Could a cast of celebrities, including Taylor Swift, and high-stakes political figures like Joe Biden really be orchestrating the media and sports events to sway public opinion? Join us as we dissect this outrageous conspiracy theory and dig into the roots of celebrity worship in politics and pop culture. We will confront the social specters of idolatry and gender biases in the public eye, juxtaposing the treatment of male and female figures in the limelight. This episode also probes into the paranoid web spun by MAGA Republicans, which implicates Swift and her partner Travis in a Democratic strategy to captivate the NFL audience. We unravel these intricate narratives with our guest, a seasoned political analyst, who helps us navigate the murky waters between conspiracy and reality.
As the political arena turns into a spectacle of courtroom drama, our focus shifts to the legal tussles of Donald Trump. His recent courtroom saga, complete with explosive reactions and strategic plays for political sympathy, unfolds before us. We also track the ripple effects of his enduring sway over GOP policies, particularly immigration and foreign aid, dissecting how his influence seeds division within the party. In an enlightening segment, we also touch upon the implications of shadowy financial dealings, like the case of Charles Little John, and how such events shape public perception and trust in governance.
Finally, we cast a sobering eye on America's shifting political landscape, considering the perilous journey toward oligarchy and the potential for a fascist takeover. Reflecting on key Supreme Court decisions and the Powell Memo, we examine the corporate stronghold on campaign finance and democracy itself. Our discussion turns to a clarion call for an engaged and vigilant electorate, with insights from experts who explore the increasing control of a wealthy elite over political outcomes, and the sobering implications for our democratic system. Tune in as we underscore the essential nature of participation and vigilance to uphold the fundamental values that define American society.
Could a cast of celebrities, including Taylor Swift, and high-stakes political figures like Joe Biden really be orchestrating the media and sports events to sway public opinion? Join us as we dissect this outrageous conspiracy theory and dig into the roots of celebrity worship in politics and pop culture. We will confront the social specters of idolatry and gender biases in the public eye, juxtaposing the treatment of male and female figures in the limelight. This episode also probes into the paranoid web spun by MAGA Republicans, which implicates Swift and her partner Travis in a Democratic strategy to captivate the NFL audience. We unravel these intricate narratives with our guest, a seasoned political analyst, who helps us navigate the murky waters between conspiracy and reality.
As the political arena turns into a spectacle of courtroom drama, our focus shifts to the legal tussles of Donald Trump. His recent courtroom saga, complete with explosive reactions and strategic plays for political sympathy, unfolds before us. We also track the ripple effects of his enduring sway over GOP policies, particularly immigration and foreign aid, dissecting how his influence seeds division within the party. In an enlightening segment, we also touch upon the implications of shadowy financial dealings, like the case of Charles Little John, and how such events shape public perception and trust in governance.
Finally, we cast a sobering eye on America's shifting political landscape, considering the perilous journey toward oligarchy and the potential for a fascist takeover. Reflecting on key Supreme Court decisions and the Powell Memo, we examine the corporate stronghold on campaign finance and democracy itself. Our discussion turns to a clarion call for an engaged and vigilant electorate, with insights from experts who explore the increasing control of a wealthy elite over political outcomes, and the sobering implications for our democratic system. Tune in as we underscore the essential nature of participation and vigilance to uphold the fundamental values that define American society.
Welcome to the Daryl McLean Show. I'm your host, daryl McLean. Today is 131 of 2024, the last day of the month of January, and let's get into this episode.
Speaker 2:I don't know if you've seen this, but there's some serious crazy talk about Taylor Swift and Joe Biden going around right now. This is one of those things you know. You expect to hear this from a couple of nuts and then it disappears, but with anything, it's picking up steam. The not too Swifties got it started like this. With tweets like this, the NFL's totally rigged for the Chiefs Taylor Swift, mr Pfizer all to spread Democrat propaganda. Calling out Casey Wintz goes to Super Bowl, swift comes out in a halftime show and endorses Joe Biden with Kelsey at midfield. It's all been an ops since day one, so let me get this straight, okay. The same people who believe Joe Biden has dementia and needs Kamala Harris to feed him butterscotch tapioca every night, they also believe that he has somehow planned and executed a diabolically brilliant scheme to fix the NFL playoffs so the biggest pop star in the world could pop up on the jumbo tron during the Super Bowl, in between a Kia and a Tostitos commercial, to hypnotize her 11 year old fans into voting for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1:For some reason, there have been and I've actually paid attention to this for the past two months this concerted attack on the singer Taylor Swift. It is actually somewhat funny because the people who are doing this so this would be some people who are more of the conspiratorial wing of the Republican Party are some of the what has been called the Mago Republicans. So Make America Great Again. Republicans have come up with a conspiracy theory about Mrs Swift that she is actually dating Travis, and this whole thing is a sham and it was generated in order so the chiefs could win the Super Bowl, or get to the Super Bowl, and then in half time, during the halftime show, taylor will perform and this is when she will endorse Joe Biden.
