Project 2025 In Power

Power shows up in unexpected places: a budget line, a staffing decision, a “temporary” emergency authority, a promise that tariffs won’t raise prices, a health care website claiming 600% savings. We walk through a fast-moving chain of stories that all point to the same question: when government power expands and oversight weakens, who absorbs the risk and who gets protected?

We start with Russ Vought selling the Trump administration’s proposed budget and connect it to Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation blueprint that reads less like theory and more like a governing checklist. We track where the playbook’s ideas surface in real policy, from a massive military spending increase to domestic program cuts, and from executive orders to agency leadership that can steer everything from trade to communications enforcement.

Then we get concrete. We unpack the tariff fight and the argument over whether tariffs are effectively a tax on American consumers, especially as courts challenge the legal footing of certain programs. We also dig into the Trump RX controversy with side-by-side price comparisons that spotlight the brand versus generic gap and why “discount” claims can still leave patients paying far more. Finally, we shift to democracy and election security, hearing directly from local election officials facing threats and from investigative reporting on how federal election guardrails can be quietly removed.

If you value deeply reported, plainspoken analysis of US politics, foreign policy, health care costs, and election administration, subscribe, share this with a friend, and leave a review. What part of this conversation do you want us to dig into next?

Transcript

Trump Budget And Project 2025

SPEAKER_16 0:46

The director of the Office of Management and Budget was on Capitol Hill today, making the case for the Trump administration's proposed budget for next year. Russ Vogt argued that a big military spending increase means about a 10% cut to domestic programs.

SPEAKER_08 1:01

Senator, I fully support this budget. Uh we go through a long policy process. It's needed for the Department of War. Uh it's one time. It's made it's it's designed to have paradigm shifting investments, like I mentioned in my opening comments, to be able to fund now what this President is willing to do in multi-year agreements. Uh and it's necessary to keep us safe.

SPEAKER_16 1:25

Before joining the administration last year, he was a driving force behind Project 2025, a controversial policy playbook by the Conservative Heritage Foundation. Liz Landers is here now for a check-in on how many of those proposals have since become official government policy. Liz, good to see you. Yes. So let's just talk about Project 2025. Remind us what was in it and who else was behind it.

SPEAKER_20 1:47

The Heritage Foundation, which is a conservative think tank here in Washington, authored this. And it was really a blueprint for the presidency should Trump win again in 2024. And Russ Volt was one of the main authors and architects of Project 2025. In it, he talks about executive powers. Now he heads up the Office of Management and Budget, and he has a huge amount of power there over the budget and the personnel decisions happening inside this administration. There are a number of other people within the administration right now, too, who had sections in Project 2025, including Peter Navarro, he wrote a section on trade. He's now one of the president's top trade advisors. Brendan Carr wrote a section about changes to the FCC. He now oversees that agency and has been uh pretty aggressively going after TV channels. And then Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, is also listed as a contributor in there. The president himself, though, insisted during that campaign cycle that he didn't know what Project 2025 was. Listen to what he said in July of that year.

SPEAKER_18 2:48

I don't know what the hell it is that's Project 25. He's involved in Project, and then they read some of the things, and they are extreme. I mean, they're seriously extreme. But I don't know anything about it. I don't want to know anything about it. But what they do is misinformation and disinformation.

SPEAKER_20 3:06

But Amna, many of the policies in Project 2025 have been tracked in the last year or so that the president has been back in office. Many of them have been implemented.

SPEAKER_16 3:15

Meanwhile, if you just reported the president's budget calls for a large increase in military spending that comes as the U.S. is in the middle of this war with Iran that he launched. Is the current Trump foreign policy in line with what was in Project 2025?

SPEAKER_20 3:30

Well, Rosvo said today on The Hill that there was a more than 40% budget increase for this next fiscal year for military spending. And that would help pay for, among other things, new Navy ships to grow the fleet to 400. That's an even bigger number than what Project 2025 called for. They called for 355 Navy ships. Project 2025 says that China is the biggest foreign threat to the United States. In Project 2025, they called it a totalitarian enemy. President Trump, of course, is gonna go to China soon next month. But Iran is mentioned as a concern. It's mentioned more than 50 times in Project 2025. There's a section devoted to it that talks about the opposition to the regime criticizing the Biden and Obama administration policies, especially the JCPOA and some of their easing of sanctions. Says that the Iranian people deserved a democratic government, but it's up to them to decide that. Here's one quote: the U.S. must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear technology and delivery capabilities and more broadly block Iranian ambitions. Certainly seems to be hewing to what the president has been doing so far. Also mentions leveraging more sanctions on Iran. The first Trump administration did that, and we heard yesterday from uh the Treasury Secretary that the Trump administration is looking at doing that again. There's analysis from the Center for Progressive Reform that says that the Trump administration has initiated or completed 53% of Project 2025's domestic agenda as of February this year. That's 283 of the 532 recommended actions. Let's look at two of these examples. One of them on LGBTQ front here, Project 2025 directed the NIH to fund studies on negative effects of gender-affirming care. One of the first things that the president signed as an executive order when he came back into office was directing HHS to quote, publish a review of the existing literature on best practices for promoting the health of children who assert gender dysphoria, rapid onset gender dysphoria, or other identity-based confusion. Another domestic policy point, too, was on reproductive rights. The Center for Reproductive Rights says that 85% of Trump's reproductive health actions have stemmed from these recommendations. One of them prohibiting Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds. That happened last summer when Congress passed their budget bill that was in there.

