← Americast
Americast
Why is Trump blowing up Venezuelan "drug boats"?
00:32:22
The administration has been accused of breaking international law.
Loading summary
Transcript95 lines
- [00:00]
Justin
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.
- [00:06]
Asma Khalid
America is changing and so is the world.
- [00:10]
Tristan Redman
But what's happening in America isn't just the cause of global upheaval. It's also a symptom of disruption that's happening everywhere.
- [00:18]
Asma Khalid
I'm Asma Khalid in Washington, D.C. i'm.
- [00:21]
Tristan Redman
Tristan Redman in London. And this is the global story.
- [00:25]
Asma Khalid
Every weekday, we'll bring you a story from this intersection where the world and America meet.
- [00:30]
Tristan Redman
Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [00:38]
Sarah
Today we're going to do one of our Americas under the Radar episodes where we specifically look at important events that are going under reported because of all the other news that there is of the Trump administration. And today we want to look at the stories about boats allegedly smuggling drugs from Venezuela into the United States, which the Trump administration are simply blowing out of the water and then taking those videos and proudly posting them on social Media. Welcome to AmericasT. AmericasT.
- [01:10]
Mariana
AmericasT from BBC News.
- [01:13]
Sarah
When Donald Trump calls, they say, yes, sir. Right away, sir.
- [01:16]
Pete Hegseth
Happy to lick your boot, sir.
- [01:18]
Sarah
We are the sickest country in the world. Oh, dear.
- [01:21]
Pete Hegseth
Are you worried that billionaires are going to go hungry?
- [01:24]
Mariana
Of course the president supports peaceful protests. What a stupid question.
- [01:27]
Donald Trump
Are you still talking about Jeff Free Epstein?
- [01:37]
Sarah
Hello, it's Sarah in the BBC's Washington bureau.
- [01:40]
Mariana
And it is Mariana, aka misinformation, in the worldwide headquarters of Americus in London.
- [01:45]
Justin
And it's Justin sitting alongside Mariana in those same worldwide headquarters.
- [01:50]
Mariana
We've not sat next to each other.
- [01:51]
Justin
No, it's really exciting.
- [01:52]
Mariana
I've been in San Francisco. I've actually been in America, you see.
- [01:55]
Justin
Yeah, which gives you kudos that I can't even pretend to have. And we're gonna talk later on. I should say right at the beginning, we are gonna talk about another thing as well that we all might have missed if we hadn't decided to talk about it today. But it is really interesting. Conservative commentators, MAGA influencers, criticizing the choice of the super bowl halftime show. This all important piece of Americana, the one for the next super bowl, which is in early 2026. And. And they have selected the Puerto Rican pop star Bad Bunny as the halftime show headliner next year. And that has caused quite a row. So we will get to that later.
- [02:33]
Mariana
Particularly because Justin's new specialist subject is apparently Bad Bunny.
- [02:38]
Justin
What I'm saying I know more about Bad Bunny than you might think by looking at me.
- [02:43]
Mariana
Okay, but before we talk about Bad Bunny and the super bowl, let's first talk about Something else. And Ameracaster Ruth in Cambridgeshire has emailed in. She says, would you be able to talk a bit about the recent sinking of Venezuelan boats allegedly carrying drugs by US Forces and leading to the killing of the people on board? Is this legal internationally? Is anyone except Venezuela reacting to it? What are the implications of this, Sarah?
