The Darrell McClain show
Independent media that won't reinforce tribalism. We have one Planet; nobody's leaving so let’s reason together!! Darrell, McClain is a Military veteran with an abnormal interest in politics, economics, religion, philosophy, science, and literature. He was born and raised in Jacksonville FL, and went to Edward H white High School where he wrestled Under Coach Jermy Smith and The Late Brian Gilbert. He was a team wrestling captain, District champion, and an NHSCA All-American in freestyle Wrestling. He received a wrestling scholarship from Waldorf University in Forest City, Iowa. After a short period, he decided he no longer wanted to cut weight which effectively ended his college wrestling journey. Darrell Mcclain is an Ordained Pastor under The Universal Life Church and is still in good standing, he's a Believer in The Doctrines of Grace Also Known as Calvinism. He joined the United States Navy in 2008 and was A Master At Arms (military police officer) He was awarded several awards while on active duty including an expeditionary combat medal, a Global War on Terror medal, a National Defense Medal, a Korean defense medal, and multiple Navy achievement medals. While In the Navy he was also the assistant wrestling coach at Robert E Lee High School. He's a Brown Belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu under six six-degree black belt Gustavo Machado, Darrell Trains At Gustavo Machado Norfolk under the 3rd-degree black belt, and Former Marine Professor Mark Sausser. He went to school for psychology at American Military University and for criminal justice at ECPI University.
The Darrell McClain show
Unraveling Misinformation: Truth, Tribalism, and Critical Thinking
What if standing firm in your beliefs makes you more susceptible to misinformation? Join me, Darrell McClain, as we unpack the complex dance between truth and tribalism in our media landscape. This episode challenges the conventional notion that unwavering belief is a virtue and suggests that it might actually blind us to deception. By examining the web of misinformation, such as the baseless allegations involving USAID and figures like Chelsea Clinton, we strive to illuminate how ideological commitments can cloud judgment, urging listeners to sharpen their critical thinking skills.
Dive into the murky waters of conspiracy theories as we dissect the false claims surrounding USAID's alleged financial dealings with celebrities and media outlets. From the fictitious narratives about payments to Ben Stiller and Angelina Jolie to the misinterpretations involving Politico and the BBC, we unravel the threads of deceit. Our aim is to differentiate between genuine financial transactions and mere subscriptions, highlighting the pressing need to combat misinformation in an age of rampant media trickery.
The conversation doesn't stop there. We also tackle pressing issues like corporate layoffs and their impact on the job market, as well as stories of justice like Gilbert Merritt III's exoneration after two decades of wrongful imprisonment. Touching on broader societal and political issues, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the distractions of culture wars, we confront the moral dilemmas posed by political allegiances. This episode promises a thought-provoking journey through the complexities of justice, economics, and the political landscape, urging listeners to question and reason in our shared world.
I was born in the mid-80s and so throughout the 90s, during the height of the hip-hop era, we had a lot of sayings. One of the sayings that was very popular to say is if you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything. I actually like that ditty a lot, but I actually think, after living Almost 40 years on this earth, that if you stand for something, it is actually very likely that you will also fall for anything, and I think that is because of the then, the will that a lot of us have, the will that a lot of us have to want something to be true. That just ain't so. And this was a lesson that was reinforced to me this week when there were the fight over Doge, the fight over the Department, so the department of government efficiency. There was a fight over um misinformation, disinformation, a lot of uh lists going around on the internet be uh being shared and um conversations I had with uh family and friends and uh normal uh debating partners and other podcasters, et cetera, about what is true and what is not true. This conversation with a lot of actually very kind and intelligent people who just have certain ideologies some I agree with, some I don't agree with, I could see that the problem is not so much what they know, it's that what they know just may not be so. And I realized that a lot of times people fall for certain media tricks. They fall for a certain social media tricks because they so badly want what is to be, what is being said, to be true. You have a certain type of ontological belief system, that is, a foundational principles of which you stand. You get information that confirms said beliefs and you kind of carry the water for those beliefs. But in that vein, we're going to have to go through some of a bit of these claims and we're going to talk about what's true and what's not true. We're also going to just kind of explore some of the things that happened throughout the week as well, as I play this game that I'm going to be playing with you of what they said then versus what they say now.
Speaker 1:Let's get into the episode. Welcome to Darrell McClain. Show them your host, darrell McClain. This is the episode would end up being 443 independent media. That will not reinforce tribalism. We have one planet, nobody is leaving, so let us reason together.
Speaker 1:So let's start with on this one with the USAID stuff, so and USAID is a kind of from my perspective a wing of United States soft power. It's also kind of a cia front that they use to topple a lot of uh governments. Yeah, the democrats kind of gave the game away a bit when one of the senators and congressmen, um, etc. We tried to defend USAID and said something like it's how we get to fight China by going into Africa and making sure we get important minerals, and kind of giving the game away. That it's the USAID. Aid is a foreign policy thing where the CIA uses that money to kind of influence pedal in Africa, in Somalia, in the Middle East, etc.
Speaker 1:So, that being said, there were several lists going around on the internet. I'm not going to take the time and read every list that said every false thing, but I am going to and read every list that said every false thing. But I am going to somewhat get into some of the nitty gritty of it because a bit of a longer show. So no, chelsea Clinton, ben Stiller and Politico didn't get millions from USID the biggest Department of Government Efficiency hoaxes that spread on X. So false claims that celebrities receive millions of dollars from the gutted US Agency for International Development have spread on X this week among many viral hoaxes about the organization, as President Donald Trump and billionaire Department of Government Efficiency czar Elon Musk effectively shutter the USAID. So many false and misleading claims about USAID spending practices have quickly spread on X, popped up by billionaires including Musk and Bill Aikman. Did Chelsea Clinton get a big paycheck from USAID? That was obviously one of the claims. No. Several viral posts on X claimed that Chelsea Clinton ranked in large, a large $84 million sum from USAID, but the references to the Clintons actually refer to the Families Foundation on and the related organizations that have received USAID funding, and that is, of courseendinggov. The grant that was given to the Clinton Health Act's initiative was used to fund the services in Zimbabwe between 2019 and 2021. And Chelsea Clinton receives no compensation as a board member, including during the years the grant money was used, and that is according to IRS documents.