SPEAKER_06 6:25

Support journalism trust for the day.

SPEAKER_01 6:27

Support PBS News. Donate now, or even better, start a monthly contribution today.

SPEAKER_06 6:32

If you can support PBS, of course, MPR. Always good to support independent journalism endeavors.

SPEAKER_07 6:40

Mr. Chair, um there has been some discussion about the bill that the DHS funding bill that the Senate passed unanimously now twice. The House, the votes are there in the House to pass it. The leadership will not take it up. You were before the House yesterday. Did you encourage the House to finally pass the DHS bill?

SPEAKER_08 6:58

My interaction we want the bill passed.

SPEAKER_07 7:05

You do want the bill passed. We want the bill passed. Did you say that during the hearing? Yes. I wasn't asked it. Well, you said a lot of things during the hearing.

SPEAKER_08 7:10

If it was a priority, in response to Democratic politicians that were saying that we were responsible for the shutdown. Hold on.

SPEAKER_07 7:17

Our shutdown? Hold on. You had the opportunity to tell the House yesterday to pass a bill that you say you support, that 100 percent of the Senate supports, and you didn't bring it up. That's facts. Senator, you had the opportunity to fund DHS without a month's shutdown. Second question, I was interested in the revenues in the budget that you sent over. One revenue in particular interested me was tariffs, what you're assuming for tariffs. Um you can see that the numbers on tariffs were sort of bumping around at less than 100 billion a year, 100 billion in 2022, uh, 195 billion in 2025, when the tariffs started to kick in an AIPA. Um, tariffs have been determined to be illegal by the Supreme Court, the AIPA tariffs. Next week you're starting to refund$166 billion of tariffs. So I was interested to see what your tariff projection was going to be. And actually, what I see is far from going down as you're refunding illegal tariffs, you're predicting dramatic increases in tariffs. What is President Trump going to tax next?

SPEAKER_08 8:24

Senator, what you're looking at is your big we we've had 10-year assumptions for the IEPA tariffs, and those should be uh shaded a different way. Obviously, the Supreme Court changed our strategy on that, and we were going through a process to replace those, but we do not believe that the tariffs uh will be less than our IEPA.

SPEAKER_07 8:42

So if you're going through the process, tariffs are a tax. I would like to introduce, Mr. Chair, two documents from the New York Federal Reserve. 90 percent of the cost of the tariffs last year fell on American consumers and businesses, and another from the Tax Foundation. The average in 2025 was$1,000 per American tax household, if I could introduce that. No objection. So you're going through a process to decide what are you going to tax next? Who are you going to tax next to reach these astronomical tariff numbers?

SPEAKER_08 9:11

We don't think they are a tax on the American people. They have not raised prices.

SPEAKER_07 9:20

But who are you going to impose the tariffs on next?

SPEAKER_08 9:22

Look, tariffs are imposed on the foreign importers, right? We have seen that they have no impact.

SPEAKER_07 9:28

What industry sectors are you going to hobble? Do you know what? It's not hobbling. It's ensuring that we have American. So I am assuming you don't know. You don't yet know who the next tariffs are going to hit. You're just projecting all this money in the market.

SPEAKER_08 9:41

Uh Senator have been out there for ever since Liberation Day.

SPEAKER_07 9:44

Liberation Day. Yeah, that's the one that you did right before tax day that took a thousand bucks out of American families' pockets. Let me go to the next one. I've heard you go back and forth between talking about the investment in the Department of Defense or the Department of War. Now, just for everybody here, legally, the name of this Department is the Department of Defense, correct? It's the Department of War.

SPEAKER_08 10:06

And why do you say that? Because that's what the President and his team has renamed it.

SPEAKER_07 10:13

And there's a statute that calls of the Department of Defense. The President did an executive order saying the Department of War was a secondary title in September of 2025. Have you been instructed to use the phrase the Department of War?

SPEAKER_08 10:27

No, there's an executive order that goes through a legal process.

SPEAKER_07 10:34

Let me ask you this. Are you aware of legislation that's been passed by Congress to change the name? No, I'm just curious as the extent to which I didn't realize this would be a debate, Senator. Well, I'm I'm not I'm not debating you.

SPEAKER_08 10:47

I'm asking you. Are you aware of the government?