Speaker 1:Now this is a very interesting, very interesting conversation to have, because I think this is not about Taylor Swift. This is about a larger conversation about why there is the hyper focus on someone like Taylor Swift. So let me go to a clip where somebody is going to say something that I was thinking, but they're coming from it from the sports perspective and I think they say it very well. So let's get to that right now.
Speaker 3:I have a problem, though, with the hardcore Taylor Swift fans. This is a little bit what idolatry, I think, looks like, and you're not supposed to do that. In fact, if you look it up in the Bible, it's a sin. The Pentagon's Psyop Unit pitched NATO on turning Taylor Swift into an asset. She's the perfect vehicle to go to those low propensity white liberal women. We can do this as well. We don't have a Taylor Swift on our side, but you know who we have. We have Kit Rock, we have Ted Nuget, we have influencers. We have all these people John Voight, she's going.
Speaker 2:Let's effing go. If I heard that and my son was dating a girl, I was like a teamster. We both said that we were cheering for the opposite team, the Ravens, to beat out the chiefs. Just because we have had enough of Taylor Swift. Don't go and involve in politics. We don't want to see you there. Major League sports in and of itself is nothing but a Psyop. Get kids plugged into the cycle of going to public indoctrination camps, playing sports for their school and going to games.
Speaker 3:There's a lot of really weird, lonely, insecure men out there. The fact that a pop star, the world's biggest pop star, is dating a star tight end who had one of his greatest games ever, and the network puts them on the air, briefly, that it bothers you. What does that say about your life? Judge people sometimes on the silly stuff that bothers them. It'll tell you a lot about them. When I hear this whole thing about Taylor Swift, I just want to watch football. Liar, you're lying, that's not true. A football telecast is not just football. In fact, the commercials for four hours before the Super Bowl will be widely watched. Did you know, statistically, in a three and a half hour NFL playoff broadcast or regular season broadcast, just 18 minutes are actual football. And we have the data, we have the numbers. You don't turn away. There's coaches, cutaways. They show fans in Buffalo on fire. Commercials, reviews 18 minutes of real football. For the record, about the length of five Taylor Swift songs, listen to this.
Speaker 3:The New York Times measured how long she was actually on the broadcast. Do you know how long it is? On average, 25 seconds in three and a half hours. Against the Ravens it was up to a whopping 32 seconds, it was 14 Chiefs and Raiders. On Christmas, 12 Chiefs and Bengals. 24 seconds, buffalo, kansas City. She was on for a minute against the Dolphins, but it was an absolutely awful broadcast. They should have had a concert in the middle of it. That would have been more interesting. And why wouldn't CBS, which you know has the Grammys cross, promote the world's biggest pop star? Hey, listen, I worked at the other network. I work at Fox. I've seen us jam people on TV shows I would never watch during football games and sporting events. Don't forget to watch this right after the game. I've already forgot about it. Let's get back to the game. But I don't have to rush to social media, I'm okay with it.
Speaker 3:Here's the other thing that strikes me Matthew McConaughey, all right, all right, all right, love him. Drake on everything. Spike Lee, knicks games, eminem, michigan sporting events we celebrate it. 80s, 90s, jack Nicholson, laker games is cool, saw Jack. But a talented and beautiful woman is on the air, one who would never pay attention to lonely men and it bothers them.
Speaker 3:There's a stat out there it's kind of uncomfortable for you, sad guys that 50% of men never have real intimacy with a woman. That means the other 50% have multiple intimate relationships with women and those ones that don't are angry and sad and lonely, and they are often misogynistic and resent women who didn't give them the time they think they deserve. We celebrate all these goofballs jumping on tables and buffalo and cheese hats and men and men and Matthew McConaughey and Drake and Jack Nicholson, men and men and men and Eminem and it's cool and can I get a selfie? And I can't believe I saw and the young, attractive, beautiful, talented woman comes on for 25 seconds and you're bothered. Again, judge people by the silly things that bother them. This says nothing, this anger. This says nothing about Taylor Swift.
Speaker 1:It says everything about the men bothered by it Right back with more on the Derail McLean Show. Has anybody ever told you you are over-opinionated? How about this one? You can talk about everything you'd like, but don't talk about religion, don't talk about faith, don't talk about politics. My name is Jerome McClane, I host a Jerome McClane show and I want to introduce you to a show called Over-opinionated with my friend from Southquist Virginia, josh Scott.
Speaker 1:Josh has always been told he has been over-opinionated. He always tried to hold back these opinions, but he tried to back them up when he had to say something with facts and logic. Since he's grown up in many ways, he had to change a lot of his views and his opinions, as a lot of people should. He's not a millionaire from Fox News or CNN. He's just at work, hardworking, blue collar type of guy. Give Josh Scott a shot at over-opinionated with Josh Scott. You can find him on patreoncom slash over-opinionated at 6.79. You can also check him out on Twitter at nrv, underscore guy79 over-opinionated with Josh Scott, where he is, this soft-spoken guy telling you the truth.
