← The David Pakman Show
The David Pakman Show
6/12/25: Tanks rolling in streets as triggered Karoline Leavitt scolds reporter
01:01:27
-- On the Show: — Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) joins David to discuss Trump’s authoritarian power grabs, Senate resistance, and what happens next — Trump’s anti-war image goes up in flames as he floats war with Iran after sabotaging the...
Loading summary
Transcript65 lines
- [00:08]
David Pakman
Welcome to the show. News from the war front. Concerns over a possible new war with Iran to be launched by Donald Trump are growing after we learned that diplomats and government employees being removed from a number of countries. Donald Trump asked about it, and his response does not exactly inspire peaceful confidence. You know, remember Donald Trump, we were told, was the real anti war guy. Tulsi Gabbard was supposedly the real anti war Democrat back in whatever year she ran. Trump is the real anti war candidate. But we knew that this was typical right wing populist rhetoric dressed up as an actual concern for peace when there is really no concern for peace. And we often hear about forever wars. Tulsi would talk about them. Trump would end the forever wars and bragged about bringing troops home. And he'd be the guy that won't drag the United States into any bloody conflicts. Well, now he's setting the stage for a war with Iran. Reuters is now reporting that Donald Trump is, quote, less confident that any nuclear deal with Iran is possible. This is the same Trump who, of course, tore up the existing Iran deal, which was working during his first term, on the promise that that was a bad deal from Barack Obama and that he would get a better deal. The better deal never happened. And now Donald Trump is floating the idea of that. There may be no choice but very ugly stuff. Here's Trump last night at the Kennedy center where he was brutally booed. We'll get to that later. But here's what he had to say about this.
- [02:00]
Donald Trump
Well, they are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place. And we'll see what happens. But they are, and we've given notice to move out. We'll see what happens.
- [02:11]
David Pakman
Is there anything that could be done to dial the temperature down in the region?
- [02:15]
Donald Trump
They can't have a nuclear weapon. Very simple. They can't have a nuclear weapon. We're not going to allow that.
- [02:22]
David Pakman
There you go. So diplomats are now being pulled from the region. Israel is reportedly ready for an attack. American officials are bracing for retaliation against American targets. So none of this feels like deterrence. Everything that's happening feels more like preparation. And then Trump there was asked, can we avoid an escalation? And he says, they cannot have a nuclear weapon, plain and simple. Which, of course, is what the deal that he scrapped was meant to achieve. And we had no evidence when Trump bailed on that deal during his first term that Iran was violating terms of the agreement. So we have no plan, no replacement deal with Iran, which Trump has been promising now for what, eight years? Seven. Eight years. No diplomacy. Certainly we have just a vague threat, as if a war with Iran would be this clean, remote, controlled affair. Remember when George W. Bush went into Iraq in 2003? Some may be too young to remember that we were going to be greeted as liberators and it would take a few days or weeks, and then we know how that turned out. So Trump even adding that we might be able to do this without people dying, whatever that means. So understand the sequence here. This is yet another situation where they really want to confuse you about the historical record. We had a functioning nuclear deal. There had been claims made by Benjamin Netanyahu during Donald Trump's first term that Iran was not abiding by the terms of the deal. But we had no proof of that whatsoever. All the evidence pointed to Iran is abiding by the terms of the deal. Trump doesn't like it, mostly because it had Obama's name on it. Trump didn't like anything that Obama did, so he pulled out. And what does Iran do? The obvious thing, not something I want to see them do. I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon. But they start ramping up enrichment. Of course they would if Trump gets out of the deal. Because Trump unilaterally pulled out. International inspectors confirmed at the time that Iran was complying with the deal's terms. But Trump got out of it, scrapped it anyway, said he could get us a better deal, like the health care bill, like the trade agreements, like all of it. The better Iran deal never materialized. So Iran resumes nuclear enrichment, tensions skyrocket, the US Loses leverage. The US Obviously has lost credibility because we just get out of deals that the next president doesn't like. And Trump now says, I don't know that we're going to be able to get a new deal. And now war is implicitly being floated as the next step. So understand that none of this is anti war. This is a blueprint for war. And it's authored by, catalyzed by Donald Trump's incompetent belligerence. It's not theoretical. The costs of a war with Iran would be catastrophic. We're talking about at least thousands dead, a regional implosion. We're talking about global chaos. If all you care about is your 401k and your stocks, they are going. If you think it's erratic when Trump announces tariffs, just wait until you see a war escalate in Iran. But this is how Trump supporters talk about it. You look online and you'll find people kind of casually cheering it on. If we have to go to war, so be it. Right before saying that they're applying for disability and wouldn't be getting drafted no matter what happens. So it's very easy to pound the war drums when you're never going to hear the blast or feel the repercussions. And even Russia, even Russia is trying to step in with an off ramp, offering to take Iran's enriched uranium. This is how dangerously close we are to something irreversible. The anti war image of Trump was always a scam. It was a marketing line. And now, with potential war on the horizon, the scams becoming very real. And meanwhile, why is Trump dressed like this? Because he's going to see Les Mis at the Kennedy center while we have protests in the streets, Marines in the National Guard in L. A and soon to be elsewhere, I believe, and war on the brink in Iran. The question is whether the American public is going to fall for it again or are we going to see it as the obvious lie dressed up as peace dragging us to war. That it is. Well, Americans seem to know something is wrong. And the protests this weekend are going to be huge. On June 14, that Saturday, while Donald Trump celebrates his 79th birthday, there will be tanks rolling through Washington, D.C. i will show you the video. They're already there, but millions of Americans are going to be in the streets protesting against Donald Trump. These are the no Kings protests. This is set on Saturday to be the largest national demonstration since Donald Trump returned to office, possibly the biggest single day anti Trump protest ever. We have events planned in more than 1500 cities around the country. This is not just a few big marches. This is a national uprising happening all at once. This is happening on Flag day. It's the 250th anniversary of the army, both symbols that Trump is trying to wrap around himself. He's