SPEAKER_07 10:50

The President and Executive Order. Are you aware of any bill to change the legal name of the department? Not to my knowledge, but it's probably something we would consider. Well, I'm saying there's an NDA process right now. Folks want to change it. I would look forward to that debate because I think you'll get laughed out of the room and you'll become a punchline on TV. Um, nations all around the world have secretaries and ministers of defense. Do you know of any that has a secretary and minister of war?

SPEAKER_08 13:08

Our founders thought it was a pretty good uh name when the remote.

SPEAKER_07 13:11

And after World War II, President Truman changed it back. Are you aware of any nation in the world that calls this function war rather than defense? I did not realize that this was a source of defense. I will tell you that there's no other nation. Uh do you know in the oath that our military officers take, is the word war mentioned? I'm not aware. Defense is mentioned, war is not mentioned. Finally, you've uh sacked 350,000 people. Do you know what percentage are veterans?

SPEAKER_08 13:38

Senator, we have ensured that all of the veteran preferences are stuck to the United States.

SPEAKER_07 13:45

So when you fire 350,000 people, I think you have fired more veterans than any administration in the history of the United States. I yield back.

SPEAKER_12 13:54

In the midst of these crazy, unprecedented, and dangerous times, I want to say a few words about what I and other progressives have been up to recently. And frankly, it is a lot. First, some very good news. Just this last Thursday, Annalilia Mejia won a landslide victory to become the Congresswoman from the 11th District of New Jersey. Now, what was important about her victory is not just that Annalillia is a strong progressive, a grassroots organizer, and someone who played a major role in my 2020 presidential campaign. That's important. What was more important is that the district she won was not considered to be particularly progressive. In other words, what Annalilia's victory showed is that a time of massive income and wealth inequality and deep discontent with status quo politics, our progressive analysis and progressive vision is gaining more and more traction in all parts of our society. In other words, we can win anywhere. So let me just thank Annalillia for her great campaign and thank many of you for the support that you gave her. Another important development. Last Wednesday, I and other progressives in the Senate took a major step forward in reversing one of the ugliest and most dangerous aspects of American foreign policy. As many of you know, I have for several years been trying to stop our government from sending military aid to Israel. A nation which, under the leadership of right-wing extremist Benjamin Netanyahu, has committed genocide in Gaza, started an illegal and horrific war in Iran, and has been bombing civilian neighborhoods in Lebanon should not be supported by U.S. tax dollars. Now, when we began this effort several years ago, the first resolution that I offered to stop U.S. military aid to Israel received only 11 votes in the Senate. The next resolution received 18 votes, followed by a resolution that won 27 votes. Last Wednesday, a resolution that I offered received 40 votes. 40 votes. Over 80% of the Democratic caucus and all-time high. We received no Republican support. The simple truth is that when working people are struggling to put food on the table and pay for housing and health care, they do not want billions of their hard-earned tax dollars to be spent on killing innocent people in the Middle East. And the Democratic establishment is, belatedly, to be sure, they are now catching on. Bottom line, we are making progress in this vitally important area, but much more needs to be done. We must continue pushing forward to stop these never-ending and illegal wars. We must end U.S. military aid to Israel. We are also making progress in another area of extraordinary consequence. Artificial intelligence and robotics are the most transformational technologies in the history of humanity. They are going to impact the lives of you and you and every other person in our country. And I gotta tell you, Congress is way, way behind in terms of protecting the American people from the negative impacts these technologies will have. These revolutionary developments pushed by the wealthiest people in the world. We're talking about a handful of multi-multi-billionaires who are pushing these technologies. These could result in the loss of tens of millions of jobs, could completely eviscerate our privacy and negatively impact the education and mental health of our kids. Further, there are very knowledgeable scientists who worry that if AI becomes smarter than human beings, it could operate independently of human control with perhaps catastrophic results. That is not science fiction. That is what some leading scientists believe to be the case. Recently, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and I introduced legislation calling for a moratorium on the construction of new data centers. And the reason for that is that the data centers are the infrastructure for AI. And we, our legislation imposes a moratorium until guidelines and regulations are established that protect workers and every American from the dangers of AI and robotics. This idea is gaining momentum all across the country. In conservative areas and progressive areas, local communities are voting down the construction of data centers, and many cities and states are now considering moratoriums. Just a few days ago, the state legislature in Maine became the first state in the nation to pass a moratorium to prevent the construction of data centers. Bottom line, the American people increasingly understand that these revolutionary technologies, AI and robotics, have got to improve life for all of us, not just make the richest people in the world even richer. I understand that these are very difficult and stressful times for the people of our country, and especially for our younger generation. Given the conditions under which we are living, it is very easy to feel despair and even helplessness. That is a natural reaction to what is going on today. It's a natural reaction to the pathological lying of Donald Trump, to his illegal wars, to his authoritarianism, his narcissism and mental instability, and his contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law. But despair and helplessness is exactly what we do not have the luxury of allowing for the sake of our kids and future generations, we must fight back. Further, I hope all of you understand that the agenda that we are fighting for is the agenda that the American people want. In the richest country in the history of the world, ordinary Americans understand that health care is a human right, not a privilege, that every worker is entitled to a decent standard of living and a secure retirement, that all of our kids should enjoy a world-class education without going into debt, that we must address the crisis of income and wealth inequality, and that the rich must start paying their fair share of taxes, among many other issues. And let me conclude by sharing some very positive developments. In case you haven't noticed, the resistance that together we have been mounting against Trumpism and oligarchy is succeeding on many, many fronts. Trump's poll numbers are plummeting. The American people are catching on to the fraud that he is. And there is a very real likelihood that Democrats will gain control over the House in the 2026 elections, and a growing possibility that Democrats may even win the Senate. Further, our progressive movement is expanding. A number of strong progressives running for the Senate in the House have excellent chances of winning. And in the next few months, I look forward to campaigning with some of these great candidates in Michigan, Ohio, Minnesota, Maine, and elsewhere. Thank you all very much for what you do. What you know and I know is that real change never takes place from the top on down. It is always from the bottom on up through grassroots activism. That is what we are doing. That's what we have got to continue doing. Let us go forward together. Thank you all very much.