Speaker 1:The paranoid style of let's call him red pill right-wingers was on full display after the Kansas City Chiefs upset the Baltimore Raisins in the AFC Championship game Sunday. The Apple Mail if your feelings crowd began to collectively imagine a deep state boogeyman everywhere, even among the most macho and violent of team sports, not to mention that their own 13-year-old daughters Spotify. In case you missed it, not only is Taylor Swift an FBI and Pentagon SIA, the deep state is also rigging the NFL to make one of the world's most famous entertainers and are already hall of fame-bound boyfriend artificially famous. You think I'm making this up? Are just nitpicking the ratings of a few obscure randos in the fever swamps on the right? Well, no, I'm not.
Speaker 1:This crazy conspiracy is quickly gaining steam. Take Vivek Ramoswamy, for example. In a response to Pisa Gate pusher, jacob Posapeck, the failed presidential candidate tweeted I wonder who's going to win the Super Bowl next? Well, I wonder if there's a major presidential endorsement coming from an artificially culturally propped up couple. This fall, maybe just be asking questions, but Ramoswamy's unhinged insinuation was generally greeted with applause on Twitter. One response came from a verified account with 55,000 followers who added Nothing feels organic about Taylor's rise, or this whole relationship, or now this whole Super Bowl thing. Now, note, this sentiment is widespread, with some versions of the phrase Not organic being constantly invoked to describe the chief's playoff win and the Swift and her boyfriend's romance.
Speaker 1:But did the Deep State build the Swift in a laboratory last year? Swift's first hit, tim McGraw, came out when George W Bush was president. Her smash hit, pop album 1989, came out almost a decade ago. So yeah, that was a long con. Meanwhile, the Chiefs are headed to their fourth Super Bowl in five years and anyone who has watched Sunday's playoff game versus the Ravens catch is made by Swift's boyfriend Travis knows rigging. The outcome would have been a million times harder to fake than the moon landing. So why is this happening?
Speaker 1:Well, it's kind of obvious to many of us on the new right view Swift on the serious threat of Donald Trump's illiteral chances and putting aside the crazy conspiracy theories about Syox, they do have a point. So it's safe to say that Taylor Swift is incredibly popular, perhaps even more popular than we realize. She's not just famous. A recent NBC News survey, for example, shows Swift has the highest net favorability rating of any person or group tested in the poll. Now the new breed of culture warrior understands the power of pop culture. They see Joe Biden as an old fart who can't possibly defeat their celebrity President, donald Trump. But they also see the potential for Swift to have a major impact. By rallying her army of Swifties to register to vote in 2020 on Instagram posts, swift reportedly led 35,000 people to register for the first time, and that was an Instagram post that she put up in 2020. And then to turn out to vote for the slightly older of the two Coggers. So, what is more is it's true that Swift does have a political motive. It's not just because, in recent attacks, she has endured. After staying out of the 2016 race, swift endorsed Biden in 2020. It's no secret that Biden desperately wants her to be involved in the 2024 campaign. And if the potential for her to utilize her mega fame weren't enough, swift is also now aligned with one of the greatest players currently in the National Football League.
Speaker 1:Now Travis displays all the masculine behavior that these right-wing keyboard warriors fetishize. They also hate him for starring in a COVID vaccine commercial, a move that inspired the conspiracy theory. Obsessed New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers to go after him for being too a tool of big pharma. Now, if Travis isn't enough of a threat to the narrative about latte liberals, look no further than his older brother, jason, a center for the Philadelphia Eagles and also likely to be Hall of Fame bound. So who is the kind of guy who recently celebrated his brother's own fill performance by drinking 40 beers and going shirtless in a frigid buffalo weather? So good luck trying to cast him and his brother as a soy drinking pajama boy? Elites are a Colin Kaepernick-like activist type.
Speaker 1:The idea that Swift and Travis and the chiefs and the NFL are part of some deep state conspiracy is only slightly less possible than the idea that leveling such an allegation could actually work politically. Still, those who are desperate to piece together some tenuous conspiracy theory will find threads wherever they can. So, after sexually explicit deepfakes for X to temporary pause searches for the pop star, right-ring YouTuber Tim Poole tweeted so this is all a part of Asaya, adding that disabling the search for images that run counter to X's terms of service means users can't search for Asaya. Now, following the tortured logic of Poole's conspiracy theory, the online far-rights favorite billionaire, elon Musk, must have been personally overseeing the Asaya.
