON “MORNING JOE,” A FOLLOW-UP TO ONE OF OUR JOE,” A FOLLOW-UP TO ONE OF OUR MOST DISCUSSED — MOST DISCUSSED –>>BY THE WAY, I DO HAVE TO>>BY THE WAY, I DO HAVE TO COMMENT REALLY QUICKLY JUST ON COMMENT REALLY QUICKLY JUST ON THE EXHAUSTION FACTOR. THE EXHAUSTION FACTOR.>>IT IS EXHAUSTING, IT IS.>>IT IS EXHAUSTING, IT IS.>>HERE’S WHY IT MATTERS,>>HERE’S WHY IT MATTERS, ADRIENNE ELROD, I’LL GO TO YOU. ADRIENNE ELROD, I’LL GO TO YOU. HILLARY CLINTON’S PROBLEM IN HILLARY CLINTON’S PROBLEM IN 2016 REALLY WASN’T THAT THE 2016 REALLY WASN’T THAT THE PEOPLE THAT WENT OUT TO GO TO PEOPLE THAT WENT OUT TO GO TO VOTE FOR TRUMP. VOTE FOR TRUMP. IT WAS PEOPLE WHO STAYED HOME IT WAS PEOPLE WHO STAYED HOME AND YOU WOULDN’T VOTE FOR AND YOU WOULDN’T VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON AND NORMALLY HILLARY CLINTON AND NORMALLY WOULD. WOULD. BLACK VOTING NUMBERS, DOWN THE BLACK VOTING NUMBERS, DOWN THE MOST — DOWN FOR THE FIRST TIME MOST — DOWN FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 20 YEARS. IN 20 YEARS.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>AND YOU COULD TALK ABOUT>>AND YOU COULD TALK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE THAT JUST STAYED AT OTHER PEOPLE THAT JUST STAYED AT HOME. HOME. I HAVE BEEN SAYING IT, I WILL I HAVE BEEN SAYING IT, I WILL SAY IT STILL, DAVID BRINGS UP A SAY IT STILL, DAVID BRINGS UP A GREAT POINT. GREAT POINT. THAT EXHAUSTION, THAT KEEPS THAT EXHAUSTION, THAT KEEPS REPUBLICANS AT HOME THAT WOULD REPUBLICANS AT HOME THAT WOULD ALWAYS GO OUT AND VOTE. ALWAYS GO OUT AND VOTE. FOR A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL FOR A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. CANDIDATE. THE EXHAUSTION OF DONALD TRUM THE EXHAUSTION OF DONALD TRUM MAKES SOME EVANGELICALS SAY, MAKES SOME EVANGELICALS SAY, LISTEN, I’M NOT VOTING FOR A PRO LISTEN, I’M NOT VOTING FOR A PRO CHOICE CANDIDATE, BUT I’M NOT CHOICE CANDIDATE, BUT I’M NOT VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP. VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP. OR MAKES FISCAL CONSERVATIVES OR MAKES FISCAL CONSERVATIVES SAY, I’M NOT VOTING FOR SOMEBODY SAY, I’M NOT VOTING FOR SOMEBODY WHO MAY BE A SOCIALIST, BUT I’M WHO MAY BE A SOCIALIST, BUT I’M NOT VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP. NOT VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP. YOU WATCH THE UNDERVOTES IN 2020 YOU WATCH THE UNDERVOTES IN 2020 AND I HAVE BEEN WRONG MANY TIMES AND I HAVE BEEN WRONG MANY TIMES BEFORE. BEFORE. BUT MAN, IF I’M A REPUBLICAN, I BUT MAN, IF I’M A REPUBLICAN, I AM HORRIFIED BY THE PROSPECT AM HORRIFIED BY THE PROSPECT THAT SHEER EXHAUSTION KEEPS THAT SHEER EXHAUSTION KEEPS REPUBLICANS AT HOME AND DONALD REPUBLICANS AT HOME AND DONALD TRUMP LOSES FOR THE SAME REASONS TRUMP LOSES FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT HILLARY CLINTON LOST FOUR THAT HILLARY CLINTON LOST FOUR YEARS AGO. YEARS AGO.>>WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, YOU CAN>>WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, YOU CAN CALL IT TRUMP FATIGUE, RIGHT? CALL IT TRUMP FATIGUE, RIGHT? PEOPLE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF PEOPLE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF THIS, SICK AND TIRED OF HIS THIS, SICK AND TIRED OF HIS TWEETS, HIS BANTER, HIS LIES AND TWEETS, HIS BANTER, HIS LIES AND DISINFORMATION BUT THEY’RE ALSO DISINFORMATION BUT THEY’RE ALSO TIRED OF THE FACT THAT HE’S NOT TIRED OF THE FACT THAT HE’S NOT GETTING ANYTHING DONE. GETTING ANYTHING DONE. THE TAX BILL IS A SHAM. THE TAX BILL IS A SHAM. HE’S FAILED AMERICAN FARMERS HE’S FAILED AMERICAN FARMERS THEY’RE SUFFERING. THEY’RE SUFFERING. HE DIDN’T REPEAL HEALTH CARE HE DIDN’T REPEAL HEALTH CARE WHICH HE PROMISED HE WOULD DO WHICH HE PROMISED HE WOULD DO AND THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS AND THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DON’T WANT A REPEAL, THEY WANT DON’T WANT A REPEAL, THEY WANT IT FIXED. IT FIXED. I HOPE THE DEMOCRATS WILL HEED I HOPE THE DEMOCRATS WILL HEED TO THIS AND NOT GO DO FAR TO THE TO THIS AND NOT GO DO FAR TO THE LEFT BECAUSE WE HAVE A GOOD LEFT BECAUSE WE HAVE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY HERE TO TAKE BACK OPPORTUNITY HERE TO TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY BUT WE NEED TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON’T GET TOO FAR SURE THAT WE DON’T GET TOO FAR TO THE LEFT ON SOME OF THESE KEY TO THE LEFT ON SOME OF THESE KEY ISSUES THAT MATTER TO AMERICANS. ISSUES THAT MATTER TO AMERICANS.>>ONE QUICK POINT ON THE>>ONE QUICK POINT ON THE EXHAUSTION FACTOR IS — IT’S NOT EXHAUSTION FACTOR IS — IT’S NOT ME. ME. ONE QUICK POINT ON THE ONE QUICK POINT ON THE EXHAUSTION FACTOR, JOE. EXHAUSTION FACTOR, JOE. THERE WAS A SURVEY DONE AND THIS THERE WAS A SURVEY DONE AND THIS WAS A FASCINATING SURVEY. WAS A FASCINATING SURVEY. COLOR OF CHANGE DID IT. COLOR OF CHANGE DID IT. THEY INTERVIEWED THEY INTERVIEWED AFRICAN-AMERICAN VOTERS AND WHAT AFRICAN-AMERICAN VOTERS AND WHAT THEY DISCOVERED WAS THAT THE THEY DISCOVERED WAS THAT THE MORE YOU MENTION TRUMP, THE LESS MORE YOU MENTION TRUMP, THE LESS LIKELY THEY WERE TO VOTE. LIKELY THEY WERE TO VOTE. THEY SIMPLY JUST WANTED TO TUNE THEY SIMPLY JUST WANTED TO TUNE IT ALL OUT. IT ALL OUT. NOW, THIS WAS A YEAR OR SO AGO. NOW, THIS WAS A YEAR OR SO AGO. SO MAYBE THINGS HAVE CHANGED. SO MAYBE THINGS HAVE CHANGED. BUT THAT EXHAUSTION FACTOR IS BUT THAT EXHAUSTION FACTOR IS REAL. REAL. PEOPLE ARE JUST SO TIRED OF PEOPLE ARE JUST SO TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT TRUMP. HEARING ABOUT TRUMP. AND THEY DON’T THINK ANYTHING AND THEY DON’T THINK ANYTHING WILL CHANGE FROM VOTING AND THE WILL CHANGE FROM VOTING AND THE RESPONSE TO IT IS NOT TO ENGAGE RESPONSE TO IT IS NOT TO ENGAGE MORE, BUT TO ENGAGE LESS. MORE, BUT TO ENGAGE LESS. SO BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO FACTOR SO BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO FACTOR THIS IN AND THIS IS A DEBATE THIS IN AND THIS IS A DEBATE CURRENTLY HAPPENING AMONG CURRENTLY HAPPENING AMONG DEMOCRATS. DEMOCRATS. HOW MUCH SHOULD THEY FOCUS ON HOW MUCH SHOULD THEY FOCUS ON TRUMP HEADING INTO 2020 AND HOW TRUMP HEADING INTO 2020 AND HOW MUCH DO THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY MUCH DO THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY PUT TRUMP ASIDE AND FOCUS ON A PUT TRUMP ASIDE AND FOCUS ON A FORWARD LEANING VISION IS TO FORWARD LEANING VISION IS TO INSPIRE PEOPLE TO GO VOTE. INSPIRE PEOPLE TO GO VOTE.>>>STILL AHEAD ON “MORNING JOE”>>>STILL AHEAD ON “MORNING JOE” A FOLLOW-UP TO ONE OF THE MOST A FOLLOW-UP TO ONE OF THE MOST DISCUSSED SEGMENTS FROM DISCUSSED SEGMENTS FROM YESTERDAY. YESTERDAY. A RENEWED PUSH FROM CONSERVATIVE A RENEWED PUSH FROM CONSERVATIVE VOICES TO CLEANSE THE REPUBLICAN

Rep. Jamie Raskin: We’re In An Impeachment Inquiry Now | All In | MSNBC


ABUSES OF POWER BY PRESIDENT TRUMP, HIS ASSOCIATES AND TRUMP, HIS ASSOCIATES AND MEMBERS OF HIS ADMINISTRATION. MEMBERS OF HIS ADMINISTRATION. JOINING ME NOW, ONE OF THE JOINING ME NOW, ONE OF THE CONGRESS PEOPLE LEADING THIS CONGRESS PEOPLE LEADING THIS IMPEACHMENT, JEREMY RASKIN. IMPEACHMENT, JEREMY RASKIN. MAYBE YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO US WHAT MAYBE YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO US WHAT THIS VOTE IS AND WHAT THESE THIS VOTE IS AND WHAT THESE PROCEDURES MEAN? PROCEDURES MEAN?>>WE’RE VOTING ON PROCEDURES>>WE’RE VOTING ON PROCEDURES THAT FORMALIZE THE IMPEACHMENT THAT FORMALIZE THE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. IT GIVES THE CHAIRMAN OF THE IT GIVES THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE THE POWER TO DENOTE A COMMITTEE THE POWER TO DENOTE A PARTICULAR HEARING AS PART OF PARTICULAR HEARING AS PART OF IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AND IT ALSO IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AND IT ALSO GIVES HIM THE POWER TO SAY THE GIVES HIM THE POWER TO SAY THE PARTICULAR SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING PARTICULAR SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING IS PART OF THE GENERAL IS PART OF THE GENERAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. OTHER THAN THAT THE BIG PART OTHER THAN THAT THE BIG PART THAT I TOOK AWAY FROM IT IS THAT THAT I TOOK AWAY FROM IT IS THAT AFTER ALL OF THE MEMBERS CONDUCT AFTER ALL OF THE MEMBERS CONDUCT THEIR TRADITIONAL FIVE-MINUTE THEIR TRADITIONAL FIVE-MINUTE QUESTIONING, BOTH THE DEMOCRATS QUESTIONING, BOTH THE DEMOCRATS AND THE REPUBLICANS WOULD HAVE A AND THE REPUBLICANS WOULD HAVE A HALF HOUR MORE OF QUESTIONING BY HALF HOUR MORE OF QUESTIONING BY STAFF AVAILABLE. STAFF AVAILABLE. SO IT FORMALIZEs WHAT WE’RE SO IT FORMALIZEs WHAT WE’RE DOING AS WE ENTER INTO A NEW DOING AS WE ENTER INTO A NEW SEASON HERE. SEASON HERE.>>OKAY.>>OKAY. SO THAT MEANS THERE’S GOING TO SO THAT MEANS THERE’S GOING TO BE A FULL HOUSE VOTE ON THAT, IS BE A FULL HOUSE VOTE ON THAT, IS THIS RIGHT? THIS RIGHT?>>NO.>>NO. THIS IS JUST IN THE JUDICIARY. THIS IS JUST IN THE JUDICIARY.