Speaker 1:Next claim did the USAID pay celebrities to visit Ukraine, including Ben Stiller and Angelina Jolie? So, of course, this one was given, brought to my attention by one of the former guests and one of my cousins who kind of floats down the conspiracy wormhole, avid Trump supporter etc. And he gave it to me, brought it to my attention. I immediately kind of thought it was not true, but then wanted to look into it because I do know, like um. So when I was in the united states uh, military, it was very rare, um, I wasn't going to say they they used to have what was called uso tours. So there's a lot of times that I met celebrities et cetera because the USO would fly them into the Middle East to kind of entertain us. Robin Williams used to do it, I met the actors from Avatar and so I thought that there could be something to this. But when I went and looked it up, there was actually no evidence that USAID paid celebrities to visit Ukraine.
Speaker 1:So several viral social media posts accused USAID of paying Ben Stiller, angelina Jolie, sean Penn and Orlando Bloom to travel to Ukraine to take pictures with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. So according to Forbes magazine, forbes had reached out to Stiller, jolie, penn and Bloom for comment. Stiller called the claims totally false and untrue. In a post on X he's clarifying he funded his entire trip to Ukraine by himself and had not received any money from USID. He also said that it was people need to understand that this was a part of a Russian disinformation campaign to somewhat have to have a propaganda war with Ukraine. A propaganda war with Ukraine. Now Sean Penn's litigation attorney, matthew Rosengart, told Forbes that claims are completely false and noting that Penn also self-funded his visit and he threatened to take legal action if the deframatory statements continue.
Speaker 1:Now Elon Musk amplified these false claims on X reporting Uh and um, of course, because sorry, x and Facebook, to me those are media organizations, but anyway. So Musk uh reported, and I reposting a video that was fabricated to look like it had been reported by E news. E news then stepped in and denied any statement to the AFP that is credited to the video. Very interesting. The next one was did USAID fund research that caused the COVID-19 pandemic? The answer is no, no. Now Musk reported a claim that USAID funded research by a scientific nonprofit, echo Health Alliance, that led to the creation of COVID-19. Now, although USAID and other government agencies has given its funds to an Echo Health Alliance method and they are very controversial and they are very controversial the group has previously said the virus that it studied were not similar to COVID.
Speaker 1:Other right-wing leaning outlets figures have spread the claims that USAID gave news outlet Politico millions of dollars, which Trump baselessly claimed was to write good stories about Democrats suggesting this could be the biggest scandal in history, but when you look into it, politico never received any donations from USAID. Now, according to the funding records on USAspendinggov and a statement from the company, usaid spent $44,000 between 2023 and 2024 on a subscription called Politico Pro, which the news outlet describes as professional subscription service used by companies and organizations and yes, some government agencies, and it is targeted specialized users and private sectors who want to track legislation and public policy news. Now the subscription reportedly start at about $10,000. Politico said it never received any government subsidies or grants and clarify USID's purchase was a transaction, not funding. Now conspiracies about Politico being funded by USID spread after a technical error caused paychecks from Politico staff to be delayed earlier this week, leading some ex-users to jump to the false conclusion that USAID, which was gutted before the payroll issues, must have been the funding outlet for Politico as well, which is what caused their payment glitch. Next one was did USAID fund other media organizations, like the British Broadcast Channel?
Speaker 1:Other news outlets face similar hoaxes as Politico, as ex-users use misleading and false cases and outright false claims about the payments by USAID to media companies like Politico. Some of these transactions were payments for subscriptions by government agencies, not grants, not subsidies. The New York Times said it had not received any grants and clarified that the federal funds it received were payments for subscriptions that government offices and agencies have purchased to better understand the world that government offices and agencies have purchased to better understand the world. Rutters and the Associated Press also said they have not received government grants and agencies have purchased subscriptions. Instead, usaid and other government agencies have funded some global media organizations, but not many of the big name outlets targeted by X. The BBC said in a statement it's charity arm supporting local media worldwide, bbc Media Action, received about 8% of its income from the US government between 2023 and 2024. But the charity is wholly separate from BBC News, which does not receive any funding. Usaid made 1.9 million donations to the BBC media charity, not to BBC News, to support its efforts in India. The rumors USAID funded the BBC News were boosted by Musk. Countries with limited democracy, our free press, including media in Ukraine and Russia, as well as the organized crime corporation reporting project, which supports corruption reporting worldwide.
Speaker 1:Another one was did USAID fund condoms in Gaza and Afghanistan? Various rumors that the Department of Government Efficiency identified millions in US spending on condoms in Gaza and in the Middle East spread with no evidence. Trump's press secretary, carolyn LeVette, claimed last week the USAID spent $50 million on condoms in Gaza. Levette may have been referring to USAID's grants issued to the International Medical Corp, a group that provides aids to victims of war, and totaling more than $100 million, in which a family planning program including contraceptives, were included, which is typical for aid packages to developing countries. Now the Associated Press reported that Rep Buddy Carter, the Republican, claimed in an interview Thursday that USAID spent $15 million on condoms for the Taliban, echoing a claim made earlier this week by Rep Brian Mass, a Republican from the great state of Florida. Ryan Mass, a Republican from the great state of Florida. Now the Atlantic reported that USAID had in past funded condoms for Afghan citizens, not for the Taliban, which controls the Afghanistan government. Cnn reported the agency did not fund any condoms for the entire Middle East during the three previous fiscal years.
Speaker 1:Now an ex uh must said the united states should not be sending us taxpayers money to buy condoms for foreigners and baselessly claim money for contraceptives ended in the pockets of hamas. Did usaid fund a transgender opera and a dei musical? No, levette and several viral posts on X claimed USAID spent thousands of money on transgender opera in Columbia and, although the government did give a grant to the Columbia University to increase transgender representation, it wasn't a USAID fund. The State Department gave $25,000 to a universal program called Universidad des Los Angeles in Boca Raton for a purpose in 2021. Similarly, the State Department not USAID gave $70,000 in 2022 to fund a musical in Ireland that promoted diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility.