- [03:08]
Sarah
Well, let me run you through just exactly what it is that's been going on, because, you know, under any other circumstances, this would be an enormous story. But, you know, there's so much news coming out of the White House all the time, as we know, that there are things like this that we don't talk enough about. So Friday last week, Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, or war secretary, as he calls himself, said that American forces had killed four people during a military strike on a boat that was off the coast of Venezuela. He said that it was trafficking drugs. And in fact, he posted on X the strike was conducted in international waters just off the coast of Venezuela, while the vessel was transporting substantial amounts of narcotics. Now, they've produced no evidence for that whatsoever. And because of this strike, the boat was blown up before any they could try to even get any evidence. The people on board were killed, not arrested. And this is not the first time this has been going on for about a month or so. There have been at least three separate strikes that have killed a total of about 17 people over the last few weeks. And you won't be surprised that international lawyers, the UN Other people have been very critical of this, saying governments can't just go around murdering alleged drug traffickers, particularly not in international waters, when there's no evidence whatsoever that they've actually committed any of these crimes. And Republicans being quite critical about it as well. Let's have a listen, though, to what Donald Trump had to say when he was speaking at an event on Sunday celebrating the Navy's 250th birthday. He said that these strikes are about protecting American citizens.
- [04:38]
Donald Trump
In recent weeks, the Navy has supported our mission to blow the cartel terrorists the hell out of the water. You see that? And you know, there are no boats in the water anymore. You can't find any. We're having a hard time finding them. But, you know, it's a pretty tough thing we've been doing. But you have to think of it this way. Every one of those boats is responsible for the death of 25,000American people and the destruction of families. So when you think of it that way, what we're doing is actually an act of kindness. But we did another one Last night. Now we just can't find any. You know, it's the old story, we're so good at it, that there are no boats, in fact, even fishing boats. Nobody wants to go into the water anymore, Sorry to tell you that. But it's. We stop. We're stopping drugs coming into America, if that's okay. We're stopping drugs at a level that nobody's ever seen before.
- [05:39]
Mariana
It feels like there are some numbers there that possibly need querying, not least this line where he says, every one of those boats is responsible for the death of 25,000American people and the destruction of families. I guess there's two different points, isn't there? The exact numbers here, which there doesn't seem to be necessarily evidence to support the exact numbers. But obviously there is a significant impact of drugs on the U.S. and that's, I guess, just in what he's sort of getting at here.
- [06:04]
Justin
Yeah. And he knows it'll be popular. There's not going to be a big blowback in the United States itself to what he's portraying as and what will seem to most people to be the killing of people who don't deserve to stay alive because they're wreaking havoc with people's lives in the United States. But as our questioner suggests, she uses the word allegedly. I mean, you don't know who's on these boats. You don't know what's on the boats. You don't know if there are US Citizens on the boats who have all sorts of protections under US Law, but you don't know. Anyway, maybe there are people who've been kidnapped on these boats. Maybe there aren't drugs on the boats. They just don't know. And in those terms, it seems like an act of recklessness, as Sarah's dead. Right. In any other time, we'd be talking about it all the time, and so would Americans, but it's just kind of gone under the radar. So, you know, quite apart from, we'll get to this in a second, the legality of it. Because that's something for you, Sarah, to weigh in on what people are saying about the constitutional legality of what he's doing, it just seems to me to be the most staggeringly reckless thing to do. Even if you can make the case that there are drugs that come across that stretch of water and they are carried in boats, you don't know that it's these ones.
- [07:17]
Sarah
Why is it reckless, though? Reckless because you think there'll be retaliation from Venezuela or morally reckless?
- [07:24]
Justin
I think it's reckless because you don't know who you're killing. And the idea that Americans are now the American armed forces are killing people in international waters who, they don't know who they are or what they're doing seems to me to be an order of recklessness that we just haven't seen before.
