← The David Pakman Show
The David Pakman Show
11/7/25: Most blame Trump for grocery prices as strange sign installed at White House
00:55:38
Loading summary
Transcript22 lines
- [00:00]
A
Trump is getting hammered from every direction. And even his own allies are starting to say the quiet parts out loud. Fox News is now admitting most Americans blame Trump for higher food prices. The economy he promised to fix is becoming the thing that is dragging him down. And then, as the oldest president in history, we have Trump putting up a sign at the White House to help him find the Oval Office. And I really do wish that that were a joke. A psychiatrist who studies dangerous offenders is warning that Trump is getting more unstable. He's getting worse by the day and expects his behavior to get even worse. Meanwhile, Gavin Newsom crushes a reporter trying a very lazy both sides question on him. Trump melts down online. And Ted Cruz and Maria Bartiromo try to outdumb each other about Operation Arctic Frost. It's worse than Watergate. We are looking at a nightmare scenario, which is what happens when the administration decides they don't have to listen to the Supreme Court at all. Plus, I'll have viewer mail comments and feedback which will tell us a lot about where MAGA is right now. Remember that for the month of November, all new membership first payments will be donated to Feeding America. We've already funded over 82,000 meals for hungry people. Simply sign up at join pacman.com or on my paid substack and your first payment, be it monthly or yearly, the entire first payment will go to Feeding America. We've got a show for you today. Glad you're here. Well, Fox News just got hit with numbers that are like a slap in the face. 70% of Americans say groceries cost more than a year ago, and they're right. The other 30% are just objectively wrong. And 60% of Americans, this is the key part, say that Donald Trump is to blame for that. You know, the Fox anchors in this clip we're about to look at, they try to keep their composure. But this is not a comfortable report for the Fox News audience. This, the Dear Orange leader is responsible. How could that be?
- [02:20]
B
This, as a new poll finds about 70% of Americans say groceries are more expensive now than they were a year ago. And about 60% of them are blaming President Trump.
- [02:34]
A
You know, this was supposed to be Biden's problem. For years, Republicans were just hammering, hammering inflation, grocery prices, the cost of eggs. It was like their golden ticket. It was the issue that won them seats. It energized the base. It got, in a sense, it was partially responsible for the numbers looking bleak for Biden when he was the presumptive nominee and eventually for Kamala Harris when she became the nominee, and voters were furious about spending 50 bucks on what used to be $30 worth of groceries. And Trump said, I'm going to fix it on day one. Prices will come down. We're going to make America affordable again. Groceries, it's such a beautiful word. No one's ever heard it before. Day one came and went, month one came and went. Soon it'll be year one. And grocery prices didn't fall, they went up. Trump owns the problem that he campaigned on, and it is his problem now. Now, the shift, it sort of happened quickly. You know, Americans, to a degree, don't need to be concerned with complex economic theory. They don't need to be concerned with delayed policy effects. They care about what's happening at the checkout line. Is the cashier giving me a bigger number than I expected? And then I used to pay for this same set of groceries. And what they're seeing is that grocery bills are going up. And Trump's president, the connection is simple, it's direct, and it is devastating for Trump. Now, in February, maybe it's plausible, oh, it's Biden. It's still Biden. March starts to get a little difficult. April, May, June. Well, we're in November at this point in time. And Trump's policies are part of the problem. The tariffs and the tariff threats, the trade war rhetoric, it ripples through supply chains. Importers raising prices in anticipation of rising costs. Domestic producers raise prices somewhat because they have to, somewhat because they can. Retailers pass it all on to consumers. And so the president, who said, I will fight for you, I will fight for working families, he is now overseeing things getting worse and more difficult for working families. The food companies are not shy about it either. Earnings calls now say the tariffs are part of the problem. Price increases are justified by saying trade policy uncertainty, tariffs. And so Trump wanted that as leverage. He thought, I'm going to use that as leverage to lower prices. We never believed it because it doesn't make any sense. Now the opposite is happening. Trump's policy is actually making prices go up. Now, as we get into 20, 26, which I consider we are in the 26 election, now you start to get the political implications, because Republicans built their 24 strategy around economic pain. Biden has given you pain, and we are going to solve it. And to a degree, they won because people were tired of the grocery prices and they blamed whoever was in power and it happened to be Biden. We have FL flip the script now, and they don't really have an answer. You can't blame the previous administration forever. At some point, it's your economy. And I believe that time is now. Voters seem to believe it, too. And Trump just gets defensive. He says, well, retailers are price gouging. The only real problem is beef. There's greed. It would have been worse under Democrats. We're going to fix it. And by the way, Republicans should acknowledge things are really awesome. Why don't they? And none of it is landing. When you campaign as the dealmaker who will instantly fix everything, you can't then pivot to give me time, be patient or pointing fingers elsewhere because you've already fired that bullet, so to speak. You told the voters you would deliver results, they expected results, and it's not happening. So you look at Republican strategists and they're panicking. Privately, 60% saying Trump is the reason prices are higher is a disaster. It's not just Democrats and independents. When it's 60%, that includes Republicans, too, who are saying, I voted for