Speaker 1:Did USAID spend six million dollars on tourism in Egypt? No, usaid announced a six million dollar payment to Egypt to increase educational opportunities and strengthen livelihoods of the people in North Sion, not to fund tourism, as the White House claimed. The White House fact check sheet linked to USAID's announcement actually does not mention tourism at all and it was issued in 2019 during Trump's first administration. Were any of the controversial claims of USAID spending actually true? Yes, usaid did provide funding for several programs that have been slammed by Republicans. Usaid gave $1.5 million in 2022 to advance diversity, equity and inclusion in Serbian's workplace and business communities communities and to increase employment opportunities for LGBTQ Serbians. This payment was slammed by LeVette and several Republican members of Congress, including Ted Cruz, the Republican senator from Texas, and the White House also criticized a $2 million payment by USAID for sex changes in Guatemala, which turned out not to be true. But USAID did make a $2 million payment to strengthen translate organizations and gender affirming healthcare in Guatemala. Through gender affirming care, income passes more used for.
Speaker 1:So that took us a while and, as I said before in a previous show, everybody knows I like ditties and this is just. This is one. The ally will get around the world three times before a troop even gets out of the bed and puts his pants on. And what I've learned from just my many years of talking about foreign policy etc. Is I'll just say the government is bad enough. The government does enough foolish things without us having to make stuff up and because of the way this whole game works when it comes to social media, a lot of times people can just make stuff up of times, because of people's ideological persuasions, they will accept it as true because they want it to be true.
Speaker 2:members of the Tuskegee Airmen has died a hero and a trailblazer. Tonight here remembering an American hero, a group of average.
Speaker 3:Americans must become a team of fighting men with wings.
Speaker 2:Retired Lieutenant Colonel Harry Stewart Jr was a fighter pilot in World War II, part of the Tuskegee Airmen, America's first ever black combat pilots.
Speaker 3:Squadron after squadron out of Tuskegee.
Speaker 2:The Tuskegee Airmen playing a vital role in the US victory of World War II. Lieutenant Colonel Stewart would fly 43 combat missions during World War II. Lieutenant Colonel Stewart would fly 43 combat missions during World War II. He was one of only four Tuskegee Airmen with three air-to-air victories in a single day, taking down three Nazi planes in one flight At 18, training with the first group of black pilots at Tuskegee Army Airfield in Alabama. Retiring in 1950, he would go on to become an executive in Detroit. Lieutenant Colonel Stewart, one of the last Tuskegee surviving airmen, died at his home in Bloomfield Hills, michigan. He was 100 years old Tonight. Here retired Lieutenant Colonel Stewart.
Speaker 4:In his own words I'm just happy that I did my part and that's it, and if any of the benefits that our race derived from it gives me very, very, very proud we honor his sacrifice so in the the durell mclean uh reading club, this week I'm reading the book by the senator from vermont, uh, bernie sanders.
Speaker 1:Uh, the book is called it's Okay to Be Angry About Capitalism, of course. Remember last month I read the book by Walter Isaacson about Elon Musk, and so this month we are going through Bernie Sanders' book Now reading the book. It is actually well done and of course it led me to certain thoughts. And of course everybody knows on this show. I always say Of course everybody knows. On this show. I always say I'm concerned about the money, I'm an economic existentialist is kind of the thing.
Speaker 1:And so one of the things that it made me ask was what does it actually mean to be a free person in the United States of America? And and um, and of course that comes from the economic standpoint that I take under the Department of the Navy and several years working for the Department of Homeland Security and in the private industry. Shift work makes my sleep pattern abnormal. But what I asked was what does it truly mean to be free? Are individuals genuinely free if they are unable to access medical care when they face ill or face financial ruin upon leaving the hospital? Are they truly free if they cannot afford prescription medications necessarily to sustain their lives? Are individuals truly free when they devote over half of their income to housing costs and are compelled to secure loans from payday lenders at exorbitant rates of 200% interest? Are seniors truly free at the age of 70 if they are still forced to work due to insufficient pensions or retirement savings? Are individuals truly free if they are unable to pursue higher education or vocational training due to their family's limited financial resources?
Speaker 1:Are individuals truly free if they are forced to work extensive hours, often 60 plus or 80 hours a week, simply to make ends meet due to the lack of jobs offering a living wage? Are new parents truly free if they are compelled to return to work immediately following the birth of their child due to the absence of paid family leave? Are small business owners or family farmers truly free if they are pushed out of the market by the monopolistic practices of large corporations? Are veterans truly free if, after putting their lives on the line to defend their country, they find themselves without a home and forced to live on the streets? Are individuals truly free if they work in a job that offers no genuine autonomy and are vulnerable to the authoritarian, which may result into automation, which may result in not only them losing their jobs, but having to train their replacement to take their jobs. Are individuals truly free when critical decisions regarding technological advancements in such areas such as communication, health care and welfare are made by multinational corporations prioritizing profits over public health and well-being? The answer is that Americans may not be nearly as free as they perceive themselves to be the company.
Speaker 5:Workday announced it is cutting about 8% of its workforce. Workday, which is based in Pleasanton, says the cuts will work out to about 1,700 jobs. The company's CEO says the changes are part of a restructuring plan and that the company is also investing more in AI and continuing to hire in other strategic areas. The impacted workers may know by today this is the second round of cuts for Workday in a year. It did cut 3% of its workforce last February.
Speaker 1:So Workday is based in Placenton, is cutting 1,750 jobs. Salesforce in San Francisco and is cutting 1,750 jobs. Salesforce in San Francisco and Walmart are also slashing jobs. Workday is the payroll and HR company based in Pleasanton, and they announced on Wednesday that they're cutting 8.5% of their workforce to use AI instead. Basically, the CEO, carl Asenbach, said the changes are part of a restructuring plan. He began with an open letter calling his employees workmates and said the company is at a pivotal moment where the companies everywhere are re-managing and re-imagining how work gets done and increasing a demand for AI as a potential drive to as an era of new growth for Workday. So what else do? We don't know is. Workday is a global company and it's unclear how many cuts will occur over time. The big picture is that this the Salesforce base in San Francisco announced it will also be slashing 1,000 jobs while hiring artificial intelligence roles. The company has not disclosed which division will be affected by job cuts. In addition, walmart, the nation's largest private employer, is eliminating hundreds of roles and closing one of its North Carolina offices as it continues to pull workers back to its main hubs in California and Arkansas, according to the internal memo seen on Fox Business on Tuesday. On Tuesday, walmart Chief People Officer Donald Morris said in a memo sent to employees that the company is cutting roles and asking office-based employees in Hoboken and some of its smaller offices to relocate to the company's newly opened headquarters in Arkansas, as well as the offices in Sun Valley, california. In Sun Valley, california. So tough times actually may be coming, because the job market is actually flashing signs that layoffs probably could accelerate this year. There are signals coming from employers that they hit that layoffs could accelerate. Layoff announcement rose 28% in January from the prior month, according to Challenger data. Now business filings of mass layoffs as well have also elevated in the month. The resilient US job market could weaken this year, with employers sharing early signs that they are readying for more job cuts in 2025. For more job cuts in 2025.