- [07:44]
Sarah
Tells you a huge amount, though, about the Trump administration. Not just that they're prepared to do this, but that they're pleased with it, they're boasting about it. They will post on social media about it, they will celebrate it. There's a kind of torturous legal justification for them being able to do it, but they don't feel obligated to make that every time. I mean, you heard Donald Trump there. He's very happy to say, look, we see these people, we think they're doing bad things and we blow them up. They're proud of it. Of something that, as you say, is highly controversial and potentially reckless. There is a sort of justification whereby, first of all, Donald Trump signed a directive back in July authorizing lethal force against certain Latin American drugs cartels. And to do so, he designated them as terrorist organizations, I guess, saying that they do such harm to America by smuggling drugs in and of course in some cases illegal immigrants as well, that he defines that as terrorism. It's not, you know, this is not Al Qaeda that we're talking about here or isis. But he says that they're terrorist organizations. Then he, so he says that these are terrorists, that they're striking in the waters and that they're doing so in self defense because those boats would be coming with drugs to America to harm Americans. So, yeah, so firstly, you're saying drug smugglers are terrorists, and secondly, you're saying that stopping drugs coming into the country is self defense in a way that could be defined as such an international law and allow what's basically military action being taken against them. So that is, I mean, it's trying quite hard, I think, to come up with something that they're calling is it non international armed conflict with drug cartels allows them to take this action. And that would be, you know, it is source of great debate among legal scholars and things, and less so a source of outrage on the streets of America.
- [09:29]
Justin
And we should say as well, Pete Hegseth, the war secretary, as we must call him, directly contradicts what I've just said about not knowing who's on board the boat. In fact, let's let him, let's hear from him. He was asked specifically about it. By Fox News's Pete Doocy.
- [09:45]
Sarah
You have said the strikes will continue against narco terrorists. Every video of a cartel boat blowing up looks like it is a trailer for a Bat Bad Boys movie sequel. But how is that legal?
- [10:00]
Pete Hegseth
We have every authorization needed. These are designated as foreign terrorist organizations. They're a threat to the homeland. They're a threat to the American people. They've been poisoning our people for far too long. And President Trump said, no more. They're effectively designated just like Al Qaeda, which if I saw Al Qaeda in the conduct of doing something that was going to threaten and kill Americans, I had the right to do that. In Iraq and Afghanistan. If you're in our hemisphere and you're in the Caribbean, if you're north of Venezuela and you want to traffic drugs to the United States, you are a legitimate target of the United States military. And in each one of these strikes, we know where they're coming from, we know who they work for, we know where they're going, we know what they're carrying, we know how many people are on that boat. And that's why these are legitimate clean kills in pursuit of defending the homeland. And we hope it deters those foreign terrorist organizations from doing it, because the American people deserve to be defended.
- [10:47]
Mariana
Before we get into the use of that word terrorist, and I'm sure that we will in a second. But just on what the reporter asked, you know, saying every video of a cartel boat blowing up looks like a trailer for. For a movie, essentially, like that has been. That is one of the things that the Trump administration have been doing. They've been sharing these clips on social media, and they are quite literally, you know, very eye catching. They're the kinds of things that do.
- [11:12]
Justin
Kind of look like it's like a video game.
- [11:13]
Mariana
Yeah, yeah, it looks like a video game. Something out of a film. What I would say, though, and I find this quite interesting because, and I've spoken about it quite a lot, but Donald Trump's social media team, the administration social media team, are, are famously or infamously quite good at rage bait, posting the kinds of stuff that will trigger a reaction. And when they've posted different content around, for example, issues like immigration, often that content has actually been quite successful, if that's the right way of describing it, at evoking a reaction on either side, either lots of support or lots of people disagreeing. Interestingly, this stuff I don't think is cut through in the same way. It's almost why we're talking about it in this under the radar Sense, because there have been people reacting to. Of saying, whoa, what's going on here? But it almost feels like the step between the boat being blown up and then your life. I don't know that the gap there feels longer than perhaps when it comes to illegal immigration, for example, or the.
- [12:02]
Justin
Putting of the sombreros on the Democrats who went to see Donald Trump, which caused so much outrage, but also made some people laugh a lot. But it was kind of just. It didn't have that kind of sense of, well, nobody died.