lower prices, I was promised lower prices, and yet I've got higher prices. When I go to the grocery store, some are speaking up, saying, does the tariff policy make sense? Is it worth it? Is whatever pain we were told was worth experiencing? Is it actually really worth it? And Democrats, hopefully will sense blood in the water and are going to keep hammering this message. The campaign ads basically write themselves. He promised lower prices. Just do a montage of Trump promising it and meanwhile, show prices going up. Show the polling that says Americans know why prices are up. It's the playbook they used on Biden. You just got to turn it around. So Trump is not going to be able to dismiss this as fake news. He's not going to be able to dismiss it as. As biased media. For Fox is acknowledging the reality. His own ecosystem is reporting it. What terrifies Republicans the most is the trend line. Because the numbers get worse every month. Every month that groceries stay expensive or tick up a little bit more. Voters are saying, I think Trump must be the cause because he's now been president an additional month and Trump built a comeback on fixing it, and he's not doing it now, as the economy becomes Trump's biggest liability with no easy way out, what is he likely to do? Is Trump likely to adjust policy in order to be better for the average? It's laughable, right? I don't even have to finish the sentence. No, he's not going to do that. Trump is going to figure out, how can he use propaganda and authoritarianism to suppress the repercussions of what he has done. And then when it comes to 2026, the they are not going to go easy. If it looks like Democrats are going to crush them. They will do everything they can not to win the hearts and minds of people with good policy. They will do everything they can to win by suppressing the vote, manipulating who gets to vote. It's the oldest story and they've been going with it for over a decade. This is kind of funny. The oldest president ever to start a term the elderly Donald Trump has now installed a sign labeled Oval Office, pointing to the Oval Office. It's kind of funny that the sign, which is of course written in that gaudy gold script that Donald Trump loves, it actually seems to be a few pieces of paper or card stock that someone printed up and taped to the wall. Like it's not even really. It seems like the sort of thing that was like, we need this so urgently printed up right now using your office printer rather than getting an actual sign made. Patrick Rodenbush, as former President Barack Obama spokesperson posted on Twitter, quote, oh, this is very helpful. Otherwise no one would be able to figure out the oval shaped room in the West Wing is actually the Oval Office. A writer and comedian Aquila Hughes said, it's so Trump doesn't take a wrong turn and end up on the roof again. Mario Nicolay on Twitter wrote, so smart. You know, many memory care units also label rooms so that those with dementia can remember where they are. And Matthew Neville wrote, if Joe Biden had done this, Fox News would be running nonstop coverage of how they had to label offices so Biden knew where he was going. In response to all of this, the White House spokesperson Davis Engel said, quote, president Trump is making the White House beautiful and giving it the glory it deserves. Only the Daily Beast and people with a severe case of Trump derangement syndrome would find a problem with that. I keep going back to this is three pieces of paper taped to the wall, which really to me says, we've got to address this right now. We don't even have the time to wait for a proper sign to be made. And they really seem like those tacky signs that are all over Trump's golf clubs and golf courses. I hope that when Trump finally leaves, the next president will immediately tear down every piece of the fake gold crap that is all over the White House. Now I know that even in my audience, you guys are sort of divided between this is because Trump just has crass tastes and he wants the gold script everywhere versus this is something Trump needs to Figure out where the Oval Office is. I don't know what the truth is. I know that you all are kind of divided on that. But one of the greatest and most important reminders that if you follow the Trump White House and Trump's political career, you're reminded of day in and day out is money doesn't buy class. And that gaudy gold script. I am so tired of seeing that crap and the gold leaf paint and all of it. I really do hope whoever is next in the Oval Office is going to remove all of it. A psychiatrist who we have previously interviewed is issuing a warning about Donald Trump's mental state, suggesting that his quest for power could be spiraling into increasingly dangerous territory. This is Dr. Bandy Lee. Bandy Lee is a forensic and social psychiatrist trained at Yale. Controversial figure, without a doubt. Spent years studying dangerous people in maximum security prisons. And she is turning her expertise to the Oval Office. And she says what she sees is extraordinarily alarming. Now has her central thesis that she lays out. And this is the host of the Daily Beast podcast. We're going to hear from Bandy Lee in a moment. The central thesis is Trump's aggressive power moves. Mobilizing the agents to go after immigrants, deploying National Guard. All of it, all of it stems not from strength, but from insecurity. And that can be dangerous. Let's just watch a little clip of this podcast.
- [12:02]
B
Do you think that Donald Trump has.
- [12:04]
C
A sense of his own limitations deep down? Absolutely. And that is why he is constantly on guard. He's paranoid. He is doing whatever he can. People may think he's the most powerful man on the planet. Why does he need more and more? He's now accumulating ICE agents as government, government police force. He's now required every State to deploy 500 National Guard members to function essentially as a guard for himself against the people. Because when he demands this kind of powerful positioning of himself, he's doing so from a place of path pathology. It's not a healthy demand. So he's doing so in a way that actually fuels his sense of insecurity, his own unfitness, his unbelonging. And so he will increasingly become more defensive and more dangerous.