throwing a military parade with thousands of troops, tanks and fighter jets on his birthday. Now, this is a show of force, and it's meant to look powerful. But we know because history tells us that real power is really showing up in town squares. It's on the courthouse steps, it's on neighborhood streets across the country. And the message is really simple. We don't want a king. We also don't want a dictator, which is really what Donald Trump wants to be. And since Trump returned to power, there have been waves of these protests. But I believe the scale on Saturday is going to be like nothing we have seen during Trump's presidency. We haven't seen anything this loud. We haven't seen anything this well organized, the people behind no Kings are standing up to authoritarianism. That's really what this is about. Billionaire first politics are not good for the non billionaires. And the use of fear and the use of force to control the public has to be opposed. And this time I like that the protests are taking the lead. What makes protests like these really matter is not just the number of people, although that does matter. It's how they shift the story. When protests are peaceful, and we'll get back to that. Coordinated and widespread, they are impossible to ignore. Politicians notice. They change how the media covers power. They remind us that we're not alone. They turned fear into action. Now, Trump has already threatened to use heavy force against protesters on Saturday. Days ago, he sent thousands of troops to Los Angeles to suppress and to push people to just stay home. He wants people stay home. But the response has been people are saying, I'm going to be out there on Saturday. More cities are joining. Even some in the business world are speaking out. The Walmart heiress who funded ads promoting the protest is now facing a MAGA led boycott. We'll talk about that on the bonus show. So this is what resistance and opposition look like. It's not hashtags. There can be slogans, but it's not just slogans. It's peaceful people in the street, together. So in a way, Saturday is a showdown. It's ok, it's Trump's birthday, it's a parade. But it's a showdown between Trump's wet dream of power and the reality of democracy. On the other side, you've got, on the one hand, a government trying to scare people into silence and staying home and not exercising their constitutionally protected right to peaceful protest and assembly. And on the other hand, you've got a country that I hope refuses to shut up. And so I believe these will be the biggest protests of Donald Trump's entire presidency. They will certainly be the biggest protests of the second term. My hope is that this is only the beginning. Now we look at history. Historically, protests have the greatest impact when they reach a critical mass. In the research I did for my book on this topic, it's often cited as 3.5% of a country's population actively participating. What's the bad news? The bad news is it's not clear we're going to get the 3.5% on Saturday. The good news is that 3.5% is not that high of a number. And this work comes out of the work of political scientist Erica Chenoweth, who studied hundreds of protest movements around the world. And what she found was that nonviolent campaigns, and that's critical because when the campaigns are violent, it unleashes a whole different scenario. Nonviolent campaigns that engage at least 3 and a half percent of the population bring major political change. It might be regime change, it might be policy reversal, it might be institutional transformation. It might just be starting the momentum towards the next election at which everyone in power is voted the hell out. But the point here is 3.5%, that is roughly, it's probably about 12 million. But let me actually do the calculation. If we have 341 million people in this country, 3.5%. 11.9 million. Yeah. So my math was sort of okay there. What we're talking about is 12 million people taking to the streets. Even below that threshold, the scale matters, right? So if we get 1% of the population, that'd be like 3.4 million. Okay. Even protests of that size, 1 out of 100 people protesting. Historically, that has helped to shape public opinion, to draw media attention and to force politicians to respond. So after the break, I'm going to show you images that really should get you interested in participating on Saturday if you're not interested already. So if you're going to be there, let me know where info@david pakman.com you can Google no Kings protest at and the name of your city or your state to figure out where they're going to be. And in all of this, remember, we need to make sure that we have a strong and robust independent progressive media to talk about the protests before the fact and also to cover them after. So make sure you're subscribed. It's free on the YouTube channel. It's free to get on my substack. Most of the stuff we're doing is free. We also have membership. But just about everything we're doing is free. Let's build independent media. Let's get out at these protests Monday. Of course, we'll be talking about how they go. We'll take a quick break. And I can't even believe I'm saying it tanks in the streets after the break. 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. That's magic spoon.com/pacman for $5 off. The link is in the podcast notes. You know, every time we call out Donald Trump's authoritarianism, the right calls it media hysteria. But I want to remind you that Trump admits he's looking for ways to defy the Constitution and maybe even pursue another term. Now if you don't know the bias behind your news, you might believe oh, Trump's just teasing us. There's nothing here. Go to Ground News slash Pacman and see how media bias influences more than your perception from Trump's policy and ability to understand and undermine constitutional norms. I've been with Ground News for years now because this is what they do. They expose the hidden agendas behind reporting sources and make it easy to compare coverage and understand critical issues. Even better, if I'm reading a story on another site, the Ground News browser extension will flag the source's political bias and and give me other reports on the same story so I can verify the information. My viewers get 40% off the same unlimited Vantage plan that I use. So you get their top tier plan for just $5 a month. Go to Ground News slash Pacman. The link is in the description or scan the QR code. The David Pakman show is an audience supported program. I invite you to get the first full experience. There's perks, goodies and gifts associated with membership by signing up@join pakman.com thank you to the 169 new subscribers. Over the last few days I've been telling you that because of the economic instability, I'm hearing from a lot of people who say, David, love the show but I'm just canceling subscriptions. I've got to cancel. And so I told you that we were about minus 140 at the beginning of the week. We've kind of clawed our way out to minus 1 20. And if there is any time that I can think of that has been more important to support independent progressive media than right now. I can't think of it. This does strike me as the most important time. And by the way, at the end of the show, I'll tell you about a new change to YouTube moderation policy that is only bad for progressive independent media. So grab a membership@join pacman.com, get the bonus show.