Speaker 1:Now, while this particular narrative is just now coming into focus, similar strands of paranoid idiocy have been going on for months and, like many narratives on the far far right, the most unhinge allocations seem to have started by QAnon before trickling into two more mainstream places. So, for example, a few weeks ago a Fox host, jesse Waters, said Swift could be the front for a covert political agenda. So people who are predisposed to believe this will, of course, believe almost anything. Now, that is dangerous enough, but just as the Travis can easily be oversized, swift simply cannot be a Hillary sized in the way of the polarizing politician and opposed to the widely believed pop star and beloved pop star could be. This is the fight that the paranoid right would be wise not to pick, but of course they will. They have this is what they tend to do, but as a Ms Swift says in her songs one of her songs haters gonna hate.
Speaker 1:Now the next few segments are going to be very heavy when it comes to the former president, donald Trump. So since we've been last spoken, one of these cases has actually been decided one of the court cases and that is that now former president Trump has been ordered to pay $83 million. So former president Trump is starting to have to basically pay what he owes. The former president Trump is staring down nearly 100 million in total damages to EJ and Carol. After jury handed the advice columnist a victory at her second trial. Now the newest verdict orders the $83.3 million for defaming Carol when she came forward in 2019 accusing the then president of sexual assault decades earlier. Now the $83 million verdict exceeds the $5 million Carol won last year in a separate trial when Trump was filed liable for sexually abusing the columnist and defaming her in a separate comment. It's a staggering sum. That came after Carol's lawyer, in the closing argument, asked the jury to come back with at least $24 million, but the request only included compensatory damages. Carol's lawyers opted against providing the jurors with the request for punitive damages, which are designed to deter conduct in the future and ultimately made up the bulk of the total sum. Now the $83.3 million comprises of 18.3 in compensatory damages, $11 million for a reputational repair program and $7.3 million in additional funds and $65 million in punitive damages. Now the jury's decision to order the whopping amount in punitive damages is similar to the recent defamation verdict against former mayor of New York, rudy Giuliani, who became Trump's personal attorney to Georgia election workers, sue Giuliani, over the false claims that the Dio committed voter fraud following the 2020 election. Giuliani was ordered to pay about $148 million when he lost his case, about $75 million, which were punitive damages. So, although both Trump Giuliani's cases marked sizable sums. It did not come close to the $787 million that happened last year when Dominion voting systems build a defamation case against Fox News over the network's coverage of unfounded mass electoral fraud claims in the 2020 election.
Speaker 1:Now, before, during and after the trial, trump and his team made their theory very clear. In recent weeks, a long Trump attack carried dozens of times in his true social platform, while also criticizing the district judge, lewis Kaplan, who was appointed by the former president Clinton as a nasty judge and a Trump hating guy. There is no longer justice in America. Our judicial system is broken and unfair. Trump wrote on true social following Friday's verdict. That anger carried over to inside the courtroom of the former president, voluntarily attended much of the trial and at times was animated and could be heard venting his frustration to his lawyers. Now, by the end of the trial, every time Kaplan ruled against Trump on an objection, the former president and his team would shake their heads. This is not America, not America, this is not America. Trump told the courtroom audience on Thursday. After briefly testified, kaplan at times also got testy with Trump's counsel and brought her team. Kaplan on Friday said Alana Habba, the former president's lead lawyer was only verge of spending some time in lock up. Minutes later he told Trump advisors Boris Epstein, who was seated behind Trump, that he was being distracted by moving around too much, accorded Epstein to get up from his seat, and earlier this week the judge kicked out Trump spokesman Steve Cheyoon from the courtroom after an alarm on his phone went off.
Speaker 1:The jury's verdict actually came after less than three hours of deliberation. The short window also included their time for lunch. The nine member jury retired for the deliberations at 1.41pm. The court officials were receiving word that the verdict had been reached by 4.15pm. The group returned to the courtroom minutes later and delivered their unanimous verdict. In Kara's first trial last year, the jury similarly reached a verdict in a matter of hours. So of course, as is his right, trump vows to appeal within minutes of the verdict being handed down. Trump vows to appeal the ruling. The challenge will raise the possibility that the jury's verdict could be reversed down the road, but Trump still might have to cough up the $83 million in the meantime. So ever since last year's jury handed down the sexual battery verdict against Trump, the former president has been appealing, but he still has to deposit a $5.5 million check in the meantime, trump uses court appearances normally to take political advantages, so in recent weeks he has shown a renewed resolve to attend various court proceedings, trying to turn his trials into campaign stops, as he remains the decisive Republican presidential front-runner, on track to decisively win the nomination.
Speaker 1:In the weeks leading up to the Iowa caucus, trump spent two days in other courts and in other cases, attending an appellate argument as to whether he has criminal immunity and in one of his indictments, and appearing at the closing arguments of a civil fraud trial in New York. Iowa voters then delivered Trump a historic win, with the former president emerging victorious in Albu-Wan County. The next day, as the campaign moved to New Hampshire, carol's trial against Trump began. The former president attended nearly all of the defamation trial, except for one day when he insisted that he needed to instead go to his mother-in-law's funeral and when the jury returned with its verdict. As the trial was ongoing, trump pulled off a victory in New Hampshire, where the chief rival, nikki Haley, hoped to win and begin her path at least to overcome former president.