- [13:13]
A
So, listen, the. The gist here is this is a feedback loop with Trump, and this is so common with. It's like a standard authoritarian analysis, quite frankly. A lot of authoritarians and dictators have these trai. The more power Trump demands, the more his underlying insecurity is revealed. And that is what Bandy Lee says makes him Defensive and unpredictable. Now, Bandy Lee's outspokenness has cost her a lot. In 2020, Yale fired her after she claimed Trump supporters were experiencing shared psychosis. The university said this violates the Goldwater rule, which means you're not supposed to diagnose public figures without examining them. Now, of course, we've delved more deeply into, into the oranges of the Goldwater rule, and other doctors have said it doesn't really apply when it comes to some of these personality type disorders. Observing people through the media is, is actually enough. Now, despite the professional blowback that she's been hit with, Dr. Lee stands by the warnings. She says Trump's behavior follows patterns we see in violent offenders. They become more dangerous when their sense of control is threatened. 60% of America now blames Trump for higher grocery prices. We had a stunning blue wave rebuke of Republicanism and MAGA ism and Trumpism on Tuesday night. Trump fears that he is going to lose control of his presidency if Democrats take control of the House in 2026. And so, of course, the administration dismisses Dr. Bandy Lee's concerns. White House spokesperson Abigail Johnson Jackson Rather said, hopefully this doctor knows how to treat tds. She can start with herself, referring to Trump Derangement Syndrome. But I try to see this as a message that transcends partizan politics, because what Bandy Lee at the core is calling for is for Congress, the courts, federal agencies to consult mental health experts who specialize in dangerous people before allowing Trump to consolidate more power. I don't know whether her warnings are going to be heeded as this second Trump term unfolds. This is a major question. When unchecked power meets profound insecurity and you add being scared like a cornered animal, how dangerous can it get? History and psychology and the medical literature suggest it can get very, very dangerous. So my expectation is that as Donald Trump's place in power is increasingly threatened, both by the possibility of Democrats taking the House, the possibility that, I don't know, maybe some of those, some of those cases come back to haunt Trump, at least from the standpoint of investigations, I assume he will lash out more and only get more dangerous. Now, this would all be less of a concern if we felt that our institutions were strongly positioned to control Trump's behavior and that when a court makes a decision or a judge makes a decision or a legislative body makes a decision, that that actually has some strength and that that actually has some teeth in order to allow enforcement. We don't have evidence of that right now because he's mostly gotten away with everything. So the way that I would see, you know, I know there are people in the audience who say, oh, Dr. Bandy Lee, she's disgraced. Well, Dr. Bandy Lee has been outspoken at a significant personal cost to her. And you don't have to necessarily think every detail of her assessment is spot on to recognize traits of dangerous authoritarians and dictators in Trump. And we know that when those dictators start to get scared, they act out even more erratically. So I'll leave it to you. What do you expect to see from Trump in the administration over the next three plus years, assuming that Tuesday's blue wave does portend significant downfall for Republican power over the next couple of years? Let me know in a comment. Let me know in an email info@david pakman.com There is something about winter that makes warm bread and pastries at home feel nicer than ever. And that is what you get with Wild Grain. No effort or cooking. Our sponsor, Wild Grain, is the first baked from Frozen subscription box for real artisanal breads, pastries and handmade pastas. All ready in 25 minutes or less. No prep, no cleanup. Everything's made with clean ingredients and a slow fermentation process that adds depth of flavor. I recently tried the cranberry pecan rolls. Some say pecan, I say pecan. They came out with a soft center, crisp edge and the house just smelled great. I also love their Parmesan herb biscuits. Definitely check those out. You can also customize your box. They've got gluten free, they've got plant based. You can send it as a gift or send a gift card for the holidays. If you're looking for the perfect way to elevate cozy nights at home during the holidays, give Wild Grain a try. Get three $30 off your first box plus free croissants for life at wild grain.com/david the link is in the description. Donald Trump has already packed his second term cabinet with loyalists. He's threatened deportation as political punishment. He's expanded executive authority in ways we have not seen in modern history. These are real changes that are happening right now. And what's even more alarming is that a lot of the media is either glossing over the worst of it or they're reframing it. So it all sounds a little more palata. And that is why I use ground news. This is a news comparison tool. Doesn't just feed you headlines, it shows you. Here's how different outlets left, right, center are covering the same story. And this is one of the few tools I know of that can really help you detect the political spin, the bias catch stories that your usual sources might downplay or not cover at all on everything from immigration policy to economic shifts. If you want to get a bigger picture, a broader picture of what's being reported, Ground News is an invaluable source to keep you informed. And Ground News is offering my audience 40% off their top tier vantage plan. You'll only pay five bucks a month. Go to Ground News, slash Pacman or enter the code PACMAN in the app to get started. The link is in the description the David Pakman show is an audience supported program. What that means is that our primary funding source for what we do comes from viewers and listeners, people who might listen to the audio podcast or watch a YouTube clip or find me on Snapchat or Tik Tok or Substack. The primary means that that support comes in is through our web site at join pacman.com memberships and through substack paid subscriptions@substack. David pakman.com for November because of the food stamp fiasco, Thanksgiving coming up, holiday time, families struggling when it comes to food insecurity. Every first payment for new memberships. This month we are donating to feed hungry families through the organization Feeding America. Every dollar donated supports 10 meals. If you get a monthly membership on my website, you've just funded 60 meals. If you get a yearly membership on my website, you've just funded 600 meals. Join pacman.com substack.david pakman.com all right, a reporter confronted Governor Gavin Newsom and failed really badly. And Gavin Newsom was ready for these ridiculous questions. And I think he handles this really, really well. Let me explain what's going on. The reporter attempted to both sides the way in which Donald Trump in a serious manner and Gavin Newsom in a satirical manner have been posting to social media. Now let's watch the clip. First, it's about Newsom mocking Trump's social media style. You'll hear the question from reporter Kristen Welker and then you'll hear the answer from Gavin Newsom.