>>JUST IN THE COMMITTEE.>>JUST IN THE COMMITTEE. IT’S GOING TO VOTE, FORMALIZE IT’S GOING TO VOTE, FORMALIZE THE PROCEDURES. THE PROCEDURES. IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING AT THE IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING AT THE CONCLUSION OF THAT VOTE THAT CONCLUSION OF THAT VOTE THAT WE’RE FORMALLY IN A WE’RE FORMALLY IN A CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE BE AN CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE BE AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY UNDERWAY? IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY UNDERWAY?>>LOOK, THE CONSTITUTION>>LOOK, THE CONSTITUTION DOESN’T DEFINE WHEN IT’S DOESN’T DEFINE WHEN IT’S UNDERWAY. UNDERWAY.>>NO, I’M ASKING YOU.>>NO, I’M ASKING YOU.>>LOOK, I THINK WE’RE IN IT>>LOOK, I THINK WE’RE IN IT NOW. NOW. I THINK IT’S GREAT THAT THE I THINK IT’S GREAT THAT THE COMMITTEE WILL FORMALIZE IT WITH COMMITTEE WILL FORMALIZE IT WITH THIS PROCEDURE. THIS PROCEDURE. LOOK, WE’RE BEING HIT ON A DAILY LOOK, WE’RE BEING HIT ON A DAILY BASIS INUNDATED WITH NEW HIGH BASIS INUNDATED WITH NEW HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS. CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS. THE STUFF THAT WE FOUND OUT THE STUFF THAT WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE VICE PRESIDENT’S TRIP ABOUT THE VICE PRESIDENT’S TRIP TO IRELAND, ABOUT THE TO IRELAND, ABOUT THE REDIRECTION OF THE AIR FORCE REDIRECTION OF THE AIR FORCE CREWS TO GO TO THE TRUMP HOTEL CREWS TO GO TO THE TRUMP HOTEL IN SCOTLAND. IN SCOTLAND. THAT’S AMAZING STUFF. THAT’S AMAZING STUFF. THE PRESIDENT HAS CONVERTED THE THE PRESIDENT HAS CONVERTED THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES INTO AN INSTRUMENT OF INTO AN INSTRUMENT OF SELF-ENRICHMENT. SELF-ENRICHMENT. THIS IS THE ORIGINAL SIN OF THE THIS IS THE ORIGINAL SIN OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. IT WAS THE MAIN THING THAT THE IT WAS THE MAIN THING THAT THE FRAMERS WERE TRYING TO PREVENT. FRAMERS WERE TRYING TO PREVENT. THEY DID NOT WANT THE GOVERNMENT THEY DID NOT WANT THE GOVERNMENT BEING USED AS A FOR PROFIT BEING USED AS A FOR PROFIT ENTERPRISE BY THE PRESIDENT. ENTERPRISE BY THE PRESIDENT.>>WHAT IS THE TIME LINE HERE?>>WHAT IS THE TIME LINE HERE? I WANT TO PLAY FOR YOU A LITTLE I WANT TO PLAY FOR YOU A LITTLE BIT OF YOUR COLLEAGUE, JERRY BIT OF YOUR COLLEAGUE, JERRY NADLER WHO’S THE CHAIR OF THIS NADLER WHO’S THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE, TALKING ABOUT HIS COMMITTEE, TALKING ABOUT HIS UNDERSTANDING OF THE TRUMP UNDERSTANDING OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S VIEW OF THE ADMINISTRATION’S VIEW OF THE TIME LINE ON THIS AND THEN GET TIME LINE ON THIS AND THEN GET YOUR RESPONSE TO IT. YOUR RESPONSE TO IT. TAKE A LISTEN. TAKE A LISTEN.>>WELL, THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY>>WELL, THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY IS TRYING TO RUN OUT THE CLOCK. IS TRYING TO RUN OUT THE CLOCK. THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID HE WOULD THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID HE WOULD DENY — OPPOSE ALL SUBPOENAS. DENY — OPPOSE ALL SUBPOENAS. THAT WAS ARTICLE 3 OF THE NIXON THAT WAS ARTICLE 3 OF THE NIXON IMPEACHMENT, THAT THE PRESIDENT IMPEACHMENT, THAT THE PRESIDENT IMPOSED SUBPOENAS. IMPOSED SUBPOENAS. NIXON WASN’T FOOL ENOUGH TO SAY NIXON WASN’T FOOL ENOUGH TO SAY IN ADVANCE HE WAS GOING TO IN ADVANCE HE WAS GOING TO OPPOSE ALL SUBPOENAS. OPPOSE ALL SUBPOENAS. THAT IS A HIGH CRIME AND MISS THAT IS A HIGH CRIME AND MISS DEMEANOR UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. DEMEANOR UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. OBSTRUCTING THE WORK OF CONGRESS OBSTRUCTING THE WORK OF CONGRESS IN INVESTIGATING. IN INVESTIGATING.>>HOW DO YOU GET AROUND THAT?>>HOW DO YOU GET AROUND THAT? AND WHAT IS THE TIME LINE HERE? AND WHAT IS THE TIME LINE HERE?>>WELL, IN AN ORDINARY>>WELL, IN AN ORDINARY PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION 16 PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION 16 MONTHS LEFT TO GO WOULD BE MONTHS LEFT TO GO WOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE VERY NEAR THE END SOMETHING LIKE VERY NEAR THE END OF THE, YOU KNOW, FOURTH OF THE, YOU KNOW, FOURTH QUARTER, BUT IN TRUMP TIME, QUARTER, BUT IN TRUMP TIME, THAT’S AN ETERNITY. THAT’S AN ETERNITY. CAN YOU IMAGINE THE DAMAGE THAT CAN YOU IMAGINE THE DAMAGE THAT HE CAN INFLICT ON THE COUNTRY IN HE CAN INFLICT ON THE COUNTRY IN THE NEXT 16 MONTHS? THE NEXT 16 MONTHS? AND I THINK THAT MORE AND MORE AND I THINK THAT MORE AND MORE OF OUR COLLEAGUES HAVE COME OF OUR COLLEAGUES HAVE COME AROUND TO THE VIEW THAT WE NEED AROUND TO THE VIEW THAT WE NEED TO BE ON CONSTITUTIONAL HIGH TO BE ON CONSTITUTIONAL HIGH ALERT. ALERT. WE NEED EVERY TOOL IN THE WE NEED EVERY TOOL IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL TOOL KIT ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL TOOL KIT ON THE TABLE. TABLE. AND SO WE’RE GOING TO — YOU AND SO WE’RE GOING TO — YOU KNOW, THE PROBLEM WITH TRUMP, OF KNOW, THE PROBLEM WITH TRUMP, OF COURSE, IS THAT THERE ARE TOO COURSE, IS THAT THERE ARE TOO MANY IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES. MANY IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES. WITH BILL CLINTON THEY BASICALLY WITH BILL CLINTON THEY BASICALLY HAD ONE THING ON THE GUY. HAD ONE THING ON THE GUY. HE LIED ABOUT SEX. HE LIED ABOUT SEX. WITH DONALD TRUMP WE’RE WITH DONALD TRUMP WE’RE OVERWHELMED WITH THE DOMESTIC OVERWHELMED WITH THE DOMESTIC EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE, FEDERAL EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE, FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND SO ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND SO ON. ON.>>BYRON IN NEW YORK IS A>>BYRON IN NEW YORK IS A CONSERVATIVE PUNDANT AND CONSERVATIVE PUNDANT AND REPORTER. REPORTER. WAS TRYING TO MAKE THE CASE THAT WAS TRYING TO MAKE THE CASE THAT BECAUSE THERE’S A SCOPE THAT’S BECAUSE THERE’S A SCOPE THAT’S WIDE, INCLUDES A LOOK INTO THE WIDE, INCLUDES A LOOK INTO THE PRESIDENT’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE PRESIDENT’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE ILLEGAL CONSPIRACY TO HIDE THOSE ILLEGAL CONSPIRACY TO HIDE THOSE HUSH MONEY PAYMENTS AS WELL AS HUSH MONEY PAYMENTS AS WELL AS OTHER THINGS, THAT THIS IS A OTHER THINGS, THAT THIS IS A TACIT ACKNOWLEDGMENT, THE TACIT ACKNOWLEDGMENT, THE MUELLER REPORT ITSELF, IS NOT MUELLER REPORT ITSELF, IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THE BEGINNING OF SUFFICIENT FOR THE BEGINNING OF IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. WHAT’S YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT? WHAT’S YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?>>I THINK THAT’S TOTALLY WRONG.>>I THINK THAT’S TOTALLY WRONG. THERE WERE DOZENS OF CRIMINAL THERE WERE DOZENS OF CRIMINAL INDICTMENTS THAT CAME OUT OF THE INDICTMENTS THAT CAME OUT OF THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION. MUELLER INVESTIGATION. THERE WERE SEVEN GUILTY PLEAS THERE WERE SEVEN GUILTY PLEAS AND CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS AND WE AND CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS AND WE LEARNED OF NINE OR TEN DIFFERENT LEARNED OF NINE OR TEN DIFFERENT EPISODES OF PRESIDENTIAL EPISODES OF PRESIDENTIAL OBSTRUCTION. OBSTRUCTION. IT’S JUST THAT THAT’S A VERY IT’S JUST THAT THAT’S A VERY NARROW SNAPSHOT OF ALL OF THE NARROW SNAPSHOT OF ALL OF THE LAWLESSNESS TAKING PLACE IN THE LAWLESSNESS TAKING PLACE IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND IT TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND IT HAPPENS TO BE ONE THAT IS NOT HAPPENS TO BE ONE THAT IS NOT THE MOST INTUITIVE TO THE THE MOST INTUITIVE TO THE PUBLIC. PUBLIC. I THINK THAT THE PUBLIC I THINK THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THAT THE PRESIDENT UNDERSTANDS THAT THE PRESIDENT IS ESSENTIALLY A BUSINESSMAN, IS ESSENTIALLY A BUSINESSMAN, ALBEIT A FAILED AND CORRUPT ALBEIT A FAILED AND CORRUPT BUSINESSMAN, BUT THAT’S WHAT HE BUSINESSMAN, BUT THAT’S WHAT HE IS. IS. AND HE HAS TURNED THE GOVERNMENT AND HE HAS TURNED THE GOVERNMENT INTO A FOR PROFIT ENTER PRICE INTO A FOR PROFIT ENTER PRICE AND HE’S ELUDING THE ASSETS. AND HE’S ELUDING THE ASSETS. EVERY TIME HE GOES DOWN TO EVERY TIME HE GOES DOWN TO MAR-A-LAGO IT’S COSTING PEOPLE MAR-A-LAGO IT’S COSTING PEOPLE 75 TO $100,000 FOR THE FBI, 75 TO $100,000 FOR THE FBI, SECRET SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF SECRET SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GOING RIGHT INTO THE DEFENSE GOING RIGHT INTO THE COIFFEURS INTO THE TRUMP COIFFEURS INTO THE TRUMP INDUSTRY. INDUSTRY. THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT THE THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT THE FOUNDERS WARNED US AGAINST. FOUNDERS WARNED US AGAINST. THAT’S WHY THEY SAID IN THAT THAT’S WHY THEY SAID IN THAT CASE CONGRESS CAN’T EVEN APPROVE CASE CONGRESS CAN’T EVEN APPROVE OF IT. OF IT. IN THE CASE OF FOREIGN IN THE CASE OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENT PAYMENTS, GOVERNMENT PAYMENTS, THEORETICALLY WE COULD APPROVE THEORETICALLY WE COULD APPROVE OF IT. OF IT. I HOPE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS WE