SPEAKER_21 22:46

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So after President Trump and the Republicans slashed health care for millions of families, the president pitched his Trump RX website as the answer for Americans who are worried about health care costs. He claims that Trump RX has reduced prices by as much as 600%. 600%, which I think means companies should be paying you to take their drugs. But let's do some real math here. Take one drug protonic, a 30-day supply of this heartburn medication, cost$200 on Trump RX, but there is an identical generic version of this pill called pantoprisol. Secretary Kennedy, do you know how much it costs for a 30-day supply of that drug at Costco?

SPEAKER_04 23:42

Oh, but I would say that as Senator Do you know what it is. There's two ways of calculating percentage. If you have a$600 drug and you reduce it to 10, that's a 600% reduction.

SPEAKER_21 23:57

You know, I only have five minutes. Do you know what the drug costs at Costco?

SPEAKER_04 24:04

Uh I do not.

SPEAKER_21 24:05

The drug is$16 at Costco. Trump RX charges$200 for protonics, and Costco charges$16. Let's do another one. Uh TOSAN is a treatment for heart arrhythmia, costs$336 on Trump RX. Or you can get the generic uh cost plus drug for$12. So you tell me, Mr. Secretary, are patients better off paying$336 on Trump RX? X or 12 bucks at once drugs.

SPEAKER_04 24:43

You're comparing apples to oranges because you're comparing the brand drug to the generic drug.

SPEAKER_21 24:50

Yeah, to the exact same drug.

SPEAKER_04 24:54

Well, people should be buying the generic and we will be directing to the exact same drug. And we'll be directing them to the generic.

SPEAKER_21 25:01

Tell me. Tell me, Mr. Secretary, you think people ought to be paying$336 instead of$12.

SPEAKER_04 25:07

Well, a lot of people, a lot of doctors prescribe the brand. So we're giving them 600% reductions on the brand. We will be directing them to the generic whenever it's available.

SPEAKER_21 25:20

So here's so here's the thing. We know about brand names versus generic. It's a big foreign talking point in order to fool people into buying a more expensive drug. The generic is chemically the same. And here's the thing: if you're buying a drug on Trump RX, there is a more than one in four chance that Trump's discount is actually a price hike. And for an anti-big pharma guy, you sure don't seem worried about steering patients to more expensive drugs that are going to pad big pharma's profits. But there's more in this deal. In exchange for these scam discounts, President Trump has exempted these drug companies from his 100% tariff. So think about that. Big pharma makes billions of dollars in tariff relief by listing their drugs on Trump RX, and then they don't even lower the costs on many of these drugs. That is a great deal for big pharma. So, Secretary Kennedy, here's my question. Did you sign off on these sweetheart deals for Big Pharma, or was this all President Trump's idea?

SPEAKER_04 26:35

The tariff relief is only applicable if the company has agreed to produce the drug in America. They have one year to do so. Well. And then they get and then they don't get the tariff relief, and then what is going to bankrupt them?

SPEAKER_21 26:51

So you're the one who negotiated these?

SPEAKER_04 26:53

Did I negotiate the deal?

SPEAKER_21 26:55

You negotiate these deals. Will you make those deals available to us so we can see them?

SPEAKER_04 27:00

I didn't personally negotiate those.

SPEAKER_21 27:01

All right. Did your team negotiate these deals? Yes. Will you make those deals available to us so we can see them? A little transparency?

SPEAKER_04 27:09

We will make the I well I've already said this. I'm happy to make the deals available, except for proprietary information and trade secrets, which when you pass the IRF.