- [21:31]
B
You've been one of the most outspoken Democratic voices against President Trump and part of your tactic is to imitate some of what we see online from President Trump. So you mimic his all cap posts. You send out similar memes. Do you run the risk of normalizing that behavior?
- [21:54]
D
Quite the contrary. The whole expression was to not allow it to be normalized. It was becoming normalized all this he the normalization of deviance across the spectrum of issues. But his communication, he's dressing up as the Pope, as Superman. He's hold on. He's putting his face on Mount Rushmore. He's saying thank you. It's madness. And so I put a mirror up to that madness.
- [22:21]
B
It reminds me of something Michelle Obama said once. When they go low, we go high. Is there still room for that mindset?
- [22:32]
D
I would love to go back to that, but politics have changed. The rules of the game have changed. Now we have to rewrite the new rules. I'm trying to iterate. I'm in that process of doing that. But Michelle Obama also recently was interviewed about that comment, and she amended that comment about going high is also going strategic, meaning finding some strategies to address concerns and anxieties. So she's evolved on her own foundational principle, but it's the right one. We're all better off. We're all better off. This can't continue forever. All of us living in the state of fear and anxiety, on edge. And so of course, we want to go back to some semblance of normalcy, but you have to deal with the crisis at hand. It's just been 10, 11 months of this presidency. We have three more years, time to batten down the hatches. And it's time for us to change if we want things to change. And that's why our communication strategy is.
- [23:31]
A
So listen, this is an effort to play the both sides game, and I am so damn sick of it. How is Gavin Newsom normalizing the way that Trump communicates? The press stopped covering Trump's unhinged posts. They normalized it. They've accepted it and they've normalized it where the deranged rantings of an orange madman barely make news anymore. Let me break down why I believe this is so important and why Kristen Welker's question is really, what's wrong with a lot of legacy media right now? Think about what Trump does online. He posts AI images of himself as a superhero, shares pictures of himself dressed as the Pope. As Gavin Newsom mentioned, he spreads conspiracy theories. He attacks private citizens. He makes up stories. He shared an AI video where he is piloting a fighter plane and dumping human feces on my friend Harry Sisson. He is doing this stuff daily. And the press has mostly stopped covering it. Trump has gotten them to normalize it. They barely cover it because he does it so much. When Trump does something bonkers, it often doesn't even get a headline because it's happening so often. That's the definition of normalization. And the legacy press has allowed it to happen. So Gavin Newsom comes in and he starts holding up a mirror to it. He starts showing people, look at how absurd this is. When I make posts like this, they seem like a joke. They seem idiotic, they seem insane. And the press response is, governor, are you normalizing this sort of thing by doing it? It's like if you're at a restaurant and someone's screaming and you go, that person is screaming. And then somebody says, oh, you. You're making screaming normal by pointing it out. No, the screaming was already happening. What I'm trying to do is make sure people notice. And this is really the both sides game at its utter worst. The media is so terrified of appearing biased that they twist themselves into these pretzels to find a way to blame Democrats for Republican behavior. I'm not even arguing Kristen Welker is a right winger, I guess, nominally. Nominally, she's a Democrat or whatever. But the point is she's performing, in a sense, by choosing what questions to ask. Trump posts unhinged content every day. Newsom points it out in a clever way, and suddenly he's normalizing it. Suddenly we need to have a serious conversation with Newsom about what he's posting. Have any of these reporters ever said to Trump, hey, you communicate like a lunatic on social media? Here's 50 examples from the last month. What's the deal with this? Newsom didn't get defensive, which I think is interesting. He explained it. This stuff was being normalized. I'm trying to denormalize it by showing how insane it is when you see it coming from anybody you're not used to seeing it from. Where was the concern when Trump was doing it in the first place? Where were the questions about normalization when Trump started posting AI images of himself as a religious figure? And the answer is, they stopped talking about it because it became too common. They normalized it through silence. And that, I believe, is what Gavin Newsom is fighting against. Now, I think that it has a time limit on it. Newsom can't do this for the next however many years if he plans to run for president. I don't think that posting like this is going to be a part of his presidential campaign, or at least I hope that it isn't. But Newsom is normalizing it. Give me a break. What a pathetic question. Donald Trump suffered a nuclear panic as he lost everything this week and spent the day panic posting and now warning about the midterms. Let's start there. A reminder. Trump knows what they're up against. Trump on truth Social, quote. The Democrats are far more likely to win the midterms and the next presidential election if we don't do the termination of the filibuster, the nuclear option, because it will be impossible for Republicans to get common sense policies done with these crazed Democrat lunatics being able to block everything by withholding their votes for three years. Nothing will be passed and Republicans will be blamed. Elections, including the midterms, will be rightfully brutal. If we do terminate the filibuster, we will get everything approved like no Congress in history. We will have fair, free