Speaker 1:So job cuts announcements continued to rise in January, even as the labor market remained on solid footing. Overall, layoff announcements swelled to 49,795 over the month of January, according to the data from Challenger Gray and Christmas. That marks a 28% increase from the prior month, though it was the quietest January for the layoff announcement since 2022, the career replacement firm said in the report. Now the number looks poised to increase in the coming months, giving recent layoffs announcements. The firm added.
Speaker 1:Since the start of February, adm has said it was planning to cut up to 700 workers in the latest cost-cutting measures. While Salesforce had worked, they also made plans of cutting 1,000 workers and 1,750 workers respectively. January was relatively quiet in terms of job cut announcements. However, we've also seen major announcements in the early days of February, so it seems quite unlikely to last. Andrew Challenger, the senior vice president, wrote in a note. Meanwhile, warren Filings regulatory filings business with more than 100 workers must admit if they are planning to lay off. More than 50 people at work sites have also increased in recent months.
Speaker 1:Companies filed 253 layoff notices in December with plans to cut 21,873 jobs, according to public records accessed by WarrantTrackercom. Now that's up from the prime month when firms filed 217 notices with plans to cut 20,105 workers. Now the numbers and the positions covered by warrant Fowler jumped in November and remained relatively high in December. As a result, we still think the trend in claims will rise to about 250,000 people by the end of quarter one, reflecting a fading drag from residual sensibility and the deterioration of underlying trends. Now that comes from Samuel Toombs, the chief US economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics Now. Hiring was robust in December. The economy added 256,000 jobs that month, well above the expected 164,000 jobs. The jobless rate, meanwhile, remained near record low, slipping to 4.1%. Economic forecasters do have been observing weaker labor market conditions in the past year, with the unemployment rate climbing 30 basis points throughout 2024. Friday job support was expected to show that hiring decelerated but continued to grow. In January, economists expect US employers to have added 170,000 jobs, according to FactSet.
Speaker 1:In Virginia there's a guy by the name of Gilbert Merritt III Now. He spent more than 20 years in prison for a murder in Norfolk he did not commit. His exoneration was settled after a witness told a judge she lied under oath due to manipulation and threats from a disgraced Norfolk detective, robert Glenn Ford. Now the delegate, rip Sullivan wants to make it easier for wrongfully incarcerated people like Merritt, who was imprisoned due to intentional acts by law enforcement, to get a maximum payout outlined in the state. Now this is coming out of Norfolk, virginia, where I'm currently sitting. Now, standing before state gallants.
Speaker 1:During the General Assembly hearing last month, a tearful Gilbert shared a deep and emotional toll of spending more than 20 years in prison for a crime he did not commit and it has taken on his life. You know the toll it took. He said his whole family was ripped apart, which, of course, is understandable. During the January committee meeting to hear the testimony about a bill that would compensate him for his wrongful incarceration. Now Merritt was in his 20s in the year 2001 when he was sentenced to 30 years in prison for murder in Norfolk. Sentenced to 30 years in prison for murder in Norfolk. The Merritt's exoneration was settled in 2024, according to a bill asking the General Assembly to compensate Merritt as a witness confessed in the year 2001,.
Speaker 1:Later told the Norfolk Circuit Court judge in 2022 that she lied under oath due to manipulation and threats from a disgraced Norfolk detective, robert Glenn Ford. Ford is infamously tied to false confessions of four Norfolk sailors in the 1997 rape and murder of Michelle Moore Bosco. Those men have also since gained their freedom After retiring from the Norfolk Police Department. Forrest was sentenced in 2010 to 12 years in federal prison for taking bribes from drug dealers while on the job. Shouldn't we give these people more money because of how they were mistreated? Shouldn't we give these people more money because of how they were mistreated by Detective Ford? Said Delegate Rip Sullivan from Fairfax during the same January hearing where Mayer shared his story. It's hardly a stretch that four times base the amount, regardless of this, might be proper.
Speaker 1:Depp Sullivan authored a bill this year that would have removed barriers for people who were wrongfully incarcerated due to intentional actions by law enforcement to receive quadruple the base pay rate outlined in the state's law. Current state law allows that lawmakers to compensate and order exonerated people roughly 55 000 for each year they spent in prison. The current law also allows people like mary, who have been incarcerated due to intentional acts, to receive up to four times that amount, but only if the city or county that wronged them would contribute to the payout. The delegate stressed to his fellow delegates during the hearing do we want to hand over this responsibility, which we can enhance someone's claims under the wrongful and contrary statutes and give localities the ability to block it, either because they don't like the results or they can't pony up the money? However, delegate Sullivan's fix fell apart in the committee, but his colleagues in the House of Delegates did agree that the state could double the pay for people like Merritt on their own and still allow the wrong person to go after the city or the county where they were wrongfully convicted for more money.
Speaker 1:Sullivan's bill is now in the Virginia Senate's hands and could face more challenges and amendments. Thing but the front of the pack when it comes to terms how we treat our citizens who have been so badly wronged, said Sullivan in a conversation in 2022 about his successful effort to increase the yearly payout for wrongfully incarcerated people. Regardless of the fate of the bill, the measure to secure compensation for merit at the current pay rate is on path for approval, yet there is no amount of money that can make up for what people like Merritt have endured. It is no real answer, said Merritt. It's no real closure. Ford has never been criminally charged for his connection to the wrongful incarcerations. Unfortunately, a reported in 2023, norfolk's Commonwealth Attorney, ron Fitts, is allowing the University of Virginia's Innocent Project to review Ford's old cases to learn if there are any additional innocent people that he, his investigations, etc. Put in prison.