Fighting the Oligarchy Inside the Democratic Party


Welcome to the Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore. Across the country, progressive activists
are waging a fight on two fronts, against Trump and the far right and the policies of
this administration, but also inside the Democratic Party against what Bernie Sanders calls the
oligarchs, the section at least that controls the Democratic Party. Some people call them corporate Democrats. How do they balance this fight. Some people say that fighting against Democrats
of any shape or size or color at this point in the campaign weakens the fight against
Trump. On the other hand, some of the leading activists
say the fight does need to be waged. In fact, they suggest that if the fight against
corporate Democrats isn’t successful the fight against Trump won’t be successful. Here’s Nina Turner at a recent event at the
Real News Network. Sisters and brothers, again, this is not just
, see, folks want us to fixate so much, overly so, on the man in the White House. He makes it hard for us not to pay attention
to what he’s doing. I’m not saying ignore what he’s doing. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t bump up or
get some resistance, fight what he’s doing. But what are we going to do once we’re done
resisting? What are we going to replace him with in 2020? Because I say that any old blue just won’t
do. Any old blue just won’t do. That’s one of the slogans people are adopting. But as I said before, there are people suggesting
any old blue is better than Trump. So don’t split the resistance, as it’s called. Now joining us to talk about all of this are
three people who are involved in this fight on both fronts. First of all, from Wallingford, Connecticut,
Alexandra Rojas is the Campaigns Director for the Justice Democrats, a progressive political
action committee founded in January of 2017. Joining us from New York is Moumita Ahmed. Moumita is a grassroots organizer with People
for Bernie Sanders, and co-founder of the group Millennials for Revolution, previously
known as Millennials for Bernie Sanders. And joining us from Washington D.C. is Eugene
Puryear. Eugene is a journalist, author, and activist. He’s co-founder of Stop Police Terror Project
D.C., and a member of D.C.’s Movement for Black Lives steering committee. Thank you all for joining us. Alexandra, why don’t you kick us off. How do you balance this issue of fighting
against corporate Democrats? It’s a major fight in the party as we head
towards 2020. First, obviously, 2018 with the primaries. But assuming Bernie Sanders runs again in
2020 this could be a major split in the party. There was one last time, but it could be even
more this time. How do you deal with this, as I call it, the
fight on both fronts? Absolutely, yeah. I think there’s enough evidence out there,
and just anyone, you know, like the folks on this call who have worked with grassroots
leaders before, knows that the way to win is going to be fighting for a more progressive
vision. We’ve seen what happens, I think, in the past
with things like Obamacare, where it doesn’t matter if you have a Democratic majority if
Democrats aren’t united on a vision of what universal health care looks like. So we actually at Justice Democrats just commissioned
a report. It’s called “The Future of the Party.” You can go to FutureOfTheParty.com. And a lot of the data right now shows that
there is this base out there that is totally untapped into, this marginal, these marginal
voters that are more progressive, that vote more consistently, that can achieve these
electoral victories and really mobilize people. So there’s plenty of evidence out there, I
think, that shows that fighting for a more progressive vision and being united on those
policies like Medicare for All, a living wage, and ending mass incarceration are vastly popular
with the American people. And so all we’re asking for, I think, is,
is to, you know, give what the base wants. And I think that’s how we’re going to achieve
electoral victory. So primaries, and Justice Democrats, mind,
is the best way to do that. It’s how we push policies forward. It’s like, you know, what we saw, like you
said, during 2016. Even though there’s tension, this is good,
right. We need to be having this national conversation,
to continue to push forward. Especially in times like Trump, where we don’t
have time to wait to just elect any old Democrat. We have to elect people that are actually
going to fight for working people. Moumita, this fight is not just a difference
of policy in terms of these sections of the Democratic Party. Some people call the Sanders wing, some people
call it Sanders wing versus the corporate Democrat wing. It’s often talked about as just disagreement
about policy. In fact, Hillary Clinton said this, the only
real difference between Sanders and me, she said, is how to get to the same objectives. But this difference is quite more profound
than just the same objectives. This essentially as a section of the party
that’s based on Wall Street, and sections of Silicon Valley and other sections of the
oligarchy who really have their hooks and couldn’t have for, for probably actually really
forever more or less controlled the Democratic Party. Perhaps Roosevelt pushed back on that to some
extent. That kind of fight is a fight against enormous
sections of capital. But it gets framed as if it’s just a policy
difference, that somehow the Democratic Party can be won over to this more progressive vision. What do you make of that? You’re absolutely correct. It’s not just policies that divide the, you
know, Sanders wing or the Hillary Clinton wing. The Sanders campaign was just the outcome
after years and years of working class people, women of color, people of color, the LGBT
community just absolutely tired of the policies of the 1 percent and their influence in our
politics. At this point our elected officials do not
care about helping working class people, or policies to help working class people or address
this income inequality. Income inequality is a choice made by our
elected officials that we have right now who take money from Wall Street, from the NRA,
from all these lobby special interest groups. And so it’s not just mere policy differences. It’s literally a structural difference. The way the Democratic party is structured
currently, the consultant class, the big donors, the, you know, the Wall Street funders are,
are literally buying offices or positions that influence legislation. And so when you have, so that’s a structural
issue. That’s not merely a policy issue. And I think more people, more and more people
are waking up to that fact, and are realizing that this is, this is the structural issue
that we all need to go after. And, and in order to fix the structural issue,
as Alex said, as you were saying, we need to run people, progressives, in the primaries
who are not going to take money from super PACs, and they’re going to challenge the establishment
candidates who are being bought, who are being, you know, who are being influenced by consultants. Yeah. Eugene, I talked once to a political consultant
for one of the big unions, and he said that the progressive forces, which he, speaking
on behalf of the unions, they understand that the right, and this is even pre-Trump. So what he would say is even more the case
from his point of view. That you need sections of Wall Street, you
need sections of what they would call the liberal oligarchy if they want to use the
oligarchy word. You need them to fight the far right. And that they’re simply, as he would say,
being naive to think that when it comes down to real national presidential elections you
can beat these guys without the kind of financial resources Wall Street brings to bear in these
campaigns. And so if you want to stop, you know, I don’t
know if he would have used this word, but a real fascist, or a further fascisization
of America, you gotta play this game where you allow room for Wall Street and that section
of the oligarchy in the Democratic Party. How do you answer that? Well, I would just answer that by looking
at the facts. I mean, I think that it’s demonstrably true,
and the labor movement has had this policy consistently of the lesser of two evils. Really going back to the second half of the
first Carter administration, politics in the United States has marched inexorably to the
right, regardless of the [ethics] of the two major political parties in both houses of
Congress, and in the White House, and at the statehouse. And I think that when you look at that it
shows that the lesser of two evils politics, which is consistently given ground on the
important, and I think that as my copanelists spoke to, the extremely important differences,
and given up in some ways trying to win them in favor of some form of triangulation has