and safe elections. No men and women's sports are transgender for everybody. Strong borders, major tax and energy cuts and will secure our Second Amendment, which the Democrats will also terminate immediately if we don't do it. They are far more likely to do well in the upcoming elections, which would mean a packed Supreme Court, two more states and four more Democratic senators, D.C. and Puerto Rico, and eight more electoral votes. Remember, Republicans, they are going to end the filibuster as soon as they get the chance. We know this because they already tried and. And the only two people who didn't go along are now out of office. But they have much less chance of winning if we have great policy. Wins after wins after wins, all caps now. In fact, they will lose big and for a very long time. Terminate the filibuster now, End the ridiculous shutdown immediately and then most importantly, pass every wonderful Republican policy that we have dreamt of for years but never gotten. We will be the party that cannot be beaten. The smart party. Trump is right that there is a risk that Republicans get crushed next November. He's right. He's identified that correctly. On the other hand, Trump's solution is not to win the hearts and minds of voters. It's to change the rules so they can force things through. Spoken like a true authoritarian. Trump's not about, we've got to really communicate with people and explain to them how my tariff policy will help them. The tariff policy won't help them. They've lost on policy. So he needs to use procedure. Trump with one more of these. He said, quote, the unconstitutional redistricting vote in California is a giant scam in that the entire process, in particular the voting itself, is rigged. All mail in ballots where the Republicans in that state are shut out is under very serious legal and criminal review. Stay tuned. It turned out that none of that is true. The redistricting vote is constitutional. There is no evidence of ringing, rigging. Mail in ballots are fine. Nobody's being shut out, and there is nothing criminal about it. But the panic is about we can't win on the merits of what we're offering. So we have to figure out other ways. Let's use the filibuster to pass legislation without needing consensus. Let's get rid of mail in votes in order to prevent people we've identified as undesirable voters from voting. Let's get rid of early voting locations in order to make it more difficult for people who can't necessarily take the day off to vote on a Tuesday to vote. Okay. They are no longer trying to win on the merits. They are trying to win on procedure, on limiting votes. We've got to be ready. I know attorney Marc Elias and his law firm are ready, but they can't do everything. We all have to be ready. And we're going to be talking about that a lot in the forthcoming months. Every time you Google your name, you will probably find dozens of sites that expose your personal information. This can include phone number, home address, family details. It's just sitting there waiting to be scraped or abused. Incogni is a privacy service that they go after these sites on your behalf. They contact the data brokers. They demand your data be removed, which the brokers are legally required to do. Incogni will automatically remove your information from hundreds of the biggest and most notorious data broker sites. But you're not just limited to those. You can use Incogni's custom removal. If you find your info on a website outside of Incogni's default list, team at Incogni will work to get that information removed. This is how you protect yourself and your family from identity theft, financial scams, harassment, even AI powered profiling by ad companies. And Incogni's data removal process is the only one verified independently by Deloitte. This gives them a unique level of credibility. Try Incogni risk free and get 60% off when you go to incogni.com pacman and and use the code PACMAN. The link is in the description. There's a question that a lot of people have been avoiding. And the question is, what if the Trump administration simply doesn't listen to the Supreme Court? I believe we may be about to find out. I don't think our systems are really ready for what might be coming here. And the thing is that it's already kind of happening. Like federal judges have issued orders that Trump has ignored. There have been deportation flights ordered to Turn around. They kept flying anyway. A judge found probable cause for criminal contempt, but nothing really happened to Donald Trump. And J.D. vance said judges aren't allowed to control the executive's power. And Elon Musk called the judge corrupt and said the judge should be impeached. So there is a lack of respect for the judiciary and for courts that has evolved into open defiance. Now, lower court judges, sometimes, I guess maybe you can get away with ignoring them or dismissing or attacking them if you're at the absolute top of the elites, like the President of the United States is. But what about the Supreme Court? What happens if the law of the land as handed down by the Supreme Court says one thing and the president goes, nah, make me. We are going to see the Supreme Court hear a challenge to Donald Trump's tariffs, and they could rule that he is violating the Constitution by seizing congressional taxing power and strike down the entire thing. So imagine that that happens. And then Trump goes, I'm simply not going to comply. Now, we have seen this before. In 1832, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee Nation, a native group. And Andrew Jackson reportedly said, john Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it. And the result was the Trail of Tears, where thousands died and the court had no army. But the president did. What people don't understand is that the Supreme Court doesn't have any special enforcement mechanisms. They depend on the executive branch to enforce their rulings. Federal marshals report to the Justice Department. The Justice Department