- [12:13]
Mariana
Yeah, it's quite literary stunt. Whereas if someone is. If there is a boat being blown up and people are being killed by the us, it's kind of like, oh, hang on, this isn't really a stunt anymore. This isn't like, you know, an AI generated video or something. That's not real. It is real. And I was thinking about this actually, just in the context of having just been in San Francisco for this documentary I'm doing about social media algorithms. And I obviously witnessed in a way that feels so different to the uk, and I'm sure, Sarah, you see it a lot in different ways, but the impact that drugs do and can have, and particularly there in San Francisco, where there were, you know, entire areas that there were lovely areas, but there were also areas, areas where there was clearly a really serious public health problem. And it's kind of interesting because also you wonder whether, you know, if people are seeing these boats being blown up, will they expect in six months, a year that they're not going to see those same scenes on the streets of America? Well, the line there is probably not quite so straight as might be useful to Donald Trump's administration.
- [13:07]
Sarah
You make a very good point, Mariana, because it is visible, I mean, quite particularly in California, but in cities all over America, the way fentanyl use has changed the drug problem. Because we're accustomed to there being serious drug problems in the UK and in Europe, the same as there is America, many other countries, for decades now. And it's done, you know, heroin, crack cocaine, they've done huge harm to people, to societies, to families. And you can see the effect in homelessness and crime. But fentanyl is of a different order. And it is, as you say, even if you're lucky enough to have a family who's not been affected by it, you can see it on the streets almost daily, which, yeah, depending on your response, might give you huge compassion for the people who've been afflicted and their loved ones, or make you furious that this is, you know, causing some kind of public hazard on your way to enjoying yourself. But one way or another, you cannot escape what the effects of the fentanyl problem have been in America. So, yeah, people are probably more motivated to take serious action to deal with it. But that's a different question, of course, for whether or not there is any legality around being able to just simply blow boats out of the water and say after the fact, we know who was on them and we know what they were doing without producing any evidence whatsoever.
- [14:22]
Justin
And it's also. Is it terrorism? I mean, because these, these people, these drug lords are awful people and there's no one is defending them. But are they really terrorists? I mean, they, they, they like the United States as a market.
- [14:37]
Mariana
That word is so weaponized, though, isn't it? It's like terrorist has come to just mean enemy often when Donald Trump is using it. But actually, terrorist in the sense that we define it, like here at the BBC, for example, is usually to do with a prescribed organization. It's like a group of people with a very obvious, often goal. And I guess, I guess, like you could argue maybe there is some kind of ideological motive, but. Or motive to cause harm. But really, I mean, most of this stuff is about money, is it not?
- [15:02]
Justin
Yeah, the motive isn't to cause harm that damages the market. The, the motive is to keep the market going, isn't it? I just think that's. That's weird. I also, I mean, you think, Sarah, when you, when you look at what the legal justifications are, this'll be a bit of prehistory for Marianna. But Barack Obama had a drone strike that killed a U.S. citizen. I think it was in Yemen, a guy called Anwar Orlaki. And it was a big issue at the time, wasn't it? Because he was a US Citizen. He was killed deliberately in a drone strike. Obama signed it off when he was president. I think there's any doubt at all that he wanted to kill Americans and he wasn't someone who was friendly towards the United States and he was a US Citizen. But, you know, the fact that he was a US Citizen, I remember at the time the fact that he was a US Citizen. I mean, entire screeds have been written by constitutional scholars about the killing of Anwar or Lackey. I mean, to the extent that I remember his name, and I do remember very much, but, you know, it was a really big deal. And it just seems to me that now all of that kind of is just being chucked out of the window and you're just seeing People killed willy nilly. And as I say, they don't. I mean, all right, I suppose I should take Peak Hegseth's word for it. But what if there was an American citizen on one of these, on one of these boats? What if they'd got it wrong? I mean, that is a new order of difficulty, it seems to me constitutionally, if indeed anyone cares anymore.