Speaker 1:So, following the primary, trump briefly took to the stand where the trial resumed, but he testified for only about two minutes and he was under strict limitations from the judge, but for days sitting by his lawyers, he made outbursts and at one point led the judge to threaten to kick him out. And minutes after Carol's closing arguments on Friday, trump suddenly stood up and walked out. Carol's lawyers, who sat in the front of Trump's team, on multiple occasions complained that the judge could hear Trump under his breath making comments attacking Carol and denying her sexual assault accusations. The spectacle was a stark contrast to Carol's trial against Trump last year when famously and, in my opinion, by big mistake he made a massive mistake. Trump did not show up at all or testify. So the former president has recently expressed regret for not going, blaming it on his lawyers, who Trump said had advised him that the proceedings were beneath him For that explanation. One of the former president's attorneys, in that case for a jury counsel just before the most recent trial. Again, trump has promised to attend all of his trials.
Speaker 1:As his four criminal indictments and the campaign season moves forward, I'm going to move right along into a next story. That was a somewhat of a big deal, and this is now just as coming into a person that a lot of people, at least on the left side of the aisle believed did something in the wrong, so they put them almost as a whistleblower or whatever. But what it is is is the X IRS consultant has now been sentenced to five years in prison because the X IRS consultant actually leaked tax returns. So on Monday he was sentenced to the term for leaking tax information for about 1000 of the nation's wealthiest individuals to news outlets between 2018 and 2020. So Charles Little John, who is 38, played guilty in October to one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax returns and return information after reaching a plea agreement with the government prosecutors so the Justice Department did not name the news outlets are individuals whose tax information was disclosed Doe.
Speaker 1:The description and timeline of little John's actions coincided with reporting in the New York Times and in ProPublica about the former president Trump's tax returns in his courts filings. Now little John confirmed he sent the records to those outlets. Now the New York Times published a story titled Long concealed record show Trump's chronic losses and six years of tax avoidance on September 27, 2020. That same day, prosecutors say the first article linked to little John's leak was published. The second outlet which little John was indicted is in ProPublica and that was published, where they published nearly 50 articles beginning in June of 2021. Based on the tax return information little John disclosed, the Justice Department said.
Speaker 1:Now prosecutors requested a five year sentence for little John, purporting he applied to work with the IRS with the attention of accessing and disclosing the tax returns. Quote the defendant weaponizes access to unmask taxpayer data to further his own personal political agenda, believing that he was above the law, prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memo. The Justice Department also said that, while a free press and public engagement with the media are critical to any healthy democracy, the stealing and leaking of private tax information straps individuals of the legal protection of their most sensitive data. Little John said in court filings that he should receive a lesser sentence for cooperating with the government and admitting to stealing the records and providing them to reporters. He committed this offense out of a deep, more belief that the American people had the right to know the information, and sharing it was the only way to effect change. His lawyer, lisa Manning, wrote in a sentencing memo. He did what he thought was right at the time, but he now fully acknowledges that he was wrong.
Speaker 1:So this was something that a lot of people reported on. A lot of people wanted to know. It showed that Trump, over a period of years in his tax return, had lost billions of dollars. It was almost a decade that he did not actually make any money and his company was losing so much money that he was actually getting money from the government. And then, the time that he did end up having to pay taxes, it was something that was less than $800 and that was something the media really went crazy about. And of course it was very inappropriate for him to release those documents.
Speaker 1:Of course everybody speculated, everybody wanted to know if Donald Trump was a billionaire like he says, etc. But I do have to remind the audience that, just because every president has set the precedent to release their tax returns, that somebody running for president has no legal obligation to release those tax returns. So as much as he could say was for the service of the general public, I find it hard to believe that it actually was, because what we know about Trump's finances and what we knew about Trump's finances before he even ran for president was a matter of the public record. Everybody already knew about the bankruptcy, everybody knew about the times Donald Trump had sued people for defaming him and in the process of discovery you found out the way he somewhat inflated his value. A very famous trial where Donald Trump said his view of his net worth was based solely on how he feels at the time, and so that person won that case that Donald Trump had tried to sue for defamation, and in that case we were able to dig in and see exactly how much President Trump was worth when he was a civilian. So this person is now going to has been sentenced to five years. We have no idea if he's going to serve all that time, of course, but that is where we are at the moment.
Speaker 1:Now, the last Trumpian story that I'm going to go over is a significant, important, and this is his influence. So just as senators were closing in on a deal that Republican negotiator said would constitute the most conservative border security bill in decades, donald Trump was closing in on the GOP presidential nomination, and his vocal opposition to compromise, which would also send tens of billion dollars to aid in Ukraine, now threatens the chance of the entire package in a divided Congress House. Twin primary victories have forced Republicans to once again fall in line. Now he's wielding a heavier hand over his party's agenda in Congress than any other time since leaving office. So Republicans are in a bit of a conjury. So Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, told his conference in a closed meeting on Wednesday. According to lawmakers who attended, who was supposed to basically be very excited for what everybody was saying was a sweetheart deal for conservatives and opposed to sending tens of billions of dollars to Ukraine, had become as politically treacherous as the foreign aid itself. He said. Now Trump's going influence was actually dividing Republicans on an issue that once actually united the party, and that was a hard line on immigration.