- [17:28]
Brian Schatz
The bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad.
- [17:33]
David Pakman
That's right. And you can use the coupon code. It will end soon to save about 50%. All right, so this is real. This is not a video. This was not generated by Chat GPT or Claude or Gemini or any of these tools. Tanks are rolling through the streets of Washington, D.C. ahead of the military parade Saturday that just so happens to fall on Donald Trump's 79th birthday. And if this sounds and looks like something you would expect in Russia or in North Korea or Iran, that's because it is. Take a look at this. Take a listen to this. Tanks rolling. Yeah. Okay, so this event is technically being billed as a celebration of the Army's 250th anniversary. Fine. If we're honest, Trump is calling the shots here. He says it's going to be unforgettable. It's a full blown state sanctioned show of military force on Trump's birthday. With 7,000 troops to tanks, 50 helicopters will be flooding Constitution Avenue, D.C. so of course we have to ask, is this a tribute to the military or is it really a glorified flex for an authoritarian obsessed president who once said he envies how Kim Jong Un's generals stand at attention and just look like they are so enamored with, with their dear leader. Because none of this is new. Trump's been obsessed with military parades since watching Bastille Day in France back in 2017. He tried it in 2019, and now that he's back in power, the tanks are back. He's even threatening protesters ahead of the event, saying very big force is what they will be met with, even if they are engaging in the constitutionally protected activity of peaceful protest. And the worst part is, we've seen this movie before. These are the kinds of propaganda spectacles that authoritarian leaders use to crush dissent, to project dominance, and to make people afraid. You put tanks in the streets, you put soldiers information in, in a formation, goose stepping around, you do the flyovers over the Capitol. It's not to defend the country, it's to celebrate the leader. Look at how strong he must be if he was able to put this together. And look at the loyalty he commands, if he was able to do this. If you need any proof that this is all about Trump, look at who's skipping it. Most Republicans. The Daily Beast is reporting that only seven of 50 Republican senators are showing up. Even they know that this looks very, very bad. And this is going to be very expensive. This is tens of millions of dollars. And then another aspect, I don't know how many people know this, but when these heavy tanks go on normal streets, it really screws up the streets. And then you've got to pay to fix the streets. So in summary, Trump stages a birthday military parade, threatens protesters, rolls tanks in D.C. treats the 250th anniversary of the army as sort of like a personal coronation. And we're supposed to pretend it's normal. We're not supposed to protest, we're not supposed to complain. We're supposed to attend with our MAGA hats and cheer. The whole thing. It should freak you out. It is. Look at history. And it's a tragedy that so often during this presidency we have to look at the 20th century's authoritarian strongmen for examples of what we are seeing now. In the Soviet Union, you know, massive parades in Red Square were the way to showcase power and instill fear. They had tanks, they had missiles, they had the goose stepping soldiers in front of the Kremlin as the world watched you go from Russia to North Korea. Kim Jong Un, known for staging these elaborate military displays every single year to signal strength to his own people. I guess he wants to signal strength to the outside world. It's really only effective on his own people. And then of course, demanding loyalty. That's always what's implied. You go back to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, where there were frequently similar shows of force with troops and weapons serving as props for the speeches centered on the personal glory of Saddam and defying the west and how much the US Sucks and all of that. What all of these displays have in common is that they're not about patriotism. Fundamentally, they don't. When Russia does this, it doesn't bring out the patriotism of the Russian people. When Kim Jong Un does it, it's not about showcasing how devoted to North Korea the people really are. It's about serving the man, scaring people and leader worship and blurring the line between patriotism and fear. So Saturday is not going to be about honoring the military. In reality, it's all about Trump projecting is power and it's not democracy. It's the propaganda playbook of authoritarians. But the good news, as we talked about in the first segment, is that I believe we are going to see on Saturday the biggest protests certainly of Donald Trump's second term, but I believe of Donald Trump's entire presidency. I hope that you will be participating. Let me know at info@david pakman.com if you will. Gavin Newsom, the governor of California brutalizing, just brutalizing the Arkansas governor, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, over the issue of homicide rates. So let me set this up for you. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, did her, you know, the Fox dog and pony show is Fox News hosts bring on a Republican official to criticize a Democratic official. They brought on Sarah Huckabee Sanders yesterday to criticize what's happening in California. And she went on and said we would never see in Arkansas what you are seeing in California because we value order over chaos here. Let's take a listen to what she had to say. And the response from Governor Newsom is just perfect. Take a listen.
- [24:10]
Brian Schatz
All right.
- [24:10]
Donald Trump
Let's dig deeper on this with the Arkansas governor, Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Governor, good to be with you this morning.
- [24:15]
Brian Schatz
Thanks so much for joining us.
- [24:17]
Gavin Newsom
Absolutely. Thanks for having me.
- [24:19]
Donald Trump
So let me start you off with this question. As governor of the state of Arkansas, if the president of the United States.
- [24:24]
Brian Schatz
Deployed the National Guard to your state.
- [24:27]
Donald Trump
Without your request or your assent, what.
- [24:29]
Brian Schatz
Would your reaction be?
- [24:31]
Gavin Newsom
Well, we wouldn't have this problem in Arkansas in the first place because we would never choose rioters and criminal illegals over American law enforcement. And if we got to a place, place where that was happening, I would call the president myself and ask him to bring people in to help us out. But we would never allow what California Governor Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass have allowed to take place in California to ever happen in Arkansas. It's really clear they can either choose normal versus crazy or order versus chaos. The fact that they are allowing rioters to run their streets and are mad at the president for stopping it is insane. They should be thanking Donald Trump for helping and assisting reorder back to their city and state that they're frankly incapable of doing themselves.