- [16:28]
Sarah
There has been a slightly tortured legal defense of what they're doing. Donald Trump designated certain Latin American drug cartels as terrorist organizations back in July. As we've just been saying, not necessarily everybody's definition of terrorism, simply trying to smuggle drugs and illegal immigrants into America. But he did that to give them the justification to take actions against them that you couldn't take simply against drug smuggling suspects. And they have claimed that these particular strikes of Venezuelan borts are military self defense. That is these drugs coming into America would do great harm to Americans. So in defending the homeland, they're stopping them from coming. There was even a leaked memo sent to Congress that's been reported in the media here saying that the government had decided it's in a non international armed conflict with drug cartels. Now, not quite sure what legal basis you can have for deciding that you're in a non international armed conflict with these kind of organizations, but so they are working around a legal defense. A lot of legal scholars have said that this just doesn't add up to anything. But even to maintain this, you would still have to demonstrate at some point that you knew it was members of these drug cartels who were on the boats and you knew that they were smuggling drugs into America before you attacked them. And I think it's the lack of any evidence of that whatsoever other than Pete Hegseth sort of insisting that they knew this in a rather macho way. We've heard that from this administration before and it's turned out that they didn't have any evidence around these kind of things. So yeah, without any form of due process being involved in determining who's on the boats and what they've got on them. That's why it looks as though it's just, yes, murder rather than self defense.
- [18:08]
Justin
And where the heck, Sarah, is Congress in all of this?
- [18:11]
Sarah
Well, where have they been since 21st January? Just when it came to standing up to the Trump administration and doing any of these kind of things, Things. I mean, the answer right now, of course, as to where his Congress is, it's shut down. And so they wouldn't be able to do anything about this Right now anyway. But no, there aren't, you know, big questions being asked about this. People are not being dragged into hearings on the Hill to demand what their justification is. We're not hearing from legal scholars giving evidence about whether or not the justification from the Trump administration holds up. It is, yeah. I mean, as we said at the beginning, flying a little bit under the radar. It's not that nobody knows about it. The strikes are reported, they just don't seem to make. Yeah. The kind of fuss.
- [18:51]
Justin
Yeah, there are one or two. I mean, it's all the usual suspects, isn't it? People on the libertarian wing of the Republican Party. It is worth saying, and I've heard some people on, on right wing podcasts saying, oh, hang on a second, I'm not sure we should be doing this. And Rand Paul, the senator, the Libertarian senator has, has been critical of it, hasn't he? And, and I think, Sarah, the other thing is, and, and we, we mentioned this right at the beginning, didn't we? You were saying to me what, what did I mean by reckless? Did I mean they were going to get themselves into a war with Venezuela? Well, when people look back to what happened in Panama, which was right at the end of the 1980s, they invaded, they, they seized Manuel Noriega, they brought him back to America, didn't they? And they stuck him in jail. I mean, they tried him and he was found guilty. There is a judicial process. But, you know, they went and took him and brought him back. And you wonder whether the Trump administration, number one, it just seems to me that is 100% not what they said they were going to do. They weren't interested in that kind of thing. There's sort of international policing actions, etc, etc. Number two, if they did do it then would they then lose a lot of support in the MAGA base because the MAGA base doesn't want this kind of thing, or would it be, you know, a small successful operation, they get rid of a guy who's, you know, stolen an election and all the rest of it. They could tell that story to people. Would it actually be popular? I don't know what the answer is to that.
- [20:16]
Sarah
Well, this is an alternative because what you're discussing, as controversial as it was the idea of going into another country and arresting the president, bringing him to the United States, that, as you say, is exactly the kind of thing that President Trump said he wasn't going to do, not get the United States involved in that kind of international action. But it's so much easier, isn't it just to blow a few boats out of the water, look like you're doing something, as he says. I mean, he's right when he says it has deterred a lot of other vessels being on the sea, whether they were there for shipping or any other legitimate purposes or for smuggling drugs. I think what we're witnessing is exactly the alternative to what the United States used to do, which was to use its military might to go into countries and try and tackle the problem at its source. Now they're more than happy to just attack the symptoms rather than the disease. And if that has the desired effect for America, they don't really mind what the consequences are for other countries.