been completely unable, even when Democrats have gained the majority, of arresting this
steady march to the right in terms of where the political center sits. And I think that a lot of it is based on a
policy of, really a fear. I think that electoral change and votings
and things like that come after major cultural shifts, major progressive moments in terms
of Congress and the like really come because there are mass independent, uncompromising
social movements that are fighting these fights on their real true basis on the ground, and
winning people over both intellectually and in terms of their own interests. And I think that that’s why, this issue of
the fight within the Democratic Party, I would not look at two things as, as antipodes at
all. I think that ultimately the only way to start
to push back against the right, and for progressive people move the political center of the country
back to the left, towards pro-people policies, can only happen if we’re willing to build
up a majority of people who, you know, A) I think already agree with what a lot of you
were saying but are politically demoralized and demobilized because the political lesser
of two evils politics has delivered so little. But I think also to try to win over some people
who are in the right wing camp whose interests I think are not being served. I don’t think that’s going to happen via these
same type of triangulation politics that have not proven successful. So Eugene, does that mean, though, that you
actually think this fight within, within the Democratic Party is worthwhile, or not? I think it’s one of the healthiest things
happening right now in America that we see really millions of people, especially young
people, engaged in a conversation about what the future of this country should look like
in a real way, whether it should be just a slightly diluted version of the pro-corporate
dominance of all facets of our society, or whether or not we should start thinking about
how do we really serve the public good? How do we start to put people before profit? I think it’s happening in an embryonic way
in some places, and in a broader way in other places. But I think ultimately it’s very healthy for
the country, and to the extent that it bleeds out into building a real strong progressive
political agenda irrespective of party, really a progressive political movement culture,
I think that it can shift the ground, the country. Alexandra, at the time of the Sanders, at
the height of the Sanders campaign during the Democratic primary, there were hundreds
of thousands of people excited about the Sanders campaign. Millions of people voted for him. There were rallies, enormous momentum. When Sanders endorsed Clinton, some of the
steam went out of that. But heading into 2018, what, do you feel that
this momentum has picked up again or not, in terms of the flights that are taking place
at the level of primaries and going into the actual elections? I think the momentum is still there. And I think we’ve seen it in the past two
primary seasons that we just had. In terms of what people are voting for at
the booth, in places like Texas you’re seeing candidates like Mary Wilson that are spending,
you know, probably like four times less than their opponents that are spending close to
a million dollars. And the way that they’re winning is by having
people going out knocking doors and talking to voters. So the energy is still there. We just need to continue to keep up that momentum
and give people opportunity to tap in. It’s definitely a challenge. There’s a lot of work that goes into, just
in general, congressional races and making sure that you turn out your base. But people are hurting. And people really, really want to see change,
especially in the wake of Trump. And that’s what we’ve been seeing, you know,
across the board, at least in our elections. And so we’re making historic victories in
places like Texas and Illinois, and we’re hoping to continue to, continue to plug people
into that. Some people are arguing that Sanders never
really had to face a full-scale onslaught of Wall Street. That Wall Street certainly backed Clinton
over Sanders, but Wall Street didn’t come in full force, and Sanders wound up raising
almost as much money as Clinton did. But in a presidential race, if it was a Sanders
versus, I don’t know whether it’s Trump and Wall Street, and so is the tech sector warmed
up to Trump quite a bit, that if the tech sector and Wall Street really throw their
resources, and of course fossil fuel, at a presidential race, that Sanders’ model can’t
compete. What do you make of that? I 100 percent disagree with that. During the primaries there were multiple polls
that showed that if there were, if there were to be a race between Trump and Bernie Sanders,
he would’ve won by 10 points or more. And I think his primary campaign, considering
that he was not a well-known senator or well-known politician, but his ideas spread so widely,
and have continued to spread even farther with a lot of the resistance movement people,
who are a majority of millennials and young people getting involved for the first time
in politics, we are seeing that he is extremely popular in Washington D.C. when he went to
the March for our Lives first walk out. Hundreds of kids just swarmed him, and just
went, you know, crazy, like as if he were the Beatles. And so these kids are going to be able to
vote pretty soon, especially in 2020. So we are going to see a huge voting bloc
of people, young people organizing, and majority of young people are progressive. They are against the oil companies. They’re for Fight for $15. They’re for Medicare for All. They’re for progressive policies. So yes, they have the money. But as we’ve seen with John Ossoff’s race,
there was so much money spent on that race. It didn’t, yet it didn’t yield the result
that they wanted, the Democratic Party wanted, in Georgia. And as we saw in the governor’s race in Chicago,
that race itself, I think more money was spent on that race than in the presidential election. So and, and again, as we saw that Democrats
did not win. [Pritzker], however you say his name, did
not make it. So I don’t, I think the influence of money
is waning because more people, as Eugene said, more people are organizing. The grassroots is becoming more , more of
a well-oiled machine. And you know, I think we’re going to, I think
the polls that came out during 2016 about Trump versus Bernie are going to, you know,
that’s going to stay in terms of like, what was predicted in 2020. Just finally, Eugene, I got a call the other
day, I was talking to Ralph Nader, and he was sort of berating the left across the country
from the, the point of view of he didn’t feel there was enough sense of urgency about the
moment we’re in, in terms of the fascisization, of course the climate crisis, geopolitically,
the, the level of tension and potential war. I mean, there already is wars going on. But getting broader and even more dangerous. I don’t know if you, if you agree with this
idea, that, that too much of the left seems to, quoting him, doing kind of left business
as usual. What do you make of that? Well, I think there is a sense of urgency. I think there is a sense of urgency, but I
think the problems that you outlined, that he was outlining are so big, can we ever have
enough of a sense of urgency? But I would just say I would agree in the
sense that I do think that, and speaking of the issue of big money, about politics, that
we aren’t having enough of a conversation on the left about these big questions of our
time. I think there’s too much wrapped up in Trump,
in all the drama in the White House, that we need to be focused, more laser focused
on a lot of these points that at least broadly Bernie Sanders was raising. I mean, these are the questions of our time. I mean, are we going to take things that are
strictly for private health care, housing, and the like, and turn them into public goods? Are we going to truly invest in infrastructure? How are we going to invest in mass incarceration
re-entry and transforming so many of our communities that have been devastated by the war on drugs? I mean, win, lose, or draw, these are the
fights that we just absolutely have to have if we’re going to have a world that’s really
worth anything at all. And I think, you know, that’s something that
Ralph Nader has been consistently trying to point out throughout his career, which is
that if we don’t challenge this type of corporate power head on and directly and counter[inaudible]
without people power and public goods can give us a much better form of life and standard
of living, we’re going to keep moving to the right and it’s going to keep being unsuccessful. OK this panel is just the beginning of a conversation. We hope to do this every week, or once every
other week, talking to the panelists that are with us now, inviting some others who
are involved in this fight in different parts of the country. So all three guests, thank you very much for
joining us. Thank you so much for having me. And thank you for joining us on the Real News
Network.

