← The Daily Beans
The Daily Beans
Breakdown for the Week Ending 11/2/2025
00:36:17
Today on the Breakdown, ICE wants to offer cash bounties to inform on immigrants as the government moves toward invoking the insurrection act, DHS is caught red-handed fabricating propaganda, and police confess to a coverup of feds shooting at an unarmed Black man in DC.
Loading summary
Transcript14 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hey, everybody, I'm Alison Gill. I'm back from my vacation. Thank you for letting me bring you last week's show from a hotel room instead of the studio. I wasn't going to do a show last week, but that Epstein connection to secret Pentagon donor Tim Mellon was too important not to cover. So thanks for watching. Now, today's top story. ICE wants to offer cash to private bounty hunters to inform on immigrants. I have a document from the Department of Homeland Security revealing plans to pay bounties to private vendors using our taxpayer money. They know there's more of us than there are of them, and now they have to start building their network of informants in exchange for cash. Plus, Trump wants to move away from the more timid and gentle ICE operations to the more brutal and violent Customs and Border Protection ops, led by the guy I've been talking about pretty much every week here on the Breakdown, Greg Bovino, the guy who lied in court, the guy who calls immigrants scum, filth and trash. Head of Trump's secret police, AKA Customs and Border Protection. But he's actually changed his look a little bit to fit the part. Look at this. This is how he showed up to court to testify this week about tear gassing peaceful protesters without warning. Look at him. Look at this guy. I mean, come on, he is one pair of Mr. Potato Head glasses away from being Himmler himself. Look, if you don't want us to call you Nazis, maybe don't do Nazi stuff or maybe don't dress exactly like a Nazi if it walks like a duck and siegs heil like a duck. Anyway, if that weren't enough, the government's been caught red handed fabricating propaganda and potential contempt charges could happen against the government because they deployed the National Guard to Portland after they were ordered not to. Plus, I'll talk about the COVID up. At the Department of Homeland Security, there's a huge cover up. A federal agent fired shots at an unarmed black man and a local police officer confessed under oath that his superior officer instructed him to cover it up. It's a straight up confession of a cover up. All that and more on today's episode of the Breakdown. So in Nazi Germany, the Gestapo used propaganda to trick the people into thinking there were more of them than there were, that the Gestapo was everywhere, all the time, omnipresent, and that their dissenters were outnumbered. But in reality, there was only about one secret police officer for every 10,000 Germans, one for every 10,000. So to maintain the facade of being all knowing and all present and all seeing the secret police relied on a network of thousands of informants, private citizens who passed on information to the Nazis about their friends and family members and neighbors. Now here in the United states, there's about one ICE or CBP agent, that's Customs and Border Protection agent. There's about one of them for every 8,500 of us. And now it appears the Department of Homeland Security is worried about that deficiency. So it's I think starting to build its network of informants using our tax dollars to do it. This week the Department of Homeland Security issued a Request for Information memorandum to gauge interest in recruiting informers in the private sector and to find out how much money it would take to get these private companies to help them find and target immigrants. Quote this is a request for information only. RFI the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. immigration and Customs Enforcement is conducting market research for skip tracing and process. Serving as part of its market research, ICE is issuing this RFI to determine the estimated number of interested vendors capable of meeting this requirement. The government may use the responses to this RFI for information and planning purposes. Prospective vendors are required to submit proposed capabilities, proposed solutions, their thoughts on the government awarding contracts to multiple vendors at once. They're asked for feedback on an incentive based pricing structure. How much per human being do you require? What are your cost estimates for locating batches of human beings from ten thousand to a million at a time? Also, all your ideas are belong to us. Look, all your ideas become property of the United States government. That's interesting and here's the scope of the work here. Private citizens is how you calculate the cost to sell your soul what the life of one human being is worth. The vendor will be given a caseload of approximately 10,000 aliens with information residing in an area of the United States. There is the potential to receive further increments of 10,000 aliens after the vendor verifies the accuracy of the provided address or a new location. They may be asked to deliver and serve