- [21:13]
Mariana
Isn't there also an element here about perception? And, I mean, I know we can't get inside Donald Trump's head or the administration's head, but how these kinds of actions. Look, you're projecting this image that we are against these people or we are against this thing. You know, whether it's immigration, whether it's drugs, whatever, whether it's another country, a particular idea that this is the approach that they take. And it's kind of like, what is the stuntiest thing that we can do? And we should say here that this is a stunt where people are killed. Like, it's not a sort of. It's not like some of the other stunts we talk about that. You know, I'm sure if Donald Trump was sitting in the worldwide headquarters with us, he would say that it's, it's not a stunt. It's a legitimate measure that they're taking in order to deal with a problem and to deter other people from, from smuggling drugs in this way and, and everything else. The other thing I was thinking about is if people are seeing these boats being blown up and then the situation in their streets or their neighborhoods isn't changing. What does Donald Trump say then? He. He. Does he say, oh, it's the governor in your state who's, you know, for example, Governor Newsom or whoever it is who, who's a Democrat. They actually are still allowing. Like, when do you admit that maybe you are responsible for that?
- [22:19]
Sarah
Okay, on a slightly lighter note, same theme, stories that maybe aren't getting as much attention as they ought to because of the other overwhelming news. But let's talk about the Super Bowl. So even if you're not interested in football or sports, the super bowl is a huge cultural moment in the United States because of the halftime show. They always get a massive headline act, but on a musical show, in the middle of it, that's specially choreographed and created and it's, it's an extravaganza in and of itself. And you can ignore the fact that it happens in the midway between two bits of football being played if you want to. Of course, world's full of sport fans who absolutely adore this sporting event as well. And the headline has been announced and it is the Puerto Rican pop star Bad Bunny. Huge all over the world. Really not liked by conservative influencers. MAGA types in the United States, they are not happy about this at all. They see this as a kind of political announcement that somebody who doesn't like the administration is going to be headlining the show. And so it has become quite big news.
- [23:20]
Mariana
So for any Americans, you haven't heard of Bad Bunny. He is obviously super famous. He's a US citizen, but he is from Puerto Rico. He's a rapper, he's a singer, he's someone who is, is really credited with making music in Spanish, Spanish language music, very mainstream in the United States. He was in a very eye catching Calvin Klein advertising. Other underwear is available which made him go really viral last year. He's gone out with. I can't remember if he's still going out. You might know this. He's still going out with Kendall Jenner, one of the Kardashians. Oh, they're not going out anymore, I'm told reliably by the producer in the gallery. And he has a huge, huge presence on social media. He's also someone who has been vocal about politics in the United States. He basically said he would not perform in the mainland states over concerned that his concerts and people who attend them could be targeted by ICE raids. These raids have been going on, so he's become a bit of a sort of figurehead for that. And that's why he's such a pointed choice, might be the way of describing it for the super bowl, which is the genre of football that I'm not interested in.
- [24:26]
Justin
Not soccer, but yeah, football with the helmets.
- [24:30]
Mariana
The real football with the helmets and the running about.
- [24:32]
Justin
We should say the criticism of it before we get to talk a bit about Bad Bunny, which I'm desperate to do because I want, I want you all to know everything I know about him. But. But before we do that, it does come right from the top, doesn't it? So the Homeland Security Secretary herself, Kristi Noem, talking to the conservative podcaster Benny Johnson on Friday. Let's listen.
- [24:51]
Kristi Noem
The NFL is sending a message presumably to maga, to the Trump administration by choosing this anti ice, anti Immigration enforcement performer. He's scared to perform in America because he's worried that ICE will have enforcement at his concerts. As we said in multiple interviews. What is your message to the NFL? What is your message to Bad Bunny? Will there be ICE enforcement at the Super Bowl?