SPEAKER_21 27:19

I will hold you to that, Mr. Secretary, because if these deals with big pharma are so great for Americans, then we should be able to see what promises have been made. You have the power to make this deal yourself. Why don't you do that? Why did you we did this because you refuse to do it? What we've got is trunky. You have a lot more power to negotiate than we do. We've got the lowest prices. And you and Donald Trump are actually making the problem worse. The American public deserves better.

SPEAKER_04 27:50

Millions of people who are using Trump RX disagree with you. I said the millions of people who are using Trump RX disagree with you.

SPEAKER_21 28:10

Not on branded drugs. Oh, so your answer is Americans should just not take prescriptions.

SPEAKER_04 28:18

We will be directing people to the generics, the cheapest available. But a lot of doctors prescribe the brands, and we're giving them massive reductions in the brands.

SPEAKER_21 28:28

So those mass, mass discounts. Massive discount.

SPEAKER_04 28:33

600%.

SPEAKER_21 28:35

600%. They could pay hundreds of dollars on Trump RX, or they can get it for twelve bucks.

SPEAKER_05 28:41

This is the second instance of the Secretary denying the public's right to know. That's all that the members on this committee have asked for.

SPEAKER_15 28:50

It's a very interesting and combative interview yesterday between Rokana and Maria Barderoma over on Fox News about whether or not Trump is making decisions for the U.S. or for Israel. Let's take a listen.

SPEAKER_09 29:01

All Trump did is listen to Netanyahu. That's his entire foreign policy. You know what? I resent the fact that Israel is going to tell the United States what to do. The American president should call the shots in this country.

SPEAKER_03 29:15

And well, the American president should call the shots in this country, but you and your colleagues are trying to clip his wings right now with this war powers vote. I agree. The president is in charge. But look, a lot of the things that you just said are just not true, Congressman. I mean, look, we have to look at this realistically. And President Obama sent money to the Iranians, and what did they do? They resumed their uh buildup of enrichment. What's not true? What's not true? What specifically about that sentence is not true.

SPEAKER_09 29:49

There was a deal that we reached to get 97% of the enriched uranium out. In the process of that, Iran had certain assets that were Iranian assets, wasn't our money, that was unfrozen. And that was a deal that China, Russia, France, UK, Canada, the United States all agreed to. And then we had Netanyahu come in and trying to torpedo it, and AIPEC. APEC tried to torpedo that deal. We were on a path to having a uh denuclear Iran. But what happened is it wasn't in Netanyah's interest and APEC's interest, and they've dragged us into another war in the Middle East. They've hurt American people, and the American people are tired of it. They want people who are going to be team America. They want people who are going to bring gas debt prices down here and care about our nation and get us out of these wars. And that's why Obama won. He was against the Iraq war. That's why he was on a path to normalization in terms of getting Iran to be denuclear and had the whole world on our side. And AIPAC Netanyahu tore that up.

SPEAKER_15 30:48

Relax. So apparently, yeah, he was cooking there. Um, and you know, what's interesting is obviously like Fox News boomers are the people who continue to be most supportive of Trump, the Iran war, most pro-Israel, et cetera. But even with that audience that was over on Fox Business, you're gonna have some significant number who are listening to Roe and actually agreeing with him over a Democratic congressman over Maria Bartaroma, the you know, right-wing host there, who is very pro-Trump. And uh this is a good catch actually from Jack Cocharella. So very shortly after this appearance from Rokana, Trump posted this on True Social. Let's put this up on the screen. He says, Israel never talked me into war with Iran. The results of October 7th added to my lifelong opinion that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon, did. I watch and read the fake news pundits and polls in total disbelief. 90% of what they say are lies and made up stories. The polls are rigged, much as the 2020 presidential election was rigged. Just like the results in Venezuela, which the media doesn't like talking about, the results in Iran will be amazing. And if Iran's new new leaders, regime change, exclamation point, are smart, Iran can have a great and prosperous future. So this looks to me like Roe getting under his skin a little bit, because we all know how closely Trump watches the content there over at Fox News and Fox Business.

SPEAKER_02 32:03

Oh, almost certainly. It is interesting, though. Uh, I mean, I don't, you know, the one thing that really gets me in that Maria Bartriomo clip is her going after him for the war powers resolution because she's basically advocating for total monarchy. I mean, I think that is one of those where we really should not move past the fact that this is not only we started a war with Iran, we are still in a state of war with the blockade. A blockade is a recognized act of warfare. That's why during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy was very careful. We are quarantining Cuba. We are not it's the same thing, but he would not use the word blockade. Trump just comes out and says blockade. That is a straight-up act of war that must have been authorized by Congress. And in it, she's going after Roh Khanna, not just for saying that Trump calls a shots. He should have total ability to wage war in whatever way he wants. And look, that's true if the Congress authorizes the war. And they're cowards because they don't want to vote on it right now. And I think he was actually very effective in conveying that message, both on the Israeli control, but also uh in terms of the war powers resolution and getting her to articulate an insane view, which I don't think any American really would agree with at all in terms of the ability to unilaterally start the war.