official government documents to the alien for an additional fee detailed in the incentive structure. The vendor shall verify that the address provided by the government is accurate and if the address provided by the government is not accurate, you provide new location data to the government that will allow the government to more easily locate the individual. That data can include addresses, phone numbers, work addresses, vehicle information, real property information, social media information. The vendor will provide a collection of photos and documents verifying the alien's residence or place of employment to the government. The government will respond to the verification either by closing the case or requesting document delivery. They're building their network of informants. And meanwhile, back at home base, the Department of Homeland Security, the Trump Miller regime has decided it prefers the Midway Blitz style terrorism of Customs and Border Protection to the more woke, I guess, targeted criminal enforcement operations of ice. They like what Customs and Border Protection is doing. You think ICE is bad? Customs and Border Protection is its evil twin. And this past Monday, the Trump administration purged ICE leadership and replaced them with Customs and Border Protection officials. As many as a dozen ICE leaders were replaced or reassigned, impacting more than half of the agency's 25 field offices. As senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, Aaron Reichland, Melnick pointed out, if you think things are bad now, it'll get worse. NBC reports the list of replacements was actually compiled by two Corey Lewandowski, a special government employee at DHS who advises Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Greg Bevino. Now, when we last spoke here on the breakdown, a federal judge in Chicago in a separate case from the National Guard deployment cases, the federal judge ordered Kristi Noem to produce Gregory Bevino to answer for potential restraining order violations over Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago. As you know, Judge Sarah Ellis issued a temporary restraining order barring federal agents from using illegal force against journalists and members of the clergy, peaceful protesters, unless they have evidence that those people have committed a crime. She also said if they're going to deploy tear gas, they have to give multiple verbal warnings and they have to give people enough time to comply with those warnings. But ICE and Customs and Border Protection have been failing to give those warnings. They've also used force against journalists and members of the clergy with no clear evidence of crimes being committed. So Judge Ellis ordered Kristi Noem to produce Bevino in court because he tossed one of these tear gas canisters himself and she put him on the stand. And John Sidell from the Chicago Sun Times covered the testimony. You should definitely follow him for all things federal court in Chicago. And here are some of the standout moments of the judge questioning Bavino on the stand. First, she talked about the oaths that they took. She says, you know, when I was getting ready for this morning, I took a look at the oath that I took and the oath that you took when we both started our jobs. And the oath that I took says, I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as a Judge under the Constitution and, and the laws of the United States and the oath that you took, Mr. Bovino, is that you do solemnly swear you will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that you take this obligation freely and without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that you will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which you're about to enter. And thinking about it, even though the words of the oath that we each took are different, fundamentally they're the same oath. We both agree to support and defend and uphold the Constitution and the obligations that we each have under the Constitution. As a member of the executive branch, you have a different role to play than I do in the judicial branch. And my role is not to tell you that you can or can't enforce validly passed laws by Congress. That's not my role and I have no intention of doing that. My role is simply to see that in the enforcement of those laws that you and the agents operating under, you are acting in a manner that is consistent with your obligations under the law. Now, Judge Ellis said she wants to go at that point. She says, I want to go through my restraining order with you, Mr. Bevino, because it's either, it's one of three things. Either it's unclear which is my bad and I'll clarify it, or number two, it wasn't read or number three, it was read and ignored. And she said, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't read and ignored or that it wasn't read at all. So I'll put this back on me that it maybe it wasn't clear. To help me make it clear, she says kids dressed in Halloween costumes walking to a parade do not pose an immediate threat to the safety of law enforcement. They just don't. Then she asked about body worn cameras and Bavino says about 99% of Customs and Border Protection