Joe: This Is About Being True To America’s Greatest Values | Morning Joe | MSNBC


>>>AT LEAST 2,500 PEOPLE ARE>>>AT LEAST 2,500 PEOPLE ARE REPORTED MISSING IN THE BAHAMAS REPORTED MISSING IN THE BAHAMAS AFTER HURRICANE DORIAN. AFTER HURRICANE DORIAN. BAHAMIAN OFFICIALS SAID THE LIST BAHAMIAN OFFICIALS SAID THE LIST COULD SHRINK BECAUSE THE NAMES COULD SHRINK BECAUSE THE NAMES HAVE NOT BEEN CHECKED AGAINST HAVE NOT BEEN CHECKED AGAINST THOSE STAYING IN SHELTERS. THOSE STAYING IN SHELTERS. AT LEAST 50 PEOPLE ARE CONFIRMED AT LEAST 50 PEOPLE ARE CONFIRMED DEAD AS A RESULT OF THE CATEGORY DEAD AS A RESULT OF THE CATEGORY FIVE STORM THAT STRUCK THE FIVE STORM THAT STRUCK THE ISLANDS EARLY NEXT WEEK AND THAT ISLANDS EARLY NEXT WEEK AND THAT NUMBER IS EXECED TO RISE. NUMBER IS EXECED TO RISE. OIL IS NOW CONTAMINATING PART OF OIL IS NOW CONTAMINATING PART OF THE COASTLINE OF THE BAHAMAS THE COASTLINE OF THE BAHAMAS DAYS AFTER A NORWEGIAN COMPANY DAYS AFTER A NORWEGIAN COMPANY REPORTED THE HURRICANE HAD BLOWN REPORTED THE HURRICANE HAD BLOWN THE TOPS OFF OIL STORAGE TANKS THE TOPS OFF OIL STORAGE TANKS ON GRAND BAHAMA ISLAND. ON GRAND BAHAMA ISLAND. THE OIL COMPANY DISCLOSED THE OIL COMPANY DISCLOSED YESTERDAY THE HOYLE BEEN SPOTTED YESTERDAY THE HOYLE BEEN SPOTTED IN THE OPEN WATERS ALONG THE IN THE OPEN WATERS ALONG THE SAME COAST AS THE TERMINAL AND SAME COAST AS THE TERMINAL AND IT WAS INVESTIGATING THE ORIGIN IT WAS INVESTIGATING THE ORIGIN OF THAT SPILL. OF THAT SPILL. GOVERNMENT SAYS THEY WILL TAKE GOVERNMENT SAYS THEY WILL TAKE CARE OF THE SPILL AS SOON AS THE CARE OF THE SPILL AS SOON AS THE TOP PRIORITY, TAKING CARE OF ITS TOP PRIORITY, TAKING CARE OF ITS PEOPLE, HAS BEEN SECURED. PEOPLE, HAS BEEN SECURED. MEANWHILE, THOSE TRYING TO FLEE MEANWHILE, THOSE TRYING TO FLEE THE BAHAMAS CAN COME TO THE THE BAHAMAS CAN COME TO THE UNITED STATES TEMPORARILY BUT UNITED STATES TEMPORARILY BUT WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO LIVE AND WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO LIVE AND WORK IN THIS CAN’T. WORK IN THIS CAN’T. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAD THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAD BEEN DEBATING WHETHER TO GIVE BEEN DEBATING WHETHER TO GIVE TEMPORARY PROTECTED STAT TO US TEMPORARY PROTECTED STAT TO US BAHAMIANS DISPLACED BY HURRICANE BAHAMIANS DISPLACED BY HURRICANE DORIAN. DORIAN. BUT AN ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL BUT AN ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TELLS NBC NEWS THEY WILL BE TELLS NBC NEWS THEY WILL BE ALLOWED INTO THE U.S. IF THEY ALLOWED INTO THE U.S. IF THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TRAVEL DOCUMENTS, HAVE THE RIGHT TRAVEL DOCUMENTS, BUT WILL NOT BE GRANTED WORK BUT WILL NOT BE GRANTED WORK PERMITS. PERMITS. THE STATUS WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE STATUS WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THEM TO WORK AND LIVE IN THE THEM TO WORK AND LIVE IN THE U.S. UNTIL IT IS SAFE TO RETURN U.S. UNTIL IT IS SAFE TO RETURN HOME. HOME. TEMPORARILY PROTECTED STATUS IS TEMPORARILY PROTECTED STATUS IS CURRENTLY GRANTED TO MORE THAN CURRENTLY GRANTED TO MORE THAN 300,000 PEOPLE LIVING IN THE 300,000 PEOPLE LIVING IN THE U.S., INCLUDING VICTIMS OF U.S., INCLUDING VICTIMS OF HAITI’S 2010 EARTHQUAKE. HAITI’S 2010 EARTHQUAKE. LET’S BRING IN NBC NEWS LET’S BRING IN NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT JULIA AINSLIE CORRESPONDENT JULIA AINSLIE WHO’S BEEN COVERING THIS STORY. WHO’S BEEN COVERING THIS STORY. SO, JULIA, WHAT DISTINCTION DOES SO, JULIA, WHAT DISTINCTION DOES THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION MAKE IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION MAKE IN THIS CASE VERSUS, SAY, THE THIS CASE VERSUS, SAY, THE HAITIAN FOLKS WHO CAME HERE HAITIAN FOLKS WHO CAME HERE AFTER THAT HORRIBLE EARTHQUAKE? AFTER THAT HORRIBLE EARTHQUAKE? WHY IS THIS TIME DIFFERENT AND WHY IS THIS TIME DIFFERENT AND WHY WON’T THESE PEOPLE BE GIVEN WHY WON’T THESE PEOPLE BE GIVEN TEMPORARY STATUS? TEMPORARY STATUS?>>SEEMS TO ME IT’S POLITICAL.>>SEEMS TO ME IT’S POLITICAL. YOU LOOK AT THE WAY TEMPORARY YOU LOOK AT THE WAY TEMPORARY STATUS WAS GIVEN IN THE PAST. STATUS WAS GIVEN IN THE PAST. IT WASN’T CARTE BLANCHE TO IT WASN’T CARTE BLANCHE TO EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY, BUT EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY, BUT THERE WOULD BE A DATE AND TIME. THERE WOULD BE A DATE AND TIME. YOU PICK TODAY, SEPTEMBER 12th YOU PICK TODAY, SEPTEMBER 12th AND SAID ANYONE HERE FROM THE AND SAID ANYONE HERE FROM THE BAHAMAS IS GRANTED TEMPORARY BAHAMAS IS GRANTED TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS. PROTECTED STATUS. ANYONE WHO COMES AFTER THAT WILL ANYONE WHO COMES AFTER THAT WILL NOT BE. NOT BE. THAT’S THE WAY IT’S BEEN DONE IN THAT’S THE WAY IT’S BEEN DONE IN THE PAST. THE PAST. BUT IN THIS CASE THE TRUMP BUT IN THIS CASE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS DECIDED NOT ADMINISTRATION HAS DECIDED NOT TO GO FORWARD WITH TEMPORARY TO GO FORWARD WITH TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS WITH PEOPLE PROTECTED STATUS WITH PEOPLE FROM THE BAHAMAS WHO WERE FROM THE BAHAMAS WHO WERE LEAVING HURRICANE DORIAN. LEAVING HURRICANE DORIAN. AND IN LARGE PART BECAUSE THIS AND IN LARGE PART BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT LIKE. ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT LIKE. THEY HAVE TRIED TO END IT FOR THEY HAVE TRIED TO END IT FOR COUNTLESS OTHER COUNTRIES, SOME COUNTLESS OTHER COUNTRIES, SOME THEY HAVE. THEY HAVE. IT’S SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE WHO IT’S SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE FANS OF STEPHEN MILLER HAVE ARE FANS OF STEPHEN MILLER HAVE BEEN FIGHTING AGAINST BECAUSE BEEN FIGHTING AGAINST BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT IT GIVES PEOPLE THEY THINK THAT IT GIVES PEOPLE TOO LONG TO LIVE HERE. TOO LONG TO LIVE HERE. OFTEN THEY COULD STAY TEN OR 15 OFTEN THEY COULD STAY TEN OR 15 YEARS BECAUSE IT TAKES SO LONG YEARS BECAUSE IT TAKES SO LONG FOR THEIR HOME COUNTRIES TO BE FOR THEIR HOME COUNTRIES TO BE DEEMED SAFE. DEEMED SAFE. SO IN THIS CASE IT SEEMS TO BE SO IN THIS CASE IT SEEMS TO BE ROOTED IN THE ADMINISTRATION’S ROOTED IN THE ADMINISTRATION’S BELIEFS ABOUT IMMIGRATION MORE BELIEFS ABOUT IMMIGRATION MORE SO THAN THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ON SO THAN THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ON THE GROUND THERE IN THE BAHAMAS. THE GROUND THERE IN THE BAHAMAS.