Hungary Signals ICC Line On Netanyahu

SPEAKER_15 33:18

Well, and you actually just um triggered a thought in my mind, which is that I saw a report that Schumer is actually planning to push another war powers resolution. And Trump, in that interview that he recorded with CNBC, was going after Schumer and saying, oh, he wants us to stop and these Democrats are traitorous, et cetera, et cetera. That comes directly out of he does not want to have to deal with more war powers resolution votes because they've been coming very, very close to success. Now, do I think he's gonna like abide by what the Congress passes? No, but it creates more issues for him, and he feels that it constrains him because he believes he should have the powers of king. And apparently Maria Barteroma agrees with that assessment and thinks he should just be able to do whatever he wants, whatever he wants. Constitution be damned because it says very clearly in the constitution what body has the right to declare war and it is not the president of the United States. One other interesting thing here on the Israel front, which I was very glad to see, and put D3 up on the screen. So we talked before on the show about how Hungary has elected a new leader after 16 years of Viktor Orban being in place and really doing what he could to rig the system in his favor, taking over the media, rewriting, you know, rewriting the constitution, really defenestrating the opposition in all sorts of ways. He actually was defeated and resoundingly so. So you've got this new guy in Peter Madjar, and there's a lot of questions about okay, well, what exactly is his ideology? In a lot of ways, he positioned himself as, you know, sort of similar ideologically to Orban, but without the corruption. However, this is very different. He says, listen, if Netanyahu visits Hungary, I'm sorry, but we're part of the ICC. We're signatories to, you know, the International Criminal Corps. So we have to arrest him if he arrives here in Hungary. So uh pretty surprising to me because he previously had said some things that were pretty pro-Israel. But here he says, nope, we're gonna stand up for international law. He's a wanted war criminal, and we will do our duty as part of the ICC.

SPEAKER_02 35:15

Yeah, I think you know what's crazy is actually it puts him out of step with some of the other big European powers. So, for example, France had argued that they could never arrest Bibi. Germany said that they could never arrest Bibi, Italy said that they couldn't, but this is little old Hungary is out there being like, oh yeah, yeah, we would arrest him, sure. Uh and so, I mean, I don't know which way to read it. It could be uh political positioning. Israel is dramatically unpopular around the world, has been now for years. Even in European countries, which are very pro-Israel at an actual government level, their population has been very against Israel, or much more so than even the US population now for years. So if you were to take it, you know, full step, I think, with Hungary, this is like the South Korea example. People like Magyar or in South Korea, especially South Korea, you don't need an opinion on Israel. We're on a different side of the globe, like whatever. And then they get you into a war and you're like, fuck you, actually.

SPEAKER_15 36:13

You know, it's one of those where I think those are going to help to crash the global economy. Crash massive repercussions are my own people. You're like, okay, now we've got a problem.

SPEAKER_02 36:21

Now we have a problem. Right, exactly. Now we have a problem. Uh with Hungary, I have no idea where this came from, except maybe in trying to position himself as uh, you know, against uh Orban in trying to because if you were to guess, Orban, you know, is lost because of corruption. Obviously, people got sick of the government apparatus over the last 16 years. Magyar is still running. In fact, he's saying he's a corrupt sellout for letting more illegal or letting more immigrants in, like on a guest worker program. I'm gonna shut that down. He kind of portrayed himself as like the cleaner candidate. With that respect, I bet you that the same influence, like of Israeli money or influence in their politics, is probably seen in the same way. Same with Russia, any of these forces that were seen as controlling or like above the fray in terms of uh Orbon. So that's probably what he's trying to, he's probably trying to convey a message of I'm my own man, I'm gonna act in your own interest, which I'm I'm here for.

SPEAKER_15 37:14

Yeah, it's also very embarrassing to other European countries like France and Germany that are also signatories to the ICC, but have made all these convoluted arguments about why they don't have to arrest Netanyahu if he shows up on their soil. So it's humiliating. Um, Orban had apparently was had initiated the process to withdraw Hungary from the ICC altogether. And Magyar is also saying, no, I'm reversing that process. We're gonna stay part of the ICC. Netanyahu was planning to visit Hungary in the fall. So this is not just like, you know, completely idle speculation. I guess he's gonna have to rethink those plans, given this uh new uh new pronouncement from um from Magyar. So uh so yeah, pretty interesting, like I said, very humiliating for other countries, European countries in particular, which posture as being pro-human rights and caring about international law, et cetera, and not only when it comes to Israel, but also when it comes to the US. I mean, how many of them had anything to say about our illegal and offensive war against Iran? Very, very little, very muted to the extent there was any. There's a little bit from France. Spain is basically the only country that has come out with a full-throated condemnation of, you know, actions from the US here clearly violate international laws.