- [25:21]
David Pakman
There's only one problem with this. There is a problem with the pot calling the kettle black. There's a problem with people in glass houses throwing stones. And Gavin Newsom encapsulated it perfectly in a response to this video on Twitter where Gavin Newsom said to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, your homicide rate is Literally double California's. We fact checked it and it is true. The Arkansas homicide rate is 11.8, whereas the California rate is 5.9. The Arkansas rate is almost exactly double that of California. So there's a bigger story here. There's, there's a lot of stories here. Obviously, we have the legal story. Was Trump legally able to do what he did in sending in troops and Marines? He says he was. Legal experts say that it is extraordinarily shaky. Second one is this split between red and blue states generically, but also just the obsession with attacking California. Now, California has an economy and a population that's bigger than most countries. Most countries have some homicide. Most countries have some level of poverty, without a doubt. But you can't really eliminate from that analysis that California also has leading educational institutions, leading innovation centers, leading medical institutions. It is one of the most dynamic economies not in the country, but in the world. And it's just pathetic. No, no attack on people who live in Arkansas. But Arkansas education is not good. Arkansas infrastructure is not good. Arkansas health care is not good. It's just someone's got to be last, right? And Arkansas is not last on all of these things. In some, it's Mississippi and some, it's other, other states. But Arkansas is a disaster on just about every metric. And so Sarah Huckabee Sanders going on Fox News to lecture Gavin Newsom. Dear God. Dear God. And Gavin Newsom doing a good job of pointing out the absurdity. Let's take a quick break. We'll be back right after this. If you or someone you love is on Medicare, this is important. The Department of Justice filed a major fraud complaint against three of the biggest Medicare brokers in the country. These brokers pretended to offer unbiased advice while secretly steering seniors into plans that paid them the greatest kickbacks. This is why I recommend Chapter. After seeing their own families get scammed, they created a better way. CHAPTER is fully independent and the only national Medicare adviser that searches every plan available to find the one that actually fits your needs. They advocate for you, not the insurance companies. No steering, no pressure, just expert help. Completely free. Chapter has saved the average senior over $1,000 a year. And they are a free resource for my audience. So if you want help with Medicare, give chapter a call. By dialing pound250 and saying the keyword Medicare, you'll talk to a real person who will help you figure out exactly which plan is right for you. Or go to askchapter.org pen pacman. All you have to do is dial pound 250 and then say Medicare. Or you can go to ask chapter.org/pacman. The info is in the podcast Notes. Today we're going to be speaking with Senator Brian Schatz, Democratic Senator representing Hawaii. Senator, so good to have you on. Really appreciate it.
- [29:28]
Brian Schatz
Thanks for having me.
- [29:30]
David Pakman
So I want to pick something specific to dove into with regard to this tax bill that's on the table and help my audience understand something like a work requirement for some of these programs, which maybe at the surface level sounds sort of inoffensive. Listen, if you're able to work. What's so bad about a work requirement? Can you talk about what's really kind of pernicious and insidious about that?
- [29:56]
Brian Schatz
Yeah, it's just cut. I mean, it's cutting the program. Right. And they, you know, they've tried this in other states, Republican states, and repealed it because they. It turns out it's more expensive to administer a work requirement than it is to just provide the benefit. You know, most people receiving public assistance, whether that's, you know, nutritional assistance or medic, Medicaid are working. Right. And, but they're also very busy. And putting in these onerous paperwork requirements is intended to throw people off of their healthcare because they don't submit a form on time. Like you lose your healthcare if you don't submit a form on time. And there are, there are already examples of this happening. The other thing is, you don't have to take my word for it. The reason that the Republicans are projecting a huge sort of inflow of cash to the United States government as a result of these Medicaid provisions is because they anticipate that up to 16 million people are going to lose their healthcare. It's not 16 million undocumented individuals. They're not all on Medicaid. Come on. And so I think it's important to take a half a second to explain why this is bs, but not indulge in this kind of back and forth about work requirements. Everybody knows what this is. And by the way, they tried to do a similar thing on FEMA and disaster response. They said, you know, only Americans should receive disaster relief. Okay? The kind of thing that sounds good until you realize after the Lahaina wildfire, after a hurricane, after a flood or an earthquake or whatever it is, people don't have their damn IDs on them. Right? And so those kind of like administrative burdens that we put on stuff, it sort of sounds good. And then once you start to operate it, everybody gets furious. About all the paperwork requirements.
- [31:46]
David Pakman
You know, one of the things that seems true no matter what program you study, is that it generally seems simpler just to provide a benefit than to go through the bureaucracy and expense of what is often proposed by Republicans. I mean, when we zoom out, we've done studies, for example, in Utah on homeless veterans. What does it cost to just give them housing, give them health care and make sure that they're fed? And it's cheaper than all of these individual programs with their own rubrics, barometers, and, and, and sort of overarching administrative infrastructure. And so what that really reinforces for me, and I'm curious what you see in conversations with your colleagues on the other side of the aisle, is that this is fundamentally not really about money. It's about morality and what George Lakoff called strict fundamental father morality, that on some deep visceral level, they just don't think people have earned some of the stuff that these programs provide. And you can show them that it's cheaper till you're blue in the face. But at the end of the day, it doesn't really seem to be about that, does it?
- [32:54]
Brian Schatz
Yeah, I think they think help makes you lazy.
- [32:57]
David Pakman
Right, right.