have body worn cameras, which prompted Judge Ellis to ask Vino if he has a body worn camera. I do not, ma'. Am. No. I have not yet received a body worn camera or the training. To which Judge Ellis replied, how about by Friday you get a camera? Now Ellis said on the use of tear gas on Saturday, quote, that was the instance as well where children were present and they were dressed up in their Halloween costumes. Those kids were tear gassed on their way to celebrate Halloween in their local school parking lot. These kids, you can imagine their sense of Safety was shattered on Saturday, and it's going to take a long time for that to come back, if ever. She said it should have been a really happy day. Now, at that point, the judge asked Bovino for all use of force incident reports, all of them, and all body worn camera footage. 99% of you are wearing it, so I should see a bunch of it. And she ordered Bovino to report to her courtroom every day at 4:30 until the preliminary injunction hearing, which is set for November 5th. Now, he said 4:30 was a little early. There's traffic. How about 6pm Deal. Deal. They agreed to meet every day at 6pm but then Trump's Justice Department asked for an immediate stay of that order to meet with Bovino daily. And the 7th Circuit anonymously blocked that daily meeting. That anonymous panel of three judges said it was because she's trying to do Bovino's job. She's trying to be in charge of Bovino, which she specifically said she was not doing in her opening statements about her job and her oath and his oath and his job, but they blocked it. But her order blocking federal agents from acting like lawless thugs against protesters and clergy, her body worn camera order, all that still stands, as well as the order to get all of the use of force incident reports and body worn camera footage. But these kinds of cases, they're going to become extremely important if and when Donald Trump invokes the Insurrection act and sends the military into cities. Because even though he would have the authority to do so, if he invoked the Insurrection act, well, that could be litigated, but in the meantime, they're still not allowed to violate people's constitutional rights. So let's talk about how close we could be to Trump invoking the Insurrection act so that he can deploy the military to what he considers problem cities, so that he can quash peaceful protests, which he calls rebellions and insurrections, and possibly muck up our elections. Now, what makes me think he's close to invoking the Insurrection Act? Well, first, he and the shadow president, Stephen Miller, talk about it all the time.
- [15:02]
B
I can use the Insurrection Act. We have an Insurrection act for a reason. If I had to enact it, I didn't. I'd do that. Everybody agrees you're allowed to use that. And there's no more court cases, there's.
- [15:13]
C
No more anything is simply a factually accurate statement that that is a form of illegal insurrection.
- [15:17]
B
Because I think that's all insurrection.
- [15:19]
C
California and Los Angeles are waging insurrection against the federal government.
- [15:24]
B
Yeah, well, it's been invoked before. As you know. Take care of that one. That's like an insurrection more than it is anything else.
- [15:30]
C
The Insurrection act, is that going to be formally invoked? Is that a way to kind of get around all this opposition?
- [15:37]
B
Well, it is a way to get around it.
- [15:39]
A
Now, second, the Supreme Court seems poised to deny Trump his ability to deploy the National Guard under the current authority he's trying to use Title 10, United States Code Section 12406. As you know, the government is fighting two lawsuits over deployment of the National Guard, one in Oregon and one in the Northern District of Illinois. Now, in the Oregon case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals this week vacated itself. That was pretty interesting. Some quick background. Judge Immergut, a district judge, a Trump appointed judge, issued a restraining order blocking the government from deploying the Oregon National Guard. So what did Trump do? He deployed the California National Guard and the Texas National Guard to Portland. And Judge Immerget is like, really? Honestly, she called an emergency hearing. She's like, are you serious? Stop with the games. Fine. Here's a second restraining order that says you can't deploy any National Guard to Oregon because there's nothing going on in Portland that requires it, whether it's the Oregon National Guard, California or Texas. Stop playing games. Stop being cute. That was her second restraining order. Now, the Trump administration appealed the first restraining order and the three judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, including two Trump judges, blocked Judge Immerget's restraining order. The single dissenting judge, it was a 2 to 1 vote. And the single dissenting judge urged her colleagues, all of the judges on the Ninth Circuit, to please reconsider hearing this en banc, which means the full court panel, not a three judge panel. And that's a little different in the Ninth Circuit and we'll get to that in a second. But she also implored the American