>>JULIA, WHEN YOU WERE HERE A>>JULIA, WHEN YOU WERE HERE A COUPLE DAYS AGO WE WERE TALKING COUPLE DAYS AGO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE BAHAMIAN PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT THE BAHAMIAN PEOPLE WOULD NEED TO COME TO THE UNITED WOULD NEED TO COME TO THE UNITED STATES AND YOU SAID THEY’D HAVE STATES AND YOU SAID THEY’D HAVE TO HAVE A PASSPORT AND THE RIGHT TO HAVE A PASSPORT AND THE RIGHT TRAVEL DOCUMENTS. TRAVEL DOCUMENTS. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNDERLINED THAT AGAIN TODAY. UNDERLINED THAT AGAIN TODAY. IS THAT UNUSUAL? IS THAT UNUSUAL? IS THAT SOMETHING WE’VE SEEN IS THAT SOMETHING WE’VE SEEN BEFORE WHERE THE VICTIMS OF BEFORE WHERE THE VICTIMS OF NATURAL DISASTERS WOULD NEED NATURAL DISASTERS WOULD NEED TRAVEL DOCUMENTS JUST TO ARRIVE TRAVEL DOCUMENTS JUST TO ARRIVE HERE? HERE?>>THEY DO NEED TRAVEL>>THEY DO NEED TRAVEL DOCUMENTS, THEY HAVE IN THE DOCUMENTS, THEY HAVE IN THE PAST, BUT OFTEN THERE’S A LOT OF PAST, BUT OFTEN THERE’S A LOT OF COOPERATION WITH THE HOME COOPERATION WITH THE HOME COUNTRY AND WITH CONSULATES IN COUNTRY AND WITH CONSULATES IN ORDER TO HELP PEOPLE GET ORDER TO HELP PEOPLE GET DOCUMENTATION THAT THEY MIGHT DOCUMENTATION THAT THEY MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO FIND IN THE NOT BE ABLE TO FIND IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT RUBBLE THAT MIDDLE OF THAT RUBBLE THAT YOU’RE SHOWING THERE ON THE YOU’RE SHOWING THERE ON THE SCREEN. SCREEN.>>RIGHT.>>RIGHT.>>THERE HAS BEEN SOME>>THERE HAS BEEN SOME COOPERATION. COOPERATION. WE UNDERSTAND, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT WE UNDERSTAND, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT FER THAT I WAS FER THAT I WAS FERRY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO STOP FERRY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO STOP IN NASSAU, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN IN NASSAU, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TRY TO GET VISAS THERE. ABLE TO TRY TO GET VISAS THERE. THAT FARERY DID NOT COORDINATE THAT FARERY DID NOT COORDINATE WITH AUTHORITIES. WITH AUTHORITIES. BUT IT’S SOMETHING TO KEEP AN BUT IT’S SOMETHING TO KEEP AN EYE ON TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE EYE ON TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO COME HERE. ARE ABLE TO COME HERE. WE DOES UNDERSTAND ABOUT 1500 WE DOES UNDERSTAND ABOUT 1500 PEOPLE AS OF MONDAY WERE ABLE TO PEOPLE AS OF MONDAY WERE ABLE TO COME TO FLORIDA FROM THE COME TO FLORIDA FROM THE BAHAMAS. BAHAMAS. IT’S NOT CLEAR HOW MANY WERE IT’S NOT CLEAR HOW MANY WERE ABLE TO STAY FOR A SIGNIFICANT ABLE TO STAY FOR A SIGNIFICANT PERIOD OF TIME OR WERE SENT BACK PERIOD OF TIME OR WERE SENT BACK BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE THE BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE THE PROPER TRAVEL DOCUMENTS. PROPER TRAVEL DOCUMENTS.>>YOU KNOW, WES, THE ISSUE OF>>YOU KNOW, WES, THE ISSUE OF TRAVEL DOCUMENTS, AS JULIA WAS TRAVEL DOCUMENTS, AS JULIA WAS JUST POINTING OUT AND THE JUST POINTING OUT AND THE PICTURES THAT WE WERE JUST PICTURES THAT WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, MY LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, MY PASSPORT IS IN THE KITCHEN PASSPORT IS IN THE KITCHEN DRAWER BY THE, YOU KNOW, THE DRAWER BY THE, YOU KNOW, THE PLATES AND THE SILVERWARE. PLATES AND THE SILVERWARE. THOSE PICTURES, IT’S GONE. THOSE PICTURES, IT’S GONE. EVERYTHING IS GONE. EVERYTHING IS GONE. BUT IT SEEMS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE BUT IT SEEMS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS TAKEN EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES HAS TAKEN EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM SPECIFIC TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM SPECIFIC NATIONS OF A SPECIFIC SKIN COLOR NATIONS OF A SPECIFIC SKIN COLOR FROM ENTERING THE UNITED STATES FROM ENTERING THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. OF AMERICA.>>IT’S AMAZING WHO’S PART OF>>IT’S AMAZING WHO’S PART OF THIS CONVERSATION IN WHO CAN THIS CONVERSATION IN WHO CAN MAKE IT UNDER THE DEADLINE AND MAKE IT UNDER THE DEADLINE AND WHO CAN’T. WHO CAN’T. WE’RE WATCHING TRENDS. WE’RE WATCHING TRENDS. AND THE THING ABOUT IT IS WHEN AND THE THING ABOUT IT IS WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT HOW ARBITRARY YOU THINK ABOUT HOW ARBITRARY AND MIZERLY THIS PROCESS IS, AS AND MIZERLY THIS PROCESS IS, AS A MOMENT WHEN PEOPLE HAVE LOST A MOMENT WHEN PEOPLE HAVE LOST EVERYTHING, WE’RE LOOKING AT EVERYTHING, WE’RE LOOKING AT THEM AND SAYING, AND YOU’RE NOT THEM AND SAYING, AND YOU’RE NOT GOING TO FIND ANY SALVATION GOING TO FIND ANY SALVATION HERE. HERE. WE’RE ASKING MEMPEOPLE WHO ARE WE’RE ASKING MEMPEOPLE WHO ARE FLEEING POVERTY TO COME TO FLEEING POVERTY TO COME TO POVERTY. POVERTY. BECAUSE WE’RE TELLING PEOPLE YOU BECAUSE WE’RE TELLING PEOPLE YOU CAN’T WORK AND STAY HERE CAN’T WORK AND STAY HERE PERMANENTLY. PERMANENTLY. YOU’RE TELLING PEOPLE YOU’RE YOU’RE TELLING PEOPLE YOU’RE FLEEING POVERTY TO COME TO FLEEING POVERTY TO COME TO POVERTY AT A TIME WHEN PEOPLE POVERTY AT A TIME WHEN PEOPLE HAVE LOST EVERYTHING. HAVE LOST EVERYTHING. AND WE’RE LOOKING AT THIS CYCLE AND WE’RE LOOKING AT THIS CYCLE NOW WHERE THESE HUNDRED-YEAR NOW WHERE THESE HUNDRED-YEAR STORMS ARE NOW HAPPENING ON AN STORMS ARE NOW HAPPENING ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. ANNUAL BASIS. HAD GOING TO BE A RECURRING HAD GOING TO BE A RECURRING THEME THAT WE’VE GOT PREPARE FOR THEME THAT WE’VE GOT PREPARE FOR AS A WORLD AND HAVE POLICIES AS A WORLD AND HAVE POLICIES THAT CAN REINFORCE THE BASIC THAT CAN REINFORCE THE BASIC HUMANITY THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING HUMANITY THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO NEED. TO NEED. THINK ABOUT OUR WORK ESPECIALLY THINK ABOUT OUR WORK ESPECIALLY DEALING WITH MIGRANTS — DEALING WITH MIGRANTS –>>AND ROBIN HOOD.>>AND ROBIN HOOD.