- [32:58]
Brian Schatz
I think that's, I don't say all of them. Some of them are just, you know, we'll do whatever Donald Trump says. Some of them are intentionally kind of in a fantasy land and want their tax cuts. And they, they understand how much this is going to hurt people, but they just don't care that much. But there are people for whom, you know, they don't believe if they've done well, that they were fortunate. They may have worked hard, but they have to understand that to do well is also to be a little lucky. Right. You know, no major illness befell you. You grew up in the community that gave you a chance. There's just always luck involved and in life, bad luck and good luck.
- [33:36]
David Pakman
Yeah.
- [33:36]
Brian Schatz
And I, you know, I, I used to talk to Sherrod Brown about this and he said, you know, Republicans just underestimate hard luck as a factor in people's lives. But to your point, it is this fundamental view that, you know, if you give a person 6 bucks a day, 6 bucks a day for nutritional assistance, that somehow they're going to be unmotivated to make their life better. And, and the truth is the average person on SNAP only spends about a year on snap, the average child on snap. And so it's not like you're creating this long term dependency. You're just helping people. When they need it the most.
- [34:11]
David Pakman
Last question on the bill and then I want to talk to you about this weekend a little bit. My expectation has been that it would be too much of a visible failure to not pass anything in the Senate. And so given that people like Rand Paul are saying, well, if you just take the debt limit increase out, I'd vote for, for it. That there's sort of this soft opposition or hesitancy from some of your Republican colleagues. I'm assuming it will ultimately pass, but in a slightly different form. What's your assessment right now?
- [34:42]
Brian Schatz
I don't know. And I'm sort of trying to resist the temptation I have to like be a part time pundit. Right. I'm in the arena and it's like this is the arena where I'm supposed to like come out at halftime and, and then turn like, you know, it's like Draymond Green, the basketball player, who's like an actual, you know, high quality NBA basketball player and podcaster about the NBA. I don't want to be that guy. I'm in the arena. Percentage likelihood. Here's my theory of change here. We should try to kill the bill because I think there's a chance that we can kill the bill. And I think if we do it right and maximize the likelihood that we can kill the bill. What that means is that we drove public opinion in our direction regarding the policy and, and then even if they pass the bill, they now have a political anvil around their necks to carry for the next year and a half. And so whatever I think is likely to happen doesn't matter because our strategy is the same, which is this bill super unpopular. And the more you know about it, as you know, as a general proposition, the more you hate it. That's the good news. People are about 2 to 1 against it. The bad news is that about a third of the public is not aware of the bill. And so our job collectively is to not allow Donald Trump to distract us from, you know, this picking of the pockets of the regular person across the country with what's going to happen with the National Guard this weekend with whatever crazy stuff he's going to tweet. And it's not that we shouldn't respond or it's not that we should be overly chill and always quote, unquote, you know, pivot to kitchen table issues like, we've got to fight the fight. I've done so on usaid, which I understand, like, is not necessarily the first thing that someone running for reelection or to be newly elected is going to run on. That doesn't mean it's not important. So not telling people not to fight on the things that matter to them, I am saying here is this thing that is massively important from a policy standpoint in terms of a wealth transfer from struggling people to people who are wealthier than anyone who's ever walked the planet. It also happens to unite the Democratic coalition. So we're not fighting amongst ourselves. And it opposites also. We're on the very popular side of this with independent voters. And so for the next six weeks or until this bill succeeds or fails, I would like everybody for every tweet or substack or, you know, verbalization of here's the path for the Democrats going forward, I want them to do three tweets or substacks about this bill. Everybody owes it to the country to talk about this bill and to make sure that 95 or 98% of the public is aware of it. Because if that happens, I think we'll win the battle in the few minutes.
- [37:23]
David Pakman
We have left this weekend. I was just reviewing with my audience video of tanks rolling in the streets last Night of Washington D.C. we've got this parade on Saturday, happens to be Donald Trump's birthday. Also the 250th anniversary of the army. The no Kings protests now are expected in more than 1500 cities across the country. I assume and hope that they are going to be peaceful. Does this feel like a potential inflection point where we are right now, or is there too much kind of hope being wrapped up in this weekend, these protests, in this moment?
- [38:02]
Brian Schatz
You know, I don't know if it's an inflection point. The way I view this thing is like, just chip away, just chip away, just chip away. I used to have a therapist, a political operative in Hawaii who sort of jokingly used to say everything is worth 2%. And you know, he said if you're short, that's minus 2% if your name's easy to pronounce, plus 2% if you walked house to house more than the other guy, that's 2%. And it was Hawaii, so 2% was considered, you know, not a lot. So we're talking about a tenth of a percent. But my point is everything matters. But there is no. Like, if we do X, then that unlocks democracy going forward or that unlocks popularity going forward. This is a long term project to build a pluralistic, peaceful movement on behalf of democratic values. I think Saturday will be important, but it's not either. The beginning or the end of the movement. The one thing I'd say just to encourage everybody is let's police ourselves, right? Let's make sure that we use peaceful means, but also that we communicate within whatever crowd you're in, whether it's 75 people or 7,500, like what the expectations are. Because there are a bunch of people who will hijack any political protest just to be, you know, shit disturbers. Right? Just to light a trash can on fire and be anarchist. And those people do not belong in our movement. Right. We can have a variety of views, including views, you know, that I don't agree with on the center left, center right, you know, leftist. Like that's not. What I'm saying is that people with differing views are not welcome. Everyone's welcome, but the behavior matters. And if you are going to stand up for the rule of law, it is very, very helpful to be lawful in doing that. And the best way, and I'm not some expert in civil disobedience and organized protest, but I certainly know this, the best way is for us to police ourselves. And if someone starts to act like a jackass, to call them out and say, cut it out. That's not what we're doing here.