Speaker 1:So Trump burst into national political scene in 2015 with a dark warning about dangerous immigrants invading the country's southern border and with his slogan that outlasted the mall, build the wall. So, more than eight years later, it is again. The Trump is on the scene and he is again agitating against compromise. He says we need a strong, powerful and essentially perfect border and unless we get that, we are better off not making a deal Now. He wrote that on social media. Now, when more than half of the Senate Republicans now officially backing Trump's candidacy, those entries are becoming harder to ignore as a mere prattle from Palm Beach. Senators have been working on a border deal since before Thanksgiving, but it's complicated to talk Except drag on.
Speaker 1:Trump has begun collecting delegates and pressing for the parties to coalesce around him and his agenda. His allies in Congress regard him as the party's de facto leader and urged their colleagues to fall in line with his policies. Even Republicans who are not die hard Trump fans of Trump have said in recent days that they will do what they can to support him as a nominee. Now his policies include severe immigration measures that President Biden and Senate Democrats would never support. Trump and most House Republicans want to block for mass immigrants from living and working temporarily without visas in the United States while they await the outcome of the immigration claims. And conservatives seek a rival of the memo which has been called the Remain in Mexico policy, which forced immigrants to wait elsewhere to see if they would be permitted entry into the United States. A speaker of the House, mike Johnson, who talks about immigration regular Trump, said that the Senate deal without those policies would now be dead on arrival. So the collapse of this deal was actually with Republican supporters of a broader deal where to live it at the notion that Trump might take their work. We have had people here who support Trump's will have endorsed President Trump's. Go to him and tell him. What a compelling case this is, says Tom Tillis, the North Carolina Senator.
Speaker 1:Trump has always had a far more power to derail things than to help lawmakers find consensus to. Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy knew that and worked hard last year to keep Trump quiet during the negotiation with Biden to avoid the federal debt limit default. Trump didn't weigh in until after the deal was done and McCarthy was able to pass the bill with the majority of GOP support. But back then Trump was not yet winning. Nominating contestants and spending cuts were never the animating issue of his political identity. Attacking Biden's border policies already a main plank of Trump's campaign. He is accused of president opening the door for terrorists and for fits and all and to pour to the country and Trump campaign a claims that buying immigration policies raised the possibility of a Moss attacks in the United States and the Trump vows to build even more wall along the southern border.
Speaker 1:On Thursday Mitch McConnell tried to assure alarm senators that he was still moving ahead with the border and the broader UK recrame package. But still this road is less certain than it was last year before Trump began winning and nominating contest. So Senator Tommy Tuberville, the Alabama Republican and Easton Trump supporter, said that the breathless atmosphere that enveloped Capitol Hill yesterday was nothing but hot air. But we haven't seen the text yet and everyone is panicking. He said just get it done and see if you have enough votes. The DeRome McClain show, remember, has a voicemail number. That voicemail for comments or anything you would like to say on the show. That phone number is 757-310-7303 and we are going to go to the voicemail right now, just wondering if, from your next show or a future show, you could go over how awards work, for example, donald Trump being fined at $83 million, or rather he held the award at $83 million.
Speaker 1:How exactly does that work? The appeal process what happens to the money? Who gives the money? How's the money guaranteed? Is she guaranteed that she will get those funds? Could you step through that please? I think I would like to know, and other business would like to know some particulars around that. I think there's a lot of speculation out there and it would be great for you to hear things out. Thanks, obviously, we'll go into more detail as we get more information, but I will say this as to what we do know and this is very important when it comes to what happened versus what people think happened.
Speaker 1:So one the attorney for Donald Trump, ms Hava, kept saying, and the former president kept saying as well, that they were not able to make a defense. There was a very specific reason why they weren't able to make the defense and that is because this particular trial was not about saying whether or adjudicating the fact if Donald Trump had sexually assaulted or raped Ms Carroll. Donald Trump had already lost that case for a alleged sexual assault and defamation. The losing of that case, ms Carroll had been awarded $5 million, a civil penalty $5 million. Now, after he lost that he continued to go on to what Ms Carroll and her lawyers said was to frame her. So in this case it was not about whether or not Donald Trump had been convicted of the crime or whether he was found guilty by the jury of to be civilly liable. So this wasn't a criminal trial. So it was a civil trial. So there is no prison sentence or anything like that. This is a suit. So he was found liable. So he had already lost the $5 million and in this case came. This was just to determine if he had continued doing the defamation and, if so, how much money would be sent. How much money did Ms Carroll deserve? A lot of the court proceedings kept trying to re-litigate the case from the previous court that he had already lost, which is why the judge kept slapping that down, etc. He can appeal. The money will be put into a bond with the court so that Ms Carroll can be protected and that she can receive the funds. I'm going to get more information about how many days he has to give her the funds, but in this particular case, even just to do the appeal, he has to put down a minimum of $5 million. I'll give you more information about how Ms Carroll will be protected and so on. When I get more information, it will definitely be a great topic. Thank you for the question.