Speaker 6:Every investigation reveals black people are more likely to be wrongfully incarcerated for crimes they did not commit than any other group in America. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, while black people are just over 13% of the US population, they are 53% of the 3,200 exonerations since 1989. I analyzed the registry's numbers for Virginia. Data shows of the 64 people exonerated in the Commonwealth since 1989, half of them are black men. While those men have been exonerated, there's a number of people who were freed because the evidence shows they're innocent, but the courts and previous governors have yet to exonerate them. As a few of them shared with me during a conversation at the UVA Innocence Project, those men are asking what more do they have to prove?
Speaker 7:They actually allowed me to be encaged in that prison.
Speaker 6:A horrific experience shared among these men.
Speaker 8:Incarceration is damaging to the mind, the body and the spirit, especially the spirit.
Speaker 6:Their bond forged in a bondage that evidence indicates they never should have endured.
Speaker 7:The relationships that we shared. That's what helped me get through Us. We didn't.
Speaker 6:Each man convicted of crimes in the Commonwealth in the 90s, when incarceration rates started soaring nationwide.
Speaker 7:So you can clearly see that during that particular time of incarceration, something was wrong with the justice system.
Speaker 6:Rojay Fentress was 16 years old when he was convicted of murder in Richmond. He'd spent 24 years in prison when former Governor Ralph Northam set him free in 2020.
Speaker 7:So I fainted when I was convicted, but I didn't cry or shed a tear when I was sentenced, because I knew that wasn't my sin. That ain't what God had for me.
Speaker 6:Darnell Phillips was 19 years old when he was sentenced to life for the rape of a Virginia Beach girl. He was paroled in 2018 after nearly 28 years in prison.
Speaker 7:It threw me away, you know, because I didn't matter, my life didn't matter, my breath on earth didn't matter, like I didn't matter, like my life didn't matter, like my breath on earth didn't matter.
Speaker 6:Messiah Johnson was 24 when he was sentenced to essentially life in prison for a beauty salon robbery in Norfolk. I wrote the story about his quest for freedom in 2017. He was released by former Governor Terry McAuliffe the following year after 21 years in prison.
Speaker 8:I fought for my freedom since day one, since the day they put the handcuffs on me.
Speaker 6:In all, these men have spent more than 70 years behind bars.
Speaker 4:This is a problem. It needs to be addressed.
Speaker 6:The UVA Innocence Project estimates anywhere between 40,000 and 230,000 prisoners are actually innocent. So what's driving this? The National Registry of Exonerations points to mistaken witness identification, which is more likely to happen to people of color, misconduct by police and prosecutors and false or misleading evidence.
Speaker 7:Seek justice and not conviction.
Speaker 6:In Phillips, virginia Beach case in 1990, the little girl identified him as the rapist but Innocence Project attorneys learned that was only after Beach police misled the little girl about the weight of evidence against Phillips. Attorneys also learned that the DNA evidence excluded Phillips as the perpetrator. The victim now supports Phillips' exoneration. You can clearly see that something's wrong. In Ventress' case the Innocence Project learned the woman who identified him in that 1996 Richmond murder told the detective she was intoxicated during the interrogations. She initially identified someone else but the detective did not disclose that during the trial.
Speaker 8:I want to be vindicated, and exoneration is my path to death.
Speaker 6:And, in Johnson's case, a victim in the 1997 Norfolk Beauty Salon robbery he was accused of. Identified him days later from a distance at night while police surrounded Johnson. The definition of a suggestive show up at sensing a family friend helped Johnson keep the faith.
Speaker 8:I must have. My head must have went down a little bit. She had the awareness to say hold your head up, we ain't gonna stop fighting, come on. And you know, I just kind of stood up straight and I've been standing up straight since then.
Speaker 6:And now side by side with his brothers in their journey for justice.
Speaker 7:I see Messiah like family, that's what I see in that. I met Roseanne. Like little brother. I met his name. I just want to live.
Speaker 6:And they are. Phillips is a pastor, johnson has his own trucking business. Still Virginia courts have failed to exonerate them, but Governor Glenn Youngkin can, with an absolute pardon.
Speaker 7:I've just been waiting for someone to do the right thing. All I want is for that last shackle on me, that last shackle, to be broken off of me. We're going to stand before God. My conscience is clear broken off of me.
Speaker 6:We're going to stand before God. My conscience is clear. Governor Youngkin has until the end of his term to exonerate them, making them eligible for compensation from the state. But what's the solution to stop wrongful incarcerations in the first place? Some prosecutors say more diversity among prosecutors and police is a start, and tougher scrutiny of using eyewitness identification alone, which is the leading cause of wrongful convictions. You may remember my investigation into former Chesapeake basketball coach Brian Falcon's conviction. He was set free after our reports revealed the victim in a 2012 robbery identified him in a suggestive show and our reports revealed the DNA collected from the crime scene did not match Falcon. He was freed in January and has yet to be exonerated either. To learn more about the unreliability of using eyewitness identification alone and the wrongful incarceration rates in Virginia, click inside this story at WTKRcom. Jessica Larche, News 3.
Speaker 1:So that's just something that's sad and ridiculous that this is still happening in the year 2025. And in the state that I am currently sitting in, 20 years of a 30 year sentence for a crime you did not commit because a detective purposely trumped up charges against you, and then that detective is still not being had not been charged for all the people who he falsely put in jail and is getting sitting in jail now for 12 years less time than the people he had wrongly convicted because he was caught during another crime, which was bribing drug dealers, etc. Accepting payouts from drug dealers. This is why I have always suggested that I am against the death penalty, etc. Because when you have stuff like this, when the system is this corrupt and corroded?