people to bear with the courts, bear with us. Justice, I think is coming. Just a little. Hold on just a little longer. Just, just, just. We're working on it. And she said, Please 9th Circuit full panel reconsider this block of Judge Emerget's restraining order. Now, the appeals court doesn't have to wait for the government or Portland to file an appeal. They can take it up sua sponte, which means of their own accord. And that's exactly what they did. They vacated the three judge panel's block of immigrants order and they're going to reconsider the case. But Steve Vladek reminds us, and if you aren't following Steve Vladek please do. He's got a great substack, called one first. I learned so much from him. He reminds us that en banc, the full panel usually means the full panel of judges, but it means something else in the Ninth Circuit. He says the full court on the Ninth Circuit has 29 active judges, 16 Democrats, 13 Republicans. And for en banc, they vote, all 29 vote on whether or not to rehear a case. If they vote yes, 10 judges are then randomly selected to sit with the chief judge as the en banc full panel. So it's not the full panel. It's not even half of the judges that are on that court. The 10 judges are drawn from the pool of all non recused active judges, any senior judges who were on the panel and wished to be eligible. So the dissenter that said, please hold on just a little bit longer, Judge Graeber would presumably be in the pool. But because it's just 10 of the 29 judges and they're randomly drawn, that could mean the en banc court here could easily skew one way or the other. And although there is a procedure to seek full en banc rehearing, what they call super en banc in the Ninth Circuit, when Steve Vladek was clerking there, that procedure has never been successfully invoked. Now, while all this is happening, there's actually a trial going on in Judge Immerget's courtroom about the deployment of the National Guard. And the first day of that trial saw a bombshell that the government actually deployed the National Guard troops to Portland to the Portland ICE facility the day after Judge Immerget issued the restraining order not to deploy them. And the judge said, well, we'll talk later about whether that's contempt. So this could be another potential contempt hearing from the government, which usually ends up having discovery ordered. And then the government just ignores the discovery part. They did it in the Abrego case. They're still doing it, but we'll see how that goes. But now let's talk about the Illinois case on the National Guard in Chicago. A lower court there issued a restraining order to not Deploy. And the 7th Circuit there, they upheld that lower court order. So there's no need for an en banc rehearing. But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court. That was about 17 days ago. And this week, the Supremes issued an order that tells me they might actually rule against Trump on this one, on his authority under 10 US code 12406, section 12406. That's the authority he's currently trying to use. And this order makes me think that the Supreme Court will rule that he doesn't have the authority, this authority under that particular law. Here's the order from the justices I'm talking about. It says the parties are directed to file supplemental letter briefs addressing the following question whether the term regular forces refers to the regular forces of the United States military, and if so, how that interpretation affects the operation of Title 10, U.S. code Section 12406. So 10 U.S. code Section 12106 is the law, like I said, that Trump says gives him the authority to deploy the National Guard. It says the National Guard can be deployed when the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States. Now, the Trump administration says that the local federal cops in Chicago are regular forces and that they can't control the crime by themselves. So he thinks regular forces means civilian law enforcement, not the military. Now, Illinois and a guy named Marty Lederman, who's filed an amicus brief in this case, argues that the regular forces are the military. And since Trump hasn't deployed the military, he hasn't met the requirements of the law that says POTUS can send the National Guard when regular forces fail. You can only send the National Guard if the military, if regular forces are the military. You can only send the National Guard if the military has failed. He never sent the military, so you can't send the National Guard. So the Supreme Court here wants the parties to define regular forces and it gives them until November 17th to do so, meaning the National Guard will remain blocked from being deployed in Chicago until at least November 17th. But it seems obvious to me that Trump is trying to get permission to deploy the military under this law. 12406 but if he fails, if the Supreme Court says no, I imagine Trump will take a look at invoking the Insurrection act, giving him that exception to Posse Comitatus that bars him from deploying the military against the people except in cases of rebellion. Another clue that they're preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act. A