Speaker 1:We also, of course, on the DeRoe McLean Show Voice Mail also. You don't have to call, you can also leave questions. I think that I do have a question via text message, which is also available for the listeners. The 14 states are arguing to keep Trump off the ballot. Would the courts have to consider the cases before the case before the next presidential election? That was a question for the show. I think that, for all intent purposes, the states do have a decent case when it comes to if they could keep the former president off the ballot. I think they're going to lose those because if they're saying that he participated in the insurrection, the biggest problem would be that he has not been convicted of an insurrection, nor has he even been tried for insurrection. Even in Jack Smith's suit against him or litigation against him In the federal court, he does not accuse Donald Trump of insurrection. So I think those states that are challenging the president on this are is going to. The former president of Mrs is going to lose.
Speaker 1:I have another question that came from a different source, not on the show line, but says a House Republicans voted to impeach a Jondo mega ruckus for willfully systemic refusal to enforce immigration laws at the southern border. What would be the results of such an impeachment? Would he then be forced to take corrective actions regarding the enforcement of immigration laws? So this is just all a political stunt. This impeachment is going to go nowhere fast, and I think that what he's going to say is that he's enforcing the laws as best as he can, etc, etc. There is no way to actually say whether he's doing everything in his power to do so. The president's going to back him and I don't think this particular impeachment is going to go anywhere. So this is just kind of a show thing. This is an election year and the border is always a good thing to run on. It's one of the Republicans favorite chew toys that they pull out and shake around and then, if you notice, when election season is over, all the caravan stopped coming, etc, etc. Nobody's focused on the border, except the people who actually have the displeasure of living in a border state.
Speaker 1:Wonderful questions today. Thank you so much for those questions If you would like to follow suit and be like some of the great patrons who left questions. You can do so by calling 757-310-7303. Or if you don't like your voice so much, you can also text to that number, 757-310-7303, and we will take your comments and analyze them on the show, and so it's a very good form out there for people to let me know whether thinking don't always have to ask questions. Even if you want to take me to task on something that I said that you think was articulate or that was incorrect, I have no problem playing that stuff as well. Now, what we're going to do today is we do have a rant from Thomas Hartman, so from the Hartman report. Now, he is an old school type of a progressive, been around for a very long time and this is going to be his take on a lot of the few things. So we're going to go to that and listen to Tom as he talks about whatever he has to say in his rant for today.
Speaker 1:Why are too many Americans ignoring the ongoing collapse of democracy in the US, like an alcoholic family that wants to discuss alcoholism, proving Doug Keody's warning never to mention a rope in the home of a man who's been hanged? Why are too many Americans unwilling to acknowledge or even discuss the ongoing collapse of democracy in the US. We see it in everything from our last two Republican presidents having lost the national vote but taking office anyway, to the extreme gerrymandering happening in every red state in the country, to the naked bribery of our legislators and Supreme Court justices and our media excluded from almost every conversation. Networks run promotions mentioning Trump's indictments but completely failed to point out that he's calling for the end of democracy in America, the suspension of the Constitution and playing the role of a dictator. On day one, president Jimmy Carter took it head on when he told me on my radio program that the Citizens United decision, which brought us this crisis quote, violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it's just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president, and the same thing applies to governors, us senators and congress members. So now we've just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors who modern expect to sometimes get favors for themselves after the elections over.
Speaker 1:This complete subversion of our political system grew in large part out of Richard Dixon's 1972 appointment of TAP tobacco lawyer and right wing extremist, lewis Powell, to the Supreme Court. Powell, in 1971, had authored the infamous Powell memo for the US Chamber of Commerce, strongly suggesting the corporate leaders needed to get politically involved and essentially take over everything from academia to our court system to our political system. In 1976, in the Buckley case, powell began the final destruction of American democracy by declaring that when rich people or corporations own politicians, all that money that got transferred to the politicians wasn't bribery but instead was constitutionally protected. First Amendment defined free speech. Powell expanded that when he personally authored the decision the 78 Bellotti decision, which acknowledged corporations as persons with full access to the Bill of Rights, including their own free speech right to own politicians. Five corrupted in the bag. Republicans on the Supreme Court radically expanded that doctrine. In 2010 was Citizens United. As a result, there's really very little democracy left in our democracy. Our votes are cast in districts so gerrymandered that a 50-50 elector can produce a 70-30 outcome. Congressional representation Our laws are written more often than not by corporate lawyers and lobbyists or representatives of billionaire level wealth, and our media is boned by the same class of investors and stockholders, so it's a stretch to expect them to do much critical reporting on the situation.