Speaker 1:corrupt and corroded? How could you trust that the people that you have put on death penalty are the people that actually did the crime when you have a evidence after evidence, case after case of, of, of erroneous arrest, of fake evidence, of, uh, of the exculpatory evidence that could get somebody off being purposely um hidden? This is a monstrous betrayal of what justice is supposed to be, and this is why I've always said you should not give a corrupt government and a corrupt system the tools and the power to kill its own citizens. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and that does not change because you give somebody a shiny collar device or a badge. One of the funniest things happened this week that I've been kind of debating, ironically, also this week.
Speaker 1:So on Tuesday, president Trump signed an executive order designed to prohibit transgender students from participating in girls sport. Now, despite that fact that the numbers in the US are extremely small, the number is even further when you look specifically at the people he claimed that he wants to target. So the numbers shrink even further when you look at middle school and high school. According to Newsweek's, jillian Breitbart, a spokesperson for the American Civil Liberties Union, pointed out that, to save women's sports. One of the spending groups pushing for such bans could only actually themselves identify five transgender athletes competing on the girls teams in K-12 sports. So let me just say this again that is not 5,000. That is not 500. That is not 50. There are five trans student athletes.
Speaker 1:Yet lawmakers have poured time and political energy, on political outrage, into legislation aimed at stopping this tiny handful of young people from playing in school sports. Now, if they can write a bill that will target only five students, why not write one on the taxes to, you know, the top 10% of US families who control over 60% of the nation's wealth and use it to help everyday Americans who are struggling? It is because and this is what I have been debating with some people this week this is a culture war issue. This group is a very small percent of the population. They do not affect these things like people think that they affect. And when you have years of rhetoric, years of rhetoric aimed at a said group, and then the legislation comes down and you see the legislation affects five people. Now think about all the millions of dollars in ads. You know that this was a con. This was nothing more than a bait and switch to get people riled up about something that has no material effect on their lives will not put a penny in a pocket, will not change their lives in one material way. It is a ploy that is always used by the donor class to stop people from looking at what the real material problems in their life are, which are economic. And if you can stop people from focusing on the economic disparity between those who have and those who have not, if you can stop people from focusing on the cost of the groceries, et cetera, et cetera, and get into focus on wedge issues, you are going to always have people to manipulate and unfortunately, because of the tribal nature of the way humans think, they are always easily ready to be manipulated.
Speaker 1:So let me tell you a secret about me. I, darrell McClain, consume a lot of eggs. I was spoiled for many years because one of my closest friends owns a farm and on that farm he used to have chickens. So, out of the kindness of his heart, he would regularly give me free eggs, people that worked at his job eggs, as well as people that just were around him, because they were free for him, because he owned a lot of chickens and I got spoiled with getting the delicious free-ranged brown eggs Now. So being outside of the economy when it comes to eggs made me a spoiled little brat because I never, ever, had to pay attention to the price of eggs when I started to go to the grocery store to get eggs, it was also relatively inexpensive. I would get 30 eggs and they would be about $3 for 30 eggs from the local food line. So I was shocked when, during the Biden administration, we started to hear all this conversation about the price of eggs going up and it made me do this thing that I rarely do when I go shopping.
Speaker 1:I am historically weird when it comes to things like gas and groceries. I do not look at the prices of things. I make a list, I go, I grab it, I go to the register, I swipe, I move on with my life. I don't pay attention to gas prices. I have already in my head I am putting $25 in the car, I go and put said $25 in the car, I drive off, I, I and it's. It's somewhat similar when, when I go grocery shopping, I'll say my plan is to spend 150 bucks, uh, I go and I grab the things on the list, list I, then my total will come up to eighty two dollars. I say mission accomplished. I spent less than 150 bucks.
Speaker 1:Now, during the campaign, it was all a buzz that the prices of eggs were going through the roof and a mistake that Joe Biden was making, you know, according to the the um analysts was there was inflation at the cost of eggs, normally around a dollar or so. $2, $3 were just skyrocketing to the fact that now 12 eggs would be $4. And when Donald Trump was running of course, as politicians do he said he was going to take care of it. Jd Vance had a famous tweet where he talked about how, when Kamala Harris took office, the price of eggs were a dollar, but because of Kamala Harris inflationary policies, the cost of eggs are now $4 or something like that.
Speaker 1:So yours truly, your humble servant, goes to the local grocer to get 12 eggs. I actually wanted to get 30 eggs. To be honest, the egg shelf was almost bare, and so I grabbed the 12 free range beautiful brown eggs that I like to get, and I go to the register and do my normal thing of not looking at the price, but I'm in self-checkout. As I scan the 12 eggs, it says $7.47. And that was the reality that I guess the price of eggs have drastically gone up, because the self-checkout that used to say one dollar, two dollar, three dollar now is saying seven dollars.
Speaker 1:And out of all the things that were said on the campaign trail, it actually does not seem, when you look at the market analysis, that this price of eggs thing is going to get better anytime soon. In fact, when I was looking up the research, it actually showed that, according to the market analysis, the price of eggs will probably not go down until sometime in May. Now eggs are the ingredient that people use in cooking to make almost everything, so this is going to affect everyday people. Now, of course, we run into the big problem that people on the campaign trail said one thing and they had a plan to do one thing. And of course now you see the policies that are being passed and they see that it is very difficult to actually solve this problem. Yours truly will survive. I'm not going to stop buying eggs. I'm going to keep doing the same thing that I used to do. I'm still going to be on the search for the 30 eggs and if I can't get them out, just buy the 12 and keep it moving. But not everybody is as fortunate as me and this is going to become a big problem, whether people want to ignore it or not.
Speaker 1:For partisan political purposes these are pocketbook issues. You can distract people for a while with the trans stuff. You can distract people a while with the old the gays are kissing. Should they be allowed to be married? You can distract people a while with the culture war stuff. But eventually, when they start going to the store and they realize things aren't getting cheaper, like was promised, we're going to run into a very big problem very, very fast.
Speaker 1:It's very easy to campaign, in fact, as somebody who's on the outside of the Republican Party, disgruntled ex-Republican, as somebody who's on the outside of the Democratic Party the only person that I ever officially liked who even ran on the Democratic ticket was Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator Bernie Sanders the only Democrat that I can somewhat stomach are all the outsiders, the AOCs, the Bernie Sanderses, the Elizabeth Warrens, the kind of the crazy people in the party I guess they would be categorized as and, when it comes to the Republican Party, the person that I think that obviously has their finger on the pulse of what's more correct would be your Rand Paul's, your Josh Hawley's, your Thomas Massey's, and so my political coalition is actually very tiny. Welcome to the world of anarcho-syndicalism. The viewpoints that I have are not going to be shared with a large portion of the american public. Uh, in the american context I'd be considered a libertarian, internationally a narco-syndicalism, uh. But anyway.