couple of months ago, NBC reported that the Trump administration was considering establishing domestic civil disturbance quick reaction forces composed of hundreds of National Guard troops tasked with rapidly deploying into American cities facing protests or other unrest. Now, this week, the government went from evaluating plans and considering to starting to execute them. The Guardian reports a top US military official has ordered the National Guard of all 50 states, the District of Columbia and all US territories to form quick reaction forces trained in riot control, including the use of batons, body shields, tasers and pepper spray. That's according to an internal Pentagon directive reviewed by the Guardian. The memo, signed on October 8th by Major General Ronald Birkett, the director of operation for the Pentagon's National Guard Bureau, sets thresholds for the size of the quick reaction force to be trained in each state, with most states required to train 500 National Guard members, for a total of 23,500 troops nationwide trained in riot control with batons and tasers and riot shields. And amidst all this, the Department of Homeland Security has been caught red handed, fabricating violent propaganda to justify the deployment of the military and to possibly justify the invocation of the Insurrection Act. This comes from Drew Harwell and Joyce Soyun Lee at the Post. The administration has used misleading footage promoting its immigration agenda, muddying the reality of events in viral clips that have been viewed millions of times. In one ad, they show footage of detainees claiming that they were nabbed in D.C. but in reality, that was footage from Nantucket. DHS has also used some footage that it generated itself at the Broadview ICE facility in Chicago, claiming that it was Portland to try to prove Portland is a war zone. So the feds, through tear gas without warning in Chicago, then had their professional videographer, videographer capture the chaos that ensued and then attributed that ginned up, created fabricated chaos, attributed it to happening in Portland. DHS also claimed that footage of federal agents in Chicago were actually in Memphis, Tennessee. Another effort to make you think they're everywhere. They're omnipresent. There's more of them than there are of us. And this one's good. A video depicting a border crossing with a voiceover that says, failures of the past administrations. Open borders. Look, failures of past administrations have allowed border crossings like this one. The problem is that footage was taken in 2019 when Trump was in office. DHS also posted video of an ICE raid in Florida, claiming that it happened in Chicago. So they film in Florida and say it's Chicago. They film in Chicago and say it's Portland. Just fabricating propaganda, lying in court, making up chaos. That is why it's so important that we get our cameras out and we don't let up on documenting the truth. And Canada says, elbows up. I say, cameras out, America. Because you never know. Your evidence may end up in one of their trials or in a trial to protect the innocence of someone who they claim assaulted them. You might end up on one of the juries. And they're doing all of this to justify deploying the military against civilians. It reminds me of a Quote, there's a reason you separate the military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people. That quote comes from Commander Adama in Battlestar Galactica Season 1, episode 2. It's over two decades old. Very prescient and relevant today. And our next story is indicative of the dangers of blurring the lines between the military and the police. A federal agent opened fire at an unarmed black man during a traffic stop in D.C. and the police officer that saw it confessed to covering it up. This story comes from the Washington Post. A federal agent shot an unarmed black man during a traffic stop earlier this month while working alongside D.C. police officers. That's according to three of the man's lawyers who accused city police of misconduct. Because the gunfire isn't mentioned in the incident report, a D.C. police officer told a judge he was instructed by a superior not to document the shooting in a court record. That's according to a transcript of court proceedings. And the judge dismissed charges against the driver over a lack of evidence. Yes, all charges were dismissed, but not after the man, Philip Brown, who's 33, spent days in jail because the judge declined to consider the shooting. Because the cops left it out of the report. He couldn't consider it. Now, of course, the lying spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security says the federal agent had to fire his gun. He fired his gun because he feared for his life, saying Philip Brown drove his vehicle at officers deliberately trying to run them down. But the same cop that confessed that his superior ordered him to cover up the shooting also testified that that was a lie. There were no officers in front of Brown's vehicle during the stop. And his lawyer pointed out that the bullets entered the side of the car. Not the just lies upon lies. Another part of the COVID up. Prosecutors offered Philip