- [40:04]
David Pakman
Very well said. We've been speaking with Democratic Senator from Hawaii, Brian Schatz. Thanks so much for your time today.
- [40:12]
Brian Schatz
Thank you.
- [40:13]
David Pakman
Go Google your name right now and you'll probably be shocked by how many sketchy websites have your address, phone number, even details about your family. Our sponsor, Incogni, is the solution. It is a service that will force data brokers and people search sites to delete your personal information so scammers, spammers and snoops can't get their hand on it. It's also now part of their unlimited plan that you can do custom removals. You're no longer limited to just the 250 plus sites in their automated system. You can submit any link where your personal info is exposed and Incogni's privacy experts will get it taken down. Even if the site's not in their database, whether it is whitepages.com, trellis.law, dNB or anybody else quietly publishing your information, Incogni will wipe the footprint clean. You paste the link and they do the rest. If you're tired of being tracked, profiled, targeted, this is how you push back. For instance, these sites are where scammers and spammers can get your information to then target you. Using Incogni can cut way down on the spam calls and the messages that you get, try it risk free for 30 days and get 60% off an annual plan. When you go to incogni.com/pacman, that's incogni.com/pacMan for 60% off. The link is in the podcast notes. After blowback for his total authoritarian nightmare statement about levying unleashing a very big force against protesters of any kind, that is birthday military parade, Donald Trump's press secretary, Caroline Levitt, had to back off. But she went too far, as they often do, calling a reporter's question about protesters stupid, even though anyone who's been following Trump knows that it is not a stupid question, it's a logical question. So take a listen. She was asked about, wait a second, is Trump suggesting that even peaceful protesters are going to have force? And she goes, no, of course not. That's a stupid question.
- [42:27]
Caroline Levitt
Thanks so much, Caroline. The President warned that any protests on Saturday would be met with force. Can you clarify what kind of protest President Trump does support or find acceptable? President absolutely supports peaceful protests. He supports the First Amendment. He supports the right of amendment Americans to make their voices heard. He does not support violence of any kind. He does not support assaulting law enforcement officers who are simply trying to do their job. It's very clear for the president what he supports and what he does not. Unfortunately for Democrats, that line has not been made clear, and they've allowed this unrest and this violence to continue, and the President has had to step in.
- [43:04]
David Pakman
One question.
- [43:05]
Caroline Levitt
So if there were peaceful protests on Saturday for the military parade, President Trump would allow that? Of course the president supports peaceful protests. What a stupid question.
- [43:13]
David Pakman
What a stupid question. Except she's mad because she knows it's exactly the right question. Struggling with math continues to be a theme of this press secretary and of this White House more broadly. A reporter responded to Caroline Levitt claiming that a majority of the Los Angeles protesters are violent. Except the math obviously doesn't check out, and you can tell that basic arithmetic is proving very confusing for Caroline Levitt.
- [43:44]
Sarah Huckabee Sanders
You were just asked about the First Amendment rights issues in the President's comments yesterday, though he just said protesters would be strongly dealt with. In your list before you referred to insurrectionists, rioters and protesters together, obviously they're quite different from your earlier answer. I'm struck by the fact that the President has not at any point said, the most important thing here is to protect the First Amendment rights of peaceful protesters. So I'm wondering, where in his hierarchy of interests does he place that? Is the First Amendment protection the Most important is stopping violence. Most important, why is he not out saying all peaceful protesters are, will be protected?
- [44:29]
Caroline Levitt
I think two things can be important at the same time. And the president, as I just answered, supports the right of Americans to peacefully protest. He supports the First Amendment. But that is not the majority of the behavior that we have seen taking place in Los Angeles. We have seen mobs of violent rioters and agitators assaulting law enforcement officers, assaulting our federal immigration authorities. And we have seen, as I said this, this goes back to what this administration is trying to do and accomplish, and that's enforcing law and order in our nation's communities. And it's removing public safety threats from communities in Los Angeles.
- [45:04]
Sarah Huckabee Sanders
You're saying the majority have not been peaceful. Majority.
- [45:07]
Caroline Levitt
I just read for you the arrest numbers. We've arrested nearly 400 illegal aliens alone. Just illegal aliens who have been arrested in these riots since June 6th, since.
- [45:17]
Sarah Huckabee Sanders
They began the streets.
- [45:18]
Caroline Levitt
Yeah. And we've had hundreds of people who have assaulted law enforcement officers. Are you saying that that's not, that's appropriate behavior?
- [45:25]
Gavin Newsom
Are you saying.
- [45:26]
David Pakman
Of course it's not about the appropriateness, it's about what do we mean by majority? Majority being more than 50% now, the, the hundreds of, quote, illegal aliens that have been arrested. That's the ICE deportation program. That's not actually about the protests. Then you go to the protests and she claims it's a majority when it's of course not. These protests are overwhelmingly peaceful. The property crime I denounce, you're going to, you're going to get arrested, you're going to have to deal with the consequences. Violence, if you're committing it, you're going to get arrested, you're going to have to deal with the consequences. That's an overwhelming minority. But then, just as importantly, she wants us to believe that the Trump administration cares about violence against law enforcement. We know because of exhibit a called January 6, 2021. They only care about violence against law enforcement when it's convenient. When it's inconvenient, they don't care. One final clip. Caroline Levitt won't say whether the Biden auto penned conspiracy is an impeachable offense, but says it could be criminal. This coming from the MAGA suck up seat in the White House press briefing room.
- [46:33]
Caroline Levitt
Does he think that Biden allowing or at least being negligently unaware of this.
- [46:37]
David Pakman
Activity was an impeachable festival?