Election Officials Face Threats And Doubt

SPEAKER_02 38:24

Yes, that's exactly right. All right, let's get to anti-Semitism, shall we?

SPEAKER_16 38:27

After Virginia voters backed a push by Democrats to redraw congressional maps in their favor, President Trump, without evidence, called it a rigged election and a travesty of justice. It's the latest example of the president casting doubt on the U.S. election process. Liz Landers joins us again with more on the concerns local election officials are expressing with midterm election season well underway.

SPEAKER_20 39:16

So we spoke to several local election officials about their worries over security resources and getting the federal support they need.

SPEAKER_10 39:28

I'm Derek Bowens, the elections director for Durham County, North Carolina. Um, and I've been the director of elections here for nine years.

SPEAKER_19 39:34

My name is Carly Kapas, I'm the Weld County Clerk and Recorder in Colorado.

SPEAKER_06 39:39

I'm Scott McDonald, and I've been Dane County Clerk for 14 years.

SPEAKER_19 39:42

Uh yeah, I've I've been uh threatened with coming and being dragged out of my office and charred and feathered in the parking lot.

SPEAKER_11 39:49

Our concerns about physical security um issues this year are pretty wide. And keep in mind, last year in Colorado, we had an election office down in Archuletta County firebomb. Somebody threw a Molotov cocktail into their tabulation room window. So these things that are that have been threats have passed over into actual violence against election officers and election officials.

SPEAKER_10 40:11

In 2024, we moved it to a brand new consolidated facility uh with cameras, duress buttons, bulletproof glass, bullet stick doors.

SPEAKER_19 40:20

The election enthusiasts, as I will now try to call them, they found out that I was expecting a child. Their rhetoric became focused on my unborn child. I received emails and messages uh saying, you know, to the extent of uh your unborn child is, you know, the seed of the devil.

SPEAKER_06 40:43

They they've come up with a conspiracy theory, and by the time you formulate a response to it, they've already moved on to something else. I mean, the point isn't the conspiracy theory, it's just to sow doubt. It's to make people doubt who won, uh, not trust the system, and that's really damaging.

SPEAKER_19 41:00

The support that we're getting from SISA, DHS, and some other of our federal partners uh is drastically changed. Uh in my opinion, at this point, there's just none.

SPEAKER_11 41:13

They undercut all of the competent people who actually understood the mission, had built relationships with the community, and then literally brought uh foxes into the handhouse.

SPEAKER_10 41:22

Um I think my biggest concern is um what comes as a result of misinformation. Um I do have concerns about potential federal presence at polling places if we kind of look at some of the executive orders, some of the things that we've heard.

SPEAKER_06 41:38

Was the FBI gonna show up at our door? Are they gonna try to seize our equipment, our ballots? Um, can we expect ICE agents or other federal agents at the polls in November?

SPEAKER_10 41:48

I have hope that our democracy will sustain and that we'll continue to uh you know execute elections properly and people will accept the results. Uh, but some of the rhetoric is a concern.

SPEAKER_11 41:57

People have fought and died for this right. You know, people have marched and been beaten for this right. Clerks understand that, and their teams understand that they're up to the moment for it, they're working hard to prepare for it.

ProPublica On Federal Election Guardrails

SPEAKER_20 42:08

A recent investigation by ProPublica details a nationwide effort by the president and his allies to gain influence over the officials and offices that administer elections at the state and local level. For more, I'm joined now by Jen Fifield, one of the reporters covering that story. Jen, thank you for joining NewsHour. Thanks for having me on. Your reporting looks at what you describe as a long-standing strategy to reshape election administration. Can you explain some of what is happening, what you found in your reporting?

SPEAKER_17 42:39

Sure. So we studied the 2020 election and the guardrails that prevented Trump from overturning the election at that time and what he's done since he took office the second time to try to dismantle some of those guardrails. That included includes cybersecurity officials that were overseeing the cybersecurity infrastructure of our elections federally. And that includes people within the Department of Justice who were doing things like protecting law enforcement from public uh from partisan investigations into elections.

SPEAKER_20 43:12

You mentioned cybersecurity. There's this little known agency. People may not have heard of this CISA Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. It's historically helped states with cybersecurity of their own elections. We heard from election officials that we interviewed who say that they don't trust CISA anymore to help them. What changes have occurred there over the second Trump administration?

SPEAKER_17 43:36

Sure. So CISA was created by Trump actually in 2017 and built up trust among these local officials who are really used to running their own elections. Now what we see is the people that they've grown to trust have all left. And Trump has put into place, or the administration has put into place, people who have in the past questioned the 2020 election results or even spread misinformation about that election. These are people now trying to create communicate with the same state officials, the same local officials that ran those elections and believe they're free and fair. So the trust has really broken down.

SPEAKER_20 44:12

You described that you're reporting an exodus of sorts of election officials that have left the federal government at agencies like the Department of Homeland Security after 2020. How many people left and why have they left?