Brown a deal, a plea deal, if he agreed not to go forward with his hearing, where the gunfire would most certainly come up. So they were trying to rob him of his right to meaningfully consult a lawyer in order to keep the gunfire under wraps. Also, no one has seen the body worn camera footage. Hmm. Nor is there a lawsuit in which the footage could be requested. At least not yet. I hope there will be soon. Now, as you know, I like to end the breakdown on an up note, and I have a couple today. First, the relentless onslaught of propaganda that Democrats are somehow to blame for the Trump shutdown isn't working. Even though the Trump regime controls pretty much all the levers of communication in the country from social media, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, right. All of the those social media platforms is Bentani. He's got his own truth social. He's got sending emails to federal workers, changing federal workers out of office emails while they're furloughed to blame the Democrats. All federal benefits recipients, including myself as a veteran, have received emails blaming the Democrats, North Korea style Kristi Gnome videos being played to captive travelers in line at airport security. They control the corporate media, they control the mail. I've been getting snail mailers, digital spam pop ups on government websites blaming the Democrats, relentless press conferences with Mike Johnson always blaming the Democrats. And despite all that, despite controlling pretty much every lever of communication in this country, people aren't falling for it. A new Washington Post ABC poll, two outlets, by the way, that have bent the knee to Trump, says that Americans blame the Republicans for the shutdown, 45 to 33. That's negative 12 for Republicans. And independents blame Trump and the Republicans by a 2 to 1 margin, 46 to 23. So the propaganda is not working. And a judge in the Abrego case, one of the Abrego cases, there's a couple, is also apparently sick of hearing the Trump propaganda and he's ordered the government to knock it off. Politico reports. U.S. district Court Judge Waverly Crenshaw ruled the Trump cabinet members violated a local court rule limiting comments by government officials relating to an ongoing criminal case. Now, Crenshaw stopped short of issuing a gag order against future comments about Abrego. However, the judge ordered prosecutors to notify every employee at the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security about the existing rule restricting public statements about pending cases. Additionally, Judge Crenshaw said a while back that because there's some evidence that the government vindictively and selectively prosecuted Mr. Abrego, he ordered discovery. But big surprise, the government is stonewalling discovery. So Abrego asked to postpone the November 4th and November 5th motion hearing because the Trump Department of Justice is refusing to hand over relevant documents that they've been ordered to hand over. Without the documents and testimony, Mr. Abrego argues he won't be prepared to rebut the government. And they're not simply allowed to just spring new witnesses and information on them with no time to prepare.
- [33:34]
D
Don't you want to know why Trotter gave you his files?
- [33:36]
A
I told you why already.
- [33:39]
D
He has to. By law, you're entitled. It's called disclosure, you dickhead.
- [33:43]
A
Quote. Although the defense bears no burden at the evidentiary hearing. While the presumption remains unrebutted, and we believe it will continue to be unrebutted on the limited evidence the government has apparently prepared to offer, the defense is entitled to cross examine the government's witnesses, which requires the timely pre hearing production of documents to the defense. Given the government's lack of communication with the defense about any production of discovery and its in camera submission, our ability to prepare for a hearing that is now five days away is severely hamstrung. The judge granted Mr. Abrego's request and has postponed the hearing from November 4th and 5th to December 8th and 9th. And finally, the hero of Halloween in D.C. is none other than Sandwich Guy Sean Dunn, former Department of justice employee. The Washingtonian reports instances of Sandwich Guy skeleton yard decorations popped up all over the D.C. area and beyond, and several people were spotted in Sandwich Guy Halloween costumes this year. Sandwich Guy, by the way, filed a motion to dismiss the misdemeanor charge against him. And the reason it's not a felony charge is because the government couldn't get a grand jury to indict him for throwing a sandwich. But he has a motion for vindictive and selective prosecution and if that motion to dismiss fails, his misdemeanor trial will begin tomorrow in D.C. jurors, you know what to do. So everybody, thank you so much for watching. I'm Alison Gill and I'll see you next week on the Breakdown. Foreign.
- [35:59]
E
Love this video support independent media and unlock exclusive content, ad free videos and custom emojis by becoming a paid member of our YouTube channel today. You can also gift memberships to others. Let's keep keep growing together.