reports to Trump. So how does a Supreme Court that normally depends on the executive and the Justice Department to enforce their rulings. How does the Supreme Court get their rulings enforced when they are about what those very institutions are doing? If the Supreme Court issues a ruling and Trump says, I disagree, I'm not going to follow it. Who enforces the court's decision? I don't know that there is anyone. Republican Congress will just shrug. Democratic Congress can't do anything because there is no Democratic Congress in the sense that Republicans control it. Plus, the government is shut down, or Trump doesn't openly defy the court, he just delays. He goes, yes, right, we're going to do it, but we've got to reinterpret what you mean, and we're going to comply in some nominal way that doesn't really represent the spirit of what the Supreme Court has ruled, and it'll be death by a thousand bureaucratic cuts. If a president can get away with ignoring the Supreme Court, what is left? Because the court was supposed to be the Final check. If the check bounces, there are no more checks. Now, this is not like an abstract constitutional debate. This affects people. The immigrant family that won their court case but gets deported anyway, that's a very real impact. A federal worker who won a wrongful termination suit but doesn't get their job back, that is a tangible impact. People being hurt by tariffs, and the Supreme Court goes, no, you can't do it. And then they happen anyway. They are still hurt by the tariffs. The other aspect of this that I think is important to wonder about is if the President can ignore the Supreme Court. What about everybody else? And what I mean by that is, what is a court ruling worth at the end of the day, if people don't actually have to follow it? Foreign leaders are also paying attention to this. Why would people invest trillions in the U.S. economy? Well, they trust our legal system. They trust courts and their ability to enforce contracts. They protect property rights, they provide stability. Judges already warned this is going to cripple the reputation of the United States. If anybody is able to get away with ignoring court rulings, even if it is the president. Because when trust evaporates, foreign investment will drive dry up, the dollar will weaken, four 1ks will tank, and it won't be because of tariffs or inflation as a primary cause. It'll be because nobody trusts the country anymore. And trust is already in short supply under Donald Trump. You look at Hungary, you look at Turkey, you look at how other democracies have become dictatorships, this is often the path. It's not tanks, it's the erosion of institutional authority. If courts can't enforce the law, power is all that matters. And maybe Trump's got the power. Now. Constitutional scholars are saying, oh, yeah, this is a nightmare scenario, and we are living through it in slow motion right now. Andrew Jackson proved a president kind of can ignore the Supreme Court if Congress allows them to. If the public doesn't rise up, if nobody makes them pay a price, the Supreme Court is going to be ruling. Trump has already shown he ignores courts. He's already in contempt. He's getting away with it. We when he ignores the Supreme Court, what happens next? Is this how it ends? Not with a bang, but with a president saying, make me, and then maybe nobody makes him? We really could be heading towards one of the darkest aspects of this entire authoritarian experiment. And by the way, it's an authoritarian experiment that has failed everywhere else that it has been tried. So where do we go next? If that's what happens, let me know what you think. Leave a Comment. Send me an email info@david pakman.com I'm going to play a video for you and I want you to tell me who is the bigger fool here? Who is the bigger moron? Is it Ted Cruz or is it Maria Bartiromo? Now, let me explain to you what this is about. Republicans, in their desperation to keep the Epstein files from coming out, keep the attention off of all the horrible things that Donald Trump is doing, Republicans have now found a new muse and it is called Operation Arctic Frost. I already told you a little bit about it. Last week we're going to talk about it again. Ted Cruz appeared on Maria Bartiromo FOX News show and he says Arctic Frost is Biden's Watergate. And Watergate is nothing compared to this. Let's take a listen to what Ted Cruz had to say. Well, sure.
- [39:03]
E
Maria, good morning. Good to be with you.
- [39:06]
A
Arctic Frost is Joe Biden's Watergate.
- [39:09]
E
And in fact, in terms of abuse of government power, it makes Watergate pale in comparison.
- [39:15]
A
You know, that moment as I was thinking about it kind of reminded me of this moment where Trump was like, obamagate is the worst crime ever. What's Obamagate?
- [39:27]
F
Mr. President, in one of your Mother's Day tweets, you appear to accuse President Obama of the biggest political crime in American history, by far. Those were your words. What crime exactly are you accusing President Obama of committing? And do you believe the Justice Department should prosecute him?
- [39:43]
E
Obamagate, it's been going on for a long time. It's been going on from before I even got elected. And it's a disgrace that it happened. And if you look at what's gone on and if you look at now all of this information that's being, by.
- [39:56]
A
The way, this video is from 2020. Notice how much more coherent Trump sounds at least.
- [40:03]
E
And from what I understand, that's only the beginning. Some terrible things happened and it should never be allowed to happen in our country again. And you'll be seeing what's going on over the next, over the coming weeks. But, and I wish you'd write honestly about it, but unfortunately you do choose not to do so. Yeah, John, please.
- [40:19]
F
What is the crime exactly that you're accusing him?
- [40:21]
E
You know what the crime is. The crime is very obvious, everybody. All you have to do is read the newspapers except yours.