- [46:39]
Caroline Levitt
I haven't heard the President address whether it's an impeachable offense, but it could perhaps be a criminal offense, especially on behalf of staffers who may have been utilizing the President's signature without his authority or consent. I understand that Republicans on the Hill are moving in the right direction to call attention to this and to bring in some former White House staffers who clearly knew more than they ever shared and never addressed with the American public.
- [47:03]
David Pakman
And let me tell you a little something funny. Whatever you believe about the Biden auto pen conspiracy theory, and I don't know what you believe, I'm going to argue that it doesn't matter because the Biden auto pen conspiracy theory is overtly about official acts done while Biden was in office. Trump argued, and the Supreme Court agreed that official acts can't be considered criminal. If the president does it, it's not illegal. Trump argued it and the Supreme Court said we generally agree and MAGA applauded the decision. This entire thing is complete and total nonsense. Donald Trump suffered acute delusions on truth, social saying endless things that are untrue about Los Angeles as well as the big beautiful bill. I want to go through it just to show you the level of disinformation that's being spread and try to interject a little bit of truth here. Trump posting to troth central quote Los Angeles was safe and sound for the last two nights. Our great National Guard, with a little help from the Marines put the L A Police in a position to effectively do their job. They all worked well together, but without the military, Los Angeles would be a crime scene like we haven't seen in years. Governor Gavin News Scum had totally lost control of the situation. He should be saying thank you for saving his ass instead of trying to justify his mistakes and incompetence. So what's the truth? Because that's the story that MAGA wants to tell about what's been happening in L A. The truth is yes, 700 marines were deployed. Thousands of National Guard troops were deployed to downtown L A in the middle of protests, but there is zero evidence that L A was going to descend into widespread violence or chaos without them. L A Mayor Karen Bass didn't ask for them. Governor Gavin Newsom didn't ask for them. The entire thing was contained to a few block radius and critically, critically, overwhelmingly peaceful protests. City officials had a curfew in place. LAPD made it seems to be dozens of arrests on looting or violence, which is the right thing to do. If you show up and loot, you're going to get arrested and now you're going to be in a legal fiasco. If you're going to do violence, you deserve to be arrested, and you're going to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. That's not what protests are about. National Guard deployments are only legal when protecting federal property or, or in limited other circumstances, which we've gone over ad nauseum this week and federal judges are now reviewing. Did Trump legally overstep the constitutional limits? Trump's story about the great savior of Los Angeles, despite Newsom and Bass wanting it to go to hell, completely fabricated. Trump. Then on the tax bill, quote, in all caps, the great big beautiful bill will grow the economy like it has never grown before. At the same time, it is cutting expenses by $1.6 trillion. It puts our country on the right track, plus make America great again. The whole savings thing is the biggest cherry picking that I've ever seen. What Trump is doing is he's saying, hey, look, the bill includes 1.6 trillion in spending cuts. And he says, so we're going to save $1.6 trillion. But he doesn't mention the tax cuts, which will cost the country significant revenue. Independent analysis, you know, you look at the CBO, you look at PolitiFact, you look at Penn Wharton, they estimate that the tax cuts that Trump wants to include in the bill will increase the deficit by 3 to 4 trillion. So Trump goes, we're going to save 1.6. Right, but you're going to add 3 to 4 trillion in expensive. Imagine if I came to you and I said, hey, I found a great way for our household to save money. We're going to cut all our grocery spending. We're just, we're cutting all grocery spending. We just found savings. But I don't mention we're going to be eating out instead. And I don't include the cost of eating out. Well, sure, if you just say we're not spending any more money on groceries, it sounds like we're saving money. If we acknowledge that we're going to start eating out for every meal, you say, oh, there's another side to the equation. It's extraordinarily dishonest. And there's a few Republicans that have been willing to admit it. Congressman Thomas Massie, Senator Rand Paul, Senator Ron Johnson. They're saying, well, you've got to subtract out the increase in the debt. You've got to account for the increase in spending. So Trump just lying to his followers on Truth Central. No evidence that L. A would have collapsed into a crime scene without his involvement. No evidence that the big Beautiful Bill actually presents net savings. But his supporters love this stuff. And my guess is because it's the way it has always happened in the past, if you go out and talk to Trump supporters, they will parrot this logo. Now, there's 1.6 trillion in savings there. Well, what about the increased expenses? Haven't heard a thing about it. Donald Trump was brutally booed at the Kennedy center last night as protests were building in Los Angeles and around the country. Donald Trump booed pretty brutally. Now, listen, I mean, it's a mixed bag, right? Trump did try to fill the place with a lot of his friends. I saw Maria Bartiromo from Fox posting that she was there. But this is not what Donald Trump wants to hear when he shows up in a public place. And you see a lot of people straight up turning away, not even looking at Trump. All right, and then we also saw more of this at other moments. Yeah. So even with Trump trying to fill the place with his friends, a significant amount of booing. Now, Trump did make a couple of statements on his way into the Kennedy center to watch a performance of Les Mis. It was brought up to him that protests are spreading to more cities. Trump just goes, I don't think they are.
- [53:44]
Gavin Newsom
If this turns into another summer of unrest, we. What are you prepared to do, sir?
- [53:49]
Donald Trump
About what?
- [53:50]
Gavin Newsom
If this turns. Well, the protests have spread now to 16 cities across the U.S. if this.
- [53:55]
David Pakman
Turns in, you're saying, do I believe you?
- [53:57]
Donald Trump
I don't think so.
- [53:57]
Gavin Newsom
Well, I got that from the Fox News brain room.
- [53:59]
Brian Schatz
What we have.