Speaker 1:But one thing that I recognize that ties us all together is we have to eat, and I'm hoping that when people start to recognize that it hasn't gotten any easier for them to eat, that they may start to realize wait a minute, something is going on. So why we have this thing going on where the billionaires have gotten hold of the treasury department and they're looting it, while pretending that they're doing it for the American people? I want people to think and see is any of this money that they're allegedly stopping from being looting from the Treasury Department is going to end up in your pocket? And if it doesn't, if your material life hasn't gotten any better, are you going to course correct? It's very easy to have an enemy. It's very easy to have somebody to point to.
Speaker 1:One of the brilliant things that Donald Trump has always been able to do, which I want to see if he can pull it off this term is to be in control of the government, while acting as if he is above high, looking at the government and the government is wrong. This is why they talk about the deep state. To act as if you are running the government but you are somehow not in control of the government is a great talent, and it's one of the one of donald trump's many, many great talents is to be in control while at the same time uh, during the first term acting like he was not in control. The place is actually run by a bunch of bureaucrats, which, in a lot of senses, the place is run by a bunch of bureaucrats, but to act like you were not in control of said bureaucrats and you can't fire them or you don't put them into place or you didn't hire them, is a feat that I wonder if this current administration is going to get away with.
Speaker 1:Now, and I think, when it comes to these egg prices and if the groceries don't go down, I want to see if the economic populism of the right is going to respond, especially when you have this, this fight that continues to brew with Steve Bannon and Elon Musk, which, on that side of the fight, steve Bannon, in my observation is correct. Steve Bannon has his pulse on the actual American populace and he's not too interested in the globalization, he's not too interested in the mass immigration, he's not too interested in the overtaking of tech billionaires, because he has a real, a actual, real and genuine economic critique and he knows that money has no loyalty to any country, he knows that multinational corporations, by the very nature, cannot be loyal to the country and he is very critical of financialization of, I'll just say, the American public. And the billionaires come to town to save us silliness that a lot of people have kind of bought into. And so at least you know where I stand, and and so at least you know I stand, I'm on the Steve Bannon side of the argument when it comes to the type of populism. So yours truly is feeling the pain of egg prices.
Speaker 1:I'm very interested in this only because I recognize that there was a lot of talk about the price of eggs during the campaign. It was the top subject. And when I did a just a tiny Google search of the stories about the eggs, et cetera, et cetera, all of a sudden nothing. Uh uh. Donald Trump's only been president for three weeks or so, but all of a sudden, no news stories about the price of eggs, no news stories about how the prices are going up, even though the prices have still been increasing. What they said before versus what they said now is going to be very interesting. I'm actually very happy that Donald Trump has allowed independent media into the press corps, independent media into the press corps. Steve Bannon's War Room will be there and, yes, obviously they're on the right, but they're going to be very critical, they're going to be asking some very serious questions, and so that's a plus, a win for independent media.
Speaker 8:How long will it take to cycle through and get some of the actual prices that Americans are paying to come down?
Speaker 9:Prices at the store and at the grocery pump across the board, sure? Well, the president is doing everything he can, obviously, to reduce the cost of living crisis in this country as quickly as possible. That's why he signed a litany of executive orders across the board in the first couple of weeks here. He declared a national energy emergency. He committed to cutting 10 regulations for every new one on the book as you know, working for a Fox business-related outlet, deregulation and energy independence are huge drivers of reducing inflation in this country and I think Americans can be assured by the results President Trump had in his first term when, again, inflation was 1.4 percent when he left office. Will it be months?
Speaker 2:or will Americans have?
Speaker 9:the patience to wait for it. So of course, here's the problem with that.
Speaker 1:Like I said, there is a timeline. The timeline, according to all experts, is the prices are going to be high until May. The problem with that is, of course, I can survive until May, fairly decent when it comes to being able to buy food or whatever. But Donald Trump on the campaign, made a certain promise of when the problem would be solved. Promises made, promises kept. Question mark.
Speaker 9:When I will immediately bring prices down, starting on day one, because people can't afford their groceries and we're going to straighten it out. We're going to bring prices way down. It'll also bring your grocery bill way down. We'll get it done fast and they're going to be affording their groceries very soon.
Speaker 1:Yeah, day one, day one. So of course, politicians lie and exaggerate. The question that I'm going to have is how many people, when Donald Trump said day one, really thought he meant five months in, and if they can survive almost half of the year with the prices being outrageous, and what is the actual plan to lower the prices? And, like I said many times, a lot of this is not about production. A lot of this is out of the hands of the president. A lot of this is about price gouging. A lot of this is about price gouging. A lot of this is about the new bird flu and the Biden administration killing unsaid number of chickens because of the bird flu outbreak.
Speaker 1:But when you have people who so badly want something to be true and they vote on something so badly to be true, when that bubble is popped, the response sometimes is visceral and unfortunately I'm already seeing this. And look, I'm not somebody to gloat and say, yes, I told you so. But when you look at this stuff, like the Muslims for Trump and now they're online complaining because their family members are getting deported I look at them like, oh, you didn't know that you were in America illegally and that they can't admit what they were going to say when they were talking about mass deportations. You didn't think that was serious. When I look at the gaze for Trump and then the second they're getting power. You now have people trying to get Obergefell to the Supreme Court to be overturned and I say, oh, so you didn't think that Trump was going to come for you, for your gay marriage, and they're maybe about to lose those rights. When I see the groups, the blacks for Trump, and I laugh. And because they're complaining because they got fired because their jobs were targeted because it was labeled DEI, and I say, well, hmm, there used to be something that liberals used to say back in the day and it was seen as insensitive and they would say they would. And of course it was kind of liberal propaganda because they were saying this about conservatives and conservatives kind of return their favor and they say it about liberals. But it was that a lot of times people vote and they vote despite that. The policies that will be put in place are going to hurt them. Now liberals used to say that conservatives regularly voted outside of their economic interests and then they would have all these postulations about why they did such a thing. But I must admit, when I watch all these videos of all these groups and all these people looking around and saying, oh, I didn't think he was talking about us.