- [40:27]
A
It's Obamagate anyway. So this is really about Ted Cruz now trying to convince us that it's Arctic Frost before it was Trump convincing us that it was Obamagate. This conversation with Ted Cruz and Maria Bartiromo was sort of like a duel between two people trying to outdumb each other on national tv. Does Ted Cruz know that he's lying? Does Maria Bartiromo know that he's lying? Are they both lying? So let me remind you what Operation Arctic Frost was. The FBI investigated Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including the fake slates of electors. That's Operation Arctic Frost. They investigated an attempt to overturn a presidential election by Donald Trump, as they should. Remember what we watched on January, 6, 2021, that got investigated and they want to call it a scandal. And where it gets fascinating is that House Republicans are now saying, you know, they investigated Trump and 160 congressional Republicans. That's the scandal. Think about the psychological warfare that is happening here. Trump and his allies tried to overturn an election. They got investigated for it, and they are saying the investigation has victimized them. And it is a scandal that the investigation even took place. This is a theme. Russia prefers Trump in 2016. Putin and Trump don't meet to conspire, but Russia prefers Trump over Hillary. They love the idea of destabilizing the US by having the country elect such a buffoon. And there were connections between Trump associates and Russians. So it was investigated. What's the scandal? The investigation is the scandal, according to maga. And the same thing here. They tried to overturn an election. It was investigated. They say the investigation was the scandal. Couple thoughts here. Number one, as usual, up is down, left is right, black is white, everything is opposite. But also, they must really not want those damn Epstein files out. When. When you are talking about FBI overreach after you tried to steal an election, instead of asking, why does Trump's name keep appearing in depositions involving Epstein victims? You know, that you're trying to cover cover stuff up. Contrast for a moment the fake outrage about Arctic Frost with the real thing they're terrified of. But try never to talk about the Epstein files. They, the people who tried to overturn an election want you to be angry. Not that they tried to overturn the election, but that they were investigated for trying to do it. Pathetic stuff. Honestly, I believe both Ted Cruz and Maria Bartiromo know that this is no big deal, that the investigation is no big deal and they're just lying. That's my view right now. Our sponsor, Magic Spoon, has been with us a long time. They do the high protein, zero sugar cereals and treats, nostalgically reinventing some of my favorite childhood snacks. Many of you know, for me, cereal was not breakfast. It was a snack. And that is still the case. And what Magic Spoon has done is taken your favorite sugary cereals from when you were a kid and turned them into something you can feel good about. Magic Spoon is also launching a brand new high protein granola true to the Magic Spoon promise, packed with protein, crunchy, 13 grams of protein, zero added sugars, and in delicious flavors like dark chocolate, almond, honey almond and peanut butter. They've got their high protein treats as well. Crispy, crunchy, airy with 12 grams of protein in many flavors. And of course, if you don't love Magic Spoon as much as I do, and our team does, Magic Spoon will refund all of your money, no questions asked. Get $5 off your next order at magic spoon.com/pacman or look for Magic Spoon on Amazon or in your nearest grocery store. The link is in the description. All right, let's get into Friday feedback. You can always email info@david pakman.com we will sometimes feature YouTube comments, Spotify comments, Tik Tok comments, subreddit posts, and much more. There are some angry people this week. I will tell you that a user who goes by the name we are all leaving the earth soon says, oh boy, you're it's the wrong your. Your not getting your taxpayer funded food stamps. Sounds good to me. And y' all can thank Schumer and the Democrats for that. Shutting down the government. I guess y' all will have to eat bugs. You know, putting aside for a second that most Americans understand that Republicans are to blame for the shutdown and putting aside that most Americans understand Republicans control the White House, the House and the Senate. Putting all of that aside for a moment, it's really weird to me that it is increasingly acceptable in the ranks of MAGA to sort of take joy at the idea that people might not have food to eat. I wouldn't even dream of denying food to my worst enemy. And it has now become politically acceptable. They're like laughing about it to a degree. These people who rely on food stamps are going to have to eat bugs. You know, most of the people on food stamps work. 16 million of the people on food stamps are kids and 8 million are senior citizens. There's a bunch of people who are disabled. We're now just going to go, oh, maybe they can find some bugs to eat. This is a sick political movement that is increasingly of the mind that I guess cruelty is something to like. Cruelty is something to promote. It's outrageous. Man from the sky 91 wrote on YouTube I just really hope that some of the people who voted for him, meaning Trump, get as outraged as they should be when their health care premium triples, when they can't afford groceries, when their government benefits dry up and they turn on Fox News and see Trump waddling around in his gold ballroom. Maybe then they'll realize how badly they messed up. You know, there's a couple things here. There are people who follow Trump who really are like cult members. Cult members, for the most part, don't realize I made a mistake. There's cognitive dissonance and cult dynamics at play. There's also something called the sunk cost fallacy. And the best way to illustrate that is you pay. What does it cost to go to a movie? Now, I haven't been to a movie in four years. I don't know. You pay 15 bucks, maybe 20 bucks to go to a movie. You sit there for the first hour and it's terrible. In your mind, you say, well, I've paid for the ticket. I might as well get the full movie before I leave. But the economic answer would be, actually, if the last half of the movie is worse than going and walking around or just going home or going out to dinner, you actually, either way, you've spent the money. That money is sunk. You should get out and do something you enjoy more. And there is a sunk cost fallacy, I think, at play here as well, where people go, well, I'm in this far. I've supported him this far. I'm kind of