- [54:00]
Donald Trump
What we have is a situation in Los Angeles that was caused by gross incompetence. They didn't have the police to handle it. The police were asking us to come in. They were very late. We had to go in to save a lot of ICE officers. There's, you know, who were held up. They were holed up in a building and they were being attacked and the military went in. The National Guard went in and got him. The police weren't able, unfortunately, to move fast enough, but we move fast.
- [54:26]
David Pakman
So Trump just denying it. Reports of protests spreading to somewhere between 16 and 45 cities. And Trump just goes, well, I'm not going to believe what you're telling me. Maybe the funniest moment of this brief conversation with the press. Trump asked about Les Mis. Do you identify in the story more with Jean Valjean or Javert? And Trump goes, oh, that's really tough. I don't know. And of course, this is sort of like, what's your favorite Bible verse? And he's like, oh, that's very personal. I wouldn't want to share that with you.
- [54:54]
Gavin Newsom
This turns into another summer of unrest.
- [54:58]
David Pakman
Oh, sorry, this is the wrong clip. Here's the right one.
- [55:02]
Donald Trump
We're not going to allow that.
- [55:06]
David Pakman
Question on the musical. Have you seen the musical before?
- [55:09]
Gavin Newsom
And do you identify more with Jean Valjean or Javert?
- [55:13]
Donald Trump
That last part of that question, that's tough. I think you better. You better answer that one, honey. I don't know the. I've seen it. We've seen it a number of times. It's fantastic. I thought it was just about our first choice. That's what we got. And we have others coming.
- [55:29]
David Pakman
Yes. So Trump's not going to weigh in on that one. It reminds me of when Trump was asked by the Christian Broadcasting Network, are you do you prefer the New Testament or the Old Testament? And Trump goes, oh, I would say both. Or was it Christian broadcasting? Or was it John Heileman now? I don't even remember. You know, this is like first term stuff. It's so obvious he's trying to give a book report without having read the book. But the bigger picture story here, protests, raging Trump flirting with war with Iran, and he's at the Kennedy center wearing a tux to watch Les Mis. Not exactly transmitting the right level of seriousness for the situation. All right, we have now gone beyond hypothetical. We are at the real, and it is happening right now. YouTube has changed its moderation policy in a way that directly benefits the Trump administration and hurts channels like this one. Let me explain to you what's going on. New York Times did an investigation and it found that YouTube has quietly told its moderators, start favoring, quote, freedom of expression over risk of harm. Now, in content moderation, this is the balance. There's a piece of content. What's the risk of harm? What's the importance of freedom of expression? And you find a balance and you say, well, we want to prevent harm. So we might somehow sometimes limit what people say because we want to prevent harm. Now you might say, well, it's reasonable to favor freedom of expression over risk of harm. But you've got to understand what that really means for content and for channels like ours. Videos that would have been removed for hate speech or Covid disinformation, election lies are now allowed to stay up if they are considered, quote, in the public interest. That label is completely up to YouTube. Before, if 25% of a video was deemed harmful, it got taken down. Now, up to half of a video can break the rules, but stay online and so you can now have videos where half of it is lies and slurs or incitement, and it's allowed to stay up if the rest of it sounds vaguely political or newsworthy. Now, it's important to understand that this did not happen in a vacuum. YouTube made these changes in December, right before Donald Trump returned to the White House. Never were these publicly announced. The only reason we know about it is because of the New York Times investigation and leaked internal training documents. This is not only about YouTube. I want to make that clear. Metta, Facebook, Instagram, X, they've all scaled back fact checking, they've all scaled back moderation under pressure from the right. This is another example of creeping authoritarianism. You don't need laws banning dissent, although Trump wants them. You don't need tanks rolling in the streets, although they are, and we're going to see a lot of them on Saturday. You need powerful platforms to quietly change their rules so that they don't piss off the dear leader, because Trump made it really clear. You criticize them, you could lose your business, your contract, your livelihood. And companies that are terrified about being targeted are deciding it's safer to let the lies slide. This affects us directly. Okay? If you were watching this right now on YouTube, on Instagram, on Facebook, it means, I assume, that you care about independent creators, you care about real news, you care about accountability. But the space for voices like ours is getting squeezed. Not by a ban. We're not banned. Not by a big purge, but by letting the worst content flourish and pushing truth further and further down the algorithm. And right now, we're seeing what happens when the platforms decide that transphobic slurs, violent fantasies, Covid lies, whatever. It's fine as long as it's framed as a newsworthy discussion. A video joking about putting politicians in guillotines allowed. False claims about gene altering vaccines allowed. Hate speech buried in a talking head rant allowed. So this is way bigger than a single policy change. It's a shift in the ecosystem. And when companies start weighing freedom of expression as more important than actual harm, what they're really saying is we're going to take engagement over safety and we're going to take profits over people. Now, I don't plan to go anywhere. I plan to be here and to continue telling the truth to the extent that I am allowed to do it. But we need you with us. Okay? Please subscribe, please share, please speak out, because if the Trump administration can scare these platforms into submission, they're going to come for us. We've already seen evidence of it. They tried coming for my book. And this is much bigger than policy on any one platform. This is about does independent media survive for the next four years? Okay, a lot of what you can do is free. Subscribe to the YouTube channel, subscribe to our substack, which is the only platform on which we own our data. And if we get shut down, it's the only place I'll be able to tell you what happened. You can email info@david pakman.com and say, David, get me on that substack newsletter. You can sign up yourself@david pakman.substack.com and remember that following us on any platform, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, it's all free. If you have a couple bucks to spare, consider getting a membership@join pacman.com I can't think of any time since I started doing this that progressive media was as imperiled as it is today and that independent channels were as at much of a risk as they are today. We've got a great bonus show for you today. We'll talk more about it. New show tomorrow.