Speaker 1:It goes into the fuck around and find out category of my brain watching the fight between the left, so Democrats and leftists. Because when Trump made the comments about Gaza, they immediately said now remember, you guys didn't want to vote for Kamala Harris because she stood by genocide, joe. And now what are you going to say? You're not protesting now in college campuses, now that Donald Trump is going to eradicate the Palestinians from the land, you have not a mumbling word to say. Et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 1:And I find, I find all this to be somewhat comical because, of course, the answers to that is a bit more nuanced. Of course the answers to that is a bit more nuanced. I may, I may talk about the nuances of that gaza issue and how the the leftists are gonna are responding to the democrats and how the democrats are responding to the actual leftists who didn't vote for kamala harris and the muslims who didn't vote for kamala harris Harris because of what they viewed as her inaction, are non-answers. When it came to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, um, it looks like Donald Trump is going to give Netanyahu kind of the the free will to be even worse than he was during the Obama administration. And, um, you gotta have to struggle with the question that politics makes you struggle with.
Speaker 1:Politics is the art of doing what is possible. And, uh, you, you, you. You regularly have to play this little game that I don't like to play and I debate with people all the time the voting of the lesser of two evils and the recognition from somebody who thinks about this stuff like me, and I respond to that by saying the voting for the lesser of two evils just means that you have normalized evil and that you have corroded yourself and you are going to eventually be co-opted to do things that are evil, but you will label them as for the greater good. Now I was sent something very interesting that made me think about this, and it was from one of my christian friends and followers, and they actually said this to me. Growing up, I was told that the demise of christianity would be caused by the country rejecting god. Now I actually believe that the demise of christianity will be caused by christians blatantly rejecting the teaching of Jesus for the sake of political power. Just something to think about, let me tell you something I will never quit.
Speaker 3:I will never stop until we keep a con man from taking over the party of Reagan and the conservative movement. He's a con man. He's a con man. He's a con man. He portrays himself as the strongest guy on illegal immigration. That's fine, but Trump Tower was built by illegal immigrants from Poland, who he paid $4 an hour, $12, 12 hours a day. A judge found that he was involved in a conspiracy to defraud these workers of their pay.
Speaker 1:Judge found that he was involved in a conspiracy to defraud these workers of their pay, playing the funny little clip of little Marco Rubio, who is now the Secretary of State, saying one thing before that you know he wouldn't say now was just because, when it came to this discussion about USAID that I engageded in the beginning of the show, of course, just like Marco Rubio said something different about Trump, that he would say something very different, now he's speaking a different tune when it comes to what USAID does other countries.
Speaker 4:Well, look, I mean my frustration with USAID goes back to my time in Congress. It's a completely unresponsive agency. It's supposed to respond to policy directives of the State Department and it refuses to do so. So the functions of USAID there are a lot of functions of USAID that are going to continue. They're going to be part of American foreign policy, but it has to be aligned with American foreign policy continue to be part of American foreign policy, but it has to be aligned with American foreign policy.
Speaker 4:I said very clearly when we during my confirmation hearing that every dollar we spend and every program we fund that will be aligned with the national interest of the United States. And USAID has a history of sort of ignoring that and deciding that there's somehow a global charity separate from the national interest. These are taxpayer dollars and so I'm very troubled by these reports that they've been unwilling to cooperate with people who are asking simple questions about what does this program do? Who gets the money, who are our contractors, who's funded? And that sort of level of insubordination makes it impossible to conduct the sort of mature and serious review that I think 4 and 8 writ large should have. And we're spending taxpayer money here. These are not donor dollars, these are taxpayer dollars and we owe the American people the assurances that every dollar we are spending abroad is being spent on something that furthers our national interest, and so far, a lot of the people that work at USAID have just simply refused to cooperate.
Speaker 4:We do so because it furthers our national interest. That's why we give foreign aid. Now, obviously, there's a component to foreign aid that's humanitarian in scope and that's important too. I promise you it's going to be a lot harder to recruit someone to anti-Americanism, anti-american terrorism, if the United States of America was the reason why they're even alive today. Anybody who tells you we can slash foreign aid and that will bring us to balance is lying to you. Foreign aid is less than 1% of our budget. It's just not true.
Speaker 1:So that has been our journey into the episode of what they said before versus what they say now, Starring the new Secretary of State, former Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio. See you on the next episode. Your fiscal year 2023 budget request to the Defense Department, Department of State and US Agency for International Development to send a clear message that the United States has a comprehensive strategy to counter the Chinese Communist Party's expanding global influence and the increasing threat that it poses to US security interests and those of our allies.
Speaker 3:In all fairness, marco is not a negotiator. I watched him melt down and I'll tell you it was one of the saddest things I've ever seen. He's not going down. He thinks a Palestinian is a real estate deal. These people may even be tougher than Chris Christie. The Palestinians are not a real estate deal, donald. No, no, no.
Speaker 8:A deal is a deal. Let me tell you, I've heard it a long time ago.
Speaker 4:A deal is not a deal when you're dealing with terrorists.
Speaker 2:You are not a negotiator.
Speaker 3:You are not a negotiator, and if you're thinking you will never bring peace, you will never bring peace. Donald might be able to bring more condos in the Palestinian areas, but he's not going to. This is not a real thing, people. He will never be able to do it. I think I may be able to do it, although I will say this probably the toughest deal of any kind is that particular deal.
Speaker 1:So guess what Marco Rubio wrote the other day? That the deal that Trump has tried to do in Palestine, that he suggested, is a great deal. Let's make Gaza beautiful again. And of course, donald Trump, who said Marco Rubio is the worst dealmaker ever, is the Secretary of State now who's going to be working hard on making the deal. This stuff is um laughable. It used to be commonplace for politicians, before we had tv, to say one thing in one state and then say something else in another state, and because they knew that the people who are writing the papers, by the time the news got there it would be too late. I think it's just funny, with all the video capabilities that we have, that people still do it and, for the most part, still get away with it.