in. I'm going to stick with them even if doing something different would actually be better for me. I think that is also absolutely happening. All right, Here is from YouTube. Michael R2VB this one is whacked. Totally, totally whacked. Quote Trump's awesome missing apostrophe. The ballroom is paid for by donations. Paid it is not a word. TDS is strong in these comments. Some networks trash anything Trump does nonstop. You do, really? If this country goes commie, period, your free ride is over. Period. Hope you're ready. Wrong Your to work or stave. I think they meant starve. There is no free rent, free food, free electric, free heat, free water, free phone, free Internet. Free, free. And free is over. Just look at other communist countries. A wiseman said, that's not a wise man. It's someone whose last name is Wiseman. A wiseman said, you can walk right into communism, but you got to fight your way out. Be careful what you wish for. Was independent and supported Obama. Now I'm 100% red Obama. Like I said Trump is awesome. Well, if there is ever, if there has ever been a case made for why your average Trump supporter maybe is not someone that we should be listening to, it is this comment and this message. And it is not just because it is riddled with spelling and grammar errors as they almost often are. It's not just because of that, but it represents a total disconnect from reality that you are not going to be able to talk people out of. All right, I want to get your your thoughts on this one global farm 1212 posted to the subreddit Even if Trump can find a way to legitimately serve a third term, he could never win another election. And Global Farm goes on to write, let's say theoretically Trump is able to run for a third term. Whether he is the winning candidates VP and then the winning candidate steps down or any of the other theories that have been circulating, people seem to be forgetting one key thing. He would still have to win another election. Now sure, there are plenty of MAGA diehards who would gladly vote for Trump in 2028, but I think that the average voter, maybe even the average conservative, would be against Trump serving a third term because it is unconstitutional and un American and as a result support a different candidate. This all goes without mentioning Trump's low approval. I think even if there was no term limit under the current circumstances, he is too unpopular to win another election. Many voters have already expressed regret voting for Trump and I have a feeling that the withholding of food stamps that will only increase that sentiment. I know David said America failed an IQ test by electing Trump twice and I agree. But I don't think Americans are that stupid to elect him for a third time. You know, this is the same argument people made before. Now that he's been indicted and found civilly liable for sexual assault, and now that he tried to steal the election, he could never win again and he won in 2024. Any assumption that the country is finally ready to pass the IQ test and not vote for Trump, I would be very, very skeptical of such an argument because we've seen it happen multiple times with tens of millions of Americans. I'm Pink Snail wrote on the subreddit. Why does David consider himself a social Democrat and not use the term social capitalist to define himself? And goes on to write, I've been listening for a long time and understand David identifying as a social Democrat, but I haven't heard him describe why he differentiates himself from a social capitalist. While I hate name semantics, Social Democrat sounds very similar and confused with democratic socialism and the right has has somewhat successfully weaponized the term socialism against democrats over the last few decades. I have nothing against the socialists, but I'm curious why David hasn't labeled himself or acknowledged his alignment with social capitalists. You know why? I don't know anyone who uses that term. It is a term A social capitalist wants to combine capitalist principles with human welfare. But social capitalism is a much less well known term than Social Democrat social democracy, and there are even parties with that name all over the world. Social democracy is the sort of prevailing perspective of governments in places like Denmark and Sweden and other countries. The reason why I use the term social democrat rather than the social capitalist it is a far better known term. And if I start using a new term, I think I'm only going to create even more confusion. Itinerant Degenerate wrote on the sub Reddit Ballroom Costs has anyone brought up the point that despite the initial building costs of this ballroom being covered, at least to some degree by donors, those donations will not be covering the long term maintenance and repair of a much larger building than there was previously? MAGA defenders seem to brush the whole thing off by pointing to donations, but aren't considering that the taxpayers will likely be paying higher maintenance costs for this huge beast of a ballroom for the next 100 years. Rant over. Of course, as usual, Donald Trump is not acknowledging that the maintenance and staffing costs are going to be borne by the taxpayers. But the reason why it's accurate to point it out but not the most relevant thing in the world is that it's not even clear to me that the ballroom is really being paid for entirely by donations, as Donald Trump claims. And even if the ballroom is being paid for entirely by donations, as the ball, as Donald Trump claims claims, it is not at all clear to me that those aren't simply bribes that are going to then be used by people to curry favor with Donald Trump and to get goodies and deals in the future. Like no matter what the truth is of who's paying when maintenance, it's clearly another way to ingratiate yourself with Trump to get benefits to yourself or your business by sending in money supposedly for the ballroom. It's all a lie. It's not. It's not the only lie that the costs will be borne by donors. It's one of the many lies. Send me your emails info@david pakman.com Remember that this month we are donating the first membership payment, be it on my website or on substack, be it a monthly or a yearly membership. Your first payment for new members will be donated in its entirety to Feeding America, a Nonprofit with only 2% overhead. 98% of the money goes to Feeding People. We are in a food crisis. It is an unbearably unethical and immoral thing and one of the richest countries in the world. We are trying to do what we can to feed as many people as possible. You get yourself a monthly membership. Your first payment of $6 through Feeding America will feed will provide 60 meals. So this is a real opportunity. Updates soon.