Speaker 1:It is booked the decline of the West, first published in German in 1918 and then in English in 1926, as well as Ben Glur suggested that what we call Western civilization was then beginning to enter a hardening or classical phase, in which all the nerdy, rate and supportive structures of culture would become, instead, instruments for the exploitation of a growing peasant class to feed the wealth of a new and strengthening aristocracy. And that's true. It would become a parody of its. Average. People's expectations would decline while their wants would grow, and a new peasantry would emerge, which would cause the culture to stabilize in a classic form. And Ben Glur, while he doesn't use the term, seems very much like feudalism, the medieval system in which the Lord owned the land and everyone else was a vassal, a tenant who owned loyalty to the landlord, or, it's more modern incarnation, fascism, a word that didn't even exist when Ben Glur wrote decline. Ben Glur considered himself an aristocrat, so he didn't see this as a bad thing. In 1926, he prophesied that once the boom of the roaring twenties was over, a great bust would wash over the Western world. While this bust had the potential to create chaos, its most likely outcome would be a return to the classic, stable form of social organization, what Speckler calls high culture and I call it neofutalism and or fascism. You wrote, quote in all high cultures, therefore, there is a peasantry which is breed stock in the broad sense, unless, to a certain extent, nature or self, and a society which is assertively and emphatically informed. It is a set of classes or estates, and no doubt artificial and transitory, but the history of these classes and estates is world history at highest potential 20th to 21st century.
Speaker 1:Cultural observers ranging from billionaire George Soros has booked the crisis of global capitalism to professor Norina Hertz. In the silent takeover of global capitalism, in the death of democracy, it pointed to deep cracks in the foundational structure of Western civilization, traceable in art to the current legal status of corporations versus humans. More recently, jane Mayer has laid out a painful detail in her book Dark Money by the coconut market. A few other political minded billionaires have essentially taken over the entire Republican party, as has Nancy McClain with her book Democracy and Chains. The extent of the problems within our political and economic structures are laid bare with startling and sometimes frightening clarity as a result of all these changes in our politics, most driven by five corrupt Republicans on the Supreme Court, putting oligarchy above democracy.
Speaker 1:Princeton scholars Bill Martin McGillens and Benjamin Page famously found that the odds of average Americans'. Political desires being translated into policy are about the same as random noise, whereas what they refer to as economic elites quote frequently get everything they want from the political class. They wrote that we still have the features of democracy, like elections, but ended their paper with this cautionary no quote. We believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of afloat Americans, then America's claim to being a democratic society are seriously threatened. End quote.
Speaker 1:It seems that America has arrived at the point Speckler saw in early 20th century Europe, and indeed there are some concerning parallels, particularly with the late 1920s and early 1930s. Italy, germany and Spain all lost their democracies and moved to fascism during that era. While Speckler and his avocatolites cheered and indeed it was one of FDR's biggest challenges in the early 30s steering America through a middle course between communism, which was then growing popular, and fascism, also growing popular he pulled it off with small, compared to Europe, nods to democratic socialism and instituting programs like social security and the minimum wage, establishing the right to unionize, among other things. The point is often quoted as saying that history doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.
Speaker 1:Many look at that all out of war being waged against American government by the hard right, from Trump and his cronies to the billionaire networks funding right-wing propaganda and lobbying efforts, and think it can't happen here. They're wrong. It can't happen here. We now have police intervening in elections, privatized corporate voting systems and a massive voter suppression campaign to prevent elderly, young and non-white Americans from being able to vote. Meanwhile, republican politicians and the billionaires who own them are now dropping any pretense at all to carry about the fate and future of our country's fiscal health, so long as they get and keep their tax cuts. In summary, what's left of our democratic institutions are under siege. Add to that a largely billionaire-funded and owned right-wing media machine that's willing to regularly and openly deceive American voters, documented daily by media vendors, and you have the perfect setup for a neo-futilist, fascist takeover of our government, or, as President Carter so correctly called, oligarchy.
Speaker 1:This year's election may be our last chance to push back against the oligarchy that the GOP has been constructing for the past 43 years. President Biden and Democrats in Congress made a valiant try with the For the People Act that would have expanded voter rights, outlawed jury-mandering and reversed citizens united to strip dark money out of our electoral system, overstabbed in the back by Joe Manchin and Kirsten Simmel. If Biden is re-elected and Democrats can take the House and hold the Senate, there's a very good chance particularly without Manchin and Simmel to sabotage the process like they did in 2022. And such legislation can be brought up again in the past. Double check your voter registration, particularly if you live in a blue city, in a red state, where there are already purging millions of voters every month, and help everybody you know get their registration up to date. American democracy can't afford many more years of corruption before it's dead. All we're trying to do, without any screens or brains, is to try to protect ourselves from