- [25:13]
There will be because the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for keeping it safe. So I have the responsibility for making sure everybody goes to the super bowl has the opportunity to enjoy it and to leave. And that's what America is about. So, yeah, we'll be all over that place and I can. We're going to enforce the law. So I think people should not be coming to the super bowl unless there are law abiding Americans who love this country.
- [25:34]
And you message the NFL with this decision. It seems like they were trying to send a message to the Trump administration.
- [25:40]
Well, they suck and we'll win and God will bless us and we'll stand and be proud of ourselves at the end of the day. And they won't be able to sleep.
- [25:49]
Sarah
At night because they don't know what.
- [25:51]
Kristi Noem
They believe and they're so weak. We'll fix it.
- [25:55]
Mariana
And then Bad Bunny returned to host Saturday Night Live for the second time at the weekend and addressed the backlash in his opening monologue.
- [26:02]
Pete Hegseth
I'm very excited to be doing the super bowl, and I know that people all around the world who love my music are also happy.
- [26:18]
Mariana
He then switched to Spanish partway through to say, especially all the Latinos and Latinas in the whole world and here in the United States, all the people who have worked to open doors. More than an achievement for me, it's a milestone for all of us. Demonstrating that our footprints and our contribution in this country, no one can ever remove or erase.
- [26:37]
Pete Hegseth
If you didn't understand what I just.
- [26:40]
Justin
Said.
- [26:43]
Pete Hegseth
You have four months to learn.
- [26:46]
Justin
Okay, so here are my thoughts about Bad Bunny. Number one, for goodness sake, does everything have to be politicized? And I think to a lot of Americans it's just, well, yeah, in your world it does, but. Oh, goodness, he's an interesting choice. Cause he's a kind of younger person's choice. So my daughter Clara, American citizen, really.
- [27:06]
Mariana
Huge friend of the pod.
- [27:07]
Justin
Hugh, friend of the pod. And she absolutely, you know, she follows him. She knows lots of people who follow him. She does speak Spanish, so I think that probably helps. But. But the interesting thing that she tells me about him is that he records and sings almost exclusively in Spanish. And that for the super bowl is going to be a change. But, you know, the whole business of I mean Puerto Rico. It's not as if he's some kind of foreigner. Puerto Ricans have every right that a US Citizen has. And it's a culture that is having a moment, actually. That's what Clara tells me. It's a culture worldwide. And the idea that you sort of come out, I just think for the Trump administration and for the MAGA people, I mean, yes, he is political in the sense that he's a supporter of Puerto Rico and a supporter, as he said, in that Latinos and Latinas and open access for them into the corridors of power in America and all the rest of it. It just seems to me to be a fight that doesn't do them any good and ultimately can't be a winner for them.
- [28:10]
Mariana
I would say that actually just on. And you mentioning your daughter, for example, really liking Bad Bunny. He's hugely, hugely popular with an audience that the NFL will be wanting to get. You know, they've got a bit of an aging audience. They'll want younger people to really watch it. They also want to make a statement. They'll want there to be loads of clips going viral. Everyone, you know, they want people to want to tune in. And people will, because he'll probably make a bit of a statement. So I think there's. There's something interesting on that choice just because it's a little bit provocative. And also he's just super, super popular. And so you can see why they've. You can see why they've gone for it. And I really do think this in the kind of social media world where. Where everything is polarized and you kind of have to take a view. Deciding not to take a view is quite radical and would. And inauthentic. And quite a lot of people would have a really serious problem with it. But certainly within Hispanic communities who, like, they have been targeted unfairly, Sarah, it.
- [28:59]
Justin
Would be like Puerto Rico's Kamala Harris.
- [29:01]
Sarah
Well, he did remember, he responded personally, Bad Bunny, when that comedian made that joke, it was at the big Trump rally at Madison Square Garden just before the election. And a comedian said that there was an island of garbage floating in the middle of the ocean. And it's called Puerto Rico.