SPEAKER_17 44:25

We found about 75 or more people across the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, intelligence agencies that were working on elections. They either resigned, were forced out, or their entire entire structure was dismantled. And this includes people, like I said, that watch over cybersecurity, that make sure that there is no foreign influence influence in our elections, and other people within the Department of Justice that did voting protection lawsuits.

SPEAKER_20 44:58

There have been plenty of threats from the president, especially during his first term, to try to change elections, but they focused more on challenging things after the fact. How is it different now?

SPEAKER_17 45:10

These people are already doing unprecedented actions across the country. For example, we saw the FBI raid in Georgia for their 2020 election material. We saw action in Maricopa County, them subpoenaeing our 2020 election information. And now we see them in Michigan demanding that they get information and ballots about the 2024 election. These are actions that experts say may not have taken place if people like the public integrity section in the Department of Justice still existed to judge whether these actions were politically motivated. So we're seeing a lot of action to look in the 2020 election and a lot of things to prepare too for the upcoming midterms.

SPEAKER_20 45:53

There are election officials now in roles across the country who ran on some of these unfounded claims that the 2020 election was stolen. How are these people shaping what we're seeing now?

SPEAKER_17 46:07

Well, they're definitely trying to do things like, for example, some secretaries of state are uh running their voter rolls through this new save tool that's supposed to show them non-citizens to remove from their voter rolls. And they're moving forward with this, even though we've found that there's inaccuracies, that they're actually identifying citizens and marking them for removal from the voter rolls. So uh one of the big concerns from experts is that somehow these voters would be purged ahead of the election.

SPEAKER_20 46:36

There are some outside groups like the election integrity. Network who are helping to shape some of the policy and some of the personnel in the Trump administration. Talk a little bit about that organization.

SPEAKER_17 46:49

Sure. This is an organization that's run by Cleta Mitchell, who was a former Trump lawyer, and a few of the people within it are now in the federal government. And that includes Heather Honey, who was a part of the Election Integrity Network, and now helps to oversee voting systems. I think part of the concern is if there's any insinuation that voting machines are insecure, and that comes from the federal government. That comes from people that believe that the 2020 election was stolen. That's really hard to counter.

A Closing Reflection On Quiet Strength

SPEAKER_20 47:20

Jen Feifeld with ProPublica, thank you so much for coming on and talking about this very important reporting. Thank you for having me on.

SPEAKER_00 47:26

There is a kind of strength in this world, my friends, that does not shout, does not boast, does not demand the spotlight. And if I pause for a moment here, it's because this truth is simple. But it carries a weight many of us overlook. I'm talking about quiet strength. The strength that does not need applause to be real. The strength that does not need recognition to be righteous. The strength that lives in a man's heart long before it reaches his hands. We think the strongest voice must be the truest one. The boldest stance must be the bravest. The biggest crowd must be the right crowd. But a life has shown me again and again that real strength is often carried by those who speak softly, walk humbly, and suffer silently. Quiet strength is the mother who works two jobs and still finds enough love to tuck her children into bed. Quiet strength is the young man who refuses to choose violence, even when violence seems to be the only language being spoken around him. Quiet strength is the soul that bends but does not break. During the movement, I met many giants, and most of them were not on the stage. They were the old women who marched with aching knees, the students who sat at lunch counters with shaking hands, the fathers who stood guard at their doors at night, praying their children would see the dawn. They did not yell. They did not see cameras, but their presence, steady, faithful, unshaken, was stronger than any roar the world could make. You see, noise is temporary. Quiet strength endures. Let me tell you something else. Quiet strength is not weakness. Quiet strength is discipline. Quiet strength is the decision to stand tall without the need to push others down. It is the courage to hold your tongue when anger rises. The wisdom to listen when pride wants to speak. The patience to wait for the truth to reveal itself. There is a reason Scripture tells us, be still and know that I am God. Stillness is not the absence of power, stillness is the presence of deep power. Now I admit, I've met some folks who think if they are not the loudest one in the room, they must be the weakest. And once a man said to me, Reverend, I don't know how to be quiet. If I'm quiet, people won't hear me. And I said, Brother, if your message is true, they'll hear it even in a whisper. He laughed, and well I laughed too, because sometimes we all need to be reminded that leadership isn't measured in decibels. Quiet strength is what keeps a man honest when no one is watching. Quiet strength is what allows a woman to forgive when her heart wants revenge. Quiet strength is what helps a child stand up again after the world has knocked him down. And quiet strength, quiet strength is what keeps hope alive when despair knocks on your door. So if you feel unseen today, if you feel unheard, if your strength doesn't look like the world's strength, don't you worry, don't you doubt yourself. For the strongest trees do not grow in the noise of the storm. They grow in the silence of long, patient seasons. Walk with your quiet strength, stand in it, live by it, and one day the world will look back and realize that it was your steady, gentle, unshakable spirit that held far more power than its loudest voices.