>>AND ROBIN HOOD, ONE OF THE>>AND ROBIN HOOD, ONE OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE FUND IS SAY PROGRAMS THAT WE FUND IS SAY PROGRAM CALLED I CARE. PROGRAM CALLED I CARE. WHERE ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS IS WHERE ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS IS PROVIDING IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS PROVIDING IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS AND OTHER TYPES OF SUPPORTS TO AND OTHER TYPES OF SUPPORTS TO MIGRANT CHILDREN WHO ARE IN THE MIGRANT CHILDREN WHO ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DEPORTATION HEARINGS. PROCESS OF DEPORTATION HEARINGS. BECAUSE OTHER THAN THAT, THEY’D BECAUSE OTHER THAN THAT, THEY’D BE DEFENDING THEMSELVES. BE DEFENDING THEMSELVES. CHILDREN. CHILDREN. IT GOES BACK TO A BASIC IDEA OF IT GOES BACK TO A BASIC IDEA OF HOOUM HUMANITY. HOOUM HUMANITY. AND WHAT PROUD OF THE FACT THAT AND WHAT PROUD OF THE FACT THAT NEW YORK CITY HAS SEEN THE NEW YORK CITY HAS SEEN THE SUCCESS. SUCCESS. YOU WATCH HOW IF YOU CAN GIVE A YOU WATCH HOW IF YOU CAN GIVE A CHILD IN THAT SITUATION ACTUAL CHILD IN THAT SITUATION ACTUAL LEGAL SUPPORTS THAT THEIR LEGAL SUPPORTS THAT THEIR CHANCES OF SUPPORT AND CHANCE OF CHANCES OF SUPPORT AND CHANCE OF STAYING ACTUALLY SKY ROCKET, STAYING ACTUALLY SKY ROCKET, BASIC LEGAL SUPPORTS. BASIC LEGAL SUPPORTS. BUT IT STILL IS UNDERLINED BY BUT IT STILL IS UNDERLINED BY BASIC FABRIC OF HUMANITY. BASIC FABRIC OF HUMANITY.>>YOU KNOW, WILLIE, IT IS>>YOU KNOW, WILLIE, IT IS REALLY — WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE REALLY — WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE PICTURES AND YOU REALIZE HOW PICTURES AND YOU REALIZE HOW CLOSE THIS IS TO THE UNITED CLOSE THIS IS TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE PAIN STATES OF AMERICA AND THE PAIN AND SUFFERING THAT THESE HUMAN AND SUFFERING THAT THESE HUMAN BEINGS ARE ENDURING, AND THEN BEINGS ARE ENDURING, AND THEN YOU LOOK AT THE COUNTRY THAT YOU LOOK AT THE COUNTRY THAT DONALD TRUMP IS THE PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP IS THE PRESIDENT OF, IT’S THE RICHEST COUNTRY ON OF, IT’S THE RICHEST COUNTRY ON THE PLANET. THE PLANET. DONALD TRUMP HIMSELF IS THE DONALD TRUMP HIMSELF IS THE BIGGEST SPENDING PRESIDENT OF BIGGEST SPENDING PRESIDENT OF ALL TIME. ALL TIME. THE LARGEST DEFICITS OF ALL THE LARGEST DEFICITS OF ALL TIME. TIME. THE LARGEST DEBT OF ALL TIME. THE LARGEST DEBT OF ALL TIME. THE BIGGEST BUDGET OF ALL TIME THE BIGGEST BUDGET OF ALL TIME THAT EVEN RAND PAUL SAID WAS THE THAT EVEN RAND PAUL SAID WAS THE MOST RECKLESS SPENDING POSSIBLY MOST RECKLESS SPENDING POSSIBLY IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. A PENTAGON BUDGET THAT’S THE A PENTAGON BUDGET THAT’S THE BIGGEST BUDGET OF ALL TIME WHERE BIGGEST BUDGET OF ALL TIME WHERE DONALD TRUMP IS ACTUALLY DONALD TRUMP IS ACTUALLY SPENDING MORE MONEY THAN THE SPENDING MORE MONEY THAN THE PENTAGON IS REQUESTING FOR PENTAGON IS REQUESTING FOR PROGRAMS THAT THE PENTAGON PROGRAMS THAT THE PENTAGON DOESN’T WANT. DOESN’T WANT. AND YOU LOOK AT THOSE HUMAN AND YOU LOOK AT THOSE HUMAN BEINGS SUFFERING, WHAT DO THEY BEINGS SUFFERING, WHAT DO THEY NEED? NEED? THEY DON’T NEED AN F-22. THEY DON’T NEED AN F-22. THEY NEED BOTTLES OF WATER. THEY NEED BOTTLES OF WATER. THEY NEED SHELTER. THEY NEED SHELTER. THEY NEED FOOD. THEY NEED FOOD. I SAW THIS IN KATRINA EVERY DAY. I SAW THIS IN KATRINA EVERY DAY. THEIR CHILDREN NEED CLEAN THEIR CHILDREN NEED CLEAN DIAPERS. DIAPERS. THEY NEED THE BASIC NECESSITIES THEY NEED THE BASIC NECESSITIES OF LIFE. OF LIFE. AND IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF AND IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS AND THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS AND THE GRAND SCHEME OF OUR FEDERAL BUDGET, IT’S OUR FEDERAL BUDGET, IT’S SOMETHING WE WOULD NOT FEEL SOMETHING WE WOULD NOT FEEL PECIALLY IN THE AGE OF DONALD PECIALLY IN THE AGE OF DONALD TRUMP AND THE BIGGEST SPENDER IN TRUMP AND THE BIGGEST SPENDER IN U.S. HISTORY. U.S. HISTORY. HE’S TALKING ABOUT A $15 BILLION HE’S TALKING ABOUT A $15 BILLION BAILOUT TO IRAN. BAILOUT TO IRAN. I MEAN, THIS IS, AGAIN, A GUY I MEAN, THIS IS, AGAIN, A GUY THAT GAVE $15 BILLION IN A THAT GAVE $15 BILLION IN A SOCIALIST SCHEME TO THE LARGEST SOCIALIST SCHEME TO THE LARGEST AGRICULTURAL, INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURAL, INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIES OUT THERE BECAUSE INDUSTRIES OUT THERE BECAUSE HIS — HIS PROTECTIONISM AND HIS HIS — HIS PROTECTIONISM AND HIS TRADE WARS HAVE HURT AMERICAN TRADE WARS HAVE HURT AMERICAN FARMERS SO MUCH. FARMERS SO MUCH. BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE A DIME BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE A DIME SOME THAT’S WHAT? SOME THAT’S WHAT? THAT’S WHAT THIS WOULD BE LIKE THAT’S WHAT THIS WOULD BE LIKE TO DONALD TRUMP’S ADMINISTRATION TO DONALD TRUMP’S ADMINISTRATION AND TO THE BUDGET TO HELP THESE AND TO THE BUDGET TO HELP THESE PEOPLE, TO KEEP THESE PEOPLE PEOPLE, TO KEEP THESE PEOPLE ALIVE, TO SHOW JUST A SHRED OF ALIVE, TO SHOW JUST A SHRED OF HUMANITY IN THIS TIME OF HUMANITY IN THIS TIME OF TROUBLE. TROUBLE.>>HE’S MAKING A VERSION OF THE>>HE’S MAKING A VERSION OF THE CARAVAN ARGUMENT THAT HE MADE CARAVAN ARGUMENT THAT HE MADE FOR THE MIGRANTS COMING UP FROM FOR THE MIGRANTS COMING UP FROM CENTRAL AMERICA ABOUT THE CENTRAL AMERICA ABOUT THE BAHAMAS AFTER A HURRICANE. BAHAMAS AFTER A HURRICANE. HERE’S WHAT HE SAID AND WHY HE HERE’S WHAT HE SAID AND WHY HE WANTS TO BE, QUOTE, TOUGH. WANTS TO BE, QUOTE, TOUGH. WE HAVE VERY BAD PEOPLE, SOME WE HAVE VERY BAD PEOPLE, SOME VERY BAD GANG MEMBERS, AND SOME VERY BAD GANG MEMBERS, AND SOME VERY, VERY BAD DRUG DEALERS. VERY, VERY BAD DRUG DEALERS. THE PRESIDENT SAID THE OF THE THE PRESIDENT SAID THE OF THE PEOPLE TRYING TO FLEE THE PEOPLE TRYING TO FLEE THE HURRICANE IN THE BAHAMAS. HURRICANE IN THE BAHAMAS. IT’S INTERESTING AS WES POINTS IT’S INTERESTING AS WES POINTS OUT, SUSAN, THE GROUPS OF PEOPLE OUT, SUSAN, THE GROUPS OF PEOPLE THAT HE CHEWS TO LABELOOSES TO L THAT HE CHEWS TO LABELOOSES TO L WITH. WITH.>>YESTERDAY ON THE AN VESRY OF>>YESTERDAY ON THE AN VESRY OF 9/11 I WAS DOWNTOWN WITH THE 9/11 I WAS DOWNTOWN WITH THE DESIGNER OF LOWER MANHATTAN. DESIGNER OF LOWER MANHATTAN. HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE FREEDOM HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE FREEDOM TOWER. TOWER. HE SAID WHEN HE WAS DOWN THEY HE SAID WHEN HE WAS DOWN THEY WAS THINK OF THE HISTORY AND WAS THINK OF THE HISTORY AND LOOKING OUT AT THE STATUE OF LOOKING OUT AT THE STATUE OF LIBERTY AND THOUSAND WAS PART OF LIBERTY AND THOUSAND WAS PART OF THE REPRESENTATION OF BRING US THE REPRESENTATION OF BRING US YOUR HUNGRY, YOUR TIRED, YOUR YOUR HUNGRY, YOUR TIRED, YOUR POOR. POOR. AND IMMEDIATELY I THOUGHT NOT AND IMMEDIATELY I THOUGHT NOT UNDER DONALD TRUMP. UNDER DONALD TRUMP. IT WAS JUST A REALLY SAD IT WAS JUST A REALLY SAD REFLECTION OF THAT’S WHERE WE REFLECTION OF THAT’S WHERE WE WENT AS A COUNTRY COMING WENT AS A COUNTRY COMING TOGETHER AFTER 9/11 TO A COUNTRY TOGETHER AFTER 9/11 TO A COUNTRY THAT THIS PRESIDENT WANTS TO THAT THIS PRESIDENT WANTS TO TEAR APART AND STOP HOPE FROM TEAR APART AND STOP HOPE FROM SPRINGING ETERNAL. SPRINGING ETERNAL.