- [29:16]
Justin
That's the one, yeah.
- [29:17]
Sarah
And we were speculating at the time, would they lose lots of Puerto Rican votes in the crucial state of Pennsylvania? Could it cost them Pennsylvania? And Bad Bunny did speak out quite forcefully at that point. I have to be hon. When he entered my consciousness, not because of all the music he had released up until that point. So just bring Me a little bit up to date. Justin, your favorite bad Bunny track.
- [29:40]
Justin
You're putting me on the spot there because there are so many. He only knows the background, the intel, my favorite tunes. I'm going to talk to Clara and I'll get back to you. But I promise next episode I will have a good answer.
- [29:52]
Mariana
He'll do remark us in fluent Spanish sentence. On your point though, Justin, also that you were saying about. Is this something where the Trump administration's grasp on the public opinion around this issue is perhaps not as spot on as sometimes it can be?
- [30:08]
Justin
Well, I don't know what Sarah is. That is. What do you think? Is that. Is that right or not?
- [30:12]
Mariana
Well, it's.
- [30:13]
Sarah
I think it's an interesting point to test the loyalty of so many Hispanic voters that they have attracted recently. And we've explained many times that we shouldn't be surprised that an administration that's promising to crack down on illegal immigration should have support from Latino and Latina voters here in America who are here entirely legally. But a cultural attack like this sort of saying, you know, we'll have immigration officers outside the super bowl because somebody will be performing in the Spanish language and therefore a whole bunch of illegal immigrants might turn up to try and listen to him. That might be, you know, stretching into cultural areas that could be considered a little bit more racist and perhaps test the loyalty of some of these Hispanic voters. But then again, as we say all the time, it's the economy stupid, isn't it? And you know, maybe people are prepared to shrug off this over politicization of cultural events. We shall see. It's an interesting one though, isn't it, to watch where it's possible that an administration that feels it is so triumphant and transcendent culturally in America at the moment can possibly take things for granted that too many people share their views and just get. Get a bit cock about it, potentially. It's something. It's an interesting thing to watch.
- [31:27]
Justin
If you're gonna press me on my favorite song, it's Debi Tira Mas photos.
- [31:33]
Mariana
I will just say that Justin texted that to Clara and received a response quite remarkably in the space of about five minutes.
- [31:40]
Justin
She's meant to be busy at university. Just shows, doesn't it? It's 10 to 4 in the afternoon here in London, so that tells you something about the life of a university student. She's presumably back from lectures.
- [31:51]
Sarah
We should probably wrap up and, and say that's it for this particular episode. We'll be back with you soon. Till then, bye.
- [31:57]
Mariana
Bye.
- [31:58]
Justin
Adios, amigos.
- [31:59]
Donald Trump
Bye.
- [32:02]
Mariana
Ameracast. Ameracast from BBC News.
- [32:06]
Justin
Well, look, thanks for listening all the way to the end of today's AmericasT. You are now officially an AmericasT. It is, of course, a ride, a wild ride, navigating the US News, particularly in the era of Trump. But you have made it. If you have a comment, a question about the things we've talked about or anything at all, actually, get in touch with us. The email is americastbc.co.uk the WhatsApp is 033-01-239480. We answer your questions every single week, actually, on the podcast, so keep them coming. You can join the online community as well on Discord. The link is in the podcast description on your app. We will be back with another podcast very soon. So until then, see you later. Bye.
- [33:02]
Asma Khalid
America is changing and so is the world.
- [33:07]
Tristan Redman
But what's happening in America isn't just the cause of global upheaval. It's also a symptom of disruption that's happening everywhere.
- [33:15]
Asma Khalid
I'm Asma Khalid in Washington, dc.
- [33:17]
Tristan Redman
I'm Tristan Redman in London, and this is the Global Story.
- [33:21]
Asma Khalid
Every weekday, we'll bring you a story from this intersection where the world and America meet.
- [33:27]
Tristan Redman
Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.