>>JULIA, LAST WORD –>>JULIA, LAST WORD –>>YOU KNOW –>>YOU KNOW –>>OH.>>OH.>>I WAS GOING TO SAY REALLY>>I WAS GOING TO SAY REALLY QUICKLY, IT’S ANOTHER EXAMPLE, QUICKLY, IT’S ANOTHER EXAMPLE, THOUGH, OF HOW THE LACK OF THOUGH, OF HOW THE LACK OF HUMANITY REALLY OVERRIGHTS ANYDE HUMANITY REALLY OVERRIGHTS ANYDE POLICY DECISIONS. POLICY DECISIONS. AS PEOPLE KNOW THAT HAVE FOLD MY AS PEOPLE KNOW THAT HAVE FOLD MY CAREER IN CONGRESS, I’M VERY CAREER IN CONGRESS, I’M VERY CONSERVATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO CONSERVATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO IMMIGRATION AND MAKING SURE THAT IMMIGRATION AND MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE THAT COME HERE COME HERE PEOPLE THAT COME HERE COME HERE LEGALLY. LEGALLY. THAT’S NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. THAT’S NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. WHAT THIS IS ABOUT IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS ABOUT IS EXACTLY WHAT SUSAN JUST SAID. WHAT SUSAN JUST SAID. THIS IS ABOUT BEING TRUE TO WHAT THIS IS ABOUT BEING TRUE TO WHAT AMERICA’S GREATEST VALUES ARE. AMERICA’S GREATEST VALUES ARE. THE WORDS THAT ARE INSCRIBED ON THE WORDS THAT ARE INSCRIBED ON THE STATUE OF LIBERTY, THE THE STATUE OF LIBERTY, THE PROMISE THAT HAS GUIDED THIS PROMISE THAT HAS GUIDED THIS GREAT LAND AND MADE IT A CITY GREAT LAND AND MADE IT A CITY SHINING BRIGHTLY ON THE HILL FOR SHINING BRIGHTLY ON THE HILL FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE AS THE ALL THE WORLD TO SEE AS THE SCRIPTURES AND RONALD REAGAN SCRIPTURES AND RONALD REAGAN ALWAYS SAID. ALWAYS SAID. I MEAN, THAT PHRASE, THAT’S WHAT I MEAN, THAT PHRASE, THAT’S WHAT THIS COUNTRY IS. THIS COUNTRY IS. AND WE’RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE AND WE’RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WERE WHAT? WHO WERE WHAT? 45, 50, 60 MILES FROM THE UNITED 45, 50, 60 MILES FROM THE UNITED STATES, NO MORE. STATES, NO MORE.>>AND YOU KNOW, JULIA, YOU CAN>>AND YOU KNOW, JULIA, YOU CAN DRAW A THREAD BACK TO THE FIRST DRAW A THREAD BACK TO THE FIRST DAY OF HIS CAMPAIGN THE WAY HE DAY OF HIS CAMPAIGN THE WAY HE TALKED ABOUT IMMIGRATION AND TALKED ABOUT IMMIGRATION AND IMMIGRANTS. IMMIGRANTS. THIS WHO HE BELIEVES HE HAS TO THIS WHO HE BELIEVES HE HAS TO BE AND THIS IS HIS IDEA OF BEING BE AND THIS IS HIS IDEA OF BEING TOUGH ON KEEPING PEOPLE OUT OF TOUGH ON KEEPING PEOPLE OUT OF THIS COUNTRY. THIS COUNTRY.>>THAT’S TRUE, WILLIE.>>THAT’S TRUE, WILLIE. ONE OF HIS FIRST ACTIONS AND THE ONE OF HIS FIRST ACTIONS AND THE FIRST WEEK IN OFFICE WAS THE FIRST WEEK IN OFFICE WAS THE TRAVEL BAN, SOMETHING WE DON’T TRAVEL BAN, SOMETHING WE DON’T OFTEN TALK ABOUT ANYMORE. OFTEN TALK ABOUT ANYMORE. BUT THERE WAS A THIRD ITERATION BUT THERE WAS A THIRD ITERATION OF THAT THAT IS IN PLACE NOW OF THAT THAT IS IN PLACE NOW THAT PLACE RES STRICTIONS RESTRI THAT PLACE RES STRICTIONS RESTRI PEOPLE COMING FROM A NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMING FROM A NUMBER OF COUNTRIES. COUNTRIES. THAT’S SOMETHING THE PRESIDENT THAT’S SOMETHING THE PRESIDENT CAMPAIGNED ON AND HE CONTINUES CAMPAIGNED ON AND HE CONTINUES TO USE AS AN ISSUE. TO USE AS AN ISSUE. SOMETIMES THERE HAVE BEEN SO SOMETIMES THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY POLICIES, JUST THIS SUMMER MANY POLICIES, JUST THIS SUMMER YOU COULD LOOK AT JUST WITH THE YOU COULD LOOK AT JUST WITH THE SUPREME COURT YESTERDAY SAYING SUPREME COURT YESTERDAY SAYING THAT THEY COULD GO FORWARD, THE THAT THEY COULD GO FORWARD, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION COULD GO TRUMP ADMINISTRATION COULD GO FORWARD AND DENY ASYLUM REQUESTS FORWARD AND DENY ASYLUM REQUESTS FOR PEOPLE COMING THROUGH MEXICO FOR PEOPLE COMING THROUGH MEXICO THAT THEY HAVE TO CLAIM ASYLUM THAT THEY HAVE TO CLAIM ASYLUM THERE BEFORE THEY CAN COME TO THERE BEFORE THEY CAN COME TO THE UNITED STATES AND BE THE UNITED STATES AND BE ELIGIBLE. ELIGIBLE. THAT IS ONE OF THE TOUGHEST — THAT IS ONE OF THE TOUGHEST — THAT IS THE TOUGHEST ASYLUM THAT IS THE TOUGHEST ASYLUM RESTRICTION THAT THIS RESTRICTION THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN ABLE TO ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENT. SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENT. AND THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF U.S. AND THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES SAID YESTERDAY HE WILL SERVICES SAID YESTERDAY HE WILL START IMPLEMENTING THAT. START IMPLEMENTING THAT. THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY POLICIES THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY POLICIES THIS SUMMER THROUGHOUT THE THIS SUMMER THROUGHOUT THE ADMINISTRATION. ADMINISTRATION. SOME HAVE GONE INTO EFFECT, SOME SOME HAVE GONE INTO EFFECT, SOME HAVEN’T. HAVEN’T. SOMETIMES IT STARTS TO JUST GET SOMETIMES IT STARTS TO JUST GET LOST IN THE WEEDS AND WHAT IS LOST IN THE WEEDS AND WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING DONE HERE. ACTUALLY BEING DONE HERE. BUT WE’RE SEEING A SYSTEMATIC BUT WE’RE SEEING A SYSTEMATIC CHANGE THAT’S HAVING AN IMPACT CHANGE THAT’S HAVING AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE’S LIVES. ON PEOPLE’S LIVES.>>THANKS SO MUCH AS ALWAYS FOR>>THANKS SO MUCH AS ALWAYS FOR YOUR REPORTING. YOUR REPORTING.>>>COMING UP HERE FROM DEEP>>>COMING UP HERE FROM DEEP FAKE VIDEO TO FISHING AND FAKE FAKE VIDEO TO FISHING AND FAKE NEWS. NEWS. WHAT AXIOS IS CALLING THE WHAT AXIOS IS CALLING THE MISINFORMATION AGE AND HOW IT’S MISINFORMATION AGE AND HOW IT’S HURTING MORE THAN JUST OUR HURTING MORE THAN JUST OUR POLITICS. POLITICS. WE’LL BE RIGHT BACK. WE’LL BE RIGHT BACK.>>WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL.>>WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL. EVERYBODY NEEDS TOTALLY PROPER EVERYBODY NEEDS TOTALLY PROPER DOCUMENTATION BECAUSE — LOOK, DOCUMENTATION BECAUSE — LOOK, THE BAHAMAS HAD SOME TREMENDOUS THE BAHAMAS HAD SOME TREMENDOUS PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE GOING TO PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE GOING TO THE BAHAMAS THAT WEREN’T THE BAHAMAS THAT WEREN’T SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. I DON’T WANT TO ALLOW PEOPLE I DON’T WANT TO ALLOW PEOPLE THAT WEREN’T SUPPOSED TO BE IN THAT WEREN’T SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE BAHAMAS TO COME IN TO THE THE BAHAMAS TO COME IN TO THE UNITED STATES, INCLUDING SOME